LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Monday, June 3, 2019
Madam Speaker: O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Thee to frame such laws as may tend to the welfare and prosperity of our province. Grant, O merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy will, that we may seek it with wisdom and know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen.
Please be seated. Good afternoon, everybody.
Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): I move, seconded by the member for St. Johns (Ms. Fontaine), that Bill 243, The Climate and Green Plan Amendment Act (International Panel on Climate Change Targets); Loi modifiant la Loi sur le Plan vert et climatique (groupe international d'experts sur les objectifs en matière de changements climatiques), be now read a first time.
Motion presented.
Mr. Kinew: This bill represents our commitment to fight for our future and to put forward a real plan to stop global warming.
This bill sets into law science-based targets that would have us meeting the responsibilities that we have under the Paris climate accord and in line with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recommendations for reducing global warming to less than 1.5°C.
I'm very proud and honoured to bring forward a plan to fight for our future.
Madam Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed]
Mr. Reg Helwer (Brandon West): I move, seconded by the MLA for La Verendrye, that Bill 245, The Prompt Payments in the Construction Industry Act; Loi sur le paiement sans délai dans l'industrie de la construction, be now read a first time.
Motion presented.
Mr. Helwer: This builds on the private member's bill that was introduced last session. We've done a considerable amount of consultation with many of the colleagues in the industry here that are in the gallery. I thank them for their input.
Every time we spent working on this it felt like my brain was in pain because there was a lot of detail there.
But I do like to thank them, along with the drafters, and we'll move ahead with this legislation.
Thank you.
Madam Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed]
Committee reports?
Madam Speaker: There's no tabling of reports? The honourable Minister of Education?
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Education and Training): Thank you, Madam Speaker. I was looking forward to tomorrow.
I'd like to table the 2018 annual report for the Teachers' Retirement and Allowances Fund.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister of Families, and I would indicate that the required 90 minutes notice prior to routine proceedings was provided in accordance with our rule 26(2).
Would the honourable minister please proceed with her statement.
Hon. Heather Stefanson (Minister of Families): Madam Speaker, I rise in the House today to recognize Special Olympics Awareness Week in Manitoba. Earlier today, I, on behalf of our Premier (Mr. Pallister) and our government, had the privilege of presenting this year's proclamation to the staff at Special Olympics Manitoba on the Legislative lawn.
It was an honour and a privilege to introduce and pass private member's Bill 209 six years ago, proclaiming the second week of June each year to be Special Olympics Awareness Week in Manitoba.
Madam Speaker, I was pleased to see many MLAs with athletes, coaches, law enforcement and Special Olympics staff and volunteers on the Legislative grounds earlier today. Despite the–this–the thunderstorm, there was a great turnout and–a true testament to the dedicated individuals in attendance and their commitment to Special Olympics.
I would also like to mention, this year 109 Special Olympics athletes from across the country competed in nine sports at the Special Olympics games this past March in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
The athletes represented Canada and Manitoba successfully on the international stage, bringing back 155 medals: 90 gold, 37 silver and 28 bronze.
I am pleased to share three–pleased to share that three athletes from Manitoba came back with medals: Regan Hofley of Winnipeg won two gold medals in track and field; Philip Bialk of Winnipeg won a gold and a silver medal in bocce ball; and Darbe Cunningham from Brandon won a gold medal in the 10-pin bowling singles event.
The athletes displayed sportsmanship and skill, but most importantly, the athletes, coaches and staff embodied and represented Canadian and Manitoba values throughout the competition.
As Canadians, we are committed to promoting respect, acceptance, inclusion and dignity for all people regardless of the challenges and obstacles life puts in front of us.
We all know that people with intellectual disabilities still face stigma, neglect and marginalization in our society. Special Olympics has done incredible work towards eliminating those barriers, but it's time for us all to step up and ensure that people with intellectual disabilities feel included in our lives and in our society. That work begins by supporting our Special Olympics athletes.
Madam Speaker, I ask that all members join me in thanking and recognizing our guests that have joined us in the gallery today: president and CEO of Special Olympics, Jennifer Campbell; current board chair, Deanne Harrison; past board chair, Larry Chornoboy; Duane Brothers, Katherine Cheyne, David Cheyne, David Robinson, and Philip Bialk.
I want to thank our guests today for everything they do to make our province and our world more inclusive for people with intellectual disabilities, and I ask all my colleagues to join me in congratulating all of those athletes from Manitoba and Canada who participated this year.
Ms. Flor Marcelino (Logan): Welcome and congratulations to the Manitoba Special Olympics team here.
Today we recognize the hard work and talent of our Special Olympics athletes in Manitoba in support of Special Olympics Awareness Week.
In Manitoba and across the world, the Special Olympics provide an incredible opportunity to celebrate the achievements of our athletes and raise awareness about increasing accessibility in sport.
* (13:40)
The Special Olympics champion inclusion and acceptance through sport by providing year-round athletic programs and competitions in various sports for children and adults who live with intellectual disabilities. They give these amazing athletes a chance to showcase their talent and skill. More importantly, though, the Special Olympics fosters respect and promotes dignity for all Manitobans.
As an organization, the Special Olympics has existed for decades, but they continue to promote respect and advocate for the dignity and inclusion of all people. I would like to thank all the volunteers, staff, coaches and athletes who are involved in the Special Olympics for the valuable and uplifting work that you are doing to promote inclusion and acceptance.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Madam Speaker, Special Olympics Awareness Week is an important time for our province.
Special Olympics Manitoba hopes sport will create opportunities for a special group of athletes, will open hearts and minds towards people with intellectual disabilities and will create inclusive communities.
Two months ago, I held a forum in River Heights, and one of the presenters was a parent of a child with an intellectual disability. She told how his presence in a regular class helped other children, how it improved empathy to others and how the teacher, nervous to begin with, said at the end of the year that it was the best class she'd ever had.
Special Olympics Manitoba has been promoting, through sport, acceptance and inclusion for people with an intellectual disability for over 36 years, all the while enriching lives, fostering respect, promoting dignity and supporting advocacy in schools and communities around Manitoba.
On behalf of our Liberal caucus, I congratulate those who competed in the 2019 winter games this past winter, and I thank the athletes, the staff and the countless volunteers who help with the Special Olympics program in our province.
Accept With No Exception is a message of inclusion which should be a consistent theme in everything we do every day.
Thank you. Merci. Miigwech.
Mr. Len Isleifson (Brandon East): Annually in April, Brandon plays host to the Western Manitoba Science Fair. Each year, on average, 25 schools from 10 different school divisions hold science fairs and send their finalists on to the Western Manitoba Science Fair.
This year, four finalists from the–western Manitoba joined 36 other Manitoba students, making a combined 450 students from across Canada advancing to the national Canada-Wide Science Fair recently held in Fredericton, New Brunswick.
Neelin High School student Aiden Simard's project titled Adolescent Anxiety and Social Media, won best of fair and earned him the right to represent Manitoba in Fredericton. Joining Aiden at the Canada-Wide Science Fair was Amy Gudmundson from École Jours de Plaine in Laurier, Emily Robb from Brandon's Vincent Massey High School and Rayna Shepherd, a grade 7 student from Kirkcaldy Heights School, also in Brandon.
Each of the winning students from across Manitoba who have joined us in the gallery today deserve recognition, but I still want to take this opportunity to say how incredibly proud I am of the four inspiring youth from the Westman area.
These four students came away from the Canada-Wide Science Fair with a combined total of three medals and four special cash scholarship awards, which is the best ever result to day from the Western Manitoba Science Fair region. The total winnings from all 40 Manitoba students were five bronze, three silver, two gold and six special cash and scholarship awards.
Madam Speaker, the goal of the science fairs is to foster an enthusiasm for science in students by encouraging their natural curiosity and creativity through hands-on projects involving science, technology, engineering and math, known as STEM projects.
Madam Speaker, students from across Manitoba did extremely well at the nationals this year, and they join us in the gallery today. It is my pleasure to stand and ask all my colleagues to help me in congratulating them as they are not only winners in the world of science but also in the future of Manitoba. Congratulations.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): So as I was saying last week, the Premier (Mr. Pallister) cut birthing service to Flin Flon; cut funding to Neighbourhoods Alive!; cancelled the cap, K-to-3 classroom sizes; cut health care for international students; imposed a PNP head tax on newcomers; cut 111 nurses' aides at HSC; cut the Status of Women budget by $90,000; voted against Bill 226 to provide gender-neutral identification options; dismantled the democratic infrastructure of Manitoba, leaning elections in their favour, including suppressing votes, Madam Speaker; froze wages for 120,000 public servants; jacked up rates for Manitoba Hydro and MPI; privatized water bombers; abandoned the 'chown' of Churchill; cut training for youth; closed the Victoria hospital ER; didn't establish a safe-consumption site; sold off hundreds of social housing units; cut maintenance to social housing by 62 per cent; cut the special drug program; cut the amount of support given to children in CFS care; failed to acknowledge Pride last week; they have little, if any, diversity in their caucus; and, again, all of this while the Premier has sat on the beach in Costa Rica.
So my message to Manitobans, Madam Speaker, is to vote out this Premier and every single one of his members and his ministers who have done his bidding to make all of our lives more miserable and harder.
Miigwech, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Bob Lagassé (Dawson Trail): On a positive note, I rise in the House today to recognize an active community organization and non-for-profit that provides an essential service to adults living with intellectual abilities in the Dawson Trail area.
Located in Ste. Anne, Manitoba, Pulford Community Living Services has been part of the town for a full 10 years, making connections between the people they serve and the community. Through the help of volunteers, Pulford's provides those with abilities an opportunity to find their strengths.
They also provide individuals with employment opportunities. One of these opportunities came in the form of a second-hand shop that started an–as an employment initiative. The store sells gently used clothing, furniture, housewares and home decor at affordable prices.
Madam Speaker, I had the opportunity to tour the store and the building it is housed in. I was extremely impressed with the facility and the fantastic work done there by the individuals. The revenue raised by the store goes directly to furthering the organization and the people they serve.
They have also partnered with the town of Ste. Anne to become as much a part of the community. This partnership includes operating a recycling depot for the town.
Last year Pulford community services held a picnic in the park, and it was a great success. This year, they once again will be hosting the picnic at the Ste. Anne splash pad, complete with food, games and a bouncy castle.
Unfortunately, Madam Speaker, their bus broke down on the way in, but we do have the executive director in–here in the gallery today, so please join me in honouring them as Dawson Trail heroes.
* (13:50)
Mr. Mohinder Saran (The Maples): Madam Speaker, today is the last day of the spring session. I do not know if the election will be called or not, but I want to express my heartfelt gratitude to all of my colleagues in the House and all The Maples' residents and all the Manitobans.
It has been my honour and the–it has been my honour and privilege to have the co-operation of colleagues over since–over the years since 2007. My constituency residents extended their support to me for more than a decade. They trusted me as a friend. I always remained present there to hear them and work with them shoulder to shoulder.
I acknowledge with great respect my previous and present staff members and volunteers who served my constituents professionally. I am indebted to them for their service, accompaniment, great advice from time to time whenever sought, and passion for meeting new people all the time. I wish them all the best.
The Maples constituency office is perhaps the busiest of all constituencies in Manitoba. This is the first instance of a political office that serves people on Saturdays as well. On weekdays, people from all walks of Manitoba visit our office for help on various matters and information.
My office welcomes them to share, mingle and ask for help regarding the constituency issues and also help on other issues, like sitting in–filling citizenship forms, visa forms and Rent Assist forms and other forms, you name it.
The Maples office provides comprehensive and all-out support under its political and legal jurisdiction. Especially the newcomers who otherwise feel uncomfortable to go straight to government offices come to the constituency office for various help.
Today, at the end of this spring session, I wish good luck to all the members and thank the staff members of the Chamber.
I wish everyone a nice summer. Thank you.
Mr. Blair Yakimoski (Transcona): It's not often we get to celebrate a 100-year anniversary, but 100 years ago this week Canadian National Railway, or CNR, was created.
CN's history is steeped in stories interwoven with the foundation of our great nation, from bringing new Canadian immigrants fleeing war in Europe to their new lives on the Prairies, and the early years which included the CN Steamships line, CNR Telegraph, CNR Radio and, of course, the historic CN grand railway hotels such as the Château Laurier in our nation's capital and our very own Hotel Fort Garry.
CN's history is Canada's history. The existence and name of my community of Transcona is linked partially to CN's predecessor, the Transcontinental Railway, and our location in the centre of Canada on the outskirts of Winnipeg made us the perfect hub for maintenance of the steam engines taking goods and Canadians from coast to coast.
I and many of my former–many former railroaders and residents recall fondly the daily whistles that could be heard throughout the community from the CN Shops, heralding the beginning and end of shifts.
On May 13th, the Royal Canadian Mint unveiled two commemorative CN 100 coins celebrating CN's rich history in Canada at Transcona's Claude Mongeau National Training Centre, where they train engineers and conductors that are educated from across Canada with the utmost focus on safety first.
This fall, from September 19th to the 22nd, CN's 100th birthday party comes to Winnipeg with a train-filled event called A Moving Celebration.
This event will give us all the chance to discover the people, the trains and the spirit behind the railway that helped build our community and this nation.
From looking back on CN's history in Manitoba with the Transcona shops, Symington yard and the beloved CN 2747, the largest artifact in Transcona Museum's collection, to looking to the future of rail freight movement, this should be a great event at The Forks and I assume will include the newly named CN Stage and Field.
Please join me in congratulating CN on this historic achievement.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Transcona?
Mr. Yakimoski: I ask for leave to include my guests in the gallery.
Madam Speaker: Is there leave to include the names of the guests in the gallery? [Agreed]
Jasdeep Devgan.
Introduction of Guests
Madam Speaker: Prior to oral questions, we have a number of guests in the gallery that I would like to introduce to you.
Seated in the public gallery from Winnipeg Mennonite Elementary and Middle Schools Katherine Friesen Campus we have 15 grade 4 students under the direction of Wes Krahn, and this group is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Fort Richmond (Mrs. Guillemard).
Also seated in the public gallery from Shady Oak Christian School we have 13 grade 6 to 9 students under the direction of Kendall Friesen, and this group is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Indigenous and Northern Relations (Ms. Clarke).
And also in the public gallery with–we have with us today Linda Kaatz, Hayley Sosnowsky, Tyra Smith, Bella Delse, Tyler Rislund and Joanna Kaptein, who are the guests of the honourable member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Ewasko).
And also in the gallery today we have with us Elyse Lathlin and Natanis Pascal, who are the daughters of the honourable member for The Pas (Ms. Lathlin)
On behalf of all members, we welcome all of you here.
* * *
Madam Speaker: And as is our custom, we are saying farewell to three more pages today.
Hannah Belec will be graduating from Murdoch MacKay Collegiate in June 2019. In the fall she will be attending the University of Manitoba Faculty of Arts, majoring in history and minoring in political science. Once she has obtained her bachelor's degree she plans to attend law school to start a career in advocating for the rights of Canadian citizens.
Outside of school, Hannah enjoys expressing herself creatively in front of others, taking vocal, guitar, piano and musical theatre lessons. This summer Hannah will be playing the lead role in Boys Will Be Boys, an original musical written by herself and two friends. She also plans to work to save money for university and next summer's adventure: backpacking through Europe.
The page program has been one of Hannah's greatest accomplishments to date. She has loved learning about the legislative process and the power of democracy. It has inspired her to–now, I'm not sure what this–it has inspired her towards a–I don't think this is a–[interjection] What? To end her law career? [interjection] Okay. It has inspired her to end her law career in either provincial or federal politics. It has been a privilege to work with the staff and elected officials at the Manitoba Legislature.
Avery Groeneveld will be graduating magna cum laude from Fort Richmond Collegiate in a few short weeks. She has received direct entry to the Asper School of Business at the University of Manitoba where she will be attending as a President's Scholar this fall.
Avery looks forward to exploring the world of business where she currently has interests in accounting and economics.
Avery will spend her summer working at her other part-time job of two years at Cineplex and spending time with friends and family. She will also continue her fifth year volunteering with Special Olympics.
Her winter track and field season with the Road Runners is just finishing up, and she will coach her bocce ball team, the Kildonan Crashers, for the summer season.
After working as a page at the City of Winnipeg last year, Avery looked forward to expanding her experience and to seeing a different level of democracy in action here at the Legislature. Avery's expectations were surpassed as she began working here in the Chamber and is sad to see her time come to an end.
She looks forward to using all of the experience she has gained here at the Manitoba Legislative Assembly in her future endeavours where she hopes to pursue business, law and, eventually, she hopes, politics.
And our third page who is leaving and who is seated in the Speaker's Gallery today is Richard Han. He will be graduating from Glenlawn Collegiate this June and will be pursuing post-secondary education at the University of Toronto for Rotman Business School to earn a degree in bachelor of commerce. His ultimate goal is to join the NGOs, like the United Nations, and to speak for those who can't speak for themselves. He wants to be able to give back what he learned by making a positive change to the world.
He earned the 2019 Horatio Alger Association Canadian scholarship; Canadian Senior Mathematics Contest School Champion medal; University of Waterloo Fermat award, top 25 per cent; and 2018 Manitoba Korean scholarship this school year.
* (14:00)
The opportunity he got to work alongside the people he admired and aspired to–became one of the biggest factors that he enjoyed so much working at the Legislative Building. To have the chance to talk and to get to know the people who make our laws was an honour for him, and he said he will never forget the time he got to work as a page.
He wants to thank all the MLAs, staff and his fellow pages for making his sixth year in Canada a lot more memorable, and, also, Richard is joined today by his mother, Jung Sook Seo, and his brother Tony.
So thank you to all our pages, and we wish you all the very best.
Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): I'd just like to thank Hannah, Avery and Richard for all your hard work as pages and to wish you all the best in the journeys to come.
I also want to acknowledge the final report of the inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women, girls and two-spirit people which was brought forward in Ottawa today. It is certainly the culmination of years of effort on behalf of indigenous women and by indigenous women, girls and two-spirit people in our country who are demanding justice.
I note that the minister was present to accept on behalf of Manitoba today. I also want to highlight the work of my colleagues from Point Douglas and St. Johns, who, clearly, spearheaded this effort.
Certainly, it's a day for women to speak, but I would just note that, as an indigenous man, it's my role to raise the next generation free of toxic masculinity.
I do have a question about the closure of Concordia ER, but I thought this was a momentous occasion to honour first.
Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): I thank my colleague for his genuine comments.
We offer our sincere thank you and our heartfelt appreciation to all involved in the preparation of this report and in the work that went into it. The process of listening to those who have experiences which we can learn from is an important one, and we appreciate that and look forward to reading the detailed report in full, because it is a commitment our government has made since its election to act on these recommendations as much as we possibly can, given the limitations of the realities of the situation we inherited.
That being said, Madam Speaker, I would like to share with members of the House that over the weekend, our government received correspondence from the Attorney General of Ontario requesting evacuation assistance for the wildfire situations in Pikangikum First Nation, and I want to inform the House that we're working with Indigenous Services Canada and the Red Cross to assist. Five flights arrived last night here with 336 evacuees; more are coming. We anticipate up to 2,200 people will find comfort here temporarily until the danger passes in their home community, and we're proud to help here in Manitoba.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a supplementary question.
Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): Well, I thank the Premier for the update, and I ask that he continue to keep Manitobans informed as this situation continues to develop.
One area where the government has been remiss and has not kept the people of Manitoba informed is, of course, in the rushed and misguided closure of the emergency room at Concordia Hospital.
We know that northeast Winnipeg is losing acute care–in fact, lost acute care earlier this morning when this government closed the emergency room after only five days notice. This is a culmination of a plan that has seen wait times increase year over year, according to the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority; that has seen surgical wait times increase, according to CIHI; and has led to nurses being forced to work unprecedented amounts of mandatory overtime.
Seeing as how the emergency room only closed later today, there is still time for the Premier to reverse his decision. Will he take advantage of the opportunity to do so now and announce that he will reopen Concordia's emergency room?
Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Well, the member is the leader of a party that acknowledged there was a serious problem–quite rightly acknowledged that there was a serious problem with a lack of access to emergency services in Winnipeg. They commissioned a study to investigate and simply didn't have the courage to act on what was recommended.
This government is acting and we are in pursuit of a better system.
I don't share the member's pessimism. I understand that change is difficult and challenging, but it takes courage to address the need, and Madam Speaker, though the previous government acknowledged that there was a need, they failed to demonstrate the courage necessary to make a bad situation better.
We'll work diligently to make sure that the people of this city and province get better care sooner.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a final supplementary.
Mr. Kinew: The problem with the Premier's plan, his failing plan for health care, is that it has been rushed from the start.
This government has been in such a rush to try and save money by closing emergency rooms in Winnipeg that they've ignored the possibility that they will make the same things worse, and yet that is exactly what's happened.
In addition to rising wait times in the WRHA and rising surgical wait times, in addition to the mandatory overtime, they've also cut 100 nursing positions just in the city of Winnipeg during their time in office, Madam Speaker. And now we see the next step of these cuts and closures. We see the closure of the emergency room at Concordia Hospital taking place just earlier today after only five days notice.
I would repeat my call for the Premier to reverse his position on this closure. They can proceed with other changes to the health-care system, but why not take advantage of the opportunity to stand in the House today on the last day of session and announce that Concordia will get a chance to keep their emergency room?
Mr. Pallister: Well, in suggesting that we go slow, Madam Speaker, the member is also demonstrating he fails to recognize the serious problem that existed before and a problem that resulted in the longest waits for people in the country, and the member says, go slow.
We don't believe that that's the right approach. We understand the human suffering inherent in what the member is saying, even though he may not. More people were leaving the Concordia emergency room than ever before after hours of waiting without receiving any treatment at all, and the member says go slow.
Madam Speaker, that's not the approach that will give people the care they need–better care sooner–and more people were being moved after they were admitted to other acute-care centres elsewhere in the city–much greater risk involved in that, much greater hardship for Manitoba families, and the member says go slow on that too.
We need to solve these problems, Madam Speaker. We're following the lead of experts recommended to the NDP, and we are following the lead of most other jurisdictions across the country in getting better care sooner to Manitobans.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question.
Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): And yet the situation in health care in Manitoba is worse now after three years of this Premier's time in office.
Nurses in Manitoba have put it into writing–several times, at this point–that they have serious concerns for patient safety as a result of the cuts that this government has made, and they have said, unequivocally, that health care in Manitoba is now worse than it has ever been.
Now, we've heard from several independent sources, Madam Speaker, that the government is going to call for a voluntary media blackout of advertising beginning on June 14th, so just in about two weeks' time. But we wonder whether this will, of course, impact the public service announcements that are supposed to warn northeast Winnipeggers about this government's closure of the Concordia emergency room.
They say they're spending $100,000 warning northeast Winnipeg people that they've closed this emergency room. We haven't seen it yet.
But will the government's arbitrary plan to call an early election impact their ability to get the word out about the closure of the Concordia emergency room?
Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): I'd just like to give the–take the opportunity, if I could, Madam Speaker, to, on behalf of our government, thank Hannah and Avery and Richard very much for their service here. We wish them the very best going forward. They are an inspiration to us, as young people who we are committed to assisting in any way we can to help them find a better future and–we hope here in Manitoba. And so I thank them.
One thing they no doubt will have noticed as pages is the member for Fort Rouge has a tendency to make things up, and one of the things he does is he puts false information in his preambles and hopes people will buy it.
Madam Speaker, no matter how many times and in how many different ways he repeats that false information, the system is better than it was–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Pallister: –and it will continue to get better because there's a government in Manitoba that's willing to face the challenge of making it better.
* (14:10)
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a supplementary question.
Mr. Kinew: Nurses in Manitoba say that health care is worse under this government than it has ever been, Madam Speaker.
Of course, we know that this government rushed ahead with the closure of the Concordia emergency room even after the consultant that they rehired told them that nobody was ready for the closure of the Concordia ER, and this rush of theirs to close the Concordia emergency room has been–it's left many of us with the question, why? Why were they in such a rush to close the emergency room?
But, again, the spectre of this June 14th date for a voluntary blackout, a cessation of government advertising, does beg an important question. Did the Premier artificially rush the closure of the Concordia emergency room so that the closure and the attendant public service campaign would happen before this June 14th date?
Said in another way, did they close the Concordia emergency room early simply because they planned to close–or because they planned to call–
Madam Speaker: The member's time has expired.
Mr. Pallister: Not at all, Madam Speaker.
Did the NDP cover up untendered repeated contracts to a party donor for Tiger Dams that didn't–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Pallister: –work. [interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Pallister: Yes, they did, Madam Speaker.
Did the NDP cover up aspects of certain candidates' backgrounds prior to the last election so that the public would not be able to see and ascertain the true record of that candidate? Yes, they did, Madam Speaker.
Did the NDP misrepresent their intentions on tax hikes that they had planned to introduce prior to the 2011 election? Absolutely.
Madam Speaker, the NDP are experts on covering things up, but they shouldn't think that that misbehaviour is the kind of behaviour that this government will repeat. We will not follow their lead.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a final supplementary.
Mr. Kinew: So, again, health care is worse under this government than it has ever been, according to nurses in Manitoba.
The significance of the June 14th date is that it's approximately 90 days before September 10th, which is one of the election dates that people are speculating about amongst those who watch Manitoba politics.
So it seems as though this government, in addition to potentially rushing forward the closure of the Concordia emergency room to suit their plans to call an early election, has also created a very small window of time during which they can let northeast Winnipeggers know that they are losing acute care at the Concordia emergency room.
So my final question for today is simply to the Premier: Does he believe that two weeks' time for this advertising is enough notice to give the people of northeast Winnipeg that they're losing acute care at the Concordia emergency room?
Mr. Pallister: Well, the member asks why we're proceeding with these reforms, and, Madam Speaker, in asking that question he demonstrates that he does not understand the nature of the mess we inherited from the NDP. Record-long waits exceeding seven hours on average is not something to be proud of, and the NDP advocate that we go back to that. Record numbers of people leaving without getting any care at all, and the NDP says we should go back to that?
No, Madam Speaker, when asked–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Pallister: –why–the NDP ask why, why we are fighting to achieve change, why we are finding better ways, why we are–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Pallister: –working with experts and adopting and adapting our strategies to their recommendations.
Because we want better health care for the people of Manitoba than they ever got under the NDP government.
Mrs. Bernadette Smith (Point Douglas): Nobody believes anything that comes out of this Premier's mouth when it comes to health care.
People in Selkirk today are rallying for Selkirk laundry because this government is set to close Selkirk laundry and put 43 people out of work. These 43 people have been asking this government, what are they going to do in terms of their jobs?
What has this government said? They're posted.
So will the minister or the Premier get up today and assure that those 43 workers at Selkirk laundry have a job?
Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Well, I'm glad the NDP wants to campaign on trust. I think that's wonderful.
