Mr. Speaker: Good afternoon, everyone. Please be seated.
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Mr. Speaker: Introduction of bills?
Mr. Speaker: Seeing no bills, we'll move on to committee reports.
Mr. Reg Helwer (Chairperson): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the Fourth Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts.
Clerk (Ms. Patricia Chaychuk): Your Standing Committee on Public Accounts presents–
An Honourable Member: Dispense.
Mr. Speaker: Dispense? Dispense.
Your Standing Committee on Public Accounts presents the following as its Fourth Report.
Meetings
Your Committee met on the following occasions in the Legislative Building:
· February 25, 2013 (2nd Session, 40th Legislature)
· May 8, 2013 (2nd Session, 40th Legislature)
· March 19, 2014 (3rd Session, 40th Legislature)
· September 3, 2014 (3rd Session, 40th Legislature)
· January 28, 2015 (4th Session, 40th Legislature)
· November 4, 2015 (4th Session, 40th Legislature)
Matters under Consideration
· Auditor General's Report – Annual Report to the Legislature – dated March 2014
o Chapter 1 – Accounts and Financial Statements: Section 10 Annual Report
· Public Accounts for the fiscal years ending March 31, 2012 and 2013 (Volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4)
· Public Accounts for the fiscal years ending March 31, 2014 and 2015 (Volumes 1, 2 and 3)
Committee Membership
Committee Membership for the February 25, 2013 meeting:
· Ms. Crothers
· Mr. Dewar (Vice-Chairperson)
· Mrs. Driedger
· Mr. Ewasko
· Hon. Mr. Gerrard
· Mr. Helwer (Chairperson)
· Mr. Jha
· Mr. Pedersen
· Hon. Mr. Struthers
· Mr. Whitehead
· Ms. Wight
Substitutions received prior to committee proceedings on February 25, 2013:
· Ms. Crothers for Mr. Allum
· Ms. Wight for Ms. Braun
· Mr. Ewasko for Mr. Cullen
Committee Membership for the May 8, 2013 meeting:
· Mr. Allum
· Ms. Braun
· Mr. Cullen
· Mr. Dewar (Vice-Chairperson)
· Mrs. Driedger
· Hon. Mr. Gerrard
· Mr. Helwer (Chairperson)
· Mr. Jha
· Mr. Marcelino
· Mr. Pedersen
· Hon. Mr. Struthers
Substitutions received prior to committee proceedings on May 8, 2013:
· Mr. Marcelino for Mr. Whitehead
Committee Membership for the March 19, 2014 meeting:
· Mr. Friesen
· Hon. Mr. Gerrard
· Mr. Helwer (Chairperson)
· Hon. Ms. Howard
· Mr. Jha
· Mr. Marcelino
· Mr. Martin
· Mr. Pedersen
· Mr. Whitehead
· Mr. Wiebe (Vice-Chairperson)
· Ms. Wight
Substitutions received prior to committee proceedings on March 19, 2014:
· Mr. Marcelino for Mr. Dewar
· Mr. Martin for Mr. Schuler
Committee Membership for the September 3, 2014 meeting:
· Ms. Allan
· Mr. Dewar
· Hon. Mr. Gerrard
· Mr. Helwer (Chairperson)
· Mr. Marcelino
· Mr. Pedersen
· Mr. Schuler
· Mrs. Stefanson
· Hon. Mr. Struthers
· Mr. Wiebe (Vice-Chairperson)
· Ms. Wight
Substitutions received prior to committee proceedings on September 3, 2014:
· Ms. Allan for Mr. Jha
· Mrs. Stefanson for Mr. Friesen
· Hon. Mr. Struthers for Hon. Ms. Howard
Committee Membership for the January 28, 2015 meeting:
· Hon. Mr. Dewar
· Hon. Mr. Gerrard
· Mr. Helwer (Chairperson)
· Mr. Jha
· Mr. Maloway
· Mr. Marcelino
· Mr. Martin
· Mr. Pedersen
· Mr. Saran
· Mr. Schuler
· Mr. Wiebe (Vice-Chairperson)
Substitutions received prior to committee proceedings on January 28, 2015:
· Mr. Martin for Mr. Friesen
· Mr. Saran for vacancy
Committee Membership for the November 4, 2015 meeting:
· Hon. Mr. Dewar
· Hon. Mr. Gerrard
· Mr. Helwer (Chairperson)
· Mr. Friesen
· Mr. Jha
· Mrs. Lathlin
· Mr. Maloway
· Mr. Marcelino
· Mr. Piwniuk
· Mrs. Stefanson
· Mr. Wiebe (Vice-Chairperson)
Substitutions received prior to committee proceedings on November 4, 2015:
· Mr. Piwniuk for Mr. Schuler
· Mrs. Stefanson for Mr. Pedersen
Officials Speaking on Record at the February 25, 2013 meeting:
· Ms. Carol Bellringer, Auditor General of Manitoba
· Hon. Mr. Struthers
· Mr. John Clarkson, Deputy Minister of Finance
Officials Speaking on Record at the May 8, 2013 meeting:
· Ms. Carol Bellringer, Auditor General of Manitoba
· Hon. Mr. Struthers
· Mr. John Clarkson, Deputy Minister of Finance
Officials Speaking on Record at the March 19, 2014 meeting:
· Ms. Carol Bellringer, Auditor General of Manitoba
· Hon. Ms. Howard
· Mr. Jim Hrichishen, Deputy Minister of Finance
Officials Speaking on Record at the September 3, 2014 meeting:
· Mr. Norm Ricard, Acting Auditor General of Manitoba
· Tyson Shtykalo, Assistant Auditor General
· Mr. Jim Hrichishen, Deputy Minister of Finance
Officials Speaking on Record at the January 28, 2015 meeting:
· Mr. Norm Ricard, Acting Auditor General of Manitoba
· Hon. Mr. Dewar
· Mr. Jim Hrichishen, Deputy Minister of Finance
Officials Speaking on Record at the November 4, 2015 meeting:
· Mr. Norm Ricard, Auditor General of Manitoba
· Hon. Mr. Dewar
· Mr. Jim Hrichishen, Deputy Minister of Finance
Agreements:
Your Committee agreed to conclude consideration of Chapter 1 – Accounts and Financial Statements: Section 10 Annual Report of the Auditor General's Report – Annual Report to the Legislature dated March 2014 at the November 4, 2015 meeting.
Reports Considered and Adopted:
Your Committee has considered the following report and has adopted the same as presented:
· Public Accounts for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2012 (Volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4)
· Public Accounts for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2013 (Volumes 1, 2, 3 and 4)
Reports Considered but not Passed:
Your Committee has considered the following reports but did not pass them:
· Auditor General's Report – Annual Report to the Legislature – dated March 2014 (Chapter 1 – concluded consideration of)
· Public Accounts for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2014 (Volumes 1, 2 and 3)
· Public Accounts for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2015 (Volumes 1, 2 and 3)
Mr. Helwer: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Piwniuk), that the report of the committee be received.
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Speaker: Any further committee reports?
Mr. Speaker: Seeing none, we'll move on to tabling of reports.
Hon. Eric Robinson (Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to table the 2015 annual report of the Manitoba Floodway and East Side Road Authority.
Mr. Speaker: Any further tabling of reports?
Hon. Kerri Irvin-Ross (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, I'd like to table the annual report for Family Services for 2014-2015.
Hon. Ron Lemieux (Minister of Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection): Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to table the 2014-15 annual report for Vital Statistics Agency for the Department of Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection.
Mr. Speaker: Any further tabling of reports? Seeing none, we'll move on to ministerial statements?
Order, please. Order. Order, please. Ministerial statements?
Mr. Speaker: Now we'll move on to members' statements.
Ms. Amanda Lathlin (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, joining us in the gallery is Deputy Chief William J. Lathlin from my community, Opaskwayak Cree Nation.
William knows as well as I do that the OCN Blizzard is a hockey team at the heart of OCN and The Pas. Now playing their 20th season, I congratulate the Blizzard on everything they've accomplished.
From the start, the Blizzard made it to their goal to be the hardest working hockey team in the Manitoba Junior Hockey League. And they have succeeded. They have won championships and they have served as a launching pad for talented players to move on to college and professional hockey.
Jordin Tootoo is one of those players. Jordin went on from the Blizzard to make his mark in the NHL with the Nashville Predators and Detroit Red Wings, and now with the New Jersey Devils.
The Blizzard shows commitment to their players off the ice as well. They work closely with their local high schools to make sure all of their players graduate with good grades. And they help their players get a head start on post-secondary degrees by awarding them scholarships by working with the University College of the North.
Having grown up watching Blizzard games with my friends and family, I can tell you that the Blizzard means a lot to my community. We still watch all the home games we can and we stay glued to the radio for away games, a habit I learned from my late father.
To the founders, coaches, staff, players and fans who have shaped the Blizzard over the past two decades, thank you for giving our community something so special.
And to Derek Fontaine, the Blizzard's general manager who passed away in January, thank you for your part in this. I bet the next–the Blizzard's next 20 years will make you proud.
Thank you.
Mr. Shannon Martin (Morris): Mr. Speaker, my grandfather attended the recruitment office in Vancouver on February 11th, 1943, enlisting at age 23, leaving behind his young wife and three kids, my father included. He found himself crossing the Atlantic to the UK for training and then on to North Africa and Italy, concluding his military service on June 9th, 1945, the results of injuries sustained during the Italian campaign which left him, according to the military, and I quote, unable to meet the required military physical standards, end quote.
I remember as a child looking up to my grandfather as the closest thing to a superhero and noticing the severe scarring on his arm. Back then as a 10‑year-old, I thought that was pretty cool and I asked my grandfather how many Nazis he killed. My grandfather, like many of his generation, never spoke about the war much. But his reaction, even all these years later, remains as vivid as ever. He turned to me, looking at me with such a quiet sadness in his eyes, a sadness shared by all those unfortunate enough to experience the horrors of war but fortunate enough to return home. He said he signed up because he saw the aggression overseas. He knew that something had to be done, that his time was more about survival than killing, that he thought of his wife and boys constantly and wondered if he ever–would ever hold them in his arms again, as opposed to the worn photograph he kept. He told me that war is a deadly combination of boredom and terror, comparing it to an out-of-control see-saw.
Every day, even today, Mr. Speaker, I regret asking my grandfather that question, that I would diminish his service to a question of notches on his belt. But I did make a point subsequent to call him every Remembrance Day and thank him. It was never a long conversation but an acknowledgement of the debt I owed him.
After he passed away, I received his original military discharge certificate. Those, along with the picture of a young serviceman, are framed in my home. He allowed me to share with my own children the stories my grandfather shared with me and for them to understand that long before the world of iPods and digital downloads existed a world on the brink, that if not for the sacrifice of people like their own great-grandfather, that perhaps the world would be a different place.
So, on this Remembrance Day, I would ask all of us to please acknowledge their efforts.
Thank you.
Mr. Clarence Pettersen (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, I ask you to consider two different numbers when it comes to northern health care: $4 million versus $8 million. On the surface, one definitely sounds better than the other, doesn't it? Except our government just invested $4 million, and $8 million is how much the Conservatives cut from northern health care the last time they were in government.
Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition's former Conservative government cut $1.9 million from the Flin Flon General Hospital alone. We have consistently taken a different approach, with planned upgrades to three health-care and senior facilities in Flin Flon this year.
Recently, we brought the northern Telestroke as well as the EMS facility in Flin Flon. Now the Flin Flon General Hospital will receive $2 million in upgrades to its emergency power system and operating rooms. We're not stopping there. Planning is nearly complete on a major project to expand and redevelop the emergency department and admitting area.
We are also investing in Flin Flon's seniors facilities. Upgrades for the Flin Flon Personal Care Home will include a new sprinkler system for improved fire safety, along with the kitchen renovations. Northern Lights Manor will receive needed improvements to its kitchen as well.
Mr. Speaker, we know from experience that the Conservatives make very little–or very different choices. The Leader of the Opposition's former government tried to privatize home care, cut home-care services and experimented with home user fees. We said no to that. Instead, we continue to invest in home care, supporting housing and other supports to help seniors stay in their homes longer.
If you think $8 million is bad, try $550 million in across-the-board cuts. That's what the Opposition Leader is pushing for, which would mean firing nurses just like they did in the '90s, and closing rural operating rooms.
Our health, our seniors, our North, these are the kinds of things our government believes in, not cuts to the services we all count on.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): As customary, on the last day I've derived my inspiration for today from the rebel five and Bruce Owen.
I've got a Tiger Dam by the tail, it's plain to see; / I won't be much when they get through with me. / Well, I'm at the losing polls and turning mighty pale. / Looks like I've got a Tiger Dam by the tail.
Well, I thought the day that I met you, you were peaking to the lead, / just the kind of guy to cover up my bad deeds. / But now the pace we're living takes the winds from my sails, / and it looks like we've got a Tiger Dam by the sail.
I got Tiger Dams by the tails, it's plain to see; / I won't be much when they get through with me. / Well, I'm losing at the polls and turning mighty pale. / Looks like I've got Tiger Dams by the tail.
* (13:40)
Well, every question period you drag me where the bright lights are found, / And there ain't no way to slow you down. / And my answers to your questions are looking mighty frail. / It looks like I've got a Tiger Dam by the tail.
I've got a Tiger Dam by the tail, it's plain to see, / And we won't be much when they get through with me. / Well, we're losing at the polls and we're turning mighty pale. / Looks like Tiger Dams have got us by the tail.
And my apologies to Buck Owens.
Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park): Mr. Speaker, tomorrow night, the Manitoba Filipino Business Council, MFBC, will host its fourth annual awards gala. It's a stylish affair that celebrates the talented entrepreneurs in Manitoba's Filipino community. It showcases important accomplishments while raising funds to pave the way for a stronger business community in Manitoba.
The council is led by President Hipolito Alibin Jr., a successful business consultant who graduated from the Red River College business administration program. It only goes to show how far this wonderful institution can take you.
The MFBC acknowledges the efforts of both small and large Filipino businesses, as well as individual enterprise, innovation and contributions to the community. I can hardly wait to find out who this year's winners are. Finalists include JOCRI Windows and Doors in Burrows and Albert Lalu of Jeepney Restaurant in Minto.
The council represents Filipino business owners working in many different sectors, including technology, finance, automotive, publishing and health care. The MFBC offers a wonderful hub for networking so that Filipino businesses and professionals can collaborate in a group that's focused on bettering the business community.
Congratulations to Hipolito and the MFBC board members. The council's efforts are making Manitoba a better place for business and strengthening the bonds of the Filipino community. Congratulations to all the finalists for making it this far, and good luck tomorrow night.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: That concludes members' statements.
Mr. Speaker: And just prior to oral questions, I'd like to draw the attention of honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us from the University of Winnipeg Collegiate, we have 52 grade 9 students under the direction of Claire Dickens, and this group is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Wolseley (Mr. Altemeyer).
On behalf of all honourable members, we welcome all of you here this afternoon.
Government Record
Mr. Brian Pallister (Leader of the Official Opposition): One year ago this week, Mr. Speaker, six government MLAs asked for change, and they ended up being supported by almost half of the delegates in a leadership race, but none of them got the change they wanted. And since then, six government members have decided they would create change themselves by changing careers.
Now, these NDP MLAs and many who remain understand that their leader cannot change, and today's rebellion budget proves that absolutely. The Premier's deepening the debts of our province. He is raising taxes. He is emptying our rainy day fund, and all of this a continuation of a reckless and dangerous financial mismanagement practice.
Would the Premier agree today that based on the actions that he's undertaken in the last while, including but not limited to the posting of a budget which has a 20 per cent higher deficit than last year, that he does not represent any positive change for the future of our province?
Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I'm proud to be part of a government that has created more jobs in this province than any other province in the country. We've done that in partnership with the private sector, the community organizations, the municipalities, of course, our Crown corporations. Everybody has been pulling together to make sure Manitoba has a steady path through this difficult time of the global economic recession and the continuing economic fragility.
And we've launched a major infrastructure program which has produced over $1 billion worth of activity on infrastructure this very summer: better roads throughout the province; better roads in the city of Winnipeg and other cities like Brandon; and in the North, better roads that have never been seen before up there; 9,600 jobs, Mr. Speaker; opportunities for young people to get good jobs and good training.
And we look forward to accelerating that program as we good for–go forward. Now that we have a federal government which is also committed to infrastructure and willing to increase the amount of money available, we can do even more in this province and make a better future for all Manitobans.
Government Record
Mr. Brian Pallister (Leader of the Official Opposition): Well, he–the Premier doesn't want to partner with Saskatchewan. He can't partner with Manitoba's municipal governments, and, in fact, half his caucus can't partner with him. So I don't think partnership is a word he should use with any integrity, Mr. Speaker, when he hasn't demonstrated an ability to build partnerships, quite frankly.
The people who know him best are not his replacement ministers, though they benefited, of course, from the dismissal of–the decisions of the front-bench ministers who rebelled against him. Certainly not the motel minister or the fairy-dust minister or the selfie-photo-op minister, they are people who don't know him well.
But those who left, those who rebelled against his leadership know him well and they know that he cannot be trusted. They've said that, that he misleads Manitobans, that he's not listening to them, that he's only focused on his re-election. They know and they've said these things, Mr. Speaker, that he will not change.
Now, will the Premier admit that his re-election budget, the one he's tabling here today, verifies the truth of all the rebels' statements about him?
Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): Mr. Speaker, the greatest threat to trade between Manitoba and any other jurisdiction is the Leader of the Opposition's policy announcement that he would never build Manitoba hydro for export.
We have $9 billion of export commitments available to us in the province of Manitoba. This will allow us to export clean energy to jurisdictions which are trying to reduce their reliance on coal, trying to reduce their reliance on lignite, trying to reduce their reliance on other sources of carbon fuels. This helps Manitoba keep our rates low for all Manitobans, including businesses and rural Manitoba and northern Manitoba. At the same time, it helps us be a partner with all the jurisdictions around us on climate change.
The leader opposite has run out and said, we will never do that; we'll cancel building hydro for export. That guarantees higher costs for Manitobans. That guarantees higher emissions for greenhouse gas emissions around the world.
That is not a policy with any vision behind it, Mr. Speaker. That's a backward-looking policy which means higher rates of unemployment and less prosperity for the people of Manitoba. That's not a partnership. That's a partnership with ideology, not a good vision for the future of Manitoba.
Mr. Pallister: Well, this Premier has broken his word on every promise, Mr. Speaker, including meeting emissions requirements.
We have record out-migration from our province. We lead the country in out-migration except for PEI. We're losing more people than every other province in the country, and he's happy about it. That's hard to believe.
But where's the change in all this? What has the Premier learned as a result of this rebellion over the last year?
