LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Wednesday, October 6, 2021


The House met at 1:30 p.m.

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. Welcome back, everybody.

An Honourable Member: Welcome back to you.

Speaker's Statement    

Madam Speaker: Thank you, and I have a statement for the House.

      I must inform the House that Brian Pallister, the hon­our­able member for Fort Whyte, has resigned his seat in the House, effective October 4th, 2021. I am therefore tabling his resig­na­tion and my letter to the  Lieutenant Governor-in-Council, advising of the vacancy created in the House member­ship.

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): Could you please canvass members for leave to allow the House to imme­diately consider the Sessional Order which is currently printed on today's Notice Paper?

Madam Speaker: Is there leave to allow the House to imme­diately consider the Sessional Order which is currently on the notice paper–is there leave? [Agreed]

Government Motion

Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Friesen),

THAT the following Sessional Order applies for the Third Session of the 42nd Legislature, despite any other rule or practice of this House.

THAT in the event of a discrepancy between the orders and the Rules, Orders and Forms of Proceeding of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, the pro­visions of this Sessional Order are to apply.

Sitting dates and times

1.       To conclude the fall sittings of the Third Session of the 42nd Legislature the House shall sit on the following days, with the following start and end times:

(a)    Wednesday, October 6, 2021 from 1:30 p.m. until 6 p.m.;

(b)    Thursday, October 7, 2021 from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. to 5 p.m.;

(c)    Friday, October 8, 2021 from 10 a.m. to 2:30 p.m., and this day will include routine proceedings followed by orders of the day, government business;

(d)    Tuesday, October 12, 2021 from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. to 6 p.m.;

(e)    Wednesday, October 13, 2021 from 1:30 p.m. to 6 p.m., or until all estimates resolutions have been passed in the Committee of Supply, whichever is later;

(f)     Thursday, October 14, 2021 from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. and 1:30 p.m. until royal assent has been granted on all bills passed during the fall sittings.

Withdrawal of Designated Bills

2.       The following bills shall be withdrawn from the Order Paper effective on passage of the Sessional Order and will not proceed as House business:

(a)    Bill 16 – The Labour Relations Amendment Act;

(b)    Bill 35 – The Public Utilities Ratepayer Protection and Regulatory Reform Act (Various Acts Amended);

(c)    Bill 40 – The Manitoba Liquor and Lotteries Corporation Amendment and Liquor, Gaming and Cannabis Control Amendment Act;

(d)    Bill 57 – The Protection of Critical Infrastructure Act;

(e)    Bill 64 – The Education Modernization Act.

Rescinding the Question on a Private Member's Bill

3.    Despite the fact that on June 1, 2021, the question was put on second reading of Bill 237–The Elections Amendment Act, and that–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Goertzen: –a request for a recorded vote was–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Goertzen: –deferred, the question on that bill motion shall be rescinded, and the bill shall remain on the Order Paper until private members' business, debate on–under private members' busi­ness, debate on second readings, with an in­dication that the debate is open. Accordingly, the deferred vote on this question, scheduled for 11:55 a.m. on October 7, 2021, shall be cancelled.

House Business

4.       Despite appearing on the Notice Paper on October 6, 2021, the government shall be able to introduce The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act during routine pro­ceedings on that day, with the bill to be distributed to members on the same sitting day.

5.       On the following days the House is to resolve into Committee of Supply during orders of the day, government business:

(a)    Wednesday, October 6, 2021;

(b)    Friday, October 8, 2021;

(c)    Tuesday, October 12, 2021;

(d)    Wednesday, October 13, 2021, and on this day at 6 p.m.,

                        (i)      the Chairpersons of the Committee of Supply in this section shall inter­rupt debate and put the question immediately, without debate, on any remaining estimates resolutions,

                      (ii)      for any requested recorded votes the division bells shall ring for no more than one minute on each question and the committee and the House shall rise following the con­sideration of the last resolution.

6.       On Thursday, October 7, 2021:

(a)    during the first hour of orders of the day, private members' business, the House shall consider second reading of Bill 232 – The Emancipation Day Act, with the Speaker to interrupt debate and put the question at 10:55 a.m.;

(b)    during orders of the day, government busi­ness, the House shall consider second reading of Bill 72 – The Disability Support Act and Amendments to The Manitoba Assistance Act, with the Speaker to interrupt debate and put the question at 4:45 p.m.

7.       On Tuesday, October 12, 2021 at 6:30 p.m. the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development will meet to consider the following bills:

(a)    Bill 72 – The Disability Support Act and Amendments to The Manitoba Assistance Act;

(b)    Bill 232 – The Emancipation Day Act.

8.       On Thursday, October 14, 2021:

(a)    during the first hour of orders of the day, private members' business, the House shall consider concurrence and third reading of Bill 232–The Emancipation Day Act, with the Speaker to interrupt debate and put the question at 10:55 a.m.;

(b)    during orders of the day, government busi­ness, the House shall consider second reading of The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act;

(c)    at 4 p.m. the Speaker shall interrupt pro­ceedings. The Speaker, or the Chairperson of Committee of the Whole and Committee of Supply, shall then put the question, without debate, on the following items, in this order:

                        (i)      all remaining stages of the Main and  Capital process as set out in  appendix D of the Rules, Orders and  Forms of Proceeding of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, including The Loan Act, The Appropriation Act and all re­main­­­­ing stages of The Budget Implemen­tation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act,

                      (ii)      concurrence and third reading of Bill 72–The Disability Support Act and Amendments to The Manitoba Assistance Act;

(d)    despite item 8(c), the concurrence motion under consideration in the Committee of Supply (step 4 of the Main and Capital process) shall be debated for 90 minutes, and once that time has expired the Chairperson shall interrupt debate to put the question;

(e)    after 10 p.m. the division bells shall ring for no more than one minute on any recorded vote;

(f)     the House shall not rise until royal assent has been granted on all bills passed during the fall sittings.

* (13:40)

General Provisions

9.       A recorded division on any item referred to in this Sessional Order cannot be deferred.

10.   During the proceedings outlined in items 5(d)(i) and 8(c), matters of privilege and points of order will be deferred until 1:30 p.m. on the next sitting day (with the exception of the opening day of a new session, in which case the deferral will extend to the following sitting day at 1:30 p.m.).

11.   After adoption by the House, this Sessional Order may be amended only by

(a)    unanimous consent of the House;

(b)    passage of a subsequent Sessional Order by the House; or

(c)    written agreement of both House leaders, if the House is not sitting.

12.   This Sessional Order will expire when the House rises on October 14, 2021.

      And if members wish me to read this again, the answer is no.

Madam Speaker: It has been moved by the hon­our­able Gov­ern­ment House Leader (Mr. Goertzen) and seconded by the hon­our­able Minister of Justice (Mr. Friesen) that the following Sessional Order be adopted–

An Honourable Member: Dispense.

Madam Speaker: Dispense? Thank you.

      Is there any debate on the sessional order?

      Seeing no debate, is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed]

      Intro­duction–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order. Order.

Introduction of Bills

Bill 74–The Budget Implementation
and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2021

Hon. Scott Fielding (Minister of Finance): I move, seconded by the Minister of Families (Ms. Squires), that Bill 74, The Budget Imple­men­ta­tion and Tax Statutes Amend­ment Act, 2021 be now read a first time.

Motion presented.

Mr. Fielding: I am pleased to speak to Bill 74, The Budget Imple­men­ta­tion and Tax Statutes Amend­ment Act, 2021.

      The bill implements tax amend­ments and other measures announced in the 2021 Manitoba Budget that supports our summary budgeting process. These measures lower taxes and costs for Manitobans and busi­nesses while enhancing the government's delivery of services.

      BITSA will also support economic growth and increase em­ploy­ment for workers as we recover from the COVID­-19 pandemic.

Madam Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion? Agreed? [Agreed]

Committee Reports

Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs


Ninth Report

Mr. Andrew Smith (Chairperson): Madam Speaker, I wish to present the ninth report on Standing Com­mit­tee on Legis­lative Affairs.

Clerk (Ms. Patricia Chaychuk): Your Standing Com­mit­tee On Legis­lative Affairs–

An Honourable Member: Dispense.

Madam Speaker: Dispense.

Your Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs presents the following as its Ninth Report.

Meetings

Your Committee met on July 28, 2021 at 1 p.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building:

Matters under Consideration

·         Reappointment of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner and Information and Privacy Adjudicator.

Committee Membership

As per the Sessional Order passed by the House on October 7, 2020, amended on November 19, 2020, December 3, 2020 and further amended on May 18, 2021, Rule 83(2) was waived for the July 28, 2021 meeting, reducing the membership to six Members (4 Government and 2 Official Opposition).

·         Ms. Fontaine

·         Hon. Mr. Goertzen

·         Mr. Isleifson

·         Ms. Marcelino

·         Mr. Smith (Lagimodière)

·         Mr. Teitsma

Your Committee elected Mr. Smith (Lagimodière) as the Chairperson.

Your Committee elected Mr. Teitsma as the Vice-Chairperson.

Motions

Your Committee agreed to the following motions:

·         THAT the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs recommends to the President of Executive Council that Jeffrey Schnoor be reappointed as the Conflict of Interest Commissioner and the Information and Privacy Adjudicator for a term not to exceed three years from date of commencement.

·         THAT the Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs authorize the Chairperson to advise the Speaker of the reappointment of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner and Information and Privacy Adjudicator once the offer has been accepted, and to ask the Speaker to inform all MLAs in writing of this appointment prior to presentation of the committee report to the Assembly.

Mr. Smith: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by  the  hon­our­able member from Rossmere, that the report of the com­mit­tee be received.

Motion agreed to.

Standing Committee on Crown Corporations


First Report

Mr. Shannon Martin (Vice-Chairperson): Madam Speaker, I wish to present the first report of the Standing Com­mit­tee on Crown Cor­por­ations.

Clerk: Your Standing Com­mit­tee on Crown Cor­por­ations–

An Honourable Member: Dispense.

Madam Speaker: Dispense.

Your Standing Committee on CROWN CORPORATIONS presents the following as its First Report.

Meetings

Your Committee met on the following occasions in the Legislative Building:

·         June 4, 2020 (2nd Session – 42nd Legislature)

·         June 10, 2021 (3rd Session – 42nd Legislature)

Matters under Consideration

·         Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2018

·         Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2018

·         Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2019

·         Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2019

·         Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2020

·         Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2020

Committee Membership

As per the Sessional Order passed by the House on October 7, 2020, amended on November 19, 2020, December 3, 2020, and May 18, 2021, Rule 83(2) was waived for the June 4, 2020 and June 10, 2021 meetings, reducing the membership to six Members (4 Government and 2 Official Opposition).

Committee Membership for the June 4, 2020 meeting:

·         Hon. Mrs. Guillemard

·         Mr. Kinew

·         Ms. Morley-Lecomte

·         Mr. Sandhu

·         Mr. Smook (Chairperson)

·         Hon. Mr. Wharton

·         Your Committee elected Ms. Morley-Lecomte as the Vice-Chairperson.

Committee Membership for the June 10, 2021 meeting:

·         Mr. Kinew

·         Mr. Lagimodiere

·         Mr. Martin

·         Mr. Sandhu

·         Hon. Mr. Schuler

·         Hon. Mr. Wharton

·         Your Committee elected Mr. Lagimodiere as the Chairperson.

·         Your Committee elected Mr. Martin as the Vice-Chairperson.

Officials Speaking on Record at the June 4, 2020 meeting:

·         Mr. Ben Graham – President and Chief Executive Officer, Manitoba Public Insurance

·         Dr. Michael Sullivan – Chair of the Board of Directors, Manitoba Public Insurance

Officials Speaking on Record at the June 10, 2021 meeting:

·         Mr. Eric Herbelin, President and Chief Executive Officer, Manitoba Public Insurance

·         Dr. Michael Sullivan, Chair of the Board of Directors, Manitoba Public Insurance

Non-Committee Members Speaking on Record at the June 4, 2020 meeting:

·         Mr. Sala

·         Mr. Lamont

Reports Considered and Passed

Your Committee considered and passed the following reports as presented:

·         Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2018

·         Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2018

·         Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2019

·         Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2019

·         Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2020

·         Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2020

Mr. Martin: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by   the hon­our­able member for Dawson Trail (Mr. Lagassé), that the report of the committee be received.

Motion agreed to.

Standing Committee on Crown Corporations


Second Report

Ms. Janice Morley-Lecomte (Vice-Chairperson): Madam Speaker, I wish to present the second report of the Standing Com­mit­tee on Crown Cor­por­ations.

Clerk: Your Standing Com­mit­tee on Crown Cor­por­ations–

Some Honourable Members: Dispense.

Madam Speaker: Dispense.

Your Standing Committee on Crown Corporations presents the following as its Second Report.

Meetings

Your Committee met on June 21, 2021 at 1 p.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building.

Matters under Consideration

·         Annual Report of Manitoba Liquor & Lotteries for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2020

Committee Membership

As per the Sessional Order passed by the House on October 7, 2020, and amended on November 19, 2020; December 3, 2020; and May 18, 2021, Rule 83(2) was waived for the June 21, 2021 meeting, reducing the membership to six Members (4 Government and 2 Official Opposition).

·         Mr. Kinew

·         Mr. Lagimodiere (Chairperson)

·         Ms. Morley-Lecomte

·         Hon. Mr. Pedersen

·         Mr. Sala

·         Hon. Mr. Wharton

Your Committee elected Ms. Morley-Lecomte as the Vice-Chairperson.

Officials Speaking on Record

·         Mr. Manny Atwal, President & CEO, Manitoba Liquor & Lotteries

Reports Considered and Passed

Your Committee considered and passed the following report as presented:

·         Annual Report of Manitoba Liquor & Lotteries for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2020

Ms. Morley-Lecomte: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon­our­able member for Dawson Trail (Mr. Lagassé), that the report of the com­mit­tee be received.

Motion agreed to.

Standing Committee on Crown Corporations


Third Report

Ms. Janice Morley-Lecomte (Vice-Chairperson): Madam Speaker, I wish to present the third report of the Standing Com­mit­tee on Crown Cor­por­ations.

Clerk: Your Standing Com­mit­tee on Crown Cor­por­ations–

Some Honourable Members: Dispense.

Madam Speaker: Dispense.

Your Standing Committee on Crown Corporations presents the following as its Third Report.

Meetings

Your Committee met on June 29, 2021 at 9 a.m. in Room 255 of the Legislative Building.

Matters under Consideration

·         Annual Report of the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2020

Committee Membership

As per the Sessional Order passed by the House on October 7, 2020, and amended on November 19, 2020; December 3, 2020; and May 18, 2021, Rule 83(2) was waived for the June 29, 2021 meeting, reducing the membership to six Members (4 Government and 2 Official Opposition).

·         Mr. Kinew

·         Mr. Lagimodiere (Chairperson)

·         Ms. Morley-Lecomte (Vice-Chairperson)

·         Mr. Sala

·         Hon. Mr. Schuler

·         Hon. Mr. Wharton

Officials Speaking on Record

·         Jay Grewal, President & Chief Executive Officer, Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board

Reports Considered and Passed

Your Committee considered and passed the following report as presented:

·         Annual Report of the Manitoba Hydro-Electric Board for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2020

Ms. Morley-Lecomte: Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon­our­able member for Borderland (Mr. Guenter), that the report of the com­mit­tee be received.

Motion agreed to.

Tabling of Reports

Madam Speaker: Tabling of reports, and I have the following reports to table:

      The first one is the 'remount'–report of Amounts Claimed and Paid pursuant to Section 4 of the Members' Salaries, Allowances, and Retirement Plans  Disclosure Regula­tion for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2021; the second one is the   report   on amounts paid or payable to members   of   the   Legislative Assembly pursuant to subsections 52.27(1) and (2) of The Legis­lative Assembly Act for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2021; and the final tabling is the Manitoba Legis­lative Building Long-Term Restoration and Preservation Plan and Annual Imple­men­ta­tion Plan for the fiscal years 2021-22 to 2029-30.

Ministerial Statements

Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women
and Girls Awareness Day

Hon. Alan Lagimodiere (Minister of Indigenous Reconciliation and Northern Relations): Madam Speaker, in 2017, the Manitoba government passed Bill 221 to proclaim October 4th of each year as Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls Awareness Day, making Manitoba the first province to proclaim October 4th as an official day.

      This past Monday, I was humbled to attend the MMIWG Awareness Day and express my sincerest respect to the families, friends and survivors who have experienced terrible tragedy. We mourn the loss of Indigenous women, girls and 2SLGBTQQIA peoples, and honour the strength and courage of survivors and those that continue to experience trauma and violence.

      We also acknowledge and remember the people who have gone missing and who have been taken from us far too soon. I encourage all Manitobans to speak out against violence against Indigenous women, girls and 2SLGBTQQIA people.

      More than 12,000 Indigenous women and girls in Canada have gone missing or have been murdered since the 1980s, and for decades, families and loved ones have grieved and called for greater recognition of the crisis of violence against Indigenous women and girls and 2SLGBTQQIA people.

      The Legislative Building was lit on October 4th with a symbolic red dress. The red dress is a visual reminder of the tragedy of missing and murdered Indigenous women, girls and 2SLGBTQQIA people across Canada and is a powerful symbol of hope and acknowledgement.

      Madam Speaker, our government is committed to advancing truth and reconciliation and to bring greater awareness and focus with respect to addressing violence against Indigenous women, girls and two-spirited individuals.

* (13:50)

      On September 30th, the first National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, I was honoured to attend Orange Shirt Day events in Thompson with many leaders and community partners. One of the most important issues they raised was the tragedies of MMIWG, reaffirm our government's commitment to justice for the victims, survivors and their families.

      We all have a role to play in advancing truth and reconciliation. Our government is committed to taking concrete action, in partnership with Indigenous leaders, families, survivors, communities and all levels of government towards a world free of gender-based violence.

      Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: And I would indicate that the required 90 minutes notice prior to routine proceedings had been provided in accordance with rule 26(2).

Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): October 4th marks the official day to recognize and honour missing and murdered Indigenous women, girls and two-spirit here in Manitoba and across our territories in Canada. It's a day to recognize not only Manitoba's MMIWG2S and their families, but all families across Canada coast to coast to coast.

      It's a day to show compassion, kindness and support to MMIWG families who often feel alone and forgotten and who ap­pre­ciate the shows of solidarity and honour for their missing or murdered loved one. It's a day to commit to real action at addressing the epidemic levels of violence against Indigenous women, girls and two-spirited.

      On Monday, the member for Fort Rouge (Mr. Kinew) and I had the op­por­tun­ity and the honour to be in Selkirk emceeing a beautiful ceremony officially unveiling a mural in Selkirk. The 'murial'–the mural is in honour of MMIWG2S families and it was visioned by Jeannie White Bird. And she's had this vision since 2008. And so it was a beautiful day on Monday for us to be able to sit and–with MMIWG family members, leadership and elders at this unveiling.

      Throughout the day, across Manitoba, there were so many events and activities taking place, including a sunrise ceremony at The Forks, Soles On Fire Run/Walk at The Forks and a vigil and feast at the monument. There were events in Thompson and The Pas as well, Madam Speaker.

      I want to just say miigwech to Angela Lavallee, Sandra DeLaronde, Hilda Anderson-Pyrz, Alaya McIvor and Gerri McPherson-Pangman and every­body who partici­pated in honouring and organizing events for October 4th.

      Madam Speaker, I would also be remiss if I didn't point out that support and solidarity with families of MMIWG is more than just words; it's more than just posts on social media. It requires real action. It requires financial supports to deal with the underlying issues that contribute to missing and murdered Indigenous women, girls and two-spirit.

      Finally, Madam Speaker, I would dedicate my min­is­terial statement today to Diem Saunders, formerly known as Delilah Saunders, who is the sister of Loretta Saunders, who was murdered in 2014 in Halifax–

Madam Speaker: The member's time has expired.

An Honourable Member: Leave.

Madam Speaker: Is there leave to allow the member to complete her min­is­terial statement? [Agreed]

Ms. Fontaine: I just want to dedicate this min­is­terial statement to her. She did so much work in honour of her sister, Loretta Saunders, who was pregnant when she was murdered in 2014 and, tragically, she's just lost her life as well.

      Miigwech.

Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Tyndall Park): Madam Speaker, I seek leave to speak in response to the minister's statement.

Madam Speaker: Does the member have leave to respond to the statement? [Agreed]

Ms. Lamoureux: It's my solemn honour to speak virtually here today in response to the min­is­terial statement, Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls Honouring and Awareness Day.

      It should be no surprise to any of us the inter­generational trauma that exists because of the role governments have had on many files, whether that be Justice, CFS, Edu­ca­tion–are all intertwined within.

      As a result, survivors and others have done in­cred­ibly hard and painful work to provide us legis­lators with some tangible action items. That is why we must do all within our power to honour the work of many by imple­men­ting and promoting the recom­men­dations of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, as well as from the 2015 Truth and Recon­ciliation Com­mis­sion's final report.

      Madam Speaker, youth in our CFS system are con­sistently the highest rate of missing persons in Manitoba, and some of them never come home. Reuniting families and reducing the number of children in care is one of the most im­por­tant issues we face to ensure that Indigenous youth are safe.

And, Madam Speaker, for vul­ner­able women, girls, non-binary and two-spirited individuals, there are often nowhere to go during times of crisis. Those who have nowhere to turn when they want to or have the op­por­tun­ity to and those who face violence at home can feel trapped in their circum­stances.

      We know that a person's crisis does not work around a 9-to-5 schedule, and that is why we know the role that ac­ces­si­ble com­mu­nity support, 24-hour safe places can play for safer com­mu­nities and pro­tec­tion of vul­ner­able Manitobans.

      We need to keep families together. We need to reunite them and reduce the number of children in care. This is one of the most im­por­tant issues we all face to ensure that Indigenous youth are safe. We must continue to promote the stories of the in­cred­ible Indigenous women, girls, non-binary and two-spirit individuals because these voices have to be heard. Madam Speaker, it's painful to hear to these stories; however, we need to in order to understand the truth.

      Miigwech, thank you and merci.

Madam Speaker: The hon­our­able First Minister, 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 First Minister please pro­ceed with his statement.

Brian Pallister

Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Premier): On September 1st, Brian Pallister resigned as the 22nd premier of Manitoba. On Monday this week, he resigned as the MLA for Fort Whyte, ending nearly three decades of elected life.

This Legislature has traditionally recog­nized the service of party leaders and premiers. I have witnessed and been part of tributes to Gary Filmon, Gary Doer, Greg Selinger, Stuart Murray and Hugh McFadyen. It is the best part of this place that we recog­nize across party lines the sacrifice that is made by elected repre­sen­tatives. It is the common thread that runs through each of us.

      Mr. Pallister's resig­na­tion closes a public life that has gone from the Manitoba Legislature to Parliament in Ottawa and back to the Manitoba Legislature. It began in the fall of 1992 when he won a by-election in Portage la Prairie, his much beloved hometown. His wife Esther and he decided that it was im­por­tant that they run in the election to help the com­mu­nity, which had lost a number of jobs to the closure of plants and industry.

Five years later, Mr. Pallister took a run at federal politics and, after one suc­cess­ful bid, he was elected to Parliament under the banner of the Canadian Alliance Party where he would serve, eventually, as a Conservative MP following the reunification of political parties until 2008.

      In 2012, Brian Pallister returned to prov­incial politics, being elected as the leader of the Manitoba Progressive Conservative Party. He dedi­cated himself to being an aggressive op­posi­tion leader and com­mitted himself to rebuilding the party financially and structurally.

      After four years in op­posi­tion, in 2016, he led the Progressive Conservative Party to the largest majority gov­ern­ment in Manitoba in a century and, in 2019, to the second largest majority gov­ern­ment. During those electoral mandates, the PST was reduced, edu­ca­tion taxes reduced, and the budget was balanced while maintaining record invest­ments in health, edu­ca­tion and investing historical amounts in infra­structure.

      Like all leaders around the world, the past 18 months have been in­cred­ibly challenging and emotionally draining. The pandemic has forced elected leaders to make decisions that have divided society deeply. Those have come at a personal cost to everyone, including those in elected life, and they took their toll on Mr. Pallister and his family as well.

      Members of this Assembly know the challenge of elected life. Whether in op­posi­tion or in gov­ern­ment, we share that common ex­per­ience. Every elected person who has sat in this Chamber for more than 100 years has ex­per­ienced those challenges, and as much as ever during these past 18 months.

* (14:00)

In my 18 years in this Assembly, I can say without reservation that almost everyone I've encountered on both side of this Chamber have done their best to make Manitoba a better place. The way in which that is achieved is a matter of debate between political parties, but the motivation should not be a matter of debate.

      Brian Pallister served with that motivation as an MLA, a provincial minister, a Member of Parliament and as premier. His sacrifice of time, his commitment to service is to be recognized.

      Politics is filled with many successes, many challenges, many setbacks, but it is worth the struggle. Theodore Roosevelt in 1910, in his famous speech called The Man in the Arena, spoke of the person who strived valiantly, although not perfectly; whose face was marred with sweat and blood, but who dared to achieve.

      Brian Pallister spent almost 30 years in that arena, and today, he has exited it. I know my colleagues all wish him well as he has greater time for the things and people that he loves.

      I'm not sure, but I have heard rumours that Brian Pallister may have a place down south somewhere. If that is true, my colleagues wish him many days of sunshine, safe hiking trails that he can adventure on with his wife Esther and daughters Quinn and Shawn.

      May the challenges of elected life fade into the distance, while the memories of achievements be forever vivid. We thank him for his service as Manitoba's 22nd premier and for his 30 years in elected life.

Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): I first met Brian Pallister in 2013 or 2014. We were at the Uni­ver­sity of Winnipeg's Duff Roblin dinner. It's a large banquet, gala, dinner-type setting at the Hotel Fort Garry, and I was standing there talking with a group of people and Mr. Pallister came up behind me. He grabbed me by the arm, he leaned in close and he said: Wab, you'd make a hell of an MLA.

      I'd like to think that I've proven him right over the years, though, perhaps, for a different party than the one he had in mind at the time.

      We didn't agree on much, and we were at odds quite a bit this past summer and through­out the pandemic especially. But I would like to acknowl­edge his service in public life. He was a member of the Filmon gov­ern­ment as an MLA and minister. He was a member of the Harper gov­ern­ment and, of course, he was both an op­posi­tion leader and a premier here more recently.

      And so in acknowl­edging that, I want to say to him and to Esther and to their family, all the best in what lies ahead.

      And to the remaining PCs who now try and distance them­selves from his legacy, good luck.

Mr. Dougald Lamont (St. Boniface): I ask for leave to speak in response to the minister's statement.

Madam Speaker: Is there leave for the member to speak in response to the min­is­terial statement? [Agreed]

Mr. Lamont: Choosing a life in public service and especially accepting the responsibilities of a leader is a challenge. It means you are responsible not just for your own decisions and actions, but for those of others as well. Your comments and your life may be placed under a microscope.

And I remember attending, actually, at the Uni­ver­sity of Winnipeg, Paul Thomas was receiving an honorary degree and he talked about how good leadership requires good followership.

      And I had many fundamental disagreements with the premier. That's certainly no secret. When it comes to politics and policy, I think sometimes we would have not agreed on the colour of the sky. We have different world views; that's why we are in different parties.

      Mr. Pallister had a vision, though. I think he deserves–it is not a vision I agreed with, but he had a vision. He had things he wanted to accom­plish and he did everything in his power to make them happen. We did everything we could to oppose him. I didn't agree with them, but his competitive drive and his vision absolutely cannot be denied.

      And I will say, he–I also think he did change and grow over the years. When you look at some of his positions, that he did actually change, as we all hope we can.

And my personal interactions with him were always very pleasant. I remember coming to the Legislature with two of my children. I just ran into him in the hallway. He greeted me and my family very warmly and it was one of those–one–disarming and really welcome moments in politics. And meeting his wife and hearing him talk about his children at events, it's clear he loved them very, very much.

      And even during the pandemic, it's im­por­tant to remember he lost a sister and, like so many Manitobans, could not attend the funeral because–could not have a proper funeral. So he had to mourn, as so many other Manitobans did, in this very tough time.

      And I think that's the reality of politicians, the people you see on TV or they're–hear on the radio or on the Internet: we all have a humanity that often goes unseen, and it's not just the people we think that are on our side or that we agree with.

The discussion sometimes comes up with calling somebody in an opponent or an enemy–and words do matter because I think when you call an enemy, it means you can justify doing anything to beat them. And, I think, with an opponent, it means it's more like a hockey game that at the end of the game, we shake hands because we recog­nize we all have to live and work together and maybe play again.

      And I think that's–the division in our politics is partly because we dehumanize our opponents when recog­nizing that humanity is what is required to bridge that divide or at least make greater under­standing and empathy possible.

So it should go without saying, the Legislature will be very different and politics will be very different without Mr. Pallister–possibly less exciting–but there's no denying he left his mark on Manitoba, on the PC Party. And on behalf of the Manitoba Liberal caucus and Manitoba Liberals, we wish him and his family well for a long and happy retirement.

      Thank you. Merci.

Members' Statements

Fire Pre­ven­tion Week

Mr. Dennis Smook (La Vérendrye): This year, October 3rd to the 9th is Fire Prevention Week. There are many ways that families can prepare to make their homes fire safe.

      This year, the focus of Fire Prevention Week is on knowing or learning the distinct sounds smoke and carbon monoxide alarms make. If there is a beep or a chirp coming out of your smoke or carbon monoxide alarm, knowing the difference can save you, your home and your family. Make sure everyone in the home understands the sounds of the smoke and carbon monoxide alarms and knows how to respond.

      Alarms are devices that do not last forever. All smoke alarms must be replaced after 10 years and CO2 alarms also have end-of-life sounds that vary by manufacturer. A single chirp every 30 or 60 seconds means the battery is low and must be replaced.

      Having a fire plan for your home and everyone in that home knowing what to do can make the dif­ference between safety and tragedy. Make your home fire safe today. To learn more, visit NFPA's website at www.firepreventionweek.org.

      If you don't have a plan, make one today.

      Thank you.

Abortion Protest Buffer Zone Act

Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): This past Saturday, in concert with states all across the US, Manitobans stood in front of this Legislature in solidarity with our relatives in Texas, now under the most restrictive, archaic abortion regime.

      Texas is not alone in its regressive, oppressive agenda. At least 12 other US States have similar laws or are contemplating–said. These laws are all meant to open the Roe v. Wade decision and, on December 1st of this year, the US Supreme Court will hear a case from Mississippi challenging Roe v. Wade.

      Why does this matter here in Manitoba and across Canada?

      Because just this past June, federal Conservative MPs put forward anti-abortion, anti-choice legis­lation–the 7th time since 2007–always voted down, but given the chance, these same Con­ser­vative MPs wouldn't hesitate to enact laws banning abortion in Canada.

      In Manitoba, we've had Health ministers that couldn't even say the word abortion and several PC MLAs attending anti-choice rallies. It took the PC caucus three years to finally approve Mifegymiso and fully paying for it.

      In fact, Manitoba has more pregnancy crisis centres than we do centres offering abortion and, as recently as 2019, this PC government gave almost $17,000 of financial support to a pregnancy crisis centre.

* (14:10)

      And every single one of these PC caucus members have stood and voted down my abortion buffer zone. Why? Because they care more about capitulating to their base than they do protecting Manitobans.

Next Thursday, we will vote on my abortion buffer zone bill again. I encourage citizens to email or tweet at their PC MLAs to demand that they pass the abortion buffer zone act.

      Miigwech.

Kyle Waczko

Mr. Bob Lagassé (Dawson Trail): Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure today to present Kyle Waczko.

      Kyle and his wife, Rebecca, of 13 years, along with their newborn daughter, moved from Winnipeg, Manitoba, to a five-acre hobby farm near Giroux.

      He was returning to his roots as a farm boy and the thought of his infant daughter's future made him rethink his relationship with the planet.

      Kyle has, over the years, worked as a commercial plumber for Randall plumbing. He has also been passionate and relentless–way relentless when it comes to his work with Ducks Unlimited. Con­sistently following their mission, he continually strives to raise important funds for wildlife con­servation. It comes at no surprise that most recently, Kyle was named Ducks Unlimited Volunteer of the Year here in Manitoba.

      Kyle volunteers as a firefighter and is an active advocate for childhood cancer. Cancer awareness hits close to home, as the son of his wife's friend is battling for his health. Kyle recently took part in the Great Cycle Challenge of Canada to fight kids' cancer. Kyle started out donating blood, which then turned into Kyle hitting a $500 financial fundraising mark by the beginning of June. Today, he has surpassed $4,000 and out of 1,000 riders he is third in the province of Manitoba for fundraising.

      Kyle's enthusiasm for improving the future of our planet is impressive as he extends his concerns to his family, friends and the entire community.

      Please join me in recog­nizing and congratulating yet another remarkable Dawson Trail hero, Kyle Waczko.

Dave Rundle

Mr. Ian Bushie (Keewatinook):      Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay honour to a true survivor, Mr. Dave Rundle.

      Dave's grandfather, Chief David Rundle of Norway House, who he is named after, was an original signatory to Treaty 5.

      In 1955, at the age of 10, Dave was taken away to  the Fort Alexander residential school where he was  forced to attend for the next five years of his life. While I could not begin to speak of and share Dave's residential school experiences, I would en­courage everyone to read the article in the July 4, 2021 Winnipeg Free Press, to read first-hand some of Dave's sharings.

      Dave did not let the experience he suffered at residential school define his life and who he would become. Dave has spent his entire life giving back to his family, his community and his people. Next week, Dave will celebrate his 76th birthday, and in his career Dave has spent over 50-plus years working to give Indigenous people a better life.

      I first met Dave when I was just a young boy, and his career led him to be the executive director of Southeast Child and Family Services. Dave loved to interact with people and com­mu­nities. It was one of these community trips that once again changed Dave's life.

      In December 1997, Dave was aboard a plane that crashed in Little Grand Rapids. Dave was among the 13 survivors but, tragically, four people lost their lives that day. And as I share this, my thoughts once again go out to those families that lost loved ones.

      Today, Dave, along with his wife Del, who has been a registered nurse for over 50 years, continues to give back to the com­mu­nity.

      At 75 years old, Dave works with the Island Lake First Nation communities, and later this month will also take on a role of native language teacher, a true testament to Dave wanting to give back and do his part to ensure our culture and language survives.

      As a pro­fes­sional, Dave is contributing; as an elder, Dave is teaching and sharing; and as a child, he mattered.

      In closing, Madam Speaker, Dave is not telling stories, Dave is sharing his life and his life experiences. Dave Rundle is a true survivor in every sense of the word.

      Miigwech, Dave, for sharing your life with us to ensure we will never forget your experience and con­tributions. Keep up the great work.

      Miigwech.

Community Recognition During Pandemic

Ms. Eileen Clarke (Agassiz): Madam Speaker, it's good to see you.

