Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable Member for Charleswood (Mrs. Driedger). It complies with the rules and practices of the House. Is it the will of the House to have the petition read? [Agreed]

Will the Clerk please read.

Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): The petition of the undersigned citizens of the province of Manitoba, humbly sheweth:

THAT the Health Centre, located in downtown Transcona at 108 Bond Street, is an important government service to the community of Transcona and surrounding areas; and

THAT the said Health Centre is centrally located, close to major bus routes, and therefore convenient to the people, with its community based services of Pre-natal and Post-natal care, Public Nurse consultations, Immunizations, Vaccinations, and Mental Health services; and

THAT the said Health Centre also contains the administrative support for home care in the area, with home care workers reporting in and out of the centre; and

THAT the loss of the Health Centre would be a major economic set back to the commercial well being of downtown Transcona and the entire Transcona community; and

THAT the people of Transcona were not consulted prior to the Provincial Government making the decision to relocate the Health Centre and that the plan for its relocation to a 'strip mall district' runs contrary to all concepts of community development; and

THAT there is plenty of space in downtown Transcona for the construction of a permanent facility or for the leasing of new space or for the expansion and renovation of the existing facility.

WHEREFORE YOUR PETITIONERS HUMBLY PRAY THAT the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba request that the Minister of Health and the First Minister of Manitoba immediately instruct the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority to end its plans to remove the Health Centre at 108 Bond Street from Transcona and instead direct the WRHA to consider finding existing space in downtown Transcona, since much space exists, for both their short term and long term facility needs.

* (10:05)

Hon. Eric Robinson (Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I have a statement for the House.

As Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs, I rise before the House today to address one of the most serious and pressing problems facing our province. Mr. Speaker, as the members of this House know, the socio-economic conditions of Aboriginal peoples in Manitoba are unacceptable. While we cannot immediately reverse the effects of almost a century of neglectful and at times abusive policies, our Government is committed to building new partnerships that will lead to improvements in the lives of Aboriginal communities and Aboriginal people. That is why it is of immediate importance to our Government to redress the devastating consequences of the flooding of the lands of First Nations for hydro development.

The five communities which are party to the 1977 Northern Flood Agreement are Split Lake, York Factory, Nelson House, Norway House and Cross Lake First Nations. The people of those First Nations have been struggling with the effects of the flooding to this day. As a member of one of those communities, I am greatly saddened when I think about what I have witnessed. Our Government acknowledges the damage done to the five First Nations as a result of the flooding. We share responsibility with the federal government, Manitoba Hydro and First Nations communities for implementing the Northern Flood Agreement and working to improve the quality of life of community residents. We have the assurance of all parties that they are prepared to engage in fair and open negotiations.

The Government of Manitoba has begun working with the leadership of the five First Nations to establish new partnerships. Recently, through Manitoba Hydro, we signed an historic agreement in principle with Tataskweyak Cree Split Lake First Nation that contemplates employment of Tataskweyak Cree people in a proposed Gull Rapids project and in the ongoing operations. It also provides the option of the Tataskweyak acquiring an equity interest in the project. This agreement has been ratified by the members of the community.

Manitoba Hydro, is also negotiating partnerships with the Nisichawayasihk Cree First Nation, also known as Nelson House, and the York Landing First Nation also known as York Factory First Nation. New appointments to the board of Manitoba Hydro will ensure that the views of northern and Aboriginal communities are well represented. The new board includes three Cree First Nation representatives: Phil Dorian of the Opaskwayak Cree Nation, Mayor Mike Spence of Churchill and Reverend Stan McKay of Fisher River. This past week Hydro announced new targets for training and employing Aboriginal Manitobans.