He's covering up secret severance payments. That's not openness. He's hiding hydro dam contract details and analysis. That's not transparency. And he's going around every day doing ribbon cuttings with money he's taking from our kids and grandkids. That is not fiscally responsible. That's credit-card politics, nothing more. He refuses to work with neighbouring provinces. That's killing jobs here. And meanwhile, our health care ranks 10th, our education quality, 10th, our social services, dead last. His record is one of dysfunction and division, and all he's got is distraction techniques.
He responds with fantasies about our record, responds with fantasies about the 1990s, about the past. Will the Premier admit that the real reason that he keeps trying to rewrite history to change history is because he can't change himself?
Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, Manitoba has brought more people to this province since our term in office, over 130,000 people.
And in the middle of a refugee crisis that's of a global scale, 6 million Syrians alone displaced from their communities, Manitoba has said we will double the number of refugees coming to the great province of Manitoba, and we will do that in partnership with non-profit organizations. We will do that in partnership with church organizations, with members of the community.
The member–the Leader of the Opposition has been completely silent on that issue. He has said absolutely nothing.
And he complains about making ribbon-cutting announcements. What are those ribbon-cutting announcements? More skills labs, more schools, more daycare centres to help the people of Manitoba get good jobs and look after their children, more personal-care homes so that we can look after the elderly in Manitoba.
We're looking after the people of Manitoba. They want good opportunities for children. They want good opportunities for young people. We're pursuing that through a skills agenda, and I know we now have a federal partner to do that.
* (13:50)
The Leader of the Opposition: no policy, no vision, no partnership. The only person he's dancing with is his own ideology.
Effect of Tax Policies
Mrs. Heather Stefanson (Tuxedo): More photo ops means more broken promises for Manitobans, Mr. Speaker. It's unfortunate.
Mr. Speaker, since the NDP came to power in 1999, Manitoba's net interprovincial migration lost is the largest in Canada with 6.54 per cent of the population moving elsewhere in Canada.
Will the minister just admit that his high-tax‑and-spend policies are driving Manitobans to other provinces?
Hon. Kevin Chief (Minister of Jobs and the Economy): I do want to say for the member, you know, when I was out in Morden-Winkler, I got to meet with over 100 businesses, Mr. Speaker, and when the Leader of the Opposition was sitting around the Cabinet table, Morden–he lost 30,000, net loss 30,000 in the population. That's like losing the town of Morden four times over. That's like losing Winkler four times over. That was the plan that the Leader of the Opposition had then. I ask the member from Winkler: Is that the same plan he has now?
Simply put, Mr. Speaker, I ask them over and over again, why won't they ask the leader, is that his plan today, or is it a different plan he has now? I think they're scared to ask their leader. In fact, I think they don't even know what the Leader of the Opposition's plan even is.
Mrs. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, since the NDP took office in 1999, almost 75,000 Manitobans have moved to other provinces. That's the equivalent of Brandon, Steinbach, Swan River and Dauphin put together.
Mr. Speaker, will the minister just admit that his high-tax-and-spend policies are driving Manitobans to other provinces?
Mr. Chief: Mr. Speaker, since our government was elected, the population has grown by 150,000, and the Leader of the Opposition, sitting around the Cabinet table, a 30,000 loss.
But not only that, Mr. Speaker, when you have one of the strongest economies in the country, it creates a demand for high-skill jobs. BuildForce Canada has come out and said, in the next 10 years, there's going to be a demand for 12,000 jobs in the construction industry alone. We know we can meet that demand because we have an incredible demographic of indigenous young people. We support and stand with our newcomers and our refugees, and we are seeing more women in the trades now than we ever have before in our history. That's our record.
Once again, will the member from Tuxedo ask: What plan does the leader have for Manitobans? Is it the same plan where we lost 30,000 people when he sat at–
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister's time on this question has elapsed.
Mrs. Stefanson: Well, this is a minister that belongs to a government that's responsible for driving seventy–more than–almost 75,000 Manitobans out of our province, and many of those are young people.
Mr. Speaker, since this Premier (Mr. Selinger) took over the leadership of his party for the first time, the number of people leaving for other provinces has tripled. And the majority of these people are, in fact, young people under the age of 40.
Will he just admit that his high-tax-and-spend policies are driving Manitobans–and in particular, young Manitobans–to other provinces, Mr. Speaker? This is a very serious issue.
Mr. Chief: Once again, Mr. Speaker, one of the strongest economies in the country leads to one of the fastest job growths.
What kind of jobs are we talking about for our young people in Manitoba? Boilermakers, bricklayers, carpenters, concrete finishers, construction estimators, construction managers, construction millwrights, contractors, supervisors, crane operators, electricians; it goes on and on. We have a plan to meet the demand for this job, Mr. Speaker.
I ask again: The member from Steinbach, the member from Tuxedo, the member from Morden-Winkler, have they asked their leader, does he have a plan? Is it the same plan he had when he was in government, Mr. Speaker, or does he have a different plan?
I think they're scared to ask the leader what his plan is, Mr. Speaker, because it's a scary plan. It scares me, it scares Manitobans, and, clearly, they don't have the courage to stand up and ask their own leader what his plan is.
Service Provision Concerns
Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, I felt sick today when I heard that a woman had had a double mastectomy when she did not need one; she did not have cancer. I cannot even begin to imagine the emotional distress of this woman and her family.
Now, I'd like to ask the Minister of Health (Ms. Blady) to explain to Manitoba women how this could possibly happen in today's day and age.
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Acting Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, errors, mistakes and tragedies in the health-care system and incidents as the member's talking about are tragic, and no member in this House doesn't want to provide sympathy and understanding to the terrible mistake that happened. And, unfortunately, in a system that does over a million procedures every year, and as well as we try, mistakes can and will happen.
What we can do, Mr. Speaker, as a universal health-care system that we believe in, as a public system, is to try to, every time there's an error or mistake, to try to see what went wrong and try to make sure that that terrible thing never happens again. And you only do that by reporting mistakes, and we do that online quarterly.
Mrs. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time that this has happened. That's what makes this even more troubling.
In 2010 two breast cancer biopsies were switched in Winnipeg, leading to one woman having a lumpectomy when she did not need it, while another who did have cancer had a 10-week delay for treatment. The NDP promised then, in 2010, that they would ensure that this didn't happen again. Five years later, it happened again.
So I'd like to ask the minister: How can this possibly have happened again after we had the incident in 2010? Did they not learn anything or do anything about it?
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, when we came to office there was no reporting system for errors in the health-care system. Mistakes were put under the rug.
We went and examined the airline industry, Mr. Speaker, and we took as an example–we're the first jurisdiction in the country to examine the airline industry and put in place reporting errors and learning from critical incidents and providing that information so it doesn't happen again.
Mr. Speaker, I'm sorry to say that even in the airline industry mistakes happen every single day, but every time there's a mistake and an error, we try to improve the system and learn from that so there's less likelihood it would happen again.
Mr. Speaker, every day in Manitoba there are tens of thousands of contacts between hospitals, patients and the public. We are trying to make sure that no errors occur. Unfortunately, as human beings, as a system, mistakes will occur.
The biggest mistake we can make is to not learn from them and not try to make the system better as a result of reporting these mistakes and putting them online and trying to learn from them.
Mrs. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, the double mastectomy happened in 2014, yet to date, 2015, Manitoba Health will not say what is being done to prevent this from happening again. It looks like it has been swept under the rug. That is alarming, that is unacceptable, and that is exactly why Manitobans need change.
I would like to ask the minister to explain this government's refusal to tell Manitoba women what is being done today to prevent this from happening again.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, not only we–have we put in place a critical incident reporting system, but we've put in a follow-up system of safety checks in place, and every time an error occurs we're able to prevent it, as we're able to prevent, perhaps, a future incident.
And while we're not perfect, I want to indicate they are now using a checklist prior to the beginning of surgery that wasn't done before. There's now smart infusion pumps that wasn't put in place before. We're now ensuring formal communications between health-care pertinent patients and other information on shift changes to ensure that occurs. That's as a result of mistakes that have occurred and systems put in place to prevent those mistakes.
In Saskatchewan, the head of the quality council said, quote: Perhaps a good way to start walking the talk would be to follow Manitoba's lead and be absolutely transparent.
Mr. Speaker, we're not proud of those mistakes, but we are trying to learn from them, and every time there is an error or mistake we try to make sure that doesn't happen again. We're not perfect, but we're trying to do the best we can in a human system.
Disclosure Practices
Mr. Reg Helwer (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker, the NDP government has regularly broken The Financial Administration Act by wilfully not disclosing untendered contracts. Now they are changing that law to suit their needs.
* (14:00)
If BITSA passes, the government will be able to decide which under–tendered contracts it wishes to disclose and which it can hide. It will select the contracts to disclose through regulation rather than following the law.
The NDP are saying, trust us. This is the NDP that asked Manitobans to trust them, lied about tax increases and raised the PST. Mr. Speaker, with the NDP, Manitobans are paying more and getting less.
How can Manitobans trust anything promised by this tired NDP government?
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Acting Minister of Finance): Well, there's another entirely predictable question from the local Stephen Harper franchise.
You know, I don't know how often we have to hear from them about shrinking the economy, about shrinking the number of jobs, about shrinking the usefulness of government to Manitobans who need someone on their side, Mr. Speaker, but today there's a question before the House, and we are asking members, all members of this House, will they please vote for steady growth, good jobs, or are they going to stick with their old platform of no growth, odd jobs.
Mr. Helwer: Mr. Speaker, the member for Fort Rouge (Ms. Howard) said that, quote, we cannot work together on the priorities of Manitobans if we cannot be honest with the Premier (Mr. Selinger). End quote.
Now this NDP government is asking Manitobans to trust them, to believe they will be open and honest and disclose untendered contracts, when we regularly find contracts that were untendered and undisclosed hidden from Manitobans. Mr. Speaker, Manitobans are tired of NDP broken promises and want change for the better.
What will this minister hide from Manitobans next?
Mr. Mackintosh: Well, the member knows, and they were briefed, that The Financial Administration Act is being appropriately amended, as recommended by the Office of the Auditor General.
But, Mr. Speaker, I know they want to chip around the edges, but today's the big vote. And I–actually, I have to admit there are some members on this side that actually did the right thing back then, and we voted for a Filmon budget. And maybe it's time for members opposite to think about doing the right thing and vote for tomorrow today.
Mr. Helwer: Mr. Speaker, Manitobans are telling us they're tired of these tax increases.
Changes under BITSA will allow this NDP government to pick and choose which untendered contracts they will disclose to Manitobans and which they will keep hidden.
Why should Manitobans trust anything said or promised by this NDP government?
Mr. Mackintosh: Well, Mr. Speaker, of course, not only does BITSA set forth the new process, as recommended by the Office of the Auditor General, it sets out the different kinds of contracts. It'll signal those that are tendered versus those that are untendered.
So what the member really should be thinking about is how he's going to vote today, Mr. Speaker. Is he going to vote for senior homeowners? Is he going to vote for volunteer firefighters? Is he going to vote for film tax credits? Is he going to vote for farmers? Is he going to vote for research and development?
How about voting for film and–or how about the printing of Canadian books, digital media in Brandon? Oh, a little helpful hint here. Or flood protection, the Daly Overpass, Brandon airport, First Street Bridge, ACC at–
An Honourable Member: At the new North Hill.
Mr. Mackintosh: Yes, at the North Hill.
Whoa, get on board. Join the crowd. Get with tomorrow. Vote today, the right way.
Cottage Fee Increases
Mr. Shannon Martin (Morris): The NDP's efforts to sow division amongst Manitobans is illustrated by their efforts to portray the tens of thousands of Manitobans who enjoy cottage life as freeloaders, Mr. Speaker.
Given the minister's flip-flopping in–on several issues in Estimates, can the minister indicate whether or not he has a–has had a change of heart when it comes to the 750 per cent increase on service and lease fee increases that he's imposing on cottagers?
Hon. Thomas Nevakshonoff (Minister of Conservation and Water Stewardship): I thank the member for the question raising the topic of cottages in our province.
Of course, this is the government that put in place a cottage lot program and created more than 1,000 additional cottage lots for the benefit of the people. And, of course, many of those cottage lots are, indeed, located in our parks in Manitoba as well, something that this government pays particular attention to.
Mr. Speaker, unlike members opposite, we made a $100-million commitment to improve our parks over an eight-year period. This is a process that is well under way, many of them in the constituencies of members opposite. Spruce Woods park comes to mind, a park that was profoundly impacted by the flood of 2011. Not only did we repair that damage, Mr. Speaker, but we improved upon that park.
So we stand by our record on–in regard to our parks in this province; too bad members opposite don't.
Thank you.
Mr. Martin: Mr. Speaker, while the NDP continue their attacks on cottagers, comparing anyone who owns a cottage to Mr. Nygård, the facts, not surprisingly, don't match up to their assertions.
As noted in the Whiteshell Echo, Mr. Speaker, and I quote: Cottagers are simply ordinary Manitobans, many of them fixed-income seniors who have prioritized their expenditures and found ways by dint of hard work and sweat equity to build and enjoy their cabins. End quote.
Will the minister today stand up and, on behalf of his government, apologize for–to cottagers for his inaccurate, inflammatory characterizations?
Mr. Nevakshonoff: Well, once again, Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for the question.
We all want to enjoy the cottage life here in Manitoba, a beautiful province with over 100,000 lakes. We want it to be affordable and fair for all Manitobans. That's why the issue of cottage fees came to light, fees that pay for a great range of services, Mr. Speaker.
Just to give you an example, shortly after I was appointed minister, I had the pleasure to open up a new regional fire control centre in the constituency of Lac du Bonnet. Almost $10 million invested by this government to protect our parks, to protect our cottages. Those are the types of services that Manitobans have come to expect and deserve. They–
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister's time on this question has elapsed.
Mr. Martin: The NDP claim that the revenues from the 750 per cent increase in lease and service fees will go towards park infrastructure.
Perhaps the minister who, granted, has said, and I quote, that budgets are complicated, end quote, can circle the square for cottagers as to why, according to page 135 of his own Estimates book, capital investment, including refurbishment and upgrading of park facilities, has been cut by $28 million, or 54 per cent, since 2012.
Mr. Speaker, where's the money going? Because we know where it's not going.
Mr. Nevakshonoff: Well, Mr. Speaker, I'm surprised the former member of the Canadian federation for independent business criticizes a government when they're trying to show fiscal restraint, as we are on this side of the House.
But we're not doing it, Mr. Speaker, by sacrificing any front-line services whatsoever. There are a hundred and thirteen or fourteen conservation officers in the field; that number remains firm. We're not cutting any money to front-line services.
We are doing things in a fiscally restrained manner and delivering the services that Manitobans expect and deserve.
Government Record
Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden-Winkler): Mr. Speaker, he wants to speak about fiscal restraint.
Well, today the NDP government members will rise and vote in support of a budget that shows no change and continues the NDP legacy of high tax, high spend, low results, a budget where expenditures will exceed revenues by almost half a billion dollars. This despite a broken-promise PST that rakes in hundreds of millions of dollars each year in additional revenue. And they still can't balance their budget; in fact, the deficit is up, not down.
Will the Finance Minister just admit today that he doesn't have a plan and that today he and his NDP colleagues will actually vote for a broken budget of mismanagement and overspending that threatens front-line services?
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Acting Minister of Finance): Yes, the continuing and faint echo of the local Stephen Harper franchise, there they go again, Mr. Speaker, over and over again. How often do we have to listen to this?
Yes, shrink the number of jobs, shrink the economy, shrink opportunities, shrink government. Ah, Mr. Speaker, Manitobans are on to them; they know what a risk they are.
Mr. Friesen: That member knows that the new Finance Minister, the third Finance minister in three years, made a promise to Manitobans less than a year ago. He said he had a plan to return to surplus by controlling expenditures.
Well, the fiscal year ended three months later, and now the annual reports show he did not control expenditure. Government spending is not down; it is up by over $200 million over budget. Another NDP broken promise and Manitobans pay the price.
Will the NDP Finance Minister admit today that when his members stand up, they are standing for a broken budget, for a broken fiscal record, or will they stand up for Manitobans who are tired of paying more and getting less?
* (14:10)
Mr. Mackintosh: Well, Mr. Speaker, they still have a chance on the clock. They can change their minds. Some of them can change their minds. We welcome that.
But it is time that they made up a–made a decision to vote for a budget that's fair to all. Perhaps, Mr. Speaker, they would have voted for the budget if it made major cuts to taxes for the wealthy and powerful, all their friends. But this is a budget that works for all Manitobans. It works for the future.
Mr. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, I would remind that member that debt servicing costs are up again this year, almost $850 million.
Moody's first warned this government, then it downgraded the Province's credit rating, the first credit downgrade in 30 years. Moody's cites–cited steady growth in deficits and debt despite all the NDP promises to get on track. They cited a loss of fiscal discipline.
Every member who–of the NDP who stands in support of this broken budget stands for rising debt costs that siphon resources from front-line services.
When the time comes to vote this afternoon, will these members stand in support of this broken budget, or will they stand up for Manitobans?
Mr. Mackintosh: Well, Mr. Speaker, I don't know if they want to hear this, but I'll put it on the record and they don't have to listen. But–
Some Honourable Members: They never do.
Mr. Mackintosh: –they never do, yes.
But I've got a note here, and I've got to trust this note, and it says the CFIB–the member for Morris (Mr. Martin)–[interjection]–yes, I couldn't hear you over your tie–the member for Morris is going to have to listen to this: Manitoba small businesses are more optimistic than last month. Small-business optimism increased by 6 points from September.
So, you know, we love small business, and if they love small business, they'd vote for the budget today.
Funding for Services
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, in this province we've seen the ravages of depression, and particularly postpartum depression. The NDP government's reactive answer is more and more drugs. Treating depression with psychological services like cognitive behavioural therapy is now as successful as drugs in the short run and proactively much more successful than drugs in the long run.
Why are the NDP advocating the short-term fix of a drug a day instead of doing what Manitoba Liberals will do, and that is to provide additional funding needed so Manitobans can get access to psychological services when they need them?
Hon. Greg Selinger (Premier): It is an important question.
And the member will know we brought in the most progressive legislation to treat post-traumatic stress disorder under the workers' compensation fund and it's available to all working people of Manitoba to deal with mental health issues that arise out of serious incidents that they've experienced in the workplace. That is a very important policy initiative that we've taken in Manitoba and passed that legislation into law.
And it is an example for countries all around the world that have working people that do risky jobs. Some of these people are front-line service deliverers such as paramedics, firefighters and police officers, but they're also social workers, people work–that work in the field of domestic violence and even people that work in service industries where at–late at night they can be subject to, for example, a robbery and have trauma as a result of that.
That post-traumatic stress disorder legislation leads the world, Mr. Speaker. I'm proud that we've done it in Manitoba. I'm proud we put it into law. And I know services are already being made available to the working people of Manitoba on that. That's progress on mental health in Manitoba.
Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, one step forward, but there are many, many people who are still falling through the gaps.