I want to use this opportunity to say thank you to the member for Fort Garry-Riverview (Mr. Allum) for eight years of service to the public of Manitoba and wish him well going forward. I want to say that we wish him all the best in his life and in his future endeavours and also to his family and friends. I know that they will welcome the new additional time he may have to spend with them–that is not easy serving in this job, so I wanted to wish him well.
I also wanted to say to the member for Wolseley (Mr. Altemeyer), elected 16 years ago, that's–[interjection]–yes, where did that time go–and to wish him well as well in his future endeavours.
And I had previously said to the member for Minto (Mr. Swan), and I will say again, thank you for your service, sir–through you, Madam Speaker, I apologize–to the people of Manitoba.
And I also want to wish my friend from Emerson the very, very best. Elected in 2007, he's worked hard for his constituents and been an advocate for his constituency for a long time, and I know that he appreciates–I know he appreciates the honour that he's had representing that beautiful area of the province and I know that the people there appreciate him too.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Point Douglas, on a supplementary question.
Mrs. Smith: This government ran on the promise that they weren't going to cut front-line services, and that's all they've done since they've been elected. I've raised this matter three times in this House with the minister and he still hasn't answered it.
What is he going to do for the 43 workers at Selkirk laundry? Is he closing the laundry facility, and if he is, are those 43 workers going to have a job?
Mr. Pallister: I want to say to the member, although I think that sometimes there is more heat than light in her comments, that, nonetheless, she has been an advocate for murdered and missing women, and I appreciate her work and I know that she has approached that task with sincerity and with sincere motivation due to tragedies within her own family circle, and so I thank her for that.
I also want her to know that we are sincere in wanting the very, very best protections that we can find for government workers, particularly in the–on the front line, and so I give her that assurance and that sincere and heartfelt comment today, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Point Douglas, on a final supplementary.
Mrs. Bernadette Smith (Point Douglas): Today the national inquiry released their final report entitled Reclaiming Power and Place.
I want to acknowledge all of the families in all of Canada that have raised their voices and send our love out to them. Unfortunately, since I've been elected I have not seen any action from this government to protect indigenous women in this province nor have I seen any support for our indigenous families who are going through this.
So I'll ask the Premier today: What is he going to do to keep indigenous women safe in this province and what is he going to do to support our indigenous families who are experiencing this today–not after the report comes, but today?
Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Well, Madam Speaker, with all due respect, the member's preamble does not reflect the willingness to look with an open heart and with an open mind at the actions of this government. We have adopted–of 34 Truth and Reconciliation Commission recommendations, we have work completed or ongoing on 25 of them.
In terms of the recommendations of the Hughes inquiry following Phoenix Sinclair's tragic passing, we have at least 90 per cent of those recommendations implemented.
So if the member is not seeing any progress from this government I would encourage her to take a look at the previous wreck in the previous government and see if she can find an iota of action there.
Our deeds demonstrate our conviction that we must act on these areas and we are, Madam Speaker.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): We're so proud to stand with students today and supporters celebrating our collective success in pushing the Premier to finally make the abortion pill free to Manitobans–better late than never, Madam Speaker.
* (14:20)
I want to commend each and every one of the Medical Students for Choice and their advocacy in shaming this Premier into finally doing what they should have done a couple of years ago.
I table today, Madam Speaker, an example of their extraordinary work and advocacy.
I ask the minister and the Premier that while they're about to break the law: How will Mifegymiso be immediately rolled out, and will they reimburse everybody who's had to pay out of pocket?
Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): I would say to the member, who seems to relish the oversized chip on her shoulder with her comments here, Madam Speaker, to understand that public policy-making on the basis of shaming others is destined to repel her own associates in her own caucus. And perhaps she needs to take a look inside her own heart and ask herself for a minute why so many people in that diminished caucus are leaving.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. Johns, on a supplementary question.
Rural and Northern Manitoba
Ms. Fontaine: What I would suggest the Premier do is actually take a look at his caucus members who repeatedly, over the last couple of years, had gotten up and spoken at anti-choice rallies against Manitoba women and girls' and trans people's human rights to access abortion. That's what he should spend his time figuring out.
We know that Mifegymiso can drastically change the lives of Manitoba women, girls and trans folks that want to seek an abortion. Now the government says that Mifegymiso will be available in their communities in some future time.
That's unacceptable.
How does the government plan to roll out the abortion pill in rural and northern areas in Manitoba?
Mr. Pallister: Well, Madam Speaker, truly, the member for St. Johns would have a better chance of having her criticisms taken seriously if she had, after over a half decade of cashing paycheques here, left a shred of evidence that she was willing to do a single bit of research to assist in advancing women's rights in our province.
But she did not. She did not, Madam Speaker, and, clearly, her priorities were somewhere else. [interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Pallister: She also–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Pallister: –sits there as part of a political organization that for 17 years failed to take any significant steps to advance the cause of indigenous rights or indigenous women in the province of Manitoba.
This government takes those steps sincerely and honestly without a big chip on our shoulder, Madam Speaker.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order.
The honourable member for St. Johns, on a final supplementary.
Ms. Fontaine: The Premier can continue to attack members on this side, but we stand with women and girls and trans folks in accessing abortion services. And no matter any way that the minister or the Premier want to spin their ideological stance against abortion, Manitobans know that what they stand for and their archaic views don't go anywhere in 2019.
So the question remains, Madam Speaker: How is the Pallister government going to roll out accessing Mifegymiso in rural and northern areas, and when is that going to happen: after the election, before the election, next year, or ever?
Mr. Pallister: Well, an archaic approach, Madam Speaker, would be the one that the member has taken on virtually every issue, and that would be to attempt to do things like shout down indigenous women when they are testifying before a House of Commons committee, to try to publicly shame them when they are speaking about personal experiences with abuse, with assault.
That's what that member has done in the past, Madam Speaker. Because her sincerity comes into question when one examines the actual deeds.
This government concerns itself with improving the circumstances for indigenous women. That's why we are acting on the reports from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. That's why we're implementing the recommendations–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Pallister: –of the Hughes inquiry. That's why we're working with indigenous leaders like Arlen Dumas, who said last week: The Premier and I have a productive working relationship; it's allowed us to create new opportunities for First Nations in Manitoba's diverse economy.
While they're throwing me under the bus, Madam Speaker, they're throwing indigenous leaders and indigenous women under the bus too. But we're going to keep working together even though the member opposite tries to politicize every single issue.
Madam Speaker: I would just urge members that, while we may not like some of the things we hear in here, yelling across at the–across the aisle isn't going to resolve any of the issues here and it does not demonstrate democracy at its best. So I would urge members that yelling from their seats is not something that I'm going to tolerate for the rest of the day.
Mr. Dougald Lamont (Leader of the Second Opposition): This morning the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls released their report. Many of those calls for justice we've been hearing here in Manitoba for decades. This is our collective history, and it is imperative that the voices of the inquiry are not treated like so many other reports and tossed aside or left to moulder and get dusty.
Will the Premier immediately organize a committee to review and implement the recommendations of today's MMIWG report?
Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): I appreciate the comments from the member opposite, and I know that he is sincere in wanting to see positive outcomes from the work that was undertaken in this inquiry, as are we.
We continue to be committed to breaking down the barriers that exist for indigenous women and girls to receive the support, the encouragement that they deserve, and I have earlier expressed my sincere appreciation on behalf of our government for the tremendous amount of work and effort that went into the committee's work and also to the families, specifically, who shared their perspectives, which we have the opportunity now to benefit from, and I say to the member opposite, thank you for raising the issue.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Second Opposition, on a supplementary question.
Mr. Dougald Lamont (Leader of the Second Opposition): It's clear from the Premier's three years of inaction and nonanswers that he would much rather prefer to be in opposition than governing. We're looking forward to putting the Premier back where he belongs.
Over the last three years this government has taken three steps back for every step forward when it comes to justice. There's a stack of reports making it clear that when you build housing and create jobs it helps prevent crime, yet this government has left $400 million in housing funds from the federal government untouched. Community supports for homeless and youth have been cancelled.
When are they planning to issue the RFP to give them another plan they won't follow to deal with safety in our communities?
Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Well, I take–can only take from the preamble of the member opposite, Madam Speaker, that he's ready to go for an election and anxious to go to the people with his particular brand of vision which involves, and is not limited to, higher taxes for people who commute to work, no resource development in the North and, Madam Speaker, a total disregard for the respect that should have been–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Pallister: –shown to Jody Wilson-Raybould, Jane Philpott, for example, within the Liberal caucus. These things, Madam Speaker, are not indications of a member's real vision, and I would encourage the member to work hard on getting some ideas before he runs out to the doors.
We have those ideas: treaty land entitlement resolution where none was occurring under the NDP, reconciliation strategies, duty-to-consult framework, Northern Healthy Foods Initiative, Operation–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Pallister: –Return Home to get people back to their communities that the NDP left languishing in the city of Winnipeg.
These are progressive actions this government's taken. The member shouldn't–
Madam Speaker: The member's time has expired.
The honourable Leader of the Second Opposition, on a final supplementary.
Mr. Dougald Lamont (Leader of the Second Opposition): The member's time certainly has expired.
Madam Speaker, let's talk about what this government has done. The Pallister government has announced a pittance for police forces while slashing funding to the municipalities, undermining the police. This government's created institutional safety officers while slashing funding to the hospitals and universities that would hire them. They continue to tear indigenous families apart through their dismal CFS and justice systems and refuse to the–come to the table to negotiate, and now they've issued an RFP for a review of The Police Services Act. Who better to rejig our entire police act than another accounting firm?
* (14:30)
Can the Premier explain to Manitobans how it is possible that Treasury Board can review municipal planning and property development, however poorly, in two weeks, when their entire Justice department can't review a single act?
Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Perhaps the member can explain to the House how $1 billion of additional investment in child and family services, education and health care constitutes a slash of anything.
We've invested more than any previous government in the history of Manitoba in each of those three compassionate departments, and we are doing so with effective outcomes being the goal, and we are achieving effective improvements in outcomes.
But let's go back to the indigenous actions: investments to support–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Pallister: –Internet services that have never existed in some communities until this government came in and instituted those progressive changes in northern Manitoba.
Manitoba First Nations mineral development protocols: the NDP says leave it in the ground. Good luck going door to door in Flin Flon with that. Remember the member–no wonder the member's grumpy over there, from Flin Flon.
First Nations highway signage program to identify traditional First Nations names on the highway signs. Elder protocol–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Pallister: I know the members from the NDP don't like this, Madam Speaker, but they should recognize the truth of it. This government has focused on these initiatives, built better relationships with First Nations communities and leadership, and those leaders know it, and these members opposite know it too.
Mr. Tom Lindsey (Flin Flon): Ten thousand people left Manitoba last year for other provinces. Last month our province saw the biggest jump in employment insurance claims in the whole country. The Premier and the minister know this. They've been setting up for an early election instead of paying attention to that, perhaps.
There's certainly the case in the North where jobs continue to disappear.
Why won't this minister do something to assist communities with actions today–not someday, maybe sometime down the road, but what's he going to do today to help those communities in the North?
Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): The member's going to have a full plate when he next goes to an NDP policy convention, Madam Speaker, because I'm sure he'll be standing up and advocating against his leader's approach of leave it in the ground. The people of Flin Flon won't like that much.
He answered his own question, Madam Speaker. If he would read the NDP policy approach, the Leap Manifesto says leave it in the ground. How you going to create jobs in Flin Flon leaving it in the ground?
And the NDP policy platform says no to trade agreements, Madam Speaker. It does. Now, would the member believe that the people of Flin Flon would be better off with no trade agreements with neighbouring jurisdictions? I don't think that's right.
So he'll be busy at the policy convention, and I know he'll be busy because he'll be concerned about the tax disadvantages that are inherent living in Flin Flon versus Creighton. I know that he'll be advocating for the support for a lower PST in Flin Flon as well.
Madam Speaker: I have asked for everybody's co‑operation in showing respect, and I am going to have to call the member for Point Douglas (Mrs. Smith) to order. Constant heckling is just not good for moving forward a political, parliamentary, democratic agenda here. And I would ask her, please, to respect what we're trying to do here and to refrain from the constant heckling that is coming from her seat.
I know members get very passionate here, and I know we're going to have some degree of heckling, and I've always said that that's going to be something that we're going to see here, but ongoing constant heckling is just not something that I think is very good for this institution.
The honourable member for Flin Flon, on a supplementary question.
Mr. Lindsey: You know, we listen to this Premier and he calls down people from the North rather than standing up, trying to support them.
You know, there's legislated programs that are in place already that are there to help particularly people in the North, particularly northern communities. The community mining reserve fund: it's existed for 50 years.
Premier stands up and says, well, there is no money in that fund, and clearly we showed last week that that's not true. The Communities Economic Development Fund's been frozen for how many months, how many years now? All those things should be in place and working to help people in northern Manitoba.
So why has this minister choked off any kind of funding that will help people in northern Manitoba?
Hon. Blaine Pedersen (Minister of Growth, Enterprise and Trade): I just want to give a shout-out to HudBay mining company. My colleague, the member for La Verendrye (Mr. Smook), and I were there last weekend. We toured the Stall, Chisel Lake, Lalor, New Brit mine, as well as got an–in–explanation of the exploration going on at 2019.
HudBay is investing over $250 million in refurbishing and they're going to develop a new mine at 2019. They have over 600 employees plus 800 contracted employees.
I don't know why the member would be so grumpy when all this is happening in his very own constituency–in Snow Lake in the Flin Flon constituency.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Flin Flon, on a final supplementary.
Mr. Lindsey: I'm well aware of what HudBay Minerals is doing in Flin Flon. I'm also well aware of what this government is doing for the people in the North, which is absolutely nothing.
So they can sit there and clap and carry on all they want. The people in Flin Flon know exactly that this government has abandoned them.
The only government that's been further right-wing than this bunch is Sterling Lyon, and they were only here for one term.
So is it this Premier's plan to abandon ship and get out early? Because people in the North aren't buying what he's selling.
So will he step aside, call the election today, I guess, so that the people of Manitoba can decide that this government is done?
Mr. Pallister: I just have to suggest to the member, you've got to be awful careful what you ask for.
Because if that member is asking to go to the polls right now, he's asking me to go to the people of Flin Flon and tell them that he's saying no to job-training opportunities for young men from Cross Lake that I met with last week who are now going to be working at the Lawlor mine because of the initiatives–partnership initiatives of this government. And he's going to be saying no to a government that's willing to partner with First Nations on resource development while his party says no to that. And he's going to be saying no to lower taxes for the people in his area.
The only thing he's going to say yes to, Madam Speaker, if he wants to go to the doors and be honest with the people he meets there, is he's going to be saying yes to higher taxes for driving to work, higher taxes for volunteering in the community, higher taxes for parents taking their children to sports and arts events. He's going to be saying yes to higher taxes, no to jobs, no to progress. That's what the NDP's about.
I get that he shouldn't be quite as optimistic about the election, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Andrew Micklefield (Rossmere): Modernizing Manitoba's justice system is a priority for our government, and we continue to deliver on that priority.
Last week the Minister of Justice announced the latest initiative to modernize our courts.
Could the minister please share the details of this announcement with the House?
Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Contrary to the spenDP, our government is investing in the Idea Fund, which supports initiatives proposed directly by front-line public services.
Our government is moving forward with plans to modernize Manitoba's court through the implementation of an integrated case management system. Currently, there are more than 20 different systems throughout Manitoba courts that are not integrated, and the majority of the systems are paper based and require manual updating. This project is an important initiative to replace antiquated and outdated systems.
The new system will ensure Manitobans will have better access to justice.
Mr. Dougald Lamont (Leader of the Second Opposition): In March 2015 the Premier wrote an op-ed that, though no one knew it at the time, was a preview of the PC's first term. I table it. It was titled, A plan is in the works, and in it the Premier announced that he was planning to have a plan.
More than four years later, little has changed, and last year's Deloitte report said, quote, the Province is unable to articulate a forward looking vision for Manitoba's economy, end quote.
Now, was the Deloitte report mistaken? Is the problem that the Province doesn't have a plan, or that the Premier doesn't?
* (14:40)
Hon. Brian Pallister (Premier): Madam Speaker, I want to also say thank you to the member for Logan (Ms. Marcelino), who I understand is also intending to give up this wonderful career, and I wish her, very, very sincerely, all the best as she goes on in future endeavours.
I know, from her personal background, that she will always be involved in this province and its communities and that she will give of herself in any way she can. She's a person of great service. She served as the minister of Culture in the previous government and served well.
And she has also taken on the responsibility of being the interim leader prior to the election of the member for Fort Rouge (Mr. Kinew) and filled that position admirably, as well, in a difficult time of challenge within the opposition caucus.
So I say thank you to her and sincere–as I consider her to be a sincere and honest person. And I thank her so much for the chance to get to know her a little bit better, and all the best to her and her family in the years to come.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Second Opposition, on a supplementary question.
Cost of Permit Delays
Mr. Lamont: It's no secret this government has trouble getting things done, and it's starting to put Manitoba's economy at risk. This government can't get prospecting permits out the door. They've shut down government offices so people can’t start businesses, and the Premier keeps picking fights and breaking deals.
We've seen this government and Hydro break deals with municipalities, businesses, the federal government, community organizations, all of which would be bad enough, but it's worse, because this government appears to be actively preventing investment in Manitoba. At last count, this government was leaving $1.5 billion in federal housing and infrastructure funds on the table.
The Treasury Board thesis was that delays cost the economy.
Does the Premier know how much his obstruction of $1.5 billion in investment for more than a year will cost the Province?
Mr. Pallister: Well, rejecting most of the overtly silly preamble of the member opposite, I would say this: we lead the country in the last two years in attracting private sector investment to Manitoba.
And, Madam Speaker, we do that because we are focused on encouraging job creation and partnering with the private sector by creating a more stable environment where there is less waste, less duplication and better delivery of services, better results, more focused spending.
These are really not exclusively Manitoba concepts, but they're concepts Manitobans live by and live with within their own families, within their own small businesses. And the member opposite, not perhaps understanding that, doesn't understand why this progress is happening, but I can tell him that it is and it will continue.
The only thing better, Madam Speaker, than today in Manitoba will be, with this government in charge, tomorrow in Manitoba.
Madam Speaker: The time for oral questions has expired.
Madam Speaker: And I have a very brief statement for the House.
As the House is adjourning for the summer today, I would encourage all honourable members to remove the contents of their desks now. I would further encourage members to recycle as much of the material as possible.
The blue bins here in the Chamber are designated for recycling of Hansard only, and any other material you would like to recycle may be placed in the larger recycling containers in the message rooms located just outside the Chamber.
Thank you.
Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
And the background to this petition is as follows:
(1) The loss of sleep associated with the beginning of daylight saving time has serious consequences for physical and mental health and has been linked to increases in traffic accidents and workplace injuries.
(2) According to the Manitoba Public Insurance news release, collision data collected in 2014 showed that there was a 20 per cent increase in collisions on Manitoba roadways following the spring daylight saving time change when compared to all other Mondays in 2014.
(3) Daylight saving time is associated with a decrease in productivity the day after the clocks are turned forward with no corresponding increase in productivity when clocks are turned back.
(4) There is no conclusive evidence that daylight saving time is effective in reducing energy consumption.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to amend The Official Time Act to abolish daylight savings time in Manitoba effective November 4, 2019, resulting in Manitoba remaining on Central Standard Time throughout the year and in perpetuity.
And this petition has been signed by Rod Stoesz, Edna Stoesz, Peter Hildebrand and many, many more fine Manitobans.
Madam Speaker: In accordance with our rule 133(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House.
Further petitions? If there are no further petitions, then grievances.
Madam Speaker: Oh, the honourable member for The Maples, on a grievance?
Mr. Mohinder Saran (The Maples): Yes, Madam.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for The Maples, on a grievance.
Mr. Saran: I would like to put a few words on the grievance because–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Saran: –in the Maples area and The Maples community there were a couple of schools to be built. But they have not built yet, and still we are waiting. When they are going to start? I hope the Education Minister look into this situation and immediately start building those schools.
And I–Madam Speaker, I was very interested in the Provincial Nominee Program, and we were able to make some changes. There were some requirements, and those requirements were removed and it was made easier for the applicant to apply for it. And–but still, I proposed some of the things which can be done under a Provincial Nominee Program but they have not done yet.
That's when newcomers come over here, immediately they are put in their prospective trade or profession. And they can go for two, three months and the government should pay for their wages and employers should be able to–should be helping them to learn the culture, and that will help. And that has not come into place yet.
And also I have suggested that there should be culturally sensitive personal-care homes and culturally sensitive seniors' housing. And I am not clear if there's any program. I asked those questions; I have not got answers about that. And that should be put in place because, when seniors come from other countries, they have a language problem and because of the language problem, they cannot socialize with other people. And if they have their own community members who are from their own culture, they will be more comfortable in their old age, and they can enjoy that way.
So, throughout all those years I tried to make some changes, like changes in scattering of cremated ashes into water bodies; that was my effort. Similarly, compensation of additional utility bills of the patients taking home-based dialysis. That was another improvement. Similarly, there was a Seniors' School Tax Rebate. And the Seniors' School Tax Rebate, it was promised by both parties that it will be $2,300 and–but that did not happen. Both–even PC did not keep its commitment, and it reduced to $470. So all those kind of situations, those promises were not fulfilled.
* (14:50)
I hope seniors can get $2,300; that will go a long way. And that way they can stay in their houses for a longer time. And because they can stay in their houses for a longer time and also they will be more satisfied because they are living in the known neighbourhood. And therefore, that–I think government should bring that back, the $2,300 school tax rebate. I don't think it's too much cost to the government that will–saving behind the scenes lots of money because of seniors' health and other services not to be provide to the seniors.
So, Madam Speaker, there are so many other things. I think I can go into it, but I just want to point out that the two schools should be built immediately, and also they should think about closing the Seven Oaks ER because there are–many other innovative methods can be used.
Like, there should be put–a kind of list of what is emergency, what is not emergency. What's an emergency, people can stay there; what is not an emergency, people can go.
Maybe they can ease hospital, have can–some private clinics and the government can provide some kind of incentive so those private clinics can be opened 24 hours, and the person who goes for emergency but it's not really an emergency, they can be moved to those personal–those clinics and they can be served there.
So I think many innovative ways to keep those emergencies at Concordia and Seven Oaks to open, but at the same time, some innovative ways can be applied so that people–it will be easier for the people to come close to their hospitals, instead of going to downtown, because going to downtown it will cost–one thing, it will be hard for the people. Especially in the Maples area, many people are new immigrants so they have language problems and they have other problems. They are not that wealthy so that everybody does not have cars.
So I think that should be–the government should rethink about this decision and it's not too late.
So I think, similarly, some other incentives can be [inaudible] Like, people who work at night time who have children and they cannot find a babysitter. Perhaps each area should have one such place where people can drop there and they can sleep over there, and that way it will be easier for them, the people, to work at night time and evening shifts.
So, many innovative ways we can improve the services and, at the same time, we can keep control of the budget. So, Madam Speaker, I will suggest that the government rethink all those things instead of just saving money and cut all the services.
Thank you very much.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Wolseley, on a grievance.
Mr. Rob Altemeyer (Wolseley): Today is June 3rd, 2019, and 16 years ago to the day I was first elected as MLA for Wolseley. It–I announced I would not be seeking re-election some time ago, over a year ago, to spend more time with my family, and I have learned since that I'm leaving as the longest serving MLA in our caucus.
I think they–the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) will always have more years and more mileage, for sure, under his belt, but a consistent term of 16 years is an honour, to put it mildly.
And, Madam Speaker, if it takes a village to raise a child, it takes an entire community and a movement to raise and support a politician trying to make a difference in a place like this. So if I accomplish anything with my final speech here today, I hope it is to dispel the myth that any of us accomplishes anything on our own.
Everything that we do down here is only made possible by hundreds, if not thousands, of other people and I want to thank them for making the past 16 years of my life possible here as MLA.
And I want to start with the most important people in my life, several of whom are here in the gallery, starting with my wife Kim, who is not only my best friend ever, but–and biggest supporter, biggest fan, biggest pain, biggest pusher, and the very best at making me realize just how much further we have to go as a society, and how much further I could go as a person.
She is simultaneously the glue that holds our family together, and the one that is pushing all of us to become more than what we are right now. And, sweetheart, I love you to death and I always will.
Sitting next to her is my mom, no small political animal herself. I run into more people who know me as, oh, you're Jean's kid, than I do run into people who know me as the MLA for Wolseley. Either that, or they know me as my father's son, given that he educated tens of thousands of students at the University of Manitoba. Both of them alive and well, I'm happy to report. Mom's able to join us here today and, in the vein of, you know, how on earth do you thank your parents for making your life possible and keep it under a day-and-a-half-straight lecture, let me just focus in on the incredible progressive values that you instilled in me.
My parents were amongst, well, the million who marched with Martin Luther King in the fight for the Civil Rights movement in their home country of the United States. They volunteered with the Peace Corps. Mom did work in the inner city of Chicago, in the black ghettos, on literacy projects, and she brought that passion for change here and became one of the best facilitators in the inner city that agencies would constantly call on to help them deal with the challenges that they faced, and went on to teach at the Winnipeg Education Centre, the social work access program, which I hope hasn't been cut by the government recently, but I believe that it has. And Dad, of course, is a–quite rightly world-renowned, recognized expert in the rise of right-wing authoritarianism through his work in social psychology at the University of Manitoba.
Not surprising how their son might turn out given the values in the room, but thank you for everything you've done for me and everything you've done for the world.
I also want to acknowledge the community leaders that helped shape me who I am today, two of whom are in the gallery in the form of Shirley Lord and George Harris, who along with my mom were heavily involved in the Choices Social Justice Coalition the last time the Conservatives were in power and they needed to be taken to task. Shirley's probably greatest influence over my life would be the birth of her son, Mr. Boyd Poncelet, who I am proud to say has been my only full-time constituency assistant for all 16 years that we have done this job together.
And I simply have to say something significant and substantive about Boyd because of–even though I know he doesn't like to be the focus of attention any more than Kim does, but, pal, your patience, your kindness, your skills in innovation, your dedication to causes that are larger than just ourselves has set such a high moral standard. I always knew that if you left the constit' office, it was because I wasn't living up to what I should have lived up to. And I take it as one of the highest accomplishments in my career that you stuck around, that you supported me, that you believed in the work that we were doing, because you have been my absolute professional rock and one of the best friends that I've ever had.
This man handles over 1,000 instances of case work every single year, easily, because Wolseley is a surprisingly intense place to be. And when people walk into Boyd's office, he and I have worked together over the years–we try to do our best to make sure that we're advocates and not just trying to manage them and get them out the door as quickly as possible. We don't care who you voted for, we don't even care if you live in the constituency. If you have an issue personally or you see a way to improve the community or the province, we will do our best to work with you to at least get you an answer and hopefully get you across the finish line to success. And it's–and we've been unapologetically progressive from day one.