      Madam Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to recognize and acknowledge the many health-care workers, educators and business owners, not only in my constituency but right across the province. COVID has added stress on our health system, in our classrooms and brought forward many changes to businesses and organizations. There are so many people on the front lines as well as behind the scenes to ensure the proper sanitation measures were and are taken, adequate care provided, services maintained and a level of education uninterrupted.

      We've been navigating uncharted waters for a very long period of time and many have had to adapt to new work environments, learn new skills, advance in technology and endure long, extended workdays. I recognize the many challenges that business and organizations have had to adhere to and appreciate all the efforts and sacrifices many Manitobans have had to make.

      Health-care workers have faced the biggest and most significant burden of COVID‑19 pandemic, many of which are our family, our friends and our neighbours. We've seen the fatigue; we've heard the worry-weary voices as we listen to heart-wrenching experiences, and we see the stress taking hold of many. But in spite of it all, these workers get up and go back to work every day.

      Although there is a lot of anger and frustration during this pandemic, there have been some positive changes that have come to be. Many retail busi­nesses have had to explore other ways of marketing and doing business, even create new products that otherwise may not have happened. Many teachers have provided new delivery methods in our class­rooms with added technology and found new ways to engage the students. The dedication and efforts of teachers helped many students have a successful year in unordinary times. On behalf of all members of this Assembly, I would like to say thank you to the many businesses and organizations for their continued efforts in maintaining business and to the many health-care providers for taking care of our loved ones during the COVID pandemic, and to the teachers and educated who are in the classrooms and continue to encourage and teach our young people.

      This hasn't–been an unprecedented time in our history, and you have all gone above and beyond the call of duty every day.

To those in business, health  care and edu­ca­tion, a big thank you and a shout-out for your hard work and continued team efforts to ensure the health, safety and well-being of 'manaltobans' is maintained.

      Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Speaker's Statement

Madam Speaker: I now have an op­por­tun­ity to intro­duce you to some people, and they are our pages for this next period of time. And it looks like I've lost the two from the front, so I'm just going to start at the north entrance. I'm going to intro­duce to you 10 students who have been selected to serve as pages for this session, and I would ask you all to hold your applause until I have completed the intro­ductions.

      So, at the north entrance–and we are going to do this one at a time so that we can control traffic here. So at the north entrance: we have Michaela Callender from St. John's High School; Ms. Chelsea Capellan from Springs Christian Academy; we have Mr. Ethan De Brincat from Miles Macdonell Collegiate; we have  Ms. Lien Huynh from Collège Churchill; we have Mr. Ashton McIver from Murdoch Mackay Collegiate; we have Ms. Divya Sharma from Fort Richmond Collegiate; we have Mr. Prabhnoor Singh from the Uni­ver­sity Of Winnipeg Collegiate; we have Mr. Quirin Stetefeld from Fort Richmond Collegiate; and to my right, we have Ms. Abrianna Graham from Collège Béliveau; and to my left, we have Ms. Taylor Keen from Miles MacDonell Collegiate.

      So please help me to welcome and encourage these young pages.

      Thank you. I would like to draw your attention now to the public gallery, where the six individuals who are serving on the Manitoba Legis­lative Internship Program for the 2021-2022 year are seated.

      In accordance with esta­blished practice, three interns were assigned to the gov­ern­ment caucus and three to the official op­posi­tion caucus. Their term of em­ploy­ment is 10 months, and they will be performing a variety of research and other tasks for private members.

      These interns com­mence their assignment September 13th, 2021, and will complete them in June. They are working with the gov­ern­ment caucus. We have Ms. Christina Rabet of the Uni­ver­sity of Winnipeg. [interjection]

* (14:20)

      Could that–hi–Mr. Carson Ransom of Brandon Uni­ver­sity and Mr. Aidan Trembath of Brandon Univer­sity.

      And working with the caucus of the official opposi­tion, we have Mr. Nathan Dueck of the Canadian Mennonite Uni­ver­sity; Ms. Celina Oster of Redeemer Uni­ver­sity in Ontario and Ms. Sanjam Panag of the Uni­ver­sity of Winnipeg. Professor Kelly Saunders of Brandon Uni­ver­sity is the 'acanemic'–academic–pardon me. I'm going to start that one again.

      Professor Kelly Saunders of Brandon Uni­ver­sity is the academic director of the program. The admin­is­tra­tion of the program on a day‑to‑day basis is carried  out by our Clerk, Patricia Chaychuk, and the caucus repre­sen­tatives on the internship admin­is­tra­tion commit­tee are the member for Brandon East (Mr. Isleifson) and the member for Point Douglas (Mrs. Smith).

      I would like to take this op­por­tun­ity on behalf of all members to con­gratu­late the interns on their ap­point­ment to the program and hope that they will all have a very interesting and very suc­cess­ful year with the Manitoba Legis­lative Assembly. And welcome.

Oral Questions

BITSA Legislation
Request to Withdraw

Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): Brian Pallister may be gone, but Brian Pallister's party is still here imple­men­ting Brian Pallister's plan. We know that there's a crisis in the health‑care system right now, and this budget will make things worse. It cuts millions of dollars from emergency rooms across the province. It cuts money from long‑term care during the pandemic.

      This bill forces teachers to pay for school supplies out of their own pockets. That's what Brian Pallister's budget focuses on and that's what this party has returned to this Legislature to try and pass. It's wrong. It's bad. It should be thrown out.

      The question for the Pallister‑Goertzen gov­ern­ment is simple: Will they reject Brian Pallister's legacy, yes or no?

Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Premier): Well, a recycled question from the 1990s by that Official Op­posi­tion Leader, Madam Speaker.

      This budget will do what our budgets have been–continued to do: to provide support to those who need it most. More than $1 billion more for health care; more than $300 million more for edu­ca­tion than was ever done under the NDP; more than $230 million more than was ever done under the NDP.

      We know that the pandemic is the challenge of our lifetime. We are rising to that challenge. We are ensuring that those who need the support on the front lines are getting that support. We're ensuring that there are health orders in place to protect Manitobans. We are ensuring that we are ahead, as much as we can, of the fourth wave and that is bearing out in our success in Manitoba.

      And we'll continue to do that because we're a gov­ern­ment that cares about Manitobans, that listens to Manitobans and that acts for all Manitobans, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a supplementary question.

Mr. Kinew: Does anyone on that side of the House really think that Brian Pallister improved health care in this province?

      Complete silence.

      I encourage the members opposite to say so, to tell us, are things better for the nurses? Are things better for the patients? We know that this budget cuts millions of dollars from emergency rooms across Manitoba–[interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Kinew: –it cuts resources from seniors care, the hardest hit health‑care facilities through­out the pandemic.

      And we all know the damage that Brian Pallister caused to this province; that's why he's no longer sitting in this Chamber. That's why those members chased him out of office.

      And so they need to tell Manitobans: Do they support his plan or not? Will they withdraw this terrible, damaging budget that cuts health care, or do they support continuing Brian Pallister's legacy?

Mr. Goertzen: The member opposite may not want to look to the right, left or behind him about who is about to chase him out of office, Madam Speaker. But  I would say to him, we continue to invest historic amounts in edu­ca­tion, in families, in health care. We were doing that long before the pandemic started. But, of course, during the pandemic there have been systems that have been stood up in health care that could never have been imagined before in this province or any other province.

      The vaccine rollout, Madam Speaker, that–among the most suc­cess­ful vaccine rollouts of any province in the country. It is one of the reasons why we are in a better position now compared to other provinces when it comes to the fourth wave. We know that there are challenges. We know there's more to do. We'll con­tinue to do that work.

      The member opposite can sit in his seat and throw rocks all he wants, we'll do the hard work that Manitobans elected us to do, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a final supplementary.

Mr. Kinew: Bragging about pandemic failures, just like Brian Pallister.

      As bad as things are in Alberta right now, Manitoba's per capita out­comes were worse here during the third wave. And why was that, Madam Speaker? That's because this gov­ern­ment, under the interim PC leader, cut health care. It's because this gov­ern­ment, under one of the PC candidates, refused to invest in long‑term care. It's because this party, under the other PC candidate, slashed health‑care funding not only in Manitoba but across the country.

      We know that this budget bill amounts to cuts to schools, cuts to hospitals and it makes life more expensive for the good people in Manitoba. We know that they should have the courage to make a clean break from Mr. Pallister's legis­lative agenda, but they won't. They want to rebrand them­selves without tabling a new budget.

      Will they simply abandon this BITSA bill and commit to a better one today?

Mr. Goertzen: Well, the member opposite hasn't identified what it is that he doesn't like about the bill. Maybe it's the fact that it invests more than $1.2 million in health care than his gov­ern­ment ever did. Maybe that's why he doesn't like it: $1.2 billion more.

      Maybe he doesn't like it because it invests more money in training nurses, Madam Speaker, to ensure that we have more nurses, something that they never dealt with when they were in gov­ern­ment.

      Maybe he doesn't like it because it does invest more in edu­ca­tion.

      He might not like it because it lowers the PST on some personal services, Madam Speaker. He might still be fighting Greg Selinger's battle–the Greg Selinger‑Wab Kinew op­posi­tion.

      I would ask him to stop fighting the old battles, get on board, don't vote against more health care, more edu­ca­tion, more family funding like you always have. Support Manitobans, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: Just a reminder to the First Minister that we are not to use members' names in the House, but their con­stit­uencies or their titles as a minister. So a reminder, please.

      The hon­our­able Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question.

Legis­lative Agenda
Gov­ern­ment Intention

Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): Well, all we hear is the PC Party continuing to defend Brian Pallister's legacies, though, so they should be clear: do they support Brian Pallister's plan, yes or no?

      There's not a clear answer there, is there? They refuse to say, Madam Speaker. Do they support his agenda, yes or no?

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Kinew: They cannot answer the question, Madam Speaker, because­–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Kinew: –the reality is this: they have forced them­selves into an impossible position. They have chased Brian Pallister out of the Legis­lative Building, and then they rushed back in to pass his budget and his legis­lative agenda.

      Since they're in such a mood to rebrand them­selves, tell Manitobans: Will you repeal bill 28? Will you cancel your health‑care cuts? Will you finally invest in schools? Or will you just be a continuation of Mr. Pallister's sad legacy? [interjection]

Madam Speaker: I didn't think we'd get here this quickly.

Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Premier): Madam Speaker, I'd like to welcome Greg Selinger back into the House. I guess he's continuing–he's continuing that legacy.

      He's fighting against the PST reductions that are held within this budget. He doesn't want to make life more affordable. He doesn't want to increase funding for health care. He wants to keep it at the levels that the NDP were at many years ago. He doesn't want to have more money for edu­ca­tion, Madam Speaker. He doesn't want to have more money for infra­structure. He doesn't want to have more money for families.

* (14:30)

      I don't know why it is that that member opposite, the member of the–the Leader of the Official Opposition doesn't want to do the things that benefit Manitobans, that help on health care, that help on edu­ca­tion, that make life more affordable. He can continue the legacy of Greg Selinger.

      We're moving forward. We're looking forward to the first woman premier in Manitoba history, ever, being elected here in 30 days, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a supplementary question.

Mr. Kinew: Well, it's pretty clear the members oppo­­site are still fighting the 2016 election, because they are supporting Brian Pallister's agenda.

      We've been clear on this side of the House. We're on the side of the people of Manitoba. That's why we called out the disaster at the Maples Personal Care Home. What did they do in this budget that they're trying to pass this year, this week, this day? They cut funding for long‑term-care homes.

      We called out the transferring of ICU patients from Manitoba to other provinces. What do they do? They advance the same austerity agenda and program of cuts that caused such a disastrous third wave here in Manitoba.

      Madam Speaker, they are repeating the same mistakes as we head into the fourth wave as Mr. Pallister did during waves one, two and three.

      Have they learned nothing?

Mr. Goertzen: After all these months, and it's the same talking points from the Leader of the Opposition, Madam Speaker: $56 million more for personal-care homes and support for personal-care homes. But the Leader of the Op­posi­tion and all the people that support him on that side are going to vote against it. More money for health care, more money for support for busi­nesses, and all the members on that side are going to vote against it.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Goertzen: All the different support for edu­ca­tion, and he's going to vote against it, Madam Speaker.

      Well, he has to try to shout me down, Madam Speaker–[interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Goertzen: –because he knows it's true.

      Thank you, Madam Speaker.

      He knows it's true, Madam Speaker, so he has to try to shout me down. That's fine; he'll have an op­por­tun­ity. He can vote against invest­ments for health care, vote against invest­ments for edu­ca­tion, vote against invest­ments for personal-care homes.

      We'll continue to do what is best for Manitobans. He'll continue to do what's best for his and Greg Selinger's legacy, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a final supplementary.

Mr. Kinew: What's the first thing the interim Leader of the PC Party does when he comes to the Chamber? He tries to pass Mr. Pallister's budget. Nothing has changed. It's the same budget that Mr. Pallister brought in in the spring that cuts funding for long-term care.

      We all stood up, shoulder to shoulder: We're going to do right by seniors. We're going to learn from the mistakes of Maples. Show me the page where operating funding for personal-care homes is increased–[interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Kinew: –in Manitoba. You cannot point to that page because this budget cuts funding. [interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Kinew: You are talking about the budget that they are tripping over them­selves to pass because nothing has changed. This is still Brian Pallister's party; this is still Brian Pallister's austerity agenda.

      Will any of them at least have the courage to stand up and take owner­ship of that?

Mr. Goertzen: What's the first thing that the Leader of the Official Op­posi­tion comes back and tries to do? He tries to stop increased funding for health care. He tries to stop increased funding for edu­ca­tion. He wants to stop increased funding for families.

      He, of course, wants to stop the reduction of the PST for personal services. Now that's on brand. We know that he doesn't want life to be more affordable, so maybe that's not surprising, Madam Speaker, but he's also trying to stop funding for very im­por­tant COVID programs, for also ensuring that public ser­vants get paid to ensure that programs continue on.

      That's what he is: he's a roadblock, Madam Speaker. He's trying to stop all the good things that have to happen for Manitobans in a very difficult time. We won't let him stop all those positive things.

      I hope that members opposite in his 'cauca' don't listen to him and vote against that mean-spirited cut-and-stop-things-from-happening from the Leader of the Op­posi­tion.

Vaccine Policy at the Legislature
Require­ment for MLAs

Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): This PC gov­ern­ment is demanding every nurse, teacher and child-care worker be vaccinated, but it won't demand that its own MLAs be vaccinated. The minister respon­si­ble for emergency measures refuses to tell Manitobans if he's vaccinated.

      You have to prove–you have to show proof of vac­cina­tion to go to a restaurant or a sports game, but  you don't have to show it to get into the Manitoba Legislature. That is a double standard, Madam Speaker.

      Will the Premier kick out the minister of emergency measures from his Cabinet today?

Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Premier): Madam Speaker, this Assembly has been a leader when it comes to COVID response. We are one of the first assemblies in Manitoba–a credit to you and your staff–for being able to set up the virtual Legislature, and that is a credit to the many people who worked on that.

      We have been a leader when it comes to different issues within the building: masking within the public places, rooms that have limited capacity, Madam Speaker. In this Assembly, you have to have had a negative test or a proof of vac­cina­tion. That is why we are keeping all of those in this Assembly and beyond safe.

      We've continued to be a leader when it comes to the Manitoba Legislature, thanks to you and others, Madam Speaker, and we will continue to lead the way.

Madam Speaker: The hon­our­able member for St. Johns, on a sup­ple­mentary question.

Ms. Fontaine: Nurses are stepping up, teachers are stepping up, child-care workers are vaccinated, but it's a different set of rules for the PC MLAs.

      It's hypocritical to demand proof of vac­cina­tion for a restaurant, but not the Legislature. The minister respon­si­ble for emergency measures should be help­ing to lead the fight against the pandemic, not under­mine it as he is. He should be kicked out of Cabinet today.

      It's a simple test.

      Will this gov­ern­ment demand that all of its MLAs be vaccinated? Yes or no?

Mr. Goertzen: This gov­ern­ment was one of the first gov­ern­ments in Canada that had a required testing regime for those who were not vaccinated, when it came to edu­ca­tion, when it came to health care, and others who were dealing with vul­ner­able people. Madam Speaker, that is some­thing that we collect­ively did as a gov­ern­ment before most other juris­dic­tions did, but now many juris­dic­tions have followed.

      In this Assembly, those within our caucus who are entering the Assembly either have to have a negative test or a proof of vac­cina­tion, Madam Speaker. We know beyond this Assembly there are rules in the individual com­mit­tee rooms–[interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Goertzen: –and the individual offices in terms of limitations so there can be spacing. There's masking within the hallways. So, many initiatives been taken to keep this as a safe work­place.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. Johns, on a final supplementary.

Ms. Fontaine: This is the hypocrisy of the PC caucus. You have to show vac­cina­tion status to eat at a restaurant but not to come to work in the Manitoba Legislature, and demand that workers also get vac­cinated. It is absolute hypocrisy.

      Every person who leads or wants to lead the PCs–[interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Ms. Fontaine: –needs to be clear: is it a require­ment for all MLAs to be vaccinated, yes or no? Anything less is just a double standard that the public simply do not like, Madam Speaker.

      The question to the Gov­ern­ment House Leader (Mr. Goertzen) and any person who wants to lead this people here, this–whatever–will require every–will they require every PC MLA to get vaccinated?

Mr. Goertzen: Madam Speaker, when it comes to health-care workers, there is a proof of a negative test if you are not vaccinated and working with vul­ner­able people. When it comes to edu­ca­tion–[interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Goertzen: –there is a proof–negative test if you are not vaccinated. When it comes to this Assembly, there is a proof of negative test or vac­cina­tion.

      It is the same rule that's being applied. [interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Goertzen: I know that the Leader of the Official Op­posi­tion (Mr. Kinew), if he doesn't like the answers, he tries to shout people down, Madam Speaker. I don't think that that's ap­pro­priate at any time, but parti­cularly this time.

      Beyond that, which is already con­sistent with the edu­ca­tion–[interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Goertzen: –and health care–[interjection]

* (14:40)

Madam Speaker: Order.

      I'll ask the table to stop the clock.

      Order.

      I don't think we're off to a very good start here with all of the heckling and overheated rhetoric that is already starting. I'm going to ask for everybody's co‑operation. We've got a lot of things to get through over these next few days. We have agreed to a Sessional Order, and I'm going to ask for everybody's co-operation so that we can, indeed, move that agenda forward. And the idea of yelling across to the point I can't hear is not some­thing that is very conducive to demon­strating a system of demo­cracy that is in action and effective.

      So, please, if everybody can just bring down the loudness in here. If you want to have con­ver­sa­tions with somebody, go outside or go to the loge, but if we can just get through the rest of this day it would be, I think, to the benefit of the public.

      So, I'm going to allow the Premier to conclude his comments.

Mr. Goertzen: As the Leader of the Official Opposition works to control himself, I would conclude by saying that, in addition to the consistency that we have with the rules in this Assembly, there are ad­di­tional rules within the building itself when it comes to masking, capacity limits, and we'll continue to have rules to protect all those who work in this building or come to this building to visit, Madam Speaker.

Edu­ca­tion Modernization Act
Edu­ca­tion Minister's Position

Mr. Nello Altomare (Transcona): Well, thank you, Madam Speaker, and welcome back.

      As you know, Bill 64 was engineered by the current interim Conservative leader, promoted by Brian Pallister and then seconded by the member for Tuxedo (Mrs. Stefanson). In short, their whole caucus team was part of Bill 64.

      The Minister of Edu­ca­tion called my com­mu­nity members a vocal, misinformed minority, defended his bill relentlessly. In fact, to everyone watching it looked like the first time he heard the bill was dead was when he stood behind a leadership contestant.

      So I want to ask the minister: When did he realize, like all of Manitoba, that he opposed Bill 64? [interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order. I think everybody would want to hear the answer. Order, please.

 

Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Education): I'll stand with all my fellow caucus members who listened to Manitobans.

      Madam Speaker, before I respond to the question, I do want to thank all of our educators, all of the staff across Manitoba who are working day in and day out to protect Manitoba students and them­selves in our K‑to‑12 edu­ca­tion system.

      We've got over 30,000 people dedi­cated to keeping it–educating children and keeping our child­ren safe, and I just want to acknowl­edge them and thank all the admin­is­tra­tive staff as well for the good work their doing and the work that we're doing with them through public health as well.

Madam Speaker: The hon­our­able member for Transcona, on a sup­ple­mentary question.

Mr. Altomare: Let's be clear: it was the NDP, families and teachers that stood in the way of Bill 64, and if it wasn't blocked, it would be the law right now, today, and all of this stuff would be happening, even that transformation board work.

      And the minister still called these people the vocal minority, right? Published himself these mis­leading fact versus fiction things. And, in fact, you can still find that very docu­ment on that website. All the pieces are there, as Brian Pallister heads off into the sunset, for this Conservative gov­ern­ment, everyone of them, to reintroduce legis­lation that hurts and harms our schools.

      I'll ask the minister again: When did he realize that he opposed Bill 64, or does he still secretly intend to revive it?

Mr. Cullen: Well, Madam Speaker, here we go again. Conspiracy theories abound by the NDP.

      Madam Speaker, Bill 64 is dead. Bill 64 is dead. I don't know if they've got the message or not. Bill 64 is dead. We've taken the recommendations–[interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Cullen: –from the K‑to‑12 report. We've put together a Better Edu­ca­tion Starts Today strategy. I'm not even sure the members opposite have read the strategy that talks about the pillars and that's provi­ding better out­comes for Manitoba students.

      The NDP want the status quo. They want dead last in the country and spend the most. 'Manintoba'–Manitoba students deserve better, Manitobans have told us they want better, and this gov­ern­ment is going to deliver on better out­comes for students.

Madam Speaker: The hon­our­able member for Transcona, on a final sup­ple­mentary.

Mr. Altomare: I want to remind the members opposite that Bill 64 wasn't a random event, some­thing they just dreamed up like that. It was the culmination of years of underfunding and cuts. And what they did to health care, this Conservative gov­ern­ment is doing to edu­ca­tion right this very minute.

      Bill 64 will let them go further. It will want to decentralize control and squeeze schools even more. The results are already apparent: right now larger class sizes, right now less classroom supports.

      So I'll ask the minister again: When did he realize he opposed Bill 64 and, once the smoke clears from this leadership thing, are they actually going to do things that are going to improve the edu­ca­tion system?

Mr. Cullen: Well, Madam Speaker, Bill 64 is dead. I want the member opposite to move on. I want him to go and read the strategy. There's other pillars in there that provide better out­comes for Manitoba students. Clearly, they decided not to report our report, not look at the recom­men­dations in the K‑to‑12 report. They don't care about out­comes for Manitoba students.

      We and our gov­ern­ment care about better out­comes for Manitoba students, and we are going to deliver on that. [interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Manitoba Hydro
Rate Setting

Mr. Adrien Sala (St. James): In 2017, the Conservative gov­ern­ment tried to push through an 8 per cent hydro rate increase. When that was blocked, they used every trick in the book to try to increase rates at the Cabinet table. They intro­duced three rate-setting bills and they increased rates through BITSA just last year.

      Brian Pallister may have exited stage right, but  these were the plans of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding), the Minister of Crown Services (Mr. Wharton) and every single member of that PC Cabinet.

      Will the minister now commit that no rate increase will ever be approved at the Cabinet table ever again?

Hon. Jeff Wharton (Minister of Crown Services): Well, thank you, Madam Speaker, and, again, welcome back to yourself and everybody in the Chamber.

      I was pleased to issue a directive to Manitoba Hydro on September 22nd of this year, Madam Speaker, to submit an interim rate application to the Public Utilities Board, and that's exactly what we did.

Madam Speaker: The hon­our­able member for St. James, on a sup­ple­mentary question.

Mr. Sala: Manitobans opposed bill 44 last year and Bill 35 this year. If Manitobans hadn't raised their voice and blocked those bills, this debate would be over. Rates would be set at at the Cabinet table each and every year for the next five years.

       Now the minister says he's seen the light and his gov­ern­ment's seen the light. Well, forgive my skepticism, Madam Speaker. For the last two years, this minister has tried to keep Manitobans in the dark. He's concealed the profitability of Hydro. He hid a $5‑billion agree­ment reached with Saskatchewan.

      So will the minister now commit that no rate increase will ever be approved at the Cabinet table now or ever?

Mr. Wharton: Certainly, we on this side of the House see the light and we want to continue to ensure that Manitobans will continue to see the light, Madam Speaker. We know what happened under the NDP: billion dollars and billion dollars of boondoggle invest­ments.

      We know, also as part, Madam Speaker–[interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Wharton: –of the directive–[interjection] Maybe the members opposite would like to listen to this and actually hear some facts, Madam Speaker. Apparently, the member from St. Johns does not.

      Also, as part of the directive, Manitoba Hydro will work with the Public Utilities Board on sub­mitting a multi-year general rate application on a go-forward basis.

Madam Speaker: The hon­our­able member for St. James, on a final sup­ple­mentary.

Mr. Sala: Bill 35 has come to an end, but there's no thanks to the minister in that.

* (14:50)

      His gov­ern­ment has tried over and over to run down Hydro's reputation. They undermined Hydro; they inter­fered in Hydro. They ran the outrageous Wall com­mis­sion that failed to mention the $5-billion sales of energy to Saskatchewan. And all of this was aimed at putting rate setting in their own hands.

      Today's events are just a setback for the gov­ern­ment's agenda.

      Will the minister now commit that no rate increase will ever be approved at the Cabinet table, or are they just waiting for the smoke to clear from their leadership race to try again?

Mr. Wharton: The member speaks of inter­ference at Manitoba Hydro. Well, he certainly has a record of that, Madam Speaker, under the NDP.

      We know that bipole-Keeyask project, Madam Speaker, went around the PUB–not through the PUB, but around the PUB–to ensure that they spent $10 billion over budget. Not only that, they tripled the debt of Manitoba Hydro in less than six years.

      The director will enshrine gov­ern­ment's in­ten­tion to proceed with a full general rate application. We know that the PUB will certainly–[interjection]–Madam Speaker, the PUB will certainly be able to work with Manitoba Hydro and Manitoba Public Insurance to ensure Manitoba ratepayers are protected going forward.

Labour Rights Legislation
Gov­ern­ment Intention

MLA Uzoma Asagwara (Union Station): Madam Speaker, in the midst of a pandemic, this gov­ern­ment intro­duced Bill 16, a blatant attack on the rights of workers. Bill 16 would have further eroded workers' rights by allowing employers to withhold salaries from employees or fire employees who are partici­pating in strikes and would have made it much more difficult for employees to unionize in the first place.

      This gov­ern­ment's disdain for Manitoba workers is clear. They used bill 28 to impose un­con­stitu­tional ways–wage freezes on front-line and public sector workers and they tried to push through Bill 16 in the last session. The only reason why Bill 16 didn't pass and is now dead is because our NDP caucus delayed it.

      Can the minister stand up and tell us why that side of the House tried to strip hard-working Manitobans of their labour rights, forcing them–

Madam Speaker: The member's time has expired.

Hon. Scott Fielding (Minister of Finance): It was my thought that the–you know, the member that's a critic for Health would ask a Health question during a pandemic, but I guess I'm wrong in respect to that.

      What our gov­ern­ment wants to make sure is there's a balance between labour and busi­ness. And that's exactly what we do through legis­lation, through other means. Collective agree­ments get decided at the table between two parties. We want to continue that to make sure there's a proper process and there's a balance between labour and employers.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Union Station, on a supplementary question.

MLA Asagwara: Speaking of health-care workers, this gov­ern­ment mandated wage freezes and other freezes for Hydro workers, edu­ca­tion support staff and nurses–and front-line workers who put their own mental and physical health at risk on the job every day to make sure we can stay safe and healthy during this pandemic.

      Manitoba nurses have gone without a contract since 2017, forcing 98 per cent of MNU members to vote in favour of a strike earlier this year. Even now that Brian Pallister is gone, Manitobans still can't trust this gov­ern­ment to uphold the rights of workers, and for good reason. It's not just Brian Pallister that has worked to erode the rights of Manitoba workers, it's the entire PC caucus.

      When will this gov­ern­ment stop trying to cut the wages of front-line workers and finally realize that protecting and upholding labour rights is the right thing to do?

Mr. Fielding: I know discussions are ongoing with both parties. We're going to let those–both parties have discussions, ongoing discussions. What we do know is we won't take a position like the Leader of the Op­posi­tion, that actually walked a picket line in the middle of a strike.

      We're not going to take–pick sides one way or the other. We want to make sure that there's agree­ments that are in place that make sense for people, whether you're nurses, whether you're other employees, plus also–[interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Fielding: –the employee is the taxpayers of Manitobans. That process is ongoing. We're going to let that happen.

MLA Asagwara: Madam Speaker, members opposite are hoping that these bills will just quietly disappear so that they can blame all of their problems on Brian Pallister, but we know that every single member of that side of the House enthusiastically supported that legis­lation along with all the other regressive, austerity-focused legis­lation that their Cabinet intro­duced last spring.

      Now, we stopped this gov­ern­ment from rolling back workers' rights for now, but we've seen this govern­ment's record and we know the disdain for Manitoba workers runs deep in that PC caucus. And we're hearing from Manitobans who are afraid that this gov­ern­ment will just reintroduce the same legis­lation under a different name.

      Will the minister commit to backing down from this archaic piece of legis­lation in any form, yes or no?

Mr. Fielding: My thoughts, again, would be that the  person that's in charge of making sure the health-care system is right, in the op­posi­tion, would ask pandemic-related questions.

      We think this process is extremely im­por­tant. We want to make sure the parties are–[interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Fielding: –together. What I can say is our gov­ern­ment is looking for balance between labour as well as busi­nesses. We want to make sure that–not we're taking one side or the other, like the Leader of the Opposi­tion, that clearly places himself, where he walks the picket line, Madam Speaker, during a strike, in the last number of months.

      We're not going to make that mistake. We're going to have a balance between busi­ness and labour.

COVID-­19 Fourth Wave
Gov­ern­ment Preparation

Mr. Dougald Lamont (St. Boniface): Dr. Roussin says we are headed for a severe fourth wave after our health-care system collapsed in the third wave on this gov­ern­ment's watch. There is no other way of saying it: we could not care for our own.

      Our warnings to prepare for the second and third waves were often ignored, with terrible con­se­quences.

      We have just under 400,000 unvaccinated Manitobans, and staff for only about 130 ICU beds, which is quite a 'bottlenake'–bottleneck in a fourth wave.

      Through­out this pandemic, Dr. Roussin has said Manitoba followed the least restrictive approach, which is another way of saying the bare minimum. Despite tough talk, only a tiny fraction of fines are being collected.

      Is doing the bare minimum still this gov­ern­ment's policy going into the fourth wave? Because it completely failed Manitobans in the second and third. [interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Premier): Thank the member for the question.

      Dr. Roussin indicated weeks ago that Manitoba's being proactive. We were proactive when it came to ensuring that there was a regime for testing for those who weren't vaccinated in edu­ca­tion and health care. We've been proactive with the indoor mask mandate much sooner than any other province has in this parti­cular wave. Madam Speaker, we continue to be proactive when it comes to public health orders.

      That is one of the reasons Manitoba is in a better place than almost every province in Canada, Madam Speaker, but that doesn't mean that we're not continuing to look at things that we need to do to ensure that we blunt that fourth wave. We know that a fourth wave is here in Manitoba. We're doing every­thing we can to blunt it, not by doing the minimum but by being proactive, and that is bearing fruit at this point.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. Boniface, on a supplementary question.

COVID-­19 and Schools
Availability of Rapid Tests

Mr. Dougald Lamont (St. Boniface): A major factor in controlling the pandemic is tracking cases, which requires intensive testing and contact tracing. We've also heard and seen that the gov­ern­ment insists on keeping schools open as long as possible, despite the fact that the Delta variant is more contagious and deadly, that children under 12 can't yet be vaccinated. If this is the case, the gov­ern­ment needs to be doing every­thing it can to keep children safe from contracting COVID.

      Last year, we heard from school officials that principals were spending all their time on contact tracing. That's a job for public health, not the school system. We also know this government has hundreds of thousands of rapid tests.

      Why is Manitoba one of the only provinces that is not making these tests freely available, especially to parents and schools?

Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Premier): Madam Speaker, this gov­ern­ment has been a leader when it comes to ensuring that we are being proactive on measures when it comes to public health. Many other provinces have been following that lead. That doesn't mean that there aren't other things that need to be done or that we're not looking at and, together with Public Health, we are always looking at those things that can help to blunt that fourth wave.

      Madam Speaker, I did have a discussion with a gentleman just a few weeks ago on the phone who told me that–and credited Manitoba for the work that they were doing getting ahead of the fourth wave. Oh, and that gentleman's name was Justin Trudeau.

* (15:00)

Surgery Backlogs
Request to Address

Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Madam Speaker, under this gov­ern­ment, tens of thousands of Manitobans are waiting and suffering in pain or with poor eyesight because of massive surgical backlogs. For more than a year the gov­ern­ment has known that there would be backlogs and yet we still have not been shown the plan to address them.

      Instead, the gov­ern­ment is ensnarled in a leadership race and is missing in action when it comes to critical issues which are needed for Manitobans.

      Why has the gov­ern­ment abandoned tens of thousands of suffering Manitobans?

Hon. Audrey Gordon (Minister of Health and Seniors Care): Madam Speaker, today I rise in the Chamber for the first time as the Minister of Health and Seniors Care, in addition to my existing role as the Minister of Mental Health, Wellness and Recovery. I want to thank the Premier (Mr. Goertzen) for this op­por­tun­ity to serve Manitoba as we enter the fourth wave.

      I also want to say thank you to our doctors, nurses, health-care aides, paramedics, EMS workers and countless other health-care pro­fes­sionals. 'Manitobas' are grateful for your heroic efforts.

      Today, Madam Speaker, is a sig­ni­fi­cant milestone in our vac­cina­tion campaign. Manitoba's administered 2 million doses. Thank you for your historic efforts. Please continue to roll up your sleeves and get vaccinated.

Early Learning and Child Care
Canada-Manitoba Agreement

Mr. Len Isleifson (Brandon East): On August the 9th, Manitoba signed a historic five-year agree­ment with Canada to offer affordable, high-quality, flexible and inclusive early-learning child care to all families in Manitoba.

      Can the Minister of Families update the House on this recent agree­ment and how this invest­ment will positively impact Manitoba families as we move towards a post-pandemic economy?

Hon. Rochelle Squires (Minister of Families): I'd like to thank my friend from Brandon East for that question.

      Our gov­ern­ment was very pleased to work with our colleagues in Ottawa, as well as the child-care sector in the province of Manitoba, to sign this historic agree­ment and work towards creating 23,000 new child-care spaces over the next five years.

      We also believe that child care should be affordable and ac­ces­si­ble to all families and that is why we are committing to an average of $10-a-day child care for all families, regardless of where you live in the province of Manitoba.

