Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the Speaker's Gallery where the six young persons who were appointed to the Manitoba Legislative Internship Program for the 1998-99 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 12 months. They have been performing a variety of research and other tasks for private members. These interns commenced their assignment last September and will complete them in August.

* (1345)

They are, working with the government caucus, Ms. Melanie Mallet of the University of Manitoba, Ms. Shelly Wiseman of the University of Manitoba and Ms. Melanie Vanstone of McGill University; working with the caucus of the official opposition, Mr. Rory Henry of the University of Manitoba, Mr. David Markham of the University of Manitoba and Ms. Renata Neufeld of the University of Manitoba.

Copies of their biographies have been distributed to the members. I would like to take this opportunity on behalf of all members to congratulate you on your appointment to the program and to hope that you are having a very interesting and successful year.

Also, seated in the public gallery we have fifty Grade 9 students from Linden Christian School under the direction of Mr. Derek Kroeker. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable First Minister (Mr. Filmon).

And, forty-three Grade 9 students from Chief Peguis Junior High School under the direction of Mr. Will Barmeir. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson).

And, forty-one Grade 11 students from Warren Collegiate under the direction of Mr. Jake Wiebe and Mr. John Smith. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns).

And, 20 senior high students from Daniel McIntyre Collegiate under the direction of Mr. Steve Patrick. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett).

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

Aboriginal Children

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, a national study dealing with the compliance of U.S. standards on disabilities produced by Patrick Kellerman and Deborah Steinstra has produced some shocking results. One of the most appalling transgressions that they speak to is the fact that aboriginal parents living on reserves have to relinquish guardianship of their children if they have disabilities in order to access provincially funded special needs programs.

I would like to ask the Minister responsible for Federal-Provincial Relations and the First Minister: has his government taken any action on this issue, and what action is he proposing to the parents who must be in a horrible situation in Manitoba to be faced with those kinds of challenges?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, my understanding is that we have had a working group that has been working on this and that the Child and Youth Secretariat along with the federal departments of Indian and Northern Affairs and Health Canada, Medical Services Branch, the Awasis Agency of Northern Manitoba, Manitoba Health and Manitoba Family Services have been working on a project designed to repatriate First Nations children with technology dependence to their home reserves. The process is near completion. The required funds have been approved, and a draft agreement has been developed with respect to the pilot project.

Mr. Doer: I will have to examine the answer of the First Minister. Madam Speaker, I am quite concerned, and I think anyone in this Chamber would be absolutely concerned, about a situation where, in order for any of our children to access special needs programs, we have to lose custody. It seems to me, whatever the jurisdictional issues here, that humanity and human rights would dictate that all of us take whatever action necessary to have programs accessible to children without families losing custody of those children.

On page 97 of the Postl report, it also talked in 1995 of this critical situation for aboriginal children for special needs. I would like to ask the Premier: since the Postl report has been produced in Manitoba and released over four years ago, has this situation been dealt with in Manitoba so parents are not faced with special needs programs versus guardianship, which I think is an intolerable situation for any Manitoban?

* (1350)

Mr. Filmon: As the member knows, among the many issues that are contained within this is the issue of jurisdiction on reserve, a matter over which, of course, the Constitution speaks. That is why this has been an issue in which technologically dependent children—we agree, I might say, with the member opposite that it should not be a situation that forces a choice of giving up the children by the parents. That is why this matter has been under development for over two years in a multidiscipline, multidepartmental study that we believe is going to result in a pilot project to try and ensure that we can provide the technology on reserve. Again, the major partner and the major authority under the Constitution is the federal government. That is why we have been a part of it, because we would want to have that matter resolved. We have certainly been urging, trying to find a way to resolve it.