* (15:00)
It is Wolseley's job to push both our political party, our governments and our society. We have tried to align ourselves to be as big a part of that as we possibly can. And a very useful exercise for all MLAs is a little bit of something we call role reversal, where Boyd becomes my boss and my campaign manager every four years and I follow whatever he says and trust his instincts implicitly.
So, pal, I couldn't have done any of this without you, and it's difficult to argue with the success that we have had in the Wolseley constituency: over 100 physical improvements, major improvements to major institutions and organizations doing fantastic work on the ground. Time does not allow me to mention even any of those by name, really, but none of that would've been possible if people in the community hadn't come forward and advocated for themselves and if Boyd and I and everyone that we've worked with in government weren't able to get it to happen.
And I want to take some time to thank the people in the current caucus, in previous caucuses, people who served as Cabinet ministers now and in the past.
I want to tip my hat to the four leaders that I've had the honour of serving with and under, two of whom are, of course, here in the Chamber today. That's not a role that I would wish on very many people; you have to put up with people like me who don't often take no for an answer and will keep pushing to try and get done what we believe will get done.
But I can't do any of what I've done without the debates, the discussion and the teamwork that we have had here and similarly, everyone at the Legislature from yourself, Madam Speaker, the clerks, the pages, security guards. Ray gets–takes me out and we throw a baseball around every once in a while; that's what all Sergeants-at Arms should do. The tour guides have been amazing; Daisy Giesbrecht will always be able to entertain anybody for an hour in this building.
And I want to give a shout-out to the people of Wolseley. You have entrusted me on four occasions to be your voice, your advocate and your conscience here in government. It is not a job that I have ever taken lightly, and I have always been deeply, deeply honoured for your choice in asking me to do that. Wolseley is a very diverse place. Where even–where do you even begin? I mean, you're going to have everything from deep, systemic inner-city poverty, living very closely to upper-income aspiration. You will have perspectives that stem from an indigenous heritage to the settler community or settlers like myself and new Canadians. You will have young families and senior citizens, the rather diverse views of renters, landlords and homeowners all together, everyone fighting for–save the planet or fighting just to survive.
And it has been such an honour to learn from all of these different communities how to walk in your world and to try to work with you to achieve what we have achieved together. I've been honoured to play my very small part. I've witnessed far too many successes in government–I'm almost done, I promise–I've witnessed far too many successes to become cynical about the positive role a government can play, just as I've seen far too much stupidity and self-interest get in the way, on occasion. We can never forget that change is never easy.
So my deepest appreciation to everyone who's been on this journey with me, who pushed me to do better than I thought I could and for making it possible for me to do this in the first place.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Minto, on a grievance?
Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto): Yes–
Point of Order
Madam Speaker: Oh, the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a point of order?
Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): Yes, on a point of order.
I would just like to thank the member for Wolseley (Mr. Altemeyer) for his excellent service to the people of Manitoba, the constituency of the Wolseley, and when he says he does push, he's telling the truth, Madam Speaker.
May history look on him kindly as a progressive voice who pushed us towards environmental justice and meeting the challenge of our time, which is climate change.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Government House Leader, on the same point of order?
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): On the same point of order, Madam Speaker.
The member for Wolseley (Mr. Altemeyer) and I were elected together 16 years ago on this very day, and we've had a number of opportunities to speak and rarely to agree, but I think in the 10 minutes that I heard him speak, I agreed with virtually everything. He did himself an honourable job with his comments, and to him and to his family and to his supporters, thank you for your service and we wish you well.
Madam Speaker: The honourable House Leader for the Second Opposition, on the same point of order.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (Second Opposition House Leader): Yes, Madam Speaker, on the same point of order.
I just want to thank the member for Wolseley for the work that he's done on environmental and other issues.
Madam Speaker: The comments are all very nice, but I do have to indicate, technically, that is not a point of order.
* * *
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Minto, on a grievance.
Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto): It's a pleasure to follow my colleague, the member for Wolseley, my neighbour along Ellice Avenue, Banning Street and Portage Avenue, as he moves on. There will be no more ball hockey played across Ellice Avenue at the Ellice Street Festival, I guess, after this year and; I wish my colleague–the two dumb guys from the West End as we were sometimes able to joke with our constituents–as we move on.
I will have some comments later on today because I think we have a fairly long evening in this Legislature.
So I come here not to praise Caesar, but to grieve him. So I am going to use the rest of my time to talk a little about some of the things that really trouble me about the way that this government is conducting its business in this House.
You know, we hear a lot from this government about the deficit and, yes, indeed, with hundreds of millions of dollars now coming from a very different federal government than the one we had to contend with, the deficit has been reduced. But in truth, there is a big increase in the democratic deficit in this province, and I'm going to give just a couple of examples of why that's the case.
The first is that it's clear this is a government which is really communicating by emailed statements from staffers late in the afternoon, rather than what has been the pattern and the tradition. I think the responsibility for decades, which is that ministers actually answer questions from media, they're actually visible, they actually respond to things that are raised by community members, by opposition members, by the media, and that is not the case.
What now happens is, if an issue's raised in question period, most–not all, but most of the ministers run out of here and hide out in their offices for the rest of the afternoon.
You know, it wasn't that long ago–three years ago and a little bit–that ministers would come out of this Chamber and they would stand in the hall and they would answer questions that were posed to them by the media. And with the exception of a few ministers who still are prepared to do that on some days, the vast majority simply run to their offices. And then around 4:30 in the afternoon, out comes an emailed statement which then goes out to the media, and that will be the government's response for the day.
Well, you can't–just as we say in law, you can't cross-examine a letter; you can't follow up an email that comes out of government and the media has simply had to go with that. I'm disappointed the media hasn't made that a bigger issue because that doesn't actually satisfy democracy if the ministers who are going to be implementing changes, whether they think it's a positive change or whether we're concerned it's a negative change, they aren't prepared to actually speak up and answer for the decisions they're making, and I think that's a great disappointment.
It is, of course, because we know there's many people advising this government that cut their teeth in the Stephen Harper administration, an administration that became increasingly aloof, increasingly paranoid. I guess, perhaps, there's a lack of confidence in this–in these ministers by the Premier (Mr. Pallister).
I think we saw that by today's performance in question period when the Minister of Growth, Enterprise and Trade (Mr. Pedersen) got up for one question, and then when he answered, that we kind of understood why nobody else other than the Premier (Mr. Pallister) was going to be allowed to answer questions today. It made it very clear that this is a one-man show and that the ministers are being muzzled so they don't, I suppose, say anything unfortunate or anything that takes away from what the government is trying to pass off as a message.
Mr. Doyle Piwniuk, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair
As my colleague, the member for Point Douglas (Mrs. Smith) says, no one believes the story they're telling on health care or in a number of different areas, and their silence and their refusal to actually do their job as ministers is just another sad by-product of the way that the Premier is running things.
* (15:10)
Secondly, of course, we have this process called Estimates in this Legislature where the government has to present their departmental spending and opposition members have the chance to ask questions of those ministers.
And we know the government has chosen to call Estimates–I believe, now, it's one time in 33 days, since the budget passed–we still have 92 hours and 32 minutes of questions in Estimates that I just don't think we're going to get to this afternoon, no matter how efficient we may be.
And I'll be honest. I've actually been embarrassed for the Government House Leader (Mr. Goertzen)–who I think I've put on the record before, I do have a lot of respect for–but I've been embarrassed as I've watched him try to justify why Estimates are not being called. And he said it's–well, because the opposition won't pass bills. Well, a newsflash for everybody: the government has guaranteed passage of their legislative agenda.
And, you know, later today there's 14 bills that are going to be passed. And, interestingly enough, 13 of them have never actually been called for third reading. The 14th bill we have been able to speak to for one minute. So, I don't think the Government House Leader–I don't think he believes what he's saying. I know he's being forced to say and I have some understanding of that feeling.
But what we know is that this government is trying to hide the impact of their cuts, their freezes, their choices for Manitobans. And we see that in health care and we see it in the Department of Families.
We see it in Justice, we see it in Sustainable Development, we see it across the board with this government and they are not prepared to let us ask the question about the vacancies, to let us ask the question about the cuts, to let us ask questions as to why agencies that have been partnering with government for years–or in some cases even decades–have had their funding reduced, have had their funding restricted, have had their funding come late or simply have not been treated with respect. And it is our hope that we will have a new government that will not have this cavalier attitude towards this important democratic process in this Legislature.
The third major point I want to get to–so little time and so much to grieve–is the musings of this Premier that he intends to violate Manitoba's Elections Act–this Premier, who tells us he's all about the rule of law. Well, we know what the law says and that's that election is to be held on the first Thursday in the fourth calendar year since the last election day and the wording of the statute's very clear: that election must be held.
There is only one condition under which that can be changed and, ironically enough, that's if a federal election campaign would actually overlap the provincial election date in the same calendar year, which is exactly the situation that we are going to have in Manitoba later on this calendar year. And if that happens, of course, under the law, in a regular–the way the statute's drafted, the life of the government would then go beyond four years.
But instead, this government has mused–this Premier has mused that he is going to consider going to Lieutenant Governor and asking her to dissolve the government to create the very conditions that this act is drafted to avoid.
And there is no justification for this early election. Again, the government has guaranteed passage of bills on time, pursuant to the orders of this House. The Premier came up with a new excuse and said, well, we can't do this because Manitoba 150 is next year and, gosh, Manitobans just don't have the ability to celebrate Manitoba's 150th birthday and vote in a provincial election.
Well, we offered a solution. I put forward a private member's bill which members opposite even voted to prevent from going to committee. I would have loved to have gone to committee and heard from all the Manitobans who are so troubled by the prospect of an election in the same year as Manitoba celebrates its 150th birthday.
Well, we know that was the only reason, now, the Premier (Mr. Pallister) has. We know the Premier has directed his members to–not to support resolving that issue.
What is the real reason? Well, we know it's because this Premier, and this party, do not want Manitobans to see the real impact of their bad governance. The vacancies, the unspent dollars, the agencies unfunded–he knows that the Manitoba economy is slowing, due in large part to his government's policies and, by next fall, when the election date should be, we may well be in a made-in-Manitoba recession.
Now I know it's at the discretion of the Lieutenant Governor. Manitobans, though, should be entitled to hear the Premier's case. If the Premier decides to make that walk across Government House–whether it's tomorrow or next week or July or August or next spring–I think the public should know what the Premier's rationale is when he's going to be asking the Lieutenant Governor to exercise her discretion to dissolve this Legislature.
But we know he's not going to provide that, and why is that? Because this Premier has zero case for breaking the election law and having this Legislature dissolve. He knows it; everybody in this province knows it.
So we know that this government has done everything they can to be undemocratic through the opposite of transparency, the opposite of open, and I cannot wait–I cannot wait–although I'd like to wait for a little bit longer for the election so we can–
Mr. Deputy Speaker: The honourable member's time is up.
On another grievance–the honourable member for Burrows, on a grievance?
Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Burrows): Yes, on a grievance.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Okay. The honourable member for Burrows.
Ms. Lamoureux: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I promise to keep my remarks very short.
I did just want to wish all my colleagues who do not plan on returning to the Chamber all the success and I'm sure our paths will continue to cross in the future.
Today's our last day of session, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and I want to use my grievance to emphasize two important health issues.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, over the next few months this government needs to reflect on two issues: the Seven Oaks Hospital is a jewel in Winnipeg's North End, and over the past 10 years this health-care facility has been marginalized, and I'm concerned that its future is at risk. We need a community hospital that provides emergency services, has operating rooms and meets the expectation of Winnipeg's North End. Its future role needs to be revised and the community needs to be actively consulted.
I am committed to a functioning hospital that is there for the people, and I am asking and urging this government to stand up and make sure that Manitobans and their health-care services are protected. This means do not close the emergency services and, Mr. Deputy Speaker, this government needs to ensure operating rooms are open and functioning the way they have the capacity to do so.
At one point in time Seven Oaks was built to be much larger than it is being used for today. For example, there's a helicopter pad on top of the hospital that does not get used. All of this incredible and costly infrastructure is going to waste because of the cuts that this government is making.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, the main point is this government's poor decision to close the ER is causing patients to suffer.
Over the weekend I received emails of people who waited two days in the waiting room. This is unacceptable and detrimental to our health and safety.
Madam Speaker in the Chair
Madam Speaker, Canada needs a national pharmacare program. This government has wasted time and caused our province to miss out on millions of dollars through health-care transfers because of this Premier's inability to negotiate with the federal government.
My constituents have explained to me situations where they cannot afford their prescribed medications because they have to pay for rent or for food. If a person is being prescribed medications chances are they need these medications and this government has an opportunity to help ensure all Manitobans can afford their prescriptions.
So, Madam Speaker, I am asking this government to get behind a national pharmacare program today and lobby Ottawa, the federal government, for one. Failing co-operation we should go alone and stand strong for health care here in Manitoba.
Thank you.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Logan, on a grievance.
Ms. Flor Marcelino (Logan): My colleagues and I wish to air the many grievances against the Pallister government and these grievances are shared by many, many Manitobans.
Before I proceed with my grievances I would like to express my thanks to you, Madam Speaker, the table officers headed by our distinguished Clerk and Deputy Clerk, the pages, Sergeant-at-Arms and staff.
I also wish to thank all of my colleagues from the Liberal and the Conservative caucuses, but greatest thanks to my own NDP caucus colleagues, my leader, our caucus chair, House leader, whip, and present and past NDP caucus members.
* (15:20)
Four months short of 12 years, I was elected MLA representing the constituency of Wellington, after which it was named Logan. I profusely thank all of my constituents, even those who did not vote for me, for the opportunity to serve them and the bigger communities of Manitoba. I am humbled and honoured by their trust and confidence for three straight election times.
In the 2007 provincial elections, political pundits and causal observers described my election to the Manitoba Legislature as serendipitous. Why? Because I did not undergo the usual process like nomination or preparing for a nomination, signing up members and meeting with people who are prospective supporters. I am grateful for that opportunity because it–this particular job that I am doing right now afforded me to meet so many people from all walks of life and afforded me the opportunity to serve, which–for the longest time, I remember since I was a young person, I thought I would like to be helpful, I would like to serve in whatever capacity I'm able to, even financially. Even though my funds are limited, I thought giving and sharing is a noble act to do by every individual.
I am brought up from a very poor family, but our family was known in the community to be a caring family. I remember people come to our house–our small house. And they sought advice from my father, who was the church minister of a small community church. And I saw the love and respect they had for my father. And my father, even though of limited means, was genuinely ready to help in whatever way.
I remember I was a young child and there was commotion on the streets, and a man was stabbed. And my–and we small kids were out then. And my father told us to go inside the house and, even though faced with some risks, went out and helped the stabbed man. So that, to me, at the very early age, taught me that helping others should be a lifelong goal or dream, and even naturally–should come naturally.
So being an MLA was an easy transition for me of helping people. And I thank the many folks that have been my constituency assistants. I think I've had three special assistants and one executive assistant. I thank all of them for the faithfulness and the diligence they have in helping constituents, not just from Wellington or Logan, but even beyond, even from other out-of-Winnipeg constituencies.
I thank–at this point, I'd like to thank, also, a colleague–still a colleague, Mohinder Saran. I've known Mohinder–we were–
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Just a reminder to the member that members still have to be referred to by their constituency names.
Ms. Marcelino: My apologies, got carried away.
I would like to acknowledge my colleague, the member from The Maples. We were elected both in 2007, and I've come to know him since then. We were seatmates for some time when we were backbenchers–or close, that is. And being a neighbouring constituency, we shared casework.
And I've come to know the member from The Maples, as well as his wife, Kuldip, and I've found them to be very generous, caring people. And so I was deeply touched when my colleague was mistakenly or even–accused of doing something which he did not do. I find it hard to believe that a person of his character, moral character and religious nature, could even verbally ask a sexually related question. It's out of his character. I believe in due time, my friend will be vindicated.
Now, back to–I still need–many more people to thank; 10 minutes is not enough. But I want to thank my family for putting up with me. The MLA's job is not 9 to 5. The commitment for this job entails working evenings, even weekends and my family was very supportive, especially my mother. In hindsight, I think I should have spent more time with her. She was asking me, why are you working so late, so long? And I didn't know that she was asking for time.
But, anyway, she's gone. There were other ways to prove to her my love and respect. But I thought, I wish I had more time. So my advice to my colleagues: spend time with your family. We have to spend time with our constituents, definitely, and serve them well. But time with the family is very, very important.
On this note, I'd like to thank my family: my husband, Orli, and my five children. They were my harshest critics but also my greatest fans. And I'd like to thank my church minister then, Rev. Dr. Ray Cuthbert. In a way, his statement to me to–when I asked him if I were to run as a candidate, without reservation he said, go for it; you have enough integrity.
So it's been a wonderful time in this beautiful building meeting so many wonderful people. Despite being from different philosophies, walks of life and even ideologies, we all wish the best for our constituents. So I wish everyone the very best. I'm richer, more fulfilled and a lot better as a person because of my stint as an MLA for this prestigious institution, the Manitoba Legislative Assembly.
Thank you very much.
Point of Order
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a point of order.
* (15:30)
Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): I would just like to take this time to thank the member for Logan (Ms. Marcelino) for her service to the province of Manitoba as MLA, as a Cabinet minister and as the interim Leader of the Official Opposition. She has served the province well and she has been a barrier-breaking politician, being the first woman of colour elected to the Chamber and also the first woman of colour to lead a political party in Manitoba.
So all the best in what's next.
Madam Speaker: And I would indicate that the member does not have a point of order, but we thank him for his comments.
* * *
Madam Speaker: The time being 3:30 p.m., I am terminating routine proceedings in accordance with our rule 2(15)(b).
Madam Speaker: We will now proceed to orders of the day.
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): I would also acknowledge the kind and appropriate comments put on the record by the departing member who I know has served well, and we certainly wish her well in the time ahead.
On government business, Madam Speaker could you please call Interim Supply.
Once Interim Supply has been passed, could you call for debate on second readings bills 24 and 25.
Following the passage of those bills, could you please call for concurrence and third readings Bill 19. And, following the passage of Bill 19, please call for concurrence and third readings bills 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20 and 21.
Madam Speaker: It has been announced that the House will consider Interim Supply, followed by second reading debate of bills 24 and 25, followed by concurrence and third reading of bills 19, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20 and 21.
The House will now resolve into Committee of Supply.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, please take the Chair–[interjection] Oh, the honourable House leader for the official opposition.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (Official Opposition House Leader): Is there leave to proceed and just pass Interim Supply?
Madam Speaker: The question that has been put forward, is there leave to–[interjection] It has been pointed out to me that we could go through a lot of Interim Supply, but because of all the steps, if there is a, you know, a willingness of the House to go quickly through all the steps, that is the only way we can actually move forward and have Interim Supply passed.
We can't do it as one because of all the various steps that are involved in this procedure. So I would indicate that there would be no leave to allow that to happen.
So the House will now resolve into Committee of Supply.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, please take the Chair–pardon me, the Interim Supply bill.
Mr. Chairperson (Doyle Piwniuk): Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. We are currently considering the first of two resolutions respecting the Interim Supply bill.
The resolution respecting operating expenditures for the Interim Supply. The floor is now open for questions.
* (15:40)
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): I have two quick questions, Mr. Speaker.
First of all, to the minister: I noted that there–in many areas of health care, there's significant vacancies, sometimes 10 or even 20 per cent of positions in certain areas.
And I ask the minister: Is this deliberate, or did the minister in writing the budget–and it's a line by line–expect that these positions would be filled?
Hon. Scott Fielding (Minister of Finance): It's our intent to fill a number of these positions. I think government as a whole has been filling a number of these positions. We'll continue to do as such. I know there is more nurses and doctors delivering services ever in this province's history.
Mr. Gerrard: In the health-care budget last year and this year there was–last year there was a large under-expenditure of something like $240 million.
I would ask, last year and implications for this year, did the Finance Minister ask the Health Minister to spend less than his budget?
Mr. Fielding: Yes, it was not a health-spending issue; it was a health-accounting issue. Both the health authorities as well as the government were working on different accounting principles, and so–that has been happening for a number of years.
We have straightened out where everyone is on the same accounting standard, so we anticipate that the budgets will be reflective of what we project in the budget document.
Mr. Gerrard: Thank you, those are my questions.
Mr. Chairperson: Any other questions from the other–anybody else? Any other members?
Okay, we'll–[interjection]
Is the committee ready for the question?
The question is: RESOLVED that a sum not exceeding $10,480,775,000, being 75 per cent of the total amount to be voted as set forth in part A, Operating Expenditure of the Estimates, be granted to Her Majesty for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March 2020.
Resolution agreed to.
Now, the second resolution respecting capital investments in Interim Supply reads as follows: RESOLVED that a sum not exceeding $575,891,000, being 90 per cent of the total amount to be voted as set forth on part B–[interjection]–oh–voted as set out in part B, Capital Investments of the Estimates, be granted to Her Majesty for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March 2020.
Does the Minister of Finance have an opening statement?
Mr. Fielding: No.
Mr. Chairperson: No? Does the official opposition Finance critic have an opening statement? No?
Does the second opposition Finance critic have an–opening comment? No?
Does the honourable member have–[interjection]
The floor is open now–the floor is open for questions. Does any committee have any questions?
Is the committee ready for the question?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Mr. Chairperson: Shall the resolution pass? [Agreed]
This concludes business before the committee.
Committee rise.
IN SESSION
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Arthur-Virden.
Mr. Doyle Piwniuk (Chairperson): Madam Speaker, the Committee of Supply has considered the–adopted two resolutions respecting Interim Supply.
I move, seconded by the honourable member for Selkirk (Mr. Lagimodiere), that the report of the committee be received.
Motion agreed to.
Hon. Scott Fielding (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Education, that there be granted Her Majesty on account of Certain Expenditures of the Public Service for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2020, under the Consolidated Fund, the sum of $10,480,775,000, being 75 per cent of the total amount to be voted as set out in part A, Operating Expenditures, and $575,891,000, being 90 per cent of the total amount to be voted as set out in part B, Capital Investment of expenditures, laid before the House at the present session of the Legislature–of the Estimates.
Motion agreed to.
Hon. Scott Fielding (Minister of Finance): I move, second by the Minister of Education, that Bill 33, The Interim Appropriation Act, 2019 (2), now be read a first time and be ordered for second reading immediately.
Motion agreed to.
* * *
Madam Speaker: The honourable Government House Leader, on House business.
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): On House business, Madam Speaker.
Could you please canvass the House to see if there is leave of members to not see the clock until the Interim Supply bill has passed third reading? [Agreed]
* (15:50)
Hon. Scott Fielding (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Education, that Bill 33, The Interim Appropriation Act, 2019 (2), be now read a second time and be referred to the Committee of a Whole–of the Whole.
Motion presented.
Mr. Fielding: I've got some very, very brief comments.
I'm glad to speak to the interim appropriation act, 2019. The act is required to ensure that government continues to have sufficient funds through to December 2019. This will allow for sufficient funding to keep civil servants paid and deliver front-line services to Manitobans while we continue to review the annual Estimates during the Committee of Supply.
Legislative Counsel and the Department of Justice has advised that Interim Supply bill 2 of '19 is, from a parliamentary perspective, the correct approach to providing interim funding past July until the legislation–Legislature has completed Committee of Supply.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: Do members have any questions on the bill?
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): One quick question for the minister. [interjection] Hmm? Oh. Okay.
My question is this. The minister has, together with other members of his government, signed not long ago an agreement with the federal government with regard to some expenditures in the area of mental health and other areas. I think they amount to about $400 million over 10 years, as I recall.
I'm just wanting to know how much of that $400 million would be in this year's budget and in these–Committee of Supply, these monies which are going to be allocated today.
Hon. Scott Fielding (Minister of Finance): There is monies appropriated to–through Health, the Health budget, as well as through interim or ISA–Interim Supply–or ISA, which is a fund to use for funding. That's identified in the budget. I don't have the budget document here. I can't tell you the exact–which page, but that money is a portion that will be leveraged over a 10‑year period.
Madam Speaker: I should indicate that a question period of up to 15 minutes will be held. Questions may be addressed to the minister by any member in the following sequence: first question by the official opposition critic or designate, subsequent questions asked by critics or designates from other recognized opposition parties, subsequent questions asked by each independent member, remaining questions asked by any opposition members, and no question or answer shall exceed 45 seconds.
Mr. Dougald Lamont (Leader of the Second Opposition): I was just–could the Minister of Finance says–has there ever been another time in Manitoba when we've had three interim supply bills in a 90-day period?
Mr. Fielding: There has never been a time where opposition members have delayed; the delay tactics have threatened interim appropriations.
An Honourable Member: What?
Mr. Fielding: Maybe once.
Madam Speaker: Are there any further questions?
Mr. Lamont: Yes, I mean, just as a question, I know that the–I'm just wondering why we have to have a second–why we're having a second Interim Supply bill when we had one before and what exactly has changed between the first Interim Supply bill that we dealt with, or bungled, in March and then has followed up with the–it now.
Mr. Fielding: I would probably say the 20 points of privilege, 20 points of order, as well as the delay tactics also, including delaying over two weeks to pass the budget implementation bill. Usually, interim appropriation takes as short as 30 minutes or as long as two days. So this is the first time in our history–there's a lot of, obviously, delays that's been happening at the Legislature, but that is the entire reason why.
Mr. Lamont: Just as a matter–I don't know if the–can the minister explain–does he recall exactly how the delay in March happened? As I recall, it was spoken out by the minister of–sorry, the member for Assiniboia (Mr. Fletcher) as a result of the bill being brought in and the vote being held late. Is there a different account that the minister could–has?
Mr. Fielding: Well, I would like to clarify one thing in terms of regularly two appropriations bill was for the '19 year, one was the 2020 year. So, just to correct the record again, there's two interim 'propriations for this year. We know that the delays that did happen–in fact, there was a debate for almost three days. The last session–although the member from Assiniboine was the last member–that was delayed for a long period of time, Madam Speaker.
We want to get things done for Manitobans. That's what this bill does.
Mr. Lamont: Just as a matter, I just wanted to put it on the record that the fact is that, at that time, that the delays were not part of the opposition in any way. And I'm more than happy to move forward.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: Are there any further questions?
Madam Speaker: Are there any members wishing to debate the bill?
Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto): Well, we won't hold up this afternoon an embarrassing third interim appropriation bill, which, of course since the minister couldn't answer the question, it is the first time the government has ever chosen to do this. We've seen a weak, vapid legislative agenda by this government. I guess they can be proud with having a couple of these bills on.
Good for them. That's all.
Madam Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the house is that Bill 33, the appropriation act, 2019 (2), be now read a second time and be referred to a Committee of the Whole.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed]
The House will now resolve into Committee of the Whole to consider and report on Bill 33, The Interim Appropriation Act, 2019 (2), for concurrence and third reading.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, please take the Chair.