      We also believe in a strong, sus­tain­able child-care sector and that is why we are committed to working with the association and increasing those wages and making that sector stable.

      I'd like to thank everyone who works in child care for all their dedi­cated efforts at keeping our children safe and keeping their child-care centre doors open.

      Thank you.

Madam Speaker: The time for oral questions has expired.

Petitions

Madam Speaker: Are there any petitions? If there are  no petitions–oh, the hon­our­able member for Elmwood.

Louise Bridge

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): I wish to present the following petition to the Legis­lative Assembly.

      The back­ground to this petition is as follows:

      (1) Over 25,000 vehicles per day cross the Louise Bridge, which has served as the vital link for vehicular traffic between northeast Winnipeg and the downtown for the last 110 years.

      (2) The current structure will undoubtedly be declared unsafe in a few years. It has deteriorated extensively, becoming functionally obsolete, subject to more frequent unplanned repairs and cannot be widened to accommodate future traffic capacity.

      (3) As far back as 2008, the City of Winnipeg has studied where the new re­place­ment bridge should be situated.

      (4) After including the bridge re­place­ment in the City's five-year capital budget forecast in 2009, the new bridge became a short-term construction priority in the City's trans­por­tation master plan of 2010-11. [interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Maloway: (5) City capital and budget plans identified re­place­ment of the Louise Bridge on a site just east of the bridge. They expropriated homes there on the south side of Nairn street in anticipation of a 2015 start.

      (6) In 2014, the new City admin­is­tra­tion–[interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order.

Mr. Maloway: (6) In 2014, the new City admin­is­tra­tion did not make use of available federal infrastructure funds, and instead decided to fund an off-the-list, low-priority Waverley Underpass.

      (7) The new Louise Bridge Com­mit­tee began its campaign to demand a new bridge and its surveys confirmed the residents wanted a new bridge beside the current bridge, with the old bridge kept open for local traffic.

      (8) The NDP prov­incial gov­ern­ment signalled its firm commit­ment to partner with the City on replacing the Louise Bridge in its 2015 Throne Speech. Unfor­tunately, prov­incial infrastructure initiatives, such as the new Louise Bridge, came to a halt with the election of the Progressive Conservative gov­ern­ment in 2016.

      (9) More recently, the City tethered the Louise Bridge replacement issue to its new trans­por­tation master plan and eastern corridor project. Its recom­men­dations have now identified the location of the new bridge to be placed just to the west of the current bridge, not to the east as originally proposed.

      We petition the Legis­lative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:

      (1) To urge the prov­incial gov­ern­ment to financially assist the City of Winnipeg on building this three-lane bridge in each direction to maintain this vital link between northeast Winnipeg and the downtown.

      (2) To urge the prov­incial gov­ern­ment to recom­mend the City of Winnipeg keep the old bridge fully open to traffic while a new bridge is under con­struction and consider the feasibility of keeping it open for active trans­por­tation in the future.

      And this petition has been signed by many Manitobans.

Madam Speaker: In accordance with our rule 133(6), when petitions are read, they are deemed to be received by the House.

      Are there any further petitions?

      If not, grievances?

ORDERS OF THE DAY

GOVERNMENT BUSINESS

House Business

Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): I have a leave request.

      Could you please canvass the House for leave to  allow the transfer of sponsorship for the follow­­ing items: Bill 233, The Filipino Heritage Month Act, currently sponsored by the hon­our­able Minister of Economic Dev­elop­ment and Jobs (Mr. Reyes), transferred to the hon­our­able member for Lagimodière (Mr. Smith); and the private member's reso­lu­tion No. 4, Inclusion of Sergeant Tommy Prince on the $5 Bill, currently sponsored by the hon­our­able Minister of Indigenous Recon­ciliation and Northern Relations (Mr. Lagimodiere), transferred to the hon­our­able member for McPhillips (Mr. Martin).

Madam Speaker: Is there leave to allow for the transfer of sponsorship for the following items: Bill 233, The Filipino Heritage Month Act, currently sponsored by the hon­our­able Minister of Economic Dev­elop­ment and Jobs (Mr. Reyes), transferred to the hon­our­able member for Lagimodière (Mr. Smith); and the private member's reso­lu­tion No. 4, Inclusion of Sergeant Tommy Prince on the $5 Bill, cur­rently sponsored by the hon­our­able Minister of Indigenous Recon­ciliation and Northern Relations (Mr. Lagimodiere), transferred to the hon­our­able member for McPhillips (Mr. Martin).

      Is there leave? [Agreed]

Mr. Goertzen: Thank the House for the granting of leave.

      Madam Speaker, I have a second leave request. Could you please canvass the House for leave to make the following permanent changes to the Estimates sequence:

      (1) move Executive Council from room 254 to the–it would be the next de­part­ment considered in the Chamber;

      (2) move Sport, Culture and Heritage from the Chamber to be the last de­part­ment considered in room 255;

      (3) move Health and Seniors Care from the Chamber to be the next department considered in room 254; and

      (4) move Mental Health, Wellness and Recovery from room 255 to be considered in room 254 following Health and Seniors Care.

Madam Speaker: Is there leave to make the following permanent changes to the Estimates sequence:

      (1) move Executive Council from room 254 to be the next de­part­ment considered in the Chamber;

      (2) move Sport, Culture and Heritage from the Chamber to be the last de­part­ment considered in room 255;

      (3) move Health and Seniors Care from the Chamber to be the next department considered in room 254; and

      (4) move Mental Health, Wellness and Recovery from room 255 to be considered in room 254 following Health and Seniors Care.

      Is there leave? [Agreed]

* * *

* (15:10)

Mr. Goertzen: Could you please resolve the House into Com­mit­tee of Supply.

Madam Speaker: It has been announced that the House will now consider Estimates this afternoon. The House will now resolve into Com­mit­tee of Supply.

      Mr. Deputy Speaker, please take the Chair.

Committee of Supply

(Concurrent Sections)

Room 254

Health and Seniors Care

* (15:30)

Mr. Chairperson (Dennis Smook): Good afternoon, everyone.

      Will the Com­mit­tee of Supply please come to order. This section of the Com­mit­tee of Supply will now resume con­sid­era­tion of the Estimates for the Depart­ment of Health and Seniors Care which last met on May the 25th, 2021 in another section of the Commit­tee of Supply.

      As previously agreed, questions for this de­part­ment will proceed in a global manner. When the speaker has one minute left, I will raise this little note just to give them a heads‑up that they have one minute left. The floor is now open for questions.

MLA Uzoma Asagwara (Union Station): I'd like to take this op­por­tun­ity to welcome the minister to her new role as Minister for Health and I'd like to start by asking some questions about, you know, COVID‑19, this pandemic and the fourth wave.

      I understand, and we all understand, that staffing has been very challenging in the southern region of the province. We're hearing, you know, a lot of reports. We've been hearing for some time that staffing there has been under, you know, quite a bit of strain.

      Can the minister advise as to whether or not admissions to Salem and to Tabor PCH–personal‑care homes–will remain open and what exactly are the plans there?

Mr. Chairperson: Could the minister please give me a signal when she is ready to start?

      The hon­our­able Minister of Health and Seniors Care.

Hon. Audrey Gordon (Minister of Health and Seniors Care): Before I respond, I want to take a few minutes to make some opening comments.

      This will be my first Estimates process as a minister of the Crown in my portfolios of Health and Seniors Care and Minister of Mental Health, Wellness and Recovery.

      I want to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Brent Roussin, Dr. Joss Reimer, Dr. Jazz Atwal, Lanette Siragusa, Johanu Botha and the many leaders and members of Manitoba's COVID­‑19 response team, Manitoba's vac­cina­tion imple­men­ta­tion task force as well and the First Nations Pandemic Response Co‑ordination Team. Thank you for the leader­ship, guidance, dedi­cation, commit­ment and compassion you've shown your fellow Manitobans during the pandemic.

      To our doctors, nurses, paramedics, EMS workers, health‑care aides, pharmacists and countless other health-care pro­fes­sionals: we know these have been the most difficult years of your career. Manitobans are grateful for the heroic efforts you have displayed and the remark­able courage and perseverance you have shown in the face of in­cred­ible challenges.

      A special thank you to Deputy Minister Karen Herd, her assist­ant deputies and the de­part­mental staff of Manitoba Health and Seniors Care. Manitobans recog­nize and ap­pre­ciate the hard work and long hours you've all put into keep Manitobans safe.

      Today is a sig­ni­fi­cant milestone in Manitoba's vac­cina­tion campaign with 2 million COVID doses administered. Thank you to those who have partici­pated in our historic vac­cina­tion efforts thus far. And I encourage those who have not yet to roll up their sleeves and get vaccinated.

      I would also like to take some time to put on the record some of the work being done by this gov­ern­ment to help fight COVID­‑19 and to help protect Manitobans in the largest vac­cina­tion campaign ever seen in Manitoba's history.

      Over 2 million, three–over 2 million vac­cina­tions were administered. This led to 85.3 per cent of elig­ible Manitobans receiving at least one dose, and 81.3 per cent are now fully vaccinated.

      We have worked col­lab­o­ratively with 63 First Nations and 50 Northern Affairs com­mu­nities in part­ner­ship with the Manitoba First Nations COVID­-19 pandemic response co-ordination team.

      We've brought in over $1.2 billion of COVID­-19 funding in Budget 2021. We've frozen the Pharma­care deductible to help provide COVID relief to Manitobans. We've given $60 million to regional health author­ities to offset COVID-related costs to protect Manitobans, another $205.3 million to personal-care homes, com­mu­nity health agencies, service delivery organi­zations to offset COVID costs.

      We've expanded vaccine third doses to im­munocompromised individuals, PCH residents and employees, health-care personnel and for use during travel.

      We've imple­mented hundreds of pop-up clinics to vaccinate Manitobans closer to home, as well as FIT teams, ensuring that every personal-care home in Manitoba had the ability to vaccinate their residents.

      We've expanded vaccine dis­tri­bu­tion to nearly 500 doctors' offices and pharmacies; raised eight vac­cina­tion supersites, two in Winnipeg and sites in Morden, Brandon, Selkirk, Steinbach, Thompson and Dauphin; partnered with five urban Indigenous com­mu­nity organi­zations in Manitoba to create Indigenous-led immunization clinics to help vaccinate at-risk urban popu­la­tions as well as our homeless popu­la­tions.

      We're a part of the team that intro­duced Manitoba's paid sick leave program, provi­ding direct financial assist­ance to Manitobans having to take time off work due to COVID-19.

      We've partnered with North Dakota to ensure that  2,500 essential truck drivers were vaccinated, allowing Manitoba's economy to keep moving; partnered with Manitoba busi­nesses; imple­mented the Fast Pass pilot program; commissioned an in­de­pen­dent review of the Maples Long Term Care Home; launched a new part­ner­ship with doctors and pharmacists to help provide resources for those who are vaccine hesitant.

      And this is only a brief snapshot of the vaccine work.

      I would now be happy to answer any questions you may have. And I also want to intro­duce my officials: Karen Herd, deputy minister; Sandra Henault, acting deputy minister, executive financial officer, Manitoba Health and Seniors Care.

MLA Asagwara: I can certainly ap­pre­ciate the minister's recap, although I think we're all well aware, actually, of the details that she shared.

      I'm going to repeat my question in the hopes that the minister, for the sake of time, will provide a direct response.

      As I stated, we understand and we know, or we're all well aware, that there's staffing challenges in the southern region. Can the minister tell me if admissions to Salem and to Tabor personal-care homes will remain open, and what is her plan there?

Mr. Chairperson: The hon­our­able Minister of Health and Seniors Care (Ms. Gordon).

      If the minister is not ready, we will hold off until she is ready, 'til I get the signal. And if the minister could please keep her video on.

      The hon­our­able Minister of Health and Seniors Care.

* (15:40)

Ms. Gordon: I had the op­por­tun­ity and the privilege of meeting with the CEOs for Salem Home and Tabor Home to discuss some of the challenges that they are currently facing, and I am advised that Tabor Home in Morden and Salem Home in Winkler–they have made the difficult decision to temporarily suspend ad­missions to both personal-care homes as a result of anticipated challenges post–by the public health order issued because of COVID­-19 pandemic.

      So, this is a temporary 'suspent'–suspension of admissions. The decision was not made lightly. We continue to support both organi­zations in terms of supports around making their staff aware of testing options and the testing procedures, talking with their staff who are vaccine hesitant. There's a lot of mis­information out there. What we want to do is work closely with each and every individual that works at these sites to ensure they have accurate infor­ma­tion and they move forward with vac­cina­tion, which is our best defence against the COVID­-19 pandemic.

MLA Asagwara: I thank the minister for that response.

      Can the minister update us on COVID­-19 vac­cina­tions for children ages five to 11, and can she let us know exactly what her de­part­ment is doing to prepare?

Ms. Gordon: I thank the member for the question–gives me an op­por­tun­ity to update the member on doses for those ages five to 11.

      It is my under­standing that Pfizer has gone to the Food and Drug Admin­is­tra­tion with a reduced concentration dose for those ages five to 11. We're continuing to monitor the dev­elop­ments alongside with public health and the Vaccine Imple­men­ta­tion Task Force.

      I want to be clear that this not the same dose that adults are receiving. It's a less concentrated dose, so we will have to procure supply from–through our federal colleagues, and the federal gov­ern­ment is keeping us updated on dev­elop­ments as they unfold. And again, we may need a new supply, and we are waiting–hearing from the federal gov­ern­ment on next steps.

MLA Asagwara: Thank you, Minister, for that response. That's infor­ma­tion that's pretty readily available for all folks who are following this really im­por­tant dev­elop­ment at this stage in this pandemic. I guess I'll be more specific: my question is in regard to whether or not your de­part­ment is taking steps to be proactive in anticipation of these vac­cina­tions being available sooner than later, we're all hoping, for ages five to 11 years old.

      It is certainly incumbent on your de­part­ment and your leadership in order to make sure that we're not being reactive at this stage in the pandemic. We're seeing what, you know, the trans­mis­sion of these variants are doing in other juris­dic­tions, certainly within younger popu­la­tions, in juris­dic­tions just on either side of us.

      And so if the minister can provide some clear detail in regard to whether or not her de­part­ment has a plan or is actively working on a plan and what the details of that looks like so that they are prepared and ready to go to make sure that those vaccines are distributed widely as soon as they're available to the public. Can she provide some details there in regard to this? Many parents, caregivers, com­mu­nities, are depending on that infor­ma­tion, and I think that would alleviate a lot of the concerns of Manitobans and anxieties as they await that infor­ma­tion.

Ms. Gordon: I want to assure the member that our gov­ern­ment is indeed being proactive in terms of preparing for the vac­cina­tion of the five-to-11-year-olds.

      So one of the things that we have been paying very close attention to is the vac­cina­tion program for the age group 12 to 19 that is currently under way. So that is the vac­cina­tion program that's being rolled out by the edu­ca­tion system and is school-based. So under that program, vac­cina­tions are being offered at school as well as after school hours in the form of com­mu­nity pop-up clinics. So there's a lot of lessons learned, and we're gathering the infor­ma­tion so that the rollout of the vac­cina­tion for the children aged five to 11 will be seamless and without glitches, so to speak.

      So we continue to look to the vac­cina­tion imple­men­ta­tion task force to lead the way and to give us a framework for the rollout of those vaccines as they become available. So public health is keeping us very much updated, but I also want to put on the record that the school-based vac­cina­tion program has been indeed a success with 97,128 people aged 12 to 19 are now fully vaccinated with two doses.

      So we will take the lessons learned from the suc­cess­ful rollout of the older children in the school system and apply them very much to the ages five to 11.

      Of course, we always want to hear from parents what worked well, what didn't work well and to take that infor­ma­tion and improve on or make any changes  that need to be made before the rollout for five-to-11-year-olds begin.

MLA Asagwara: I thank the minister for that response.

      I understand that Shared Health has esta­blished a patient flow group; that's a direct quote.

      Now, I'm wondering if the minister can share whether or not this is a new group that's been formed? Or is this just a reactivation of the access block group that was developed earlier in this pandemic? Can the minister provide some details around that?

* (15:50)

Ms. Gordon: I thank the member for Union Station (MLA Asagwara) for the question. So to respond: it is not a reactivation of the access block project, although access block was identified in the 2017 wait times task force report.

      This group has come together to focus in on the health system command structure, and they want to focus and ensure that the maximum capacity for Manitobans needing care is available. So this group, while they are functioning during the COVID pan­demic, will continue their work after COVID has passed–and we hope that will happen very, very soon–and build on their work and continue, because patient flow is not just an im­por­tant issue during the pan­demic. It's an im­por­tant issue at any time, at all times for Manitobans to receive care in the right place at the right time–and, I want to stress, the right amount as well.

      We want to ensure that once an individual's acute needs that required them to go to hospital has been resolved, that they are received in the ap­pro­priate level of care, whether that is at home with home-care supports, whether that's personal-care home, sup­port­ive housing or at another service delivery organi­zation within the health-care system.

      So the work of the patient flow group will continue to be very much needed after the–post-COVID pandemic.

MLA Asagwara: Thank you, Minister, for that response.

      I apologize–I didn't quite hear part of your answer, so I just want to clarify: Did the minister say that the structure was part of the incident command structure, or that it was the health system command structure?

      I didn't quite hear that correctly, and if the minister can clarify when this group, this patient flow group, was esta­blished, that would be great.

Ms. Gordon: I'm pleased to clarify my earlier answer.

      So the group is part of the health incident command system right now. It was created in the spring of 2021, but going forward it will stand–it will be a stand-alone group that continues to look at flow within the entire system, again, to ensure individuals are in the right place at the right time and receiving the right amount of care within our hospital systems.

MLA Asagwara: Thank you, Minister, for provi­ding that clari­fi­ca­tion.

      I'm wondering if the minister can provide some clari­fi­ca­tion around blood testing, serological testing, the survey rates of COVID­-19 infection in the popu­la­tion. Can the minister tell us what has been found through doing that serological testing and how that corresponds to levels of infection found through PCR testing?

* (16:00)

Ms. Gordon: I thank the member for Union Station for the question. Her question relates to 'seriological' testing and PCR testing.

      So, what I understand from Dr. Roussin, our chief public health officer, is that with 'seriological' testing, we're seeing–this is just an esti­mate of–one in four individuals with COVID but there are individuals that are presenting to hospital that are going right into hospital and, at times, ICU that have not been tested. The first time they received the test is when they present at emerge or at another entrance to the health–the hospital system.

      So, fewer people are seeking PCR tests, although they may have symptoms. So that is what has been reported through public health in terms of the 'seriological' and the PCR tests.

MLA Asagwara: I thank the minister for that response. I would remind–I, unfor­tunately, am dis­appointed to have to remind the minister that I do use gender-neutral pronouns. I know the minister is well aware of this and typically does respect that. Maybe it was just an unintentional slip. So just a gentle reminder to the minister about that.

      I'm wondering if the minister can provide some clarity now around ICU capacity. So, we know–we all know that Manitoba ran out of ICU capacity in the spring, right after, actually, the former minister of Health said that there was an abundance of capacity, in terms of ICU beds, and unfor­tunately had to send 56 patients to other provinces, including the costs of care, trans­por­tation and ac­com­moda­tions for loved ones, which this gov­ern­ment said would be provided for.

      So with that in mind, the fact that the gov­ern­ment had to send 56 patients out of province to receive life-saving inter­ven­tion, ICU care, if the minister can tell us, including again the costs of care, trans­por­tation and ac­com­moda­tion for the loved ones of those patients, what was the final cost of having to do so, of having to send those 56 patients out of province?

Ms. Gordon: ICU care and physician care provided through interprovincial billings for the 56 patients is some­thing that takes months to sort out between the two juris­dic­tions and may not be available until the end of the fiscal year '21-22.

      What we do have access to is the companion cost. So, companion costs accrue when we send an individual to accompany the patient to their transfer destination. The de­part­ment is seeking that infor­ma­tion now. We can have it available before the end of today's session.

MLA Asagwara: I thank the minister for agreeing to that under­taking to provide that infor­ma­tion before the end of today.

      I would ask if the minister can endeavour to provide the other details, if she would be willing to take that as a matter of–under ad­vise­ment as well.

Ms. Gordon: I also want to apologize to the member for Union Station for using the wrong pronoun when my–I answered the earlier question. My sincerest apologies for that error.

      And, yes, we will take it under ad­vise­ment and make that infor­ma­tion available to the member.

MLA Asagwara: Thank you, Minister, for all of those responses. Very ap­pre­ciated.

      I'd like to go back to my previous question regarding serological testing and what that indicates for us in relation to PCR testing. I just want to make sure that I'm perfectly clear on what the minister provided in terms of that infor­ma­tion–folks presenting to hospital and being admitted.

      Can the minister clarify that what she meant by her response was that 75 per cent of people who are presenting to hospital and who are admitted with COVID–that in fact, they have–that 75 per cent, so three out of four folks presenting, have never had a PCR test done previously? That they've had no PCR test; therefore, they haven't had any contact tracing before presenting to hospital and being admitted for COVID?

      And can the minister verify the data around whether or not those folks were in com­mu­nity while symp­to­matic or asymptomatic?

* (16:10)

Ms. Gordon: To respond to the member's question about the individuals that are presenting to hospital and whether they have been tested, and also the question of whether they are in com­mu­nity asymptomatic or symp­to­matic, we can say that, yes, there are individuals that are in the com­mu­nity that are asymptomatic or symp­to­matic but are indeed infected with COVID.

      Some may think, as we've heard, that it's a cold, it's flu symptoms and weak–and may not be willing to undergo testing. So we recog­nize there's reticence to testing, and that's why we continue to reinforce in our messaging that if you do have symptoms, please go and get tested to ensure or to rule out if you don't have COVID, that you have indeed been infected with COVID.

      And we continue to reinforce in our messaging the need to follow the fun­da­mentals: If you're sick, stay home, practice physical distancing, wear your mask, wash your hands and, yes, go and get tested if you do have symptoms.

MLA Asagwara: Thank you, Minister, for that response.

      I'm not sure if you didn't hear part of my question. I'll try it for the third time just so that I'm perfectly clear, but I did ask if you could–if the minister could clarify, rather, the infor­ma­tion she brought forward in her ad­di­tional response.

      Can the minister please clarify as to whether or not three-quarters of the people who are presenting to hospital and admitted for COVID, if those folks are–have not ever accessed a PCR test prior to being admitted? I just want to make sure that I have that infor­ma­tion perfectly clear; just the minister provided a response earlier that wasn't entirely clear.

      So if the minister can please clarify her earlier statement: Are, in fact, three-quarters of folks who are accessing the hospital and admitted for COVID not actually having been tested for–via PCR test ahead of that admission?

Ms. Gordon: So the number of individuals that present to hospital that have been tested or not tested varies on a daily basis and varies according to region. So it does fluctuate and it does change on a daily basis. So I wouldn't go as far as to say 75 per cent in terms of talking about the entire province, but certainly region-by-region that may be the case from one day to the next.

MLA Asagwara: So, I'll–maybe I'll go back to that question. But for now I am going to move on.

      And I am wondering if the minister can provide some infor­ma­tion around the STARS contract that we know is up. It expires at the end of this fiscal year, March 31st, 2022.

      In a prior response to a matter under ad­vise­ment, the acting minister at the time stated, and this is a direct quote: Shared Health will reintegrate these clinical services within emergency response services upon contract expiry, which is nearing.

      So my question to the minister is: Given the fact that the STARS contract for Lifeflight is ending on March 31st, does the minister intend to bring this contract to tender this fiscal year? And if the minister can explain, what exactly does reintegrate this program actually mean? Does the gov­ern­ment intend to keep this contract with a third party?

* (16:20)

Ms. Gordon: The planning process is indeed very complicated and the RFP process is under way. I can report that, right now, the RFP process is exploring how to actually go to market for the range of services that we need. So looking at rotary wing, like the helicopter services; fixed wing, like the plane and basic air. So, that process is under way and we look forward to the results of the RFP process.

MLA Asagwara: So under that same matter of ad­vise­ment, it provided some clarity around agency nursing costs for the Northern Health Region by fiscal year for 2017‑18, 2018-19, 2019-2020 and 2020‑2021.

      Could the minister under­take to provide the cost of agency nurses for all health regions for the–for these same fiscal years?

Ms. Gordon: I'm pleased to respond by first stating that we value the in­cred­ible work that is being done by our nurses in our health-care system, and I had the op­por­tun­ity in an earlier response to–or in my opening statement and intro­duction to thank them for their heroic efforts during this pandemic.

      Our goal is certainly to only use agency nurses when absolutely necessary and when there are specific shifts that our own nurses are not able to complete.

So I want to share with the member some of things we are doing as a government to address our nursing recruitment and retention efforts. So we've recently announced plans to add close to 400 new nursing edu­ca­tion seats, and I'm very pleased to be working very closely with my colleague in the Ministry of Edu­ca­tion–Economic Dev­elop­ment and Jobs, where they have launched a new initiative that will help internationally educated nurses, and we have seen 1,200 initial applications.

      In addition to that, we have created an internationally educated nurses navigator to help those individuals to navigate the system of getting their licensure so that they can practice right here in our province. And, of note, the Manitoba Nurses Union president, Darlene Jackson, in September, stated that these internationally educated nurses are Manitoba's best chance at helping our system in the short term, and we are taking action.

      In addition to those initiatives, we've added 16 full-time nursing positions to ICUs in Brandon, Grace Hospital, St. Boniface and Health Sciences Centre. And we continue to train nurses to work in ICUs. Since April 2020, 137 nurses have completed the critical care orientation program, and I'm pleased to receive an invitation from the Rady Faculty of Health Sciences College of Nursing to partici­pate in their graduation ceremony in–this month, later this month, where we will welcome 115 nurses to our health system, who will be graduating.

      So we are adding, Mr. Chair, to the system many new nurses so that, of course, we, as I said before, we will not have to rely on agency nurses to help us fill shifts in our health system.

MLA Asagwara: So, unfor­tunately, I won't thank the minister for that response because there wasn't an answer to my question in there, so I'm going to try one more time.

      Could the minister–would the minister agree to under­take to provide the cost of agency nurses for all health regions, for all fiscal years 2017-2018, 2018‑2019, 2019-2020 and 2020-2021?

Ms. Gordon: I want to, for the record, state that the member has asked for the agency nursing costs for 2017-2018 fiscal year, 2018-2019 fiscal year, 2019‑2020 fiscal year and, lastly, 2020-2021 fiscal year. We will take this under ad­vise­ment and make this infor­ma­tion available to the member.

MLA Asagwara: I thank the minister for that under­taking.

      As I indicated just a few moments ago, I'd like to go back to the question around PCR testing and serological testing. I do think that's a really im­por­tant area of focus, and it's im­por­tant for us to have a clear under­standing of what infor­ma­tion the public health, your de­part­ment, has been able to garner from those channels.

      So could the minister please clarify if the serological testing that's being done is only being done–or spe­cific­ally, rather, being done on admission on presenting patients only, or if the serological testing is being done more broadly, if there's more broad surveillance serological testing being per­formed? Thank you.

* (16:30)

Ms. Gordon: I want to clarify, so that it's on the record, that 'seriological' tests are not used to diagnose COVID­-19. So this is just one more tool in the toolkit for public health experts to assess how pervasive COVID is in the popu­la­tion and how to fight COVID.

      And I want to point out–I have the stats from yesterday's daily COVID-­19 update for October 6–and these are for–and so the member talked about whether individuals that are presented to hospital have not been–there are testing–there is testing occurring every day. And so, for example, yesterday the total lab tests completed–and these are PCR tests–was over 1 million tests. And tests completed as of–that was total–and tests completed as of yesterday: 3,029 tests.

      So PCR-tested individuals are presenting for testing. So this is not to say that no one is being tested and that they're only being tested when they present to hospital–and to clearly explain that 'seriological' tests are not used to diagnose COVID­-19.

MLA Asagwara: Thank you, Minister, for that response.

      I'm not quite sure why the minister doesn't want to provide clarity around how serological tests are being utilized in Manitoba. Certainly, I recog­nize what their purpose is, but I think it's im­por­tant for us to have a good under­standing of how serological testing is being utilized in Manitoba and what the implications and indications of that testing are. It's a completely relevant question, especially given what we're seeing with case numbers and with folks presenting to hospital quite sick–many of which, as informed today by the minister, are folks who have never received the PCR test.

      So, you know, the understandings of why one test is used versus the other doesn't provide any clarity around the use of serological testing by the Department of Health, and that is infor­ma­tion that is fun­da­mentally really im­por­tant for us to know. And so I'm not quite sure what the minister's resistance is to provi­ding clarity around that question. I would hope that, at some point, she would see the value in sharing that infor­ma­tion and chooses to do so.

      For the sake of time, I'll move on.

      Can the minister please inform us as to what the vacancy rate in critical care Manitoba health-care facilities is right now?

Ms. Gordon: I want to share some infor­ma­tion with the member from the Public Health Agency of Canada about antibody 'seriological' tests.

      So this is a test that uses a sample of your blood to check for antibodies. So an individual's body makes these after its been exposed to a virus. A positive 'seriological' test means that at some point an individual was infected by a virus, but it can't tell how long ago this infection occurred.

      So, just to put on the record again, that 'seriological' tests aren't used to diagnose COVID­-19 in early states of infection since they don't detect the virus itself.

      So the test can help but, again, it's one of the tools in the tool kit for public health to esti­mate how many people have had COVID­-19 and to better understand how much the virus has been spreading in the com­mu­nity and deter­mine which public health measures need to be in place.

      And, you know, back in April of 2020, Canada launched the COVID­-19 Immunity Task Force to lead a Canada-wide unified effort to perform 'seriological' tests. And again, it was to deter­mine the groups of Canadians who will receive serological testing as a first priority, and the task force is co-ordinating with provinces and territories, in­sti­tutions and research groups.

      So I'm certainly not shying away from talking about 'seriological' tests. I'm just not sure what the connection is between tests that–this testing and PCR testing or the individuals that are presented to hospital.

      So, again these tests aren't used to diagnose COVID-­19. It's one of the tools in the tool kit that public health is using to deter­mine, again, measures that need to be put in place and to better understand how much the virus has been spreading in the com­mu­nity.

MLA Asagwara: Thank you, Minister. You still haven't answered that question, but that's okay. I'd like to move on because it's clear we're not going to get a response in regards to what I'm asking spe­cific­ally.

* (16:40)

      So the minister did fail to answer my question previously and it was very direct. So I'll ask it again, very directly, in the hopes that the minister can provide a quick response. It's a pretty clear question.

      What is the vacancy rate in critical care in Manitoba health-care facilities right now?

Ms. Gordon: I do want to note that the vacancy in nurses is not unique to our province. This is some­thing that's seen–being seen globally. So at the national level, at the inter­national level, this is a long-standing issue that goes back even to the previous gov­ern­ment.

      But I am pleased to say that our gov­ern­ment is taking action, and I also want to point out that one of the actions we are taking is to launch the new initiative, the internationally edu­ca­ted nurses pro­gram, where we've seen 1,200 initial applicants and provided each of those applicants with $26,000 to help them to integrate into the health system and get their licensure.

      These are individuals that are already in our province and we are going to help them to move through the licensing system using our navigator to get them working on the front lines, parti­cularly during this difficult time of the COVID pandemic.

      And I also want to note that the Manitoba Nurses Union president, Darlene Jackson, was recently on CBC–I think it was as early as just last month, and stated that the­–this internationally educated nurses program is one of the key drivers to best–and best chance of helping our system in the short term.

      I also want to share that we are training and recruiting and staffing our nursing positions. We have a two-week general ICU nurse training session. We esta­blished this back in April 2021. A total of 137 nurses have completed the training between April and July. The Critical Care Nursing Orientation Program is also showing some really great success. It was shortened from 16 to 12 weeks and it is esti­mated that 120 to 150 nurses are required to enroll in the program to support 28 overcapacity ICU beds.

      And so, the 12-week course began being offered in June of 2021, and so 12 nurses enrolled and completed training August 30th. August 2021, we saw 15 nurses enrolled and will–and completed training for October 11th. So, that's just around the corner.

      And then September of 2021, 40 nurses enrolled and will complete their planned training for November 22nd. We have another intake planned for November '21 and we esti­mate that there will be 67 nurses enrolled and even more nurses will be coming forward as this program progresses.

      So, again, this is an issue that is being seen across our country and globally. We're talking to our mem­bers of the federation–Alberta, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia, all across Canada–and we're hearing that this is an issue.

      I myself have heard this from as far as Jamaica, that they have a nursing shortage. And so, globally, we are seeing this to be an issue. And we are sharing best practices in terms of recruitment and retention. And some of these initiatives that I have mentioned today are certainly showing good success.

MLA Asagwara: So it's not lost on me–the minister just made a statement that I think is–it really resonates: that we are, in fact, in a very difficult stage in this pandemic. We are ex­per­iencing now a fourth wave, we see that. We see what's happening in other juris­dic­tions.

      I have to wonder–as the Minister of Health recognizes that sig­ni­fi­cance of where we're at in the pandemic, as the Minister of Health goes out in front of the media and to the public and asks people, pleads with Manitobans to get vaccinated, impresses the importance of getting vaccinated upon all eligible citizens, talks about making plans and getting ready for five-to-11-year-olds to get vaccinated–I have to wonder, what does the minister think when members of her very own caucus seem to be resistant–and almost downright refuse–to be held to the same standards that the minister goes out in front of the media and expects Manitobans to adhere to and to be held to?

      I wonder what the minister thinks when she reflects upon the fact that members of her own caucus refused to wear a mask in the Chamber for quite some time, throwing a scarf around their face, like, making a mockery of mask mandates that help save lives.

* (16:50)

      And so I'm wondering if the minister could share her thoughts on the fact that members of her own caucus are asking citizens–the same health-care workers and heroes and front-line service providers that the minister calls heroes, we all call heroes, and we thank for their service–what does she think of her own members of caucus? We don't know if they're anti-maskers or anti-vaxxers. I don't know.

      Actions do speak louder than words. So I'm wondering if the minister can share her thoughts on some of her own colleagues' positions on not getting vaccinated, not adhering to mask mandates and actually being in this building as legis­lators, as ministers currently?

Ms. Gordon: I believe the Premier (Mr. Goertzen), who's also House leader, addressed this during the House session today. My views are very much aligned with his comments, and I would prefer at this time to focus on the Estimates for the Min­is­try of Health and Seniors Care.

MLA Asagwara: I think it would be–you know, as the Minister for Health, I know that there are many people who are eager to hear the minister's position on that. Many folks who are working in public sector with vul­ner­able people and who have risen to the occasion time and time again during this pandemic. I'm sure they'd love to hear from their Minister of Health, what she thinks about her own MLAs not rising to the occasion, as these public sector front-line workers have done through­out this pandemic.

      But in the spirit of what the minister has just said about focusing on Estimates, I would go back to the question she failed to answer a couple of questions ago when I asked it directly: What is the vacancy rate in critical care in Manitoba health-care facilities right now?