The Children's Advocate, for example, has said that there's a major shortfall in funding for psychological services in Manitoba, with the result that many children in care who have complex needs are not able to get the help they need. This NDP government is failing to meet the complex needs of children in care.
Why has the Premier never done what Manitoba Liberals will do and pay attention to the needs of children by providing much better funding for psychological services in our province?
Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the best thing we can do for young children is to provide prevention programs that will help them deal with the stresses that they experience in their lives.
And that's why we brought in programs to our schools such as roots to empathy, and an additional program called the Seeds of Empathy where young people get to experience infants, the family experience of how to deal with an infant, to learn the skills of empathy and communication.
We also have an additional program that's called PAX. It teaches young people how to deal with conflict without resorting to violence or abusive behaviour. Those skills–that program is in over 200 schools. We added 50 schools this year. That allows young people to be more resilient in challenging times, when families are going through difficulties in the economy, families are moving back to Manitoba in cases, and we're taking people from around the world.
We need our schools to work with young people to provide them the skills they need to navigate the complexities of life, and that's what we're doing, Mr. Speaker. And we're leading the country in those kinds of initiatives in our public schools.
Mr. Gerrard: And forgetting about the children with complex needs who need psychological services.
Mr. Speaker, there was a long waiting list for children who need a psychological assessment to obtain the appropriate support while they're still young and in school. Yet in 16 years, the current NDP government has underfunded psychological services so that children in need in Manitoba have to wait and wait and wait. And some even eventually age out of any chance for childhood supports.
Why has the NDP government, in 16 years, failed to do what a Manitoba Liberal government will do in order to give children a better future for our province?
Mr. Selinger: Mr. Speaker, the member should vote for the budget today if he's concerned about mental health services. We brought in a complete mental health strategy in this budget. We've added additional couple–$2 million to that strategy to build on work that we've already done.
We work in communities with–on suicide prevention issues. We work with our social service agencies to provide mental health services. Young people in Manitoba have taken a real lead on this. Our antibullying legislation is in there to protect people from abusive behaviour and being labelled and degraded for who they are. We support people in their identity–search for their identity to be who they really are. That's why we brought the antibullying legislation. The mental health strategy that we've put in place in this province supports that.
We work with young people. I was at an event at The Forks just a few weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, where young people from schools all around Winnipeg and, indeed, Manitoba were forming peer groups to support each other in the schools, to find ways to be supportive to people that feel isolated and left out and give them a sense of inclusion.
I'm proud we supported that legislation. I only wish the opposition would've supported it. They chose not to. They believe in excluding people in our society. We believe in including them and treating them with respect and dignity.
Investments in Core Infrastructure
Mr. Dave Gaudreau (St. Norbert): Mr. Speaker, all around this province this summer we saw construction sites. There was construction everywhere from Emerson, Morden and Winkler and all the way up to Churchill, from the Whiteshell all the way to Virden. Every single member across the way asked for construction, and we delivered.
This afternoon I was at an announcement with the Minister of Transportation, and he said that the–we have record year of construction in our province. Not only did we have a record year in groundbreaking, a record year in construction.
Can the Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation please inform the House about what those record-breaking, groundbreaking and all the construction means to Manitoba?
Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Infrastructure and Transportation): Well, Mr. Speaker, it's great to talk about our investments to core infrastructure in this province.
I want to put on the record we set a target of $1 billion investment in core infrastructure. We met it last year; we've met it again this year, Mr. Speaker.
I want to put on the record that in our first full year, Mr. Speaker, in terms of our 10-year plan, we increased the construction budget on our highways by 44 per cent. We've increased it another 10 per cent on top of that this year.
Mr. Speaker, last year we were proud when we had the second best year in terms of paving. This year it's the best in history, 30 per cent any year ever in Manitoba history.
So, Mr. Speaker, that's 6,650 jobs. That's steady growth; that's good jobs. That's the get-'er-done government rather than the shut-'er-down opposition.
Government Record
Mr. Doyle Piwniuk (Arthur-Virden): Mr. Speaker, Manitobans are tired of the NDP's broken promises to reopen emergency rooms they closed down. Many Manitobans have taken to highway medicine to seek critical care because of NDP's dysfunction and mismanagement.
Will this Health Minister admit today that she and her NDP government has lost trust of Manitobans and that, clearly, the people in rural Manitoba are not a priority for this NDP government?
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Acting Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, clearly, 80 per cent of the expenditures in health care go to the people that provide that care: nurses, doctors, lab technicians and others.
* (14:20)
We have, net, in Manitoba 750 more doctors than we did when we came to office. We have 1,500 more nurses, net of all retirements, et cetera, since we've come to office. We have opened 22 or are in the process of opening 22 clinics around Manitoba, including QuickCare clinics outside of Winnipeg. We're buying new ambulances and refurbishing the ambulance fleet. That's called investing in people, investing in structures and investing in the health care of Manitobans.
And the members opposite have voted against it in every budget, and this year, today, they have a chance to vote in favour of health care across the province.
Mr. Piwniuk: More closures, Mr. Speaker. Rural Manitobans are told that there is no emergency department services at the Hamiota District Health Centre for seven days this month alone. The fine people of Melita will have no emergency department services for 18 days this month, and the people of Roblin still have no emergency care from Monday to Thursday because, apparently, this NDP government believes people only deserve care on weekends.
Mr. Speaker, what does this Health Minister say to the people of Manitoba who are paying more and getting less and forced to use highway medicine because of this NDP government's mismanagement?
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, in Manitoba we have a large concentrated population in Winnipeg, and then we have a large urban centre in Brandon, and then we have scattered growing populations in rural Manitoba. I'm very happy that there's a lot of rural communities, like Morden, Winkler, Steinbach, Brandon, Thompson, that are expanding as a result of economic opportunities. This means that we have to provide those services to those communities.
And I guess the best way to look at it–when I look at a graph provided by an independent agency called CIHI, the Canadian institute of health information, it indicates that Manitoba has more physicians working in rural Manitoba than in BC, than in Alberta, than in Ontario, than in Quebec and even more than in Saskatchewan.
Mr. Piwniuk: Mr. Speaker, promises made, promises broken. NDP's ways continues to threaten essential front-line services. A track record of broken promises and of trust is the legacy of this NDP government in this province.
A year ago, one of the many former Health ministers said: People feel angry; they feel that this Premier (Mr. Selinger) has broken their trust.
Mr. Speaker, where are the good people of this–western Manitoba supposed to go when they need ER–when ERs are closed?
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I note that there's been more building of personal-care homes and more renewing of hospitals and more renewal of equipment than any other time in the history of the province, be it urban or be it rural.
And one of the best statistics–and I remember having this discussion with Conservative members when we came into office who were decrying there weren't enough doctors in Manitoba, and I said, well, it takes many, many years to train doctors to put them in Manitoba, so we now have more in rural Manitoba.
But I look at the chart of doctors in Manitoba, and I look for the last five years of the Conservative government. Number of doctors in Manitoba: zero, minus 19, minus 75, minus three, minus 19. I look for our last five years: plus 57, plus an additional 66, plus an additional 61, plus an additional 83, plus an additional 66.
That's on top of the millions of dollars invested in rural health-care facilities, new ambulances, and they're going to vote against it today.
Mr. Speaker: Time for oral questions has expired.
Mr. Speaker: It is now time for petitions.
Provincial Trunk Highway 206 and Cedar Avenue in Oakbank–Pedestrian Safety
Mr. Ron Schuler (St. Paul): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Every day, hundreds of Manitoba children walk to school in Oakbank and must cross PTH 206 at the intersection with Cedar Avenue.
(2) There have been many dangerous incidents where drivers use the right shoulder to pass vehicles that have stopped at the traffic light waiting to turn left at this intersection.
(3) Law enforcement officials have identified this intersection as a hot spot of concern for the safety of schoolchildren, drivers and emergency responders.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge that the provincial government improve the safety at the pedestrian corridor at the intersection of PTH 206 and Cedar Avenue in Oakbank by considering such steps as highlighting pavement markings to better indicate the location of the shoulders and crosswalk, as well as installing a lighted crosswalk structure.
This is signed by L. Pats, D. Jobb, J. Middleton and many, many other fine Manitobans.
Mr. Speaker: In keeping with our rule 132(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to have been received by the House.
Beausejour District Hospital–Weekend and Holiday Physician Availability
Mr. Wayne Ewasko (Lac du Bonnet): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
And these are the reasons for this petition:
(1) The Beausejour District Hospital is a 30-bed, acute-care facility that serves the communities of Beausejour and Brokenhead.
(2) The hospital and the primary-care centre have had no doctor available on weekends and holidays for many months, jeopardizing the health and livelihoods of those in the northeast region of the Interlake-Eastern Regional Health Authority.
(3) During the 2011 election, the provincial government promised to provide every Manitoban with access to a family doctor by 2015.
(4) This promise is far from being realized, and Manitobans are witnessing many emergency rooms limiting services or closing temporarily, with the majority of these reductions taking place in rural Manitoba.
(5) According to the Health Council of Canada, only 25 per cent of doctors in Manitoba reported that their patients had access to care on evenings and weekends.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government and the Minister of Health to ensure that the Beausejour District Hospital and primary-care centre have a primary-care physician available on weekends and holidays to better provide area residents with this essential service.
This petition is signed by S. Hildebrandt, B. Hutlet, S. Godin and many more fine Manitobans.
Manitoba Interlake–Request to Repair and Reopen Provincial Roads 415 and 416
Mr. Ralph Eichler (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
These are the reasons for this petition:
(1) The Interlake region is an important transportation corridor for Manitoba but, unfortunately, is still dealing with the serious underinvestment in infrastructure under this provincial government.
(2) Provincial roads 415 and 416 are vital to the region but have still not been repaired or reopened since sustaining damages during the 2010 flood.
(3) Residences and businesses in Manitoba Interlake are seriously impacted and inconvenienced by having no adequate access east-west travel routes over the area of 525 square miles.
(4) This lack of east-west travel routes is also a major public safety concern, as emergency response vehicles are impeded from arriving in a timely manner.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to repair and reopen provincial roads 415 and 416 to allow adequate east-west travel in the Interlake.
And this petition's submitted on behalf of L. Griffin, R. Carter, D. Cook and many other fine Manitobans.
Mr. Blaine Pedersen (Midland): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
These are the reasons for this petition:
The Interlake region is an important transportation corridor for Manitoba but, unfortunately, is still dealing with serious underinvestment in the infrastructure under this provincial government.
Provincial roads 415 and 416 are vital to the region but have still not been repaired or reopened since sustaining damages during the 2010 flood.
Residents and businesses in the Manitoba Interlake are seriously impacted and inconvenienced by having no adequate east-west travel routes over an area of 525 square miles.
This lack of east-west travel routes is also a major public safety concern, as emergency response vehicles are impeded from arriving in a timely manner.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge that the provincial government repair and reopen provincial roads 415 and 416 to allow adequate east-west travel in the Interlake.
And this petition is signed by K. Flitcroft, C. Mackie, M. Green and many more fine Manitobans.
Community-Based Brain Injury Services and Supports
Mr. Cliff Cullen (Spruce Woods): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
The background to this petition is as follows:
Brain Injury Canada, cited at the website braininjurycanada.ca/acquired-brain-injury, estimates that 50,000 Canadians sustain brain injuries each year; over 1 million Canadians live with the effects of an acquired brain injury; and 30 per cent of all traumatic brain injuries are sustained by children and youth; and approximately 50 per cent of brain injuries come from falls and motor-vehicle collisions.
Studies conducted by Manitoba Health in 2003 and 2006 and the Brandon Regional Health Authority in 2008 identified the need for community‑based brain injury services.
* (14:30)
These studies recommended that Manitoba adopt the Saskatchewan model of brain injury services.
The treatment and coverage for Manitobans who suffer brain injuries varies greatly, resulting in huge inadequacies depending upon whether a person suffers the injury at work, in a motor-vehicle accident, through assault or from medical issues such as a stroke, aneurysm or anoxia due to cardiac arrest or other medical reasons.
Although in-patient services including acute care, short- and longer term rehabilitation are available throughout the province, brain injury patients who are discharged from hospital often experience discontinuation or great reduction of services which results in significant financial and emotional burdens being placed on family and friends.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to develop and evolve community-based brain injury services that include but are not limited to case management services, known also as service navigation; safe and accessible housing in the community; proctor or coach-type assistant for community reintegration programs; improved access to community-based rehabilitation services; and improved transportation, especially for people living in rural Manitoba.
To urge the provincial government to encompass financial and emotional supports for families and other caregivers in the model that is developed.
This petition is signed by H. Thornborough, D. Ediger, C. Ediger and many other fine Manitobans.
Mr. Speaker: That concludes petitions, so we'll now move on to grievances.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
(Continued)
(Continued)
Mr. Speaker: Seeing no grievances, we'll move on to orders of the day, government business.
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you please canvass the House to see if there's leave for the Estimates remaining in the Chamber section to be moved into room 254, to follow after Multiculturalism and Literacy, and for the section of Estimates meeting in room 254 to sit simultaneously with the House?
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House for the Estimates remaining in the Chamber section to be moved into room 254, to follow after Multiculturalism and Literacy, and for the section of Estimates meeting in room 254 to sit simultaneously with the House? Is there leave? [Agreed]
The honourable Government House Leader, on further House business.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I would like to call the following bills for third reading: Bill 19, Bill 28, Bill 38, Bill 37, Bill 30, Bill 41 and Bill 45.
Following that, Mr. Speaker, I will have more House business, including the main and capital process. And in addition, 254 will be meeting in Supply.
Mr. Speaker: So while the Committee of Supply is sitting in room 254, we will proceed with concurrence and third readings of Bill 19, Bill 28, Bill 30, Bill 37, Bill 38, Bill 41 and Bill 45.
* (14:40)
Mr. Chairperson (Rob Altemeyer): Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This section of the Committee of Supply will now resume consideration of the Estimates for the Department of Multiculturalism and Literacy.
As previously agreed, questioning for this department will proceed in a global manner, and the floor is open for questions.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Manitoba compared with other provinces has traditionally had a higher rate of illiteracy, a lower rate of literacy.
I wonder if the minister can tell us just what the latest statistics are in terms of the portion of adults who are at different levels of literacy and how that compares with other provinces.
Hon. Flor Marcelino (Minister of Multiculturalism and Literacy): Thank you to my colleague for that question.
I am proud to say that Manitoba Multiculturalism and Literacy supports opportunities for Manitobans to live fulfilling lives in healthy and vibrant communities. I have visited all of the learning and literacy centres outside of Winnipeg and several within Winnipeg, and I have noticed that their students are increasing. I have the figures for the number of students–just a sec, if you can bear with me, please. In 2004 we saw 1,366 adult students graduate with a high school diploma from an adult learning centre. And our funding for adult literacy and learning centres is more than $19 million higher than in 1999. That means more Manitobans getting the skills they need to good–get a good job and raise the family.
Now, specifically, our–for our enrollment–for year-end statistics for 2014-15 school year will be available in the fall this year. However, statistics for 2013-14 school year indicate that 8,409 learners completed 11,752 courses for high school credit. And 1,329 adult learning centre learners graduated with a secondary high school diploma. And of these figures, 568 graduates self-declared–were self-declared as Aboriginal, First Nations, Metis and other Aboriginal.
More figures: in 2014-15, Adult Learning and Literacy provided grants to 33 agencies to provide adult literacy programming. Year-end statistics for 2013-14 indicate that 2,254 individuals participated in adult literacy programming: 40 per cent were male, 59 per cent female; 1 per cent were undeclared; 19 per cent were in the 19 to 24 age group; 30 per cent in the 25 to 34 age group; 24 per cent were in the 35 to 44 age group; 16 per cent were in the 45 to 54 age group; 8 per cent were over 55; 2 per cent were under 19; and 1 per cent were undeclared.
Likewise, 40 per cent identified themselves as Aboriginal learners; 28 per cent said English was not their first language.
Upon registration in the adult literacy program, 31 per cent of learners were at stage 1 level; 45 per cent were at stage 2 level, and 24 per cent were at stage 3 level.
Okay, more figures–
Mr. Chairperson: Honourable member for River Heights.
Mr. Gerrard: Yes, that's my questions. I think we're ready to go to line by line now.
Mr. Chairperson: Okay. Seeing no further questions, we will now proceed to consideration of the resolutions.
Resolution 44.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $401,000 for Multiculturalism and Literacy, Multiculturalism Secretariat, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 44.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $20,899,000 for Multiculturalism and Literacy, Adult Learning and Literacy, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
We're now on to consideration of the minister's salary, which is item 44.1.(a), contained in resolution 44.1.
The floor is open for questions, if any.
Seeing none, we will proceed to consideration of the resolution.
Resolution 44.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $272,000 for Multiculturalism and Literacy, Executive, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
This completes the Estimates of the Department for Multiculturalism and Literacy.
Mr. Chairperson (Rob Altemeyer): The next set of Estimates to be considered here are the–by the Committee of Supply is for the Department of Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection.
Does the committee wish to have a brief recess, or shall we just head straight into it?
Full speed ahead it is.
Very good. So we're now here getting ready to consider the Estimates for the Department of Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection.
Does the honourable minister have an opening statement?
Hon. Ron Lemieux (Minister of Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection): No. No, I don't.
Mr. Chairperson: Okay, thank you for that.
Does the opposition critic have a opening statement of any sorts?
Mr. Doyle Piwniuk (Arthur-Virden): Yes, I have.
Okay, I guess the opening statement I have is just, basically, that my portion of the critic role, as PC Party, is the–is tourism, heritage and culture. And I guess the biggest thing is the importance of this department is to promote our culture in the area but, also, at the same–importantly, is to actually promote the province of Manitoba when it comes to tourism, culture and heritage.
I–right now, I–sort of concerning that we pay about half as much as Saskatchewan when it comes to tourism in our province, and, again, we have such great assets in this province to promote. We have Churchill to the north; we have Winnipeg with many cultural centre–culture hub of the Prairies. We have, you know, the human rights museum, which is probably the only federally funded museum outside of Ottawa, which is very impressive, and thanks to the Conservative government for selecting Winnipeg for that.
And I think it's important that we continue to promote this province as importance, that this is where we can get a lot of our economic spin-off, is from brining people into the–into this province for, when it comes to promoting our naturally–our natural beauty that we have in this province. And that's why I think it's so important that there should be some more–bigger investment in this province.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank the official opposition critic for those remarks.
Under Manitoba practice, debate on the minister's salary is the last item considered for department in the Committee of Supply. Accordingly, we shall now defer consideration of line item 14.1.(a) contained in resolution 14.1.
If there's any staff here, they can come to the head table, but the main question before us, do we want to proceed in a global or chronological order for questioning.
Mr. Piwniuk: I would say global.
Mr. Chairperson: Global has been suggested. Minister, is that acceptable? [Agreed]
All right, it is therefore agreed questioning for this department will proceed in a global manner. All resolutions to be passed once questioning has concluded.