Mr. Chairperson (Doyle Piwniuk): Will the Committee of the Whole please come to order.
Bill 33–The Interim Appropriation Act, 2019 (2)
Mr. Chairperson: We will now consider Bill 33, the interim appropriation act, 2013-2.
Does the honourable Minister of Finance have an opening statement? No?
Does the official opposition financial–Finance critic have an opening statement? No?
Does the second opposition Finance critic have an opening statement? No?
Shall we now–we shall now proceed to consider the bill clause by clause. The title and the enacting clause are postponed until all other clauses have been considered.
Clause 1–pass; clause 2–pass; clause 3–pass; clause 4–pass; clause 5–pass; clause 6–pass; enacting clause–pass; title–pass. Bill be reported.
The committee rise.
Call in the–
Oh, this concludes the business before the committee.
The committee rise.
Call in the Speaker.
* (16:00)
IN SESSION
Mr. Doyle Piwniuk (Chairperson): Committee of the Whole has considered Bill 33, The Interim Appropriation Act, 2019 (2). The–report the same without amendments.
I move, seconded by the member from–for Thompson (Mr. Bindle), that the report be–committee–be received.
Motion agreed to.
Hon. Scott Fielding (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Education, that Bill 33, The Interim Appropriation Act, 2019, reported from the Committee of the Whole–[interjection]
I move, Madam Speaker, seconded by the Minister of Education, that Bill 33, The Interim Appropriation Act, 2019 (2), recorded from the Committee of the Whole, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Madam Speaker: Are there any speakers on debate?
Is it the pleasure–is it–is the House ready for the question?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
Madam Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
* * *
Madam Speaker: The hour now being after 4 p.m., I am now interrupting debate to put the question on the remaining concurrence and third reading motions on specified bills without further debate or amendment except for the debate provisions allowed under 2(14). For each such bill, the minister, critics of recognized parties and independent members may speak for a maximum of 10 minutes per bill. The House will not adjourn until all applicable questions have been put and royal assent has been granted. In accordance with our rules, all matters of privileges and points of order are deferred until after these actions have been concluded.
The bills will be called in the order they appear on the Order Paper: Bill 19, The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act, which is at debate on concurrence and third reading.
The remaining specified bills have not had concurrence and third reading moved and will be called in the following order: Bill 2, the municipal amendment (strengthening codes of conduct for council members); Bill 5, The Mental Health Amendment and Personal Health Information Amendment Act; Bill 6, The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2018; Bill 7, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Immediate Roadside Prohibitions); Bill 8, The Referendum Act; Bill 9, the family law modernization amendment act; Bill 11, The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Amendment Act (Cider and Cooler Sales at Beer Vendors); Bill 13, The Private Vocational Institutions Act; Bill 14, The Reducing Red Tape and Improving Services Act, 2019; Bill 15, The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Amendment Act (Cannabis Possession Restrictions); Bill 16, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2019; Bill 20, The Courts Modernization Act (Various Acts Amended); and Bill 21, The Legislative Building Centennial Restoration and Preservation Act.
Madam Speaker: On Bill 19, the minister has already spoken, and the honourable member for St. Johns has spoken for one minute and can speak for up to nine minutes more.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): Well, I'm pleased to put some final remarks. These next–how many bills do we have? We have–
An Honourable Member: Fourteen.
Ms. Fontaine: Fourteen. The next 14 hours in this House. I'm glad that several of the bills are mine, so we'll have lots of time tonight. But I would like to put on the record that certainly the NDP supports the provisions that will help Manitobans escape violent and dangerous and abusive situations. I think it is very–it is a good piece of legislation to ensure that those folks that are needing to get out of a lease are able to do so, and so I do want to put that on the record.
I would suspect that all of us in the House can agree on the need to support those Manitobans that are seeking to leave abusive situations and I would suggest that, as well, to acknowledge that oftentimes, individuals who are leaving abusive relationships, situations, dangerous situations, often have children with them as well. And so I would suspect that this bill will go further to help protect children as well so that Manitoba children are not put in a situation where they are subject to seeing domestic violence.
As well–so again, we support the legislation. One of the issues that we have with the legislation is combining it with the changes to The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act, in the sense that the–under the act, most decisions and orders of the Residential Tenancies Commission can be further appealed to the Court of Appeal. And that is–means that Manitoba can–Manitobans could no longer appeal the decision of the commission in Manitoba Court of Appeal. It means that Manitoba renters will not be able to pursue recourse on a decision that can affect their whole lives.
So, on the one hand, this legislation seeks to ensure that people are kept in safe situations, but, on the other, on the very other hand, the government has taken away the means to appeal decisions that will fundamentally impact on their lives.
And, again, in the same way that those individuals that are seeking to get out of a lease, an apartment lease or a housing lease, in the same way that, often, individuals, Manitobans, will have children, I would suggest to you that this is also putting children at risk when they can no longer appeal a decision.
And I think it's incumbent to also put on the record the–that the Pallister government has put previous changes to the act which have left Manitobans with fewer rights and protections. I would suggest, Madam Speaker, that on this side of the House, we're not sure why the Pallister government is so hell bent on taking away people's ability to appeal decisions that will severely–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Ms. Fontaine: –impact on their lives. I'm not sure why they want to pick on some of the most vulnerable Manitobans.
We know that last year's Bill 12 removed renters' ability to appeal rent increases that are within the guidelines set by residential tenancies board. That means, Madam Speaker, that renters could not appeal an increase even if their suite is falling into disrepair. They cannot even appeal rent increases if their suite has mould in it.
They've taken–the Pallister government has taken away the ability for people to make those appeals. Where else are people supposed to go to in trying to fight for their home and their place of safety? The Pallister government and every member opposite has taken away that ability of Manitobans to appeal decisions.
So we're–and let's put it on the record here that Manitobans need recourse to appeal decisions made by legislative bodies and tribunals. You–we should know that, in this day and age, we should be able to have appeal mechanisms to safeguard and ensure that all of the decisions that are being made are actually the right decisions and that they're fair and that they're unbiased. And this government has taken away all of those abilities.
* (16:10)
Obviously, we are concerned that the changes under this law to make the decisions of the Residential Tenancies Commission final and taking away the option to appeal in court–and again, I think that for those of us on this side of the House, it really does boggle the mind why you would legislate a person's ability or a family's ability to appeal a decision.
And I would suggest to you and anybody that's going to be reading Hansard that that is just another example of the callousness and uncaring nature of the Pallister government, that they simply do not care about average Manitobans that may not have their own house, may not live in their own house but are forced to live in rental suites and may be forced to arbitrary decisions that they have no control over.
That is completely callous that this government doesn't care. Not only does it not care, it's taking away the rights to appeal. We know, as well, this is kind of par for the course. This is–it isn't just this Bill 19 that the Pallister government put before this House. In that respect, you could maybe say, well, you know, maybe they made a mistake.
But actually, it is certainly something that we have seen time and time again, the slow eroding of people's rights, renters' rights. Last year, the Premier (Mr. Pallister) and his cohort of PC caucus member passed bill 24, which is the social services board amendment act.
This bill took away the right of social services appealing board to hear constitutional challenges to legislation or to grant remedies under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
What government in Canada takes away the right for constitutional challenges under the Canadian charter of human rights and freedoms? What government does that? The government that does that is the Pallister government and every single member opposite who are so anxious to get out of this House and break the law and call an early election because they simply don't give a hoot about Manitobans who are vulnerable and who are struggling and who may not have as much money and credit as they do.
I think that Manitobans should be disgusted. They should be disgusted with members opposite when they slowly erode Manitobans' ability to challenge the decisions that are not in their best interests and that intrinsically put them at risk and vulnerable.
Miigwech, Madam Speaker.
Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Burrows): I just have a few short words to put on the record today.
There are many issues that women face in this province on a daily basis. It is important that women who have been the victims of sexual violence or violence in general are fully supported and believed as they deal with the trauma that many will carry with them for the rest of their lives.
It is important that survivors are fully supported, and we believe that this is an amazing move forward in helping those survivors. Addressing gender-based violence is never something anyone in this House should shy away from. There are so many vulnerable people in our society that can make great use of legislation such as this, and Manitoba has definitely lagged behind when it comes to introducing legislation such as this.
Allowing a survivor of sexual violence to receive a letter confirming violence from counsellors, nurses, social workers, among many other professions, could be vital to the healing process. We've heard that requiring survivors to retell their story can traumatize them all over again. Allowing them to only have to retell their story to a trusted source once will allow the survivor to heal from their trauma without having to relive their experiences.
We stand fully behind believing and supporting victims of abuse in this province, and we will wholeheartedly stand behind this bill.
To close out my comments, I just want to quote Ms. Jerra Fraser, who this House had the great honour of listening to at committee. We think that this will be a way to really help survivors regain a sense of power and control and feel safe and really focus on healing from a more peaceful place.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: I will now put the question on concurrence and third reading of Bill 19, The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed]
I declare the motion carried.
Madam Speaker: I will now call Bill 2, The Municipal Amendment Act (Strengthening Codes of Conduct for Council Members) and recognize the honourable Minister for Municipal Relations to move and speak to the concurrence and third reading motion.
Hon. Jeff Wharton (Minister of Municipal Relations): I move, seconded by the Minister of Sport, Culture and Heritage (Mrs. Cox), that Bill 2 now receive third reading–I move, seconded by the honourable member from Sport, Culture and Heritage, that Bill 2, The Municipal Amendment Act (Strengthening Codes of Conduct for Council Members), as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs, be concurred in and now be read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Wharton: And I'm pleased to put a few remarks on the record today regarding Bill 2, The Municipal Amendment Act (Strengthening Codes of Conduct for Council Members).
Madam Speaker, Manitoba was one of the first jurisdictions in Canada to require municipalities to adopt a code of conduct, and I am proud to say that this legislation will ensure that we continue to lead the way.
Bill 2 is a direct response to consultation and collaboration with our municipal partners and stakeholders. It is groundbreaking, Madam Speaker. It requires all municipalities to pass a code of conduct by bylaw and all municipal councillors to complete mandatory provincially developed respectful workplace training.
When Bill 2 comes into force on November 1st, 2020, Manitoba will become the first jurisdiction in Canada to define a process of addressing code of conduct violations and for appealing codes of conduct sanctions in legislation.
Bill 2 is a clear statement of our commitment, Madam Speaker, to ensure all Manitobans have access to safe and respectful workplaces.
Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.
Mr. James Allum (Fort Garry-Riverview): Thank the minister for bringing forward Bill 2, The Municipal Amendment Act about Strengthening Codes of Conduct for Council Members. I think everyone has the right to–we certainly think, the right to work in an environment free of harassment and discrimination.
We in the NDP, of course, have long stood for an inclusive and diverse workplace that is supportive of all employees, and we want to particularly focus and make sure that we eradicate bullying from the workplace and to combat sexual harassment and workplace misconduct at every possible turn.
Whether we'll do that, Madam Speaker, through this bill, remains to be seen. Although we're largely supportive of it, we're concerned that it doesn't include Winnipeg and Brandon, and we've yet to receive a proper explanation for that.
In addition, we're concerned about the regulation-making process with regard to this bill and the extent to which the government will do the proper kind of consultations that's needed to get it right on an issue as sensitive and important as this.
And then we're also concerned about whether there'll be sufficient resources put behind the initiative in order to ensure that municipal councils across Manitoba have the resources to be able to implement codes of conduct in a way that provides the kind of training and support and assistance that's required.
* (16:20)
And so, in that sense, Madam Speaker, I think that we're largely supportive of the bill, but we do have some concerns. We will certainly hold the government to account for the next few months until we're in government on this issue, and then we'll bring it forward and we'll make it better than they do.
With that, Madam Speaker, while I have a few minutes, you might forgive a little bit of relevance on this matter, if you would. It's all relevant, or maybe everything I've said has been irrelevant; who's to say. I won't ask you to be the judge of that.
But I do just want to say a few words as this appears to be the final day of the session, although I put in my grievance last week to say that it's unconscionable that we're heading toward a provincial election when the date is fixed in law. Whatever the Premier (Mr. Pallister) has told his caucus and his Cabinet, it's not true: It is fixed in law, and it's not right that we're going into an election. But it doesn't matter to me because I'm on my way out in any event, and so I thought I would put that on the record just one final time as well.
All I really want to do, Madam Speaker, is say a few words of thanks like my friend from Wolseley and I know my friend from Minto will do and my friend from Logan already did. We stand on the shoulders of those who came before us, and we owe to them the great opportunity, the great honour and the great privilege to be a member of this Legislature. And so I just want to take a few minutes to talk about those folks.
First of all, to the people of Fort Garry-Riverview, thank you so much for giving me the opportunity to be an MLA in the first place. We know that the constituency name is going into the dustbin of history and so for good or for ill, I'll be, I think, the only MLA ever for Fort Garry-Riverview, and there's a footnote to a footnote to a footnote if ever there was one. But still, it's a neat little thing. And–but to those folks, for giving me this great honour and privilege, I thank them greatly.
To all those who provided support to me during many campaigns–I've run in a total of five, although only two for this Legislature, but five. Those who put a sign out for me, who dropped a leaflet, locked on a door, made a donation, filled out a cheque, were there to speak on the phones, just to give me a tap on the shoulder and say well done, to all of those people, thank you so much as well. Thank you for believing in me.
In that regard, I need to thank my neighbours who, in every election that I've ever run in, have supported me. I don't think they're all New Democrats, but I guess we've been neighbourly enough that every day that I would come home, I would see Allum signs up and down the–up and down my block. And it meant a great deal to me to know that my neighbours cared about me so much.
So I want to give a shout-out to them especially because it made a difference. We'd come home from some hard days of canvassing, especially in the last election, and to see those signs hanging out there was pretty special.
Throughout my political career, I've been surrounded by a number of guardian angels who have made this life possible and seen over my political career. It begins with my immediate predecessor whom I know you know, Madam Speaker, Diane McGifford–Dr. Diane McGifford, for that matter, who is as staunch a feminist as one will ever meet, as kind and caring and considerate a person as you'll ever meet, and she took no guff from anybody and for that–including from me.
And–but I owe to her and to her husband, Ed Wojczynski, and to Ilona and Andrew, her children, who'd be very helpful on my campaigns, and her daughter, Lisa. All of them, all of the McGifford clan has been incredibly supportive of me, and to them I owe a great big thank-you.
And then I have a number of campaign managers who I want to thank, and I'm going to use only their first names because many of them are in delicate positions out there, and I wouldn't want them to be wrongly associated or punished for hanging around with me, but Carolyn and the late Doreen Wilson, who I still give an award out on behalf of Doreen at Churchill school. She is the unsung hero of our neighbourhood, and she was a great friend, and she died much too soon. My friend Jeff, who was my campaign manager in 2004, and then in 2011, Lizzy, thank you so much. And then in 2016, Kate. Those were my campaign managers, but more appropriately, what Susan and I always called our guardian angels. And so I have a great deal of thanks for them.
And then throughout all of those years was–and I'm going to say her name–I don't know if she–I doubt she's listening today, but throughout all of those years, Carolina Stecher was my right-hand person. She hung with me day in and day out through many ups and downs in my political career, and to her I just say thank you so much for staying with me all these years through the good times and the bad.
I certainly want to pay tribute to my constituency assistant, Linda Wilson, who's been with me all these eight years. That she's still working with me after eight years is a tribute to her. She's a rural feminist progressive who brought that commitment and dedication and vision to our office every day. The work that she did on behalf of constituents was, frankly, fantastic. I can't think of a more caring or compassionate person to serve as a CA. So thank you, Linda.
And then I've had any number of younger people, also as constituency assistants, that came through my office over the years. They were fantastic. They had so much higher skill set than the person who was employing them. I know the future's in good hands with all of those fabulous, fabulous people.
And, of course, last but certainly not least, would want to just pay tribute to my own family, and whether their name is Allum or Frost or Nunn–I don't know if that's giving the clerks a headache or not, by saying my last name. But whether their last name is mine own or my sister's or my other sister's, from Allums all across Canada have been incredibly supportive of me.
My Aunt Hilda, who's passed away, was a CCFer, born in the–born and bred. My Uncle Bob was a life insurance salesman who was a Tory, almost certainly. Both of them were there for me all the way through. My brothers Peter and John and their wives Suzanne and Barb, my sister Mary in Waterloo and her husband Bill–they also are in Ontario still, but they were with me every single step of the way. And they often came out during campaigns and were always eager to know what was going on with me in my political life.
And then, in addition to that, when we moved here I was lucky enough to have my older sister–who's 13 years older than me–Nancy and her husband Rick. And I spoke of my nephew Matthew and my nephew John and my niece Carolyn. Their two kids, my–John's kid Anna [phonetic], all of the Frost family rallied around me, right from the get go. They could hardly believe that in coming here, moving here, I was suddenly going to have my name on a sign and my picture on a sign. And yet not a moment–not for a moment were they ever anything other than supportive. But I do want to make special note to my sister Nancy, who's just been fantastic to live in the same city with her.
And then on to my own family, Madam Speaker. My own three kids: Sarah Jean and her husband Sam, who've given me the greatest gift that anyone can ever have, which is our grandson Jacob; my daughter Hilary is the smartest and sassiest kid you could ever possibly meet; and my son Donovan, who turns out to be the genius of the family but nobody knew it until he got to university. And so I–to my own kids who were with me all these years, and were raised in this political business, I partly apologize to them but I also thank them for hanging in with me.
And then, finally, of course, the appropriate thing to do is to thank my wife Susan. For some reason, after 37 years, she still lives in the same house as me, Madam Speaker. I don't know why. I'm glad she does. Thank you, Susan, if you're listening today, for still loving me.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Dougald Lamont (Leader of the Second Opposition): It's a pleasure to put just a few words on the record about this bill. I certainly want to thank the member for Kewatinook (Ms. Klassen) for her leadership on this issue as she introduced the bill last year, which was unfortunately defeated. But I also especially want to thank all the individuals who worked so hard to make this–to put this issue in the public sphere, that there were a number of councillors–municipal councillors, rural councillors–who faced really terrible treatment at their workplace and found basically that they had no recourse.
And it was taken to the AMM, and it was taken–eventually it was taken up here in the House. And really, they deserve an enormous amount of credit, the women who worked so hard and so passionately bringing forward this bill to make sure that it would actually see the light of day and who persisted, with both the AMM and the provincial Legislature.
It's not a perfect bill. It's certainly a step in the right direction. We would like to still see an independent office to investigate these issues, and investigate–independent ethics office, an independent ethics office that would be able to deal with these things, in the sense we'd be able to remove them, if possible, from the realm of politics as much as that can be done.
So, with that, I will close, but we're happy to support this bill.
* (16:30)
Madam Speaker: I will now put the question on concurrence and third reading of Bill 2, The Municipal Amendment Act (Strengthening Codes of Conduct for Council Members).
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed]
Madam Speaker: I will now call Bill 5, and recognize the honourable Minister of Education to move and speak to concurrence and third reading motion.
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Cullen), that Bill 5, The Mental Health Amendment and Personal Health Information Amendment Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Justice, be concurred in and now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Goertzen: If I may, just briefly, as it seems to be the thing to do today, I want to just say a couple comments on the speech made by the member for Fort Garry-Riverview (Mr. Allum), his final comments, I suppose, in this House.
He has certainly been a fiery debater over the years that he's been here, which I have appreciated his famous yes or no ending to his questions will be long be remembered. The answers were never yes or no, but the questions always ended that way. I appreciated being in debates with him as well, even in the last campaign, and he was a worthy opponent in a debate.
And, while there are often fiery words exchanged in this House, I really enjoy that; I enjoy the passion that he brought to the issue, and I know he cared greatly about the ministerial portfolios that he held, and I certainly wish him and his family well as they take on other challenges.
There is nobody I've debated more in this House, though, than the member for Minto (Mr. Swan) over the last number of years, and this may be my last opportunity to say a few words on his final days here in the Legislature.
The member for Minto was–I was his critic for many years and he was my critic for a much shorter period of time, and then we worked together for a number of years as House leaders. And that's always an interesting thing, but I don't think there's–well, I know there's nobody I've debated more than the member for Minto over the last many years, and we've had some really, really difficult issues sometimes to discuss. But we–I think we were always able to do it in a way where it didn't become personal, or if it did become personal it didn't become personal for too long and we were able to maintain a friendship through that.
There was that one awkward year where I accidentally moved my Bomber season tickets and I was literally right behind him and his mother–[interjection] And, yes, that was an awkward year for–but I corrected that the year after, and by next time I'll be more careful. But I do look forward to seeing him at Bomber games, and I'm glad. It's not easy to be counterparts as often as we were, I suppose, on opposite sides of issues for as long as we were and to be able to maintain a civil relationship. But not only have we done that, I think we've done it in a way where we can actually have a decent friendship and to be able to speak at Bomber games and to enjoy when the Bombers win the Grey–the cup this year and the years coming up.
So I know the member opposite is a skilled lawyer, and I don't know if that's the occupation he'll move back into. Whatever he takes on, I know he'll do it with the same zeal and hard work ethic and attention to detail as he did in this job. And so I really do wish him and his wife and his family well, Madam Speaker.
Now, if I–[interjection]–on this particular, Madam Speaker, it is to amend The Mental Health Act to enable the disclosure by medical–the medical director of a psychiatric facility of information from a patient's clinical record maintained in a psychiatric facility if the medical director reasonably believes that this is necessary to prevent or lessen a risk of serious harm to the mental or physical health of the safety of the patient or another person, and they will also amend The Personal Health Information Act to enable disclosure of personal health information by a trustee as defined under the act if the trustee, which would include providers providing care on behalf of the trustee, reasonably believes that disclosure be necessary to prevent or lessen a risk of serious harm to the health or safety of the individual, the information is about or another individual or to the public health or public safety.
The amendments are to address concerns that the legislation that prevented health-care providers from notifying an individual's family members or support network of information that could have prevented tragedies, such as a person taking their own life after being discharged from a health facility, while respecting autonomy and privacy rights of the individual to the extent possible.
And I will note, Madam Speaker, my final comments, that during my time as Health Minister and in preparation for this legislation, I had the opportunity to talk with a few families who were specifically affected by this situation, and without their efforts and their turning what was a tragic situation into something good, this legislation wouldn't be here today.
And so I commend those families for taking a very difficult time in their life and to–turning it into something that perhaps can help save another life.
Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): I rise to put a few words on the record with regards to Bill 5, and I do appreciate that the minister has–former minister of Health has put some words on the record with regards to this particular bill and, sort of, the impact that it had–has had, and could have on the well-being of Manitobans. And as I've said many times in this Chamber, I think that those kind of personal stories make some of the best legislation that we have.
We know that Manitoba's health-care system needs to ensure it is protecting the most vulnerable. We feel, on the opposition side, that this bill is a good first step in preventing the risk of harm, either to themselves or others, by a person who is suffering with mental health issues. Informing loved ones that a person with mental health issues needs support will allow them to intervene before something serious occurs.
And as the minister alluded to, unfortunately this is what happened in 2015 to Reid Bricker, who left the Health Sciences Centre following his third suicide attempt in two weeks. His remains were later found in the Red River and his mother, Bonnie Bricker, has since, we know, been advocating for legislation like this.
Had she known at the time that her son was to be released, she might have been able to intervene and been able to prevent this tragedy. But once family, friends and loved ones know that a person is need, then they have the knowledge and the resources, hopefully, available to help their loved one.
This government needs to invest in mental health care funding and increase the number of beds available so people have somewhere to go when they need help.
Substance abuse and mental health issues are often linked, we know, Madam Speaker, and the NDP certainly believes that we need stronger supports for drug users to help combat the higher rate of mental health issues. We do feel that the province is failing to address the drug crisis. This is a huge missed opportunity and is failing to bring in a plan for harm reduction and prevention.
The province needs to bring its–a safe injection site or a safe consumption site in the city, which would help reduce the spread of disease and ensure users can inject safely, which are stressors, of course, on mental health. With this bill, protecting people's personal information and privacy also needs to be a priority.
When dealing with a situation where personal information needs to be disclosed without a person's consent, the government needs to ensure health-care providers have received proper training on how to do so respectfully. There needs to be guidelines on when the risk is serious enough to warrant disclosure and who health-care providers should then inform.
I also want to note, Madam Speaker, that this particular bill coming forward for passage third–passage of third reading and royal assent today is apt because, of course, we know that the report on missing and murdered indigenous women and girls report was issued today, and this is certainly I think speaks to some of those most vulnerable in our society and an opportunity to help protect them and to serve them better.
I do–I would be remiss though, Madam Speaker, if I didn't also put on the record that this was a government that was elected with very few promises in the last election.
One of those was, though, to focus on mental health and in fact, I think, if I remember correctly, it was one of those, you know, first 100-day type promises that new governments sometimes make with, you know, with great fanfare, that this would be a problem that they would seek to address immediately.
* (16:40)
Upon–given the reins of power though, of course, we know the report that was ultimately issued was delayed and delayed and delayed. And, when it was finally released, we know that the version that was released to the public wasn't necessarily the version that was first presented to government.
This is a missed opportunity. The VIRGO report was an opportunity for this government to take this issue seriously and to bring forward serious action with regards to mental health and addictions. And when you have a federal government that's ready to step up at the table as well and partner and make a difference with regards to mental health and addictions as well, it really is a missed opportunity and one that we're seeing now the real effects of in our communities across this province.
And so while, as I said, this is a first step towards potentially protecting those who are most vulnerable and suffering with mental health issues, I think it's a major misstep that this government hasn't taken this issue on with more gusto, hasn't provided the kind of funding that I believe could have made a difference, made our communities safer and ultimately saved lives.
Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Madam Speaker, Manitoba Liberals support this legislation. We believe it is important that individuals with brain health issues in particular will have a circle of care of people who they can identify but who are there for them and who, when they're having difficulty and coming in to an emergency room or a crisis response centre, that the physicians or health-care professionals can get in touch with them as an aid in providing the best possible care for the individuals.
This bill is similar to–essentially copies a bill that was brought forward initially by the MLA for Kewatinook, who introduced it in November of 2016–two and a half, almost going on three years now. This bill was introduced by the MLA for Kewatinook following widespread consultations that were undertaken by the Liberal–Manitoba Liberal Party and a report which was produced, the Optimal Brain Health for All Manitobans. And this report included the recommendation that the–there be effective networks of support to assist those with brain health issues and that these include changes to The Mental Health Act to make it easier for health professionals to share information with family members and other members of the person's circle of support.
The bill was based in considerable measure on the story of Bonnie Bricker and her son, Reid Bricker–I should really say Bonnie and George Bricker and their son Reid. Reid went in to emergency rooms, a crisis response centre and, in the last occasion, was sent away without his parents being notified. And the result was that by the time they realized that he had been sent away from where he should have been able to get help, that it was too late. And it was months later–months of agony and waiting–that his body was found in the river, in the Red River.