Ms. Gordon: I'm pleased to just high­light some of the in­cred­ible work that's been done by leadership within the system. Lanette Siragusa, as most of us are very familiar with that name, she is the chief nursing officer for Shared Health and she is working closely with all the chief nursing officers across the entire province.

      So all the RHAs, they're in constant dialogue with the Manitoba Nurses Union and there is definitely a shared goal to help nurses within the province. They are regularly talking about recruitment and retention, how to be innovative in terms of filling vacancies within the system.

      And so our focus is on moving forward to support our nurses here, and now and the initiatives that I high­lighted previously are showing very good success and our gov­ern­ment continues to focus on part­ner­ships with stake­holders such as the Manitoba Nurses Union and others to meet the needs of our nurses here in Manitoba.

* (17:00)

      So, our focus is laser-focused and it is results-oriented and we're seeing a lot of good success with the initiatives that I could put on the record.

MLA Asagwara: I have to say I'm a little perplexed here. This question is some­thing that former ministers were eager to provide some clarity around.

      And it's unusual, I've asked this question directly now several times, and the minister seems to have no interest what­so­ever in provi­ding a clear response on an issue that is in­cred­ibly im­por­tant given the fact that we know we have less capacity in critical care in this province than we did in previous waves. Our health-care system overall is really struggling.

      And so I'm not quite sure why the minister is unwilling to provide this infor­ma­tion. Again, this was taken under ad­vise­ment by the former minister of Health who provided quite a lot of detail that was very helpful. And so I'm going to move on from that specific question.

      But I am going to clarify, again, the former minister of Health provided infor­ma­tion about nurses in critical-care units including the number of posi­tions, number of positions that were filled, the number of vacancies and the vacancy rate. The former minister actually broke out that infor­ma­tion, broke it right down by the type of nurse and by facility.

      So, for some reason, this minister is refusing to answer my previous question.

      Can the minister at least agree to under­take provi­ding this infor­ma­tion that the former minister of Health, like I said, was happy to provide under an under­taking? Can this minister agree to take this as an under­taking to provide the infor­ma­tion as it stands right now?

Mr. Greg Nesbitt, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair

Ms. Gordon: I will take that under ad­vise­ment and take that request back to my de­part­ment and will take some time to compile that infor­ma­tion. But we will endeavour to make that available.

MLA Asagwara: Thank you, Minister, I do ap­pre­ciate that.

      I'm wondering, while you take that under ad­vise­ment, can the minister also provide similar infor­ma­tion that I've just requested for respiratory therapists?

Ms. Gordon: The request for the vacancy rate for respiratory therapists in the system will also be taken under ad­vise­ment and we'll take that back to the de­part­ment and we will endeavour to compile that infor­ma­tion for the member.

MLA Asagwara: Thank you, Minister. I thank the minister, rather, for that response and for agreeing to that under­taking.

      I'd just like to ask a question now in regards to the licences of three personal-care homes in Manitoba that are still under special review, including Maples, Parkview and personal-care home in Thompson, Nisichawayasihk.

      Can the minister please update us on the current status of these reviews?

Mr. Chairperson in the Chair

* (17:10)

Ms. Gordon:
I want to correct the record that the Niwichikana [phonetic] personal-care home is not located in Thompson. It's located in Nelson House, which is 80 kilometres west of Thompson. So I do want to correct the record in regards to that.

      We do have a branch in the De­part­ment of Health and Seniors Care, the licence and compliance branch, which constantly monitors when a licence is under review. And where there are con­di­tions applied to the licence for the personal-care homes, they work very closely with the leadership of the personal-care home and the site to address the issues. A very com­pre­hen­sive plan is developed in terms of resolving the issues that are in the review and what ongoing work will be done to help the–to ensure the organi­zation moves from a licence with con­di­tions to full licensure.

      So we certainly–I certainly, from my office, monitor through the licence and compliance branch what is happening in terms of these three PCHs and ensuring that there is movement and progress on the recom­men­dations that come forward from reviews that are under­taken from time to time.

MLA Asagwara: So, we're hearing a lot of concerns regarding staffing, service levels and response times for EMS services right now–so emergency medical services. And unfor­tunately, a lot of the public reporting on this has been removed. And we're hearing a lot–I just met with many paramedics just the other day–we're hearing a lot about overtime and detach­ments running very, very thin with very little resource–human resource.

      The de­part­ment previously did provide quarterly reporting called response compliance reports. Now, I'm wondering if the minister can provide some clarity around this. We know that that's no longer updated as it was previously–or provided, rather, the same way it was previously–but can the minister provide to me–actually, you know what, what I would ask is if the minister can actually take as an under­taking to provide the most recent response compliance report.

Ms. Gordon: I have been monitoring very closely the EMS system in our province, and today I had the op­por­tun­ity to rise in the House and thank all our health-care workers for their heroic efforts during this pandemic. And I also spe­cific­ally identified our para­medics and EMS personnel, and I truly thank them for the in­cred­ible work and the way they stepped up during this pandemic to ensure services, health-care services, to Manitobans are continued and maintained.

      I also had the op­por­tun­ity to meet with the leadership of the MAHCP just yesterday, and we talked very candidly and very openly about the issues that they are seeing in the rural and northern areas of our province. I've relayed their concerns and they shared some very innovative solutions as well. And I had the lead for emergency response services from Shared Health on that meeting with MAHCP, and following the meeting we discussed at length the importance of the matter in terms of supporting our EMS and paramedic personnel.

      I can agree to provide the data on the–related to response times. I don't–I cannot say for sure with certainty that it will be in the same format as the response compliance report. I think that dates back to 2018 or maybe possibly earlier than that date, but certainly I will take that under ad­vise­ment and have a discussion with Shared Health about provi­ding infor­ma­tion related to response times.

MLA Asagwara: I'm going to allow my colleague, the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Lindsey), to ask some questions.

Mr. Tom Lindsey (Flin Flon): I thank my colleague from Union Station for allowing me to ask a few questions. Most of my questions, Minister, will be more specific to health care in the North.

      Can the minister just confirm that she believes that everyone in the province should have access to suitable health care?

* (17:20)

Ms. Gordon: I thank the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Lindsey) for the question.

      I want to talk a little bit about the clinical and pre­ven­tative services plan. This is a sig­ni­fi­cant focus of Manitoba's health system transformation, has been the dev­elop­ment of the province's first clinical and pre­ven­tative service plan, which is a road map to improved access, shorter waits and better health out­comes.

      So for all Manitobans–so it's definitely focused on provision of health services in a prov­incial way, so not necessarily carving out sections of the province, but ensuring that equity of services across the province and across the system.

      I am pleased to say that in March of 2021 our Manitoba prov­incial budget announced the largest health invest­ment in Manitoba's history, an approximately $812-million commit­ment for im­prove­ments that will support the plan's goals of better care sooner, and this is the largest invest­ment in Manitoba history for rural and northern Manitoba.

      I've begun to–and that–make an­nounce­ments related to some of these invest­ments and I look forward to more in the days and months ahead.

Mr. Lindsey: Thank you for the answer, Minister. It really didn't answer the question.

      Let's talk very briefly about care closer to home, parti­cularly for people in the North. I'm sure the minister is aware of the Northern Patient Trans­por­tation Program. Is the minister aware of some of the more recent dif­fi­cul­ties with people, parti­cularly from Flin Flon and The Pas, being able to access health care when they have to go to Winnipeg with the present flight schedule from Calm Air that is only three days a week–Sunday, Wednesday and Friday–which means that for some folks to get to their ap­point­ment they have to leave on a Sunday, and if their ap­point­ment happens to be on a Wednesday, means they don't get home until Friday. And I'm sure the minister's aware of the costs of hotel rooms and meals and cabs and all the rest of that stuff.

      Has the minister heard any complaints about people not being able to access health care, cancelling ap­point­ments, missing ap­point­ments and having to bear exorbitant costs to get health care?

Ms. Gordon: I do want to note that air carrier services have been very unpredictable through­out the pandemic and many air carriers have had to change their schedules depending on traveller loads. And I do want to note that our gov­ern­ment is very committed to ensuring individuals can receive the care and the health-care services when they need to travel to receive those services.

      And, of note, in the fiscal year 2019-2020, we paid out, as a gov­ern­ment, $18 million in travel expenses and that was for 20,000 patients or clients to travel for care, and when we compare that to 2004‑2005, that was $709 million, and so the dollar amount certainly has grown.

      And if the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Lindsey) has specific scenarios or clients that he would like us to–yes, so, 2004-2005, $7.9 million–so if the member would like us to in­vesti­gate a specific situation or scenario, I'd be pleased to hear from the member and look into any specific issues through the de­part­ment.

Mr. Lindsey: I thank the minister for that response. So then I would assume from that response that the minister and her de­part­ment have some plan to reply to the multiple letters that I've sent to this minister and her predecessor on issues involv­ing northern patient trans­por­tation and, parti­cularly during COVID times, with the altered flight schedule of Calm Air and people's inability to access health care that they should be entitled to.

      Now, I get that the minister quotes some numbers and they've gone up since 2004, but–and really, hasn't every­thing?

      So, does the minister believe that her gov­ern­ment should increase the budget for northern patient trans­por­tation, parti­cularly in light of the fact that services in the North have been dramatically reduced since 2016?

* (17:30)

Ms. Gordon: One of the changes that I would like to note is that our gov­ern­ment made changes to the virtual tariffs for physicians to allow individuals to access care at home and to have those virtual ap­point­ments because of the disruptions due to COVID pandemic in their carrier services and flights.

      And we, as a gov­ern­ment, can demon­strate that even though there was this disruption for our carriers, we pay more under the northern patient transport program than any other previous gov­ern­ment has done. So we saw disruptions in terms of travel for ap­point­ments through­out the province, not just in the North but in the rural areas, and that's why we made this virtual tariff available to physicians, because there were some individuals that just did not want to leave home and to be travelling from one region to another. But we continued to support our northern patients when they do decide to travel for care by paying for those expenses.

MLA Asagwara: Can the minister–I'm going to ask the minister a question now about the funding letter for the WRHA.

      So, the funding letter for the regional health author­ities should have gone out by now, and I'm wondering if the minister can provide clear infor­ma­tion around how much was budgeted for the WRHA last year and how much was committed for this year. And that would be a global allocation.

Ms. Gordon: I can confirm that for last year, as the  member has requested, for the WRHA, it was $1.61 billion and committed for this year $1.62 billion.

MLA Asagwara: I thank the minister for her response.

      Can the minister tell us if she is intending–if the de­part­ment is intending on developing a triage protocol, and if so, when can that be expected?

Ms. Gordon: I do now have a cost for interprovincial transfer for companions for ICU travel, and that amount is $15,610.45. So when we send a patient out of province and a companion is required to travel with them, this has been the companion costs that we have paid to date.

MLA Asagwara: If the minister can just–she didn't actually provide a response in regard to triage protocol. Is the minister intending on developing a triage protocol? If yes, when?

Ms. Gordon: I recall from my days working in the system with the Winnipeg Regional Health Author­ity that our health-care pro­fes­sionals, our physicians, our surgeons, our nurse prac­ti­tioners and–are always on the front lines caring for patients that enter the system and spend time in our system. And as with any medical protocol, triage protocols are developed by those pro­fes­sionals in the health-care system and not by elected officials. So we continue to work with and take the advice of our health system leaders and Shared Health on this very im­por­tant matter.

MLA Asagwara: Can the minister clarify the cost for companions who ac­com­modate the loved ones who are transferred out of province for ICU care?

      The total that she–that the minister just provided, can the minister clarify if that total cost, is that the cost per companion or is that the total, the sum total, of all expenses for all of those folks. So if she can provide that clari­fi­ca­tion, that'd be great.

Ms. Gordon: I'm pleased to clarify that it's the total costs for all individuals that travelled with a patient as a companion. So $15,610.45, and it was on a voluntary basis if the patient requested for a family member or a loved one to travel with them as they received care.

Mr. Lindsey: I just want to go back a little bit to the northern patient trans­por­tation issue. You've talked a little bit about virtual care, and certainly a lot of folks in the North ap­pre­ciate the fact that they don't have to go back to Winnipeg all the time for follow-ups, that a lot of it can be done virtually.

* (17:40)

      Can the minister tell us how many people from northern Manitoba have to go to Winnipeg once a month to get a needle in their eye for glaucoma and macular degeneration-type things?

Ms. Gordon: Now, we would certainly move back or take this up with the northern regional health author­ity to deter­mine what infor­ma­tion, how granular the infor­ma­tion is that is tracked for individuals that are travelling for care. I don't know if, within the financial system, personal health infor­ma­tion would be linked to financial infor­ma­tion, so we'll have to–I'll move back through­out the de­part­ment with the northern health–regional health author­ity.

      I do want to place on the record again that for 2019-2020, we paid out $18 million in travel costs. That was for a little under 20,000 patients. And, again, I'm not sure how granular the infor­ma­tion is that's being tracked, but I will look back through the de­part­ment and connect with the northern regional health author­ity on that.

Mr. Lindsey: I ap­pre­ciate that and I look forward to the minister provi­ding that infor­ma­tion as soon as possible. It ties into the whole question around people's ac­ces­si­bility to health care.

      As the minister's probably no doubt aware, surgical services in Flin Flon have been shut down. Birthing services in Flin Flon have been shut down. Birthing services in The Pas are under stress due to nurse shortages, which is requiring more travel, which, of course, would increase the cost.

      But what the minister is not really grasping here is that a senior, for example, that has to travel to Winnipeg once a month to get a needle in their eye and now has to spend anywhere from three days to five days in a hotel and associated meals, can't afford that.

      So, does the minister agree that there needs to be some changes made to the northern patient trans­por­tation policy that was written in 1995 to update it to current standards for medical care and cost recovery for people from the North?

Ms. Gordon: I want to talk a little bit about the northern patient transport policy and put on the record that Manitoba's opted to have this program and to develop this program, recog­nizing that individuals needed to travel to receive care. It is not a require­ment of the Canada Health Act. It's Manitoba responding to a need right here at home.

      And what we hope to do through the clinical pre­ven­tative services plan is to not increase but to reduce travel require­ments and to make it possible for individuals to receive care closer to home, care that is safely delivered.

      So as we continue to roll out different com­ponents of the Canada–of the clinical pre­ven­tative services plan, we hope to see a rate reduction in individuals having to travel from the North to come into Winnipeg for services.

      And individuals are not just travelling from the North. They're travelling from rural areas we well and this is why we've under­taken this type of trans­formation because we recog­nize that travel has–certainly is difficult for individuals–elderly individuals, individuals that are having to leave their sup­port­ive network at home to come to the city.

      So I look forward to many an­nounce­ments in the weeks and months to come that will demon­strate our commit­ment as a gov­ern­ment to reducing these travel burdens on individuals, not just in the North but also in the rural areas of our province.

Mr. Lindsey: I thank the minister for that non-answer.

      We haven't seen what this gov­ern­ment's plan for the North is. We've seen bits and pieces of it unfold in front of us with services shutting down in various centres. And the minister talks about provi­ding care closer to home.

      So far her gov­ern­ment is failing miserably in that endeavour, parti­cularly for people in the North. We've seen services in Lynn Lake, Leaf Rapids, Flin Flon all disappear, cut–positions disappear and cut. We see nurse vacancies, health-care-aide vacancies and all the rest of it, disappearing.

* (17:50)

      So we're left to depend on the Northern Patient Trans­por­tation Program. But if the program never gets updated from what it was in 1995, then how will it accurately reflect the needs of northern Manitobans, parti­cularly right now with COVID impacting the number of flights coming from the North, impacting the amount of money that northerners have to pay for the same health care that you take for granted as being free here in the city? We don't have that.

      What is your plan to address that problem?

Ms. Gordon: I'm pleased to have the op­por­tun­ity to elaborate a little bit on the clinical pre­ven­tative services plan. So, again, our gov­ern­ment has invested $812 million in capital invest­ments for northern Manitoba and rural Manitoba, and this is a historic invest­ment to address the needs of com­mu­nities in the North and in the rural regions of our province. So those invest­ments will, as they continue to roll out, will certainly shape, going forward, care for individuals living in those areas

      We also offer the virtual care tariffs so that physicians can provide services virtually, and the feedback from clients that have taken advantage of virtual care is that they like the service, they want it to continue and it has served them well in terms of reducing their travel burden, having to come to the city where, again, their support networks are not with them, and that can sometimes be very disturbing for some individuals.

      We've also announced that there will be a northern intermediate hub. The location and timing of that is to be deter­mined. But we are very committed as a gov­ern­ment to ensuring that, as I said before, that care is provided to individuals closer to home, and this is a long-standing issue and our gov­ern­ment has taken action to address the needs of our rural and northern com­mu­nities.

Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Thank you, Madam Minister. There often seems to be dis­crepancies between what patients are reporting and what, in the case–indeed, physicians are reporting and what the gov­ern­ment reports in terms of wait times.

      So what is it that starts the clock in terms of the gov­ern­ment-reported wait times? Does this start when the schedule–the surgery is actually scheduled or when the diagnosis happens, or when the individual first sees a specialist and the specialist says that I'm going to do the surgery?

Ms. Gordon: I thank the member for River Heights for the question, and we do have this infor­ma­tion available on our public-facing website for the de­part­ment, and I'm pleased to share what is available in terms of the question when does a wait time start and end.

      And so, historically, the starting point for wait times does vary but all provinces and territories have agreed that the measurement of wait time should start when the physician determines that the patient is medically ready and the patient consents to treatment as indicated by the booking of the service. And the wait time ends when the patient receives the service.

      And that infor­ma­tion is trans­par­ent and available, as I said before, on our public-facing website.

Mr. Gerrard: With the Rapid Access to Addictions Medicine clinic, I've heard from individuals that they've been told that a person must not have taken alcohol or drugs for 24 hours before they can be seen at the rapid access and addiction medicine.

      Is this the way that things are proceeded? It seems that normally you would expect that somebody with an addiction could be treated imme­diately rather than having to go through, essentially, withdrawal for 24 hours.

Mr. Chairperson: The hour being 6 p.m., committee rise.

Room 255

* (15:10)

Mr. Chairperson (Len Isleifson): Good afternoon. Would the com­mit­tee–pardon me, would this section of the Com­mit­tee of Supply come to order.

      We have one small item of busi­ness before we begin today with the De­part­ment of Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment.

Families

(Continued)

Mr. Chairperson (Len Isleifson): At this session's previous meeting, where we considered the Estimates of the De­part­ment of Families, an error was made and an incorrect number was read out in a resolution that was passed. Therefore, I ask that this com­mit­tee briefly revisit reso­lu­tion 9.3 of the De­part­ment of Families so that we may read the correct number into the record and pass the reso­lu­tion as written in Estimates.

* (15:20)

      I will now re-read the reso­lu­tion.

      So reso­lu­tion 9.3: Be it RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $13,616,000 for Families, Cor­por­ate Services, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2022.

Resolution agreed to.

      Thank you. So we will now continue with the busi­ness before this com­mit­tee.

Agriculture and
Resource Dev­elop­ment

Mr. Chairperson (Len Isleifson): The next set of Estimates to be considered by this com­mit­tee of the supply is for the De­part­ment of Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment.

      Does the hon­our­able Minister have an opening statement?

Hon. Ralph Eichler (Minister of Agriculture and Resource Development): Mr. Chair, yes, I do have an opening statement.

Mr. Chairperson: Minister Eichler, go ahead.

Mr. Eichler: Well, good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment.

      Our gov­ern­ment is committed to supporting ongoing innovation, growth, im­prove­ment and resiliency to reach the full potential of our prov­incial resources on behalf of all Manitobans.

      The de­part­ment's core budget is $257.5 million for 2021-22, which represents an increase of 1 per cent over the previous year. The–Budget 2021–budget continues to advance the needs and op­por­tun­ities for Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment with funding that focuses on economic growth, competiveness and sus­tain­ability, while ensuring the pro­tec­tion of Manitoba's natural resources.

      The agri­cul­ture and natural resource sectors directly contribute 11.5 per cent of prov­incial gross domestic product and 7.4 per cent of prov­incial jobs in 2020. The de­part­ment continues to invest in busi­ness risk manage­ment pro­gram­ming such as AgriInsurance, AgriStability to ensure a strong and healthy agri­cul­ture sector.

      In addition, the de­part­ment invested $62 million into ag recovery drought assist­ance to support livestock producers challenged by Manitoba's extreme dry con­di­tions. This drought assist­ance program for the livestock and forage industry is the largest in Manitoba's history.

      Despite the challenging weather con­di­tions, Manitoba Agri-Food and processing sectors continues to grow. It is one of the key economic drivers of the province with a $2 billion invested in–by Manitoba pro­ces­sors since 2016.

      The Budget 2021 continues invest­ments that'll average Manitoba's protein advantage with support focused on the protein advantage strategy imple­men­ta­tion to position Manitoba as North America's leader in sus­tain­able plant and animal protein.

      As part of these efforts the Manitoba gov­ern­ment and the protein consortium–pardon me–protein consortium has released the sus­tain­able protein challenge dialogue final action to impact map and guide sector action, plans and out­comes.

      Through the 2021 budget, Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment is investing an ad­di­tional $100,000 to implement the protein advantage strategy with support for sus­tain­able protein dev­elop­ment initiatives and invest­ment attraction to build busi­ness dev­elop­ment op­por­tun­ities for plant and animal protein.

      The budget offers continued support for engineering research, training and innovations related to sus­tain­able livestock production and processing jobs, protect environ­ment and focus on work related to the land use require­ments for livestock production, greenhouse gas emissions and efficient use of water and energy.

      Through our partici­pation on the 2 Billion Trees Program, Manitoba will access to $63 million over the next 10 years towards increments, projects focusing on natural infra­structure, supporting sus­tain­able forest manage­ment and incremental reforestation projects.

      The Food Dev­elop­ment Centre will 'naw'–now operate as a section within the de­part­ment, focused on building Manitoba's competitive advantage in the agri-food sector.

      The budget also contains ad­di­tional funding to support the animal welfare program and sound animal welfare practices. Manitoba's allocating almost $1 million in ad­di­tional funding to help implement key recom­men­dations from the animal 'welfale' program review, bringing in a total invest­ment in animal welfare in the province to $2.7 million.

      A new one-welfare program will provide $150,000 towards the edu­ca­tion and 'charege' manage­ment for animal welfare in remote com­mu­nities. The budget also includes ad­di­tional funding of $400,000 for a total of $2 million allocated to our geoscience pro­gram­ming to support informed decisions on mineral aggregate oil and gas resource op­por­tun­ities and attract invest­ments.

      The increase in funding will support collaborative initiatives focused on mineral studies in the North and invest­ment attraction from mineral dev­elop­ment companies. In addition, the mining strategy is–dev­elop­ment to encourage invest­ment in Manitoba with an em­pha­sis on marketing Manitoba as a preferred juris­dic­tion for exploration and dev­elop­ment.

      We have created a dedi­cated capacity within the de­part­ment, provided a single-window approach to permitting and licensing. A project has been initiated to esta­blish a single-window permitting system for mineral exploration to help mining dev­elop­ment.

      We also have created a dedi­cated capacity for en­gage­ment and con­sul­ta­tion with 'indigewous' com­mu­nities, public and industry to ensure they are partici­pating in shaping gov­ern­ment programs and policies, strengthening Indigenous relationships and boosting their partici­pation in economic activities has been embedded in many of the de­part­ments' strategic initiatives, including our protein strategy and mining strategy as part of the de­part­ment's efforts toward truth and recon­ciliation.

      With the intro­duction of the edu­ca­tion property tax rebate, combined with the farm school tax rebate, we are putting more money back in the hands of farmland owners. The de­part­ment also continues to make invest­ments that protect the environ­ment, natural resources for Manitobans while addressing climate change issues.

      To enhance climate change adaptation and mitigation, the de­part­ment has developed a number of green initiatives, including the GROW program; environ­mental farm planning; watershed ecological goods and services; beneficial manage­ment practice, otherwise known as the BMP; the water manage­ment strategy. Many of those initiatives are well underway.

      That concludes my comments, minister chair. I'll turn it back to you.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank you very much for your comments.

      Does the critic from the official op­posi­tion have an opening statement? [interjection] Mr. Brar, go ahead.

Mr. Diljeet Brar (Burrows): I do not have an opening statement.

Mr. Chairperson: Okay, we thank you for that, then.

      So, under Manitoba practice, debate on the minister's salary is the last item considered for a de­part­ment in the Com­mit­tee of Supply. Accordingly, we shall now defer con­sid­era­tion of line item 3.1(a) contained in reso­lu­tion 3.1.

      Does the com­mit­tee wish to proceed through the Estimates of this de­part­ment chronologically or have a global discussion?

An Honourable Member: Global discussion.

Mr. Chairperson: Global discussion? Thank you. That­–it is agreed, then, that questioning from this de­part­ment will proceed in a global manner, with all reso­lu­tions to be passed once questioning has concluded.

      The floor is now open for questions.

Mr. Brar: Thanks, everybody. Welcome back to the session again, and welcome back, old-new minister. It's always a pleasure to work together for Manitoba producers.

      I would start with a request to the minister to under­take to provide us with a current organizational chart for the de­part­ment, including names and vacancies.

* (15:30)

Mr. Eichler: Yes, Mr. Chair, just a question to help my critic understand–we're giving the right infor­ma­tion.

      So, we do have a staff organizational chart that we had developed just recently once the restructuring was done on August the 3rd, or are you wanting a organizational chart going back prior to the re-org, once the de­part­ment was reorganized?

Mr. Brar: The latest one, Mr. Chair, that's what I am requesting for after the reorganization, and what's the current situation, with all the details of names and the vacancies at present.

Mr. Eichler: So, Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment, we have–our de­part­ment has 824 FTEs as of August the 31st, 795 which are regular, 16.8 are term. There's zero technical. There's 11.35 'departmentals' that's hired under delegated author­ities. We have 224.25 vacancies, which is a 24 per cent vacancy rate. And we have 65 staffing which author­ized requests have been approved to fill those positions, so I hope that helps my critic in his numbers that's he's asking for.

Mr. Brar: Would the minister be able to provide the names and vacancies for all the parts of the de­part­ment?

Mr. Eichler: Yes, we can endeavour to get that to my critic as soon as possible. As you know, COVID has certainly made an impact on those that are working in office and those that are working from afar.

      Coming from your back­ground, under­standing–having worked for our de­part­ment at one point in time in your career, certainly understand that, you know, we do have a turnover from time to time. And of course, what we will be sharing with the critic will be based on whatever date that's at, with the under­standing that those positions do change on a 'fegular'–regular basis.

      But for all intents and purposes, it'll give you an outline about what–who's in place now or at the time which we have the infor­ma­tion provided available. And we can provide that to you either in writing or by email, whichever the member prefers.

Mr. Brar: I thank the minister for this infor­ma­tion.

      As we all know that extension services are extremely im­por­tant for addressing infor­ma­tion needs of our farmers. Can the minister kindly share how many farm production extension specialists the de­part­ment has lost since 2016, and how many have been hired since then?

Mr. Eichler: I–I'll start back in 2016 to give my critic a bit of the back­ground infor­ma­tion.

      So I was sworn in on May the 3rd of 2016 as a minister of Agri­cul­ture as it was known at that time. It's entirely a different min­is­try now. Agri­cul­ture makes up about 20 per cent of our de­part­ment. I've–don't have the exact numbers of the staff members we had when I was minister before, but as I put on the record early on, we have now over 800 staff. That is very diverse when you consider con­ser­va­tion officers, you know, mining, forestry, but we can provide numbers on the–on our production officers in order to try and help the member understand how it has changed so much, and also now with the focus on trying to offer better services faster, we'll–also reallocated some of those to different offices now so we have a mass perspective, an agri­cul­ture perspective for it–so the rules representing work together and work in tandem.

      As the member knows, a number of those vacancies and positions have changed since even from last spring. But we can endeavour to get the member a list of those persons, what they were in 2016 and what they are now. But they'll be totally different than what it was in 2016 as opposed now to 2021, and I hope that might help the member understand how the plan has changed in five long years.

Mr. Brar: Thank the minister for the response, which I don't think is one that satisfies my demand for that infor­ma­tion.

      It's clear that we have 824 FTEs in the de­part­ment, but my focus here is public extension services. As we all know that public extension services are the unbiased neutral extension services that are very much required for the farming com­mu­nity to make decisions on their part.

      So my question is that–I can make it simple: Did we lose a sig­ni­fi­cant number of farm production extension specialists–the people? In simple language, the people who go to the farm and recom­mend tech­no­lo­gies and answer face-to-face questions with the farmers.

      So, I'm talking about that parti­cular group of people which could be livestock environ­ment agronomy, soil sciences. So, these farm production extension specialists used to be in a good number back then. How much of that workforce did we lose over the years?

* (15:40)

      The reorganization of de­part­ments doesn't impact how this question has to be answered because we're talking about a parti­cular thing that was there. It's still there, but I think it has been shrunk a lot.

      How much did it shrink and how many specialists in this category we lost over these years? It could be from 2019, from 2018, 2017–not necessarily since 2016. So, the minister can try again.

Mr. Eichler: I'll try and share this infor­ma­tion with my critic.

      So we have our director, which is–underneath that parti­cular individual, we have an admin­is­tra­tive assist­ant. Then we have an extensive–extension co-ordinator. I can provide the names–I'm not going to put them on the record–to my critic. And then we have a–under the manager of crop production, and then we have a crop specialist pathologist. We have an 'etomologeologist', a pest manager for potatoes, a bee specialist for a crop specialist, another potato position–that one is vacant. Then we have a crop specialist, emerging industry as well; a crop specialist under nutrients; a crop specialist under pesticides; another one under diagnostics. We have one for oil seeds, grains, weeds, vegetables, hemp, pulses, adaptation. We have livestock specialists–several of them. There's one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10 livestock specialists, and we have a livestock adaptation. And then also, under Ag adaptation, we have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight–and now those also 'incrude'–also eggs and poultry, turkeys as well.

      We also have soil folks; we have one, two, three, four, five soil survey, environ­mental–two are environ­mental. So–but we'll give the–my critic a full list of those on our org chart so he can be able to see, you know, where we're at now as compared to where we were. It will look entirely different, as the member knows, from being within our de­part­ment. These change pretty well annually.

      And, of course, with our reorg with our Ag offices everybody has access to a production specialist under our new system, so whenever someone calls in, they can ask for whatever service they want and that service will be provided to them. It may not be right at that moment, but in all–most cases, it will be that somebody will get back that's certainly trained in that field of expertise that they needed infor­ma­tion on.

      So that helps my member.

Mr. Brar: And thanks to the minister for the response.

      Most of the infor­ma­tion that I just had from the minister–I ap­pre­ciate the infor­ma­tion, but most of the specialists that he mentioned are actually the prov­incial specialists. I would like to share this with the com­mit­tee for infor­ma­tion that, for example, there's one entomologist in the whole province, so that's a separate story.

      What I was pointing to was, for example, the minister represents a good part of the Interlake region in Manitoba and I don't think that there is any farm production extension specialist crops in Interlake. There used to be two offices–Teulon and Arborg. Now there's only one; Teulon has been closed.

* (15:50)

      So I don't think there is even a single farm production extension specialist in crops. So that was my concern that how the people of that region would seek infor­ma­tion that's available with the de­part­ment. What's the use of having our infor­ma­tion in the libraries and in the books if there's nobody to disseminate that on the farm at the ground level. So that was my concern.

      My next question is, did the de­part­ment hire any farm production extension specialists during these years? If so, how many were hired?

Mr. Eichler: Just for clarity, I'd like to ask my critic, you want the number of extension specialists we hired for the last year or the last five years? [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Brar.

Mr. Brar: Sorry about that, Mr. Chair, thank you.

      I ap­pre­ciate if you can share the infor­ma­tion since 2016. If not, I would take the infor­ma­tion that you have for two years, three years, whatever you have. Thank you.

Mr. Eichler: Yes, rather than try and, you know, wait this out until de­part­ment finds the infor­ma­tion, what we'll endeavour to do for the member is provide him with org charts from, say, the last two years, and that would probably give him the infor­ma­tion that he would need, or we can sit and wait and we can wait for the de­part­ment to gather the infor­ma­tion. It'll take us a few minutes, maybe five minutes, but entirely up to what the member would like to do.

Mr. Brar: I can continue with the next question. In the meantime, the staff can find the infor­ma­tion.

Mr. Chairperson: Go ahead, Mr. Brar.

Mr. Brar: So this is a simpler one; we don't need much research on it. It could be answered off the top of head from the people surrounding the minister, I think.

      Do we have a director in place for this extension division, or it's vacant? If it's vacant, since how long the de­part­ment didn't hire a director for extension services?

Mr. Eichler: I'm very pleased to share with the critic that the primary agri­cul­ture person is Patti Rothenburger Now, she was with me when I was previous minister. She took a leave of absence; she's back; very honoured to be able to have her. She's wonderful, and we're very lucky in De­part­ment of Agri­cul­ture to have her expertise and advice that she provides not only to me, but to the farm families across Manitoba.

Mr. Brar: Thanks, Minister, for the infor­ma­tion.

      I would just like to know what the minister thinks about the extension services in Manitoba. Do we need to strengthen and recruit more extension personnel for our farming com­mu­nity, or the minister plans to shrink the de­part­ment and leave our farming com­mu­nity for infor­ma­tion purposes at the mercy of the private infor­ma­tion providers?

      What's the plan?

Mr. Eichler: That's a real easy one. I was looking for some­thing a little more difficult, but actually, I can be very clear with the member. Agri­cul­ture is one of our economic driver engines, and when I first took this role on in 2016, I can tell you that we didn't really have a col­lab­o­ration and a connection with a lot of commodity groups.

      So what I've done is–No. 1 thing I did is I made a part­ner­ship with the Keystone ag producers to provide advice to me. We also had an advisory group put forward some names for us to find innovation, provide new programs and we started a col­lab­o­rative approach right across Canada, mainly through our FPT. But we have a–probably a stronger relationship now, and part of our New West Part­ner­ship was also very col­lab­o­rative.

      I can give the member, you know, some back­ground and under­standing that how this is so im­por­tant that Manitoba don't get left behind. So we esta­blished not only a relationship with the federal gov­ern­ment but with our colleagues right across Canada.

      Our agri­cul­tural groups here in Manitoba are a bit different than what they are down east or in Quebec or in Ontario. We in western Canada have a diverse need; we provide a lot of cereals, a lot of livestock. So what we talk about is what's best for our producers here and what other programs are being used and developed in other provinces. So we've been able to have that relationship and those ongoing discussions. Even when I just came back to this portfolio, you know, in July, first thing I did was reach out to the federal Minister Bibeau and said, look, we've got a problem here in Manitoba, I need you to come to Manitoba. She was here on Wednesday after I called her on Friday.