Wouldn't you know it, the floor is open for questions.
Mr. Piwniuk: I guess the biggest question I have, being that I'm from Arthur-Virden and right beside the Manitoba-Saskatchewan border: What is the future plans for–and I have many of my constituents ask me this question–about the Kirkella tourist information centre on the Trans-Canada Highway?
Mr. Lemieux: Let me just say, first of all, Travel Manitoba's doing a fantastic job with tourism in the province, and I know the member put a couple of comments on the record in his opening statement with regard to where we're going in Tourism. And, you know, we certainly have a goal, and I know Travel Manitoba has a goal of reaching the $2-billion mark by 2020 with regard to what is happening in tourism in the province of Manitoba.
We're currently at about a $1.5-billion industry, and thanks to a lot of the private sector that are doing a great job in tourism in the province. And Travel Manitoba's new brand has really taken off not only across Canada, but around the world. It's where Canada's heart beats–or Manitoba: Canada's Heart Beats, and it has been a fantastic promotion and advertising campaign.
The member did mention a couple of things with regard to the kind of funding that we put forth with regard to Travel Manitoba. I know that we've had discussions with the Manitoba Chambers of Commerce and others on taking a look at a potential new funding formula. And–but I have to say, when you're investing $150 million in Highway 75 going to Emerson, all those tourists that came here for FIFA, the women's world soccer championship and the 21–or $12 million that came to Manitoba's economy as a result of that–result of the soccer championship, and a 57 per cent increase in tourism because of FIFA–a lot of that, all that rubber-wheel traffic was coming from Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota. And so those investments, arguably, could be made that they are direct investments into tourism as well. Not only fixing the highways of the province, but also investing in tourism.
So I have many other examples of that, investments that we've made in Canada's Museum for Human Rights, Journey to Churchill. All of those have had huge investments put in by the Province of Manitoba which have garnered more tourists coming to our province.
With regard to Kirkella, Kirkella's going to be staying open. I mean, I trust Travel Manitoba's judgment on where they feel traffic is coming into the province and where the province should be promoted, and Kirkella, to the best of my knowledge, is staying open and will stay open.
Mr. Piwniuk: Was the plan to close Kirkella–was that the reason that, you know, you neglected to join the western partnership with the other provinces? Is that something that you sort of focus more on the Highway 75 going to the United States than to–we do a lot of trade with Saskatchewan. Right now, we both have the oil–we're both amongst the oil patch industry; we both have strong agriculture, very similar economies.
* (14:50)
Right now I feel that–it seems it–Saskatchewan is focusing on the whole province, not just the centre. And I find that Saskatchewan is prospering because of the promotion of the whole province, because, again, I really, really believe that Regina and Saskatoon are growing because of the promotion that they have for that–for those cities, and wanting to be partners in the western partnership and working with big economies like Alberta, Edmonton, Calgary, and I think some of that emphasis is being taken away from Winnipeg. I think we need to be promoting this province even greater.
We're very–we're in a competitive global economy, and we have to compete with, also, sometimes, with our partners, but at the same time, we–as a region, we actually competing against Ontario, other parts of the North America, and I think there's going to be a great business opportunity to work with Saskatchewan. North Dakota and South Dakota, they come to this region, this could be a great opportunity to build those strong relationships. And it just seems like to be shut out in western partnership is a big impact to bringing more people from that side of the country.
Mr. Lemieux: Yes, we've worked with Alberta closely on their cultural strategy and on their tourism strategy, and we have certainly partnered with them to take a look at our current tourism strategy. So we are working with Alberta and working with Saskatchewan.
When we took a look at weights and measures with regard to Saskatchewan on our trucking industry, that agreement was working with Saskatchewan and work closely with Saskatchewan. So we work with our western partners, but we're also working with our eastern partners as well in Canada, and we believe in working with countries and provinces and states north of us, south of us, east and west.
The member mentions Highway 75, but–and I don't know if he's travelled recently on Highway No. 1 going from Virden to Saskatchewan. The Filmon government talked and did a lot of yapping about twinning that highway; our government did it. We twinned that highway from Virden right to Saskatchewan, and essentially the Highway No. 1 is twinned all the way from Saskatchewan right to Falcon Lake. There's a small stretch now to go to–from Falcon Lake to Ontario. In all of No. 1 Highway, we'll be twinned right across Manitoba.
So, as a province, we've invested–as a former minister of Infrastructure and Transportation, at one time I looked and I calculated about–roughly 56 per cent of highways budget was spent in Conservative constituencies or ridings, 56 per cent of the highways budget. I'm not sure what it's at now, but since we've spent over $1 billion in infrastructure in the province, that number may be even higher.
But working with other provinces, we've done that really well. Minister Starke, former Conservative minister in Alberta, minister of tourism, we worked closely on their tourism strategy. Minister of culture–you know, we worked closely on their cultural strategy and looking at Manitoba's cultural strategy, we've worked closely with them, and we have always partnered with our western provinces and also provinces to the east of us on many, many different initiatives.
So I would argue that we continue to be a good partner with provinces all across this country, and use the example of weights and measures, for example, in the trucking industry, which has been a huge benefit for the trucking industry of the province, and there are many other examples like that.
Mr. Piwniuk: Yes, I would like to–Mr. Chair, I would like to ask the minister, you know–first to say a statement here.
I had the opportunity to travel to Churchill, Manitoba, last August, and it was amazing. Like, it's almost embarrassing the–I grew up in Russell-Roblin area. I went to school in Roblin. Because we had a dairy farm, the furthest north I could actually travel on a day to be back to milk cows was to go to Swan River. And that's basically the furthest north I'd been to before I became an MLA, and now I have the opportunity to travel throughout northern parts and the opportunity.
And, despite the first time I went to Churchill was in August and I saw that–you know, you hear so much about Churchill within the whole international world right now; it's, you know, notorious for polar bears. And that was probably one of the biggest–if anybody knows about Manitoba, it is about Churchill. I think we're more–Churchill is more recognized by–than even Winnipeg sometimes. With our major centres in Canada, you know, Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal sort of take–and Ottawa sort of takes the emphasis away from Winnipeg, but a lot of people know about Churchill.
And one thing I noticed that it was–you could be in the Hudson Bay and the–on a boat and looking at beluga whales and you could almost feel you're in a whole–like anywhere in–that's around the oceans, you know. And it was just amazing with wide open waters, and it's hard to believe that a place like that exists here in Manitoba when you never been there before.
But one of the things I've noticed was the challenges in talking to some of the tourist areas there, people who are in the tourist industry, which is the biggest industry in Churchill. They're very disappointed in the transportation and how things for bringing people to Churchill–it seems like, you know, the train systems were not going at the time; they actually were suspended because of the condition of the tracks. Again, that was so vital for some of those businesses to get those individuals to come up there. One couple that we did meet was a mother and son, who were from Barcelona, Spain, when we went beluga–went kayaking with the beluga whales.
And I think there's a big opportunity here to make it easier for tourists to get to Churchill and to make Churchill–economically, it seems like it's been held back for so long, and I think people there are very frustrated with–this NDP government has, hasn't done much to, for opportunities for growth economically in that town.
Mr. Lemieux: Well, I would firmly disagree with the member, my critic, because we have not only invested a lot of money in the town centre in Churchill, but also I would just remind the member that it is a private company, OmniTRAX, that operates that rail line. They should be certainly taking care of that rail line.
But to credit Prime Minister Harper, the federal government did put money into that line; the Province put money into the line. So we tried to also assist OmniTRAX in a tripartite agreement to try to fix that line up. OmniTRAX is a private company, and I would remind people around the table here today that it was the Liberal government that sold that rail line to OmniTRAX for a dollar, I believe.
And so, you know, and so without making too fine a point about it, is that we have incurred a lot of challenges with that line; VIA Rail has, and VIA Rail is trying their darndest to make that rail line successful. It's very important to a lot of citizens that live along that rail line, important to Churchill as well. And beluga whales actually, beluga-whale watching is one of the premier attractions and growing attractions now in the north. Kayaking, I've had the pleasure of being there. Polar bears are extremely successful. And, but the real opportunity is the beluga-whale watching and bird watching are the two that have huge potential for Churchill.
I really–I want to take this opportunity to thank the current Prime Minister of Canada, Prime Minister Trudeau, in making a portfolio that is specific to tourism, Small Business and Tourism. At one time it was always a junior portfolio. I know TIAC and the Canadian Tourism Commission have also made it known that they feel that it is, should be a priority. It's a huge generator of jobs but also great for our economy. And the federal government should be congratulated for making that a specific department, Small Business and Tourism. And I look forward to meeting the new minister very shortly and having the opportunity to talk to her and talk about what her vision is for tourism, and I hope that would be–part of that vision would be more advertising to the United States.
The Harper government cut, I believe it was around $15 million from the Canadian Tourism Commission's budget and they–that directly affected their ability to advertise through, into the United States. It affects smaller provinces like Manitoba and Saskatchewan and the Maritime provinces to advertise because we partnered with the Canadian Tourism Commission to do it. So, and I hope with the new Liberal government in Ottawa and putting more of an emphasis on tourism, the Small Business and Tourism, and making it a major portfolio now and not a junior portfolio, I believe there's huge potential.
So we really look forward to working with Ottawa on this and I think there's great opportunities with what we have to offer now, not only the Museum for Human Rights but also the Journey to Churchill, but we have so many other attractions in Manitoba that need to be advertised. Hunting and fishing are huge but we need to let people in Chicago, Minneapolis, Denver, Los Angeles know that that opportunity is here. Without being able to advertise, they're not aware that those attractions are here.
Thank you.
* (15:00)
Mr. Piwniuk: You mentioned hunting and fishing and you're talking about bringing people into this province, but what about all the mismanagement of our hunting, you know. When it comes to, you know, moose population in certain areas, I'm noticing that when I talk to my constituents–I've been fortunate to have a couple provincial parks in my riding; one's Turtle Mountain–and the concern they have is that there's no moose left, but when you go to other parts of the constituency where it's flat in fields, the moose have been really been chased out of these provincial parks. It just shows one way that there has been mismanagement in this area, but at the same time, with mismanagement, gives–loses the opportunity to bring those tourists. And we do–one of the biggest assets we probably have is conservation opportunities in this province when it comes to fishing and hunting.
And what is this government doing with–when it comes to conservation and addressing all these different issues? And another thing I think is also the zebra mussels. If zebra mussels take over our waterways, that's going to hurt our tourism in this province.
Mr. Lemieux: Well, I'd just ask my critic to pose those questions to the Minister of Conservation and Water Stewardship (Mr. Nevakshonoff).
But just to address the question in my portfolio, hunting and fishing is extremely important. The different associations related to hunting and fishing have had their most successful years–this year may be their most successful in the last decade. I don't know what the recent numbers are. But we are, you know, with the angler program and looking at all the tourists that have come here.
Well, the American dollar is very helpful compared to our Canadian dollar. Regrettably, our dollar is lower than the US dollar, but that has helped bring in a lot of US tourists into Manitoba. And it's certainly helped, I would argue, all those lodges, fishing lodges, hunting lodges, that depend on our American tourists coming here. It has been a huge boon for them having the dollar at 76 cents or thereabouts; Canadian to the US dollar has been huge.
I believe all of us are very concerned about zebra mussels and the impact they're having on our lakes. And I don't think there's not a member in this room or anyone in the province of Manitoba that doesn't recognize that this has become very, very serious. And also taking a look at our wildlife and how that needs to be managed and the importance of it, because we want it there for our children and grandchildren and going into the future.
Not only is it important economically for us, but there are a lot of people that, for them, as a part of quality of life in this province is the ability to go fishing with their family, ability to go hunting with their family, in a respectful way. Many of–many people depend on it for their, not only their livelihood because of the hunting and fishing lodges, but also use moose meat, elk meat, deer, for food. And that's their food source, main food source, whether it be pickerel or fish, as well.
So it's important to be able to monitor our wildlife and to ensure that it's there for generations to come.
Mr. Piwniuk: So you mentioned that you promote to the United States. What is this government's–what is their plan to promote to the United States, that with their low Canadian dollar, that we're open for business?
And has there ever been any kind of investment or redirecting of advertising expense to go to promote to bring these American tourists up to this province?
Mr. Lemieux: Well, that is why we have Travel Manitoba. And the importance of Travel Manitoba is we trust their judgment and their business acumen to know where to advertise and how much to advertise and where that should go. And I think all of us would agree that not enough advertising has taken place in the United States and we need to do something about that.
And again, small provinces like Manitoba and Saskatchewan and the Maritime provinces need to partner with the Canadian Tourism Commission. I think it just makes a lot of sense for us all. If you can partner two ways or three ways with the industry, with the Canadian Tourism Commission, which is the federal body that does the work on tourism for the federal government and Manitoba travel–or Travel Manitoba, that does that work for us on our behalf of the citizens and the government of Manitoba, that they work closely together to do just that, to do more advertising, let people know what's here.
Some is being done, not enough. And I think that really that has a lot to do with taking a look at a new formula that we've talked about and certainly have discussed, and discussions are continuing with regard to how that should take place going forward.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Just two short questions. I think all of us have a real interest in The Forks and making it what its potential is for the, you know, one of the very premier tourist destinations in our province.
With that goal as background, I have a question about the provincial tourism centre at The Forks. I notice it's–in a recent announcement, it's up and running and I was there the other day. But I just wondered if the minister could help explain why there was a delay of about two years in terms of–to do the renovations which, it seemed to me, should have been possible to do in a shorter period of time.
Mr. Lemieux: Well, let me just say for thousands and thousands of years our indigenous people have been meeting at The Forks and it's a great meeting place, and has been for hundreds and thousands of years, quite frankly, and it's a great place to have our tourist information centre. That has been a tremendous move to go there to open up the new centre. It's open, it's clear. It's–when someone is–enters the place, it's just a fantastic place for tourists to come in and to meet all the staff that are there with their tablets and with their iPads to be able to give people directions on where the hotels are available, what attractions are going on.
And anyone who's been involved in any kind of construction at all, anyone who's built a home recently or, because Manitoba is doing so well, there are things that happen in construction that is not within anyone's control. And there are many projects that are just not on time, regrettably, whether it's housing projects, whether it's apartment blocks, condominiums, business offices, and there's a lot of reasons for that. And I think that's part and parcel of being a province that is–has a low employment–unemployment rate. People are busy, a lot of building going on. You just have to go to Waverley West and go around the city of Winnipeg to see–and throughout the province to see how busy the construction industry is.
Mr. Gerrard: And I wonder if the minister could provide the cost of doing the renovations.
Mr. Lemieux: Yes. I don't have staff for–with me today, so I'm sorry I don't have those at my fingertips. But the cost of the building, and I know it's being leased from The Forks and The Forks is the landlord of that particular building, and I'm not sure what that is, but I'll entertain trying to find out what it is for the member.
Mr. Gerrard: I appreciate the follow-up on that, and I know that the Tourism office had altered its space at The Forks for a while, and maybe the minister could also provide me information on whether there was a charge for the other space, as well as the original space while that was being renovated.
Mr. Lemieux: I'm not aware of what the costs of renting space was or renting a kiosk temporary space while the other new visitor information centre was being built and–but I know that The Forks–I don't think there's–very few people would argue that that's not the place to have their main Manitoba–Travel Manitoba office. I mean, that's a perfect location. That's where thousands and thousands of tourists go every year and it gives a great opportunity for the staff at Travel Manitoba to showcase our province. And now, with all the technology they have in there–and it became pretty obvious as soon as the place opened that many tourists were taking advantage of it and were really drawn to The Forks, but also drawn to that tourist information centre as a huge tourism magnet.
Mr. Gerrard: I know the minister is also responsible for the Liquor & Lotteries and, of course the new building the minister is probably expecting to be a tourist attraction. So I just–I know this is not entirely within the tourism area, but I just wondered if the minister had an update on, you know, whether there'd been decisions made about who will be the architect and who will do the building.
* (15:10)
Mr. Lemieux: The quick answer is no. You know, I mean that's Liquor & Lotteries and a bailiwick to do the due diligence and also to tender out and so on. They have a process that they followed and, no matter what the project is, Liquor & Lotteries will make–you know, they're responsible and the board's responsible for making those kinds of decisions. And I know that there's so much going on in the downtown; it's just–it's fantastic, quite frankly, for our city. I mean, you take a look at True North Square, very similar to, I believe it's called the ICE District in Edmonton, now, where they have a big, brand new arena for their–it's being worked on for the Edmonton Oilers. They have all kinds of commercial space. They have, I understand, new kind of liquor store located there, flagship liquor store, all those kinds of things.
When you take a look at that and the kind of opportunities there are for downtown to bring those employees downtown for Liquor & Lotteries, to have an office close to the SHED district, there's–it is really encouraging to see what's happening to our downtown. There's much more to do, obviously, but with True North and True North Square, I think there's–there are plenty of opportunities to come forward in the next weeks and months and days ahead.
Mr. Gerrard: I thank the minister.
Mr. Chairperson: All right. Minister, any closing comments?
Mr. Lemieux: Well, just a closing comment. You know, Manitoba–and I'll certainly be brief on this in that we have such world-class cultural events in Manitoba. Sporting events, I mean, we've got the Grey Cup coming, but we've got Folklorama, Festival du Voyageur, Winnipeg Folk Fest, Country Fest in Dauphin, Ukrainian Festival in–Trapper's Festival, Morden Corn and Apple Festival, Gimli's Icelandic Festival–I mean, we could go on and on and on. We all know this and we feel very proud of this, but we've got to get the message out to our friends, to the–in the United States and, also, around the world to let people know what we have. And that is going to be the challenge that, I think, we all have, and then what Travel Manitoba has, to be able to promote Manitoba in days going forward.
So, in conclusion, thank you, federal government, for acknowledging that tourism is hugely important, and they made Small Business and Tourism a major portfolio. So I'm looking forward to meeting the Madam Minister now federally, and I know this will be a huge boost for the tourism industry across Canada. The fact that the federal government acknowledged that tourism is a key job creator, economic development opportunities through tourism.
Mr. Chairperson: Seeing no further questions, we will now proceed to consideration of the resolutions for this department.
Resolution 14.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $58,232,000 for Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection, Tourism, Culture, Heritage and Sport Programs, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 14.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $8,907,000 for Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection, Information Resources, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 14.4: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $11,359,000 for Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection, Consumer Protection, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 14.5: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $237,000 for Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection, Costs Related to Capital Assets, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 14.6: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $110,000 for Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection, Capital Assets, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Last item to be considered is item 14.1.(a) the minister's salary, contained in resolution 14.1.
The floor is open for questions, if any.
Seeing none we will proceed to contemplation for this motion.
Resolution 14.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2,513,000 for Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection, Administration and Finance, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
This completes our Estimates for the Department of Tourism, Culture, Heritage, Sport and Consumer Protection.