In the Throne Speech our Government announced that, beginning this year, households in northern and rural communities will pay the same basic rate for hydro service as households in our urban centres. Since coming into office, our Government has also undertaken some specific measures to foster better economic conditions and improve lives of communities affected by hydro flooding. These include upgrades to provincial Highway 373 that will address transportation safety needs for the communities of Cross Lake and Norway House; engineering studies to prepare for the construction of a bridge to the Cross Lake community, in accordance with a decision by the NFA arbitrator, the re-establishment of a fund to cover the operating costs of the arena in Cross Lake; assistance of the Cross Lake community in developing a proposed titanium mine; a new agenda for NFA discussions with Cross Lake, also known as Pimicikimak Cree Nation, which has led specifically to expansion of the shoreline clean-up program; a domestic fishing program with alternative food and community food components and assistance with the re-establishment of fishing and trapping in Cross Lake; and, most importantly, the establishment of a Cabinet committee, Mr. Speaker, consisting of the ministers responsible for Highways and Government Services, Industry, Trade and Mines, Conservation, Manitoba Hydro, Aboriginal and Northern Affairs has extended to Chief Muswaggon a pledge to work together to address employment needs, housing needs, health and elderly care needs and the tragic problem of youth suicides in the Cross Lake community.

I am rising today, Mr. Speaker, to report that this is only the beginning of our Government's efforts. We intend to move forward immediately in the following ways.

First, for the first time in the history of this House, the Government of Manitoba recognizes that the Northern Flood Agreement is a modern day treaty and expresses its commitment to honour and properly implement the terms of the Northern Flood Agreement as recommended by the commissioners of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry in 1991. As part of this recognition, the Government acknowledges the comprehensive implementation agreements negotiated in good faith and signed with four NFA First Nations as one method of addressing and implementing the terms of the NFA.

* (10:10)

Second, the Government of Manitoba and Manitoba Hydro are committed to an open, fair and honest relationship with the five First Nations affected by the Northern Flood Agreement. We will participate as equals, government to government.

Third, I will offer to the five First Nations to enter into reconciliation by sitting down with me, as Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs, in a healing ceremony based on Cree traditions, without the presence of lawyers and consultants.

I believe it is time to put the divisions of the past behind us and to begin to talk directly with the communities and their leadership about what is needed to make a difference in the lives of the province's First Nations citizens. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Darren Praznik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, I want to just firstly indicate that, in listening to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs make this statement today and touch upon a number of issues, I would like to say on this side of the House we would agree wholeheartedly that one of the greatest challenges facing our province in its ability to ensure that all of its citizens, all of its residents can enjoy the full benefits of living in such a great province of Manitoba is to ensure that our First Nations people, and he has addressed particularly Status First Nations people living in reserve communities today, that they have opportunities, that they be able to share fully in the opportunities and benefits of our province.

Mr. Speaker, I think, given the history of this province, given the current issues facing those communities, levels of poverty, for example, the need for improvements in education, in infrastructure, in job opportunities, it is absolutely essential that we as a Legislature take on these issues with great strength and commitment if we are going to ensure that all Manitobans are able to enjoy the benefits of our province.

We may differ from time to time in approach, just as there are different approaches within the First Nations community, but our goals I think are fully shared by both sides of this Assembly.

I note, Mr. Speaker, that the minister makes many references to the settlement of Northern Flood. What he does not reference in his document is the fact that during the Filmon administration four of the five communities that he has referenced were able to negotiate with the Filmon government. I was minister for two of those negotiations, settlement agreements that allowed the Northern Flood process that was started by the Schreyer government, completed by the Lyon government, an agreement that quite frankly did not work in implementation.

The Filmon administration managed to negotiate four settlements with four of those communities for implementation agreements that can work. This Government is now charged with the responsibility of ensuring that happens, and we will be watching very closely as they would expect us to, but those were done by the Filmon administration. We are very proud of them.

The one challenge that is left for this minister and his colleagues is an implementation agreement for Cross Lake. He references in his statement a number of issues related to Cross Lake. Being able to achieve an implementation agreement with that community I think is one of the greatest challenges that Government will face over the next number of years. I want to tell him that we reached an agreement that was not ratified by the community. There were changes in the leadership of that community. It is going to be a great challenge, but they will be judged by their success in being able to complete that process of reaching the fifth implementation agreement.