Mr. Doer: On page 346 of the special needs report, it also talks about the perceived lack of co-operation dealing with special needs kids between the province, the school boards and the aboriginal community and a real lack of trust. It seems to me, if the dollars are constant for special needs programs and children are coming from First Nations communities to get those programs, that the issue of custody should not be in question and that the Premier today could say that no more kids will be taken into custody to access programs for special needs kids, that we could take a leadership stand today and say that programs for children in the jurisdictions that are being dealt with are one thing, but families and kids we do not believe should be split in order to access programs from one jurisdiction to another.

Can we get that commitment from the Premier today?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I would agree that we need to resolve the situation and find a solution, but rather than take the narrow perspective that the member is of just simply dealing with it and saying that we are simply going to not allow the children to be taken away without providing for them the opportunity to have the technological access that they require, we think they would be condemning them to a life of poverty and ill achievement. That is not a sufficient answer, which is why we are looking at the whole solution, not just a narrow part of the solution. That is what this pilot program is intended to do, is to find a whole solution.

Government Action

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, according to the recent Steinstra-Kellerman report, aboriginal Manitobans identify themselves as facing disabilities at twice the rate of the general population. Much of this, of course, stems from issues of poverty.

I want to ask the Minister of Education why there were no aboriginal representatives on the special needs steering committee, why no hearings were held in aboriginal reserve communities and how he intends to ensure a continuum of support and services without such educational discussions with aboriginal schools and communities.

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, the question raised here does have quite a relationship with the questions raised by the honourable Leader of the Opposition and the answers given by the First Minister. There is indeed a need for federal agencies to put the needs of the children ahead of any jurisdictional disputes or squabbles that we might have. I know that many, many aboriginal children attend schools off reserve, and the special needs programs are available for children attending the public school system in Manitoba. On that matter, funding has doubled in the last 10 years or so to $109 million. That was added to just last week by another $2 million as our first responses to the special education report. We are committed to responding further as well, and indeed in the course of doing so, we may take into account issues like the ones raised today by honourable members opposite, but without federal co-operation we have a much harder row to hoe.

* (1355)

Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, could the minister explain why, after five ministers, 11 years of Tory education policy, the special needs review felt compelled to point out the perceived lack of co-operation between the province, the school system and aboriginal communities stemmed from a lack of trust and there is a need for someone to take responsibility? Can he explain why, after five ministers, 11 years of this government, no one in this government took responsibility for that?

Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, I would take precisely the opposite view as that taken by the honourable member. It was this government that commissioned the proactive report and two years of work on special education. It was this government that saw the need to look ahead and do something about it. It was not those who simply want to criticize all the time. We took that initiative, knowing full well there were significant challenges ahead in special education in Manitoba, but we also know that is the most significant area where investment can be made to enrich the lives of young people and make them contributing members of society for their whole life. This government has shown a continuous willingness to work with the various players, be they school divisions, be they aboriginal Manitobans, whomever they happen to be, but, again, without federal participation and co-operation we are not going to make the progress that honourable members opposite want and that we want.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister who in fact initiated, in his own department's words, this review seven years ago—they have had seven years to think about this. He has been told by the special needs review that Manitoba parents, and I quote, are not getting a full picture of what is out there. Many parents, and I quote, feel they have been lied to and misinformed. The review has advised the department to prepare a handbook for parents.

I would like to ask the minister why, after five ministers, 11 years of Tory education policy, the government has been unable to prepare a handbook, a fundamental obligation of this government.

Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, again, contrary to what the honourable member is alleging here today, the aboriginal education directorate of the Department of Education has been praised by aboriginal leaders and by educators throughout the province. That is not to say that all of the issues were resolved; otherwise the government would not have commissioned a special education review. We know very well, as does the honourable member, the significant opportunity that exists if we invest the dollars and the programs in young Manitobans who have special education requirements. To go further, we can be thankful that we have forward-looking people in the Department of Family Services who have placed before Manitobans the BabyFirst program and the EarlyStart program which have such an impact and make such a difference on the early years of a student's life. Reading Recovery is another program that is very, very significant.

So the questions raised by the honourable member are indeed important, and they are important in every jurisdiction across this country as a generation of Canadians is coming forward requiring special education services.