So we want to be able to provide the support for people like Reid Bricker who get into circumstances where they are suicidal and be able to provide the support that he should have received when he initially went in to emergency rooms and crisis response centre.
I would add that it is–Reid Bricker was not the first and that there were others. And these others are mentioned in the stories that have already been told at second reading and at the committee stage. And those other stories are important because the story of Reid Bricker is not an isolated one. And it speaks to the fact that this bill can have a significant benefit to improving the health of not just a single person, but for many people who are suicidal and, I suspect, under a variety of other conditions as well.
It is important, of course, that there be the right sort of balance, in terms of protecting privacy and being able to assure that health professionals can talk to and inform members of an individual's circle of care and particularly their family when critical situations arise.
I am pleased that we had a number of presenters at the committee stage–Mr. Keith Kovacs, Ms. Bonnie Bricker, Ms. Kristen Valeri, Ms. Cassidy Allison, as examples–and that they came forward with their views and their thoughtful comments on this matter.
We are now at third reading, and it is time to share a few thoughts before the bill is finally passed. It is our hope that this will be a significant step forward as one part of an–improved health care for those with brain health issues, those who are suicidal and other critical situations.
It our hope that we will be able to make significant changes in the years ahead to improve access to psychological therapies, improve access to mental health support, peer support and other areas, so that we can impact, improve in a considerable way the mental health and addictions support for people in Manitoba.
The current government has been slow to act. We are now, as I said, almost three years before passing this bill. We had hoped that things would move more quickly and on a broader front, but we are certainly pleased that this bill is now going to third reading and to be passed and hopefully implemented very shortly.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Merci. Miigwech.
Madam Speaker: I will now put the question on concurrence and third reading motion of Bill 5, the mental health amendment and personal health information act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed]
I declare the motion carried.
Madam Speaker: I will now call Bill 6, The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2018, and recognize the honourable Minister of Justice to move and speak to the concurrence and third reading motion.
Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Education, that Bill 6, The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2018, reported from the Standing Committee on Justice, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Cullen: This bill corrects typographical, numbering and minor drafting and translation errors. This bill also contains minor amendments to a variety of acts and repeals two municipal acts that are outdated.
SCAMAA is a long-standing tradition of the Manitoba Legislative Assembly. It shows our respect for the rule of law by making sure that legislation is as accurate and up to date as possible.
I look forward to seeing this bill passed by the House.
Thank you.
* (16:50)
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): I don't even know where to begin. There's so much in this bill and as the Government House Leader (Mr. Goertzen) has alluded to, I am a stickler for spelling mistakes and I think that is something that we should debate thoroughly and robustly in this House.
Before we do so, let me just put a couple of words on the record. I think that obviously, Madam Speaker, Manitobans expect transparency and accountability from their government, but we know and I think that this is why we're a little bit hesitant.
We know that the Pallister government has a history of hiding major changes that end up affecting the lives of everyday Manitobans in omnibus legislation. We know, Madam Speaker, that last year they introduced Bill 12, the red tape reduction and government efficiency act, and in this bill hidden–embedded in this bill, the Pallister government took away the rights of renters under the residential tenancy act and reduced oversight requirements on municipal spending. That was all in one bill.
So you can understand, Madam Speaker, why we would be hesitant to just quickly, willy-nilly just get this bill through all the stages and receive royal assent.
We also now know that the government introduced Bill 16 which removes–well, we've had to negotiate reimbursements for political parties, and I think that's important to note as well because, as we've said here many times in this House in the last three years–and it bears repeating again, in the last three years, the Pallister government has systematically and very methodically dismantled democracy in Manitoba ensuring and leaning and slanting elections, upcoming elections in their favour.
And they've done so in a variety of different ways, not to mention increasing the personal contributions from $3,000–which was a lot of money, Madam Speaker, $3,000 is enough money–to actually $5,000. They did that, they thought that was perfectly acceptable to disadvantage Manitobans who may not have $5,000 that they would love to be able to contribute to their political party or to their local MLA, and, certainly, I think that that bears repeating.
And I have been very diligent at every opportunity I have to bring up what the Pallister government has done to dismantle democracy in Manitoba because I want people to know when we come back, you know, years from now and when researchers are going through Hansard to see how the heck did democracy get so loosey-goosey in Manitoba and seek to give privilege and, you know, more power to PC governments, I want people to know that every single member in this House, in this 41st Legislature, they voted for that. They voted to dismantle democracy. They voted to dismantle democracy so that average Manitobans, people who have not been a part of this Legislature have not been able to get into this Legislature because of already obstacles that they have.
So, you know, here we go, we–I want folks to know researchers when they, again, when they look at the infrastructure for democracy, they say, wow, every single member of the Pallister government voted in favour of ensuring that indigenous people, black people, people of colour, women, 2SLGBTTQ* people have less of a chance to be elected into this House. They did that and they should be so proud.
And so I'm glad that I have a couple final minutes to put on the record what members opposite have done in respect of definitely not strengthening democracy.
And, you know, if you're so proud of that legislation, that suite of legislation that we've seen over the last three years, I think they should stand up and celebrate it and let Manitobans know what they did to democracy here in Manitoba.
So all of that to say, Madam Speaker, I'm a little bit hesitant. I know that the member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen), the Minister for Education, the Government House Leader (Mr. Goertzen), you know, says that Bill 6 is just about minor spelling mistakes or grammatical errors or French–I get it, but as I'm sure the member can understand, we're–we don't believe anything that they say, right? So we're a little bit–we're a little bit hesitant. We're a little bit hesitant.
We know that there's been so many egregious cuts that we've seen in bills: cuts to strengthening the environment, cuts to Education, cuts to the health care–don't even get me started on cuts to reproductive health for Manitoba women, girls, and trans people. I think I've stood up in this House many, many times talking about their egregious cuts to our reproductive health.
So I think, to that end, those will be the final little words that I put in respect of Bill 6. I do want to encourage every single member opposite that when they–their boss, their Premier (Mr. Pallister), their leader, when he breaks the law–Manitoba law–and calls an early election, I want to encourage each and every one of them to go to Manitoba's houses and tell them what they've done over the last three years in respect of democracy.
I invite them to be proud. They're so proud of what they've done to the health-care system. Go knock on the doors and tell them how they closed the mature women's hospital. Go knock on the doors and tell them how they cut lactation consultants. Who the heck cuts lactation consultants? Two positions–who does that? Members opposite.
Go to the doors and talk about how they reduced $25,000 from the mobile breast cancer screening unit. Who does that? The Pallister government.
And this is what I've said many times, Manitoba–or, Madam Speaker, in my last two member statements. I know that Manitobans, if they're upset–and they are, trust us, they are very upset about what's been going on with the health care–you know, they will maybe direct everything just to the Premier, but I think that what's really important to understand is that every single member opposite did his bidding.
None of them got up and said, hey, boss, don't cut $25,000 from the mobile breast cancer screening unit. Don't do that. Hey, boss, don't close the Mature Women's Centre. None of them: they all just sat there on their hands while their Premier, their boss, dismantled women's reproductive health.
So, if you're good with that, go to the Manitoban's house and say, you know what? I was one of the MLAs that stood on my hands. I sat on my–not stood, that would be probably uncomfortable–I sat on my hands while our boss, our leader that we look so much up to, while our boss did all of these egregious cuts.
While our boss cut the special drug program, we were part of that. We applauded that day in and day out. Every day in question period, they get up and they clap what their boss, their Premier has done.
Own it. If you're so proud of it, own it. Go to the doors.
I know that us, on this side of the House, are going to be going to doors and saying this is what the Premier did. This is what the PC caucus did. This is what they've done to your health care. This is what they've done to your education. And if you're shocked at what they've done thus far, just imagine if they get another four-year–and that's if they want to keep a four-year, because–[interjection]–three-year term.
I mean, we keep hearing that the Premier wants to retire in two years and have a leadership race–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Ms. Fontaine: –over there. And if that's the case, fine. Bring on a new leadership race, and I think that–who knows, will that be better? I don't know.
But imagine what they're going to do if they get government again–which they won't–but if they got government again, imagine what they would do in four years to our education system. They haven't even begun.
They're not listening to folks. Even though they've gone around Manitoba, they're not actually listening to Manitobans. Imagine what they're going to do to the education system next if they get in.
And every member opposite is proud of that. They're so proud of that. That's shameful, Madam Speaker.
So that's my comments on Bill 6 and spelling mistakes.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
* (17:00)
Madam Speaker: Order. Order.
I just–a reminder to–I've been fairly lenient today with timing and whatever and comments that are being made because I know that it is the last day and there are opportunities for people to speak, but I would indicate that when people are speaking to bills, to speak to the relevance of a bill.
I will be whole–I'll give everybody the warning right now and–so that on a go-forward basis, there's relevance attributed to all of the debate.
Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Burrows): That's an interesting one to follow.
Madam Speaker, it is our pleasure to support this bill in the House today. As is usually true, most amendments in this bill are very small, and many are simple issues of translation.
As my colleague from River Heights has mentioned previously, the change to eliminate the section of The Environment Act, which requires the Clean Environment Commission to report on activities undertaken jointly by the commission and the Manitoba environmental council, reminds us all of the mistake to eliminate the Manitoba environmental council. This was a decision that was wrongfully made under the NDP government of the time. This council did important work in monitoring environmental activities.
Madam Speaker, we also have concerns surrounding the elimination of section 45 of The Efficiency Manitoba Act, which would require the Public Utilities Board to take into consideration the costs incurred by Manitoba Hydro in respect of Efficiency Manitoba. Is this because it is going to cost significantly more than Power Smart did? We're not quite sure.
With that said, I am going to keep my remarks very short, and I thank the minister for bringing forward this bill. Thank you.
Madam Speaker: I will now put the question on concurrence and third reading of Bill 6, The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2018.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Some Honourable Members: No.
Madam Speaker: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Madam Speaker: All those in favour, please say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Madam Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Madam Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it.
Recorded Vote
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (Official Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, a recorded vote, please.
Madam Speaker: A recorded vote having been called, call in the members.
* (18:00)
Order, please.
The one hour provided for the ringing of the division bells has expired. I am therefore directing that the division bells be turned off and the House proceed to the vote.
The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 6, The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2018.
Division
A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Yeas
Bindle, Cox, Cullen, Eichler, Ewasko, Fielding, Gerrard, Goertzen, Guillemard, Helwer, Isleifson, Johnson, Johnston, Klassen, Lagassé, Lamont, Lamoureux, Martin, Mayer, Michaleski, Micklefield, Morley‑Lecomte, Nesbitt, Pallister, Pedersen, Piwniuk, Reyes, Schuler, Smith (Southdale), Smook, Squires, Stefanson, Teitsma, Wharton, Wishart, Wowchuk, Yakimoski.
Nays
Allum, Altemeyer, Fontaine, Kinew, Lindsey, Maloway, Marcelino (Logan), Smith (Point Douglas), Swan, Wiebe.
Deputy Clerk (Mr. Rick Yarish): Yeas 37, Nays 10.
Madam Speaker: I declare the motion carried.
Madam Speaker: I will now call Bill 7, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Immediate Roadside Prohibitions), and recognize the honourable Minister of Justice to move and speak to the concurrence and third reading motion.
Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Families (Mrs. Stefanson) that Bill 7, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Immediate Roadside Prohibitions), reported from the Standing Committee on Justice, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Cullen: Last year, Manitoba Public Insurance reported that we lost 70 people on our roads, with impaired driving being a contributing factor in 32 of those deaths. As of May 2nd this year, we have lost 15 people in 2019, with impaired driving being a contributing factor in 20 per cent of those fatalities.
Bill 7 is about taking action to stop these fatalities on our roads and combat the culture of drunk driving that persists in our province. Under Bill 7, police will have the ability to take immediate steps to combat drunk driving at roadside, including impounding vehicles, imposing stiff monetary penalties and requiring ignition interlock use for a year in certain cases.
Creating immediate roadside penalties will also help ensure that we get police back on the roads sooner so that they can catch even more drunk drivers. We know this legislation will work because it has worked in British Columbia. Between 2010 and 2016, British Columbia's IRP law helped save 351 lives and reduced alcohol-related deaths by 50 per cent.
Madam Speaker, this legislation is strongly supported by Mothers Against Drunk Driving Canada. I want to take this opportunity to thank their chief executive officer Andrew Murray for being here when we introduce Bill 7 and I want to thank MADD Canada's legal director Eric Dumschat, who came to Winnipeg last week to–or, couple weeks ago to present at committee.
I also want to acknowledge the strong support we have received from Manitoba Public Insurance, royal 'canaded' mounted police, the Winnipeg Police Service, the Brandon Police Service and the Manitoba First Nations Police Service for this legislation. The support of these organizations will be the key to ensuring that Bill 7 is a success, so I want to thank them for their unwavering commitment to road safety in Manitoba.
In closing, I hope that all members of the House will show that they are also committed to road safety by supporting Bill 7 tonight.
Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): I'm pleased to put on a couple of final words on the record in respect of Bill 7, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Immediate Roadside Prohibitions). Certainly, on this side of the House, we agree and I suspect everybody in the Chamber would agree that all Manitoba families should and must feel safe and must be safe on our roadways.
Our team understands that impaired driving is extremely serious and can cost millions of dollars in damages; more importantly, can impact and take away innocent lives. That is something that none of us in this Chamber would want to impart on Manitoba families.
We believe that repercussions are an important part of deterring people from driving while impaired and, obviously, we want to protect the workers and families and seniors and youth and children of Manitoba so that they are not harmed or maimed or killed as a result of impaired driving.
* (18:10)
We know that vehicle-related accidents are serious and can be life-threatening. This is especially true when accidents take place around crosswalks, playgrounds and schools.
And I'm sure that everybody in the Chamber remembers that young little baby that was just recently killed–struck and killed by a car, just in the last couple of months. And I think that that's–as legislators, we are charged with ensuring that Manitoba has all safety measures. And so I know that that probably impacted on many of us in the Chamber as it did our caucus members.
And we would agree with the minister that, through legislation, we need to show Manitobans that this is a serious issue and that it is better to stay off the roads if you are impaired and find a different way home. I'm always shocked that people still–I mean, obviously things have changed in the last 30, 40 years, Madam Speaker. I'm always shocked, though, when we do see cases of drunk driving.
And now with the legalization of cannabis, I don't know what those statistics are right now, but I am still shocked there's been such a concerted, comprehensive–for years now–public awareness campaign about not drinking and driving. So to me, it actually boggles the mind that people still drink and drive. It's just simply not worth it.
What's actually interesting, as well, is–I'm fascinated that people are texting and driving. I have seen so many folks texting and driving, and–I know that the member for Morris (Mr. Martin) put some false record on Twitter, like he did–which he is–which he often–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Ms. Fontaine: –does, which he often does on his Twitter–
Madam Speaker: Order.
Ms. Fontaine: –account. In fact, speaking of the member for Morris' Twitter account and how he puts false facts on, that actually leaves the twit–the tweet on there, Madam Speaker, when you gave your judgment that, in fact, the Chamber was dead silent when he was speaking, he left that tweet on his Twitter account.
And actually, what ended up happening is there were comments about me, even though that turned out to be untrue. And the member for Morris keeps them up–oh, the member for–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Ms. Fontaine: –Morris is saying that it's not true. He's challenging your decision, Madam Speaker.
Your ruling was very, very clear that the Chamber was quiet and nothing was heard. But the member for Morris doesn't believe you, Madam Speaker. [interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Ms. Fontaine: So, I think that it is important that we get out the information. And actually while we're out, getting, like, public awareness campaigns on drinking and driving, and driving under the influence of cannabis, and texting–we should get a public awareness campaign started specifically for the member of Morris, not to tweet false facts, alternative facts, and then maybe he'll start to do his job in a better and more kind way.
And while we're adding that–I mean, I know that the member for Morris is upset, it's his–literally his last day in the House. We're so excited to have our NDP colleague–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Ms. Fontaine: –Greg Maphersen [phonetic], who is going to win the seat for–what's the new seat for–
An Honourable Member: Greg McFarlane.
Ms. Fontaine: No, no, what's the new–
An Honourable Member: McPhillips.
Ms. Fontaine: McPhillips. McPhillips.
So I know that he's got to get out his anger that he does every time he gets up to speak. It's his last chance to feel important and put people down. He still has Twitter, Madam Speaker. But, again, I think it's important to point out that he is disabusing your judgment and your rendering that nothing had occurred and he's keeping up those alternative facts.
I look forward to when we're in government. I'm going to specifically make a legislation that is geared towards the member for Morris. And it's going to be something like a public awareness campaign, something like how not to tweet false facts. [interjection] How not to tweet mean–
Madam Speaker: Order.
Ms. Fontaine: –facts, how not to tweet alternative facts in the age of Trump.
Madam Speaker: Okay, this is getting a little bit carried away here, and there's yelling going on from both sides. So I am going to call the House to order so that we can continue to move debate through as respectfully as we can.
Ms. Fontaine: I appreciate that. So here, very quietly because I want to keep my voice down because now I can hear myself, they're not heckling and laughing and doing whatever, I think that when–I'm going to extend an olive branch. When the member for Morris (Mr. Martin) loses this early election, why don't he and I work together on a public awareness campaign for Twitter on how to not be a mean girl, how not to put alternative facts, how not to Tweet fake news, and then we can maybe work together in a good way and teach him not to be a mean girl like he likes to do. [interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order. Order.
I am going to have to call the honourable member for Morris to order. This is–I'm having great difficulty even hearing the debate, and I would just encourage members, maybe if everybody could bring it down a little bit.
I think there's–we've got a long way to go yet, and provoking each other is not going to get us to the end of this evening in a useful way. So, if everybody could just ratchet it down and let's see if we can get through this evening respectfully and have some good, solid debate.
Ms. Fontaine: Madam Speaker, ever so quietly and respectfully, I do leave that on the table for the member for Morris and we wish him well. We do, we wish him well. Maybe not everybody but we wish him well on his new journey because, like I said, we're excited about the member–or, not the member, he's not the member yet–of Greg McFarlane. He's a good man. He lives in McPhillips; he will stand up for Manitobans; and, more importantly, he's nice on Twitter, like he doesn't do some of the stuff that we've seen from the member of Morris.
So, as I bring this all back to Bill 7, I am concerned about still the information that we need to impart on Manitobans to keep roadways safe.
I know that, for myself, I impart that every opportunity I have on my sons when they take the car, we have an agreement in the house that my sons are never to get in the car with anybody that’s drinking. I don't care what time of the night it is or early morning, to just call me if they don't feel safe or they know they're not safe. It doesn't matter what time, I will go and pick them up. As a mom, I want my boys safe. I want my boys to come home safe as every Manitobans do.
So, certainly, I think that we can–that is one of the issues that we can all agree on. We all love our children; we all love our families; and we want them to come home safe and sound. And we all have a responsibility to do so. Miigwech, Madam Speaker.
Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Burrows): I'm happy to rise today to just put a few words on the record about Bill 7, and I promise not to talk about Twitter at all, Madam Speaker.
When the bill was first introduced, I was looking forward to further debate and hearing from citizens at the committee stage. I wanted to hear Manitobans' concerns regarding further penalties for drinking and driving and the devices used to justify those penalties.
In 2018, the BC Supreme Court upheld immediate roadside testing to help curb impaired driving. The Supreme Court said that their provincial legislation, which our legislation very much mirrors, did not breach the Charter rights of people who blow over the legal alcohol limit. It was found that the benefit of the doubt in these cases goes to public protection and not to the police, like originally argued. I think in our case, here in Manitoba, we will leave it to the courts to see if there are any issues in this legislation.
Drinking and driving and deaths resulting from drinking and driving have been reduced in British Columbia with the introduction of immediate roadside prohibitions, and those are some very positive results.
* (18:20)
There is one issue that has been brought up recently in British Columbia which is immediate roadside prohibitions disproportionately negatively affects people with severe asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. As people with severe breathing issues are unable to blow into a breathalyzer, this may be something that we still need to address and monitor.
Madam Speaker, we are happy to be supporting this bill, and we hope that with this legislation, drinking and driving will be reduced and, above all, Manitobans will be safer.
Thank you.
Madam Speaker: I will now put the question on concurrence and third reading of motion–of the motion of Bill 7, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Immediate Roadside Prohibitions).
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed]
Madam Speaker: I will now call Bill 8, The Referendum Act, and recognize the honourable Minister of Justice.
Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Families (Mrs. Stefanson), that Bill 8, The Referendum Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Justice, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Cullen: Madam Speaker, for the last two decades, the Chief Electoral Officer has requested that the government establish a stand-alone referendum law to clearly establish the rules for conducting a referendum.
Bill 8, The Referendum Act, shows that our government is committed to listening to experts like the Chief Electoral Officer, and unlike the previous government, it also shows that we are committed to listening to Manitobans on issues of public importance.
We all know that the previous NDP government ignored balanced budget legislation so they could jack up the provincial sales tax on Manitoba families without a referendum. That's why our government committed years ago to create a stand-alone referendum law to restore Manitobans' right to vote on major tax increases. Bill 8 fulfills that commitment once and for all.
The act states that referendums are required on a change to the voting process, a major tax hike, the privatization of Manitoba Hydro or Manitoba Public Insurance and before the Legislative Assembly can authorize an amendment to the Canadian constitution.
Bill 8 also allows for government to frame its own question on a topic not prescribed in the legislation and requires rigorous public consultation on any such question.
The Referendum Act outlines the process for conducting a referendum so that it is clear and consistent with the existing elections legislation in the province.
Madam Speaker, I hope that all members will support this common sense legislation today.
Thank you.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): I'm pleased to put a couple of words on the record in respect to Bill 8, The Referendum Act. It allows me yet again, Madam Speaker, to put on the record–[interjection] And I know members opposite are excited. They should listen to what I have to say.
I, you know–we know it allows me to put on the record yet again what this government has done to dismantle democracy in this province in only three years. Again, Madam Speaker, I would ask you to imagine what they're going to do in four more years.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Ms. Fontaine: And here they are–they're clapping–they're clapping. I want Manitobans to know–[interjection] So, Madam Speaker, let the record show that members opposite, including the Premier (Mr. Pallister), who's sitting in the Chamber right now with his back to me reading–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order. Order.
The Speaker is standing, and a caution to the member that there is to be no reference to the absence or presence of members in the Chamber. So I would ask the member to be careful in making any reference that way.
Ms. Fontaine: Madam Speaker, I apologize for that. I didn't realize that I wasn't allowed to speak to members present, so I apologize to that.
But I am glad that the Premier is here to listen, is listening to words that I'm able to put on the record because I want voters to know, I want Manitobans to know that on–at 6:23–what day is it today? On June 3rd, 2019, at 6:23, members opposite, the PC caucus shouted and clapped four more years, or whatever they were shouting–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Ms. Fontaine: –and there they do it again.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: I'm going to caution one more time. I would urge people not to provoke each other and we will get through the evening.
Ms. Fontaine: So, as I was saying, Madam Speaker, members opposite were clapping and cheering and yelling at the dismantling of democracy in Manitoba. I hope that Manitobans go back in the official record sooner than later, but certainly if they want to do the research later, know that at this day, June 3rd, 2019, at 6:23 first and then at 6:26 p.m., they got up again and were clapping about dismantling the democratic processes in Manitoba.
And Bill 8, The Referendum Act, is married to that piece of legislation that they have done. And the reason why it's important to put on the record about The Referendum Act is because what they've done, they are effectively legislating, again, slanting provincial elections in their favour with increasing dollars in the amount of 25 per cent.
Madam Speaker, an extra 25 per cent is hundreds of thousands of dollars for the ruling government to slant or to attempt to spin or slant Manitobans in their favour.
But, if anybody were to go back and read Hansard and know what the government is doing, I would suggest to you that Manitobans aren't going to be tricked. They're not going to be–they're going to know first-hand what the Premier (Mr. Pallister) thought was acceptable in his three years in government. He thought it was acceptable to dismantle democracy in Manitoba.
What he has essentially, singlehandedly and callously done is ensure that indigenous, black, people of colour, 2SLGBTTQ* people will have even a hundred times more obstacles at getting elected in this House and that is shameful. That's nothing to clap about. That's something to be hiding your head in shame.
But members opposite get up twice–and actually this is only twice in the last four and a half minutes. Every time we've debated this bill, they've clapped for themselves for dismantling democracy and keeping anybody that doesn't look like them or think like them out of this House and that is shameful.
And I don't care what the members opposite think. I don't care what they think about me. Our job as NDP caucus members is to fight to Manitobans and certainly fight for–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: I'm having difficulty hearing and I would ask for everybody's co-operation, please.
Ms. Fontaine: Our job on this side of the House is to fight for Manitobans that have not been represented in this House. And the bottom line is the measures that the PC caucus–and again, the brainchild of their Premier, their boss, to dismantle democracy in Manitoba has strategically been to keep out those that don't look like them or think like them or even live like them and that is shameful.
* (18:30)
And I'm proud to stand up on this side of the House. I'm proud to stand with Manitobans that have been disenfranchised and vulnerable and marginalized. I'm proud to say, you know what? You deserve a seat in this House more than anybody. People that haven't been represented in this House deserve a seat in this House.
It is shameful that in 2019, there has never been a black person elected to the Manitoba Legislature. It's shameful. It's shameful that there's never been a Muslim person elected to the Manitoba Legislature.
And we can go down the line, and I've said it many times, Madam Speaker, it is shameful that there is no diversity in the PC caucus, and they have done everything in their power to make sure that it stays like that for generations to come, and that is shameful and they should be ashamed.
And in the whatever bill it was that I was talking about previously, is that if you're so proud of the legislative framework that you guys have put for three years, go to the doors and tell Manitobans, hey, Manitoba–Manitobans, this is what we did.
We made sure, if you're black or indigenous or POC or 2SLGBTTQ, we've made it nearly impossible for you to get elected in this House. And you know what? I'm proud of it. I did my boss, my Premier's bidding, and I did nothing about it to stand up for you. I'm so proud.
Good for these members opposite. I hope, again, that anybody that goes down into Hansard, reads each and every one of their names. I can't mention their names, Madam Speaker–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. Johns.
Ms. Fontaine: And I know I hear somebody saying disrespectfully, it is right. You–it is disrespectful what the legislative framework's members opposite have put into place. It is. I actually finally agree with them it's disrespectful what they did.
Instead of actually 'concing' on–concentrating on legislation that would've helped Manitobans, like passing the gender-neutral identification ID legislation, no, each and every one, every single member opposite, stood against Manitobans that do not conform to gender identities and did nothing to put in place a framework where they would feel safe and they could live authentically.
They stood against that. They stood against a bill ensuring that 2SLGBTTQ* students were not outed to their parents without their consent. That's who the PC caucus is made up under the leadership of this Premier (Mr. Pallister). I'm glad that that the Premier is listening to my comments. Hopefully–
An Honourable Member: But he's not listening.