Mr. Chairperson (Rob Altemeyer): The next set of Estimates to be considered by this section of the Committee of Supply is for the department of Civil Service Commission.
Shall we proceed straight to consideration of that item? [Agreed]
All right, does the honourable minister have an opening statement?
Hon. Kerri Irvin-Ross (Minister responsible for the Civil Service): Just very brief that I just want to thank the hard-working people that work in the Province of Manitoba to make sure that we are delivering the services and the policies to all of the province, and just appreciate the work that they do every day and how diligently they work to implement those programs and policies that are–become vital to everything we do.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank the honourable minister for those remarks.
Does the opposition critic have an opening statement?
Mr. Ian Wishart (Portage la Prairie): I, too, would like to express our appreciation to the hard-working staff of Manitoba that have worked for many years to make the lives of Manitobans better.
That said, proceed–
Mr. Chairperson: Good. We thank the opposition critic for those opening remarks.
Does the committee wish to proceed chronologically or globally for this consideration of Estimates?
Mr. Wishart: Globally, but we have no questions at this time. You can proceed to Estimates.
Mr. Chairperson: Well, that makes it even easier then.
Seeing no questions, we will now proceed to consideration of the motion at hand.
Resolution 17.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $18,369,000 for Civil Service Commission, Civil Service Commission, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
This completes the Estimates for the Civil Service Commission.
ENABLING APPROPRIATIONS AND OTHER APPROPRIATIONS
Mr. Chairperson (Rob Altemeyer): Next set of Estimates to be considered here is for the department of Enabling Appropriations and Other Appropriations. Shall we proceed to consideration of that?
Does the minister have any opening remarks?
Hon. Kerri Irvin-Ross (Minister of Family Services): No, I don't.
Mr. Chairperson: Does the official opposition critic have an opening statement?
Well, the floor is now open for questions, if any.
And we'll just move right along. [interjection] Oh, I have to? All right.
If the committee wanted to ask any questions, would they have wanted to do it chronologically or globally?
An Honourable Member: Globally.
Mr. Chairperson: Globally. All right.
We will globally have no questions.
All right. The floor is still open for questions, you smart alecks.
All right. So where's–[interjection] We will do it properly, absolutely.
So the committee is ready to proceed with consideration of the resolutions. [Agreed]
All right. Thank you for that.
Resolution 26.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $12,474,000 for Enabling Appropriations, Enabling Vote, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 26.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2,250,000 for Enabling Appropriations, Justice Initiatives, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 26.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $30,000,000 for Enabling Appropriations, Internal Service Adjustments, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 26.4: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $12,314,000 for Enabling Appropriations, Capital Assets, Internal Service Adjustments, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 27.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $38,500,000 for Other Appropriations, Emergency Expenditures, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 27.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $500,000 for Other Appropriations, Allowance for Losses and Expenditures Incurred by Crown Corporations and Other Provincial Entities, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 27.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1,084,000 for Other Appropriations, Manitoba Floodway and East Side Road Authority, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 27.4: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $3,400,000 for Other Appropriations, Sustainable Development Innovations Fund, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
This completes the Estimates for Enabling Appropriations and Other Appropriations.
* (15:20)
Mr. Chairperson (Rob Altemeyer): The next set of Estimates to be considered by this section of the Committee of Supply is for the Legislative Assembly.
So this section of the Committee of Supply will now consider the Estimates for the Legislative Assembly. There's no opening statement from the Speaker. Is there one from the official opposition at all?
Seeing none, does the committee wish to proceed globally or chronologically with any questions it may have?
Some Honourable Members: Globally.
Mr. Chairperson: Globally? Globally it is.
The floor is open for questions, if any.
Seeing none–someone's ringing–and that's me. That's embarrassing.
All right, we will now proceed to consideration of resolutions for this item.
Resolution 1.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $9,806,000 for Legislative Assembly, Other Assembly Expenditures, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 1.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $6,917,000 for Legislative Assembly, Office of the Auditor General, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 1.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $3,433,000 for Legislative Assembly, Office of the Ombudsman, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 1.4: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1,549,000 for Legislative Assembly, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
Resolution 1.5: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $3,832,000 for Legislative Assembly, Office of the Children's Advocate, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
This completes the Estimates for the Legislative Assembly.
EMPLOYEE PENSIONS AND OTHER COSTS
Mr. Chairperson (Rob Altemeyer): The next set of Estimates to be considered is for Employee Pensions and Other Costs.
As the Speaker is not here, we will proceed to consideration of the resolution.
Resolution 6.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $14,161,000 for Employee Pensions and Other Costs, Employee Pensions and Other Costs, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Resolution agreed to.
This completes the Estimates for Employee Pensions and Other Costs.
This also concludes the Estimates process for this section of the Committee of Supply.
Thanks to everyone who has participated: ministers, critics, staff in particular, hard-working clerk, employees of the Legislative Assembly.
The time being 3:25, committee rise.
* (14:40)
Bill 19–The Legal Profession Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker: And we'll be starting first with Bill 19, The Legal Profession Amendment Act.
The honourable Minister of Municipal Government–or, pardon me, Mineral Resources.
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Mineral Resources): I move, seconded by the Minister of Tourism, that Bill 19, The Legal Profession Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la profession d'avocat, 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. Jennifer Howard, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Just a few comments on third reading of this bill, and we are prepared to support the legislation and to see it conclude its legislative journey through this House. We have heard from those who are impacted with the legal profession at committee. I know there are a number of different changes that are happening, and not unlike other professional bodies which have their own sort of self-governing process, the legal profession has some of that as well.
In particular, there's a section of this legislation that allows for the association, the legal profession, to disclose the name of an individual who is being investigated for different wrongdoings under The Legal Profession Act. That is something I think, Madam Deputy Speaker, that is not unusual in our legal process. Of course, where there's a charge that's laid or even in a civil proceeding, often those issues are known to the public. In this case, it's considered almost a consumer protection issue where an individual who may have wanted to hire a lawyer, well, then at least they'll be able to know if they have some sort of a proceeding, that lawyer has some sort of a proceeding against them with the association. So I think that that's positive. I suspect this will be a–we hope that this will be used minimally.
We know that the people who are in our legal profession, I think are, by and large, the vast, vast majority are professional. They're certainly well‑trained. I believe that they take their job responsibly and seriously and I have a great respect for those who are actively in the practice of law, and so I know that this is–this portion of the bill will be used in a minimal way.
I also know that it'll allow the Law Society to deal with issues around not only individual lawyers, but firms. And, of course, as the legal profession changes, like other professions there are different ways for lawyers to practise and to organize themselves, whether that's through almost individual incorporation or through the act of a firm. And I think it's important that there be some amount of oversight with the ability for oversight when you're dealing with a firm as opposed to individual lawyers.
So we certainly believe that this is something that's valuable and has been asked for, I know, by the legal profession and it's a response to the legal profession. We appreciated hearing from them at committee and their comments, and with that, we are prepared to see this bill conclude third reading.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Seeing no other speakers, is the House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Madam Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is third reading of Bill 19, The Legal Profession Amendment Act.
Shall the motion be adopted?
All those in favour?
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Any opposed?
Is it the will of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Just for the information of the House, I just want to clarify the order that we're going move through.
The next bill we're going to deal with is Bill 28, The Personal Property Security Amendment Act; and then Bill 38, The Intimate Image Protection Act; Bill 37, The Radiation Protection Act; Bill 30, The Non-Smokers Health Protection Amendment Act (E‑Cigarettes); Bill 41, The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2015; and Bill 45, The Elections Amendment Act. That is the order.
Bill 28–The Personal Property Security Amendment Act
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Mineral Resources): Madam Speaker, on behalf of all members I want to thank you for clarifying the order.
And I'd like to now move, seconded by the Minister of Housing, that Bill 28, The Personal Property Security Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les sûretés relatives aux biens personnels, 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.
Mr. Ron Schuler (St. Paul): Very briefly, I want to make a few comments on the record in regards to Bill 28. This is a bill that we will be supporting. We do not seem to have any areas that we disagree with it on. It is keeping up legislation with what's going on in society. We've, over the years, heard many things, that individuals go into the court system and have found loopholes by which to frustrate individuals, to make life difficult for other individuals, and this makes it much easier for people to get what is called vexatious registrations against their property, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Often what happens is, if there's something, a caveat or something like that, placed on your property, you then have to get a lawyer, go to court. It can be a considerable amount of money that it takes to get this removed. And the legislation drafted by the public service–and it's been well done–reflects that need to have it a much simpler process. Now, if somebody wishes to put a lien or put a caveat against your house, it has to go in front of a registrar. Someone's going to have a look at it and decide if that is in case something that should be done or is it simply a punitive approach.
And, when we had a briefing with the minister, the department indicated to us there were times when the individual who had actually put this against someone else's property had long moved away or passed away and they couldn't find them and it had been a long-standing thing. I understand part of the legislation is now if you–if someone wants to put a lien, a caveat, against your property, you have to be notified of it. There were instances where individuals had intended to sell their property, thought there shouldn't be any hassle. They own their property; they've paid for it; they've lived on it for many years. They go to sell and they find that there's something in–buried deep in legalese that says that they are prohibited from it until the caveat has been dispensed with.
And, increasingly, there are individuals who feel that they've been wronged by somebody or they were angry at somebody or they didn't like how they were treated by somebody and then would go and put what is basically a vexatious caveat against the property, and this will deal with that kind of stuff. It was probably a long time in coming. It's a necessary piece of legislation, and we would encourage the government not just to move it on but also give it proclamation so that it comes into effect and cleans up one of those areas that are troubling for Manitobans and makes life for some far easier and far less complicated.
So, with those few comments on the record, we would agree to send it on and go for royal assent.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, is the House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Madam Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 28, The Personal Property Security Amendment Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Bill 38–The Intimate Image Protection Act
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Mineral Resources): I move, seconded by the Minister of Housing, that Bill 38, The Intimate Image Protection Act; Loi sur la protection des images intimes, 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.
Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I rarely speak at third reading, but I did want to say two things. First of all, I want to recognize the new federal Minister of Justice. As well, of course, the appointment of Ralph Goodale as Solicitor General of Public Safety. But I see in the new federal Minister of Justice a great opportunity. Tremendous background that she brings to the national scene. Background as a Crown attorney, as an Aboriginal leader and someone that I know will be concerned about issues that we have priorized: murdered and missing indigenous women and girls, for example.
We also, of course, will want to be pursuing, with the federal government, many other concerns, both in terms of the budgeting or financing and the legislative issues that affect public safety. We also will want to introduce the new government to the Canadian Centre for Child Protection if the centre thinks that would be helpful.
But I wanted to, second of all, just recognize that the Canadian Centre for Child Protection has been invaluable with the development of this legislation, and will absolutely be instrumental in how this legislation goes to work, particularly for those who are younger and are victimized by the distribution of revenge porn, as they call it, or intimate images. They really have an amazing operation. I was able to go and get a tour last Friday, and they just have a first class operation by–with people that care deeply about the online protection of children and the protection of children generally.
So, with those remarks, I'm very pleased to see the support of this House for this legislation. The task now is to get the implementation schedule moving as quickly as possible. Thank you.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): I'll echo some of the comments by the Attorney General, certainly in terms of the appointment of Jody Wilson-Raybould as the new Minister of Justice for Canada and also Mr. Ralph Goodale as the Public Safety Minister. I think that those are both honourable appointments and we look forward to hearing from them and perhaps meeting with them as well, Madam Deputy Speaker, in terms of their vision for their departments in Canada.
I also want to add, since it's my first opportunity to do so, Madam Deputy Speaker, congratulate Mr. Jim Carr who will be Canada's Minister for Natural Resources, and also the new Minister of Labour, MaryAnn Mihychuk. We look forward to working with them in Manitoba on the issues that are important to our province and dealing with issues that are in Ottawa, but they are affecting our province through those two ministers. And, of course, the other Members of Parliament in Manitoba as well, each of which have a voice of their own and each of which have responsibility to use that voice to represent the province of Manitoba.
Also, the minister mentioned the Centre for Child Protection here in Winnipeg. I'll echo those comments. I've had the opportunity to visit the centre as well. I've–believe that I last visited it with Shelly Glover when she was the lead minister in Manitoba and was making announcements there on the issue of child protection.
So, of course, that's an issue that doesn't strain partisan lines, Madam Deputy Speaker. I think that all members of this House, regardless of political party or political stripe, believe strongly in the protection of children and want to use whatever laws are available to ensure that children are protected to the best that legislation can do that.
I also know that when we talk about the issue of child protection, legislation is only one thing that can be done. There are other things that need to be done in terms of education and in terms of ensuring that those who need to be empowered are, in fact, empowered.
* (14:50)
This particular piece of legislation is one that we support not only in its intention, Mr. Speaker–or Madam Chairperson–Madam Deputy Speaker, but the intention of ensuring that those who would illegally distribute intimate images can cause grave damage and long-lasting damage, and we've seen tragic cases where that's happened in Canada. Members will be familiar with the very difficult situations that we've heard where individuals have taken their own life as a result of this.
And so I'm not sure that this particular piece of legislation, had it been in the jurisdictions where those situations happened, would've necessarily changed that but we know that there is nothing that can entirely, unfortunately, prevent some of these things from happen. But we dedicate ourselves–we dedicate ourselves–to trying to ensure that they are entirely eradicated.
So, with that, I think we're prepared to see this bill pass, and I would echo the comments that were made in terms of congratulations to the new ministers of Justice in Ottawa, on the Public Safety Minister, as well, in Ottawa, and we look forward to working with them, as well, for the betterment and the safety of our province and our country.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Madam Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 38, The Intimate Image Protection Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Bill 37–The Radiation Protection Act
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Mineral Resources): I move, seconded by the Minister of Healthy Living, that Bill 37, The Radiation Protection Act; Loi sur la radioprotection, 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.
Hon. Deanne Crothers (Minister of Healthy Living and Seniors): We've heard from many Manitobans regarding this bill, and I'd like to thank the individuals and business owners who presented at committee, and I'd also like to thank the organizations who met with us to discuss the bill, such as the Canadian Cancer Society and the Manitoba Lung Association, the Manitoba Hotel Association and the Manitoba Restaurant and Foodservices Association.
As we've said from the beginning, our focus is on protecting children and providing more uniform rules as to where these products can be used, and I'm very proud of the work that has gone into creating this balanced legislation. Thank you.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Seeing no other speakers, is the House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Madam Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 37, The Radiation Protection Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Bill
30–The Non-Smokers Health Protection Amendment Act
(E-Cigarettes)
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Mineral Resources): I move, seconded by the Minister of Healthy Living, that Bill 30, The Non-Smokers Health Protection Amendment Act (E-Cigarettes); Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection de la santé des non-fumeurs (cigarettes électroniques), as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Human Resources, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Hon. Deanne Crothers (Minister of Healthy Living and Seniors): Yes, I just would like to thank everyone that was involved with this and that identified the fact that we're all supportive of this bill as it passes. Thank you very much.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Yes, just say a few words. You know, it's worth noting that there were many people who came to make presentations on this bill. It went for multiple nights and, you know, I'm glad we were able to arrange additional nights so that–and we had some discussions with the Government House Leader (Mr. Chomiak)–to ensure that people had the ability to come and speak on this legislation.
It's–it is one of the great things about our Legislature. It's sometimes a bit of a myth that we're the only province in Canada that allows public presentations after the second reading; I think we're one of two. So that still puts us in very good company, Madam Deputy Speaker, but it is a great thing that we do.
Now, sometimes, of course, I mean it's difficult for staff who work here and others in terms of scheduling and organizing that, and then, of course, staffing it but–and we appreciate the service that they do to this Assembly in ensuring that that happens.
But we also think that it is important for the public to be able to come and express their concerns. There are often many ideas that are adopted from the committee, and even when those ideas aren't adopted, sometimes it gives pause for reflection on future pieces of legislation or how the individual bill can be dealt with in the future as well.
So I want to thank everyone who came, regardless of which side of the issue they were on. But everybody who came to speak to the–this bill in committee, I think that they did themselves, you know, a good service by providing some perspective, because this is a new issue, and as technology changes and different sorts of things happen, Legislatures and us as individual MLAs–and, of course, this happens on the federal level as well–are left to deal with new things that we haven't thought about or that previous legislators haven't thought about and to determine whether or not there should be rules or regulations around them.
Now I think that there is, you know, conflicting messages sometimes around this particular bill and e-cigarettes, and there are–we heard at committee that different people had different opinions in terms of the medical aspect of it and the health aspect of it. Ultimately, you know, we think that there needs to be some legislation around it and so this legislation will, of course, pass. But it's something that probably needs to continue to be reviewed and to continue to be looked at, as not only more technology and other things come into this particular end of things, but as more research becomes available, Madam Deputy Speaker, as we find out more about the effects of this and we find out more about the effects more generally of things that are being done today in society.
I think it's important that we continue to review the legislation and to look to the future in terms of what may need to be changed. So it's one of those active pieces of legislation. I hope that it's active, and we'll continue to go back and see: Is it working for businesses? Is it working for communities? Is it working for the public? Is it still using the best medical information that we have in–to our disposal? And then we can have further discussions on it.
But I think that the main message that I want to leave here this afternoon is we very much appreciated the many people who came to make their presentations. They were certainly welcomed here in the Legislature, and we're glad that they took time out of their schedule, and I'm glad we were able to schedule additional time around it as well.
So I look forward to other speakers who may want to speak on third reading when it comes to this piece of legislation, and then we are prepared to see the bill move forward to its third reading stage.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Madam Speaker, just a few comments on this Bill 30 on e‑cigarettes.
On the one hand, e-cigarettes have been said to be the best option today for those wanting to stop smoking. At the same time, there have been concerns raised about whether e-cigarettes might be an on-ramp for cigarette or drug use, and part of this bill is to try and find the right balance.
I was impressed by the presenters who came and by the accumulating evidence that e-cigarettes can be very effective in helping those who want to quit smoking to actually quit smoking.
I was interested in the early studies which show only relatively small effects, and more recent studies which are showing large effects with as high as 40 per cent or more people being able to quit smoking successfully. That's actually quite impressive numbers.
* (15:00)
I was also impressed by the many personal stories I heard as testimony to the effectiveness of e‑cigarettes, particularly in circumstances where people have tried many other approaches without success. Even allowing for the fact that those who were not successful would be less likely to come forward and talk about it, the testimonials were impressive.
As to the question of e-cigarettes and whether they may be an on-ramp to smoking or drugs, there were many presenters who spoke to this concern. I reviewed the evidence to date and much of the evidence for this association so far is pretty weak. Perhaps the best work done to date comes from United Kingdom in a study which concluded that there was not a significant issue. Nevertheless, given the potential concern over e-cigarettes being an on-ramp to smoking and/or drug use, this concern needs to be taken seriously.