      And that's the type of approach that I feel we need for agri­cul­ture in Manitoba. Yes, we have to pay attention, but agri­cul­ture is ever-changing. We never thought about talking about protein like we did, you know, 10 years ago. It's a different story. So agri­cul­ture has to stay in that ever-changing mode.

      We see more efficiencies and feed conversions now than ever before. When we talk about livestock specialists and cereal and pulses, I mean, we're growing more canola and–than we ever did. We're seeing more peas grown than we ever did. Seeing more hemp grown than we ever did.

      So, it's ever-changing and we have to be able to adapt. And our staff has to be able to adapt as well. And that's one of the reasons that we looked at how we might be able to adapt and change.

      So, I know that the member opposite will be able to identify really how quickly we have to pivot. Let's just use our drought for an example this past summer. We had to have those folks that are providing advice, in parti­cular not only just to the meat producers but other livestock sectors to make sure we had enough water in place.

      So it's a diverse–but one that has to be responded to in a very quick way in order to us to be able to pivot to make sure we have–you know, people, you know, in the front lines, giving advice to our producers so they can have the tools to be able to make their im­por­tant decisions on what manage­ment strategy they may have to have.

      So, that's why we went to this phone system, and, of course, they can call on producers as well. There's a few of them that are barely in the office at all; they're usually out talking to producers so–and I know the member knows that.

      So these are critically im­por­tant for us to be able to make sure that we have the advice and the programs in place and those programs developed in a way that's going to meet the needs of today and tomorrow.

Mr. Brar: May I ask how many con­ser­va­tion officers are currently employed by the de­part­ment? What is the vacancy rate in this team?

* (16:00)

Mr. Eichler: Yes, so currently we have 76 of 91 positions that are filled.

      The current complement of 76 includes five officers; they're recently posted from the 2020 class of recruits and it does not include the six new recruits in the class of 2021 who are completing initial training and will be posted in the field roles for on-the-job training in the next coming weeks. [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Brar–

Mr. Eichler: There's eight–I wasn't quite finished, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chairperson: Go ahead, continue.

Mr. Eichler: So we're 83 per cent filled with a 17 per cent vacancy to follow up the last part of my critic's question. Those are my concluding comments, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Brar: Thank the minister.

      How many con­ser­va­tion officers are anticipated to retire in the next five years?

Mr. Eichler: Well, I don't want to date myself here to the whole world, but I don't know when I'm going to retire either. So when asked how many people are going to retire in con­ser­va­tion, we really don't know. Every individual's a bit difference, but I know in my con­ver­sa­tions with the de­part­ment, and with those employees in par­ti­cular, they're dedi­cated to their jobs and they love their jobs. Most of them that have stayed with us through and through, they might be like me and never want to retire. I don't know. I love what I do; they love what they do.

      So to give the member a direct number, we can provide the average age–I mean, but age doesn't really mean a lot anymore. I mean, we live longer than we ever have. We work longer than we ever have and retiring younger than we ever have.

      So to be perfectly open and trans­par­ent with my critic, I really don't know how to answer the question based on, you know, the gen­era­tion we live in. But if it's about age–which it shouldn't be, in my mind–a lot of older folks do a lot better job than some of the younger guys do. But, again, some younger guys do better than the older guys do too. So I'm not going to try and, you know, say how many's going to retire, but I can provide an average age if that would help my critic.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Brar, I believe you're muted. We cannot hear you.

Mr. Brar: How about now? Is it okay?

Mr. Chairperson: That's better, thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Brar.

Mr. Brar: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

      Thank you so much, the minister, for the infor­ma­tion.

      I think you got my point. My point was to know the expected people who would be retiring based upon their age of superannuation. Otherwise, nobody can comment when 70 of the 76 could decide to go home and retire. That was not my question.

      My question is: Is the de­part­ment aware about the upcoming vacancies due to retirement in normal circum­stances, and what's the plan to fill in for those people? Because we are already understaffed; as you said, 17 per cent vacancy rate right now. And if we know that people are aging–everybody is aging and they would be likely be retiring–and then we must have a plan to fill in those positions. That's what I wanted to em­pha­size.

Mr. Eichler: I do want to share with my critic that I retired once and I didn't like it very much, so I–that's why I had to get back to work and do some­thing to keep my sanity. I think a lot of my con­ser­va­tion officers might be a lot like me. They like being out on the land and out in the fresh air. It's an op­por­tun­ity to be able to protect the environ­ment and serve the general public and pro­tec­tion of wildlife, you know, as well.

      But we always strived to make sure that we have a good manage­ment strategy. We talk about their careers, what they're short. I mean, we've made sig­ni­fi­cant changes to the way the wildlife officers work now than what they were doing even five years ago. But that's as a result of con­sul­ta­tion and working tight with them. I can't take any credit for that because that wasn't under my de­part­ment.

      But coming back to my comments earlier on. So, we hired five officers from 2020, six from 2021. So we see a trend of people wanting to be involved in this. In fact, I have a very good friend that's a con­ser­va­tion officer–been since he was 18 years old. To be honest, I don't think he's ever going to retire. It's his lifelong dream. But there'll be others that come along that inherit some money, that are just worn out; they're not ready, and they're probably going to retire before my best friend does. So, really, I really don't have much more to offer my critic other than that.

      But we see an ongoing trend, but we have a very open dialogue with our staff and right now I think we're very strong, and we'll continue to build and reinforce our staff to make sure they have some helpers as they go by.

      And the com­muni­cation system has changed so much as well. When we came into power in 2016, we had antiquated, poor com­muni­cation system, and morale was at the lowest it could have ever been. We've changed that. They have the ability to be able to com­muni­cate better now than they ever did. They need backup: we have helicopters; we've got planes; we have com­muni­cations; we have–they're living their life dream right now under the current situation.

* (16:10)

Mr. Brar: I want to say thank you to all those hard-working con­ser­va­tion officers who are serving Manitobans, some of them has been said most of their lives that's appreciable and that's good and I look forward for the youth to come into this de­part­ment and serve as well.

      But unfor­tunately, these con­ser­va­tion officers are being paid way less than their counterparts in our neighbouring provinces, right and left.

      So, is there any retention strategy that this de­part­ment is working on for these con­ser­va­tion officers? There has been examples–published examples of con­ser­va­tion officers working at a higher level in seniority and moving to another province at entry level and still getting paid more.

      So what are the minister's thoughts and plans for retention of this staff, which is very dear, very good human resource for our lands in Manitoba?

Mr. Eichler: I'd offer my colleague a bit of advice on this one: wages are not set by my de­part­ment, they're negotiated through Central Services. But I do think it's really critically im­por­tant that we do–or, I put on the record–is about working con­di­tions, about the environ­ment, about the tone that's set.

      So, my ADMs and my staff continually meet with these wildlife officers, in order to ensure that they have the tools that they need. They asked for a helicopter; we got them a helicopter. They asked for lots of things. But when it comes to the wages, we let Central Services worry about that. They do a come and–a pull approach, I believe, and probably the–my critic knows. But I believe they're in arbitration now.

      But again, that's not my job as a minister. My job's to provide them safety, make sure they got the right tools, the right working con­di­tions, the 'wight' environ­ment. And to be able to see these young people come through–five last year, six this year–that to me is really exciting. And I have to make sure I have pro­tec­tions for my officers, as well.

      So those are things that as minister of the apartment I take great pride in: to ensure that my officers have the safety that they need, as well as the tools they need in their toolbox, to make sure they're safe and be able to do the good work that they do because, quite frankly, they not only protect people, they protect wildlife too. And they can't do it alone. They have to be in tandem with us and gov­ern­ment.

      And should they be compensated? Darn right they should be. But that's not my job. That's the job of Central Services.

Mr. Brar: Thank you, Minister, for what you're doing for these wonderful con­ser­va­tion officers.

      But we do co‑ordinate with our fellow ministers and de­part­ments to make things better for our workers and our teams. And I think safety does involve financial safety, as well, and I would ap­pre­ciate if you can attract attention of the fellow minister about working around their salaries and their financial betterment in this de­part­ment, because we all ap­pre­ciate what they're doing for all of us.

      Let's move on to the next set of questions. One thing that's common between the minister and myself is that we both love Teulon due to our ties to Teulon, and Teulon is an example where there used to be MASC and Manitoba Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment De­part­ment, which is dead now. It's not there anymore. And with the closure of that office there are impacts in the com­mu­nity. Thousands of dollars that used to go to the local com­mu­nity is lost, and there are–personnel working in the de­part­ment have been moved to different–other locations–for example, Arborg or other locations. We lost those personnel from that com­mu­nity, from that neighbourhood. That also means that the local corner stores and gas stations and whatnot–car mechanics–they lost some­thing with losing this de­part­ment from Teulon.

      I am taking this as an example because both of us are connected to that town, but there are 20–20ish, I would say–other examples that say the same thing that happened to so many other towns, as well, with this PC gov­ern­ment's decision to close these Ag offices and MASC offices.

      So I would like to know, how many people quit, retired or were laid off or terminated or relocated after this decision taken by the PC gov­ern­ment recently?

* (16:20)

Mr. Eichler: Just want to try and lay this out for my critic. It's a bit difficult, but what I will do is kind of lay out what the new service delivery model looks like.

      Our whole intent through the de­part­ment was a single point of access for rural Manitobans to all services provided by Manitoba Agri­cul­ture Services, Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment. ARD and MASC are working continually to improve service, you know, with clients, whether by phone, by email, face to face. We're even talking about a chat line–haven't got that in line–online yet–so they can hit a chat button and do that a more modern way.

      Also what we're trying to is–part of our new model, MASC intro­duced a new position called client service repre­sen­tative to help manage and direct client inquiries. And all 10 client service repre­sen­tatives will now be in place, having received regular training to improve ability to assist clients. Also first-time callers can choose to receive either in French or English. We've been working with the Francophone Affairs Secretariat. So the phones have been modernized to be able to either have languages in both our official languages, English or French.

      Also I think it's really im­por­tant to know that we've added ad­di­tional staff to resource the ARD extension with the intro­duction of our AgriRecovery program. As the member knows, we need to move staff around to meet the needs of today. The member wasn't here, but if you go back to 2011, MASC was endeavoured or directed to take on the flood mitigation, some­thing that we're trained in, but certainly under the previous gov­ern­ment at that time, they were in embarked on flood recovery, mainly around Lake Manitoba and other parts of the province where they were asked to make settlements.

      So staff gets moved around. I can say this, though: that not one person lost their job. They were offered positions within the gov­ern­ment of Manitoba. Our de­part­ment right now is sitting with 65 vacancies that we've had request to fill, right at this very moment.

      But for the last six months, either through retirements or moving out of the de­part­ment or starting a different job, there's been 53 that have left my de­part­ment. I cannot tell the member how many of them are actually Agri­cul­ture because the makeup of the de­part­ment has changed. They either work in climate change, they work in water, they work in the wildlife manage or forestry. There's so many positions that are available for these folks to go to now. Because it's within the de­part­ment they can transfer, they can–they see other op­por­tun­ities. They make new friends, and they'll say, well, jeez, I didn't know Bob would have so much fun in the fishery side. So they make the switch and they go over to fisheries now. But they were in Ag over there with mining. So the de­part­ment's changed so much, the way it was to what it is now.

      So I hope that helps the member with some back­ground on how those positions have changed. But yet they haven't changed, but overall. So, right now, if you do the math, we're up 12 positions from what we were six months ago.

Mr. Brar: Thank the minister for the detailed answer, but I was looking for some­thing else. No worries.

      Can the minister share the total amount of project savings–sales associated with these office closures? How much did the de­part­ment save?

Mr. Eichler: We didn't save a penny, and I'll tell you why: because it's not under my de­part­ment.

      Ac­com­moda­tion Services come under Central Services, so when we look at efficiencies and re-orgs, we don't take into account–now, gov­ern­ment, as a whole, probably saved some money but Department of Agri­cul­ture, resource dev­elop­ment didn't save a penny because that's not under my budget; that falls under social services.

      So, in reality it is, if you look at the cost savings, that was not what this move was about. The move was about how we're going to offer more services, more benefit to our farm families in regards to ag in parti­cular, and that's what this parti­cular issue's about.

      But really, that's what the whole focus was: How do we deliver a better model to meet the needs of our farmers today as opposed to tomorrow or what it was last year from that?

Mr. Brar: It's understandable that there is an impact, but it's hard to measure. I know I have met people. I have been informed that there are so many people in the de­part­ment who are deciding to retire just because of these changes because somebody who was serving in an office, which is at five minutes drive from their home, are forced to serve at an office which is 65 minutes away from their home. That makes them decide to retire early.

      A producer–again, Teulon–a producer five minutes–at five minutes drive from Teulon has to drive 45 minutes to Arborg to get the same services or meet with the same MASC rep or farm extension specialist or whosoever he or she is in the de­part­ment.

      That means if the de­part­ment–doesn't matter if it's agri­cul­ture de­part­ment or any other de­part­ment–but the gov­ern­ment saves money. The gov­ern­ment saves money at the cost of the people filling in their gas tanks more often than they used to to get the same services. So that's where the pain is.

* (16:30)

      Another impact that I'm hearing from the producers is that people have made claims with MASC, had them approved but are still awaiting to receive their payout. Could the minister explain why there are delays in distributing funds at the same time when the minister is claiming that we are making the system efficient? Can the minister provide what the current average processing time is for MASC claims from the time it's made to when payouts occur?

Mr. Eichler: Again, I don't want to date myself here, but when I was farming, things have changed a lot. I see my colleague from Portage la Prairie on the screen here. I know he's a farmer, part of a farm organi­zation from way back. Things have changed so much on his farm that he took over from his father, and things changed so much for–from what his father was doing as well.

      The member brings up an interesting point about staffing and so on. Staffing has been a real challenge with COVID. I don't believe the fact that they had to drive 65 minutes as a reason for staff to leave. I know one of my friends that lives in Teulon–you talk about Teulon–he said by closing the office in Teulon, maybe use the Internet. And he said, I never used Internet before. He said, what I used to take all day to do, I did in 15 minutes with a service person actually in Arborg. And then he referred him to another individual that was in Portage la Prairie. He ended up actually making a claim on some products that he didn't realize what he was able to get.

      So I don't want to just throw tech­no­lo­gy under the bus and staff under the bus by saying that we don't–we had to make you move. They have choices. You can work from home now more than you ever did before. In fact, we backed off on having staff come in because we wanted to make sure they felt safe and they were safe to others. The last thing we wanted to do was have our staff be a part of spreading COVID. So we took those safety precautions.

      But also I want to put on the record for the member to understand, so let me ask–answer the first question in regards to the claim. So, as of April the 1st, we processed 3,231 claims and returned $70 million that's been paid out already on agri insurance. But here's another part of the kicker that we need to understand. So–and I know the member understands this–so we have a lot of disaster in the Interlake area in parti­cular, but other parts of the province as well. So we look back at the crops. So when I became the minister we said, look, how can we help producers get feed for the livestock to be able to try to retain as many as they can?

      So we started on the wheat and the oats, and then we went to the corn, saying, look, the corn's not going to make it. Let's turn that into some feed. My staff, through MASC and all the offices, went to the farms to assess those crops so they could be able to make a decision whether or not to turn that into feed, what their return would be with insurance, or whether to have no insurance. We also allowed producers to come into the program and not have to pay the 20 percent penalty rate as well.

      On top of that, we made sure they were able to get advance payments for their crops. So then we go into–move into ag recovery so we as a gov­ern­ment on August the 10th, I believe–my staff can correct me if I'm wrong–but our gov­ern­ment decided to put $62 million into an ag recovery program.

      So we actually developed a program in part­ner­ship with the federal gov­ern­ment on August the 31st. We were sending cheques out two weeks later. Two weeks later we were able to start sending money out to our producers that were hard strapped. We continue the updates. I'm happy to try and share those with my critic when I get them. But it's all about timing and making sure that we have those services and, quite frankly, I don't think producers care where they're at either. They want infor­ma­tion.

      And things have changed. I use Internet more now than I ever did. Let's be honest about it. I'm sure that my critic does, too. All of us do. We're doing it right now: tech­no­lo­gy changes; staffing needs change. So how do we adapt? How do we give the best service? How do we get the best results? How do we get money in the hands of producers as fast as we can? Even that has changed. We used to–when I was–I was a banker back in the early days, and I can tell you everybody come into the bank to cash their cheque. The women did their things. Now we take a picture with our phone and it's in our account literally in seconds–seconds later.

      So, are we adapting? We're trying to. We're trying to find those tools in the tool box to provide our farm families with those tools.

      And not everybody has Internet; I know that's probably going to be the next question. We're working on that, too, with the federal gov­ern­ment in part­ner­ship to ensure we have the right services at the right times.

Mr. Chairperson: The minister's time has expired.

Mr. Brar: Who knows we would be sitting with the drones tomorrow. That's possible. But, again, the same thing. Rural connectivity, everybody knows where we are at in Manitoba and what the gov­ern­ment is doing to improve that.

      So my question came from one of the producers who is still waiting for their payout for re-seeding their crops, and it's been months. So that's not happening to just a single producer; it's happening to so many producers after these staffing cuts and office closures.

      So as the minister mentioned about agri stability, we all just witnessed this summer the devastating impacts of drought and we know how painful it was.

      Will the minister now sign on to the 80 percent compensation rate of agri stability with the federal gov­ern­ment to provide Manitobans with great pro­tec­tion? Why are–why is the de­part­ment delaying to sign up on that?

* (16:40)

Mr. Eichler: Just–I want to address a question–and I don't know what to do with that question, but I don't like to talk about individuals–but if my critic would like to give me some infor­ma­tion through an email to my office, I'd be happy to check out that individual claim that said he hadn't been paid. I find it interesting, but I'll endeavour to try and get some answers for him so he can get back to that producer.

      We never want to hold anybody up when it comes to payment. So, usually, as the member well knows, there's always two sides to a story, so let's make sure we get the story so we can get the right answers.

      But I'm happy to take that offline if the member wants to share that with me. If he don't, that's okay too. But I sure don't mind getting involved but I don't like getting involved on individual cases. Just like people saying, can you give my son a job? I don't hire people. That–I got staff to hire people, so I don't get involved in it, but I will endeavour to help the member out and get some infor­ma­tion if he needs on an individual case.

      But I really don't want to set a precedent and start dealing with every individual farmer across Manitoba. We would not be able to get those done. But if, say, if it's a serious problem, we need to address it, then I will make sure–but we'll look at it as a government-all-of approach, not just one-off. But I'm certainly happy to do that.

      So, I do want to just come back to the question in regards to AgriStability and AgriInvest. Of course, AgriStability is the first line of defence that's used to support producers financing–facing financial losses, mainly because of poor yields, rising input costs, low commodity prices. AgriInvest balances are ac­ces­si­ble at any time without restriction of the use of those.

      And I want to say that there's 350–almost $351 million sitting in AgriStability right now that's available for producers. And I know the member knows this, but farmers are always reluctant to pull it out. Most of them use that as a savings account, some don't, some do use the programs pretty 'regurly'. But again, that's their manage­ment style. It's their money and they can access it whenever they want, so we don't want that to be part of that.

      The member asked about the 80 per cent. So, what we did to address the doubt–drought-related challenge facing 'Manitobers' producers in '21 AgriStability interim payment was it increased from seventy-five–50 to 75 per cent to assist producers with short-term cash flow issues. Payments are normally made within 30 days.

      The gov­ern­ment of Manitoba and Gov­ern­ment of Canada agreed to invoke late partici­pation in regards to AgriStability, as I said earlier on. So we moved the 20 per cent more payment rebate, those that were proactively enrolled in that. And, of course, when we sit down and we talk, we need two-thirds of the provinces to agree to change the reference margin to 80 per cent, to the member's question.

      Now, Alberta's been very clear on this, Saskatchewan's been very clear on it. As I put on the record earlier on, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta are entirely different than what producers in Ontario, Quebec, PEI, Nova Scotia, and the programs–we almost need a separate program for western Canada as opposed to the rest of Canada. And I tried explaining that and educating my federal minister as well.

      So there's not one size that fits all. So we try to adapt and develop programs that will assist our farmers and make sure that they have the tools in their toolbox to be able to get the best value for their invest­ment.

      I know that we've had con­ver­sa­tions, not only with Keystone ag producers but other lobby groups that come and talk to us. The AgriStability is a great program for the pork producers. We know that that has a very high intake with them; others, not so much. But again, it comes back to each individual's risk management they want to be able to take advantage of. So, there's programs out there but we've got to make sure we get it right, to the member's point.

      And, of course, climate change, how do we adapt with those? Things change on a regular basis and droughts can be part of those; excessive rains can be part of it. Climate change is here and we want to make sure we have a program that's going to meet the needs of our farmers for today and tomorrow.

Mr. Brar: Mr. Chair, can I ask how we are doing on time? Are–is the committee rising at 5 o'clock, or two hours from the time we started?

Mr. Chairperson: Yes, the com­mit­tee will rise at 6 o'clock today. We have lots of time.

An Honourable Member: For Ag?

Mr. Chairperson: Yes, I just–I was just informed that we will be switching over at 5 p.m.

Mr. Brar: At 5 p.m. Okay, thank you.

      So, may I ask the minister about lowest increase in money collected as a result of increases to Crown land leases?

Mr. Eichler: Yes, I'm very respectful. I know I was in op­posi­tion way too long, but rather than hold up the clock–I know–I didn't realize we were going to be gone at 5 o'clock. So rather than–I'll endeavour to get the–I will get the infor­ma­tion to my critic on this rather than hold up questions because I want to be able to help him understand as much as I can about our de­part­ment.

* (16:50)

      If that's okay with my critic. Otherwise, we can go ahead and wait until we get the answer.

Mr. Brar: That's okay; we can jump on to the next question.

Mr. Chairperson: Go ahead, Mr. Brar.

Mr. Brar: What was the average increase to Crown land leases this past year and how many Crown land leases lapsed this year? Or, in other words, how many agree­ments has the gov­ern­ment terminated, if that's easy to find?

Mr. Eichler: So, cancellations for all reasons: 2016, there was 61; 2017, there was 50; 2018, there was 55; 2019, there was 81 with 18 expired because of drain leases; 2020, there was 73, 10 of those were drain leases but some of those are still open. In 2021, we have 35 year-to-date; seven of those were expired drain leases and some of those files are still open.

Mr. Brar: I've been approached by a few producers sharing with me the problem of the ranchers who leased Crown lands. One of the ranchers has approached the minister through email and he also shared that email with me that a number of producers around his farm have been selling their cattle. They've been forced out by Crown land modernization.

      So I'm not sharing this as an individual case but the impact of–the example of the impact of Crown land changes on our ranchers' lives.

      So did the minister get a chance to take a look on that email and is the minister aware what's happening and what's the the impact of this Crown land modernization on our ranchers, especially in the North, and what steps the minister is taking to address this situation?

Mr. Eichler: I'd like to share with my critic–so the fall auction of November of 2020–I think it's working out quite well.

As the member knows, the auction process allows the individual to buy according to his or her own needs based on their evaluation of that parti­cular piece of property. A lot of these are in the North. There's a few in the southern area. But I think it's interesting to note that the auction value is oppose–auction value that was allocated for all those properties was a 102,000–twenty-two thousand, eight hundred.

      Under the auction value allocated that we got was $72,414, of which there were 35 out of the seventy–62 bidders, 35 of those were under the age of 40. So that speaks volumes to me as a minister. We're seeing young folks have an op­por­tun­ity to be able to take advantage of these Crown lands.

      Also want to share with the member: for our February '21 sales–I don't have the dollar amounts, but I can tell you that there was 74 young bidders. That made up 60 per cent of the total registered bidders. There was 124 bidders. Cor­por­ations, that was 30 per cent, which was 15 cor­por­ations. And there was one out-of-province bidder, so I think that the message is speaking loud and clear. Young farmers are having an op­por­tun­ity to be able to take advantage of the new system.

      And the whole idea behind the modernization of The Crown Lands Act was this: that we get in tune with the modern-day age. I had many, many complaints about young farmers not having access to it. So I think we're meeting our goal. And as a result of that, the numbers I just put on the record, I think, speaks volume to the op­por­tun­ity for those young farmers going forward, which will be our next gen­era­tion of farmers.

Mr. Brar: Talking about the com­mercial fishers: they're upset with the minister and the way his de­part­ment treats them. They strongly feel the de­part­ment favours anglers over them due to personal connections between de­part­ment employees and Manitoba Wildlife Federation. This situation is also supported by a published media story that the minister is aware of.

      Could the minister share with the com­mit­tee the steps taken to address these concerns and get back to the com­mercial fishers to satisfy them the de­part­ment is working unbiased?

Mr. Eichler: You know, I can't talk about a parti­cular case. That the member's very much aware of. But I have endeavoured. There's been an in­vesti­gation that's ongoing–an allegation made against my staff, so I will not discuss that here, just to protect those that are being investigated.

      But I can tell you that the member's wrong when it talks about our relationship with me as a minister. I just recently got back from Cedar Lake and Grand Rapids. I can tell you we were so happy to be able to have the certification process for Cedar Lake.

      Chief Beaster [phonetic] was over the moon. Also, the chief from Grand Rapids, also, was over the moon with our organi­zation. I can tell you that our relationship with our fishers has never been, probably, stronger.

      Yes, there's some hiccups in the system that we need to work out, but I will not accept the fact that they're not happy with me. They probably want some answers what we want to get. Once we have that behind us, we're happy to sit down with those fishers and have those con­ver­sa­tions. I have no problem sitting down with our fishers at all. But I have to be careful to protect my staff at the same time.

Mr. Brar: I ap­pre­ciate the minister being open to–

* (17:00)

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Brar, sorry to interrupt you, but we lost your trans­mis­sion there. If you wouldn't mind starting over.

Mr. Brar: Are you getting me now?

Mr. Chairperson: Yes, sounds better.

Mr. Brar: Okay, thank you.

      Could the minister kindly share about sig­ni­fi­cant prov­incial financial help offered to com­mercial fishers to help them sustain during the pandemic.

Mr. Eichler: Well, what we did do for the fishers and for the fishing season of 2019-2020, we waived the fees for our com­mercial fishermen, so that would take some of that respon­si­bility off of them.

      But I can tell you, in my role as Economic Dev­elop­ment and Jobs, we did lobby the federal gov­ern­ment and our de­part­ment here now that–under my new portfolio, we did lobby the federal gov­ern­ment, and the federal gov­ern­ment did provide $10 million to buy the fish back from the fishermen, which was a great move. I know there was lots of people that were involved in that. I know CEDF worked on this as well. Chief Arlen Dumas worked on this as well. We had lots of con­ver­sa­tions about it and I want to say a big thank you to federal gov­ern­ment for stepping forward and those that sided with us in regards to ensuring that the fishermen got some compensation and they got the fish, too, by the way, to share with their families and others that are on those First Nations. Critically im­por­tant to the sus­tain­ability of our fishers. Without those markets–and I'm concerned about those markets. I want to address this.

      I know we're probably going to get cut off, but I want to put this on the record that the fish–fresh fish marketing board is really having trouble with their marketing. Unless we get more eco-certified lakes, we're not going to be able to market our fish on the world market. This is a critical issue for us and we need all parties to be focused on what that should look like.

      Yes, we've moved forward with Cedar Lake. Yes, Winnipegosis, Lake Manitoba, they're having discussions. The fishers on–north of Lake Winnipeg are very much in favour of eco-certification. We have not gotten an agree­ment with the southern fishers on this, but it's an issue that we're going to have to come together on and find a balance to have that certification.

      I'll tell–I'll be very honest, I'll be surprised if fresh fritter–fresh fish marketing board will be around in five years because we're not going to have sus­tain­able markets for them to be able to fish for.

      Critically im­por­tant that we understand that–the necessity of keeping our fishing sector alive in Manitoba. That and net sizes and what to do with that. I know Chief Easter was so excited about working with us in part­ner­ship and, in fact, Chief Heidi Cook also for up around Grand Rapids talked about this as well.

      This is all so im­por­tant for us to be able to have these con­ver­sa­tions with our fishers and make sure we have an agree­ment. This is not about gov­ern­ment; this is about protecting our fishers together as an organi­zation and as gov­ern­ment in part­ner­ship with our fishers.

Mr. Brar: Last two questions. Second last. Last year, Lazy Bear Expeditions was given two permits allowing it to use Churchill Wildlife Manage­ment Area's off-road trail network. New permits for this area have not been issued since 1984. The permits were given with no local con­sul­ta­tion or input. Additionally, an in­de­pen­dent review previously concluded that the current number of vehicles be maintained as is due to environmental impact on bear habitat.

      What oversight was done prior to issuing these permits? Why was there no con­sul­ta­tion prior to issuing these permits?

Mr. Eichler: Thank you, minister.

      You know, our de­part­ment 'susports' sus­tain­able tourism in Churchill. As all members know, Churchill–and with the COVID had really put them in a very bad position financially this year. A lot of them are in that risk of losing their busi­ness.

      With the–after the third wave, we did have an op­por­tun­ity to open up the US border and a lot of those operators were able to have access to a new marketplace.

      But within our polar bear con­ser­va­tion recovery plan along with stake­holders, of course, the town of Churchill, the Indigenous com­mu­nities, basically, we want to continue to have those dialogues as we go forward.

      So, you know, what we want to do is make sure we have–find a balance and also provide economic growth for the Town of Churchill–critically im­por­tant and, of course, making sure that we protect our polar bears as well. Think it's really critically im­por­tant to make sure that we work together on this in part­ner­ship with not only the tour operators, but the com­mu­nity as well to make sure it's suc­cess­ful.

Mr. Brar: Could I quickly ask the last question which is about the drought–with producers being forced to sell their cattle early–in some cases, the entire herds–how many fewer cattle producers are there anticipated to be in Manitoba now as a result of drought as compared to last year, and how many cattle were sold off this year and how does that compare to previous years?

      Thank you, that was my last question.

* (17:10)

Mr. Eichler: Yes, I can give the member some numbers that have been made public. We don't have a direct line with the auction marts to be able to give him exact numbers but I'm sure he can get them from the auction marts, but the numbers that the de­part­ment had for–that was sold in July was quite high compared to normal years.

      So my memory is telling me it was around 1,800 head that was sold as a result of the drought because they ran short of feed, but to have a direct number–I wouldn't be able to do that. But I can share with members that part of our recovery program–our ag recovery program, which I have not got sign-off from the federal minister, but we want to have a herd-rebuilding program so that those that did sell their cows off–and that's not only for them, it's for the bison and we also asked for the elk to be included in this, as well. But it's really im­por­tant that we get our numbers back. Manitoba is known for its great beef and we want to ensure that they come back in just as strong as they were when they left.

      So I can't give him the details of that program because it hasn't been approved yet, but certainly–and quite frankly, I don't know if we'll have to use that money for this coming year either, to be totally honest. I mean, I wished I had a weather ball I could look in and say, what's next year going to look like but the rain has helped us a lot. A lot of cattlemen have been able to hold onto their herds this fall, mainly because of the rain we got since early August.

      I imagine a lot of them wished they would have planted some fall rye to extend that season probably into this month even yet or in the middle of February. But I know we have had applications for a second crop cut on some of our crops that have been popped back up through voluntary growth and we have said yes to that.

      So we're doing our best to maintain the herd numbers but to give the member exact number on those were sold off because of the drought, I just don't have those numbers available but I would suggest probably reaching out to the auction marts and seeing what he can find there or we can assist him in that if–some­thing he feels we should be doing.

Mr. Chairperson: Are there any further questions?

Mr. Dougald Lamont (St. Boniface): Yes, I was going to ask Minister Eichler, you knew–we all know that this has been an extremely tough year for livestock producers. Many have had to sell off their herd. I was talking with producers who have seen enormous numbers.

      Until the rain came in August, there was real fear that we were going to see a wipeout of the herd, so thank goodness for rain, as always. But, you know–and they're selling it off when–usually when we don't sell off livestock.

      Is–can the Minister say when he's going to be announcing funding for the program to help producers rebuild their herds after a lack of available feed?

Mr. Eichler: Well, I would ask the member to support us and if he could get a call in to Minister Bibeau. I'm really not sure when Trudeau's going to announce his new Cabinet or if Minister Bibeau's going to be there.

      Personally, I have a great relationship with her and I know that I can pick the phone up and call her but I'm not even sure if she's in the office yet. So once they're there–she's very much in favour of this program, she's told me. So I'm using that as my ace-in-the-hole for Manitoba producers because she liked the program.

      We're the only province that actually has talked about herd-rebuilding program. It's one I think that would be really im­por­tant for Manitoba because we are known as a cow cap province and we're set up perfect for that.

      So my hope is that we announce it very, very soon.

Mr. Lamont: Because I–it's–can you just clarify, because as I understand both Alberta and Saskatchewan announced. Is there any reason why? Is it just that we're waiting for a federal support?

      I mean, I'm more than happy to make a call or talk to people and–that–there have been an­nounce­ments in Saskatchewan and Alberta. I think it was $200-a-head support.

      So is there any reason why we can't proceed prov­incially, here, in Manitoba?

Mr. Eichler: Yes, Saskatchewan and Alberta did a per-head payment. Now, all of those dollars will not be able to necessarily be–the 60 per cent shared with the federal gov­ern­ment. She, to my knowledge, has not approved those.

      Our program is different than that. Again, I can't get into details of our program in Manitoba but they went­–Alberta and Saskatchewan both went to every cow-calf–every cow in that province and gave them $200 per cow, whether they had drought con­di­tions or not. So that's on them. That worked out to almost $100 per taxpayer in this–the province of Alberta.

      Now, all of our producers were not impacted by the drought so I want to be clear: our program is not for those that don't qualify for compensation. Ours qualifies for those that are in the drought con­di­tions. There's parts of our province, in parti­cular The Pas–I mean, they're sitting very good with feed, with services.

      So our program's based on drought con­di­tions and relied on that and her rebuilding program will be exactly that. It's not for every producer in Manitoba where Saskatchewan, Alberta is. That's the difference between the three provinces, so the member understands.

Mr. Lamont: Thank you, yes. Just some questions about AgriStability.

      There seems to be a pattern–you know, we seem to be leaving money on the table, that there's about $5.4 million unspent in 2020-21 and clearly, it was, you know, a terrible year for lots of producers. And the line for AgriStability seems to show the Province has budgeted around $3 million less this year.

      So just wondering why the prov­incial portion of AgriStability was not spent in 2021 and why is there–why is it budgeted lower for '21-22?

Mr. Eichler: Yes, I'll kind of go back a little bit. My critic had asked me a question on this earlier in regards to AgriInvest. I do think it's im­por­tant to put it on the record again.

      Right now, AgriInvest–we're sitting with $350 million that's available to our farmers. Again, they can apply for this at any point in time that they want. As I said before, a lot of producers, they just try and–what they try and do is find the balance for their parti­cular operation. So, some will use that through crop insurance and take the risk on that, or they can go back through and go through AgriInvest or through AgriStability.

      And it depends on what average, so we go with the markets, one year could be a bit higher or it could be a bit less. And the same with crop insurance; it could be up one year and down the next, depending on the varieties and who–what they have for contracts.

      Now, a lot of grain buyers now are having margins built within their contracts. Now, this year was an exceptional year; we had lots of calls, farmers wanting to say can I get out of my contract. The grain companies got on board on that. In early July, they said, look, we know that you've already committed a contract with us for X number of acres of–or tonnage of wheat; we know you aren't going to make it, so rather than just us be short on ours, what other crops do you have that's available for you to be able to sell. So they make a deal with them on them.

      So it all depends on the year and, of course, this year, some farmers–some farmers, not all–will make off better because we're able to transfer some corn, for example, that wasn't going to make a crop and they'd been paid an insurance claim on that. So we said you can take that crop off for feed and we'll still pay you the amount that you had for crop insurance.

* (17:20)

      Now, mind you, that's going to bring the averages down, so a lot of guys will make off better this year than they would in a normal year when they had a bumper crop.

      But again, the yields are about 50 per cent of normal, but the prices are 50 per cent higher than what they used to be. So it's a double-edged sword on AgriInsurance, AgriStability. It all depends on each individual farm family's needs and wants to protect their farm family.

Mr. Lamont: So, for–I guess for primary agri­cul­ture, it's on the annual report, how many vacancies are there to be almost a million dollars under on salaries and benefits? I know that there was just a report in the Free Press, you know, that we–our civil service has shrunk by 18 per cent and we could be losing a lot more.

      And I'm also hearing we were seeing shortages and for all sorts of reasons–burnout, issues with retention in a number of areas, but is there–can the minister just explain why do we have that sort of level of vacancy and is there anything we're doing to reverse the course or re-staff to make sure that the work that needs to get done, done?

Mr. Eichler: Yes, out of 54, we have seven vacancies in primary ag.

Mr. Lamont: Will there be an effort to be filling those spaces in, or are–because I know that there have been issues. We've been talking with people who've had issues, you know, even getting through to–whether it's getting through to MASC or getting through to the de­part­ment. Is there a plan to fill those vacancies?

Mr. Eichler: I can explain to the member that–from our overall de­part­ment.

      So, our de­part­ment went from roughly about 200 with the re-org and bringing in forestry and con­ser­va­tion officers and mining. Right now we have 65 positions that we're going to be filling. We hope to fill those sooner than later, but it would bring up an interesting point.

      Again, coming back to your party, I would really ap­pre­ciate any help you could give us in regards to trying to get Prime Minister Trudeau to get people off CERB. We're having a terrible time trying to get people back to work. The $2,000 a month–I'll use my granddaughter as an illustration. She's working two jobs. She's making $2,190 a month. She would get $2,000 a month to stay home.

      That's not how she was raised. She said, Grandad, I don't know why I'm doing what I'm doing sometimes, but, you know, my friends are staying home and going to school. And she's going to school at night, by the way, on top of all this. But, really, Manitobans need to get back to work, and we need to stop the programs and try and help busi­nesses get staff. And we are having trouble hiring people, I'll be honest. It's not easy trying to find people.

      And I will talk a bit about my previous role was minister of economic dev­elop­ment, training and jobs, but to have to find the skill set and the knowledge that we need in today's society because it's all changed so much. Even restaurants are mostly digital now. When you go and order your meal, it's digital. A lot of people don't know how to do that. So we need the younger gen­era­tion to help us get to that next level.

Mr. Chairperson: I notice Mr. Wiebe had his hand up. Mr. Wiebe?

Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): Mr. Chair, I simply just wanted to interject.

      I know that we had an agree­ment with our friends in the in­de­pen­dent caucus there that we would maybe give them 10 minutes. I am very–you know, just to disclose, I'm very eager to get to the next section and move on.

      But I'm hoping that we can all have agree­ment here today to just move on, get to the question and then get onto the next section in this com­mit­tee room.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for that. Are there any other questions?

      Okay. Hearing no further questions, we will now proceed to con­sid­era­tion of the reso­lu­tions.

      At this point, we will allow all virtual members to unmute their mics so that they can respond to the question.

An Honourable Member: Mr. Chair? Mr. Chair?

Mr. Chairperson: Go ahead, Minister.

Mr. Eichler: Yes, my colleague from the liberal–the Leader of the Liberal Party had his hand up to ask a question.

      In fairness, I want to make sure everybody has fairness here.

Mr. Lamont: Thank you. I'll just be very brief.

      This is just on the subject of fishers, because I've done a fair bit of work with the com­mercial fishers. I was at their AGM, just to say that there were some very serious concerns expressed about–actually, at Grand Rapids was a–is a com­mu­nity that has lost over a million dollars in–and issues around, how carefully the quota buybacks need to be done. I hope that these–this is some­thing that'll be done very carefully.

      It would be great if the minister would consider retroactively addressing the discriminatory buyback levels, but the other is just to say that for First Nations com­mu­nities that fishing is absolutely essential, and if you're buying out quotas, it can have a devastating impact on those com­mu­nities.

      So I know we all share the interest that this is a resource that needs to be done.

      So I hope that this is some­thing that the minister will consider. Especially, and I'm sure he'd be–I'm sure they'd be more than happy to meet with him as well, if that's some­thing–I'd be more than happy to facilitate that as well as talking to my federal colleagues who, we are actually a separate party so, but I'd be more than happy to help.

Mr. Eichler: Yes, I thank the member for his comments and, yes, we'll definitely–I met with Heidi–Chief Heidi Cook, myself and Chief Easter. We continue to have dialogues with a lot of the First Nation folks.

      And fishing sector's a large part of our economy so we'll definitely endeavour to try and find a balance. I did say quite earlier on how im­por­tant it is to our economic growth in a lot of those com­mu­nities and we want to make sure we find a balance. So we're happy to partner with you.

Mr. Chairperson: I do have to ask one more time: Are there any other questions?

      So, hearing none, we'll move right into reso­lu­tion, then.

      Reso­lu­tion 3.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $13,087,000 for Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment, Policy and Transformation, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2022.

Resolution agreed to.

      Reso­lu­tion 3.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $132,852,000 for Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment, Risk Manage­ment, Credit and Income Support Programs, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2022.

Resolution agreed to.

      Reso­lu­tion 3.4: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $18,007,000 for Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment, Stewardship and Assurance, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2022.

Resolution agreed to.

      Reso­lu­tion 3.5: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $18,067,000 for Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment, Production and Economic Dev­elop­ment, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2022.

Resolution agreed to.

      Reso­lu­tion 3.6: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $53,243,000 for Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment, Water Stewardship and Biodiversity, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2022.

Resolution agreed to.

* (17:30)

      Reso­lu­tion 3.7: BE IT RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $14,163,000 for Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment, Resource Dev­elop­ment, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2022.

Resolution agreed to.

      Reso­lu­tion 3.8: BE IT RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $950,000 for Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment, Capital Assets, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2022.

Resolution agreed to.

      Reso­lu­tion 3.9: BE IT RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $243,100,000 for Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment, Loans and Guarantees Programs, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2022.

Resolution agreed to.

      The last item to be considered for these Estimates is item 3.1(a), the Minister's Salary, as contained in reso­lu­tion 3.1.

      The floor is now open for questions.

      Hearing no questions?

      Reso­lu­tion 3.1: BE IT RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $7,034,000 for Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment, Admin­is­tra­tion and Finance, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2022.

Resolution agreed to.

      So this completes the Estimates of the De­part­ment of Agri­cul­ture and Resource Dev­elop­ment.

Infrastructure

Mr. Chairperson (Len Isleifson): Okay, good afternoon. Does the–let's see, the–this section of the Com­mit­tee of Supply will now consider the Estimates of the De­part­ment of Infra­structure.

      Does the hon­our­able minister have an opening statement?

An Honourable Member: First, I'd like to ask if you could see if there was leave for myself to make a very short statement and the op­posi­tion could–

Mr. Chairperson: Sorry–Minister Schuler, sorry to interrupt you, but I do need to recog­nize you first. So, Minister Schuler, go ahead.

Hon. Ron Schuler (Minister of Infrastructure): I was wondering if you could canvass the com­mit­tee and see if there is leave for myself to make a very short statement on the passing away of Assist­ant Deputy Minister Ruth Eden, which happened this week, and then of course, the op­posi­tion could respond, and then we would go into the regular statements.

      Is there leave?

Mr. Chairperson: Is there leave for the minister to provide a short statement on the passing of Ruth Eden? [Agreed]

Mr. Schuler: Thank you, and it is with a very heavy heart that we must say goodbye to a beloved member of our team here at Manitoba Infra­structure. Assist­ant Deputy Minister of Technical Services and Operations Ruth Eden passed away this week.

      It has been a true shock to myself as minister, deputy minister, senior staff and the entire de­part­ment. Ruth Eden was a mentor, a friend, advocate, trailblazer. She's one of the first women to achieve this high position. She's achieved positions through­out Manitoba. She was a trailblazer. She encouraged young women to get into engineering and was an unbelievable individual in this de­part­ment.

      Personally, she was an in­cred­ible friend to myself, and we did a lot of tours together, high-water tours. And she was always level, even keel, always had good advice, and I'm personally very shocked. I've said to the de­part­ment, I actually don't feel it's even real right now. I'm very, very saddened that we lost an individual who is this–the ranking member of the de­part­ment, and we turned to her a lot to get advice and what was done there and what did we do there and why did we do things. And she always had those answers.

      We can never replace Ruth Eden, and I don't think we should even try. We'll try to fill her position maybe at some point in time, but you can't replace Ruth Eden. We wish her family all the best. I know they're planning a funeral, and I hope at some point in time I can make a proper statement in the Legislature.

      Thank you for allowing us to make this statement. I do want to point out to all members of the Legislature, there's a book of con­dol­ences outside the deputy minister's office on the second floor. If you wish to come by and leave a little note, please do so. If you had an op­por­tun­ity to work with Ruth or you knew her or she's–you got to make her acquaintance, please leave a little note, and that will be handed over to the family.

      So thank you, com­mit­tee, for allowing me a few moments to reflect on the greatness of Ruth Eden. 

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for those very kind words, Minister.

      Did you want to–wish to make an opening statement at this time?

Mr. Schuler: I was wondering if the opposition wanted to make a statement and then I'd go into the opening statement.

Mr. Chairperson: Yes, the indication, Minister, is to go ahead with your opening statement. [interjection] No.

      Minister Schuler, go ahead.

Mr. Schuler: COVID-­19 pandemic, '20-21 fiscal year was challenging for Manitoba Infra­structure, gov­ern­ment at large and all Manitobans. Manitoba Infra­structure recognizes its roles as the de­part­ment of hope, the de­part­ment of the day after tomorrow. Strategic infra­structure invest­ments are fun­da­mental to economic growth in Manitoba as we gain control of this pandemic through 2020-2021 and push to restart the economy in 2021-22. Invest­ment in our prov­incial highway bridge and water control networks will be more im­por­tant than ever. Budget 2021 commits to a three-year horizon of a minimum of $500 million per year for the highway capital budget, beginning with a 2021-2022 highway budget of $505 million, including $107 million for Manitoba Restart Program.

      Overall, budget 2021-2022 include $786 million for Manitoba Infra­structure strategic infra­structure, an increase of 21 per cent from the $652 million announced in Budget 2021–twenty–2020-2021. In detail, the 2021-2022 budget includes $543 million for capital invest­ment in our infra­structure, $107 million for Manitoba Restart projects as well as $136 million for renewal activities, including $124 million for maintenance and preservation of highways and bridges and $12 million for maintenance and preservation of water-related assets.

      Key de­part­ment highlights include the following recent upcoming activities. We view ourselves as the inter­national trade hub that will connect east with west and north with south, not just within Manitoba, not just within Canada, but within North America. Manitoba Infra­structure is proceeding with the first steps towards phase 2 of the Perimeter Safety Review, which will include the north section of the Perimeter Highway, PTH 101, from Portage Avenue to Fermor Avenue. The Perimeter Highway is Manitoba's most im­por­tant inter­national trade hub and is a key link in the Trans-Canada Highway and plays a strategic role in Manitoba's economy by provi­ding industry with access to world markets.

      Phase 2 of the Perimeter Safety Review builds upon phase 1, which was developed for the South Perimeter Highway in 2018. We anticipate completing the safety im­prove­ment projects identified in both phases over the next several years.

* (17:40)

      As a result of Manitoba Infra­structure's recent reorganization, the de­part­ment's budgetary structure will look significantly different in 2021-2022. These changes will contribute to better service delivery in 2021-22 and beyond.

      On May 7th, 2020, the $500-million Manitoba Restart Program was announced. A sig­ni­fi­cant portion of this funding has been dedi­cated for highway infra­structure im­prove­ment projects, including $150 million for asphalt, highway and resurfacing, and $65 million for major projects to improve road safety; $107 million of this spend is scheduled to occur in 2021-2022.

      Manitoba Infra­structure has made sig­ni­fi­cant progress in working through the environ­ment assessment and federal approvals process, and continues to engage impacted com­mu­nities as part of this process. We are also strongly committed to fulfilling our respon­si­bility for con­sul­ta­tion under section 35 of The Con­sti­tu­tion Act. We will proceed with construction as soon as we receive environ­mental approvals. The channels will take approximately four years to construct at a total cost of more than $540 million.

      Manitoba Infra­structure is committed to provi­ding high levels of service while also creating op­por­tun­ities for better value for money. The de­part­ment is working to strengthen part­ner­ships and col­lab­o­ration with munici­palities, industry and other private sector entities to enhance service levels and find efficiencies. The de­part­ment is integrating part­ner­ships into their review of its operating model to deter­mine the best way to reduce soft costs.

      Manitoba Infra­structure is developing a five-year strategic highway invest­ment plan. This initiative will include an invest­ment framework to plan and prioritize future trans­por­tation projects across the province.

Recently imple­mented across the gov­ern­ment of Manitoba, balanced scorecards foster operational im­prove­ments by reinforcing transparency, alignment and account­ability. They've been added to the redesigned sup­ple­ment to identify key priorities for each de­part­ment that staff will work towards, with ap­pro­priate performance measures. With the sup­ple­ment redesigned to be a busi­ness plan that focused on strategic priorities, de­part­ments can take steps to create operating plans that further identify how strategic priorities will translate into day-to-day operations. The performance results of these operations will be shared at the end of the fiscal year in the de­part­ment's annual report.

      In closing, I would like to thank Deputy Minister Sarah Thiele and the leadership that she has shown in this de­part­ment, along with the other ADMs who have been just amazing. We mentioned Ruth Eden, who was just some­thing else to work with. I know with–as de­part­ment minister I will intro­duce all the rest of them when we start getting into the Estimates.

      Thank you. Those are my opening remarks.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank the minister for those statements.

      Does the critic from the official op­posi­tion have an opening statement?

No, he does not.

      So the floor, therefore, is open for questions. [interjection] Oh, I guess I got to do my job right first. So, sorry about that.

      So, under Manitoba practice, debate on the minister's salary is the last item considered for a de­part­ment in the Com­mit­tee of Supply. Accordingly, we shall now defer con­sid­era­tion of line item 15.1(a) contained in reso­lu­tion 15.1.

      Does the com­mit­tee wish to proceed through the Estimates of this de­part­ment chronologically or have a global discussion?

Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): I would suggest a global manner.

Mr. Chairperson: A global matter? Is–any discussion? Everyone agree? [Agreed] Then we shall perform in a global discussion.

      Therefore, the floor is now open for questions.

Mr. Wiebe: I thank the minister for his opening statement.

      Could the minister under­take to provide with a current organizational chart of the de­part­ment, including the names of individuals and vacancies for positions that remain open?

Mr. Schuler: Thank you very much for that question.

      Joining me here today is–and you can follow along on page 11 of the main Estimates sup­ple­ment, Budget 2021. If you want to follow along, there is a organizational chart: Deputy Minister Sara Thiele is here virtually for the com­mit­tee; Cor­por­ate Services Division, Assist­ant Deputy Minister Kristin Seier; Infra­structure, Capital Projects Assist­ant Deputy Minister Rob Taylor; Emergency Manage­ment ADM Johanu Botha who is not with us currently, he is otherwise engaged; and, unfor­tunately, there is chair that will be empty for some time and that will be Technical Services and Operations ADM, the late Ruth Eden. With me is also Andrew Clark, who is my special assist­ant, who doesn't show up on this org chart.

      Hope that answers the member's questions.

Mr. Wiebe: I think what–the minister knows what I'm getting at here and, if he'd refer to pages 65 and 66 of his annual report, he'd note that there is now currently $48 million that's being underspent in his de­part­ment because of staff vacancies in various areas.

      So what we're looking for from the minister is to provide an update to the com­mit­tee of the current number of FTEs in the de­part­ment and, most im­por­tantly, the current vacancy rates so that we can get an updated number to work with as we go forward here over the next couple of days.

Mr. Schuler: In Budget 2021-22, we have 1,820 positions. That is down five from 2020-2021.

* (17:50)

      I'd like to point out to com­mit­tee that currently, as of April 1st, we were at 631 vacancies, and that's also because we have many new positions coming on with reorganization and this would also include the seasonal hirings. So we hire a lot of students for the summer who do all kinds of great work. I would suggest that's how we end up recruiting a lot of really good people into the de­part­ment. We identify individuals who show a lot of talent and a lot of love for what they're doing, and we end up hiring a lot of very smart young engineers into the program.

      So this would also be impacted by the fact that we hadn't started our summer hiring, which is reflecting that.

Mr. Wiebe: Well, yes, I'll have to break out the calculator here, but that seems like an in­cred­ibly high number. Maybe the minister can just clarify by telling the com­mit­tee which area each of these vacancies is in. And I can understand that this might be some­thing that isn't, you know, readily available to him right now, so if he wanted to, you know, take this under con­sid­era­tion, I understand–or, I guess, two days until we come back into Estimates–but we could certainly pick up where we left off there.

      So, just which area are each of these vacancies in?

Mr. Schuler: With the reorganization of the De­part­ment of Manitoba Infra­structure we created an infra­structure capital projects division; that's many new areas. In fact, if you were to go to page 111 of the Estimates of expenditure for the fiscal year March 31st, 2022, page 111 and page 112, Infra­structure Capital Projects, and then under there we have, for instance, under (d) Project Services–this is a new division–will have a centre of excellence, amongst other areas, which we are now hiring for.

      And I would point out that there is a lot of hiring that also takes place seasonally, which would also be reflected in why the number as of April 1st was higher. It's because there is a substantive fluctuation that happens seasonally. This is some­thing that happens regularly and under previous gov­ern­ments.

      It's under ours, we ramp up for [inaudible] too cool we can't lay any more asphalt, and that kind of ends the end of the season, and even with pouring concrete there's a certain limit to which they can pour concrete too.

Mr. Chairperson: Sorry to interrupt there, Minister, but you froze there for about 25 seconds, so we missed some of what you had said. If you want to just do a really quick recap, that would be beneficial.

Mr. Schuler: So thank you.

      Under previous gov­ern­ments, same thing again, we do hire seasonally. Our–as soon as the frost is out of the ground, which was earlier this year, which was very, very advantageous for construction, was a drier year–I know that wasn't very advantageous for farmers or for forest fires, but for construction it was a really big boon. As you know we live at the bottom–in what used to be the bottom of Lake Agassiz and the gumbo, if it gets wet, is very tough to do construction work in.

      So we've had a very good season, and with the extended season with the nice weather that we're having, asphalt's still being laid and concrete without hoarding can still be poured.

      So we hire for those. We try to keep them on for as long as we can. We understand students are now going back to school, and so that number does fluctuate. And I don't know if you caught that we all said the centre of excellence, which is on page 112. That is new and we're going to be hiring for that as well. So, by next year, the entire number will come down to a degree, but again, it does reflect seasonal hiring.

Mr. Wiebe: So I didn't hear the minister commit to getting me that list, and I do think it would be helpful for the work of the com­mit­tee. I think it would be helpful for us to understand exactly where those folks are, so I'm just going to ask him very clearly if he can have that list ready to go for us for next op­por­tun­ity to sit.

      The other thing, and I can ap­pre­ciate we're running very short on time here, that I would ask the minister maybe so that we can be ready to roll next day is for a detailed list of budgeted projects, amounts spent, and deferred projects for the past fiscal year as outlined on page 24 of the public accounts where it breaks down the actuals versus the budgeted amounts for strategic infra­structure for 2021.

Mr. Schuler: While we're getting the answer for that question in the main Estimates Sup­ple­ment of Manitoba Infra­structure, I would encourage you to go to page 18 where the FTEs are listed out by division, so you can have a look at that where the breakout is and that's–that probably answers the question for the member there and mindful of the time that we're under.

      We've had a very busy season and we are constructing right until the last moment where we can still lay asphalt to pour concrete. We hope to see a lot of projects continue after that if they just involve moving earth or piling can be done in colder weather.

      So we will continue with those and mindful that we are just about at the end of our time, if the member has one quick question.

Mr.

Wiebe: Well, no, I mean, I'm well aware of the infor­ma­tion on page 18 in this, you know, paltry book that's been distributed to us that's been, you know, this is the–you know, compared to the previous years and the detail that's available.

So I'm hearing from the minister that there are 631 vacancies and, you know, he's trying to hand wave these away by saying, well, it's seasonal workers. So, well, maybe it's about the reorg or maybe it's about this, you know, the fact that it's–we can't lay asphalt right now.

      Well, I think we need to be very clear here for Manitobans. You know, based on what the minister's bringing forward, you know, this idea that his de­part­ment is the de­part­ment of hope, I think is what he called it, and yet, you know, we don't know why there are so many vacancies. And we hear about major issues and concerns when it comes to safety on the highways and roads in our province.

      So I think he needs to be very clear and detailed about where these vacancies lie and exactly which area they are in and if they can be explained away as simply just seasonal workers that no longer are employed by the de­part­ment, then he should be able to come to this com­mit­tee and bring that infor­ma­tion forward and be proud of that and to say, yes, absolutely, we're on track.

      But that's not what we're hearing from people out in the field, and we're not–not what we're hearing about the safety and the importance of trans­por­tation in our province, especially heading into the winter season.

      So, I just ask that the minister, you know, come in good faith. You know, I try to do the same here, you know, and I'm trying to just get to the bottom of this. Hopefully, we'll have more time next session.

Mr. Chairperson: Order. Time being 6 o'clock, com­mit­tee rise.

Chamber

Executive Council

* (15:30)

Mr. Chairperson (Doyle Piwniuk): Would the Committee of Supply please come to order.

      This section of Com­mit­tee of Supply will now resume the con­sid­era­tion for the Estimates for the Executive Council, which last met on May 31st, 2021, in another section of the Com­mit­tee of Supply.

      As previously announced, there–as there is only one reso­lu­tion, that the decision will be proceeded in a global manner. At this time, I invite min­is­terial and op­posi­tion staff to enter the Chamber, and I would like to ask the members to be intro­duced–their staff once they're here.

Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Premier): I'd like to intro­duce David McLaughlin, who is the Clerk of Executive Council; Elliot Sims, who is the associate clerk of executive 'councer'; and Braeden Jones, who is the special assist­ant to the Premier.

Mr. Chairperson: And we'll have the Official Op­posi­tion Leader intro­duce his staff.

Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): In addition to my colleague from St.  James, I'm joined by Mark Rosner, the chief of staff to the Leader of the Op­posi­tion.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you. Thanks, everyone.

      The floor is now open for questions. The hon­our­able Official Op­posi­tion House–the Official Leader of the–of the Official Op­posi­tion. Sorry about that. [interjection] Yes. I just want to make sure that the mic is on. The official–Leader of the Official Op­posi­tion.

Mr. Kinew: Forever. There we go. There's a–[interjection] Yes.

      So I just want to start by–you know, I just want to acknowl­edge my colleague from Steinbach who has the op­por­tun­ity to serve as Premier of Manitoba. It is an interim role but, nonetheless, it's a very im­por­tant role, and I'm sure that this is going to be one of the highlights of his career. Not an easy job but, you know, we've gotten to know each other over the past few years that I've been here–he's been here much longer than I have, I should quickly point out.

      But, yes, I know that he takes his work seriously. He loves his family very much, and so I do hope that he finds meaning in this role that he's been asked to fulfill, but also maybe he can, you know, stop and smell the roses a bit while he's sitting in that room 204 and just kind of take stock of the journey over politics that's led him here. So I just want to start by saying that.

      Just to pose a question right off the top, just to follow up on, I guess, the earlier com­mit­tee meetings that we've had here. I just wanted to ask if the First Minister can commit to making sure that the previous premier's under­takings in this com­mit­tee are going to be followed through on.

Mr. Goertzen: I want to thank the Leader of the Official Op­posi­tion (Mr. Kinew) for his kind words. I've looked around the office a bit; I haven't found any roses in the office yet. But, you know, it is a historical office and I recog­nize that many amazing things and probably some difficult things have happened in that office as well.

      And I–you know, I really ap­pre­ciate his com­ments and we have had the op­por­tun­ity to speak personally about this role, but then a umber of other things–and it is one of the sad things that people don't always get a chance to see that relational things that happen not on the record, not in question period between politicians because they happen more often than people might recog­nize.

And in the same way, I know that he honours and values his own family. Who–met his wife. I'm not sure that I've met your kids. I don't know if they were at St. John's Park for the powwow, but if they were, they should be very proud of their dad not only in the roles that he's accom­plished politically, but then also the other things and activities that you're involved in in the com­mu­nity. And I think that I can say that without any reservation.

      I think I can also say without any reservation of the undertakings that were under­taken by the previous premier will be fulfilled.

Mr. Kinew: I ap­pre­ciate those words and that commit­ment.

      Similarly, I just wanted to ask if the Premier (Mr. Goertzen) can provide an updated staff listing for Exec Council, including OIC ap­point­ments and a list of technical officers with their titles.

Mr. Goertzen: Will under­take to do that. I can assure him it has not grown since I've become Premier.

Mr. Kinew: All right, so we look forward to that under­taking.

      We know that emergency room wait times have risen again and that there's also a major issue with a staffing crisis in the health-care system. We see evidence of this reported in the media. We also hear about it in terms of case work and phone calls and con­stit­uency work. We hear from people in the health-care system who, you know, asking for privacy, but still reach out to us and try and alert us to issues. This has been a persistent challenge and it's one that became parti­cularly acute in the second and third waves during the pandemic.

      So given that we're now in that fourth wave, as Dr. Roussin says, and we do expect that, unfor­tunately, there will be a greater need for increased health-care capacity over the next few months in Manitoba as a result of the pandemic. I'd like to know what steps are being taken to address that staffing crisis and what new measures right now are being put into place to help bolster health-care capacity for the fourth wave?

Mr. Goertzen: I thank the Leader of the Op­posi­tion for the question. It's a very real question, a very timely question and a question that is being struggled with across the country.

So he will know and he would be sad if I didn't say that prior to the pandemic, when it comes to emergency room wait times Manitoba had seen among the most dramatic reductions in wait times in ERs in the country. In fact, when other wait times are going up in other provinces, ours were going down and quite dramatically. And it had been, I think, the lowest emergency room wait time prior to the pan­demic as–for years, if not decades in Manitoba.

      And then during the first wave–such as it was, the first wave of the pandemic in Manitoba–there were also reductions. That was largely driven, though, by people who were not coming to the ER because they were concerned about getting COVID. There was a lot of uncertainty at that time.

* (15:40)

      In more recent days, there's been a more normalization of the pattern of those who are coming to ERs, and maybe even a few more, because there may be some pent-up health con­sid­era­tions because some people weren't presenting in hospital before.

      So it's good that people go to hospital, go to emergency rooms appropriately. That's not a bad thing. That's not a negative thing. But there's no question that every province across Canada is dealing with those struggles and those pressures. This is not a Manitoba problem when it comes to the pandemic and ER wait times.

I know, in talking to my colleagues across Canada, everybody is feeling that pressure. And often the minimizing and the challenging factor is staff. It's not physical beds, for example, if it's an ICU. It's not space, necessarily, when it comes to an emergency room. It is the staffing pressure that is happening because of the pandemic.

In Manitoba, we've taken sig­ni­fi­cant measures to, as an example, increase the number of ICU nurses we have by putting in training programs that allow nurses to be able to scale up in terms of their skills to work in an ICU. That was sig­ni­fi­cant in helping us during the third wave. I suspect–well, I know it will be sig­ni­fi­cant in helping in whatever occurs in the fourth wave. So those efforts are well under way when it comes to staffing and resources.

We recog­nize, of course, there is a burnout factor when it comes to health-care workers. Recog­nized around the world, not even just in Canada, because there's been a sig­ni­fi­cant load that's been taken on by health-care workers, and so those who are the em­ployers of our health-care workers in the system are working all the time to try to ensure that they can mitigate some of that burnout, speaking to those who are feeling that load and trying to find the ability to provide them some relief in a time that doesn't often offer a lot of relief.

      So it gives me the op­por­tun­ity to thank those who are working in our health-care system and to recog­nize that things are being done, but the challenge should not be minimized.

Mr. Kinew: The Province has contracted with Dynacare to provide many testing services, including COVID testing. Why has the gov­ern­ment chosen to work with a private American company, and why not instead invest in increasing capacity locally here with local providers or investing in Cadham lab.

Mr. Josh Guenter, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair

Mr. Goertzen: I think there has been invest­ment in the public system when it comes to testing and lab work, but the member will–opposite–will recog­nize and realize that when the pandemic happened, there was a need to be able to respond quickly and in a flexible way, and nimbly with quality care and quality services.

      So it wasn't a–you know, a reluctance to support any of the public sector services. In fact, I would say at Cadham labs there's been sig­ni­fi­cant support, increased support, increased testing, more than they've ever done before, but there was a need to be able to provide ad­di­tional service providers, and the member opposite is suggesting that we should not have had that ad­di­tional support.

      He may want to reflect upon what the con­se­quences of that might have been, because it's not just that people were getting tested for COVID­-19. There were all the other testings that continue to happen in the system–pathology and different sorts of tests that happen within the health-care system.

      So I think it would have been negligent of a gov­ern­ment not to look for every op­por­tun­ity to try to increase testing capacity in a quality way in a pandemic to not only–to deal with the issue of COVID­-19 testing, but to ensure that those other tests that need to happen in the health-care system–which continued on and in some ways accelerated during the pandemic [inaudible] would have happened.

Mr. Kinew: Can the Premier (Mr. Goertzen) let us know how much money has been paid to Dynacare, by fiscal year, for their services that they provide to gov­ern­ment and to the WRHA?

Mr. Goertzen: We'll under­take to provide the infor­ma­tion to the hon­our­able member.

Mr. Kinew: We saw in one annual report from the De­part­ment of Health that Dynacare had been paid over $41 million in the last fiscal year. So given the numer­ous reports that we hear in our con­stit­uency offices, Legislative offices, about long waits for seniors in parti­cular and about other challenges accessing testing services, does the Premier think that we're getting good money, value for money, out of the arrangement with Dynacare?

Mr. Goertzen: I know that as we, you know, move through the pandemic–and we all hope that that happens sooner rather than later, but nobody's making any predictions about that–there'll be lots of op­por­tun­ity for folks to look back and to analyze, you know, the different responses that gov­ern­ments have had–and that's not a bad thing. I think, in fact, that sort of analysis should happen across the nation and around the world. Not simply to see what went wrong and what went right, that might be some­thing that an op­posi­tion member might want to see, but really to leave a better playbook for others if there, you know, is another pandemic–and hopefully not in our memory, but it could very well happen.

      There hasn't, of course, been a pandemic of this scale since 1918, so there wasn't a lot of, sort of, playbooks available. So I think, you know, we have the respon­si­bility to leave some of this under­standing and infor­ma­tion to other gen­era­tions if there is another pandemic.

      I'm not going to be critical of the fact that we looked for support, testing when other jurisdictions were scrambling for that as well. He will remember, it wasn't that long ago that it was hard to get PPE, that it was hard to get the different things that we needed when it came to testing. There were critical shortages of medical supplies, parti­cularly at the begin­ning of the pandemic until things could be scaled up in different parts of the economy to deal with some of these things.

      So members opposite for, as opposite as critical, that we reached out and tried to find as much support for Manitobans as we could when it came to testing and other things.

      He can be critical of that, but it was our respon­si­bility to ensure that those who needed to get tests, those who needed PPE, those who needed other medical services could get them in the best ability possible.

Mr. Kinew: So what's the plan over the coming weeks and months to ensure that seniors aren't waiting in the cold to get testing done inside a Dynacare facility?

Mr. Goertzen: I thank the member for the question.

      You know, I think it's, first of all, im­por­tant to remember that any time we hear concerns about services in the health-care system, whether it's, you know, with Dynacare and testing, or otherwise, we follow up on that and work to try to alleviate those challenges. Some challenges are, you know, harder to alleviate than others, but it's not that the effort doesn't happen. There are different kinds of testing that are happening in the system. Of course, COVID­-19 testing is the one that gets a lot of attention, but there are many other tests people are doing when it comes to their health care, and references and referrals that they're getting from their medical pro­fes­sionals.

      So, you know, to the extent that there are challenges for those who are going to Dynacare–I know that there are other options. There are online options, you can book an ap­point­ment for a test. I am not sure that that's always easy for those maybe who aren't used to booking these sort of things online. There are different options and modalities when it comes to testing, but we obviously work with 'servirce' providers to try to improve that.

      But I would say that, you know, the COVID testing right now–that's parti­cularly what the member's talking about–the turnaround time is, I believe, still under 24 hours on average, might be different in different parts of the province. That doesn't alleviate, necessarily, a lineup, if someone is trying to get a COVID test or another test at Dynacare. But we're always working with those health-care providers to try to smooth that out in a time when we understand that there's a tre­men­dous amount of pressure on the health-care system overall.

      But I would say, if the member opposite has a parti­cular con­stit­uent concern, bring that to the Minister of Health. That'll be looked at, maybe they can direct them to things like online booking or other things to help alleviate some of those concerns.

Mr. Kinew: We have been hearing from folks who are waiting quite a bit longer to get COVID testing results, and we also noticed that the advice that, I guess, nurses are giving is it's no longer 24 to 72 hours to expect a test. It's now become 48 to 72 hours to expect a test result.

* (15:50)

      So just wondering, with that in mind, those sort of reports we're hearing from con­stit­uents, the fourth wave continuing to get worse and the comments Dr. Roussin has made about increasing test positivity, parti­cularly in some health regions, what are the plans to expand testing capacity? What is the plan for testing going through this fourth wave?

Mr. Goertzen: We've seen obviously at different times that the demand for testing is different. So you're right, as we go into other waves, naturally, there are higher demands for testing.

      At this parti­cular time, when we're in the fall, there are other things other than COVID going around. So the member opposite has young children, mine isn't quite so young but still in school and so, you know, there are other things that happen other than COVID that require somebody to get a test because they think they might have COVID.