Ms. Fontaine: I–well, that's not surprising, Madam Speaker. He doesn't listen to anybody. He doesn't listen–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order.
Ms. Fontaine: –to the Prime Minister. He doesn't listen to the mayor. He doesn't listen to his PC caucus. It's not surprising.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. Johns.
Ms. Fontaine: It doesn't–it's not surprising that the Premier isn't listening to me. He has proven time and time again he has no respect for any members on this side of the House and certainly he has shown that he has no respect for myself or the member for Point Douglas (Mrs. Smith).
I will share with you that members from the Mife campaign were in the House today at question period, and we had the opportunity to talk to them afterwards. They were shocked at the way the Premier attacked both myself and the member for Point Douglas. I'm glad that they saw that. I'm glad that the Premier has his back towards me today. It is a reflection on him and not on me.
Miigwech, Madam Speaker.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order.
Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Burrows): I'd like to put a few words on the record about Bill 8.
An official referendum has never been administered provincially in Manitoba, and it's actually very uncommon in Canada to have referendums. Again, our concern remains to be whether this bill is constitutional.
The Referendum Act refers to the ability to tax, and we believe that this power is reserved solely for governments for exercise. This is why governments are elected. These powers should not be shouldered onto someone else, and it's important to note that there have been cases in the past where referenda have been declared unconstitutional.
The result of referenda under this bill are totally non-binding. This means a government can receive the results of a referendum and do nothing with those results. And we've seen both previous governments take actions that are consistent with this type of behaviour. For example, the Pallister government happily breaking fixed-date-election laws and the NDP breaking their promise not to raise the PST.
Madam Speaker, we simply cannot vote for this bill in good faith. Our constitution gives governments the power to decide how and when money is used. This responsibility is granted to governments when they are elected, and this should not be taken lightly.
Thank you.
Madam Speaker: I will now put the question on concurrence and third reading of Bill 8, The Referendum Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Some Honourable Members: No.
Madam Speaker: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Madam Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, please say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Madam Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Madam Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it.
Recorded Vote
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (Official Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, a recorded vote, please.
Madam Speaker: A recorded vote having been called, call in the members.
Order.
The one hour provided for the ringing of the division bells has expired. I am therefore directing that the division bells be turned off and the House proceed to the vote.
The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 8, The Referendum Act.
Division
A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Yeas
Bindle, Cox, Cullen, Eichler, Ewasko, Fielding, Goertzen, Graydon, Guillemard, Helwer, Isleifson, Johnson, Johnston, Lagassé, Martin, Mayer, Michaleski, Micklefield, Morley‑Lecomte, Nesbitt, Pallister, Pedersen, Piwniuk, Reyes, Schuler, Smith (Southdale), Smook, Squires, Stefanson, Teitsma, Wharton, Wishart, Wowchuk, Yakimoski.
Nays
Fontaine, Gerrard, Kinew, Klassen, Lamont, Lamoureux, Lathlin, Lindsey, Maloway, Marcelino (Logan), Smith (Point Douglas), Swan, Wiebe.
Clerk (Ms. Patricia Chaychuk): Yeas 34, Nays 13.
Madam Speaker: I declare the motion carried.
Madam Speaker: I will now call Bill 9, The Family Law Modernization Act, and recognize the honourable Minister of Justice to move and speak to concurrence and third reading.
* (19:40)
Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Families (Mrs. Stefanson), that Bill 9, The Family Law Modernization Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Justice and subsequently amended, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Cullen: Our government recognizes that family breakdown is one of the most difficult things that can happen in the lives of Manitobans. The traditional court-based system often makes this difficult time much worse. It is adversarial, complex, expensive and often damaging for Manitoba families.
Our government is responding to the damage caused by the current process by introducing Bill 9, which will remove most family disputes out of the traditional court system.
Over the next year, we will take incremental action to enact each provision of this legislation. The first phase will provide another tool to support families in resolving their disputes through arbitration and ensure that family arbitration awards are enforceable. It will also expand the powers of the Maintenance Enforcement Program.
The second phase will simplify child support processes so that thousands of matters can be addressed by the child support service outside of court.
And finally, to provide better service and to ensure better outcomes for Manitoba families, our government will launch a new family dispute resolution service pilot project next year. Work is ongoing to implement this pilot project with Manitobans helping design the services they need through regular consultation and collaboration.
I look forward to seeing Bill 9 pass so that our co-design and implementation initiative can work to improve outcomes for families and for children in Manitoba.
Thank you.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): I'm pleased to put a couple of words on the record. I see the members are already excited to hear my speech. I know that it's been riveting for everyone to hear what members on this side think of their legislation and how their legislation lacks and–in many respects.
I will say that certainly our NDP caucus support any measures that are put in place and legislated that would streamline court processes to make it an easier and safer process to go through in respect of child maintenance or custody or divorce.
We certainly support and stand in respect of the need for such measures.
I do want to just take a quick moment; I'm not going to speak long on this bill, but I do want to take a quick moment to thank all of the folks that came out to present. I think that there was quite a few presenters for Bill 9, and they did share some rather personal information about their journey through the court processes, and we had some experts share their advice and recommendations in respect of the court processes.
I think it's important to note just a couple–and that is to say, and I know that the minister was there; I know that the minister heard the same presentations that we did, and some of those pieces were that there would be measures in place that people could opt out of this pilot project if they didn't want to participate in it, and right now I think that there are no measures in that, and certainly we saw in the amendment that was put forward about ensuring the principle in the best interests of the children, and I know that there was an amendment, and so I do want to just acknowledge that that amendment was put in respect of making sure that the–what we do– what is in the best interest of children.
Again, I would suggest that everybody in the House wants to ensure, as legislators, that we put a legislative framework in place that puts children first and puts families first.
I'm going to keep my comments very short on this. I know that members opposite are excited about that, which just goes to show that members opposite have a hard time listening to anybody but themselves, so–or their Premier (Mr. Pallister), but I will keep it short today.
One of the pieces that I think that is incumbent on me to bring forward in respect of family law and some of the backlog that we see in Manitoba courts is the fact that the government has done little, if anything, in respent of–in respect of mental health issues and dealing with addictions.
We know that the court processes are filled with cases that–are from folks that have mental health and addictions, and this government has done nothing. In fact, they've left millions and millions and millions of dollars on the table and not done anything with mental health and addictions.
I think that, you know, while the members are chirping up instead of actually listening, they had an opportunity to put in place over the next 10 years–again, now we know that the Premier is about to break the law and call an election, so they had their chance; it will be our chance next as we take government, and I know that members opposite think it's funny that we're actually going to put in a plan and a strategy to work with and for Manitobans that have mental health issues.
You know, mental health issues, Madam Speaker, and addictions is not something to laugh at or to heckle over or to chirp over. People struggle in this province. You know, recently, after we held a nomination meeting in Union Station, and after that great win and that exciting time, I know that myself and the new candidate for Union Station, along with our team, went to two vigils back to back.
We went to the vigil for Shaylnne Hunter who was murdered on the Saturday. And to sit with families as they were crying over their loved one, their daughter–she was 25; she has children–but clearly, you know, the member for Point Douglas (Mrs. Smith) and myself, we've known the Hunter family, for many years, and to just see people struggling, struggling at a such a deep, cellular level, and then you just see the additional trauma.
After that vigil, we attended Pride, put on a vigil in front of the Manitoba Legislature to honour all of the 2SLGBTTQ* Manitobans who have lost their lives. And while I didn't know this individual, the Thursday before this, there was a Manitoban who struggled, who committed suicide. And I just want to acknowledge this individual. This individual as a trans person, as a Manitoban, struggles, and people struggle in Manitoba. And while they think it's funny to leave money on the table without doing anything for mental health issues, it literally is a matter of life and death. And I didn't see one single member–
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
I'm going to ask the member to speak to relevance in terms of The Family Law Modernization Act. I–getting off track on that on some other issues, while they may be important, I would ask the member to stay relevant in her comments to this legislation.
Ms. Fontaine: I would suggest to you respectfully that discussing the issue of mental health and addictions is relevant when we're talking about family law and how to–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order.
Ms. Fontaine: –modernize family law processes. It is part and parcel, as I indicated at the beginning of this, is that we do have many Manitobans that are struggling with mental health issues. And, again, I just want acknowledge this Manitoban who, you know, felt so trapped that the only measure to get out of it was to commit suicide. And I know that the Minister for Infrastructure's been chirping the whole time that I've been talking, and I know that he shows no respect for individuals that we've been talking about that have lost their lives. And they should be ashamed.
So it is relevant to the discussion, and I would encourage everyone in the Chamber to put Manitobans first before ourselves and the legislation that we bring forward, and that will be it for tonight. Miigwech.
* (19:50)
Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Burrows): Just to put a few short comments on the record about Bill 9.
Many Manitobans go through the family justice system. For many, this is a great time–this is a time of great difficulty and stress to both individuals and families. No one deserves additional stress based on having to navigate a bureaucratic legal system.
Unfortunately, the system is very 'adversial' and frequently puts Manitobans against each other. This was a system that was frequently a long and drawn-out process for all involved and only further created divide amongst the parties involved.
This bill changes a lot in terms of family law, but hopefully such changes can lead to timely yet agreeable decisions on a wide variety of matters that are covered under family law. I was glad to see that an amendment to the bill respecting the best interests of the child was passed.
I know that bills like this have been introduced time and time again, stretching all the way back to the previous NDP government. I am glad to see cross-party support for the idea of updating our family law system, even if it's taken this long to get this close to passing these reforms. I hope that we can all come together and pass these much-needed changes.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: I will now put the question on concurrence and third reading of Bill 9, The Family Law Modernization Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed]
I declare the motion carried.
Madam Speaker: I will now call Bill 11, The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Amendment Act (Cider and Cooler Sales at Beer Vendors), and recognize the honourable Minister of Crown Services to move and speak to the concurrence and third reading motion.
Hon. Colleen Mayer (Minister of Crown Services): I move, seconded by the Minister of Municipal Relations (Mr. Wharton), that Bill 11, The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Amendment Act (Cider and Cooler Sales at Beer Vendors), reported from the Standing Committee on Justice, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mrs. Mayer: Bill 11 amends the liquor, gaming and cannabis control amendment act to expand retail opportunities for all retail beer vendors to sell cider and spirited-based coolers.
I wish to take a moment to thank Scott Jocelyn, of the Manitoba Hotel Association, for joining us at committee to put forward this–his association's support for this bill. The committee appreciated hearing how these amendments will provide better choice to consumers in rural areas, many of which are served by hotel beer vendors.
This bill amends The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Amendment Act to permit an additional 137 hotel beer vendors to sell cider and spirited-based coolers. Madam Speaker, I have received numerous phone calls of support from rural–not just my rural colleagues, but rural members out in the community who support this, and it was well-received.
In addition, Manitoba Liquor & Lotteries plans to extend permission to private retail–sorry, private rural liquor vendors to sell single-serve domestic beer previously only sold by hotel beer vendors and some rural liquor vendors granting an exception.
Customers across Manitoba will benefit from greater consumer choice and convenience from a small legislative change such as this. It will provide the opportunity for private businesses to expand their product assortment to satisfy customer demand and increase their revenues.
Currently, hotel beer vendors are restricted to sell beer and malt-based coolers, and can only sell spirited-based coolers and cider under certain conditions, such as being located a specific distance from a liquor vendor. This initiative is part of our government's priority to reduce red tape, to provide more choice and convenience for the consumer and greater opportunity and flexibility for business.
I am very proud that this bill has moved past committee stage, and look forward to the next steps as this bill progresses through the House.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Tom Lindsey (Flin Flon): T'were it only as it seems on the surface, but we know that this government isn't always about what it seems on the surface. On the surface, this bill seems to make some sense, that, sure, some liquor opportunities for local hotels, but what's the bigger picture–what's the bigger picture? What's behind what they're up to? And, of course, we all know that privatization is behind what they're up to. [interjection]
Now, they'll all sit there and say, no, no, no, no, no; we would never do that. But, well, let's look at the liquor store in Churchill, Manitoba, that they've just decided to turn over to a private vendor. Even though the liquor store in Churchill, Manitoba, was making money for the government of Manitoba, it'll now make money for a private vendor.
The other downside of that, of course, Madam Speaker, is that the people that used to work at the liquor store will not have jobs now–not that it really concerns this government all that much that people in the North don't have jobs because that's not really what they're about, either, is it?
You know, it starts down that whole slippery slope that we keep talking about, and we get accused of fear mongering when it comes to these kind of issues. But everything that we've ever said that we were afraid they were going to do, they've done. We said, you know, that we were afraid, during the last election, that they were going to do something to health-care workers.
Well, it turns out that contrary to their promises about no cuts to front-line services, that's exactly what they've done. They've cut front‑line services. So now we're looking at a relatively innocuous piece of legislation, but, again, it's not always what it seems, and particularly with this Premier (Mr. Pallister) and this government, it's never exactly as it seems because they always have the ulterior motive.
You know, we've seen them get rid of the water bombers to some of their corporate friends, right? So we can start to see them getting rid of publicly owned liquor stores that provide good incomes for families–good incomes for families not necessarily in Winnipeg, either, but, you know, there's small communities out there that have liquor stores that make money for their community.
So while, like I say, on the surface this seems like it might make some sense and, certainly, I'm sure, there's many local hotel owners will think it's a great idea because it will increase their sales.
Now, are they going to pay their employees the same kind of wages that people that work at the liquor store get paid? I'm pretty sure they're not because they don't already, so it's going to be a net loss for those communities. They're actually going to land up with less people able to pay taxes, able to buy groceries, able to contribute to those communities. [interjection]
And I see the member from Thompson, he likes to speak in this Chamber when I'm speaking. So let's talk about what might happen in his community. Now Manitoba Liquor & Lotteries has just built a nice new store. Is it their intention now to turn that over to private enterprise? Maybe that's the member from Thompson's next career. Maybe he plans to run a–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Lindsey: –private liquor store in Thompson after the next election because chances are he's not going to be an MLA after the next election, so. So, you know, that's the kind of things that we always have to keep in mind with this Premier and his government.
And we should be very clear that it's this Premier–and, I mean, unfortunately all his MLAs are going to wear it come the next election as well, but it's this Premier that's directing the ship into the iceberg.
So, like I say, on the surface of this, it seems okay; it's not a big deal. But it's–where does it lead us to? What's the ultimate goal? Those are our concerns, and those are things that we should rightfully bring about and ask questions about. Unfortunately, in this Chamber, when we ask questions, we very seldom get answers, Madam Speaker. We've asked any number of questions about jobs in the North and, well, we don't get a whole lot of answers about that.
So, now, here's potentially more jobs in the North that may disappear as we've seen they're disappearing in Churchill, right? They're privatizing the liquor store in Churchill. Well, Thompson might be next. Maybe Flin Flon is next. Would I suggest that the Premier (Mr. Pallister) is that vindictive? Yes, I'm sure he probably is. It's kind of a shame.
* (20:00)
So, like I say, Madam Speaker, it's that slippery slope. And we know that it's taking money out of the whole government system and putting it into the hands of private enterprise–which, you know, I've got nothing against private enterprise. If they were to be–I know the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Kinew) may seem shocked by that statement.
There is a place for private enterprise–let's put it that way–and this is not it. Because once liquor sales go into the private hands, then we start to lose control over who's actually buying that liquor. And certainly, hotel owners in small towns, they want to make a buck. And they need to, to stay in business, so they depend on revenue from–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Lindsey: –they depend on revenue from lottery machines, now, to stay in business. So now they're going to try and get some more revenue off cooler sales. And the concern, of course, is how tightly are they going to regulate who they're selling those alcoholic beverages to. We know that the employees at Manitoba Liquor & Lotteries do an excellent job of making sure that people are of age and that people aren't overconsuming.
So, you know, we need to make sure that we keep those things top of mind when we're talking about where this government plans to go with bills such as this. So our only hope, Madam Speaker, is that this bill will pass, but we'll be able to stop further degradation of public services after the next election when this particular Pallister government is no longer the government of the day, but we'll be in charge then and we'll do things properly.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Dougald Lamont (Leader of the Second Opposition): I'll be very brief, Madam Speaker.
This seems to be a perfectly acceptable bill. It's sad in a way that the only thing that people in rural Manitoba at hotels had to drink was beer and Zima. So we welcome the potential of people being able to drink coolers while recognizing that, in the grand scheme of things, this is really not very good.
Madam Speaker: I will now put the question on concurrence and third reading of Bill 11, The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Amendment Act (Cider and Cooler Sales at Beer Vendors).
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
I declare the motion carried.
Madam Speaker: I will now call Bill 13, The Private Vocational Institutions Act, and recognize the honourable Minister of Education to move and speak to concurrence and third reading.
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Education and Training): I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Cullen), that Bill 13, The Private Vocational Institutions Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs, be concurred in and now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Goertzen: This legislation modernizes the private vocational institutions which educate many students in Manitoba each and every year. The legislation has not been modernized or updated for a couple of decades, Madam Speaker. It will ensure more accountability to ensure that those who are under the PVI legislation are actually following the legislation as it requires them to do. It ensures greater transparency for students to ensure that fees and tuitions are being reported and also it reduces red tape when it comes to the reporting for PVIs.
I want to thank the department officials for the extensive consultations. The vast majority of PVIs are in favour of the legislation, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): Very much my pleasure to rise this evening on the–what I guess is the last day of the 41st legislature, and to take an opportunity to put a few words on the record with regards to Bill 13, but also hopefully have an opportunity, as well, to join with others who have taken the opportunity to speak about some of their fellow members in this Chamber who are not seeking re-election and give them some opportunity to recognize their work.
Now I understand that it's been a pretty raucous evening, and I'm sure there'll be plenty of opportunity for members opposite to heckle and participate from the benches, so to speak, but I'm hoping that maybe I could just have a few moments to just put some words on the record with regards to my colleagues.
Now I've already spoken about the member for Minto (Mr. Swan), so I won't put too many more words on the record, but I just wanted to, once again, put on the record how much respect I have for him. I know that's been echoed by members from all sides of the Chamber and by, certainly, by members on this side as well. He is somebody who takes this–his role and his responsibility very seriously, and I think it shows in everything that he does.
When it comes to any debate in the Chamber, I can't think of too many times that the member for Minto has come here unprepared or unable to defend his position.
And, once again, I'm just going to ask if members opposite could give me some time to just put these few words on the record and then get back to the heckling and the levity that we've all been enjoying this evening.
So the member for Minto, I think, is somebody that we can all certainly appreciate his hard work that he's put in over his time.
The member for Wolseley (Mr. Altemeyer), I thought, gave an amazing speech today, and it was great to have his family down, and, again, nothing brings us together as legislators like the opportunity to have family here and for us to all, you know, show whether–you know, whichever side of the aisle you're–you stand on, that it really is your family that comes first.
The member for Wolseley has put on the record that he is stepping away from this place because of his family and to be with his family and have more family time, and I think that's something all of us can appreciate. He's been an absolute staunch fighter for his constituents and he's been somebody who's incredibly smart and gifted, not just in this place as a kind of a retail politician or in kind of the rough-and-tumble day-to-day of this place, but also as somebody who understands the policy side, and I think he's put his work in there as well.
The member for Logan (Ms. Marcelino)–an incredibly hard-working member, and I don't know if all members in the Chamber understand just how hard-working the member for Logan has been and continues to be. She is somebody who doesn't miss a moment to go out and talk to people, lots of new Canadians, lots of newcomers to Canada, but just to everybody, to talk about her values and the values that she supports, and it's built our party through her hard work, and I've certainly seen that work first-hand and appreciate the work that she's done.
And the member for Fort Garry-Riverview (Mr. Allum)–who may see these words at some point–you know, I think he's an incredibly smart person. He's also somebody who comes very well prepared to this place, but, you know, that's not the part of the member for Fort Garry that I respect the most, and what I respect the most about him is he does it all while, you know, being–you know, maybe members opposite won't believe this, but he is somebody that takes a light approach a lot of times to the job, keeps perspective that way, I think, is still able to turn it up when he needs to and be that fighter here in the Chamber.
But he's the best example of somebody who understands the balance that you need to have in this job, of somebody who takes the issues very seriously, is a passionate fighter for those issues, but is also able to have some levity and some grace as well when he needs to.
So I just wanted to put those few words on the record about my colleagues because I may not get another opportunity, and I just wanted to say how much I appreciate the work that they have done in support of our caucus and in support of building our party as an opposition and for time coming forward as well.
Now is the opportunity for the hecklers to start again if they'd like because I'll–and there they are, Madam Speaker, right on cue–that's good; they are–sometimes they do react to what they're being told.
Madam Speaker, Bill 13 is a bill that we can certainly support on this side of the Chamber. We've had an opportunity to talk to post-secondary education institutions, to vocational training institutions, and understand some of the frustrations that they've had and can appreciate that this bill is something that I think they certainly support, and so we can support it as well.
* (20:10)
That being said, Madam Speaker, I think it does–again, if this is the last day that we have an opportunity to speak in this Chamber, I would be remiss if I don't take the opportunity to just wrap up some of the cuts that we've seen from this Pallister government–[interjection]–with regards to post-secondary education.
Madam Speaker: Just a reminder to the member that he needs to keep his comments relevant to the legislation.
Mr. Wiebe: Absolutely, Madam Speaker. I intend to talk about students, I intend to talk about those institutions and just the impact that it's had.
Now, I want to start by just reminding everyone because, you know, sometimes on this side of the Chamber we tend to–we're sort of chasing the next cut that's coming down the line and there's certainly been a lot and there's certainly more to come but, you know, it's–sometimes it's important to remember back at just all of the cuts that we've seen. And the member for St. Johns (Ms. Fontaine) has done a great job in that.
And it reminded me–and she may have mentioned in her very long list–took two members' statements to get out–that all students in this province had an incredibly large cut, in fact, one of the biggest tax increases that Manitobans had ever seen under this government when the tuition rebate was taken away from them by this government.
Now, this was a move that was done without any kind of consultation, without looking at any of the results of that program, whether there'd been any successes, whether that was a good thing for students or whether that was a good thing for the institutions that support them. We had none of that analysis that was done by this government but yet they went ahead and they cut it.
Now, there was, at the time, actually quite a major–one of the $23 million in consultant fees that this government has paid out was to a firm to look at the education–post-secondary education system in this province. And what did that post–that institution say, or what did that consultant firm say?
In fact, they said that any money that was taken away from students directly in their pocketbooks should be reinvested at–in some way and should allow for some kind of accessibility to post-secondary education.
Now, did they do that? Did this government do that? Even that small step of saying, look, we're going to take from you, students, at the bottom but at least we're going to give it back to you in some other way or we're going to create some new program, something that increased enrolment, that allowed more accessibility perhaps. Did they do that?
No, Madam Speaker, they did none of that. In fact, they just took the money, they put it in their pockets, they gave themselves a raise, one of–I think–three times that we talked about their salaries in this House during this three short years–three short years and three times we talked about them protecting their salary increase–and students got nothing.
Well, if that had been it, Madam Speaker, maybe that would have been a small part of this story but we know that was only the beginning because then the government came out and said it's our intention to increase tuition in this province, to allow for the tuition rates to increase.
When we said, well, what about the people who have the least ability to afford it? They said, we don't care about those people and they said, in fact, that they were going to allow tuition to rise. The fastest in Canada, that's how fast tuition has been rising in this province and students are bearing the brunt of this.
Now, again, maybe if they had left it with institutions to make those decisions and then said tuition can rise but we're also increasing funding to post-secondary education, maybe, maybe there would have been an opportunity for a break for students.
But at the same time that they were allowing for increases tuition–to tuition, they also pulled back funding and froze funding for post-secondary institutions in this province.
So the result has been a downloading of costs to students, to post-secondary students and it's a real shame, Madam Speaker, because we know that Manitoba's becoming less competitive, that we're not building for the future, that we're moving backwards when we had so much time that we were moving forward.
Madam Speaker, I could go on. I wish I could go on. There is so much more I could talk about, but at least I had an opportunity to put very few words on the record to say that this is the party that's standing up for post-secondary students. We're the ones who are standing up for university students. We're the ones who are going to present that in an election that's apparently coming maybe tomorrow.
So we're ready to go, Madam Speaker, and we're ready to tell Manitobans that we stand with them every step of the way.
Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): I want to start by thanking the member for Minto (Mr. Swan), the member for Logan (Ms. Marcelino), the member for Fort Garry-Riverview (Mr. Allum), the member for Wolseley (Mr. Altemeyer), the member for Emerson (Mr. Graydon), the member for The Maples (Mr. Saran), the member for Assiniboia (Mr. Fletcher), the member for Kildonan (Mr. Curry) for their service here and wish them well in the years ahead.
Now, I have a special note about the MLA for Kewatinook who may or may not be back. And if the member for Kewatinook (Ms. Klassen) is here, I shall be very excited and thankful, but I want to say that if the member for Kewatinook decides to leave or circumstances move the member for Kewatinook on to other great things, then want to say a thank-you to a very special person for her contributions to this Chamber over the last session.
Bill 13–did I forget somebody there? Bill 13–I want to thank Mr. Robin Day, who appeared at the committee stage. He's the academic dean of Herzing College, and he gave us a good rundown on this bill and how it would affect Herzing College and the fact that Herzing would be ready to adapt to a situation where there are more outcomes, where there is more information needed from schools and there is measurements, for example, of graduation rates and employment rates and so on.
The bill has been updated, which is a good thing. We were left with a few questions which were not adequately answered by the minister. [interjection] Well, I would.
First of all, with regard to the harassment and sexual violence policy, there's clearly a need for such policy, and it's a good thing that it is put in in this act, the requirement for such policies. In our view, it would have been advisable to have a clear process for appeal to an independent office like the Ombudsman, or perhaps an integrity commissioner, in order to make sure that for post-secondary schools there was some level of independent oversight. There were–there could've been more details in terms of–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Gerrard: There could've been more details in terms of foreign students and the rules and the responsibilities regarding foreign students, but aside from those and the lack of specific details on the outcomes, which would be great but were not there, we will support this bill. We will support this bill. We're not flip-floppers. We're going to support this bill.
Madam Speaker, with those words, we'll sit down and wait for the vote on this and for the discussion on the other bills.
Thank you.
Madam Speaker: I will now put the question on concurrence and third reading of Bill 13, The Private Vocational Institutions Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed]
I declare the motion carried.
Madam Speaker: I will now call concurrence and third reading of Bill 14, The Reducing Red Tape and Improving Services Act.
Hon. Scott Fielding (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Sustainable Development (Ms. Squires), that Bill 14, The Reducing Red Tape and Improving Services Act, 2019, reported from the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs, be concurred in and now read for a third time and passed.
* (20:20)
Motion presented.
Mr. Fielding: I'm pleased to rise today for the third reading of Bill 14, the reducing red rape and improving services act.
In my mandate letter, reducing the burden of red 'take'–tape is a central goal. The work is vital to our mission of fixing the finances, repairing the services and rebuilding the economy of Manitoba.