Does the bill provide the right balance? It does. Does it support as strongly as possible the ability of e-cigarettes to reduce cigarette smoking? Does the bill do what it can to reduce the potential for e‑cigarettes to be an on-ramp for smoking and/or drug use? Does this bill support research so that we have made-in-Manitoba data and information, and to enable us to move forward in the months and years ahead?
It provides, in answer to the first question for vape shops and for people to do–use flavours, and many presenters said that it was important to–for them to be able to use different flavours in order to have success. And certainly this may be why the more recent studies have been more successful.
The bill is cautious in terms of preventing e‑cigarette use among young people and I guess we will wait and see whether in fact it has got the right balance in terms of providing the biggest effect to reduce smoking without–with the smallest possible effect to lead some young people to smoke or use drugs.
As to the third question about research, the bill is silent and clearly that's needs–something that needs to be done is to make sure that there is made-in‑Manitoba research on this area so that we're in a good position to have the knowledge base and the evidence to make good decisions moving forward.
I'm ready to support this legislation. I think it's important to keep a close eye on developments, see how the situation evolves. And, hopefully, with some made-in-Manitoba research, we're going to be in a better position to do that.
Thank you.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Seeing no further speakers, is the House ready for the question.
An Honourable Member: Question.
Madam Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 30, The Non-Smokers Health Protection Amendment Act (E-cigarettes).
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Bill 41–The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2015
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Mineral Resources): I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh), that Bill 41, The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2015; Loi corrective de 2015, 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.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): What an honour it is to speak this afternoon on this bill, Madam Deputy Speaker. It's–it is certainly one that has evolved, I think, over time. It used to deal with more smaller and minor amendments, almost word changes. And, in fact, I asked this of minister in committee about how the bill had changed over time and the process for it coming forward. I think it's important because the bill doesn't always get the attention maybe it deserves when it comes before the Legislature.
Just to put a few words on the record, not to set a precedent for speaking to the bill, Madam Deputy Speaker, but so others can look back and perhaps review these words and know themselves something that I didn't know.
Before committee, I asked the Attorney General how it is that this bill annually comes forward, because it's not a bill that seems to get any shorter. It seems to come up all the time, and we had the discussion about how it's not–it's no longer just minor words or small little changes, it does have some broader changes, but not to ever change the intent of legislation. And I think that that's important, because while it doesn't just correct, now, spelling mistakes, or, maybe, the translation which isn't quite right in legislation, it does ensure that the intention of the legislation that it's amending–the various bills that it's amending–doesn't, in fact, Madam Deputy Speaker, change at all.
And so I think that that is something that's important. It's my understanding that how this bill comes about annually is that they get input from the various departments, I think over the course of a year, the various departments will find certain things that need to have amendments within legislation, Madam Deputy Speaker, and they compile those and they save them throughout the year to bring forward in a bill such as this. And I think that that speaks very well of the civil servants that we have in all of our departments, who are working not just to bring forward legislation to have it passed, but also to ensure that legislation is fine-tuned over time to ensure that it is still meeting the needs of the original passage. That it still makes sense in the current context. And, where they find things that need to be changed, but won't necessarily change the intention of legislation, then they bring it forward in this particular bill.
It also, I think, speaks well of our Legislative Counsel, who also are tasked with bringing forward legislation, Madam Deputy Speaker, or changes to legislation that don't change the intention of the original bill. We know that they're a great resource to us as legislators. There are some in this assembly who have legal training, but I don't think any of us would want to take on the responsibility of necessarily drafting legislation on a regular basis. There are times, in committee, where I have–and I think others have, as well–gone about drafting minor amendments to legislation, sometimes striking out clauses or striking out certain words. But I don't think that it would be well intended or wise if we as legislators necessarily tried to draft overall legislation.
And so we rely on our Legislative Counsel to help us with that, Madam Deputy Speaker, and to ensure that we have individuals who are trained to do that. Because it's not often just changing one particular act; often there are pieces of legislation which amend a multitude of acts, Mr.–Madam Deputy Speaker, and I've seen that before, where one particular bill will amend 10, sometimes 20 pieces of legislation. And it's quite a task to go through and make sure that each one matches up. Sometimes it's even an issue of the definitions where, if you're going to put a definition into one bill, it has to match the definitions that appear in other pieces of legislation.
So I think that that's really where this particular bill comes from, Madam Deputy Speaker, when you're looking at ensuring the changes that are happening on a bill, but that don't change the intention of that bill, that that can be done through this legislation. And it comes through the departments, and it comes through the individual departments and through the Legislative Counsel. I know, on our side of the House, when we've seen bills like this come forward in the past, we ensure that the individual critics who are responsible for the pieces of legislation which are being amended are engaged in that discussion, and can look to ensure that the changes aren't necessarily significant. But we also rely, to a large extent, on the good counsel and the wisdom of those who are putting forward this bill to adhere to the intention of there not being significant changes with the legislation.
* (15:10)
It's worth noting, at this point, I think, Madam Deputy Speaker, that we have a time in our legislative cycle where a lot of the legislation that is coming before the Legislature is somewhat administrative, and I think that there is a cycle that often happens within a body like this, whether it's this Legislature or others across Canada, or even the House of Commons where bills that perhaps have more political controversy around them are often introduced mid-term or perhaps earlier in a term, and I don't have to remind you about the changes to the PST and the great controversy that that, of course, brought about.
But, as you get into–further into the legislative cycle, where we are now, not far from an election, often the bills that come before a body such as this are more administrative in nature. And when I look through the list of bills that not only are we considering today but that we've considered in the past days, Madam Deputy Speaker, I find that they are largely administrative in nature, that they really are more of a routine kind of thing, or they're brought forward by other groups.
We've seen some pieces of legislation that deal with the composition of membership on a particular organization. Now, sometimes, it's–deals with private members' bills and maybe it’s an incorporated body which has its legislation under this particular body, Madam Deputy Speaker, and they need to make a change to the composition of their board, how many board members they have or who is eligible to sit on those boards, and that comes here as legislation.
I know that in looking at other pieces of legislation, they've come forward from the different associations who are responsible for governing professions. So whether that's the legal profession or the medical profession or other professional bodies which are given the authority to have a scheme where they have their own professions regulated professionally, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think that that's something that most of us would consider to be a routine matter, an administrative matter.
There aren't many pieces of legislation, and this one would be included, where we see great political controversy around, and I think that has largely to do with the cycle that we are in here in the legislative scheme. But there are important pieces of legislation which are actually amended in this particular bill, and as you look through the bill and you see the various amendments that are happening within this legislation, it often causes us to go back to that legislation and to see: Is it in–fulfilling the intention that it was really meant to do? Is it something that is still relevant in terms of how we do things?
And I don't know if there is often enough attention paid to going back to legislation which is happening in the system, and seeing whether legislation still has that original purpose. I've had the opportunity to go and look at the–how many bills haven't been proclaimed, and I know that there's still a list of many pieces of legislation going back for a number of different years. Now it's not always the entire piece of the legislation; sometimes, it's only a small portion of the legislation which hasn't been proclaimed, but going back more than a decade, we see pieces of legislation which are still on our books. They still show up in the consolidated statutes, Mr.–Madam Deputy Speaker, but they haven't necessarily had full proclamation.
And that is, I think, a concern, and I think perhaps there would be wisdom in having–whether it's one individual party or a group of legislators come together to look through the legislation to see what has, and maybe hasn't been proclaimed and may never be proclaimed, and make that determination about whether or not it's something that should be dealt with or maybe it should be struck, Madam Deputy Speaker.
And, in fact, that's actually a process that we've undergone, and we're well under way on the rules here in this House. Members will remember that there were significant rule changes that were undertaken in the spring of this session, and I think history will show that those were good rule changes for all of us as MLAs and for future MLAs, Madam Deputy Speaker, but we're continuing that process of saying, well, what is working and what isn't working. And we've made a commitment to continue to look at things and to make adjustments, maybe not as monumental as what was done in the spring, but that continuation of looking at things. And legislation isn't any different. I think you need to have an active eye to see whether or not things should change. And so, as we look at a bill like this, which touches on so many pieces of legislation, I do think it's worth looking, historically, at bills that, maybe, are there but haven't been proclaimed, and determining why that is, and seeing if we could clean that up.
I know that, you know, as we look to modernize this Legislature, not just in terms of its physical appearance, because there's a great historical grandness to it, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I think that that's also being reviewed, but just modernize how we do things here in the building, and how we do things in this Assembly, that's important, because the public, I think, sometimes, there's something of a barrier.
There's a barrier between us as politicians and the public. And that barrier isn't necessarily us as individuals; I think it's a process barrier sometimes where people don't understand how legislatures work, how legislation works, and that responsibility, to some extent, falls upon us, because the working of this Legislature, and all legislatures–this isn't specific to Manitoba; one could look across the entire spectrum in Canada and see that all legislatures have a system that are sometimes difficult for people to understand. They're rooted in history, and I believe in history, and I believe in the historical parliamentary process that we have coming out of the British experience, Madam Deputy Speaker. I believe in that. I think it's something that has great value, but we need to be able to ensure that it can be related to people, that people can understand why it is we do certain things, and why it is that we do certain things.
And I remember as a new MLA it was–it wasn't that long ago, but it was some time ago–you know, you'd come into this place and you'd get a bit of a briefing from our clerks, and they would tell you how this place would work. And there was so many questions, because so much of it didn't entirely seem to accord with, maybe, how we were used to doing business, or the different practices and occupations that we came from in the past, Madam Deputy Speaker. And we would wonder how is it that we can change things.
Now, there were many who changed different rules here in the Legislature in the past, and I think we've come to the point where things are much more understandable and much more modern, Madam Deputy Speaker, but I think we still have a long way to go.
And this bill, not as an example, Madam Deputy Speaker, but it is certainly something where you touch on different pieces of legislation and you try to improve them, and you try to make them better. Now, that's not just for legislation–I wouldn't want to leave the impression that I'm only talking about bills and legislation–that's true for regulation as well. And I often think that we don't have enough attention paid to regulation in this Assembly. Most Manitobans, although they might not understand or be familiar with every piece of legislation that the Province has, and it's worth sometimes going on to the consolidated statutes, and they're listed alphabetically and you can go through them. And the titles are often very interesting; they're supposed to sort of inform what the subject is. They don't always completely inform what the subject is, but that's certainly the intention.
But regulations are something quite different, and there have been some steps made in terms of ensuring that regulations also get published and also have more awareness about them, Madam Deputy Speaker. But how regulations move through the process is quite different, because legislation, of course, comes through here, and we go through the familiar steps–or, at least, familiar to us as MLAs–of having the first reading, having the second reading, going through committee, and then having the third reading, like the bill–the stage that this particular bill is at right now. We are used to that process, but regulation moves quite differently because it goes through Cabinet essentially. It is essentially a Cabinet order, and there is not nearly as much scrutiny over how regulation passes as compared to legislation. And I think it would be a valuable process to spend time going through regulation and trying to reduce some of it that's either unnecessary or redundant.
* (15:20)
Sometimes we speak of that as red tape reduction here in the Legislature, and that's true. That really is what it is in terms of relating it to individuals within business, but a lot of that deals with regulation and how do you find pieces of regulation that aren't necessarily current, that aren't necessarily meeting the modern necessity or the modern reality, that aren't necessarily doing the function that maybe they were intended to do.
Now, I don't want to cast any sort of negative aspersion on any individuals who have been in the Legislature in the past because I do think that when people pass legislation or regulation, they always do so with the best intention. And even when I disagree with members, I understand, Madam Deputy Speaker, that it was done with the right intention.
So I do think–I wanted to put those words on the record regarding this particular bill and so there's a historical perspective of why we do this kind of legislation annually and how it comes to be and how it can happen in the future. So with those few words, Madam Deputy Speaker, I think we're looking forward to this bill passing.
Mr. Chomiak: I moved the motion. Is there leave for me to speak, Madam Chairperson?
Madam Deputy Speaker: Is there leave for the honourable minister to speak to this bill since he–without closing debate? [Agreed]
Mr. Chomiak: I just wanted to commend the member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen) for that riveting statement as well as the use of the word the active eye which I found very helpful.
There are things such as cruel and unusual punishment in this Chamber sometimes and sometimes we, as House leaders, are subjected to that, but I want to thank–actually, want to genuinely thank the member for both–and the Leader of the Liberal Party and all of the people that have worked on the House rules and made the changes that we've been able to put in place. I think it's a legacy that all members of the Chamber can hold out as a modernization and as a recognition of the importance of this Chamber and the importance of how we maintain decorum and order and allow for a more exclusive and appropriate Chamber.
So, with those few words, I just want to conclude debate on behalf of our party.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Any further speakers?
Is the House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Madam Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 41, The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2015.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Mineral Resources): I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh), that Bill 45, The Elections Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi électorale, 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.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): Just briefly, Madam Deputy Speaker, I want to thank the Government House Leader (Mr. Chomiak) for the process by which this bill has reached this stage. It was shared prior to first reading with us, and we had a discussion about it and what was the best way to proceed forward. We know that it was recommended by the Chief Electoral Officer, and I think it's been a recommendation that's been outstanding for some time. It'll move us towards a permanent voters list which will be a new experience for us here in Manitoba. We think that it–we hope that it'll be not only a more fulsome list and more accurate list but also relieve some of the pressure that often happens on enumeration. But we also recognize that it's something different, and it's new for the province, so we want to ensure that we're watching it closely and ensuring that it's actually functioning in the way it's intended to do.
We had some of the questions that we asked at second reading answered. Both myself and the member for River Heights (Mr. Gerrard) had questions at second reading, and they were answered, I believe, to our satisfaction, not to put words in the member for River Heights' mouth. But, from what I gathered at committee, they were answered to the satisfaction of both myself and him. And I think we are looking forward to this bill passing and going forward.
Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Any further speakers to this bill?
Seeing none, is the House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Madam Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 45, The Elections Amendment Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
The honourable Government House Leader, on House business.
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): Madam Deputy Speaker, on House business. I move, seconded by the member for–Madam Deputy Speaker, I'm seeking leave of the House to bring forward a motion.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Is there leave of the House for the honourable Government House Leader to bring forward a motion? [Agreed]
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, I thank yourself and the House for leave.
I move, seconded by the member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen), that the following bills from the Fourth Session of the 40th Legislature be reinstated in the Fifth Session of the 40th Legislature at the same stage they were at when the Fourth Session prorogues. That is, Bill 2, The Public Schools Amendment Act (Small Class Sizes for K to 3); Loi modifiant la Loi sur les écoles publiques (faible effectif des classes), No. 7, The Public Schools Amendment Act (Protecting Child Care Space in Schools); Loi modifiant la Loi sur les écoles publiques (superficie réservée aux garderies dans les écoles), No. 33, The Family Law Reform Act (Putting Children First); Loi sur la réforme du droit de la famille (mesures pour le mieux-être des enfants), No. 215, The Prevention of Interpersonal and Family Violence Through Education Act, Public Schools Act and Education Administration Act; Loi sur la prévention de la violence familiale et interpersonnelle grâce à l'éducation (modification de la Loi sur les écoles publiques et de la Loi sur l'administration scolaire), No. 300, The Mount Carmel Clinic Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la « Mount Carmel Clinic », and despite Bill 2 and Bill 7 being listed on the Order Paper for debate on second reading, each bill is to have a 15-minute question-and-answer period.
En français aussi? Pas? C'est ça.
Motion presented.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Is there any debate on the motion?
Seeing none, is the House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Madam Deputy Speaker: The question before the House is the motion put forward by the Minister of Mineral Resources (Mr. Chomiak) and seconded by the honourable member for Steinbach.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
* (15:30)
Committee Report
Mr. Rob Altemeyer (Chairperson of the section of Committee of Supply meeting in room 254): Madam Deputy Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted a motion regarding concurrence in Supply.
I move, seconded by the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Gaudreau), that the report of committee be received.
Take two. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Committee of Supply has considered and adopted certain resolutions.
I move, seconded by the honourable member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway), that the report of the committee be received.
Motion agreed to.
* * *
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): Yes, Madam Deputy Speaker, I move that we resolve the House in Committee of Supply.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I'll call Main, Capital.
Madam Deputy Speaker: The House will now resolve into Committee of Supply.
I will take the Chair to consider Main and Capital.
Capital Supply
Madam Chairperson (Jennifer Howard): Will the Committee of Supply please come to order.
We have before us for our consideration the resolution respecting Capital Supply. The resolution reads as follows:
RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $3,103,788,000 for Capital Supply for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2016.
The floor is open for questions.
Seeing no questions, shall the resolution pass?
Resolution agreed to.
Committee rise. Call in the Speaker.
Mr. Rob Altemeyer, Acting Speaker, in the Chair
Committee Report
Ms. Jennifer Howard (Chairperson): The Committee of Supply has considered and adopted the Capital Supply resolution.
I move, seconded by the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Gaudreau), that the report of the committee be received.
Motion agreed to.
The Acting Speaker (Rob Altemeyer): The House will now resolve into Committee of Supply.
Madam Deputy Speaker, please take the Chair.
Concurrence Motion
Madam Chairperson (Jennifer Howard): Will the Committee of Supply please come to 'orner'–order.
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): I move that the Committee of Supply concur in all Supply resolutions relating to the Estimates of Expenditure for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2016, which have been adopted at this session whether by a section of the Committee of Supply or by the full committee.
* (15:40)
Madam Chairperson: The floor is now open for questions.
Seeing no questions, is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt the motion?
Shall the resolution pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
Madam Chairperson: The resolution is accordingly passed.
That concludes the business currently before us.
Committee rise. Call in the Speaker.
Mr. Speaker in the Chair
Committee Report
Ms. Jennifer Howard (Chairperson): The Committee of Supply has adopted a motion regarding concurrence in Supply.
I move, seconded by the honourable member for St. Norbert, that the report of the committee be received.
Motion agreed to.
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Mineral Resources): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, that this House concur in the report of the Committee of Supply respecting concurrence in all Supply resolutions relating to the Estimates of Expenditure for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2016.
Motion presented.
Hon. Greg Dewar (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh), that there be granted out of the Consolidated Fund for capital purposes, the sum of three billion one hundred and three million–
Mr. Speaker: I didn't put the question. Sorry. Excuse me for one sec, my fault. I forgot to put the question to the House.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
My apologies to the Minister of Finance.
Mr. Dewar: I forgive you. You and I go way back.
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice, that there be granted out of the Consolidated Fund for capital purposes, the sum of $3,103,788,000 for the fiscal year ending March the 31st, 2016.
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Dewar: I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice, that there be granted to Her Majesty for the Public Service of the Province for the fiscal year ending March the 31st, 2016, out of the Consolidated Fund, the sum of $12,618,661,000 as set out in part A, Operating Expenditure, and $750,701,000, as set out in part B, million–[interjection]–oh, excuse me–$750,701,000 as set out in part B, Capital Investment, of the Estimates.
Motion agreed to.