Political Advertising

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, as I read the Monnin report, it is obvious that there was a plan to subvert the electoral process. When I read that Mr. Kozminski says he will do anything to take votes away from the NDP, I wonder where Tory ethics are when they try to pass this off as an error in judgment.

Madam Speaker, 1995 was not the first time Tories tried to play with campaigns. In 1990 the Tories put out a bogus pamphlet in the Swan River constituency trying to divide the aboriginal and the white community.

I would like to ask the Premier: given that this happened under his watch, can he indicate whether he accepts this attempt to stir up racism and to divide the people, and does he condone the actions of members of the Conservative Party to do this kind of thing?

I will table the pamphlet, Madam Speaker.

* (1400)

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, not having seen the pamphlet that the member is talking about, I would just simply say that under no circumstances do I or my party accept racism as a means of any democratic action in this province. I reject that. The member opposite can do whatever she wants to stir it up, but I will not accept it.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, the First Minister is clearly out of order. He is attributing motives. Madam Speaker, I would like to indicate that this is a leaflet that was put out by the Conservative Party that was sent only to nonaboriginal people, a phoney leaflet on aboriginal issues, and it was, by the way, acknowledged to be coming directly from the Conservative campaign. In fact their official agent ended up paying for it.

So I would like to ask you to have the First Minister withdraw his unparliamentary comments and perhaps for once accept responsibility again for this continuing pattern of attempts to subvert elections in this province by the Conservative Party.

Madam Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, I will take the matter under advisement to check the exact wording of the Premier and consult with the authorities.

Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, given that this pamphlet was put out by the Conservative Party and it was an attempt to stir up racism, I would like to ask the Premier if he will commit this time that his party will follow The Elections Act and ensure that members of the Conservative Party do not put out bogus pamphlets and try to stir up racism anywhere in the province.

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, not only is my party committed to ensure that the democratic process is followed, but we are strengthening the legislation in accordance with the recommendations of retired Chief Justice Monnin to ensure that we go beyond requirements that were there previously.

Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier if he will refer this pamphlet which the Conservatives put out to the ethics committee of the Conservative Party that was created because of the vote-rigging scandal and ensure that Tories do not distribute bogus pamphlets in the next election.

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I have already rejected the pamphlet and its content. I said so in my first answer.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, my question is to the First Minister.

We are very concerned on this side of the House about a climate as was indicated in the Monnin report, a climate and a culture that has been adopted by members opposite that seems to go beyond the area of fair play and which, in the opinion of many Conservative members, is victory at all cost.

My question to the First Minister is: what kinds of assurances can the First Minister give that future Tory candidates, future Tory members and other close people around the Premier are not involved, will not be involved, in the debacle, the tragedy and the scandal of the last few years?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, as was concluded by Mr. Justice Monnin in his report, he said: "I find no evidence that any elected PC member, any member of the Party's executive, nor any other member of the Party's management committee on which Thorsteinson sat was aware of or aided and abetted in either the plot or the cover-up.

"As far as the cover-up is concerned, it is the handiwork of three individuals. There is no evidence to suggest that anyone else knew."

I say to this member that this was after receiving testimony from 72 people, of whom 37 appeared under oath before the inquiry, and I have said unequivocally that their actions were unacceptable and that everything will be done to ensure that every step possible is taken to ensure that this never happens again.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, then perhaps the Premier can explain to me how it is that a chiropractic doctor can write a letter to all of his patients advocating support for a Conservative candidate running for the nomination, doing follow-up phone calls asking for memberships for those patients, and how that can happen and how we can lobby the effects of the Conservative Party on chiropractics in Manitoba and send out a letter to patients—and I will table this letter for review by the government—how the Premier acknowledges and accepts that.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I will be happy to refer this to Elections Manitoba for their examination as to the propriety of this.