In this year's bill, we're making meaningful change across many departments, including enabling nurse practitioners to sign death certificates, which will make it easier for families to focus on grief in their difficult times and helping our doctors focus on the work that only they can do; making Canada Day a fixed statutory holiday for retail workers; removing the licensing and fee regiment for oil and gas agents; and 'sandirizing' the size of Crown corporation boards, Madam Speaker.
These are merely a few of the changes we are making to improve services and reduce the burden of red tape in Manitoba. These changes show that Manitoba is open for business again, Madam Speaker, and we are truly Canada's most improved province.
I'm happy to say that we have the support of many groups and individuals including the Manitoba Dental Association, the Association of Manitoba Municipalities, Keystone agriculture producers, the Retail Council of Canada and the College of Registered Nurses of Manitoba.
Many of these items have been brought forward by our attention by these groups and I'm proud that we are listening to stakeholders and making much-needed changes where the previous government failed to do such.
In closing, Madam Speaker, I hope all members will join us in supporting this bill and reducing the burden of red tape for Manitobans.
Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto): Well, you know, Madam Speaker, some governments run out of steam after four terms, some after three, some after two. It is amazing to look at this government, which, if this is the best they can put forward for this bill, has run out of steam after just three short years in this Legislature.
Earlier today, we of course talked a lot about a government needing to pump up its anaemic, vapid legislative agenda with not one, but two–three, actually–three interim appropriation acts. And, of course, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) couldn't deny question that this is the most interim appropriation acts that any government has tried to bring out. [interjection]
Well, yeah, this government has lost relevance. I agree with the member across the way and I've a few more minutes to talk about the number of ways that's happened.
And now, of course, we have not one, not two, but three bills that were before this Legislature dealing with what we would call minor legislative changes.
And, of course, one they called the, I believe, the minor statute amendment act; they changed it around and said the statute minor correction act, and then we have this red tape reduction act.
You know, I know when they came in, they thought, well, this is low-hanging fruit; there's billions and billions of regulations we can do away with.
And now even though they have full-time employees, chained in an airless room somewhere in downtown Winnipeg looking for these things, they've been able to pull out a handful of changes, things that would in a normal year simply be part of a statute amendment act.
And, look, the provisions in here, there are some that are good, there are some that are bad and there are some that are outright ugly. But for this government, for this Minister of Finance to stand up and puff out his chest and say somehow Bill 14 is some evidence that this government is actually advancing and actually doing anything creative or productive, it stretches the facts, if I could say that.
Now what's interesting in some cases is that the government is outsourcing the red tape and there's a couple provisions out of The Cemeteries Act or The Farm Products Marketing Act, under The Prearranged Funeral Services Act.
They're not saying there's going to be less regulation; they're just saying, well, we're government, we're not going to be responsible for that anymore. They're outsourcing it. They're going to take it off their books and say, look, we got rid of all these regulations.
But the people impacted, they might have less, they might have the same, they may actually have more regulations because this government is simply taking its hand off the wheel.
There's other provisions that actually show promise and the changes to The Vital Statistics Act and the changes to The Fatality Inquiries Act, to give nurse practitioners more ability to do certain things, is a positive thing, Madam Speaker.
What isn't positive is that it's really, really hard to find a nurse practitioner in the province of Manitoba since all of the growth under our government to have more nurse practitioners able to practice their profession, able to work at their highest level, has now largely disappeared under this government.
So, although this is a good provision, the challenge is that it's going to be very difficult to find nurse practitioners to actually take up the additional authority they've been given.
Some of these provisions are simply weird. And there's The Noxious Weeds Act–I'm amazed the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Eichler) didn't have a word with his colleagues. As the explanatory note says, currently, certain noxious weed infestations must be prevented from spreading if it covers five or more acres and destroyed if it covers a smaller area. This threshold is changed to 20 acres.
You know, I'm a city guy, but it seems to me that if there are five acres of noxious weeds out there, that is something that should be dealt with. And I don't consider it to be a reduction in red tape to say, you know what, we're going to wait until those noxious weeds spread over 20 acres before anybody can do anything about it.
You know, again, I'm a city guy, I just don't see that quadrupling the growth of weeds in the province of Manitoba is a tremendous benefit to Manitoba agriculture and certainly not something the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) should be out bragging about.
Now, there are other provisions. What's fascinating now is we're going to standardize the number of members of the boards of certain Crown corporations. The government didn't think of this when they passed The Efficiency Manitoba Act, and now, even though the ink is barely dry on that legislation, we are now having a bill today that's going to change that number.
I know they want to standardize things. I mean, if you get appointed to one of these Crown corporations, I guess you should get your manual and get a parachute, too, because you never know–when you're appointed to one of these Crown corporations by the Premier (Mr. Pallister)–when you're going to have to take a flying leap out a window because you know that you can't work with this government.
Even though you may have supported the political party in the past, even though you may at one time have shared a lot of the same ideas, we know–[interjection]–well, and I know the member for Morris (Mr. Martin) wants to talk about the rebellion at Manitoba Hydro–unprecedented–unprecedented to have an entire board walk away from their job.
We know that the head of Liquor & Lotteries also walked away because she could not work with this government. I would really think that that parachute will be standard practice as we standardize a number of other things.
But, you know, what really sums up what this government is all about–ruining the Canada Day long weekend. And I know that the minister will get up and say, well, it's only one in every seven Canada Day long weekends we're going to ruin. Strangely enough, we didn't have the hotel association down promoting that because the hotel association, the restaurant association, parents, kids, everybody else actually liked having a long weekend to celebrate our country's birthday.
And now, in what I think is a rather cold and calculating move, should Canada Day fall on a Sunday, there will no longer be a long weekend in Manitoba. I don't think many people know that. And when this first comes into play, well, hopefully there'll be an NDP government that will reverse this–[interjection]
The member for Flin Flon (Mr. Lindsey) asks if that was in their campaign literature. No. Just like closing emergency rooms and firing nurses and having larger class sizes, that was not in the PC election platform.
So, as I said, there's the good, the bad and the ugly. But the most disappointing thing about this bill is that we have a really weak legislative agenda that we're discussing tonight–embarrassingly 'blad'. This is a government that does not like to govern. It's a government that does not like government.
And it's a government which has now had to resort to stretching things out and trying to pretend that they're actually active in doing things when, really, even with civil servants now being taken away from the work they were doing before to find regulations, they are finding, truly, the law of diminishing returns.
And, I guess, you know, who knows? Maybe I'll be here for next year's reducing red tape and improving services act, which I expect will be even more weak and uninspired than the one that we're going to be dealing with tonight.
So this is a bill which shows how this government, which thought they could just magically step in and they could achieve savings without cuts, thought they could just find all these regulations out there; they found that, actually, that is not the case. And if this is the best they can do, I'm–I would say it's a pretty sad day for Manitobans.
So those are my comments on Bill 14, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Dougald Lamont (Leader of the Second Opposition): I know that things have gotten a bit rambunctious. I'm sure–I'm wondering whether the cider and coolers have been opened for distribution somewhere other than simply rural hotels, perhaps.
* (20:30)
I don't want to suggest that perhaps the PC caucus have been enjoying–taking–celebrating early with a cider or a cooler of their own.
But the fact is, when it comes to this bill, many of these changes are not meaningful. They're not significant. They don't really much make of an impact. We've asked whether–what the economic impact of many of these will be, and it's far from clear that there will be any significant benefits. It will make it much easier to fill boards and Crown corporations when they resign en masse. So I suppose that cuts down a bit on some costs.
I do have to just mention the one thing that–it is worth mentioning, is that this is actually–when we're talking about a reducing red tape act, this is actually the–one of two acts that we're talking about, we also have a statutes correction and minor amendments act. And we actually had three different bills dedicated to Interim Supply.
So we've had an incredible oversupply of many bills, due to the disorganization of this government, which is really unfortunate. And some of these regulations are not being removed; they're simply being moved elsewhere.
If I could just take one moment, I would like to pay tribute to my colleague from Kewatinook, just very briefly, because she's been a really–it's been an absolute joy knowing her and working with her, and with my other colleagues.
And actually, and–some of you. And the–but I wanted to say about the member from Kewatinook is that I visited her in her community–communities. And part of the reason she's so special, and why she takes things so seriously and why she's different, I think–if she's no longer here, there'll be a real–it will be a true loss to this Chamber, for what she's brought here. The stories and the truths that she's been able to do.
And visiting her community. Because the community there–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Lamont: –I would say she takes a real personal responsibility. And, when her community hurts, I think she feels it in a tremendously personal way, and that's part of what's made her so passionate and such an incredible spokesperson for her community, because it's a beautiful place with many beautiful people. It's a hard place as well, and it was a joy for me to visit with her there earlier this year as well as the year before, and I hope to see her up there again soon.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: I will now put the question on concurrence and third reading of Bill 14, The Reducing Red Tape and Improving Services Act, 2019.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Madam Speaker: Did I hear a no?
Can I ask that again?
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
I declare the motion carried.
Madam Speaker: I will now call Bill 15, The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Amendment Act (Cannabis Possession Restrictions), and recognize the honourable Minister of Justice to move and speak to concurrence and third reading of Bill 15.
Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding), that Bill 15, The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Amendment Act (Cannabis Possession Restrictions), reported from the Standing Committee on Justice, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Cullen: Bill 15 makes amendments to The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Act to create a new provincial offence prohibiting the possession of more than 30 grams of cannabis in a public place. It adds an additional offence when that cannabis is not properly packaged, stamped and labelled according to federal government labelling requirements.
Bill 15 will help to crack down on the illicit cannabis market by giving provincial inspectors the clear ability to seize illicit cannabis. It will help protect the health and safety of Manitobans while preserving the integrity of the legal retail cannabis system.
Madam Speaker, I hope that all members of the House will support this common-sense legislation tonight. Thank you.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): Well, I am pleased to put a couple of words on the record for Bill 15, the liquor, gaming and cannabis control amendment act.
You know, I will attempt to–I mean, I know I said that last time–I will attempt to keep my comments short. There is so much to say in respect of this government and where their priorities lie on this last day as the Premier (Mr. Pallister) gets ready to break the law and call an early election.
What I find fascinating is that this government–members of this government have shown time and time again that they are obsessed with cannabis. They're obsessed with cannabis–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Ms. Fontaine: –something that is legal across Canada. They're so obsessed with it, they have so many different laws and regulations governing it. Meanwhile, they've turned an absolute blind eye to the meth crisis that currently is sweeping the province in the last couple of years. They don't care about the meth crisis. They're so obsessed about cannabis.
I'm not sure why they're so obsessed about cannabis. They want to further regulate it; they want to stranglehold all Manitobans that you can't do this with the–you can't smoke it here; you can't buy it here; you can't hold it here; you can't grow it here; you can't put it in some brownies. Like, it is legal, but you can't do anything in Manitoba with it.
This government is so obsessed with cannabis. Meanwhile, people are dying from the meth crisis.
And as I was reviewing my notes and what Bill 15 is attempting to do–again, further regulations on something that is considered legal–I remembered a couple of years ago–or I don't–yes, I'm assuming it was a couple of years ago–there was a huge rally at the front steps of the Manitoba Legislature where people from across Manitoba and certainly those on the front lines in Winnipeg, including Marion Willis, all convened on the steps of the Manitoba Legislature, trying to draw attention to the meth crisis.
And members of our caucus were out there, of course, as we are every time there's a rally, be it for the nurses, be it for whatever, we're always out there–be it for Mifegymiso–didn't see any members out there, including the Minister for Status of Women, who couldn't even come out. There were a couple of members there for Mifegymiso. I'm not sure if they were trying to get through or they really were there.
And I did acknowledge them when they were there. [interjection] If the member wants to get up and speak, he can get up and speak to Bill 15. That's his prerogative.
And anyways, Madam Speaker, at this massive rally in front of the Legislature, not one single PC caucus member went outside to hear those that are affected by the meth crisis and those on the front lines. Not one single member of the PC caucus took the time to just walk out the steps, two minutes, and go in front of the building.
At the time, Madam Speaker, you will recall that the minister for Justice was the minister for–or was the member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson), and the minister for Justice didn't come out. Nobody came out. They didn't think that it was important to hear what Manitobans are talking about. And those of us in our NDP caucus will remember individuals talking about how their loved ones aged 12 were addicted to meth and were dealing with the meth crisis, and they were begging and screaming and crying for somebody to listen to them in this government, but nobody did.
* (20:40)
That's just one rally that since this PC government took office has occurred in the front Legislature in respect of meth, and not one time have they ever been out there, despite the fact–Manitoba that–or, Madam Speaker, pardon me, that the Winnipeg Police Chief Danny Smyth, who is, I want to just take a moment to say, an extraordinary human being. I'm glad to work with him and honour him. And I quote: We are a city in crisis. If you look around, you see evidence of meth and meth use all around us and in all corners of the city.
Unless you bury your head in the sand, like members opposite at the direction of their boss and their Premier (Mr. Pallister), because they would prefer to believe and act as if there's no meth crisis occurring in Manitoba, because, again, Madam Speaker, it is–
An Honourable Member: Thought this was going to be quick.
Ms. Fontaine: This is quick, for the Government House Leader (Mr. Goertzen) chirping on. This is quick. I wish we had all night. I wish I had an hour or an unlimited time to speak about the meth crisis, because I could. [interjection] Yes, I have not broken the member for Steinbach's (Mr. Goertzen) record. I will at some point; trust me on that.
But I do want to just say again, Madam Speaker, that in the midst of a meth crisis, the very fact that none of the members can come out and can listen to individuals talk about the meth crisis is more of a testament to where their priorities lie and their callous behaviours and concerns for Manitobans.
So while the government is, again, obsessed with cannabis with Bill 15, yet another piece of legislation to regulate and control Manitobans' use of something that is legal, they have refused to even look at the meth crisis, other than thinking a warm cup of coffee is going to do the job, which is just an absolute insult.
I don't know who says that. Anybody that would offer a warm cup of coffee to somebody who's in the throes of addiction is somebody that–who is so utterly divorced from what's going on in the province.
And I'm glad that the individual that said that is in the Chamber to hear our comments. I don't know if that individual will actually listen. I doubt so. I suspect that that individual is very, very anxious to get out of here and head to Costa Rica.
But, with that, Madam Speaker, I want members opposite to know that we stand with them, in respect of their meth addiction, and we will continue to fight for their rights and for their loved ones, in respect of the meth crisis. Miigwech.
Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Burrows): It's nice to stand and put a few words on the record about Bill 15. You know, we've been learning a lot lately since cannabis has been legalized here in Manitoba. Ensuring that police officers understand the limits and restrictions on cannabis is important. Making sure those rules are clear is also important.
We know that legalization has not completely removed illicit cannabis from our streets, and money is still flowing into illegal organizations. Much of that is due to the high cost of cannabis partially associated with the product's place in its early life cycle, but also due to moves from the government that increase the cost of buying legal cannabis.
While this bill seeks to provide instructions on what is allowable and what isn't, when it comes to the possession of cannabis, there are still a few questions left to be answered regarding measurements of what constitutes the equivalent of dried cannabis, or will police officers be carrying scales with them to ensure that Manitobans are not being unfairly targeted for having just under 30 grams of cannabis on their person.
Madam Speaker, while we are looking forward to this legislation moving forward, we still have some issues with the bill and will be watching carefully on how this bill works out in practice and in the public.
And, Madam Speaker, I, too, just want to take a very quick moment to recognize my colleague from Kewatinook. She is an inspiration in her passion and service to her constituents up North, and she represents them so well here in the Manitoba Legislature. She is a role model of mine; a friend of mine; a very, very classy woman.
It's been an honour to work with you, the member from Kewatinook, and I appreciate how patient you have been with me in teaching me and making me more knowledgeable about our province. Thank you.
And thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: I will now put the question on concurrence and third reading of Bill 15, The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Amendment Act (Cannabis Possession Restrictions).
Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed]
I declare the motion carried.
Madam Speaker: I will now call Bill 16, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2019, and recognize the honourable Minister of Finance to move and speak to the bill.
Hon. Scott Fielding (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Sustainable Development (Ms. Squires), that Bill 16, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2019, as amended and reported from the Committee of the Whole, be concurred in and now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Fielding: Madam Speaker, this bill provides legislative authority for the implementation of tax, finance, and other measures that were announced in Budget 2019.
Madam Speaker, in making these changes, our government is committed to ensuring affordable and competitive tax environment that increases productivity, encourages economic development and job creation.
We are doing so while also working towards restoring the physical integrity of the province and responsibilities by moving Manitoba along the road to recovery.
We know for a fact, Madam Speaker, there's one government, there's one political party that is standing up for taxpayers, and that is the Progressive Conservative Party of Manitoba. There is one party that stands up for affordability of Manitobans, and that's the Progressive Conservative Party of Manitoba.
We know what the NDP and the opposition do. They want to take more money out of the pockets of Manitobans, and the same thing with the Liberals. Our government is the only one that's standing up for taxpayers. We want to put more money in the pockets of Manitobans, and that's what this bill does, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto): Well, quite an effort from the Minister of Finance. Actually, the government he did forget to thank is the federal government. As loath as I am to acknowledge it, this government has been the beneficiary of not just some dollars, but hundreds of millions of dollars in additional revenue each and every year.
And, you know, I know that it doesn't fit their narrative. They want to talk about the alleged cuts to health-care funding from the federal government. I've looked at the budget papers each and every year and there is not just more money coming, but substantially more money, more than 6 per cent last year, more than 6 per cent this year. I'm not sure why the federal Liberals are allowing them to suggesting otherwise, but I'm not going to give any advice to that particular crew.
We also know that, thanks to this province's weak economic performance as compared to, well, virtually every other province in Canada, Manitoba, which was receiving less and less payment under the equalization system, in the past three years has been the province which has experienced the biggest windfall in additional dollars.
Now I know that doesn't fit with this Premier's (Mr. Pallister) Damon Runyon pull-yourself-up-by-your‑bootstraps folksy charm, but this Premier is on welfare. This Premier has been dining off the fact that the previous NDP administration in Alberta was able to turn around that province's finances and that province's economic output.
The fact that the Horgan government in British Columbia has the strongest economy and the lowest unemployment rate in the entire country, that even the Liberals in Ontario before train wreck that is now there, had turned themselves around, and the Quebec government was also performing well.
Mr. Doyle Piwniuk, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair
So yes, this minister is able to stand up and reduce the PST a few years before it would have disappeared anyway, but, you know, I think he–he'd–almost like hockey players in Europe, I think he almost needs to sew a little Government of Canada patch onto the sleeve of his shirt.
Now, it is a fact, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and of course I can say it's a fact with some confidence, given that it appears in this government's most recent budget papers, if you look at those budget papers, which I know most members don't, you will see the government revenues from the Government of Canada were flat for an entire decade.
That was the legacy of the Stephen Harper government and–[interjection] Oh, they say, because they don't understand what those transfers mean. They don't realize the gift that this government has received over the last three years.
* (20:50)
And what difference will a 1-cent reduction in the PST make? Well, 2 cents in your coffee at Tim Horton's. That's great. Seven cents on a lunch special at some of the restaurants on Sargent Avenue, which I might or might not have a little more time to visit, and what are people giving up in exchange for saving that 1 cent on things which are subject to PST, which, I would add, is not food; it's not rent; it's not your mortgage payment. It's not kids' clothing. It's a wide range of consumer goods and other services. But what are people going to give up when they get that 1 per cent decrease in the PST?
Well, ask the folks in northeast Winnipeg today what they're giving up. They're giving up their emergency room that people in that quadrant in the city have counted on for decades.
Ask the people that live around Seven Oaks General Hospital who are going to be the next ones to lose their emergency room. Ask the people in my community and in Wolseley and across the river in River Heights and in Crescentwood who lost the Misericordia Urgent Care Centre, which had the shortest wait times and the highest patient satisfaction. Is that worth a 1 per cent cut to the PST?
And what about all those folks in rural Manitoba? It's the other shoe, you know, that's just waiting to drop. And we know that if they have the chance, after the next election, they are going to take the saw and they are going to cut apart hospitals in every part of rural Manitoba.
And, you know, I've been talking to some folks, talking about the impact already on the Selkirk general hospital with Concordia ER closed now and with Seven Oaks closing. The folks in Selkirk are getting nervous about their own hospital's capacity.
And what's going to happen? Teulon, Gimli, Ste. Anne, you name it. There are going to be rural hospitals that aren't just going to have their ERs closed; rural hospitals, they're going to close once and for all. And I'd be fascinated to ask those people in those communities that lose their ambulance station or they'll lose their hospital, that lose their doctors, was it worth 1 per cent? And the answer's going to be no. [interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Mr. Swan: And what about young people, like the ones–[interjection]
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order.
Mr. Swan: –I represent in my community, like we all represent? They're going to save 7 cents on the lunch special on Sargent Avenue. What are they giving up for that? Well, they know that they're going to have to work a lot harder to get on to university because even though minimum wage, which was frozen for two years, is now capped–it increases at the rate of inflation–their tuition, if they want to go on to post-secondary education, is the rate of inflation plus up to 5 per cent per year.
So every year those same students are having to work harder just to stay in one place. And, oh, if they have to take a bus to get to work, they're going to pay more for that too because this government took away the 50-50 sharing with Winnipeg Transit and with other municipalities.
Madam Speaker in the Chair
I'd like to talk to those–well, I know what those students are going to say: It's not worth the 1 per cent on their $7 special at–on Sargent Avenue.
And what about parents who are now seeing and fearing what's going to happen in our education system?
Again, this government may kick the can down the road a little bit. They don't want to go to the polls after the results of their education review is done. Parents are already concerned because they see services that are being cut. They're taking a look–[interjection]
Well, I know the Minister of Education–you know, the Minister of Education should have been out there talking to some teachers. In fact, teachers were in the 1919 strike recognition last week. They were in the Pride parade last week, just on Sunday, and those teachers said, yes, you know, we had a look at that consultation paper, and you had to type in your number, your identification number as a teacher, and I had teachers telling me that they weren't prepared to put their identification number down because they are fearful of reprisals from this government who actually wants to silence teachers even as they try to pretend that they want to hear from them.
And we're going to hear from individual people. I know they had their one meeting in the inner city at R.B. Russell school when they finally bowed to the pressure from folks. People all over this province have been saying how important their education system is, and you know what? Having a strong education system that's properly funded, with enough teachers, with enough teachers' assistants, with enough protections for students, is actually more important than saving 7 cents on your lunch on Sargent Avenue.
So there are many, many reasons why this government should be pleased with the amount of money they've been receiving. It was certainly not something happened before. I suppose they've been lucky having a different government federally. We'll see what happens in the next federal election, which may be before or may be after the next provincial election, depending just how badly this Premier (Mr. Pallister) is prepared to break the law.
But, you know, people are going to have their 1 per cent PST reduction and then within a week, it's going to be very, very disappointing for these members when a week after July 1st, nobody can even remember the 1 per cent pay cut. And I hope the Minister of Education comes and knocks on doors in northeast Winnipeg or north Winnipeg or the inner city of Winnipeg, and he can tell them that they got their 1 per cent pay cut and they're going to offer him a very different cut, I can promise–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Swan: So, Madam Speaker, the government is moving ahead with this. They've got hundreds of millions of dollars with which to do it, so I suppose they're entitled to do so. We are going to continue to fight against the cuts and the bad choices that this government is making with all of the other money that they have to spend.
So that's why, Madam Speaker, we are going to continue to stand up for Manitobans, we're going to stand up in the face of this government's cuts, and we're going to keep fighting for health care, education and everything else that Manitobans depend upon.
Thank you.
Mr. Dougald Lamont (Leader of the Second Opposition): There are–I've expressed my concerns about this bill before, and, in fact, one of the major reasons is that it risks undermining the fiscal performance of the government. There are, of course–and I've said this as well–that there are problems with the PST because it's a regressive tax.
But the challenge right now, as I've often been accused of supporting tax increases, first stating the simple fact that there is a–that Manitoba has a revenue problem and not just a spending problem. When it comes to a deficit–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Lamont: –a deficit is, of course, just a gap between spending and revenue and arguing about which side of it–which–whether it was spending or revenue-caused, it is a bit like arguing about which of two parts of a pair of scissors is cutting the paper. The fact is that there were massive amounts of–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order. Order.
Mr. Lamont: The federal government–previous to this administration–the Conservative federal government froze transfers to Manitoba for half a decade.
And one of the things that's happened is that the Premier continually relies on what are essentially imaginary arguments to make his case. He says things like–he talks about what the deficit would have been, what the trajectory it was on–not what it actually was, but what the trajectory it was on, had the NDP continued to spend in a certain way–while completely ignoring the role of federal transfers.
And the fact is this government has continually misrepresented their spending on health care and on education and infrastructure, they've overpromised and under-delivered consistently. And the problem with that is that those are the three most important ways that we need to be competitive as a province. And we've seen commitments over and over again of $200 million or $250 million a year that were promised while health-care funding was effectively frozen at 2016 levels.
Now, I just want to–I'd like to read from an article by Graham Lane who's nobody's idea of either an NDP or a Liberal, but he was–but he's worth talking about simply because he actually peels apart some of the–one of the–some of the issues saying that the Premier's deficit-reducing program counts very much on accounting games, including a qualified audited opinion of his government's financial statements and monopoly Crown corporations looking after government's need for revenue.
He says: while Manitobans have no choice but to rely on Crown corporations for lighting, heating and motor-vehicle insurance, the government–the sole shareholder–feeds off them through massive direct annual levies. What is left for the Crown's incomes which are counted in measuring the government's effort towards a balanced budget, the annual milking of the government's monopoly cows–Hydro, MPI and MLL–are–have allowed for the PST cut while keeping a $300-million bump in PST revenues via the NDP's expansion of PST-eligible items.
* (21:00)
But one of the most important things he actually talks about the DBRS credit agency report–and again, proceeding with this cut, this was something that was–there were–this government, like the Ontario government of Premier Ford, had its credit rating downgraded twice: first, because they overstated the size of the deficit; and then, second, because they promised to move ahead with revenue reductions without any clear way of paying for it.
And I communicated with the analyst from S&P, I wrote them an email asking them–they say if you have any questions about our credit rating decisions, please email them, and I did–and they said it's because this government is signalling that it is unwilling and unable to pay its bills.
And that's an incredibly dangerous signal to send and which, when combined with all the other agreements that this government has been tearing up, just underlines the uncertainty and recklessness with which this government has approached the economy and governing, that this is an–overwhelmingly a political decision.
But I also note that he quotes, DBRS noted the provincial government has a structural deficit, restrained opportunities, weaker program results, below-average health, education and social incomes, and risks as to future federal transfers.
Basically, this decision that is being made today anticipates continued federal transfers, which are absolutely no guarantee when they can change at a moment's notice. And bond rating agencies assume that hydro rates, however as high as they may well reach, will be covered by ratepayers.