Hon. Greg Dewar (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Ms. Irvin-Ross), that Bill 46, The Appropriation Act, 2015, be now read a first time and be ordered for second reading immediately.
Motion presented.
Mr. Speaker: Any debate? [interjection] Just first reading, pardon me.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
* (15:50)
Bill 46–The Appropriation Act, 2015
Hon. Greg Dewar (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, as members are aware, this bill is intended to provide expenditure–
Mr. Speaker: Second reading.
Mr. Dewar: I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services, that Bill 46, The Appropriation Act, 2015, be now read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole.
Motion presented.
Mr. Speaker: Now, as is permitted, there are questions. Are there any questions on this matter? No.
Does the honourable minister wish to make a statement?
Mr. Dewar: Just a brief one, Mr. Speaker.
As members are aware, this bill is intended to provide expenditure authority for the amounts shown in the Manitoba Estimates of Expenditures for 2015‑2016.
Mr. Speaker: Any questions on this matter?
Any further debate?
House ready for the question?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS
(Continued)
Bill 47–The Loan Act, 2015
Hon. Greg Dewar (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mackintosh), that Bill 47, The Loan Act, 2015, be now read a first time and be ordered for second reading immediately.
Motion presented.
Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
SECOND READINGS
(Continued)
Bill 47–The Loan Act, 2015
Hon. Greg Dewar (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services, that Bill 47, The Loan Act, 2015, be now read a second time and be referred to a Committee of the Whole.
Motion presented.
Mr. Dewar: This bill is intended to provide all incremental borrowing authority required for the current fiscal year. It also provides for the advance and guarantee authority which is required for non‑budgetary capital programs for the fiscal year which began April the 1st, 2015.
Mr. Speaker: Do honourable members wish to ask questions on this bill?
Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden-Winkler): Oh, are we standing? I thought we were just in committee.
My question for the Minister of Finance on Bill 47, The Loan Act: I'm looking at section 6(1), additional authority for loans and guarantees, and I'm looking at an amount of $200 million that is additionally authorized through this bill, and I would like the minister to clarify if it is under this appropriation of $200 million that the loan guarantee for Investors Group Field would come out of were the expenses eventually not covered off in another way.
Mr. Dewar: The–this does provide for additional borrowing authority, and the member is correct. This does cover the loan guarantee that the government's provided to the BBB Stadium consortium, Mr. Speaker. And this–if necessary–if necessary–this will cover the additional expenditures required if that–under the loan that we're providing, the loan guarantee we're providing to BBB.
Mr. Friesen: Still in the same section 6(1), another question for the minister. The stadium repairs that are already under way, there's a number of million dollars of repairs that were authorized previous to this, I guess, to the loan guarantee announced last week. I'd like to ask the minister: Will those initial repairs to the facility–are they also covered off under this same appropriation of $200 million or was that under last year's loan act?
Mr. Dewar: I'm afraid I don't have that information available right now. I would only assume that it would be covered under last year's but, again, I'm sorry; I don't have that information available at this very moment.
* (16:00)
Mr. Friesen: Could the minister indicate if there are other expenses at this time that he is able to identify which will also be addressed through this section 6(1) with this appropriation of an additional $200 million in incremental budget authority?
Mr. Dewar: An example that was identified by the staff in Finance is in case the student loan program requires additional resources. And it comes out of this line.
Mr. Friesen: I thank the minister for that reply.
I wonder, besides that example, could he point–could he indicate other or any other examples that might also be addressed under this 6(1)?
Mr. Dewar: Well, again, the loan guarantee to BBB would come out of this line. In case there's an expenditure under the student loan program would come out of this line. Those are some of the examples I can provide to the member.
Mr. Speaker: Any further questions in this matter?
Any further debate on this matter?
House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Mr. Speaker: Question before the House is second reading of Bill 47, The Loan Act, 2015.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
Bill 36–The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2015
Hon. Greg Dewar (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Ms. Irvin-Ross), that Bill 36, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2015, be now read the second time and be referred to Committee of the Whole.
Her Lieutenant–Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor has been advised of this bill, and I table the message.
Mr. Speaker: It's been moved by the honourable Minister of Finance, seconded by the honourable Minister of Family Services, that Bill 36, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2015, be now read for a second time and be referred to Committee of the Whole.
Her Honour–His Honour the Lieutenant Governor, at the time, had been advised of the bill, and the message has been tabled.
Any debate?
Mr. Dewar: The–this bill, of course, will implement the requirements of the government. I–we know that this lays a foundation. This bill lays a foundation for the economic success, Mr. Speaker, that our government currently enjoys and the province currently enjoys.
We're currently have the second lowest unemployment rate in Canada. We have some of the strongest economic growth, confirmed by the Conference Board of Canada and then also confirmed by several of the major banks–have recommended that Manitoba will either be the leader or one of the leaders in terms of economic growth. As I said before, it is–we're working with business, we're working with labour, we're working with educational and non-profit groups with the goal of being–having the lowest unemployment rate in Canada, and that is our goal. That is our goal, and I think it's a goal that all Manitobans can share in.
I know that earlier on today, there was discussion in the Chamber about the infrastructure program and the fact that the government announced that we would be spending over $1 billion this year. In fact, I understand, Mr. Speaker, that we've had–met that target and exceeded that target. We spent over $1 billion this year, and it's hard to drive anywhere in the province without encountering a construction crew who I know are hard at work. Just this last week, I must admit, they're paving Main Street in Selkirk, so I'll throw that out there. I'm very pleased with that. But it's hard to–we're up in the Interlake on part of the budget tour, and we met–we saw Highway 17 was paved in the northern part of the Interlake. Highway 16, Highway 75, Highway 59, Highway 1, many of the roads across the province have been paved by our infrastructure program. We've partnered with the–with municipal governments, and we're–as you know, we're spending $60 million this year in the city of Winnipeg. I know my colleagues who represent Winnipeg seats are very pleased with that situation. Pembina Highway's been rebuilt, Portage Avenue, Main Street, just about every street in the city, Mr. Speaker, have seen some level of infrastructure improvement because of this government's commitment.
Mr. Speaker, the–this bill also brought in an increase to the caregiver's tax credit, a 10 per cent increase. We brought in a volunteer firefighter's tax credit for those men and women who provide that valuable service. When I was in Il des Chênes, as part of the budget consultation, I met with a firefighter there, and he expressed the concern that all rural firefighters are having, departments are having, and that is both in the recruitment and the retention of volunteer firefighters. So we did that to help–with them, provide that very important service here in the province.
Another part of what we're doing, as I mentioned, we're working with the private sector. This year, this budget will increase the threshold in terms of the small-business tax rate. This will, Mr. Speaker, free up another 2,000 small businesses from having to pay any tax to the provincial government. This will allow them to invest in the economy. This will allow them to provide more jobs to the economy, which we all want to do.
Mr. Speaker, the–also this bill, again, as it lays the foundations for economic growth, which all Manitobans are enjoying, is, again, it's not only the accomplishments of this particular government. As I said, we've worked with business, we've worked with labour, we've worked with the private sector, non-profits, education to reach these goals, and I think–I know my colleagues on this side the House will be supporting this legislation, and I would commend it to the House, and I would ask all members to support this legislation.
Thank you.
Mr. Speaker: Are there questions on this matter? The honourable member–[interjection] Any questions on this matter?
Okay, seeing no questions, we'll move on. Any members wishing to debate this matter?
Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden-Winkler): It's my pleasure to rise this afternoon and put some important comments on the record with respect to the budget implementation and the.
Mr. Speaker, it's important for members of this House to understand that while we are debating BITSA, what we are really debating, of course, is the enabling appropriations that go to this government's failed budget. It is a broken budget. It is a budget that, once again, sees expenditures exceeding revenues. As we have said in debate before, this is a government with a record whereby every single year, their targets have been wrong for spending. They have overspent their planned budget each and every year since the year 2000.
Now, make no mistake, Mr. Speaker. As in all BITSA bills, there are some measures here that we have supported as a party and we'll make very clear that we've supported these things. As a matter of fact, the Minister of Finance made allusion to the tax credit for volunteer firefighters, and, of course, we support this. This is why the member for Lakeside, only a few years ago, brought a special private member's bill that would recognize–that would see a special licence plate created for volunteer firefighters. We were pleased to see his actions and the actions of other members on this bill. We stood behind volunteer firefighters at that time and got that bill passed. We're proud of those efforts.
At the same time, we continued to speak to the Manitoba association for fire chiefs. What the minister failed to say this afternoon, though, is that their advocacy for that small measure in their bill that appears this year, went back six years. For six years, the firefighters association was asking this Finance Minister, the Finance Minister before him and the Finance Minister before that if they would please pass a very small tax credit worth 300 bucks or so–I think this one's $324–just to commend them, just to acknowledge the many expenses that they do, in fact, incur in the performance of those duties and, for those of us who do have volunteer fire departments in our communities, we understand that these brave men and women incur a lot of personal expenses that aren't covered off. There are things that are provided for them, but there's other costs. There's mileage. There is technical equipment that they have to cover. So, while it's good to see this measure in the bill, it should've been there six years ago, and I thank the association for their hard work in advocating for this change that we finally see now.
* (16:10)
In the same way, the–I believe the minister may have made allusion to the small-business income tax threshold increase, for 25,000 bucks. Now, while the members crow, what really this measure represents is an abject failure by this government because what the minister failed to say in his remarks is that every other jurisdiction in this entire country sees that income tax threshold at $500,000.
The first question a chartered accountant, a CPA, I should say, said to me when they saw this measure in the budget a number of months ago, is they said, ask your Finance Minister, why not $500,000? He said, the only question that should go to the Finance Minister is, why would he raise it to an amount that still falls under the amount in any other province?
This would demonstrate that, once again, this minister is not listening to industry. He's not listening to front-line professionals. He is not supporting business. He wants the–he wants there to be a spectre that he is supporting business. He wants there to be an illusion that he is supporting business. But the facts do not support this. And this budgetary measure does not support the view that this government is supporting the needs of business.
Now, I would say, as well, there's some other things in here that are a long time coming. As a matter of fact, I know when it comes to the Interactive Digital Media Tax Credit, the cultural industries' printing tax credit, I'm sure that the minister and I have had similar conversations with third-party groups. Certainly, we understand, when it comes to, for instance, the film industry, here in Manitoba, we understand the importance of that sector to our economy. We understand how many jobs are being created.
I would suggest to the Finance Minister, there's far more here that he could have done to actually support that industry. But this is good, because this actually stems not from efforts undertaken by the Finance Minister in isolation to get this done, this was, again, the result of some very, very strong advocacy on behalf of the film community and the film industry here in Manitoba to say, you need measures to reflect the fact that we cannot always do a full production in the space of one year.
And certainly, Mr. Speaker, I understand that the new Bond movie is coming out this weekend, and so we understand that some of these films, even ones that are being filmed right here in Manitoba, like the ones this summer, they actually extend far longer than one year. We would think that a year must be plenty of time to get a production done. But the fact is that sometimes these tax measures, and I know the Finance Minister also understands this, sometimes they don't work for industry because if production runs longer than a year, two years, and they go into post-production, all of that work then could actually make them ineligible to receive a credit because now that fiscal year has ended and they're not incurring those expenses in the new year. So it's a good change, it's a long time coming. It's certainly a theme that we heard as well from industry.
There's a number of other changes or a number of other measures in the BITSA bill that I need to speak about. And I will say, when it comes to Rent Assist, this is simply a matter of, thank you very much for finally doing what we have been calling this government to do for years now. And for over two years, we have stood in our place and said that the maximum shelter assistance payable to Rent Assist participants should be 75 per cent of median market rent. The policy that the minister builds into his BITSA bill we take no exception with, because it was our plan. It was our policy. [interjection] And even while they chirp now–even third-party groups in Winnipeg have written the correspondence to say, ah, nice to see the NDP finally go where you guys were before.
So they will groan and they will make much about this, but we know, we're in receipt of the correspondence which thanks us for our leadership on this bill. Certainly the member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Wishart) was instrumental in helping to bring this measure forward. And I think, finally, the pressure on government was overwhelming and they really had no other choice. So good to see the measure in the bill. Good to see the leadership from the PC Party and from the member for Portage la Prairie with respect to this important measure that we finally now see in BITSA. A long time coming. Good to see it here.
Mr. Speaker, I would also want to make acknowledgement of the critic for Agriculture who has made it very clear in debate and question period and otherwise that when this government brought in the Farmland tax–School Tax Rebate program, it was largely bungled. And as we know, and from debate that has been had in this House, we understand that when this was brought in what really happened is that Manitobans got fooled again. They did not know that there was going to be a cap. They did not know that their spouses, in many cases, would be ineligible to receive a benefit. They did not know, when it came to registered farms, that only one member would be able to collect that. They didn't know that if they didn't reside in the province of Manitoba at that time they would be ineligible.
I would ask this Agriculture Minister: How much of those–how many of those rebates are not being issued now because perhaps at this time that individual isn't living in the province? But of far more concern to us are the comments that the member for Midland (Mr. Pedersen) raised when he said that many people were left in the lurch and were not able to actually get the rebate because the timeline was such a short period that they were ineligible. The information wasn't set out.
So, Mr. Speaker, the Minister for Agriculture has largely bungled this file and now we see changes coming, and while we want to be people of faith, we want to be people who are optimistic and think that maybe this time the Agriculture Minister got it right, there's no telling. I think as time goes on and we continue to hear from constituents throughout Manitoba, not just where we are, but in other parts of the province, places like Dauphin, places like, well, places like Lakeside, places from Altona in the south to Selkirk and higher and Dauphin and Swan River. These are farmers who weren't eligible. They're farmers who need to be included. They've been fooled once, hopefully that this budget measure will not fool them twice.
Mr. Speaker, I would want to make a few comments as well with respect to the changes that have been much made in the media of the changes that this minister is now bringing after years and years of this government saying that the best, the most transparent reporting there is is summary reporting. And, indeed, time after time, year after year, even in the budget cover, even on the inside cover, the first thing that the Minister of Finance does in last year's budget is say, summary budget reporting is just so much more superior than core government reporting. And in the cover of this year's budget his preamble is word for word, it is verbatim, except that the sentence that proclaims the superiority of summary reporting is missing. It's absent; it's not there; it's a huge whoops.
Well, believe us this time. And I think that there is no place to look, Mr. Speaker, where this becomes more obvious is when you look back, and we've said this in debate before, when the Premier (Mr. Selinger) was the minister for Finance, he said himself that the summary picture gave a better picture. He talked about one set of books that would provide Manitobans with the most comprehensive budget presentation in Manitoba history–the date on the press release April 30th, 2008. That was the Premier when he was the minister of Finance.
Now fast-forward seven years and this BITSA bill makes changes to The Special Operating Agencies Financing Authority Act that allows the Finance Minister now to redesignate any part of core government as a special operating agency. It basically places those agencies or entities that he chooses outside of core. Now, at the same time, what he does is he says now the focus will be on core reporting. Don't–it's not going to be anymore on summary reporting; the focus will be on core reporting. And now they've done a full 180, and he says summary gives the better picture.
Well, the problem with his move is that not only does it locate in the minister's office too much power without enough transparency but it basically seeks to–it serves to move outside of core, to move outside of consideration, to move outside of accountability and outside of transparency, these entities and their reports and their financial performance. This is why my colleague raised these same points last night at the Public Accounts meeting and put these questions to the deputy minister. And I thank the member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson) for bringing those questions about how this would affect consolidated reporting.
We did not get answers that would satisfy us, and we would submit that also Manitobans should not be satisfied with this move that seems to–well, that does lack transparency and openness. This is why after the member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar) delivered this budget that the condemnation in the media as they sought to understand these changes was profound. One headline read the–I cannot say the member's name, I'm sorry. One headline read the minister's name and then it said, Budget snow job. One article from the Free Press said, NDP blurring financials, breaking the bank. There's a picture here of the minister for Finance with a title: Go for broke. Mr. Speaker, I could go on, but I think the one that sums it up best is one that says, NDP out of touch with Manitobans.
* (16:20)
Mr. Speaker, this is important. This is important because it goes to how governments are how–held accountable for the finances of the province. We must understand that only minutes before, this Finance Minister rose an asked for an appropriation in the billions of dollars that would also include not just the normal operating expenses of the province but additional hundreds of millions more for the increase in government spending that outstrips GDP growth and, at the same time, as the debt increases, as the debt is added to our province, and the deficits remain stubbornly high–as a matter of fact, earlier this afternoon I said the deficit is up, not down, under this Finance Minister. All of this matters because this appropriation that will be voted on this afternoon takes into account the operation of government, but it takes into account also the additional monies that are needed to allow this government to continue to overspend. That is why it matters.
And then we open the budget this year and, in this minister's budget–absent in the budget are those summary annual indicators to show when the government will be back in surplus, not that they've ever made their targets on this before, Mr. Speaker. You know, when it comes to this government, we have to understand, the background is this: in the Budget Speech of his predecessor's predecessor, it said we are on track to return to balance in 2014. Some of us were barely elected when that promise was made on both sides of the House. I think some of us were barely alive, as the member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen) says, when the first promise of this government was made to get the budget under control and get back into balance.
But, Mr. Speaker, I would add that then, on 2014 in December, the Premier (Mr. Selinger) said we are focused on meeting that same target; that's the objective, and we will look at that. The minister of Finance after that, in 2014, said we are on track to return to balance in 2016. And then this latest Finance Minister said, it is the goal of our government to get back into surplus and we will do it by reducing spending.
And three months after that minister made that promise, the Public Accounts were concluded for that fiscal year. And, now that those annual reports have been exhibited and shown, what it shows is that the minister failed. He did not keep his promise. Government spending is not down, it is up.
Now, maybe down in the new up in this minister's lexicon, but I assure him, when it comes to accepted general accounting practices on a global scale, up is not down. And, so, when he says spending will be curtailed–spending will be cut back, and he arrives at a higher number, it is–it shows that it is desperate. It shows it is sad times. It shows you can change the Finance Minister but you cannot change the ideology.
So, absent of any real plan to actually get spending under control–spending plans, I would remind the minister that jurisdictions like Alberta and like Ontario are talking about real measures to curtail the growth of government spending. His counterpart in Alberta just delivered a speech that talked about driving down government spending.
Now, when his colleague, the member for Dauphin (Mr. Struthers) talked about that two years ago when he was Finance Minister, it didn't sound like a scary plan at that time. When we talked about the importance of staying within your means, the NDP said that was scary. But now that Rachel Notley is talking that same game plan, is it really scary anymore? So, it all depends on who's delivering the message.
The fact is, Mr. Speaker, that this BITSA bill shows that it is all about fear and desperation and overspending. The result of which is that Manitobans are paying more but, actually, getting less. Manitobans are tired of NDP waste and mismanagement, which is hurting front-line services, and they're tired of this NDP Finance Minister's broken promises with respect to the budget.