The Minister of Highways (Mr. Ashton) made a comment from his seat about recognizing those as treaties. I would flag as an issue today that we really do not entirely know what that means. When we negotiated those Northern Flood Agreements, we did not recognize them as treaties. We recognized them as settlement agreements. People have different views. I think the Government has to offer some explanation as to what that in fact means. We have to have an understanding. What does that mean? It may be a symbolic meaning. It may have something in law, but that is an issue that is flagged today. It may be something we do not oppose, but it requires I think to be flushed out in definition in order to fully appreciate the significance of that statement.

Mr. Speaker, the minister referenced that three new appointments to Manitoba Hydro from First Nations communities are Aboriginal individuals. Two of those people I have had the pleasure of working with, Mr. Stan McKay who used to be a constituent of mine and Mr. Mike Spence who is the mayor of Churchill. The third individual, I must say, I do not know but with respect to those two individuals, I can assure the public that they are high quality, hardworking individuals. I would welcome their appointment to Hydro. I think they have lots to contribute.

* (10:15)

Mr. Speaker, in the first paragraph the minister mentioned the need for partnerships, the need to improve the lives of Aboriginal people. We have all witnessed the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Sale) who had to deal with the issue around the Sagkeeng solvent centre.

If there is one thing we are learning out of this is that for all of us, whoever we are, the need for accountability, the need to ensure that people are accountable to those that they serve, and I say this, if there is a lesson to be learned that we are seeing now, and I recognize that that centre was in the purview of the Government of Canada, we know that information was brought forward to them over the years and people failed to act.

The sad thing about it, Mr. Speaker, is who suffered in the end. Who suffered with First Nations people because there was not accountability for money that was intended to deal with their issues, to deal with people in their community who suffered from addictions? The failure of the Government of Canada, the failure of the Department of Health and Welfare to heed the warnings, to heed the things that came to them is a warning to us all.

Mr. Speaker: Order. I regret to interrupt the honourable member, but Beauchesne's Citation 351 indicates that the Speaker limits the Opposition's reply to a period not to exceed the time taken by the minister. I note the honourable member's comments are now considerably longer than those of the minister. I would ask the honourable member to please conclude his comments.

Mr. Praznik: Mr. Speaker, I did conclude my remarks.

Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): I would ask for leave to comment on the minister's statement. [Agreed]

Mr. Speaker, I think I would like to begin by acknowledging the effort that the NDP government has made and the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs (Mr. Robinson) has made to try to improve the working relationships and the employment status and the opportunities for people in First Nations communities in Manitoba.

I think that the effort requires a compliment and some praise and some acknowledgement, because I think this is an important and very necessary direction for Manitoba. I would urge the minister in his efforts to work hard together with the federal government in improving the assessment of employment status in the First Nations communities. As I have commented on a number of occasions, and the Premier (Mr. Doer) has commented, current employment reports do not include many people in First Nations communities, and it is time that is changed.

It is time that all citizens in Manitoba, as far as employment status, are treated equally. We need this, and the First Nations communities need this reliable information in order to be sure that things are moving in the right direction.

The second area that I would urge the minister to pay additional attention to ise the concerns of urban Aboriginal people. Clearly, Mr. Speaker, many from the First Nations communities are now living in Winnipeg, Brandon and Thompson, and there really is need for a very effective policy and strategy for urban Aboriginal people and strong working relationships with the urban Aboriginal councils in the various communities. So I would recommend and urge that the minister pay more attention in this area and in the year ahead produce a strong strategic plan, an action plan, an implementation plan. Thank you.

TABLING OF REPORTS

Hon. Jean Friesen (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to table the Annual Report 1999-2000 for the Canada-Manitoba Economic Development Partnership Agreement, the Annual Report 1999-2000 for the Canada-Manitoba Infrastructure Works, the Annual Report of the Conservation Districts for 1999-2000 and the Annual Report of the Water Services Board for 1999-2000.

* (10:20)

Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the Annual Report for 1999-2000 for Sport, the 1999-2000 Annual Report for Community Support Programs, the Annual Report of the Health Information Services and Manitoba Corporation for the year ended March 31, 2000, the Annual Report, '99-2000, for Manitoba Health, which includes the Annual Report of the Manitoba Health Services Insurance Plan, the 1999-2000 Annual Report of the Manitoba Health Research Council, the 1999-2000 Annual Report for the Addictions Foundation of Manitoba, copies of all of which have been previously distributed.

Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minister of Agriculture and Food): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the 1999-2000 Annual Report of the Prairie Agricultural Machinery Institute, otherwise known as PAMI.

INTRODUCTION OF BILLS

Hon. Steve Ashton (Minister of Highways and Government Services): I move, seconded by the Minister of Education (Mr. Caldwell), that leave be given to introduce Bill 11, The Highway Traffic Amendment and Consequential Amendments Act (Loi modifiant le Code de la route et modifications corrélatives).

Mr. Ashton: Mr. Speaker, it is with a great deal of pride that I introduce for first reading the enabling legislation that will bring graduated drivers licencing to the province of Manitoba. Graduated drivers licencing exists in most jurisdictions in Canada, in many other jurisdictions in the world. It saves lives. Statistical evidence shows up to a 37% decrease in accidents amongst novice drivers of all ages.

We will be announcing the full details, an implementation plan, of the graduated drivers licencing early in the new year. I want to take the opportunity to thank my colleague the Member for Transcona (Mr. Reid) and the task force for the excellent work they have done. I want to indicate this is more than just about statistics; it is about people. It is about giving novice drivers the chance to develop the skills they need, to be able to live long and fruitful lives. This legislation, Mr. Speaker, will save lives.

Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered.

Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the loge to my left, where we have with us Mr. Herold Driedger, former member of the Legislative Assembly for Niakwa. On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today.

Also, seated in the public gallery from General Wolfe School are 100 Grade 9 students under the direction of Mr. Herold Driedger, Mr. Carlos Mota, Ms. Brenda Elford, Mrs. Sandra Corey, Mr. Gord Billows and Mr. Mark Fontaine.

* (10:25)

This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines (Ms. Mihychuk). On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you here today.

Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I think all members in this House agree that health care is not just a priority, but the No. 1 priority. Regardless of where one lives in Manitoba, everyone should have access to quality health care.

Many months ago the Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak) and this Government received the regional health authority template for the determination of minimal standards for acute care hospitals. In fact, it is my understanding that they have had this report in their possession since April, some eight months.

My question is to the First Minister. Can he tell this House if he will be acting on the recommendations contained in this most recent report?

Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): We certainly agree that health care is the No. 1 priority for Manitobans. We, from the moment we were elected, have been implementing our plan on health care. One of the major issues in rural communities, in fact areas that have reduced patient care in rural communities, has been a lack of nurses as a result of rather short-sighted decisions made in the previous regime. We have implemented a policy that builds on the BN program, the LPN program. By reinstating the RN program we have more people now enrolled in nursing from rural and urban communities than ever before back to '88.

Secondly, we believe one of the major issues in rural Manitoba, and it surprises us that the member opposite would be raising questions about the shortage of doctors in Charleswood and not the shortage of doctors in rural Manitoba and in northern Manitoba. The member opposite, if he is interested in rural Manitoba, would have been talking about the one doctor per two thousand residents in some rural communities instead of talking about the ratio of one doctor per six hundred being the priority.

Obviously the members opposite have not understood that rural Manitobans believe and know that we have to have a more aggressive strategy on doctors and doctor recruitment. Mr. Speaker, there were no questions about the plan announced by the Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak) in the House yesterday, and I understand why.

The five-point plan for more doctors, more residents is a plan that works for rural Manitoba and will work for northern Manitoba, and we are very proud of it.

Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): The Premier must have a very sore neck from looking over his shoulder at what has happened in the past. I just wish he would start watching the road, because he is driving Manitoba through a brick wall.

I referred to the regional health authority template, which the draft revision apparently was done on April 12, 2000. The fact remains that this report was done under this Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak). I just wonder what this Government will decide, whether valuable community hospitals will remain closed or open.

My question to the Premier: Will his Government allow rural Manitoba hospitals to close?

Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I have not got a sore neck. Our whole Government has been totally exercised in rebuilding the crumbling Conservative legacy of the member opposite. History teaches us that we must learn from the mistakes of the former government to make sure that we move forward into the future by rebuilding the number of nurses being trained–if the members opposite are embarrassed by their record, so be it, they should be–by rebuilding the number of doctors, by rebuilding the number of residences, by ensuring more rural members from rural communities are recruited to our medical schools and therefore return to rural and northern Manitoba. I met with five nurse practitioners last night who just graduated, proud to be again getting that education and training and returning to their communities.

* (10:30)

Having said that, the Minister of Health (Mr. Chomiak) has given the Opposition Leader the document. The template was developed by the previous government. The paper was produced by us. The materials are now out in rural Manitoba and in the regional health authorities for consultation. I, in fact, met with the Boissevain group just a couple of weeks ago. We are all meeting with people in rural Manitoba. Members opposite went to the board of directors of the Misericordia Hospital at six o'clock at night and closed the hospital down the next day. We do not work like that, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Murray: Mr. Speaker, the Premier simply did not answer the question. The fact remains that this Government is in possession of a report that recommends the closure of rural Manitoba hospitals. As we heard earlier this week in this House from the member from Arthur-Virden, rural Manitobans are already suffering from this Government's highway medicine policy, a policy which forces a man from Melita to travel to Winnipeg to get emergency treatment.

Will the Premier now tell Manitobans, will he tell Manitobans today if he will be closing any rural Manitoba hospitals?

Mr. Doer: As I have indicated, the report that was produced with the start of a template that was developed by members opposite, carried on by our minister, has been forwarded to the Opposition, forwarded to regional health authorities, Mr. Speaker. We are not going to have these midnight slam-dunk closures that we had under the former Minister of Health where the evening before the Budget was presented, the Misericordia Hospital and the Grey Nuns–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Praznik), on a point of order.

Mr. Darren Praznik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, I would hope that, as Premier of Manitoba, the Premier would like to be accurate in the statements he has made. He has said today that decisions made by the previous government were made late one evening, gone over in the next day, they were implemented, things happened.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask him if he would please consult with several of his own colleagues who are on the record of this House recognizing that we spoke with the Misericordia Hospital months earlier about changes to their facility. I would ask him to at least be accurate when he speaks to the people of Manitoba.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Speaker: Order. I would like to remind all honourable members, a point of order is a very serious matter. I would like to ask the honourable members to please be co-operative and to hear the points of order in silence.

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

Mr. Doer: On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker, the member opposite, the ghost of Health ministers past, does not have a point of order. We certainly have tabled letters indicating that the board of Misericordia was notified the evening before the final decision.

I note, even though we have a dispute over the facts, we do not have a dispute that this minister had the largest hospital closure in the history of Manitoba under their watch.

Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Praznik), he does not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts.

Mr. Speaker: The honourable First Minister, to conclude his comments.

Mr. Doer: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I recall years ago that, for example, in the Brandon General Hospital there were some beds closed down and out-surgery was expanded three or four times to ensure that patient care and the line-ups were reduced.

We think it is important that rather than have government unilateral decisions made in the middle of the night and imposed upon regions and people that patient care will continue to be effective patient care. Cost-effective patient care will be a criterion that we will utilize.

We are consulting with rural communities. For example, in Boissevain, when I went there, they are talking about the medical clinic and some of the outreach services and the kind of mix of personal care beds, acute care beds, outreach medical clinics. We are looking at cost-effective services to people, and the people of rural Manitoba are involved in that process and will continue to be involved in that process.

Mrs. Myrna Driedger (Charleswood): Mr. Speaker, the death of a Manitoban in an emergency waiting room is a very serious matter and, I am sure, one that we all take extremely seriously. I wonder if the Minister of Health has had time to make a decision yet as to whether or not he is willing to treat this with the seriousness that it deserves and call a public inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the death of this 73-year-old gentleman at the Health Sciences Centre emergency waiting room.

Hon. Dave Chomiak (Minister of Health): It is a very serious issue. One of the things that we did initially as soon as this happened, there was a review undertaken by the hospital in question, as well as the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority. The review and the circumstances went to the Chief Medical Examiner for the province of Manitoba, who will make and has the legislative authority and the duty to make a decision with respect to whether or not an inquest should be ordered in regard to this.