      So, you know, there are always ways for us and we're looking for ways to scale up the ability to do more tests per day and to turn that around. Sometimes I think–and we talked about the average turnaround time of 24 hours–it can be different if you're in different parts of Manitoba; sometimes that's part of the issue.

      Of course, the average is being reported but it may not be the same ex­per­ience for everyone. I know when I had a COVID test back in November, I think the average at that time was about 36 hours and I waited three days, but part of that was because I did it, I think, in a rural centre so it was a little bit slower in terms of the turnaround.

      The average time right now, I understand, is still, as I reported to him in the last answer–but we'll always consider ways to increase that turnaround time as we get that higher demand on testing.

Mr. Kinew: I want to ask a question on behalf of people that I've spoken with who live in the Southern Health region who've, you know, done their part in terms of getting vaccinated and observing public health restrictions and orders, but are also concerned about what they see in, you know, some of their com­mu­nities.

      Are there con­ver­sa­tions or plans to step up en­force­ment in the Southern Health region?

Mr. Goertzen: You know, I ap­pre­ciate the fact the member has raised. We spoke about this a little personally a couple days ago about, you know, vaccine hesitancy as an example. I know that's not specific to his question, I'll get up to the issue of en­force­ment yet.

      You know, but we really are at, I think, at a point where we're going to move the needle on vac­cina­tion rates in places that are resistant–and it's not just southern Manitoba–it is going to be through those personal con­ver­sa­tions. I think that there's, you know, the time where people are necessarily listening just to gov­ern­ment leaders or health leaders, that is diminish­ing. Now, we are relying on them talking to their neighbours and talking to their friends.

      In fact, there was a really good article that was written in the Winnipeg Free Press yesterday, and I'm sorry that I don't remember the reporter's name, but they wrote a story about three individuals who had been resistant to the vaccine and why it is that they changed their mind. And exclusively it was because they had individual con­ver­sa­tions with people.

      And it was–and I thought it was a very thoughtful article. In fact, last night I wrote an email to the reporter and said, like, this is exactly the kinds of con­ver­sa­tions that we need to keep talking about and have to keep happening because that is what's ultimately going to move vaccine hesitancy at the point that we're at now; it is those individual con­ver­sa­tions.

      In terms of en­force­ment, there's 3,300 individuals who are qualified to enforce Manitoba health orders in the province. As you know, we draw them from across gov­ern­ment, so a lot of different areas. That sometimes comes at the expense of other en­force­ment.

      It's a big province; 3,300 individuals is not just southern Manitoba. The mayor of Winnipeg will tell you that he'd like to see more en­force­ment; he has certainly said that publicly. There are other areas that have called for more en­force­ment.

      Those 3,300 people are sometimes–you know, it's difficult for them to be 'everywheres.' And while the member opposite might say, well, then, why might not make it 6,600 or whatever number he might throw out, they still have to be qualified and well trained to do that job because we are asking them to enforce things and to often go into people's busi­nesses and to be sort of in their face on certain things. And you need the right kind of people who are properly trained because, if you don't do that, that has con­se­quences as well.

      So, en­force­ment is happening. It is happening regularly in Southern Health. But it's not just Southern Health. There are many areas of the province where there are pockets where there are concerns and chal­lenges and we need en­force­ment people there as well.

Mr. Kinew: Is there a plan to increase en­force­ment in the Southern Health region?

Mr. Goertzen: Ultimately, I mean, those decisions are made by Justice officials as they look at where they can move their resources. I can tell you that en­force­ment continues. I know that as an MLA because I get emails almost daily, maybe not daily, from individuals, busi­nesses who've indicated that there's been an en­force­ment officer there and sometimes they feel the ex­per­ience went well, and sometimes they don't feel the ex­per­ience went well, but there is continued en­force­ment as officials make a deter­min­ation that in different areas there needs to be more en­force­ment, they'll make that deter­min­ation.

      But again, I know the member opposite is focusing spe­cific­ally on Southern Health. I understand why he's focusing spe­cific­ally on Southern Health, but there are areas in all parts of Manitoba and every health region where there's a call for greater en­force­ment, and that is true in the city of Winnipeg as well. The mayor of Winnipeg, who I consider a friend, went out on–publicly a few days ago and called for more en­force­ment. So to the best of the ability, they will continue to have en­force­ment officers in those areas where they are deemed to be most needed.

      But again, they have to be properly trained. They have to be the right people. It's not a matter of just saying, well, we're going to pick another 3,000 people off the street and tell them to enforce health orders because that can have con­se­quences as well. They have to be the right people with the right training.

Mr. Kinew: The reason why I'm asking is because, you know, I've had people who live in Southern Health Santé Sud ask whether there is a plan to increase en­force­ment. We've seen the test positivity rate in the region get very high. The vac­cina­tion rate in parti­cular, you know, some sub-regions of Southern Health remain very low.

      I just wonder if the Premier's (Mr. Goertzen) own relationships in the area or con­sid­era­tions about, you know, his own relationships with con­stit­uents, does that get in the way of some of the decisions that have to be made when it comes to enforcing a public health order?

Mr. Goertzen: I can assure the member and very painfully that many of the relationships that I've had with many people have been severed over the last 18 years because of decisions that I or our gov­ern­ment have made, but they've always been made with the best interests of all Manitobans as a whole. That was the case when I was the Edu­ca­tion minister, when I filled in as the Health minister.

      Now as the Premier, those decisions are made based on the best interests of Manitobans as a whole. If I was concerned about relationships that I held or was holding in southern Manitoba, you know, again, a lot of them have been severed. And I'm prepared for that.

      I understand that there is division and that there are different opinions. I don't think the member opposite should drive those divisions, though, any further by simply focusing on one area of the province. Yes, the test positivity rate in southern Manitoba is too high, but it is also too high in other parts of Manitoba as well. So there is a need for en­force­ment in many places in Manitoba.

      I just want to assure that member that the decisions that I make while I'm in this chair or any other chair that I might hold in this Assembly will be made on the best interests of all Manitobans regardless of the relationships that I hold, and I think that has been proven out over the last 18 months and if he doesn't believe me, I can give him phone numbers of people who used to be good friends of mine who are no longer good friends of mine, and he can have those difficult con­ver­sa­tions on the phone with them.

Mr. Kinew: I've spoken at length about Brian Pallister already today and some of those folks that are no longer here that the interim leader is not talking to anymore, as it were.

      In pre­par­ation of a potential First Minister's meeting, can the Premier just confirm Manitoba's stance on health transfers? Is that unchanged with the interim PC leader in place and, you know, spe­cific­ally, is–the Premier confirm that the health transfer changes initiated by the Harper gov­ern­ment and then imple­mented by the Trudeau gov­ern­ment in Ottawa that cost Manitoba a lot of money each year, that this gov­ern­ment opposes those?

Mr. Goertzen: So, this gov­ern­ment has been a leader and the former premier was a leader as well in calling for a fair deal when it comes to health cost sharing in Manitoba and across Canada. As the former Health minister in 2016 to 2018 or so and shared the health table during those years or part of those years, we did lead the way in calling for a better deal when it comes to health care. It didn't work out the way I would've hoped, not just for Manitoba but for all of the country. But I do think that there is a renewed resolve among premiers partly maybe driven by the ex­per­ience of the pandemic, but I think just maybe even before that, to try to get a better, more equitable deal when it comes to health care in Manitoba and in Canada.

* (16:00)

So, as you know, there are many juris­dic­tions in Canada who now, you know, pay for more than 80 per cent of the health care in their individual province, less than 20 percent con­tri­bu­tion from the federal. That's not acceptable and it's not sus­tain­able.

      So, in my recent call with premiers across Canada–and it wasn't a first ministers meeting or in pre­par­ation of a first ministers meeting. It was simply a call among premiers. There was a restating of the need for a meeting as soon as possible with the Prime Minister. Premier Horgan stated that publicly in a release. We want to have a meeting with Prime Minister Trudeau as soon as possible when it comes to a fair funding model for health care. Prime Minister Trudeau promised that after he was first elected. He never fulfilled that promise.

      I spoke to the Prime Minister a couple of weeks ago, reiterated–I reiterated the call for a fair funding of health care for the provinces. He didn't make that commit­ment, but he understands that the provinces are strongly united on this front.

      So I guess that's a long-winded answer to say, yes, Manitoba continues to lead and to be a leader in the country on the need for a fair funding model of health care.

Mr. Kinew: And I would just acknowl­edge the previous answer there from the First Minister.

      Can the Premier (Mr. Goertzen) talk about the decision around Bill 64? When did he decide that that bill was bad and it should be withdrawn?

Mr. Goertzen: Well, I think that the Premier–or sorry–the official op­posi­tion–I know–don't get too excited yet, you know. It's–it might not happen, you know, the way you think it might happen. A lot of things happen differently in politics. But I'll leave that up for the electorate to decide. I never presume what the electorate's going to make a decision. out of respect for the electorate.

      I think you should be careful in labelling some­thing all bad, because I know, when talking with the Manitoba Teachers' Society, the Manitoba association of school boards, that there were many things in Bill 64 that they supported, parti­cularly trying to improve out­comes for Aboriginal students or trying to ensure that there was equity in edu­ca­tion across the province because there isn't always equity in edu­ca­tion across the province now. There are some areas of Manitoba–the member will know this well–where there aren't as many op­por­tun­ities in the K‑to‑12 system as there are in other provinces.

So I don't believe he's wanting to speak against higher out­comes for Aboriginal students. I don't believe he's trying to speak against equity in edu­ca­tion, but when he labels an entire bill bad, that is what he's doing. So I'm not putting those words into his mouth. However, there were lots of concerns when it came to gov­ern­ance in Bill 64, and we listened to those concerns, and I do believe that there's an im­por­tant role for local voice when it comes to edu­ca­tion. There's an im­por­tant role for local voices to be heard when it comes to edu­ca­tion. The mechanism has been up for debate in this House for a hundred years, but I believe that it is im­por­tant to have those local voices in edu­ca­tion, and I think that's reflective of what our caucus decided to do in terms of moving away from that bill.

      I would say, in stark contrast to my friend–and I don't say this as a political point but it will sound political– that given op­por­tun­ities of the past in this  House, other gov­ern­ments who found them­selves at odds with the public, increasing the PST from 7 to 8 per cent, ignored 205 presenters, sat through the summer, rammed that bill through, changed the legis­lation so that it didn't have to go to a referendum.

      We took a different tack. We decided to listen to Manitobans, not that every­thing in Bill 64 was bad. In fact, I've heard from repre­sen­tatives of those different organizations that I mentioned who said, listen, like, let's make sure we're continuing to look to reform things in a positive way for out­comes for students. And I agree with that, but I do think on the gov­ern­ance piece we listened to Manitobans in a way that other gov­ern­ments in the past didn't.

Mr. Kinew: I just want to put on the record that it's pretty clear that, you know, Brian Pallister's party and its successor here are trying to frame the reason they capitulated on Bill 64 as having exclusively been about gov­ern­ance. But I can tell you, having spoken to many many people across the province, that the op­posi­tion to that bill went far, far further than that. While I recog­nize that, you know, there is an element of what we do that is political messaging, and my colleague has to be committed to political messaging, as does the Minister of Edu­ca­tion (Mr. Cullen), and that political messaging job that they're going to try and pull in reversing course on Bill 64 but still pursuing many of the same policies, involves trying to frame the objection to it as being exclusively about gov­ern­ance.

      But I just want to state emphatically on the record that the op­posi­tion to Bill 64 went far, far beyond gov­ern­ance issues. And we will see that any time the PCs try to bring back further cuts or damages to the edu­ca­tion system, and you will hear a loud, vocal op­posi­tion to those changes from teachers, from students, from parents as much as you did this summer.

      Obviously, I'm building up to a question on infra­structure. I just wanted ask about the Lake St. Martin, Lake Manitoba channel. I just wanted to–just see what the status of that is. Is there any updates that the First Minister can provide on costs, timeline–what is the situation when we're talking about the channel project?

Mr. Goertzen: Well–and I do ap­pre­ciate the member opposite–although I don't agree–you know, indicating that he doesn't support quality in edu­ca­tion across the province. Which, you know, was included in the K‑to‑12 com­mis­sion and reflected in the bill. I don't agree, but I ap­pre­ciate him putting it on the record that he doesn't believe increasing scores for all students in Manitoba, which was reflected in the bill.

      That is certainly some­thing he'll have the op­por­tun­ity to run on in the next election if he wants to run against the quality of edu­ca­tion for all Manitobans. If he wants to run on trying to keep our scores the lowest in Canada, I welcome him to do that. Not that I agree with him doing it, but it wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, from a purely political perspective.

      But I do hope that he has an op­por­tun­ity, at some point, to reflect upon those comments and come to understand that all students, regardless of where they live, regardless of their back­ground, benefit from an edu­ca­tion system that is not only quality edu­ca­tion but an equality of edu­ca­tion. And if he doesn't come to understand that, then I'll leave that in his court for trying to defend.

      But when it comes to Lake St. Martin, we are still in the process of trying to get the environ­mental licence, still con­sul­ta­tions ongoing, clearly we hope that the federal gov­ern­ment will see this as a priority. We expressed that many, many times that it is a priority, that it is some­thing that is, you know, seen as safety issue, a project that, you know, has been a long time in the making between different gov­ern­ments, having seen the recog­nition of its importance.

      So, still in the environ­mental licensing process. Don't have a date that I can put it on for the member, other than to say we welcome any assist­ance that he or others in this Chamber might have in terms of convincing the federal gov­ern­ment to move this project along.

Mr. Kinew: You know, I would like to see things proceed in a good way, an inclusive way, including for com­mu­nities in the Interlake. What update can the Premier (Mr. Goertzen) provide on those con­ver­sa­tion with the federal gov­ern­ment? Has this issue been raised recently over the summer with your federal–with their federal counterparts, and what is the status of those discussions?

Mr. Goertzen: Issue's been raised. I mean, you know, outside of the federal election, of course, I suppose. But, the issue's been raised by the Minister of Infra­structure (Mr. Schuler) re­peat­edly, aggressively, emphatically and we all hope that a reso­lu­tion comes to this quickly.

Mr. Kinew: I'd note that it's going to be difficult for the Minister of Infra­structure to continue raising this issue because soon he won't be able to travel on a plane to go to Ottawa. So, I'd like to know why is it that a sports fan has to be vaccinated to go see the Jets or the Bombers, but the person who signs the emergency measures in Manitoba doesn't have to be vaccinated?

      Why is there that double standard for members of the PC caucus, relative to other Manitobans?

Mr. Goertzen: If the member opposite knows some­thing about the Minister of Infra­structure's health status that I don't know, I wouldn't encourage him to put it on the record, but I am tempted to, you know, acknowl­edge that there might be a breach of PHIA if he has somehow been able to access the Minister of Infra­structure's health records in a way that would be in op­posi­tion and a breach of PHIA.

      So if he's done that, then he can certainly let me know.

* (16:10)

Mr. Kinew: The interim PC leader unintentionally makes the point about the hypocrisy of the PC caucus. Manitobans right now each and every day ask to provide a proof of vac­cina­tion when they enter a restaurant, when they enter a Bombers game, when they go to a Jets game, right? Apparently, that's not a breach of PHI. Apparently that's not a breach of personal health infor­ma­tion, right? The government seems to advance the proposition that this is a necessary part of combatting the pandemic, unless such a question were be–were to be posed to one of their own caucus members. Then, in that case, there has to be righteous indignation and scoffing at, you know, how dare people ask the question.

      So, again, I recog­nize that this is probably some­thing that I won't persuade the First Minister on, but I would like him to speak to Manitobans and just let Manitobans know why is it that they have to provide proof of vac­cina­tion to be able to enter restaurants, sporting facilities, all number of venues, many of which resemble the Manitoba Legislature in terms of having a lot of people in close proximity to one another, but members of his caucus do not have to abide by the same standard?

Mr. Goertzen: I've been to my fair share of Jets games and Bomber games and I don't know that it resembles the Manitoba Legislature. But I think the member opposite mis­under­stood me or tried to misconstrue my words. I did not indicate that provi­ding a proof of vac­cina­tion was a breach of PHIA, because that is the individual's choice to provide the proof of vac­cina­tion. I do it every time that I go in to a Bombers game. I will do it on Friday evening when I go to the Bomber game. I will happily provide my proof of vac­cina­tion.

      But the member opposite indicated is that a parti­cular member hadn't been vaccinated. I don't know that to be the case, and the member opposite has some sort of special knowledge on a person's personal health infor­ma­tion, I would just like to know how he obtained that.

Mr. Kinew: You know, it's not a credible, plausible or reasonable argument that when you have anti-vaxxers in your caucus, that all of a sudden–and I'm speaking, you, in sort of, like the–the royal sense of the phrase, if I could be allowed to indulge in that usage of the terminology. But I just don't think it's credible that all of a sudden when you have somebody who refuses to get vaccinated, I mean, they've been elevated to being a minister of the Crown and everyone else in Manitoba is rowing in the same direction, and then you have a few leaders who are paid with taxpayer dollars to lead, kicking their feet up and not rowing in the same direction as everyone else.

      And so I think that that sort of hypocrisy turns people off for sure, but beyond that I just don't understand, like, how it's plausible to members of the PC political organi­zation that if we simply cling to a misinterpretation of personal health regula­tion that that would somehow clear the air or escape account­ability when it comes to these questions that are rightly being asked by people across Manitoba.

      So how is it that, you know, these arguments that everyone else in the province sees right through are still given credence within the PC caucus room?

Mr. Goertzen: This government has led Canada in terms of promoting vac­cina­tion. I think that the results have been shown in the vac­cina­tion rates in Manitoba. We lead, I think, on a per capita basis. Most other provinces when it comes to the vac­cina­tion rate–again, the member opposite presumes to know a person's personal health-care status that I don't know. I don't know how he would have obtained that infor­ma­tion.

And when it comes to this Assembly, there's been a decision made that to enter this Assembly you either have to confirm that you have been vaccinated. If you do not confirm that, you would have to take a rapid test and produce a negative test. If you don't produce either, then you can't enter this Assembly. And that was the case today, and I can confirm and I did confirm that all members of the PC caucus who are in the Assembly today are fully vaccinated.

      But, again, the member misconstrues. I regularly produce my proof of vac­cina­tion to go to a Bomber game or go into a restaurant. I don't personally believe, having been the minister respon­si­ble for PHIA that that's a violation of PHIA. But if he has knowledge of a person's personal health-care status that hasn't been disclosed publicly, then he should indicate how he received that infor­ma­tion because that may actually be a breach of PHIA.

Mr. Kinew: You know, again, all this infor­ma­tion's been publicly reported. It's part of the reason that Brian Pallister was chased out of office and, again, the evidence is in the Winnipeg Free Press, July 14th, 2021, where the former premier–this is his quote, pulled for the headline–Public has no right to know identity of unvaccinated Tories: premier.

      Same exact line that the current PC leader is using today. So it's a bit of a case of the plus ça change, plus ça reste le même, right? The more things change, the more it stays the same. Mr. Pallister, you know, stepped back, was chased out of office, palace coup, however you choose to define that, but again, all the messaging is the same.

      Anyway, so I just wanted to offer that rejoinder, but I was going to invite the member for St. Boniface to pose some questions.

Mr. Dougald Lamont (St. Boniface): I'll try to keep my questions fairly focused. Most of them are on pandemic-related spending and pre­par­ation.

      There's a big picture–there's a report that Manitoba had spent a sig­ni­fi­cant amount of money on PPE. In fact, it had the highest proportion of PPE among the provinces–many multiples of what Saskatchewan spent. So I'll just briefly compare the two provinces, since there's some similarities.

      That–if you look at Saskatchewan, they had–I think they've had about 69,000 cases and 733 deaths, whereas Manitoba has actually, I think, a lower number of cases–61,126 and 1,214 deaths. So, you know, tragically, the death toll in Manitoba was considerably higher, in part because of issues in long-term-care homes.

      But one of the issues is that a con­sid­erable amount of money was spent on buying masks at the begin­ning of the pandemic which could not be used, and the sum there, I think–N95 and N97 masks from a busi­ness in Minnesota–was about, I think, the total amount was about $35 million US for masks that couldn't be used. So it's about $50 million Canadian.

      So I'm just wondering what happened to those masks, if we had $50 million in masks, are we getting our money back or what–if there's answer to what happened to those masks that we couldn't use.

Mr. Goertzen: Thank the member for the question. I think it's probably a question better asked to the Minister of Central Services (Mr. Helwer), who's, sort of, hands-on in terms of the procurement and manage­ment of PPE.

      I know the member opposite sort of referenced comparisons to Saskatchewan. You know, I don't know that I think that's a fair comparison, compared to where–you know, the challenges Saskatchewan is dealing with now, in terms of the pandemic.

      I think probably there'll be lots of time in the future to look back at all the different provinces and what happened during the various waves and why they happened, but I don't know, sort of, mid-game in the pandemic, that it's–or maybe, hopefully, closer to the fourth quarter of the pandemic–that it's the right time to be making that sort of qualitative or quantitative assessment.

      But parti­cularly on the amount of PPE that remains in stock in Manitoba and how it's been dispersed, I'd refer him to the Minister of Central Services.

Mr. Lamont: Another issue that came up recently was an issue of a shortfall in Families, that there were–there was $10 million that was supposed to be allocated to dis­abil­ity services, child care and child welfare. I was just wondering–oh, but apparently only $793,000 was spent. So I'm just wondering how it is–in cases, or often we would–there are really two issues here.

      One is that sometimes spending that was not strictly COVID spending was labelled COVID spending. I believe–I remember in June 2020, a fund was announced for im­prove­ments to seniors' homes, but it was largely safety–very basic safety things that were not related to infection pre­ven­tion or it was things like handrails, wheelchair ramps and sprinkler systems, things like that.

      So I'm just wondering, is there any accounting for why that–those funds would not have been–because I know that dis­abil­ity services, child care and child welfare were all–these are all areas where people have needed an enormous amount of support.

      Is there any explanation for why over 90 per cent of that $10 million wasn't allocated or spent?

* (16:20)

Mr. Goertzen: Probably the specifics of that would be better addressed to the Minister of Families (Ms. Squires). I believe their Estimates section's probably closed out, I'm advised, but there might be op­por­tun­ity to raise that in concurrence with the Minister of Families.

      I mean, the member will know that there's a lot of things that happen or that are unforeseen, and that sometimes unspent money isn't because there wasn't a desire to spend it, but simply because, you know, as we're working through COVID, we find out that what we thought might be a stronger need is less of a need or is covered off maybe by another level of gov­ern­ment. So I wouldn't want to leave on the record that there is anything that is necessarily nefarious that's gone on there. But–be better addressed, probably, in concurrence to the Minister of Families (Ms. Squires).

Mr. Lamont: The other is that I know that we had an eviction ban which, eventually, it ended up being cancelled, and, look, there's no doubt that there's a growing crisis in homelessness. People–I think they just banned people–or, the City of Winnipeg is trying to get people out from under bridges.

      And I was recently at a location where they're dealing with people who were being discharged imme­diately from hospital, people who may be home­less and who have no place to go and they're having to go straight from having, perhaps, a major surgery to either living on the street or being–a homeless shelter. And lots of people have faced evictions over the course of the pandemic.

      So I was just wondering whether there was any con­sid­era­tion to returning for an eviction–to bringing back an eviction ban, especially con­sid­ering that we're going to be going into a fourth wave that could be happening in October, November, December, when it's very cold, you know. It's an–we're supposed to have an exceptionally–we've had a beautiful fall and a very–and we're supposed to have very warm weather for the next few weeks, but there's always a point when the cold comes. And we want to make sure people are safe, especially in the pandemic.

      So, has there been any con­sid­era­tion, or would there be any con­sid­era­tion to exploring an eviction ban or returning–bringing back an eviction ban in a fourth wave?

Mr. Goertzen: I mean, while it's not under active con­sid­era­tion now, as we know, in the pandemic, as things change, you can never say that some­thing won't be considered again because there are always chal­lenges, you know, that are unforeseen sometimes in the different waves. So there's nothing imminent on an eviction ban. You know, there are often unintended con­se­quences of those things as well.

      I do think that the point that the member raises, though, in terms of homelessness, is a real point, it's a growing concern; it's not pandemic–necessarily–related. You know, when people move out of hospitals and they move into homelessness, I mean, that's a challenge, right? And that clinical advisors, those in the hospital system, are making clinical decisions, generally, based on a person's need to be in hospital. And so, you know, they–it's a challenge for them to sort of look at other things.

      I do have a meeting, actually, I believe in the next couple of days with End Homelessness Winnipeg. I asked for the meeting. I want to hear from them, their perspectives on homelessness and things that the gov­ern­ment can do, not just this level of gov­ern­ment, but the federal gov­ern­ment, too, in co‑operation.

      And I know it's an issue for Justin Trudeau, as well–Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. And, you know, hopefully get some good ideas from them, as well, when I meet with them. That was the purpose of reaching out to them, is to get a sense of, you know, how has the pandemic impacted homelessness, what are some of the strategies that can be used, parti­cularly going into winter and as we go into a fourth wave.

      So I ap­pre­ciate the member asking the question. And while there's not an imminent decision coming on an eviction ban, I certainly take to heart that he's asking it for the right reasons.

Mr. Lamont: Yes, just a bit more on that issue of evictions and homelessness.

      It is, I think–just a brief statement for explanation is that through­out–that there have been two things–is–that real estate speculators have been treating eviction–lifting eviction bans with glee because it means that they can–there have been made to be–you know, evictions occasionally of entire buildings, but also individuals, and then in the meantime, people will do superficial im­prove­ments and jack up the rent. So–but one of the things that we've seen with–these massive increases in housing prices have been driven by rental evictions and people–and rental speculation over the last year and half.

      You know, a lot to this does not–some of this does not–is beyond the control of the gov­ern­ment, but I do think that eviction bans are one area that–are that really have put people–have made people very vul­ner­able, including some seniors.

      The other question was–relates to the rapid–what has been the Province's partici­pation in the federal gov­ern­ment's Rapid Housing Initiative? So that came out, I guess, a year ago and as I understand it, it was supposed to function to–that the money would flow through the cities, cities would then fund hospital–you know, you could rent hotel rooms or whatever in order to make sure that people were properly housed.

      And I don't know that the gov­ern­ment of Manitoba partici­pated in it last year and I don't know where that's at so, if the Premier (Mr. Goertzen) could enlighten me or just let us know where the rapid housing–what the gov­ern­ment's partici­pation in the federal Rapid Housing Initiative has been, and whether there's a possi­bility that we could be exploring that or funding it, or making sure people have a place to stay.

Mr. Goertzen: Probably on the federal part­ner­ship it probably best to speak again or to ask the question for the Minister of Families (Ms. Squires) because there might be, you know, specific undertakings that she's under­taking that I wouldn't want to misquote in concurrence.

      But, you know, it's not a–it's not an unfair question when it comes to, you know, what is happening to those who can't afford housing, either from a pure financial perspective or there are other issues going on with addictions and, you know, we know that there's lots of correlation between addictions and mental health that have been well‑described in this House.

      You know, the budget that the member will have an op­por­tun­ity, I suppose, to speak on, in terms of the imple­men­ta­tion of it, does freeze the annual rent increase so that's some relief, although I'm not going to pretend that it's a perfect solution to probably a problem that doesn't have a lot of perfect solutions to.

      More money has been allocated. I think $22 million more has been allocated to Rent Assist. Again, im­por­tant initiative but not necessarily a perfect initiative but, I mean, as we go through the fourth wave, I think that we continue to look at the different things that are happening.

      We hope to blunt the fourth wave with proactive measures that have been taking place by this gov­ern­ment but we know that there's going to be still a sig­ni­fi­cant challenge regardless within the health-care system, which ripples out to other areas of society. So no measures have been excluded as possi­bilities but we'll continue to provide, you know, support where we can.

      I ap­pre­ciate the member opposite recog­nizing that some of these issues, like housing prices and that, are not always parti­cularly governed by any level of gov­ern­ment, and there's not a lot that can always be done in terms of curtailing a market that is moving as quickly as the housing market is, in many juris­dic­tions, including in Winnipeg and Manitoba, but those are some of the initiatives that have been taken by the gov­ern­ment.

Mr. Lamont: I just have one more question.

      So recently there was an Auditor General's report that came out on a City of Winnipeg land transfer. Four different–in the report it said that four different organi­zations were asked and they got four different answers, including–it involved the City of Winnipeg and the Province.

      And the question is to whose respon­si­bility it was or where, it was deter­mined, I think, that the City of Winnipeg's–that the fault lay with the City of Winnipeg, but there was an issue as to who made the proposal first. So, essentially, that if they–if it was some­thing that had been proposed by the Province first, it would have been an issue with the Province. If it were proposed by the City first, it was an issue with the City.

      So can I just–is there any–can I get any clarity or confirmation of that, over whether–did the Province contact the City first? Did the City contact the Province first? Over the–it was the transfer–lands transfer of the Vimy Arena, I believe.

Mr. Goertzen: I think the member's referring to the Bruce Oake Recovery Centre and I–I'm not going to add anything to the report that the Auditor General's already done. I guess it's been fully investigated. I don't think they found any fault with the Province and I won't comment on whatever, you know, decisions they found with the City of Winnipeg–other than to say, you know, the City, if it needs to improve upon its processes, in terms of land transfers, then I'll leave that to the City.

      But it is worth putting on the record–I had the op­por­tun­ity to attend the opening of the Bruce Oake Recovery Centre–and I don't think the member would–is taking issue with the centre itself, but certainly Scott Oake and his family and, of course, our con­dol­ences go to–out to Scott Oake on the recent passing of his wife.

* (16:30)

      And so we, you know, we have a lot of con­sid­era­tion for the Oake family in terms of what they've done to raise funds privately to ensure that that facility is available for anybody to come, regardless of their financial ability. I know right now it's limited to men going into that facility, but there are plans to expand it for women as well, which is needed.

      So, you know, quite apart from the controversy around the land transfer which, I think, largely rests in the ballpark of the city of Winnipeg, I think that all Manitobans, or I believe most–might not be one or two. But I think that virtually all Manitobans recog­nize the importance of the Bruce Oake Recovery Centre, the memory that it is for Bruce Oake and the great work that Scott Oake and his family have done to ensure that that centre is opened.

Mr. Lamont: That's it for me. I'll yield the rest of my time to the Leader of the Op­posi­tion.

      Thank you.

An Honourable Member: Yes, I think we're good to–

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): The Leader of the Official Op­posi­tion, sorry about that.

Mr. Kinew: Thanks, Mr. Chair. I think we're good to start wrapping up. We wanted to present a motion on the salary, but if you want to get us there, that would be great. [interjection]

      No, you can take it back from Brian. You can claw it back. [interjection]

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): Okay, so I just want to clarify–[interjection] Okay, so we'll just come to order here.

I just want to clarify now, or see if there's any other members with questions.

      All right, hearing no further questions, the last item to be considered for these Estimates is item 1(a) the First Minister's salary contained in reso­lu­tion 2.1.

      And at this point, we request that the First Minister's staff leave the table for the con­sid­era­tion of this last item.

      All right, the floor is now open for questions.

Mr. Kinew: To move an amend­ment–a motion, sorry.

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): All right.

Mr. Kinew: Okay. I move that line 2.1(a) be amended so that the Premier and president of the council's salary be reduced to $1.

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): All right, it has been moved by the Leader of the Official Opposi­tion that line item 2.1(a) be amended so that the Premier and president of the council's salary be reduced to $1.

      The motion is in order. The floor is open for questions.

      Com­mit­tee ready for the–[interjection] No? [interjection] Committee's ready for the–Is the com­mit­tee ready for the question?

Some Honourable Members: Question.

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): The question before the com­mit­tee is the motion moved by the Leader of the Op­posi­tion.

      Is the com­mit­tee ready for the question? Is it the pleasure of the com­mit­tee to adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Yes.

Some Honourable Members: No.

Voice Vote

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): All those in favour of the motion, please say aye.

Some Honourable Members: Aye.

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): All those opposed, please say nay.

Some Honourable Members: Nay.

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): In my opinion, the Nays have it.

      The motion is accordingly defeated.

* * *

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): Okay, we will now consider Resolution 2.1 which is as follows: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her  Majesty a sum not exceeding $4,225,000 for Executive Council, General Admin­is­tra­tion, for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 2022.

Resolution agreed to.

      This completes the Estimates for Executive Council. Shall we briefly recess to allow the next de­part­ment to prepare? [Agreed]

      Okay, committee is in recess.

The committee recessed at 4:36 p.m.

____________

The committee resumed at 5 p.m.

Advanced Education, Skills and Immigration

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): Will the Com­mit­tee of Supply please come to order. This section of the Com­mit­tee of Supply will now consider the Estimates of the De­part­ment of Advanced Edu­ca­tion, Skills and Immigration.

      Does the hon­our­able minister have an opening statement?

An Honourable Member: I do.

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): Okay. Go ahead, Minister.

Hon. Wayne Ewasko (Minister of Advanced Education, Skills and Immigration): Thank you, everyone. Just to start off, just want to mention that as all of you know, that in January of 2021 we created–the gov­ern­ment created a new De­part­ment of Advanced Edu­ca­tion, Skills and Immigration. This de­part­ment will ensure post‑secondary edu­ca­tion is better linked to workforce op­por­tun­ities, and it will create stronger links between skills dev­elop­ment and job needs by giving Manitobans the skills that they need to succeed.

      It will encourage more immigrants to come to Manitoba, the home of hope, where they can enjoy the job op­por­tun­ities our province can offer. To advance our economy past COVID­‑19, we need to advance students through their learning and into good jobs, and then into the workforce.

      I'd like to take this op­por­tun­ity to thank the post‑secondary in­sti­tutions, adult learning facilities and private vocational institutes for their ongoing efforts through­out the pandemic to protect Manitoban students and ensure their continued success.

      Budget 2021 provides more than $680 million to  post-secondary in­sti­tutions from Advanced Education, Skills and Immigration, plus $10 million to support priority maintenance to their facilities. We remain committed to supporting students so they can pursue and complete a post-secondary edu­ca­tion. We will ensure our province continues to offer the lowest tuition rates in western Canada.

      Manitoba has increased the Manitoba bursary by $3.9 million. That provides more than $55 million in interest-free loans for students to suc­cess­fully achieve their post-secondary edu­ca­tion goals and move into em­ploy­ment. The Skills, Talent and Knowledge Strategy, which was launched in February 2021 with the goal of ensuring we have the people with the right skills, talent and knowledge at the right time to rebound from the effects of the pandemic and support economic resilience and growth.

      Protecting our post-secondary and adult edu­ca­tion system will ensure Manitobans can develop the skills needed to partici­pate fully in the com­mu­nity and contribute to the–to our growing economy. Manitoba's Skills, Talent and Knowledge Strategy provides strategic direction to publicly funded post-secondary in­sti­tutions to ensure students develop the skills needed to partici­pate fully in the com­mu­nity and contribute to a growing economy. It provides a framework for stronger part­ner­ships between the Province, edu­ca­tional in­sti­tutions and the busi­ness com­mu­nity.