I remind the member opposite that his friends and supporters and fellow party members routinely use union lists to write to members, as they did when the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) became Leader of his party, and at the end of the day Bernie Christophe went on television and exulted: the machine works through the use of those kinds of things, as, Madam Speaker, the member himself, the member for Kildonan, used the lists of contractors to the Crown corporations of this province when the New Democrats were in office to call on them to raise funds for the New Democratic Party. He did that. He used those lists of who received contracts from the New Democratic Party government in the '80s to call on them personally to urge them to contribute money to the party because they had received contracts from his party.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Kildonan, with a supplementary question.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, my supplementary is to the Minister of Health, since the Premier apparently has not learned from the lessons of the Monnin inquiry when the First Minister attacked anyone that made any kind of accusation. That is why he got himself into trouble.

My question to the Minister of Health is: will the Minister of Health investigate the patient confidentiality provisions, as contained in their own privacy legislation, to see how it is that someone could take private patient lists and solicit for the Conservative Party for a Conservative candidate to work on behalf of a Conservative candidate in the next election to ensure that they can maintain themselves in office, something they have been trying to do illegally as we have found for many, many years?

* (1410)

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Deputy Premier): Well, Madam Speaker, the Premier has already indicated a preparedness to send this letter to Elections Manitoba. I am certainly prepared to look into the issue as to whether or not there has been any breach of any issues of confidentiality or any privacy legislation. I will certainly undertake to do that.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, just weeks prior to the throne speech the government went ahead and gave authorization for Manitoba Hydro to spend hundreds of millions of dollars in the acquisition of Centra Gas.

The question for the Premier (Mr. Filmon) is: can the Premier indicate to this Chamber what is the actual cost for Manitobans in that acquisition?

Hon. David Newman (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Madam Speaker, the actual equity cost was $245 million. Then there is an assumption of the debt which was also a debt, of course, that was paid for by the rates charged to consumers and approved by the Public Utilities Board. That was in the order of 300 and some-odd million dollars, and I will get the exact figure. That constitutes, in effect, the price of the acquisition. The price was a price that was evaluated by two independent bodies. The price was within the range which was considered appropriate for the market at the time.

Public Input Process

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, I would ask the government: given that there was absolutely no reference to this $100-million deal in the throne speech, does the government feel any obligation to provide a forum in which the public can have released some of these details and opposition would be able to provide more detailed questioning?

Hon. David Newman (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Madam Speaker, the nature of the transaction, of course, was such that it was a publicly traded company that was privately owned and then there was a public corporation, Manitoba Hydro, involved. So the vendor was unable to disclose information, as was the purchaser, with the result that there was a confidentiality agreement which guided the negotiations.

The process for public input can potentially take place with respect to the Public Utilities Board, and that is under consideration at this time by that body pursuant to applications that have been made. There is also an opportunity for any member of the public to inquire of myself or Manitoba Hydro about facts in relation to the transaction which could be answered to the extent they are not precluded from being answered prior to the conclusion of the final deal.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, many find it absolutely amazing government would okay something that would require hundreds of millions of dollars.

The question specific to the minister is: is the minister prepared to look at calling a Standing Committee on Public Utilities, much in the same fashion in which we handled Repap, so the public can be given a full accounting of exactly what this government has done by giving the authority to Manitoba Hydro to acquire Centra Gas, so we can find out what the hidden message or what it is that the government is hoping to be able to achieve by this purchase, and the public will be fully--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.

Mr. Newman: Madam Speaker, in the due course of time, first of all pending the decision of the Public Utilities Board, which might provide the opportunity that has been alluded to--there is, of course, a committee of this Legislature which does sit, and that might afford another opportunity in the due course of time. The full details of the transaction, when they are freed from any constraints of the negotiations pending closure, will be, of course, available to the public. We made that assurance as a condition of the negotiations, that ultimately all of the details of the transaction would be made available to the public.