I might add we did not right off the bat send out a press release, as did members opposite, making all kinds of unfair and I think inaccurate observations in that regard, which I think are inappropriate for members of this Chamber to make under those kinds of circumstances.

Mr. Darren Praznik (Lac du Bonnet): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister.

Last winter two Manitobans spoke to his office and were referred by him to the office of the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, where they sent a letter making a very serious allegation about criminal activity, that being a public official receiving payments in the course of their duty.

One of the two assistants in that office, a Mr. Steve Courchene, told them to go away. The other, a Mr. Moody, wrote to them advising them to go to a federal government department or the Residential Tenancies Branch.

Given that the Premier in this House said yesterday that it was the duty to refer these matters to the police, I would like to ask him why Mr. Moody, the political assistant, in his letter did not refer them to a law enforcement agency as I did this week when it was brought to my attention.

Hon. Eric Robinson (Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs): As we pointed out yesterday, the matter which was raised with our office was discussed with the individuals. To the best of my knowledge there was no such statement made by Mr. Courchene. In fact, a letter was sent to the couple in question indicating that it was a matter with the federal government and the Sagkeeng First Nation specifically.

I believe that it is a matter that has received some misunderstanding, and information that has been brought to this House is truly regrettable.

Given the current situation of Sagkeeng, I do not believe we should be capitalizing on matters that really have no relevance in this House.

* (10:40)

Mr. Praznik: Given that these people have put in writing, which I have tabled in this House, that they were sent to the department of Indian affairs, his department, and at that point were told, and I quote, by Mr. Steve Courchene in which they indicate they spoke with him, I would ask the minister today if he is prepared to undertake to actually meet with these people to discuss what they were told in order to be able to determine how his staff, for which he was responsible, handled this matter? Will the minister give that undertaking?

Mr. Robinson: Mr. Speaker, one of the things that this Government prides itself in doing is being open to all Manitobans no matter who they are. Certainly I will be open to meet these individuals, and if there are complaints about behaviour of certain members of staff I will deal with that.

Mr. Darren Praznik (Lac du Bonnet): My supplementary is to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines. I would like to ask this minister if she is prepared to table or to provide to this House, Mr. Speaker, a copy of the terms of reference that would have been provided to the Civil Service Commission to conduct their investigation with respect to Mr. Steve Courchene and his involvement with the Sagkeeng solvent treatment centre.

Hon. MaryAnn Mihychuk (Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines): Day over day this member is going after virtually every person who has ever been in Sagkeeng, had anything to do with that health centre and refuses to allow due process to take place, refuses to allow a fair process by an independent body. Mr. Speaker, I ask the member to use reason. Let us allow some common sense here. The issue has been referred to the Civil Service Commission, as has been the case in the past by the previous government. You do not want a double standard, and you do not want to be perceived as having a double standard in this case. So I urge members to be somewhat patient and responsible and wait for the civil service review commission to report back, which we do not expect to be very long.

Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet, on a new question.

Mr. Praznik: What concerns us in fact is a double standard. Let us not forget that this Mr. Steve Courchene is not a civil servant. He is a political appointment. He sits on the executive of the New Democratic Party with the Premier (Mr. Doer) of this province.

I want to ask the minister again: Given that the Health Canada audit clearly indicates that Mr. Courchene, operating under SJC Consulting, he and another individual were in receipt of 25 percent of the revenue of that treatment centre for the period of audit. We want to know is this going to be a fair assessment? We want to see, and I ask the minister again, will she provide the terms of reference for the investigation being done by the Civil Service Commission so we can ensure there is no double standard?

Ms. Mihychuk: I would like to inform the House that the whole issue, the audit that the member tabled in the House a couple of days ago, all activities related to the individual that is being raised in the House, his activities are being reviewed by the Civil Service Commission. I can assure the members that this individual will be treated just as any other civil servant, as a civil servant. In fact, members opposite would recall that one of their own ministers who was not in theory a civil servant was reviewed by the Civil Service Commission and his hiring authority revoked. So it can apply to every individual working for the people of Manitoba.

Mr. Praznik: Mr. