Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have this afternoon fifty-two Grade 5 students from Woodlawn School under the direction of Mrs. Anne Peters. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Steinbach (Mr. Driedger).

Also, fifty Grade 11 students from Technical Vocational High School under the direction of Mr. Mike Gartner. 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.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the First Minister.

Madam Speaker, during the testimony at the Monnin inquiry, in dealing with questions of the alleged conflict of interest with Mr. Benson, who was a senior civil servant and also involved in the Tory election campaigns, the Premier stated that he had not reviewed this potential conflict but certainly that is something I am prepared to do.

Did the Premier send this matter to the Civil Service Commission, and can the Premier report back on their findings in terms of the conflict of interest, as the Premier undertook on November 5?

* (1335)

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, subsequent to the testimony that I gave before the inquiry, further information came out about Mr. Benson's involvement and he subsequently retired from the public service of Manitoba.

Mr. Doer: That was over a month later, Madam Speaker, so obviously the undertaking he made was not a very sincere one. I would note that when Mr. Filmon took the matter of Seech Gajadharsingh under notice in this House he reported back with a report from the Civil Service Commission. In fact, the Civil Service Commission report was released to the media the same day that one Jules Benson was hired by the Premier from his post of being the Tory treasurer to being the secretary of the Treasury Board.

Given the fact that Mr. Benson stated: I did not see any conflict in my roles of dealing with the Conservative Party and dealing with being the senior civil servant, did the Premier, when Mr. Benson was hired--given the controversy at the time about his hiring of that individual and the questions that were raised publicly--explain the law requiring senior civil servants and people paid by the public to keep their voluntary political work away from their role as a civil servant?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the laws of our province, as were originally passed by the Schreyer government, allowed for public servants to participate fully in the electoral process. I believe it was the Lyon administration that amended that, because of the considerable involvement of deputy ministers, to provide for deputy ministers being excluded from that matter. Those laws have been on the books, and those people who are hired in the public service are knowledgeable and aware of their requirements under the law.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, obviously the Premier did not brief his newly appointed secretary of Treasury Board. The Premier had not sent this matter to the Civil Service Commission for over a month before Mr. Benson retired from the public service.

Given the fact on page 57 former Justice Monnin states that Mr. Benson's involvement was improper, and there was a lack of a distinction between the roles of a public employee and a volunteer in the Conservative Party, what action has the Premier taken with people paid for by the taxpayers to make sure that this kind of action does not take place in the future?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, as I have pointed out, Mr. Benson paid for his actions by retiring from his position. I can say that those actions, where people do the honourable thing and retire or resign from their positions, as has been done in the case of some, is in marked contrast to the actions, for instance, of the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale) or his Leader in not responding in any way to the Monnin report that refers to the fact that the member for Crescentwood is the only member of this Chamber who was found to have done wrong in this inquiry, the only member. No apology. No, in any way, response to this. We have here the member for Crescentwood admitting that he counselled people to subvert the law, counselled people to subvert the law, sits there immune to any action from his Leader who does not have the courage to deal with it. That is the kind of lack of integrity that people are concerned about.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Premier. Manitobans are asking if the Conservatives have learned anything from the Monnin inquiry. They know that three chiropractors have sent out letters to their patients asking for support for Conservative candidates. We know that follow-up phone calls have been organized and have been made to those patients. We know that Mr. Ted Murphy, the candidate, is a close friend of the Premier and has been on many boards, and we know that Mr. Frank Clark, the nomination chairman for Mr. Ted Murphy, is an employee of Sport Manitoba and lists his phone number on the letter advocating support for Mr. Murphy, his work number at Sport Manitoba listed on the letter that is sent out to the patients of chiropractors.

I am asking the Premier: have you learned anything from the Monnin inquiry?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, when this matter was raised in the House on Monday of this week, I took a number of actions. I not only phoned directly to Dr. Daien, the chiropractor who was referenced on Monday, and found out that he was not a member of our party but was acting in support of a person that he wanted to see become the nominee in Springfield, I asked Dr. Daien to cease and desist. I also phoned Mr. Murphy, the candidate in question. Mr. Murphy at that time indicated to me that, to his knowledge, letters of support had been sent out by three chiropractors, and I asked him to contact each one of them and ask them to cease and desist. I also wrote to Elections Manitoba, and the Minister of Health (Mr. Stefanson) contacted the Ombudsman in writing and asked them all to cease and desist.

* (1340)

When I found out subsequently that there was a letter that had the telephone number of Mr. Clark at Sport Manitoba, I had the Clerk of the Executive Council speak to the CEO, and I spoke to the candidate, Mr. Murphy, and indicated that those were unacceptable actions.

I ask, though, the members opposite whether or not they have done anything about their candidate in Gimli, Fran Frederickson, who has put out a brochure with a smiling picture of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) and has listed as the contact her e-mail address at the school board where she is the chair of the school board. I am told that this is not legitimate, to use a publicly funded office and publicly funded e-mail address as the source of taking her messages and her information on her brochure as the NDP candidate for Gimli. I would table this and ask the Leader of the Opposition what he intends to do and whether or not he apologizes for the use of public staff and public expense on behalf of his NDP candidate in Gimli.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, I am wondering if the Premier, whose staff and the people around him, Friends of Filmon, FOF, who have been found to be, to quote Monnin, a bunch of liars, if the Premier--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I would caution the honourable member to exercise caution in the choice of his words. You have been recognized for a supplementary question. Would you please pose the question now.

Mr. Chomiak: Yes, Madam Speaker, just in response to your advice, I am just looking for your direction. I believe the Monnin report that was tabled by the minister, the government House leader, did indicate that those people were in fact liars. I am only quoting the Monnin report that was tabled by the government, but I will address your issue with respect to the question.

I am wondering if the Premier, who apologized to individuals, talked to the hundreds of Conservatives who have been placed in government positions around the province in various government roles and responsibilities like Mr. Frank Clark, and has the Premier talked to all of them and spoken with all of them and told them that it is unacceptable for them to be campaigning using government phone numbers on government time with government pay for a Conservative candidate?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I would say to the member opposite that many of their candidates are public servants and working for public organizations and campaigning on public time, and we will start to catalogue them chapter and verse and indicate to them. As I told the member opposite, when it came to our attention that a phone number at an organization that is not a government organization, that is arm's length from government--that even then I phoned the CEO of that organization and suggested that it was not a good idea.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

* (1345)

Mr. Chomiak: My final supplementary is to the Minister responsible for Sport Manitoba. Will the minister undertake to launch an investigation into Sport Manitoba, which gets over $15 million in grants, which is one of the lead funding bodies for the Pan Am Games, to ensure that this practice of running nomination campaigns out of Sport Manitoba is not widespread, is not a major problem, is not being part of an overall campaign? Will he undertake today to investigate that and report back to this House?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister responsible for Sport): Madam Speaker, I assure the member opposite and all members it is not widespread. It was the action of one individual. Steps were taken immediately upon the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and others being made aware of this. The CEO of the organization was informed about it to cease and desist. That has all been done. Those were appropriate actions. When we are aware of inappropriate things happening, we take action, unlike what appears to be the case across the way when it comes to the inappropriate action of the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale) or the inappropriate action of a candidate in the Gimli constituency.

Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Health. Successive ministers of Health have claimed a sincere commitment to women's health issues, yet the Manitoba cervical cancer registry, promised first in 1994 in the throne speech, promised again in 1995, 1997 and 1998, has simply vanished from this year's throne speech. So I would like to ask the minister if the registry is: (a) only another broken Tory promise, (b) a planned reannouncement for a pre-election or an election period, or a planned reannouncement which will later become a broken promise?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, well, it is none of the assumptions that the member has jumped to, and I would suggest that she just be patient and there will be further information provided on that issue shortly.

Ms. McGifford: Madam Speaker, that is a shameful answer.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member, to pose her question.

Ms. McGifford: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister, who knows that each year more than 20 women die from undetected cervical cancer which could be detected with a registry, when he is going to initiate this program and show some respect for the lives of Manitoba women.

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, there will be a further outline of issues related to services for women related to cervical cancer, but again I remind the member opposite she had the opportunity to be at an event just this week at the HSC Women's Hospital where again an initiative was put in place for families and in particular women giving birth to children, to babies, with the whole renovations for a new LDRP, labour, delivery, recovery, postpartum redevelopment. That is something that is well supported by women right across Manitoba.

I can remind her of the significant expansion in the whole issue of mammograms right across Manitoba and a number of issues, a number of steps that this government takes to deal with health care issues that are very important to women.

Ms. McGifford: Madam Speaker, child birth and cervical cancer are quite different.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. This is--

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

* (1350)

Ms. McGifford: Does the minister not know that?

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Ms. McGifford: He should talk to the Premier (Mr. Filmon). Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I would like to remind the honourable member for Osborne that supplementary questions require no preamble. Would you please pose your question now.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Ms. McGifford: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I am just waiting for the Minister of Environment (Mrs. McIntosh) to—would you please call the minister to order?

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Ms. McGifford: I would like to once again ask this minister if he would give us dates, times, places and also assure us that when the registry is instituted, it will cover urban, rural and northern women in the province of Manitoba.

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, as I indicated to the member opposite, we will be providing further details on that very shortly.

She also in her preamble in her question referred to health services for women in Manitoba, and that is why I gave her just a couple of examples of expansions and improvements in services in the whole area of health care for women. Obviously, we take that issue very seriously, as we do all health care issues, and we have taken a number of steps to continue to improve the quality of health services to all women in the province of Manitoba.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, this government has been remarkable in its ability to deny accountability and to blame others.

I would like to ask this fifth Minister of Education to take a fresh, new approach. I would like him to look at three copies--and I am tabling three so the minister may have immediate access to them--of the FRAME reports, the audited accounts of this government for grants to public schools. I am going to table three copies of the 1992 report, three copies of the 1998 report. I think when the minister sees them, he will see that in 1992 Manitoba schools received $732 million from this government, that in 1998 they received $709 million. I wonder if the minister could confirm my suspicion that indeed this is a decrease in the funding to schools.

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Education and Training): I would refer the honourable member to the comments made yesterday in the Throne Speech Debate by the honourable member for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Downey) to get a greater understanding of the position of the honourable party opposite with respect to quality education for our children. No matter how the New Democrats can fudge issues and attempt to create a smoke screen, they cannot deny, and it bothers them a lot, that their commitment to education dropped between 1981 and 1987 from 21 percent of total spending to 17.7 percent of total spending. They cannot run away from that. Neither can they run away from the fact that, during the period from 1987 to 1998, spending on education as a percentage of total budget under the present administration rose from 17.7 percent to 19.3 percent. The honourable member cannot run away from that one.

* (1355)

Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, would the minister, who I think has given us a wonderful example of his ability to deny accountability and to blame others, answer, and I anticipated his response.

I want to table another set of documents which show graphically what I tried to explain to him in the previous question. I am tabling three copies of a graph which shows in fact how these cuts took place. In fact, in 1996-97 they sank to as low as $692 million. I would like the minister again to confirm that on his government's watch Manitoba schools have seen an actual decrease in dollars from this government.

Mr. McCrae: No matter how the honourable member might want to be creative in her approach to education funding, Madam Speaker, she cannot run from the fact that thanks to her and her colleagues, especially the one sitting to her left, we are faced, as a government in our province, with debt charges this past fiscal year ranging between $510 million to $515 million. That is the legacy of the New Democrats. I would like very much to have had a good share of that, at least the Education department's share, about 19 percent. Even if I had that, the honourable member would not be able to come forward with the types of creative accounting that she brings forward. She forgets entirely that during the last decade, we experienced the second worst recession in the history of this country. She forgets entirely that in terms of health spending and post-secondary education spending, the federal share dropped significantly in those years.

What the honourable member fails to do, every time she gets up to talk about education, she gets up to talk about money. Her own Leader and her own party have accepted the concept of living within our means. I would like to know which member on that side of the House I am supposed to believe.

Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, the minister who seems to think that the audited accounts of his department are creative numbers, would the same minister tell me whether in fact he sees any connection between these clear cuts to school funds and the observations of parent group after parent group that they are facing classrooms which are underresourced and underfunded?

Mr. McCrae: Quite the contrary, Madam Speaker. In my contacts with something like 600 parents in the past couple of months, their interests are making sure their children learn when they go to school. That is what they are interested in. They are interested in seeing that there are standards in our schools. They are interested in seeing that those children are tested to those standards and that they achieve those standards. We can quibble all day long, and we do it every year. Every year a budget comes out, there is discussion about the level of funding, and that is perfectly appropriate to do, but when, when, when will the honourable member opposite start talking about what our children are learning? That would be a more focused and a more constructive discussion, I suggest.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the First Minister. We in the Liberal Party find that it is incredibly difficult to believe that government can spend over a half billion dollars and not say anything about it in the throne speech, be so vague in terms of the rationale that was being used in order to make the purchase of Centra Gas.

My question to the Premier, Madam Speaker, is to seek some clarification from the government. Yesterday the Minister responsible for Hydro stated: "government does not intervene in good business decisions for that corporation," referring to Manitoba Hydro, when posed the question with reference to diversification of infrastructure in rural Manitoba.

Can the First Minister indicate to this House: is this government's policy one of hands off in terms of a directive in giving guidance to Manitoba Hydro?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, the ultimate decisions and the financing for the purchase of Centra Gas by Manitoba Hydro were within the hands and the capability of Manitoba Hydro. On the other hand, Manitoba Hydro sought the permission of government as to whether or not we had objections to them pursuing the discussions. We said that we did not have any objections based on the business case framework that they presented to us. Ultimately we asked that a number of objective reviews be done, and one was done, I believe, by KPMG and perhaps another one by Nesbitt Burns. Based on those analyses of value and the business case that was ultimately developed by Manitoba Hydro, they were able to achieve an agreement. We essentially gave them permission to pursue the agreement, and they are bringing it to a finalization through all of the final processes, legal and financial processes, in which they are engaged right now with Centra Gas and the owners of Centra Gas, Westcoast Energy.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, yesterday the former Deputy Premier—and I am asking for the Premier to comment on what the former Deputy Premier said yesterday inside the Chamber, and I quote: "It will provide opportunities for gasification of communities that have been denied it for years and years."

Does the government have any ideas on how Manitoba Hydro is going to be instructed, possibly by this government, in terms of rural diversification? Is that the intentions of this government, to tell Manitoba Hydro where it wants the pipes to go?

Mr. Filmon: Any of those decisions will have to be a matter of Manitoba Hydro/Centra Gas's process. I can say to you unequivocally that the business case requirements for the extension of natural gas have not changed as a result of the ownership change. It will still have to go to the Public Utilities Board, and it will still be subject to the Public Utilities Board's approval as to the allocation of costs, the justification of any decision as to expansion. That has not changed as a result of the change of ownership.

* (1400)

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Deputy Speaker, can the Premier indicate to this House very clearly: does the government have any plans of expansion of the infrastructure into rural communities? If so, what communities and at what cost?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): You know, I think it was at least five years ago that the government, in throne speech, indicated that it favoured the expansion of natural gas on a sound business case basis into as many areas of rural Manitoba as were feasible. Money was put from our federal-provincial infrastructure program, into this expansion. As a result of that, there has been expansion in areas of the southwest and areas around Boissevain and Killarney and all of that area. There has been expansion down in the area around the Steinbach, Hanover area. There is expansion taking place in the Interlake, Gladstone, many areas. There is, I believe, a very real possibility that the expansion will take place in Swan River.

All of these are on a business case analysis based on the ability for the Public Utilities Board to justify that expansion and to ensure that it can be done within the economics of providing a service to the people of the province in the various areas of the province, but certainly we believe that it improves the opportunities to attract investment, to attract growth into rural Manitoba, and we are supportive of that happening, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I do not think I bring any new news to the Legislature. I think everybody is quite familiar with what is going on in Grand Rapids right now with the Grand Rapids fishers, supported by the mayor and council and the chief and council of that community, and the blockade that has gone up to the generating station at Grand Rapids.

Simply my question is--and there are two sides to this story. There are very valid arguments on either side. I would like to ask the Premier, in the absence of the Minister responsible for Hydro this afternoon, whether or not he will step in to appoint an independent mediator to resolve this issue as quickly as possible.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I thank my honourable friend for phrasing the question as he did, that there are always two sides or even more to every issue. I know that we in the early 1990s believed that, despite the fact that no action was taken in 15 of 19 years in the '70s and '80s when the New Democrats were in office on this particular issue, and despite the fact that there was a final legal settlement made in the '60s with respect to damage as a result of the development of Grand Rapids and the effects of the flooding in the forebay and so on, we entered into an agreement on an ex parte basis that did provide over $5 million to the First Nation in Grand Rapids. Further, it appears as though none of that money went to the fishers for whom the principal claim obviously was put forward. Now that is a question that has to be addressed obviously as to why the First Nation would not have put the money towards those who they perceived to have been adversely affected by the development of that hydroelectric plant. That is a very, very valid question that should be looked at.

My understanding is that the fishers, with proper legal representation, have started an action against the Manitoba Hydro for damages, and that matter is before the courts. Now this action is taking place despite the fact that the matter has yet to have any legal review through a proper process.

It seems to me, Madam Speaker, that this is a matter that should be left to proper process. If we believe that there are valid rights and responsibilities under the law on the part of any number of different people, whether that is the government of Manitoba, Manitoba Hydro, the fishers or the local community who received a very substantial settlement, any of those things have to be sorted out by proper legal process. We do not believe that it is the sort of thing that can or should be resolved by this kind of action that is currently underway, the blockade.

Mr. Robinson: I just have one final question for the Premier. The situation is such that it could potentially lead to some violence, and certainly I would think that we want to prevent that at all costs for all Manitobans.

Simply my question was, and I will revert back to it--the Premier clearly laid out what the problem has been up until this time. I think that the province does have a responsibility here. He, as the head of this government, should probably consider the appointment of a mediator. I want him to seriously address that question, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I would hope that the member opposite is not supportive of or advocating violent action as a means here.

Madam Speaker, the difficulty is that the representatives of the Grand Rapids fishers have already initiated a legal action. That action is in process, and I am informed that Manitoba Hydro and the government are co-operating in moving that action along. So why would you intervene with a mediation process when they have already decided that they want to pursue a process under their rights under the law? The fact of the matter is that it is there. It is underway, and I believe we ought to ensure that it happens as quickly as possible. That would get the matter dealt with and resolved much more quickly, and then I think probably to the better satisfaction of those who perceive that their rights have in some way not been properly addressed.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, the Premier raised a number of questions, and I know that the opposition cannot take matters as notice, but I just want to report back to the House as a preamble to a question that the individual and the material tabled by the Premier, the phone number is paid for and located in Stonewall at the candidate's mother's house. The e-mail is paid for by the candidate. There is no membership solicitation going on and fundraising going on at that location. No lists are used, public lists, unlike the patients' lists that are used by the chiropractors, but the location of the e-mail I will discuss with the candidate, because any—[interjection] Well, it is being paid for by her. If there is anything wrong, I will report back, because we would not want that. Thank you.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, in response to that, it is obvious that the member opposite is saying that it is quite acceptable to have an e-mail that says government of Manitoba, Canada, which is located in an office that is publicly funded, that is publicly staffed, and that is paid for by taxpayers. If he says that is his bottom line for ethics, he can say that, and we will have an opportunity to address it.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I would like to remind both Leaders that this is not a time for debate. This is Question Period.

The honourable Leader of the official opposition, to pose a question.

* (1410)

Mr. Doer: Yes, thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, I pointed out there was no solicitation. The phone is paid for her and the e-mail is paid for her, but I have not had a chance to discuss the location of the e-mail address with the candidate. Would the Premier allow me a couple of hours to ask the candidate, because it is unacceptable for us to have an e-mail location in a government office, and it is more unacceptable to have public employees soliciting memberships with patients' lists as the Premier has stated?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I will be happy to give him a couple of hours. I have given him four weeks to respond to the page and a half of matters that lay out the actions of the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale), and he has not had the courage to stand up and tell his member for Crescentwood that he ought not to counsel people to break the law. He does not have the courage to do that and say that.

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

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, I know the Premier is still smarting from page 16 of the Monnin report, and I know the Premier is still smarting from not taking responsibility for four years, but to suggest that any member in this Chamber counsels any member to break the law is against our rules; secondly, we are more than willing to let the independent prosecutor identify how many Tories broke the law and should be prosecuted and anybody else that is listed in the report. We are not going to have any difficulty. The Premier should withdraw his comments immediately.

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

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, on the same point of order, I refer him to page 58 in which it is quoted: Sale, by his own admission, told Sorokowski: It is my understanding that if you don't want to meet with the investigators you don't have to. Justice Monnin goes on to point out that that is directly contrary to our laws in this province, laws that we passed in 1998. That is indeed the position: he was counselling someone to break the law.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. Time for Question Period had expired before I recognized the official Leader of the Opposition on a point of order.

On the point of order raised by the Leader of the official opposition, the member did not have a point of order.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, I challenge your ruling.

Madam Speaker: The ruling of the Chair has been challenged on a ruling on a point of order. All those in favour of sustaining the ruling of the Chair, please say yea.

Some Honourable Members: Yea.

Madam Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay.

Some Honourable Members: Nay.

Madam Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it.

Mr. Doer: On division, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: On division.