Fishing Industry

Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): My questions are directed to the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro. Madam Speaker, the minister and his colleague the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Cummings) are well aware that the fishing industry in the Grand Rapids area at the mouth of the Saskatchewan River into Lake Winnipeg has been deteriorating to the point where it is no longer feasible for the fishermen to go out and try to make a living out of fishing. Of course, these losses have long been linked to the hydro generating station that was installed there in the early '60s. My question to the minister is: since Manitoba Hydro had admitted that there is a serious decline in the fish stock , which requires action, why has this minister and his colleague the Minister of Natural Resources not made negotiations a much higher priority?

Hon. David Newman (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Madam Speaker, the history of this consequence of hydro development at Grand Rapids in the 1960s includes a period, of course, when the New Democratic Party was in office, and during that period no negotiations whatsoever took place. It was not until September 1989 that Manitoba Hydro commissioned an evaluation of the Grand Rapids project impact by an independent team of consultants, consistent with what was done with treaty land entitlement in the Northern Flood Agreements. The result of that was a settlement of $5.1 million, I believe it was, for Grand Rapids. They were acting on behalf of the fishermen at that time and entered into releases and indemnities, with some exceptions, against the unforeseen. So the deal was settled. In spite of that, in addition, there were adverse effects--compensation agreements in 1992 and '93. There were experimental habitat improvements, which continue from 1997 to 2003 costing over a million dollars, and there is a Grand Rapids walleye spawning enhancement program operation as well.

Grand Rapids Visit

Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): I have one more question for the minister. Would the minister agree to travel to Grand Rapids and meet with the fishers there to see what could be done to resolve the situation that is developing at Grand Rapids?

Hon. David Newman (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Madam Speaker, we had a meeting with the deputies of the Department of Natural Resources, my deputy minister and representatives of Hydro, including the president of Hydro, in my office some time ago. I was distracted by other activities which required my immediate attention at the time.

The result of that meeting was a decision confirmed by a letter that they were attempting through threats to extort $25 million from the Province of Manitoba and Manitoba Hydro. The result of an analysis was that they had filed a statement of claim, and the statement of claim was sitting. Defences had been filed. They have chosen a legal route to get an adjudicated result in a situation where legal opinions differ about liability. Hydro and Manitoba believe there is no liability. So they are using a process of extortion at the moment to try and bring people back to a table which there was no basis to meet about.

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, when The Elderly and Infirm Persons Housing Act was amended in June of ’97, there were 17 life-lease apartments identified in Manitoba where residents were going to receive a guaranteed tax exemption totalling more than three-quarters of a million dollars. The minister has confirmed that this list of apartments receiving the exemption is growing, but he is unclear of how much they are going to be and how many are going to have two to three years before being reviewed.

I want to ask the minister: if you knew there were more than 17 apartments at the time of the passage of the bill, how come they were not mentioned then, and how many more condominiums were you aware of at the time of the passage of Bill 60?

Hon. Jack Reimer (Minister of Housing): Under the present EIPH Act, Madam Speaker, I believe there are around 260 residents or apartments or housing complexes that are exempt. The life-lease portion of the exemption--there are 44 of these units that are exempt. The other day the member was mentioning one of the complexes being exempt, and the complex she was referring to, called Villa Beliveau, does not have an EIPH licence for exemption. The licences that have been issued were issued under the existing agreements or the parameters that were in effect before, as she mentioned, November 15, 1997. Since that time no new licences have been issued to life-lease units. The qualifications and the restrictions that apply to the size and the income have to be abided by before any licence is renewed.

Ms. Cerilli: Madam Speaker, the minister mentioned Villa Beliveau. The complex is in his riding. He was at the sod turning. His name is in the ad for the complex.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. Does the honourable member have a question, please? Question, please.

* (1420)

Ms. Cerilli: I am asking my question, Madam Speaker. I want to ask the minister if these life-lease condominiums are being marketed using the property tax exemption, and are the residents now being informed that they will lose that property tax exemption after two or three years.