      Immigration: it is a key contributor to our pro­vince's economic prosperity. COVID-19 has impacted new­comers in Manitoba through closed borders and federal delays in processing work permits. New immigrants make Manitoba even stronger, enriching our culture, filling job needs and creating new jobs for them­selves and others. We will be ready to welcome new immigrants to our province as soon as it's safe to do so. The–Manitoba's Prov­incial Nominee program ensures our province continues to attract skilled workers and entrepreneurs with the potential to make the strongest con­tri­bu­tions to our economy soon after their arrival in Canada.

      Under the Skills, Talent and Knowledge Strategy, we are working to increase op­por­tun­ities to recruit new­comers to Manitoba by promoting Manitoba as an immigration destination of choice. This includes working with our federal partners to ensure the suc­cess­ful integration of new­comers to Manitoba.

      The new de­part­ment will also better position us to stream­line systems, focusing on the unique talent needs of Manitoba's employers, bringing in talent that is not ac­ces­si­ble locally.

      While the COVID-19 pandemic continues to create challenges for our advanced edu­ca­tion and skill alignment programs, we remain committed to ensuring Manitoba has the skills and talent needed to grow the economy and contribute to a high quality of life in our province.

      I look forward, Mr. Chair, to taking questions from the com­mit­tee.

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): All right. I thank the minister for his comments.

      Does the official op­posi­tion critic have any opening comments?

Mr. Jamie Moses (St. Vital): No.

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): Okay.

      Under Manitoba practice, debate on the minister's salary is the last item considered for a de­part­ment in the Com­mit­tee of Supply. Accordingly, we shall now defer con­sid­era­tion of line item 44.1(a) contained in reso­lu­tion 44.1.

      Does the com­mit­tee wish to proceed through the Estimates of this de­part­ment chronologically or have a global discussion?

Mr. Moses: Discussion.

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): Okay, a global discussion.

      Is that agreed? [Agreed]

      The floor is now open for questions.

Mr. Moses: Looking forward to the time we have to discuss questions today. Hopefully we can go through it pretty quickly.

      Can the minister under­take to provide with–provide us with a current organi­zation chart for the de­part­ment, including some names and possible vacancies and more spe­cific­ally to kind of let us know the current FTEs, where those vacancies might be?

Mr. Ewasko: Mr. Chair, can you hear me okay? Just doing a quick check. I'm actually looking to my friend, the member from St. Vital, to see if he can hear me okay.

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): Okay, Minister, we're just having a little bit of a–I see you've got your headset here, so that's great, you're on it. We were just having some trouble hearing you.

Mr. Ewasko: Okay, so I'm going to do a mic check. Can you hear me? Is that better, Mr. Guenter?

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): Minister, you're sounding great. Much better, thank you.

Mr. Ewasko: Much better. Sounds great.

      So, again, back to my friend, the member of St. Vital's question. Absolutely. I guess the speed and the timing of our Estimates time is sort of up to him, so I'll try to answer his questions as best that I possibly can, and if I can't get the answers, we'll definitely get them to him in a timely manner.

      So, in regards to an organi­zational chart, right now, I guess I'll share with him sort of our, I guess our high level for now, and if he wants a more detailed–I–actually, I'm looking at–give me a second here. In the Main Estimates booklet, is he wanting some­thing a little more specific than page–roughly page 11 off the Main Estimates Sup­ple­ment?

Mr. Moses: Yes, I am. Tell me more detail, please.

Mr. Ewasko: Okay, thanks for that. Also, my friend from St. Vital, in the annual report that we just released–do you have that handy in front of you?

Mr. Moses: Yes, I've also reviewed that, and I'm looking for some­thing more detailed to explain the, you know, the org chart with names and also the vacancies and what de­part­ments or what areas they are in. [interjection]

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): Sorry, Mr. Minister–the hon­our­able minister.

      Sorry, just want to recog­nize you, Minister. You have–the floor is yours.

Mr. Ewasko: So right now my deputy minister is Mr. Eric Charron. My policy and performance executive director is Anne Janes. My Advanced Educa­tion assist­ant deputy minister is Mr. Joe Funk. My Student Access and Success executive director is Ms. Sonya Penner. Right now, our ADM for Immigration Pathways is vacant. My CFO for the Depart­ment of Advanced Edu­ca­tion, Skills and Immigration is Ms. Melissa Ballantyne. And I'm just sort of taking a look around and I think that's it for now.

* (17:10)

      And then as far as a more in-depth org chart, what I can do is definitely, you know, get you some­thing, you know, so-called a little bit deeper through­out. So I'll endeavour to do that.

Mr. Moses: I ap­pre­ciate you being able to look into that and I look forward to hearing the response.

      I wanted to just dive into the, you know, tuition from what we're seeing for tuition increases over the last few years as it relates to the amount that students have actually had to pay.

      Can the minister comment on whether he anticipates tuition to continue to increase for the 2022‑2023 school year and if he can provide, you know, an esti­mate on how much that would be? We know the budget has continued to decrease for advanced edu­ca­tion for post-secondary in­sti­tutions, when that will inevitably lead to increased tuition for post-secondary students.

      So wondering if the minister can outline what he anticipates tuition increases to be for the 2022-2023 school year.

Mr. Ewasko: So, Mr. Chair, the way that I just did that, sort of putting my hand up, is that good enough to acknowl­edge or represent the fact that I want to speak?

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): Yes, minister, absolutely. That works great. Thank you.

Mr. Ewasko: Okay, great, great, great. Well, you know, I ap­pre­ciate the question from my friend from St. Vital.

      When we start talking about any kind of tuition, we know–and he knows because he's heard me say this quite a few times. I mean, here in Manitoba, we–the students and ourselves as a gov­ern­ment–have worked quite hard to make sure that our post-secondary edu­ca­tion system here in Manitoba is very affordable and ac­ces­si­ble. And we know that–and he knows, I mean, because he can do the looking–the research himself as well–that right now we're sitting at third-lowest in all of Canada and lowest tuition rates in western Canada.

      As far as ac­ces­si­bility and affordability, because I think that's sort of where he was going on a little bit of his questioning–the fact is is that we put in–directly and indirectly, we fund post-secondary in­sti­tutions in Manitoba well over a billion dollars.

      And so when we start to take a look at student success and, again, ac­ces­si­bility–so under the NDP, the previous government, what ended up happening was that they had some of the scholarships and bursaries sort of at the back end. You had to–you sort of had to get yourself into post-secondary in­sti­tutions and then hope that you finished it off and maybe get some money back later on.

      And we worked hard listening to students, my predecessors did, and started putting in place–the students wanted to see the money at the front end. And so what we did was, we created the scholar­ships and bursaries to the tune of, you know, about $30 million each and every year.

      And on top of that, you know, we've got, as I said, almost $60 million in Manitoba student loans and also through Canada Student Loans as well. We're looking at roughly over $250 million that we process each and every year serving many, many, many students.

      So as far as ac­ces­si­bility, I mean, that is some­thing that I've shared–not only with the member from St. Vital but also our post-secondary edu­ca­tion partners–that we're going to try to work hard to make sure that we've got strong programs and accessibility, low tuition for students right here in Manitoba.

      And that's why I think, also, we do a good job of recruiting students and youth or adults who want to get into some post-secondary edu­ca­tion, recruiting them to Manitoba, because of our affordable tuition rates. So I thank the member for the question.

Mr. Moses: So, the minister mentioned that $30‑million amount in loans.

      Can the minister spe­cific­ally detail how much of that is actually prov­incial dollars and how much of that is private part­ner­ships or other funding? And if he doesn't have the specific breakdown, maybe he can endeavour to do so.

      I wanted to just ask that because the minister did mention that in his previous response, but really I wanted to also just follow up on the train of thought there about tuition, and the minister didn't answer the question about whether tuition would be increasing and how much that students could expect for the upcoming school year, and I think, you know, I want to just to clarify whether the minister is prepared to, you know, give students a heads up so they can properly plan for their financial–for their finances for the upcoming school year as to what they actually think tuition increases are going to be. We know that with the decreasing funding from the Province to post-secondaries, it's undoubtedly that tuition's going to increase.

      So I would ask the minister again if he can clearly identify how much tuitions will be raised in the upcoming school year and if he can let us know about that today.

Mr. Ewasko: Thank the member for–from St. Vital for the question.

      So–but I do have to clarify some­thing that he did say. In regards to the $30 million that he references, basically that's not loans. That's scholar­ships and bursaries. So I just want to make sure–and I'll just double-check with the member, did he just misspoke–misspeak, or was he actually asking some further clari­fi­ca­tion on that? And then I'll answer the rest of his points after I ask for some clari­fi­ca­tion from him.

Mr. Moses: Referring to $30 million in scholar­ships and bursaries.

Mr. Ewasko: Thank you.

      So, as you've corrected yourself, yes, absolutely. That's $30 million in scholar­ships and bursaries and, you know, basically it's–for this year we've put in $10 million, and that's a matching two-to-one dollars. So the post-secondary in­sti­tutions go around and they get some funds from their stake­holders or their partners to help with that, and so it is a total of $30 million.

      Now, as far as student loans go, like I said, we were–we're up to about $60 million and then Canada Student Loans at about 93.7, so that's the federal. Keep in mind, to the member from St. Vital, that our Manitoba student loans are actually interest-free loans–$55.5 million, to be exact. And we're looking at helping roughly just over 15,000 students. The Canada Student Loans, we're looking at just about $94 million, to the tune of roughly 15,250-ish students. And that was in the 2020, you know, pandemic year.

      So I think we–you know, when you start to drill down and take a look at the supports for students–up-front supports–I think Manitoba is doing a great job in regards to per capita.

      Now–yes, so the rest of your question. Okay, I'll leave it at that for now and then I'll answer your next question.

* (17:20)

Mr. Moses: So, you've mentioned the amounts you're putting for loans, but you have to realize also–the minister should also realize that loans eventually need to be repaid. So students are still on the hook for that amount of money. If it comes upfront or after the fact, students are still going to be respon­si­ble for paying that amount.

      Is the minister interested at all in provi­ding any of that money to actually make tuition more affordable, make tuition less, and make it more manageable for students so that they, at the end of the day, have less to pay for their edu­ca­tion. Is that some­thing that the student–that the minister is looking into?

      I also want to also address the fact–I understand the minister is looking into doing reviews on Student Aid, and I wanted to know if that's some­thing, if the minister is doing a review on Student Aid, and the status of that program.

Mr. Ewasko: And just to continue commenting on the scholar­ships and bursaries. So, the upfront grants has been actually changed to an upfront grant: $2,000 for lower income students, an ad­di­tional $1,500 for Indigenous students. And those are–those do not have to be repaid or paid back. And keep in mind that any Manitoba student loans, again, are interest free, and I know that my de­part­ment and officials and the staff absolutely worked tirelessly to help ac­com­modate and work with students on plans that–you know, for whenever it comes time to repay.

      Also I just wanted to give a bit of a shout out to our de­part­ment as well. Previous–you know, my predecessor, I guess–the fact that we ended up putting an ad­di­tional $5 million into those scholar­ships and bursaries because of the pandemic, trying to make it a little bit easier for the post-secondary in­sti­tutions to do their con­tri­bu­tion piece. And so that was a one-year $15 million. So basically we are looking at a one‑to‑one ratio with our post-secondary partners, and I think, you know, many students definitely benefitted from that.

      So, in 2020-2021 we had–almost 22,500 students actually received over $33 million, which actually was–is the most ever. So we've got more students accessing our post-secondary programs here in Manitoba. And so I think many students are very much ap­pre­cia­tive of the fact that they are getting these dollars, you know, upfront so they can get their foot in the door into a post-secondary program that best suits them and be able to better afford their edu­ca­tion.

      And, again, you know, being the lowest tuition west–in western Canada I think is a big feather in Manitoba's cap, you know, and I think we're about $1,200 in tuition lower than BC, and I do believe that BC is run by an NDP gov­ern­ment right now, and so I think we're doing quite well on trying to keep the ac­ces­si­bility rates relatively low for students to come to Manitoba and find out which programs that best suit them and moving into their careers afterwards.

Mr. Moses: I also just wanted to clarify, as I said in my previous question, about Student Aid, whether the minister is conducting a review on it. I know that–I ask about the review because I know that there are students who say the program–that they have had dif­fi­cul­ties with the program, getting through and accessing it, the lengthy wait times. I also know that enrollment is falling for underrepresented groups, groups of people, and I know the Student Aid program benefits those folks.

      So I want to know, is the minister doing a review? Is he changing or adjusting the Student Aid program?

      You know, I know, for example, Indigenous students decreased by 1.4 per cent in 2021 alone. So I just want to clarify

      So I just want to clarify about that Student Aid program, as well as what the minister's doing to address falling enrollment in under-represented groups of people.

Mr. Ewasko: Thanks to my friend from St. Vital for the question on Student Aid and doing a review.

      And so, as the member may know or may not know–I'm assuming he does know because we did send this out, and we did a client satisfaction survey and we had well over 2,000 responses for our Manitoba Student Aid and assist­ance programs. And what we have is all those various different–the feedback had come back in and so we're just–right now we're gathering a report that's going to be basically titled, what we heard report, and it's going to be published soon.

      And basically some of that feedback that we had heard from students and not just students. So these are past students, you know, people who have gone through the system, our post-secondary partners, staff, students–everybody who would possibly have touched the system.

      So there was a survey put out with some very good questions–and maybe even the member from St. Vital took part in that and maybe submitted his view on the survey on Manitoba Student Aid, and I'm not going to say one way or another whether I think or he did or did not access Manitoba Student Aid for when he was, you know, a younger man going to post-secondary but anyways, that's going to be published shortly.

      And because the survey went out on EngageMB, that–the results and that will also be published on  EngageMB and those responses–the well over 2,000  responses we received, those individuals will be getting an email and basically touched base with to make sure that they can see the report, see the feedback that they had sent in.

      Another couple key things that I did want to mention in regards to Manitoba Student Aid is a fact that with our scholar­ships and bursaries, this is allowing more and more students to access and com­plete their post-secondary edu­ca­tion.

      I really do feel–and I know that the member from St. Vital would agree with me as well on this–is that this is the foundation for building a better Manitoba and delivering on Manitoban's Skills, Talent and Knowledge Strategy. And I'm sort of hoping–I'm hoping that the member from St. Vital took me up on the–sort of, the invite to make sure he checked out the strategy and took a good look, because I really haven't received any questions on the Skills, Talent and Knowledge Strategy from the member but I'm assuming because it's such a good strategy that there's not too many critical critiquing-type questions in there.

      But just want to also assure him that we are committed to making sure that Manitobans have access to the higher edu­ca­tion by provi­ding the student programs and the financial supports. And so these programs, which include the Manitoba Student Aid, provides those interest-free loans.

      And I know the member's–you know, it sort of sounded–and he can maybe make some clarity here, that it sounded as if he was sort of talking down to the fact that Manitoba student loans are interest-free or some­thing, I'm not quite–I'll catch that–you'll clarify for me right away.

      But I do feel that it's very im­por­tant that these op­por­tun­ities are there for students–to make sure that those monies are there. Of course, again with the scholar­ships and bursaries initiatives and working with our various different partners through­out the province, making sure that those–some of those bursaries and scholar­ships are just that.

* (17:30)

      And I know for a fact the member received some of those himself, and–back in the day when he was going to post-secondary. It just makes it easier. And those are upfront bursaries and scholar­ships. They don't have to be paid back.

      Basically, some of the–you know, I just got a bit of a heads-up. I can go more on the, sort of the review on the student aid questionnaire that went out on Engage Manitoba and I see that I've only got a few seconds left, so I'll finish with this and then I can go more on the review that we did or there–questionnaire that we put out there.

      But again, just making sure that the member is putting correct infor­ma­tion on the record, making sure that he knows that, you know, that we're putting in $30 million into scholar­ships and bursaries each and every year, which is astronomical.

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): All right. The minister's time has expired.

Mr. Moses: Okay. So I'd like to–thank you.

      I'd like to ask the minister about the ongoing negotiations and what we've seen in the past year with the, you know, 2016 and previous years–in 2016 there was a strike–faculty at the Uni­ver­sity of Manitoba. Last year, there was obviously negotiations and bargaining between the admin­is­tra­tion and the faculty and–seemed–appeared to come close to a strike. That didn't happen, thankfully.

      I'd like to ask the minister about a mandate letter that was sent out last year that went into–played into the negotiations between the faculty and admin­is­tra­tion at U of M–letter that came from the gov­ern­ment, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding), saying spe­cific­ally the amounts that could be negotiated for salary increases, which I think is a clear inter­ference in the negotiation process between faculty and administration.

      So I'd like to know if that–such letter has been given this school year in this year, as the faculty and the admin­is­tra­tion are engaging in discussions.

Mr. Ewasko: Thank the member from St. Vital for the question.

      So, please take this the right way. During the discussions over Bill 33, the member had questioned me on a few occasions in regards to leaving it up to post-secondary in­sti­tutions and–because of their autonomy. And now it almost sounds like the member from St. Vital–and I'm just going to ask for clarity on this one–so it almost sounds like the member from St. Vital wants me now to get involved in those negotiations that are sort of a, you know, autonomous with those post-secondary in­sti­tutions?

      I'm just going to ask for clarity on that one, because I'm unsure if he's maybe unsure of how the process actually works.

Mr. Moses: I'm asking spe­cific­ally, has the prov­incial gov­ern­ment sent a mandate letter of any form to the Uni­ver­sity of Manitoba, their board of admin­is­tra­tion, in regards to negotiations or of any sort? And I'd like to know the content of that letter.

      We know that there was a letter sent last year that directly influenced the negotiations, and we want to know if there was one sent this year and if there was, what the content of that letter is.

Mr. Ewasko: Thank you, my friend from St. Vital, for the question. So, in regards to process, in regards to any type of–whether it's labour relations or things along those lines, we in the de­part­ment we actually don't get involved in that.

      That would have to be potentially a question for the De­part­ment of Finance because, as I've stated before, we work closely with our post-secondary partners–post-secondary edu­ca­tion partners, and–you know, and I'll take this time, since we've got a few minutes, to commend them and our public health officials for actually working together and col­laborating and really putting in a huge effort to make sure that our students that were seeking, you know, post-secondary edu­ca­tion are still able to access their edu­ca­tion. In some cases, it's a bit of a hybrid model. I mean, we've got some that are remote, some that are in-person classes. You know, they worked quite closely with Public Health to make sure that they were abiding by all public health orders.

      So, this sort of goes with that autonomy. I mean, we're partnering and collaborating and basically listening to what our post-secondary partners basically are looking towards to doing. And so with that, I mean, I don't get involved, my de­part­ment does not get involved in negotiating, no matter how much, unfor­tunately, my friend from St. Vital tries to tell people that that's what's going on.

      So if there was any cor­res­pon­dence, I personally have not sent out anything to our post-secondary in­sti­tutions on the matter for any type of negotiating with any staff of theirs because, again, they are the employers; we just work with them.

      So, thanks.

Mr. Moses: Thanks for clarifying that a letter wasn't sent from your de­part­ment.

      You said there's a possi­bility that it was sent from the De­part­ment of Finance, as it was last year, and I'd like to clarify whether you have knowledge of that, if that was sent out, because I find it hard to believe–I mean, perhaps your gov­ern­ment is so siloed that, you know, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) wouldn't even inform you if he sent a letter out to one of the in­sti­tutions that you're respon­si­ble for and you wouldn't even be aware of it.

      Perhaps that's the case. Perhaps you do know; I'm not sure. That's why I'd like to clarify again if you know if there was a letter sent, even by the Department of Finance or another de­part­ment, to the Uni­ver­sity of Manitoba, to their board or admin­is­tra­tion, that would've directed them and perhaps given them a mandate or some direction on the negotiation process with the faculty.

Mr. Ewasko: So, just to be clear on a couple things.

      So, I didn't say that a letter did come from the Minister of Finance. I did say that the member would have to ask the Minister of Finance.

      So–but in regards to cor­res­pon­dence back and forth in regards to any type of mandates or anything else, I do know that back in 2016–and this is shortly after the member himself was elected, but I'll just give him a bit of a history here–that, when we formed gov­ern­ment in 2016–and I was in op­posi­tion for five years and I had the pleasure of being the edu­ca­tion and advanced education advocate back then–I'm hoping that the member from St. Vital is taking it more of–as an advocacy as opposed to a critique role because I know that, deep down, we want to see student success here in the province and I'm hoping that we'll continue, you know, decent enough dialogue moving forward.

      But the NDP had saddled the new gov­ern­ment–our gov­ern­ment in 2016–with roughly over $900 million as a deficit. The debt alone, when you combined the prov­incial debt and the debt from Manitoba Hydro, was not far off of $50 billion–that's billion with a B, not million with an M–a whole huge chunk of change.

      And so, I do know that, you know, back in 2016, some of the asks to our taxpayer-funded–you know, whether it was in­sti­tutions or any organi­zation within the gov­ern­ment–was asked to take a 00.75-in-one.

      So that, for sure, was out there and that's public knowledge, I mean, that was asked. And matter of fact, you know, I know that my colleagues and myself on the Progressive Conservative side of the House took zeroes as far as wage increases and–you know, and we disclosed that, and we did public an­nounce­ments on that. And I don't really remember the NDP side, and maybe, you know, now is a good time for the member for St. Vital (Mr. Moses) to put it on the record whether his side of the House took zeroes or what they did with their wages but we've taken zeroes for five years now.

* (17:40)

      And so, back to his original question on post-secondary in­sti­tutions and dealing with any type of union negotiations or staff negotiations or anything along those lines, I mean, the fact is is there's a process, and that process goes along with the post-secondary in­sti­tutions them­selves and their boards and their, you know, president's offices and their financial people within their in­sti­tutions.

      So, again, that's a process our de­part­ment doesn't get involved in. So I thank the member for the question.

Mr. Moses: I just want to clarify for the minister, I was elected in 2019, not 2016.

      I did want to just move on and ask the minister about the prov­incial gov­ern­ment used and provided a one-time traditional–Transitional Support Fund last year during the pandemic.

      Wondering if the minister can provide and, you know, hope the minister can just endeavour to provide this infor­ma­tion: a breakdown of how much, when and to whom that Transitional Support Fund was distributed and if there are and how much of that fund is still remaining unallocated.

Mr. Ewasko: Thank the–my friend from St. Vital for the question.

      Yes, thanks for the clarity on the 2019 thing. Boy, time flies when we're having fun, and I absolutely do miss my colleague, Colleen Mayer, who was an exceptional MLA for the St. Vital area, and I think she's absolutely sadly missed at this time in the St. Vital area but, you know, brings us to today. It is what it is. So I gave you the extra three years by accident there, member for St. Vital (Mr. Moses), so hopefully you'll forgive me.

      So, in regards to the transitional one-time invest­ment. So, keep in mind that this is a global pandemic and post-secondary in­sti­tutions, I mean, you know, with varying different reasons, they needed some transitional support funding. So for the year of 2020-2021, we provided colleges and uni­ver­sities, again, with a one-time invest­ment of $25.6 million and through the Transitional Support Fund. This funding helped them to respond to unanticipated changes in enrolments and other challenges posed by the pandemic.

      Now when the member asks about specifics, and I know the member does some decent research, so I'm just going to give him a link so that he can check it out and if there's further questions after this, definitely no problem. But go to infoMB, and that's basically where anything is–any letters or any kind of cor­res­pon­dence that is publicly disclosed is on that website. And each letter that was sent to each in­sti­tution, with the amounts and every­thing, is on that site.

Mr. Moses: I'd like to move on to ask some questions about Bill 33, but as I do so, I'd also just like to clarify the second part of that question as to whether there are any unallocated funds that are part of that fund and what that amount is, and I'll also move on to Bill 33 and ask a few questions about that as to the minister–and I know he's mentioned this several times about consulting on Bill 33 and the consulting on the regula­tions that will be–or have already been perhaps developed as a result of Bill 33.

      So, asking the minister if he's done that con­sul­ta­tion work, if the regula­tions have already been developed or is that work ongoing, and if he is planning on actually doing con­sul­ta­tion work to develop the regula­tions on Bill 33.

Mr. Ewasko: So, in regards to the Transitional Support Fund, as I've said, it was a one-time support fund that basically went to the post-secondary in­sti­tutions to help them sort of navigate the unexpected, unanticipated challenges that we all faced through COVID, whether that was PPE or whether that was hand sanitizer or masks or, you know, cleaning materials, anything that they saw fit; we actually did not put a stipulation exactly what they had to spend it on, but those dollars were actually all transitionally sent to the post-secondaries, so there was no monies sort of left over; it was all sent to the post-secondary in­sti­tutions.

      And, again, the website–I think you've probably got a pen; I can't see you from here, but infoMB is the link where we disclose all that cor­res­pon­dence. And in that cor­res­pon­dence, each letter actually is on there and it gives you the total amounts that were allocated to each post-secondary in­sti­tution, and, yes, the total amount again for the Transitional Support Fund was $25.6 million.

      Now, Bill 33. It's one of my–it's become one of my favourite topics, and I think Bill 33 was a great demon­stra­tion of working with our edu­ca­tion partners. And I know that, you know, the member had heard me on more than one occasion about, you know, the con­sul­ta­tions and the op­por­tun­ities that we did with many different stake­holders. And keep in mind, and as he said, you know, Bill 33 had seen a couple different post-secondary edu­ca­tion ministers as the time had gone, and so we brought Bill 33 forward again, and it passed, and through­out the con­sul­ta­tions, of course, he knows that the students had requested some clarity.

* (17:50)

      And so, actually, it was shortly after I was appointed minister in January that–about Bill 33, and we actually had, you know–and back then, of course, through the pandemic, I mean, we had to do some Zoom or team meetings, and we had student organi­zations come in, and some of their concerns were the fact that they were concerned that Bill 33, when we're talking about doing a shoulder check, and I'll bring that term up again just to remind the member we're doing shoulder checks on–they're just touching base with our post-secondary partners.

What are they looking at as far as any kind of tuition fee increases, any type of pro­gram­ming changes, things like that, to sort of let the–let our de­part­ment know so that we can check, because he knows that there was a, you know, college review and there was also the report from the Auditor General to sort of, you know, to keep an eye on these types of things because as he knows, as the member from St. Vital has been a lifelong Manitoban himself, I mean, it's taxpayer funded, it's taxpayer money at the end of the day and so it doesn't hurt to do that shoulder check.

      So we had the students come in and they–on the Zoom meetings they had basically put their concerns in regards to the fact that they were worried that I or the minister of the–you know, of Advanced Edu­ca­tion was going to have author­ity over their student fees that are put forward by unions, their student union fees. And we said to them on the Zoom meeting, you know what? It doesn't affect your student union fees; these are student fees set by post-secondary in­sti­tutions and the tuition as well.

      Well, they wanted some further clarity so we had them in again to do a technical briefing with my officials who are non-partisan civil servants. And so sat down with them, went through, explained, and what we did was we basically put forward an amend­ment to Bill 33 so that it actually spelled it out word for word that it actually did not touch on student union fees. And so as far as col­lab­o­ration goes I think our record proves that we do consult with our post-secondary edu­ca­tion partners.

Mr. Moses: The minister clearly didn't really answer my question. I asked whether the regula­tions have been developed or are they being developed right now as a result of Bill 33. I'd like to get clarity on that spe­cific­ally.

      But I'd also like–you know, the minister's so proud of Bill 33. I'd really like to see if the minister can point to which part of Bill 33 makes tuition affordable and makes our uni­ver­sities and colleges more ac­ces­si­ble. Can the minister point to one part of Bill 33 that actually works to that end?

Mr. Ewasko: Well, you know it's as if the member from St. Vital and I sort of got a–had a chat before today and you sort of threw me up a nice lob, a lob there, my friend from St. Vital, because when you want to talk about affordability and ac­ces­si­bility, absolutely, I can talk for minutes and minutes and minutes on that. And so when you talk about Bill 33–so first of all, I'll go to your first part of the question because I know that you had clearly pointed out that I didn't answer part of that.

      So I did want to make clear that the con­sul­ta­tions with our post-secondary partners–and, again, post-secondary partners are the post-secondary in­sti­tutions them­selves, the students, the staff, other stake­holders that possibly might have some­thing to do with our advanced edu­ca­tion system here in this great province of ours.

      So, in regards to Bill 33, some of our commit­ments in Bill 33 is to make sure that we maintain the affordability and ac­ces­si­bility for the students with the need for our uni­ver­sities and colleges to remain sus­tain­able. So there's that fine balance. I know that, you know, in the previous gov­ern­ment, they really focused on, you know, the tax-and-spend theory, and, you know, somebody's grandkids or great-grandkids will pay for stuff later on sometime into the future.

      That, I'm really not going to make too many more comments on, but, I mean, I think as we move forward making sure that we're looking to our various different regula­tions and touching base with our post-secondary in­sti­tutions. We're going to make sure that those edu­ca­tion partners are in the loop with those con­sul­ta­tions and, matter of fact, if the member from St. Vital is still the post-secondary edu­ca­tion advocate at that time, we'll put the olive branch out and, as he knows, my door is open to have a con­ver­sa­tion about that and we'll definitely include him on that list of people to come in and consult with.

      When you talk about remaining and keeping it affordable, I mean how many times, I'm not quite sure and I'll continue to say it: our goal is to, again, make sure that our post-secondary edu­ca­tion here in Manitoba is affordable and ac­ces­si­ble.

      How do we do that? We do that with making sure that we've got that $30 million on scholar­ships and bursaries, upfront grants to students to make sure that they can get their feet in the doors to their post-secondary dreams about going ahead and bettering them­selves. And at the same time, hopefully then, after they graduate, staying right here in this great province of ours, as the member from St. Vital has done, as I've done, as my kids are doing, as, you know, we hope that many, many more kids as time goes on, students and young adults. We want to train and retain them right here in this great province of ours.

      So as far as ac­ces­si­bility and affordability, again, the member knows we are still, you know, third-lowest tuition in all of Canada, the cheapest, the lowest tuition in western Canada, and I've put it on the record more than one–on more than one occasion, that that's our goal. We have to make sure that we've got strong pro­gram­ming but, at the same time, making sure that our tuition remains affordable for our students here in Manitoba.

      And so, moving forward on, you know, the policies within Bill 33, we want to–we are–we're going to be consulting on that as time goes on. I think, you know, some of the hopes were going to be that we were–we would have started some of that in the summer after, you know, the bill passed and into the fall. But as the member knows, I mean, worldwide pandemic, you know, various different other challenges have been going on as well. We're in the midst of doing that and we're going to make sure that he gets an invite for the con­sul­ta­tion piece as well, on the policies on Bill 33.

Mr. Moses: I just want to go back to the discussion around the negotiation between the U of M and their faculty and their mandate letter. And I want to just be crystal clear with the minister if he says that he didn't put out a letter of any sort or any directive of any kind, I just want to be crystal clear on that.

      I also said that, you know, if a letter did come out, perhaps from the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding), as it did last year, if it did come out and his de­part­ment was unaware of it, it would really show that this govern­ment has huge silos–has huge silos between de­part­ments for the Minister of Advanced Edu­ca­tion to not know what the Minister of Finance is doing with one of his in­sti­tutions.

      So I just want to be crystal clear: from the minister's knowledge, has his de­part­ment or any other de­part­ment put out any mandate letters of any kind to U of M, to direct them into–in regards to their negotiations with the faculty?

Mr. Ewasko: Sorry, Mr. Chair, I unmuted before I put my hand up.

      But to go on, you know–and I ap­pre­ciate the member from St. Vital. He's bringing in his ag back­ground into this discussion, talking about silos and that, so it's very interesting. So, growing up on a small farm southwest of Beausejour, it brings me to some great fall pictures when our local farmers are filling those silos up with various different forages ready for their animals through­out–for the winter and all that.

      But just–I'd just like to put another thing quickly on the record, as I see we're–I'm not sure what's going on with the clock but it's all good.

      When the member–the member from St. Vital needs to stop calling in Bill 33 the regula­tions. The point is is that they're policies, and why they're policies is because policies are more flexible and so–

The Acting Chairperson (Josh Guenter): The hour being 6 o'clock–order. The hour being 6 o'clock, com­mit­tee rise. Call in the Speaker.

IN SESSION

The Acting Speaker (Josh Guenter): The hour being 6 o'clock, this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until 10 a.m. tomorrow.



LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Wednesday, October 6, 2021

CONTENTS


Vol. 77

Speaker's Statement

Driedger 3793

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

Government Motion

Goertzen  3793

Introduction of Bills

Bill 74–The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2021

Fielding  3795

Committee Reports

Standing Committee on Legislative Affairs

Ninth Report

A. Smith  3795

Standing Committee on Crown Corporations

First Report

Martin  3796

Standing Committee on Crown Corporations

Second Report

Morley-Lecomte  3797

Standing Committee on Crown Corporations

Third Report

Morley-Lecomte  3798

Tabling of Reports

Driedger 3798

Ministerial Statements

Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women  and Girls Awareness Day

Lagimodiere  3798

Fontaine  3799

Lamoureux  3800

Brian Pallister

Goertzen  3800

Kinew   3801

Lamont 3801

Members' Statements

Fire Prevention Week

Smook  3802

Abortion Protest Buffer Zone Act

Fontaine  3802

Kyle Waczko

Lagassé  3803

Dave Rundle

Bushie  3803

Community Recognition During Pandemic

Clarke  3804

Speaker's Statement

Driedger 3804

Oral Questions

BITSA Legislation

Kinew   3805

Goertzen  3805

Legislative Agenda

Kinew   3806

Goertzen  3807

Vaccine Policy at the Legislature

Fontaine  3808

Goertzen  3808

Education Modernization Act

Altomare  3809

Cullen  3810

Manitoba Hydro

Sala  3810

Wharton  3811

Labour Rights Legislation

Asagwara  3811

Fielding  3812

COVID-19 Fourth Wave

Lamont 3812

Goertzen  3813

COVID-19 and Schools

Lamont 3813

Goertzen  3813

Surgery Backlogs

Gerrard  3813

Gordon  3813

Early Learning and Child Care

Isleifson  3814

Squires 3814

Petitions

Louise Bridge

Maloway  3814

ORDERS OF THE DAY

GOVERNMENT BUSINESS

Committee of Supply

(Concurrent Sections)

Room 254

Health and Seniors Care

Asagwara  3816

Gordon  3816

Lindsey  3825

Gerrard  3828

Room 255

Families 3829

(Continued)

Agriculture and Resource Development

Eichler 3829

Brar 3830

Lamont 3842

Infrastructure

Schuler 3845

Wiebe  3847

Chamber

Executive Council

Goertzen  3849

Kinew   3849

Lamont 3857

Advanced Education, Skills and Immigration

Ewasko  3861

Moses 3862