Mr. Speaker, here's the broad strokes: it's a $36‑billion deficit, doubled in size in just seven years. It is a deficit that is up, not down. The highest debt-servicing charges in history in this province, and every indication as Dominion Bond Rating Service will issue their report in the coming weeks, minister–the minister may already know what the content is of that, and he will know that everything hangs in the balance. The storm clouds continue to gather not just over this Legislature, today, on this dreary November day, but they also gather over the minister's head.
It is because of those things that my colleagues and I challenge the government members this afternoon. They still have a chance. Are they going to stand up for a broken budget or are they going to stand up for Manitobans who deserve more?
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, a few comments on the BITSA bill and on the policies of the government.
We have a government which, once again, has overspent. But the problem is that not only is this government overspending, they're not delivering. You know, furthermore, when they promise one thing, we get something else. We see this with the situation with our net debt; it's going up because there's a very large deficit, but it's also going up because this government is not using the money from the PST to fund infrastructure. Instead, it's borrowing money to pay for infrastructure and it's using the PST money for other things. They, you know, go into general revenue and the government uses it for all sorts of things, but they borrow money to do–pay for most of the new infrastructure they're building.
The problem is we continue to have a very large out-migration of people, particularly young people, from our province to other provinces, a net out‑migration. Our manufacturing has fallen behind Saskatchewan in recent years. In fact, our manufacturing sales in the most recent numbers that I saw are actually lower than the sales in 2007 or 2008. We should be growing, and Saskatchewan has grown very substantially since then but we haven't grown. Our manufacturing business is since then and, you know, maybe part of that is because they've, are cutting off our markets by not joining the north–the New West Partnership.
We're seeing not only economic troubles, but we're seeing, you know, the results of our education system with lower PISA scores. We're seeing the results of a health-care system which has got very increasing wait times in the emergency rooms. We've got, continuing a report today, higher numbers of children in care than last year, continuing to be well over 10,000 kids in care. We've got more than 100,000 Manitobans with diabetes. There's no decrease in the number of kids with FASD.
There has been an increase in the number of children and young people, youth in particular, entering our Correctional Services, whereas in other provinces there've been actually dramatic reductions. There's been increases in the food bank use in Manitoba in contrast to–much bigger than other provinces.
For four and a half years we've had thousands of people evacuated from their homes in Little Saskatchewan, Lake St. Martin, and Dauphin River, and they're still evacuated and still wondering when they're going to go home. And I asked the minister quite recently, and although he was optimistic that the people from Dauphin River might be on their way back in the not-too-distant future, he couldn't give a date as to when the people in Little Saskatchewan or Lake St. Martin are going home. In fact, my understanding is that in four and a half years, they haven't even built a single house in Little Saskatchewan First Nation. And they haven't even tendered for the houses which they should have been able to tender quite some time ago. And they continue to delay and delay.
We hear some water management plans but they want to move to no net loss of wetlands, but we didn't get a bill and there's no sign they're actually going to change their water management plans. It's status quo in spite of all the talk. The algal problems in Lake Winnipeg get worse, and we now have a new problem on Lake Winnipeg with zebra mussels which they've been very slow to address. It took them about a year and a half to implement a bill which should have been done in–by September of 2014, and we finally got it implemented in November of this year.
* (16:30)
We have had, overall–there's been much in the news recently–very high incarceration rates in Manitoba with 70 per cent of the people in our jails been not convicted and not 'sented' on remand. Poor management all the way up and down the line, and that's why this budget really can't be supported because it's spending so much money, it's getting such poor results, and there's such poor management all the way up and down the line.
So those are my comments, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker: Is there any further debate on this matter?
Mr. Reg Helwer (Brandon West): Mr. Speaker, I did listen intently to the comments and the comments from the MLA for Morden-Winkler did highlight that there are high points and there are low points in this bill here, and I heard the government encouraging us to vote for it, but, of course, we can't vote for something of this nature. It's just–there are so many negatives in there.
But I do recall the MLA for Brandon West prior to the last–or, sorry, the MLA for Brandon East prior to the last election succinctly staying in a public forum that, you know, there's a lot of reasons that MLAs vote against budgets. It doesn't mean they're against everything in the budget, but, you know, so it doesn't mean that they disagree with everything in that budget, but apparently the government has changed their tune now and they don't want to listen to what the MLA for Brandon East said prior to the election on why people vote against budgets, especially the budgets of this government here, Mr. Speaker.
But this is a government that has promised several times to be open and accountable, and we see, in fact, the reverse. We know all the problems that have happened with untendered contracts and the non-disclosure of those untendered contracts. Indeed, we see, Mr. Speaker, that many times we've had to bring to the attention of the government contracts that were not tendered, that were issued, that were awarded, and yet they're hidden away from Manitobans. And when we bring it to the Finance Minister's attention, he says, oh, oh yes, well, we'll add that one to the list and then Manitobans can see where a little bit of their money has been spent.
And so it's quite concerning to me, Mr. Speaker, that now there is a section in this act where they are talking about the disclosure of contracts, and they're moving most things into regulation. So then the government can hide things further from Manitobans and they can change the regulations as what is disclosed and what is not disclosed at any time, and, in particular here, in section C it says, exempting contracts from the reporting requirement–not really any stipulations on why the government might exempt something. So, it's free that they can exempt any contract at any time for any reason, or for no reason at all.
You know, it's very strange, Mr. Speaker, when I have spoken in public accounts about open data, I can see the minister with a quizzical look on his face and the deputy minister trying to understand, and then all of the staff members sitting there nodding their heads, going yes, we should have open data that will allow Manitobans access to the very information that they need to see where their money has been spent.
So, when I see instances like we have in this act here, Mr. Speaker, all it shows to me is the government continues to hide more and more from Manitobans how their money is spent. Manitobans deserve to know where their money is going. It is ridiculous that this government would hide it any further.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: Is there any further debate on this matter?
Is the House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is Bill 36, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2015.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Some Honourable Members: No.
Mr. Speaker: I hear a no.
Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the motion would please signify by saying aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the motion will please signify by saying nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Speaker: In the opinion of the Chair, the Ayes have it.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): On division, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: On division.
* * *
Mr. Speaker: The House will now resolve into the Committee of the Whole to consider and report on Bill 46, The Appropriation Act, 2015; and Bill 47, The Loan Act, 2015; and Bill 36, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2015, for concurrence and third reading.
Madam Deputy Speaker, will you please take the Chair.
Madam Chairperson (Jennifer Howard): The Committee of the Whole will come to order to consider the following bills: Bill 36, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2015; Bill 46, The Appropriation Act, 2015; and Bill 47, The Loan Act, 2015.
During the consideration of these bills, the tables of contents, the enacting clauses and the titles are postponed until all other clauses have been considered in their proper order. If there is agreement from the committee for bills 46 and 47, I will call clauses in blocks that conform to pages.
Is that agreed? [Agreed]
Due to the structure of Bill 36, and with the understanding that we may stop and–at any point where members have questions or wish to propose amendments, I propose that we call the bill in the following order: Parts 1 through 10, pages 1 through 48 called in blocks conforming to the parts of the bill; then the table of contents, page i; the enacting clause, page 1; the bill title.
Is that agreed? [Agreed]
Bill 36–The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2015
Madam Chairperson: The first bill for our consideration is Bill 36, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2015.
Does the minister responsible for Bill 36 have an opening statement?
Hon. Greg Dewar (Minister of Finance): I do not, Madam Chair.
Madam Chairperson: Thank the minister for that.
Does the critic from the Official Opposition have an opening statement?
Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden-Winkler): I do not.
Madam Chairperson: Thank the member.
We will begin with parts 1 through 10, pages 1 through 48.
Part 1, page 1, clause 1–pass; part 2, page 2, clauses 2 through 4–pass; part 3, page 3, clause 5–pass; part 4, pages 4 through 26, clauses 6 through 25–pass; part 5, pages 27 through 30, clauses 26 through 33–pass; part 6, page 31 through 37, clauses 34 through 41–pass; part 7, pages 38 through 40, clauses 42 through 48–pass; part 8, page 41, clause 49–pass; part 9, pages 42 through 45, clauses 50 through 52–pass; part 10, pages 46 through 48, clause 53–pass.
We will now consider the table of contents, found on page i.
Table of contents–pass.
We will now consider the remaining items in the bill, page 1.
Enacting clause–pass; title–pass. Bill be reported.
* (16:40)
Bill 46–The Appropriation Act, 2015
Madam Chairperson: The next bill for our consideration is Bill 46, The Appropriation Act, 2015.
Does the minister have an opening statement?
Hon. Greg Dewar (Minister of Finance): I do not.
Madam Chairperson: Thank the minister for that.
Does the official opposition critic have an opening statement?
Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden-Winkler): No, Madam Chair.
Madam Chairperson: Thank the member.
Clause 1–pass; clauses 2 through 5–pass; clauses 6 and 7–pass; schedule–pass; enacting clause–pass; title–pass. Bill be reported.
Bill 47–The Loan Act, 2015
Madam Chairperson: Considering Bill 47, the last bill for our consideration is Bill 47, The Loan Act, 2015.
Does the minister have an opening statement?
Hon. Greg Dewar (Minister of Finance): I do not, Madam Chair.
Madam Chairperson: Thank the minister.
Does the critic from the official opposition have an opening statement?
Mr. Cameron Friesen (Morden-Winkler): No, Madam Chair.
Madam Chairperson: Thank the critic.
Clauses 1 and 2–pass; clauses 3 and 4–pass.
Shall clauses 5 through 7 pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
An Honourable Member: No.
Madam Chairperson: I hear a no.
Mr. Friesen: Earlier this afternoon, the minister and I had a discussion about section 6(1), additional authority for loans and guarantees, this incremental budget authority to additionally appropriate $200 million. There was a question he could not provide an answer to.
Now that the minister has staff assisting him, is he able to provide a fuller answer when it comes to identifying other events or expenditures, other than the Investors Group Field BBB loan guarantee, which may or may not eventually have an impact on this amount? Are there other fees, charges, anticipated costs other than the one he identified having to do with the possibility of student loan expenses coming out of this amount?
Mr. Dewar: It is–of course, it's for the unanticipated loan act during the year. And since it is unanticipated we don't have any examples other than the ones that I referenced, the loan guarantee for the stadium and the student loans.
Madam Chairperson: Are there any other questions?
Clauses 5 through 7–pass; schedule–pass; enacting clause–pass; title–pass. Bill be reported.
That concludes the business before us.
Committee rise. Call in the Speaker.
IN SESSION
Committee Report
Ms. Jennifer Howard (Chairperson): The Committee of the Whole has considered the following: Bill 36, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2015; Bill 46, The Appropriation Act, 2015; and Bill 47, The Loan Act, 2015, and reports the same without amendment.
I move, seconded by the honourable member for Minto (Mr. Swan), that the report of the committee be received.
Motion agreed to.
(Continued)
Bill 47–The Loan Act, 2015
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Ms. Irvin-Ross), that Bill 47, The Loan Act, 2015; Loi d'emprunt de 2015, reported from the Committee of the Whole, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Speaker: Any debate? Is there any debate on this matter?
* (16:50)
Mr. Chomiak: Yes, might we have leave to not see the clock until debate on all of these three matters is concluded?
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House to not see the clock until all matters have been concluded? [Agreed]
Any debate on this matter?
House ready for the question?
An Honourable Member: Question.
Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 47, the appropriation act, 2015.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Speaker: I hear a no.
Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the motion will please signify by saying aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the motion will please signify by saying nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Speaker: In the opinion of the Chair, the Ayes have it.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): A recorded vote, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: A recorded vote having been requested, call in the members.
* (17:30)
Order, please. The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 47, The Loan Act, 2015.
Division
A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Yeas
Allan, Altemeyer, Ashton, Braun, Caldwell, Chief, Chomiak, Crothers, Dewar, Gaudreau, Howard, Irvin‑Ross, Jha, Kostyshyn, Lathlin, Lemieux, Mackintosh, Maloway, Marcelino (Logan), Marcelino (Tyndall Park), Melnick, Nevakshonoff, Oswald, Pettersen, Robinson, Saran, Selinger, Struthers, Swan, Wiebe, Wight.
Nays
Briese, Cullen, Eichler, Ewasko, Friesen, Gerrard, Goertzen, Helwer, Martin, Pedersen, Piwniuk, Smook, Stefanson, Wishart.
Clerk (Ms. Patricia Chaychuk): Yeas 31, Nays 14.
Mr. Speaker: I declare the motion carried.
* * *
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): Yes, Mr. Speaker–
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Order, please.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, I seek further leave of the House to not see the clock until royal assent.
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House to not see the clock until royal assent has been completed? [Agreed]
Bill 46–The Appropriation Act, 2015
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Ms. Irvin-Ross), that Bill 46, The Appropriation Act, 2015; Loi de 2015 portant affectation de crédits, reported from the Committee of the Whole, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Speaker: Is there any debate on this matter?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Mr. Speaker: House ready for the question?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Speaker: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the motion will please signify by saying aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the motion will please signify by saying nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Speaker: In the opinion of the Chair, the Ayes have it.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): Recorded vote, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: Recorded vote having been requested, call in the members.
Order, please. The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 46, The Appropriation Act, 2015.
Division
A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Yeas
Allan, Altemeyer, Ashton, Braun, Caldwell, Chief, Chomiak, Crothers, Dewar, Gaudreau, Howard, Irvin‑Ross, Jha, Kostyshyn, Lathlin, Lemieux, Mackintosh, Maloway, Marcelino (Logan), Marcelino (Tyndall Park), Melnick, Nevakshonoff, Oswald, Pettersen, Robinson, Rondeau, Saran, Selinger, Struthers, Swan, Wiebe, Wight.
Nays
Briese, Cullen, Eichler, Ewasko, Friesen, Gerrard, Goertzen, Helwer, Martin, Pedersen, Piwniuk, Smook, Stefanson, Wishart.
Clerk (Ms. Patricia Chaychuk): Yeas 32, Nays 14.
Mr. Speaker: I declare the motion carried.
Bill 36–The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2015
Hon. Dave Chomiak (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Ms. Irvin-Ross), that Bill 36, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2005; Loi d'exécution du budget de 2015 et modifiant diverses dispositions législatives en matière de fiscalité, reported from the Committee of the Whole, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Speaker: Is there any debate on this matter?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Mr. Speaker: House ready for the question?
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Some Honourable Members: No.
Mr. Speaker: I hear a no.
Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the motion will please signify by saying aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the motion will please signify by saying nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Speaker: Opinion of the Chair, the Ayes have it.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Official Opposition House Leader): Recorded vote, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: Recorded vote having been requested, call in the members.
Question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 36, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2015.
* (17:40)
Division
A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Yeas
Allan, Altemeyer, Ashton, Braun, Caldwell, Chief, Chomiak, Crothers, Dewar, Gaudreau, Howard, Irvin‑Ross, Jha, Kostyshyn, Lathlin, Lemieux, Mackintosh, Maloway, Marcelino (Logan), Marcelino (Tyndall Park), Melnick, Nevakshonoff, Oswald, Pettersen, Robinson, Rondeau, Saran, Selinger, Struthers, Swan, Wiebe, Wight.
Nays
Briese, Cullen, Eichler, Ewasko, Friesen, Gerrard, Goertzen, Helwer, Martin, Pedersen, Piwniuk, Smook, Stefanson, Wishart.
Clerk (Ms. Patricia Chaychuk): Yeas 32, Nays 14.
Mr. Speaker: Declare the motion carried.
* * *
Mr. Speaker: We'll now prepare for the 'arrile'–arrival of Her Honour.
The Acting Sergeant-at-Arms (Mr. Craig Waterman): Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor.
Her Honour Janice C. Filmon, Lieutenant Governor of the Province of Manitoba, having entered the House and being seated on the throne, Mr. Speaker addressed Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor in the following words:
Mr. Speaker: Your Honour:
The Legislative Assembly of Manitoba asks Your Honour to accept the following bills:
Clerk Assistant (Ms. Monique Grenier):
Bill 46–The Appropriation Act, 2015; Loi de 2015 portant affectation de crédits
Bill 47–The Loan Act, 2015; Loi d'emprunt de 2015
Clerk (Ms. Patricia Chaychuk): In Her Majesty's name, the Lieutenant Governor thanks the Assembly and assents to these bills.
Mr. Speaker: Your Honour:
At this sitting the Legislative Assembly has passed certain bills that I ask Your Honour to give assent to.
Clerk Assistant:
Bill 4–The Farm and Food Awareness Act; Loi sur la promotion du secteur agroalimentaire
Bill 10–The Municipal Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités
Bill 13–The Planning Amendment Act (Special Planning Areas); Loi modifiant la Loi sur l'aménagement du territoire, conscriptions spéciales aménagement du territoire
Bill 15–The Foreign Cultural Objects Immunity from Seizure Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur l'insaisissabilité des biens culturels étrangers
Bill 18–The Certified Occupations Act; Loi sur les professions reconnues
Bill 19–The Legal Profession Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la profession d'avocat
Bill 20–The Architects Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les architectes
Bill 21–The Engineering and Geoscientific Professions Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les ingénieurs et les géoscientifiques
Bill 23–The Boxing Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la boxe
Bill 24–The Wildlife Amendment and Fisheries Amendment Act; loi modifiant la Loi sur la conservation de la faune et de la Loi sur la pêche
Bill 27–The Veterinary Medical Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la médecine vétérinaire
Bill 28–The Personal Property Security Amendment Act; loi modifiant la loi sur les sécurités relatives aux biens personnels
Bill 30–The Non-Smokers Health Protection Amendment Act (E-Cigarettes); Loi modifiant la Loi sur la protection de la santé des non-fumeurs (cigarettes électroniques)
Bill 31–the registered professional planning act; Loi sur les urbanistes professionnels
Bill 32–The Noxious Weeds Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la destruction des mauvaises herbes
Bill 34–The Safer Roads Act (Drivers and Vehicles Act and Highway Traffic Act Amended); loi sur la sécurité accrue des routes, modification de la loi sur des–les conducteurs et les véhicules et du Code de la route
Bill 36–The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2015; Loi d'exécution du budget de 2015 et modifiant diverses dispositions législatives en matière de fiscalité
Bill 37–The Radiation Protection Act; Loi sur la radioprotection
Bill 38–The Intimate Image Protection Act; Loi sur la protection des images intimes
Bill 41–The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2015; Loi corrective de 2015
Bill 45–The Elections Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi électorale
Bill 70–The Real Estate Services Act; Loi sur les services immobiliers
* (17:50)
Clerk: In Her Majesty's name, Her Honour assents to these bills.
Her Honour was then pleased to retire.
God Save the Queen was sung.
O Canada was sung.
Mr. Speaker: I want to first, on behalf of the members of the Assembly, thank our pages for a wonderful job that they do in calling the vote. And also to thank our table officers for the work that they provide for this Assembly again and again.
And the hour being past 5 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until November 16th at 1:30 p.m.