Mr. Reimer: Madam Speaker, firstly the member is right. I was at the ground-breaking ceremony for Villa Beliveau, but as was mentioned this unit does not have an EIPH licence so it is paying its share of taxes, whether it is property taxes or education taxes. So it does not qualify under the exemptions. The exemptions have been renewed on three-year bases, and at that time all of them will be reviewed for their applications as to their qualifications, not only their income size but their income requirements to be qualified under the EIPH. So they will be reviewed. They were grandfathered, like I mentioned, for three years, and they will be reviewed.

Mining Industry

Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Madam Speaker, given the importance of mining to Manitoba, the vast area of Manitoba's mineral resources, it is important that our resources are managed and developed in a fair and open process. We are now in an intolerable situation where Manitoba has no claims inspectors.

Can the minister explain why he has taken no effort to replace Manitoba's claims inspectors, and in fact we have none and have a situation that is going before the mines review board tomorrow?

Hon. David Newman (Minister of Energy and Mines): Madam Speaker, at this particular point in time, there is a process considering the hiring of two claims inspectors, one for the northern area of the province and one for the southern area. There was a retirement of a civil servant long serving, and at the moment there is no claims inspector on departmental staff.

There are ways that that need can be fulfilled in the interim, but the intent is to as soon as possible engage two claims inspectors. The contingency plan, of course, is there to be operated when and if necessary.

Interim Claims Inspectors

Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Madam Speaker, will the minister confirm that it is the intention to send out geological staff to be interim claims inspectors?

Hon. David Newman (Minister of Energy and Mines): Madam Speaker, it is always a decision that has to be made based on what other people are involved in, but other alternatives that are being investigated as to service in the immediate future, the suggestion that she has made is one of them. On the longer term, quarry inspectors may be available for that purpose, but there would have to be some upgrading and adjustment. Also, the representative from The Pas office, Fred Heidman, would be able to provide training, and he is also providing inspection services in the northern parts of the province at the present time.

Winnipeg Inner City

Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Madam Speaker, the government admits in the throne speech that, and I quote, "many of our neighbourhoods, particularly in the centre, have seen an unacceptable level of decay and decline," which is well known to the residents of Manitoba, as a direct result of 11 years of this government's policies, which include but are, of course, not limited to unacceptable levels of sprawl in the Capital Region, a flight of residents from Winnipeg, and reduced financial resources to the city as a result of government examples like giving BFI a licence in the R.M. of Rosser, which has meant a loss of $7 million and the loss of several million dollars as a net result of the province overtaking social services.

In light of these and other devastating results of this government's deliberate policies and choices, how does the First Minister expect the people of Winnipeg to believe you when you state, and I quote again, "the success of our entire province is linked to the success of Winnipeg"?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, as the throne speech says, there is no major city in Canada that gets a greater proportion of its financing and funding from the provincial government. This government has increased dramatically its transfers to the City of Winnipeg, and I remind her—she would not know this because she was not here in 1988—that one of our first official responsibilities was to reverse a reduction in the Provincial Municipal Tax Sharing agreement which they--

An Honourable Member: The Schreyer agreement.

Mr. Filmon: Yes, it was the Schreyer agreement and then the Pawley-Doer government with Doer as the leader of the--

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: The honourable First Minister, to complete his response.

Mr. Filmon: Yes, Madam Speaker, I can understand the sensitivity of the member for Concordia (Mr. Doer), because he was the Minister of Urban Affairs that was cutting in half the transfer of the provincial-municipal tax sharing to the City of Winnipeg at that time. We reversed that cut as one of our first responsibilities in government. Now they have the audacity to try and say that they are friends of the city when they were trying to cut their transfers to the city in those days. We did not agree with that. We have continued to enrich our transfers to the city, and that is one of the ways, one of the strong ways that we are showing our support to the City of Winnipeg. There will be many other opportunities that we will have to work co-operatively with the City of Winnipeg. That is what our commitment is, has been, and will continue to be, unlike the New Democrats.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. Time for Oral Questions has expired.