So, to–the fact that this cut has been combined with various changes–with changes to campaign financing which have required the Premier (Mr. Pallister) to tie himself in knots in order to justify both accepting and all–then–for–then rejecting and then accepting subsidies to his political party again shows sort of the incoherence of this government.
All that being said, we'll have to see how the Liberals vote on this bill.
Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: I will now put the question on concurrence and third reading of Bill 16, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2019.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed]
I declare the motion carried.
Madam Speaker: I will now call Bill 20, The Courts Modernization Act (Various Acts Amended), and recognize the honourable Minister of Justice to move and speak to concurrence and third reading motion.
Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister of Education, that Bill 20, The Courts Modernization Act (Various Acts Amended), as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Justice, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Cullen: The Courts Modernization Act makes important reforms that will reduce court backlogs, increase transparency and improve access to justice for all Manitobans.
The amendments contained in this bill will improve the appointment process by replacing individual nominating committees established through orders-in-council to having a single standing committee receiving applications year round. This revised process for appointments will allow for vacancies to be filled more quickly and establish a more effective application process–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Cullen: –for candidates.
Bill 20 also includes an annual reporting requirement for the Court of Appeal and the Court of Queen's Bench, which will enable the chief justices to report on the activities on each of their courts for the fiscal year, which will enhance public understanding of the work they do.
The amendments contained in this bill will also provide for a mandatory retirement age of 75 years for judges, JJPs and masters.
Finally, the monetary limit for the filing of small civil claims will be increased from $10,000 to $15,000, and improvements will be made to the small claims court process, further enhancing access to justice.
Madam Speaker, we are also listening to the concerns raised at committee and have amended Bill 20 to ensure that it will take effect on proclamation. This will ensure that the Judicial Compensation Committee has the time to consider the mandatory retirement age through their regular process for considering judicial compensation.
I look forward to see Bill 20 become law so that we can improve access to justice for all Manitobans. Thank you.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): I'm going to put some final notes on the record tonight. This is my final chance to speak for what will certainly be the last day of the 41st Session of the Manitoba Legislative Assembly, as we await the Premier (Mr. Pallister) to break the law.
I want to thank all the folks that came out to committee. There were some very informative presentations from experts in respect of The Courts Modernization Act.
I just want to concentrate on one aspect of it, and it's something that I referred to in committee and have spoken here in the House. And it is the measure in the bill that 'legislach'–legislates committees so that each committee that appoints a judge or judicial justice of the peace will be made by standing committees.
You know, I'm proud to belong to a party and a former government that put measures in place so that people that were–that had vacancies, judicial judge vacancies, would be able to participate in the process to actually have candidates that are suited within that area and that there is buy-in from the community, which is particularly important when we're working with indigenous communities and rural communities and northern communities.
The Pallister government has gotten away–has done away with that. And so it really does bear the question: What is the commitment from the Pallister government in ensuring that our judicial judges have buy-in from community and that they represent Manitobans that they are going to judge and proceed over?
Now, I know that members opposite don't necessarily care about representation because all we need to do is look across the way and see that representation is something that's seriously lacking in respect of diversity. [interjection] And I know that the member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen) is talking about that they're elected; that's actually, precisely, my point.
When you put measures in place that ensure that black and indigenous and people of colour and 2SLGBTTQ will not be able to vote because they–or not be able to participate in the electoral process as candidates, you ensure that what you get is members opposite where we have established in this House, time and time again, that has absolutely no diversity.
And let me clarify again: diversity doesn't mean the same as gendered representation. Certainly, members opposite have women in their caucus. I think that that is a great thing. I would suggest on both sides of the House we need more women. I'm sure members opposite are not surprised to hear me say that. I would love to belong to a Manitoba Legislative Assembly that literally has 50 per cent women and 50 per cent men, or less than but is also made up of folks that are non-binary. I think that we can all do better on that front.
But that's not the same as diversity. And so we–the Minister for Justice, at the request of his boss, has situated and legislated where communities will no longer have opportunities to participate in the hiring of their judges and ensuring that they are representative of the people that they are judging over and passing judgment. I think that is a sad commentary in the year 2019. It's not surprising. It's not shocking, coming from this PC government but, surely, they could have done better.
Madam Speaker, if you will allow me just a couple of minutes, I would like to just take a couple of minutes to say miigwech to the clerks. It has been an absolute honour to work with each and every one of you. I know that I wouldn't be able to do my job as House leader had it not been for your extraordinary knowledge and expertise, and I'm sure that everybody in the House agrees that we are blessed with some pretty, pretty phenomenal clerks. So I say miigwech to each and every one of you.
* (21:10)
I also want to, Madam Speaker, on behalf of our caucus, just say miigwech to our Sergeant-at-Arms. Thank you for–it is an honour to work with you as well and I know as an indigenous woman we are so proud to have an indigenous man in this House representing. Keep us all safe.
I want to say miigwech to all of the pages over the last three years. We have had some extraordinary pages and I'm always fascinated with how they can remember everybody's names, so congratulations to each of you.
And then finally to all of the Chamber staff who get us in and out of the doors; miigwech for all of your work. And for Hansard as well, miigwech for all of your work.
None of–this Chamber wouldn't be able to operate if it wasn't for the amazing folks that we have working to help support the work that we do on behalf of Manitobans and so I would ask my colleagues maybe to all join and give everybody a round of appreciation and acknowledgement.
Miigwech, Madam Speaker.
Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Burrows): It's great to stand and put just a few words on Bill 20, The Courts Modernization Act. Madam Speaker, thank you for this opportunity.
While we are generally supportive of this idea, there were concerns raised at committee from members of the legal community that must also be addressed. Echoing the comments from the member from River Heights, it's important that vexatious litigants must be fully understood. They should not be ignored. When a real issue for them arises and the legal system is the only recourse, they should not be turned away.
The justice system must be fair for all Manitobans and the judiciary must be representative of Manitobans. We are supportive of a call for diversity in the legal system. People from the indigenous, Filipino, Indo-Canadian, and other immigrant communities would love to see themselves better represented and understood in the judicial process.
Based on comments made by Ms. Dawes, counsel for the Provincial Judges Association of Manitoba and the president for the Manitoba Bar Association, we must be cautious that some of these amendments do not impede on the independence of the judiciary. I think it is important that the Minister of Justice (Mr. Cullen) listen to their concerns and follow the proper procedure for making the changes that they have outlined in this bill. We heard from them that making 75 a mandatory retirement age can be an issue when it comes to the independence of the judiciary.
And while this change may seem innocuous, we should not ignore what Manitobans in the field have to say.
Madam Speaker, I, too, just want to reiterate and echo the words that the member from Point Douglas had mentioned about thanking everyone in these Chambers. I'm scared to start rattling off all the different positions, but you all know who you are and it's been great having the opportunity to work with you all over the past three years. I know my father and I often talk a lot about many of you individuals, and it's something I've genuinely enjoyed, being able to get to know all of you.
And as well, this will be my last opportunity to say anything to my colleagues. I do wish everyone a great summer. I hope to see some of you back in this House. Others, I hope to see in communities and out and about in the community and just wishing everyone a great summer.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: I will now put the question on concurrence and third reading of Bill 20, The Courts Modernization Act (Various Acts Amended).
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
Some Honourable Members: No.
Madam Speaker: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Madam Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, please say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Madam Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Madam Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it.
An Honourable Member: On division.
Madam Speaker: On division.
Madam Speaker: I will now call Bill 21 and recognize the honourable Minister of Finance to move and speak to concurrence and third reading of Bill 21, The Legislative Building Centennial Restoration and Preservation Act.
Hon. Scott Fielding (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Cullen), that Bill 21, The Legislative Building Centennial Restoration and Preservation Act, reported from the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Mr. Fielding: Madam Speaker, it's my pleasure to be–to speak to Bill 21, The Legislative Building Centennial Restoration and Preservation Act. The Manitoba Legislative Building opened on July 1920, and is truly a gift to all Manitobans from the past generations. As we celebrate Manitoba's 150th anniversary next year, we'll also be celebrating over 100-year anniversary of the completion of this historic building.
Today the building is at risk of irreparable heritage loss and requires more than $150 million in deferred repairs and upgrades. The act establishes a process to ensure the restoration, preservation, maintenance of the Legislative Building and its associated infrastructure.
Bill 21 will achieve this by establishing a Legislative Building restoration preservation advisory committee, co-chaired by her–Speaker of Legislative Assembly to guide the development of a long-term plan and annual maintenance plans; ensures the committee has members with engineering and architectural experience and conducts consultations with members of the Legislative Assembly and other occupants of the building; setting up processes to provide stable and secure funding of $10 million annually for the next 15 years, commencing in 2019; providing $2.5 million annually to pay for the up–ongoing maintenance beginning in 2034.
The government's intention with this bill is to meet the needs of both the public and all the stakeholders that use the Manitoba Legislature. We want to ensure that everyone has input and will be appointing a committee of capable Manitobans to advise the Legislative Assembly and the government on the restoration projects. And we'll consult with those stakeholders as plans are developed for the restoration.
Therefore, I encourage all members of the House representing–representatives or–of our commitment to the Manitoba Legislative Building stand for next 100 years.
On a final comment, as I believe this is the final bill that will be passed in the Manitoba Legislature, I do want to say thank you very much to a number of people. I want to say thank you to our Premier (Mr. Pallister), who has done a fabulous job, in terms of leading our province. I want to thank all our Cabinet ministers who I've served with over the last three and a half years with distinction. Thank you very much for all the work you do.
And, most importantly, I want to thank our caucus for everything that you've done to make it–there's–it's a talented group of individuals. It's a group that I truly would consider as team members and family in so many different ways where we support each other.
I also want to thank the political staff that supports us. I know the opposition have good political staff as well that supports them. I want to thank the civil servants, the deputy ministers, ADMs and directors of all levels of department for the advice they provide to us.
I want to thank the pages, as the table officers and the Legislative staff.
And I'd also, finally like to thank and wish everyone all the best in your future endeavours, whether you come back to this House. I wish you well, if there is an election coming soon or not, but I do want to say that we're all richer for serving together, specifically with our caucus but as a whole.
So I want to thank you, and I want to thank your service, Madam Speaker, for everything that you do on a daily basis.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto): Our caucus supports the passage of Bill 21, and this bill is a reminder that each of us in this House, whichever party we belong to and whichever community we represent, are merely passing through this place.
Some wise people suggested I should make this speech as if it would be my last in this Chamber, and while I'm reluctant to agree, as I always expect others to follow the letter and spirit of the law, that is clearly beyond my control, so I do have a few things I want to say.
I want to start by thanking my friends and, above all, my family. Having a spouse or a partner or a parent or even a child in politics is not easy. My family's made sacrifices for me and have been supportive the whole way.
When I was first elected, my daughters were not yet six and not yet four, and they have grown up with me serving in this role. And there's drawbacks: I made most of their concerts, parent-teacher conferences, games and dance recitals, but certainly not all. There's no question, though: my wife did the lion's share of the work. I am not just saying that because she's listening in from home.
Now, I kept my name and address in the phone book, or now online, the whole time as an MLA, even as Attorney General. Very few Manitobans abuse that privilege. Our kids, they get used to the protective service van driving up and down our street and our back lane, and there were times when we were told to be careful, but that was outweighed by the much greater advantages of public life. My wife and my kids have had the chance to see so much province and get to know so many amazing people.
For my friends in the NDP caucus, I know you appreciate just how many people in Manitoba are counting on you. We're a party that wins when we're smart and when we're inclusive.
And I know that most of you who are running again are going to be joined by many more in–whether it's a couple of weeks or a couple of months or another year and a half. And I've–other advice for all of you all, I'll continue to share, which I'm not going to put on the record here.
* (21:20)
To the members for Logan (Ms. Marcelino), for Wolseley (Mr. Altemeyer) and Fort Garry-Riverview (Mr. Allum), I wish you all the best as you also leave this place and as we say no more ball hockey across Ellice Avenue.
I've a few comments for government members as well. I've got to say, some of the most rewarding moments have been accomplishing things beyond the partisan. Things like the Healthy Kids, Healthy Futures taskforce. The taskforce on organ donation led by the member for Brandon West (Mr. Helwer). And maybe, above all, our successful efforts to host the Midwestern Legislative Conference in the summer of 2018.
And if there's any member over there that I would have to single out, you'll not be surprised to know it's the member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen), with whom I've shared one of the longest running shows in this Legislature. First we lined up against each other on Richard Cloutier's political panel on CJOB, and then I was–found him as critic for most of my time as Attorney General, and then we effectively just switched roles after 2016.
And early on in his tenure as minister of Health, I became his critic. He and I have played very similar roles in our caucuses. Few have debated more important things, yet few of us have been called upon more often to speak for 10 or 20 or 30 or even more minutes, sometimes about nothing at all.
I hope to watch NFL football with the member for St. Norbert (Mr. Reyes), as our team climbs the stairway to seven. I hope to drink beer out of boots with the member for Brandon East (Mr. Isleifson) again. And I've got to say–and I've got a few comments to make, it is a ridiculous thing for anyone in any party to stand up and complain in this House that someone else is saying something or making something political. That's our job and that's what we do here.
And I do regret, I truly regret that difference of opinion can become personal. I've been guilty of that and I've been the recipient of that too. In our parliamentary system, I must say, Madam Speaker, heckling, I think, always has a place. We're given great freedom to say whatever we want in this Chamber without proof.
Heckling opposition members who overstate their case or can't back up their claim is part of the process. So too is heckling ministers who cannot or will not answer questions. And sometimes heckling can even be funny.
I would hope that members will continue to work together to improve our rules. Governments are entitled to govern and the opposition is entitled to oppose, and those two realities have to be balanced.
I want to recognize the people of the West End, an incredible community filled with kindness and diversity and courage and hope. And 15 years ago, the voters of Minto entrusted a big white lawyer–imagine that–to be their voice in this place, and I hope I've succeeded in having their back.
I've never considered time in schools or churches or community centres, public spaces or small businesses, or most of all, on doorsteps, to be a waste of time. And I always say I learned something new every day and I mean it. At the 2016 election–for obvious reasons, was the most difficult election–but Minto voters certainly came through for me and I do truly appreciate that.
There's a lot of people to recognize. I've been blessed with great staff over the years. In my office on Sargent I had Sara, Daniel, Lucia, Kelsey. And now Devon is the storefront face of a busy office where people come needing real help.
When I was appointed minister in 2008, I lucked out with amazing political and non-political staff. Greg Merner was my special assistant and his even keel was always helpful. Pratik Modha is my assistant for Liquor and Lotteries and we've covered pretty much every corner of the province.
Lisa laughed at me and took away the paper daybook I had used to keep appointments through 14 years of practising law and four years as an MLA, and she and Cindy kept me in line. And my deputy, Hugh Eliasson, was truly a godsend, Madam Speaker. A font of institutional knowledge and calm wisdom. It was invaluable.
As Justice minister, I was served by deputies Jeff Schnoor and then Donna Miller, whose love for the law was evident. I was lucky to have Janis Bermel, Matt Schaubroeck and then Heather Laube as special assistants as Manitoba continued to punch above our weight on a national scene.
Heather and Elena staffed the office, including a huge volume of calls and letters and emails. Andrea Dyck and then Catherine Chambers served as my EAs, covering for me in the community.
I've always been supported by our caucus staff and our political staff, who work so hard in difficult conditions. I wish I had time to thank all the civil servants that perform so admirably. I'll name just two who recently retired: Greg Graceffo and Robert Manson, who to me exemplify what civil service is all about.
The executive team and the board members I worked with at Lotteries, Liquor and then MPI always have had the best interests of Manitobans at heart.
Our police services have had tremendous leaders. I was proud to work with Kevin Brosseau, Devon Clunis and Ian Grant, who served as progressive champions of effective policing.
I want to thank and recognize our Clerk and our table officers and everyone else who works to keep this institution running.
There were five MLAs who joined me in a tumultuous time in this Legislature and our lives. And when I said I was not running again, I was asked if I had any regrets about the steps that we took that led to my resignation as the Attorney General, which was the best job I ever had and the hardest decision I have ever made. I gave the same answer I give today and I'll give tomorrow. I regret we came up a little short of our goal. Had we been successful, this House would have looked a lot different, and however the 2016 election would have turned out–and nobody knows–I believe the last four and a half years would have provided a much better government for the people of Manitoba.
I learned a lot about what courage means and how it's a quality not easily found in others, but I sure found it in these five, as well as staff and others who were not prepared to hand over the province without a fight. And there's more to be said about this, but not here and not now.
I regret if the House doesn't convene before the next condolence motions. I won't be able to speak of my friend Clarence Pettersen, who [inaudible] with cancer last year. If you have a chance this summer when it's dark out, kick back and look up for one more star in the northern sky for Clarence.
And if, indeed, I am not back here the first Wednesday in October, on my feet, demanding Estimates be called, then I leave here with a full heart with pride in my accomplishments, with hope for a better future, a lot more friends than I had when I came here, and a few more enemies, too, and above all, the satisfaction I tried my best as I passed through here, as all of us do pass through this place.
I love Manitoba; I love Winnipeg, and I love some of you too.
So what comes next? Someday girl I don't know when / We're gonna get to that place / Where we really wanna go / And we'll walk in the sun / But 'til then tramps like us / Baby we were born to run.
Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.
An Honourable Member: A point of order? No? Okay.
Madam Speaker: According to the rules, there are no point of orders, so I don't think I can break that rule. I think I've broken a few throughout the day by allowing longer speeches, but I apologize for that.
Mr. Dougald Lamont (Leader of the Second Opposition): Madam Speaker, I won't try to top that at all. I just wanted to say I do want to thank everyone here, but–especially on this bill, actually, because occasionally I'll lie back in the long hours in the afternoon and look up and read, and I've wondered what some of these things have meant, but when you reflect of the statues that are overlooking us, that's Moses, that's Solon, and both are great symbols, but we also have symbols–Confucius, Lycurgus, Alfred, Justinian, Manu and I looked them up on my phone to find out what they were about, but they're actually representatives of laws from the entire–from around the world, that Confucius is from China, Manu is from India.
We have representations of wisdom and peace and justice and I sometimes reflect on the ways in which–it's–the discussions we're having are at odds with misericordia or sympathy and grace and all the other things that are around us.
There's also some parts which are–where the paint is clearly peeling, which is one of the reasons why I'm more than happy to support this bill, and it's an opportunity to occasionally return. We do have a–we have strange jobs. I often find that, but I–I've been honoured to be here and I'm actually going to be sad that I will not be able to work with many of you for longer than we would have otherwise.
But it's also worth recalling–it's also an opportunity to sometimes consider the reasons why we came into this life. I do find that there's always an opportunity to learn from everybody and to learn a day, and that's part of what makes this calling so very special, the opportunity to learn every day from each of you. There's always something we can do.
So we're happy to support this bill and thank you very much, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: I will now put the question on concurrence and third reading of Bill 21, The Legislative Building Centennial Restoration and Preservation Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? [Agreed]
I declare the motion carried.
An Honourable Member:
Point of order.
Point of Order
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a point of order.
Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I just want to put a few short words on the record to praise two departing NDP MLAs.
* (21:30)
To my colleague in Fort Garry-Riverview, I've heard it said of him, you know, that he's given it his all these past number of years, and certainly I can attest that even behind the scenes he's played a tremendous role as a mentor and, indeed, as a compatriot who wears his heart on his sleeve, so I do wish him all the best in what's next.
And to our colleague from Minto, that was a heck of a farewell address. I was very impressed when I first got to know him after the 2016 election. He came in immediately and he started researching and writing his own questions for question period. And I was watching him, thinking there's a guy who used to be the Attorney General of Manitoba, and he's humbled himself and he's now doing the very basic work of researching as an opposition critic.
I always like people who work hard for what they have, and it's probably the best compliment that I can give him, that he's truly lived up to that example. And so I want to thank him for his service to the party, to this Chamber, but, most importantly, to the people of Manitoba.
Madam Speaker: I would indicate that technically the member does not have a point of order, but we do appreciate his comments.
* * *
Madam Speaker: I am advised that Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor is about to arrive to grant royal assent to the bills. I am therefore interrupting the proceedings of the House for royal assent.
Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms (Mr. Ray Gislason): 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, Madam Speaker addressed Her Honour the Lieutenant Governor in the following words:
Madam Speaker: Your Honour:
The Legislative Assembly of Manitoba asks Your Honour to accept the following bills:
Clerk Assistant (Mr. Claude Michaud):
Bill 33 – The Interim Appropriation Act, 2019 (2); Loi no 2 de 2019 portant affectation anticipée de crédits
Clerk (Ms. Patricia Chaychuk): In Her Majesty's name, the Lieutenant Governor thanks the Legislative Assembly and assents to this bill.
Madam Speaker: Your Honour:
At this sitting, the Legislative Assembly has passed certain bills that I ask Your Honour to give assent to.
Clerk Assistant (Mr. Claude Michaud):
Bill 2 – The Municipal Amendment Act (Strengthening Codes of Conduct for Council Members); Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités (exigences accrues à l'égard des codes de conduite visant les conseillers)
Bill 6 – The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2018; Loi corrective de 2018
Bill 7 – The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Immediate Roadside Prohibitions); Loi modifiant le Code de la route (imposition immédiate de sanctions)
Bill 8 – The Referendum Act; Loi sur les référendums
Bill 9 – The Family Law Modernization Act; Loi sur la modernisation du droit de la famille
Bill 11 – The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Amendment Act (Cider and Cooler Sales at Beer Vendors); Loi modifiant la Loi sur la réglementation des alcools, des jeux et du cannabis (vente de cidre et de panachés par les vendeurs de bière)
Bill 13 – The Private Vocational Institutions Act; Loi sur les établissements d'enseignement professionnel privés
Bill 14 – The Reducing Red Tape and Improving Services Act, 2019; Loi de 2019 visant la réduction du fardeau administratif et l'amélioration des services
Bill 15 – The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Amendment Act (Cannabis Possession Restrictions); Loi modifiant la Loi sur la réglementation des alcools, des jeux et du cannabis (restrictions relatives à la possession de cannabis)
Bill 16 – The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2019; Loi d'exécution du budget de 2019 et modifiant diverses dispositions législatives en matière de fiscalité
Bill 17 – The Police Services Amendment Act (Institutional Safety Officers); Loi modifiant la Loi sur les services de police (agents de sécurité en établissement)
Bill 19 – The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la location à usage d'habitation
Bill 20 – The Courts Modernization Act (Various Acts Amended); Loi modifiant diverses lois en matière de modernisation des tribunaux
Bill 21 – The Legislative Building Centennial Restoration and Preservation Act; Loi sur la restauration et la préservation du Palais législatif marquant son centenaire
Bill 31 – The Tobacco Tax Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi de la taxe sur le tabac
Bill 207 – The Manitoba Conservation Officers Recognition Day Act; Loi sur la Journée de reconnaissance des agents de conservation du Manitoba
Bill 226 – The Presumption of Death and Declaration of Absence Act and Amendments to The Insurance Act; Loi sur la présomption de décès et la déclaration d'absence et modifiant la Loi sur les assurances
Bill 228 – The Sikh Heritage Month Act; Loi sur le Mois du patrimoine sikh
Bill 240 – The Elections Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi électorale
Clerk: In Her Majesty's name, Her Honour assents to these bills.
* (21:40)
Her Honour was then pleased to retire.
God Save the Queen was sung.
O Canada was sung.
Madam Speaker: That brings our session to a close, and from me, and I'm grateful to everybody also for complimenting our Leg. Assembly staff. We do have some incredible staff here in the building.
Our clerks deal with their jobs with great grace and patience, and I think we all recognize and appreciate how much you've done for us. So thank you.
And also to all the rest of the Assembly staff–there are a lot of them–it takes a number of people to make this place work as well as it does, and we do have a very well-functioning Legislative Assembly here and it is because of all the people that work here and the support that all of you give to them too.
So I appreciate it that everybody has acknowledged them, and I think it's well-deserved praise.
And to those members that won't be coming back here, all the best to all of you. It's not easy to–I'm sure–say goodbye, but times do happen. And we say goodbye to all of the rest that are going to have a busy summer. I hope that you do all have a great summer. I wish everybody the very best.
And the hour being past 5 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until October 2nd or at the call of the Chair.
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Monday, June 3, 2019
CONTENTS
Bill 243–The Climate and Green Plan Amendment Act (International Panel on Climate Change Targets)
Bill 245–The Prompt Payments in the Construction Industry Act
Special Olympics Awareness Week
Pulford Community Living Services
The Maples Constituency–Acknowledgements
Universal Access to Mifegymiso
Integrated Case Management System
Bill 33–The Interim Appropriation Act, 2019 (2)
Bill 33–The Interim Appropriation Act, 2019 (2)
Bill 33–The Interim Appropriation Act, 2019 (2)
Concurrence and Third Readings
Bill 33–The Interim Appropriation Act, 2019 (2)
Debate on Concurrence and Third Readings
Bill 19–The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act
Concurrence and Third Readings–Amended Bills
Bill 2–The Municipal Amendment Act (Strengthening Codes of Conduct for Council Members)
Concurrence and Third Readings
Bill 5–The Mental Health Amendment and Personal Health Information Amendment Act
Bill 6–The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2018
Bill 7–The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Immediate Roadside Prohibitions)
Concurrence and Third Readings–Amended Bills
Bill 9–The Family Law Modernization Act
Concurrence and Third Readings
Bill 13–The Private Vocational Institutions Act
Bill 14–The Reducing Red Tape and Improving Services Act, 2019
Bill 15–The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Amendment Act (Cannabis Possession Restrictions)
Concurrence and Third Readings–Amended Bills
Bill 16–The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2019
Bill 20–The Courts Modernization Act (Various Acts Amended)
Concurrence and Third Readings
Bill 21–The Legislative Building Centennial Restoration and Preservation Act
Bill 33 – The Interim Appropriation Act, 2019 (2)
Bill 2 – The Municipal Amendment Act (Strengthening Codes of Conduct for Council Members)
Bill 5 – The Mental Health Amendment and Personal Health Information Amendment Act
Bill 6 – The Statutes Correction and Minor Amendments Act, 2018
Bill 7 – The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Immediate Roadside Prohibitions)
Bill 9 – The Family Law Modernization Act
Bill 13 – The Private Vocational Institutions Act
Bill 14 – The Reducing Red Tape and Improving Services Act, 2019
Bill 15 – The Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Amendment Act (Cannabis Possession Restrictions)
Bill 16 – The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2019
Bill 17 – The Police Services Amendment Act (Institutional Safety Officers)
Bill 19 – The Residential Tenancies Amendment Act
Bill 20 – The Courts Modernization Act (Various Acts Amended)
Bill 21 – The Legislative Building Centennial Restoration and Preservation Act
Bill 31 – The Tobacco Tax Amendment Act
Bill 207 – The Manitoba Conservation Officers Recognition Day Act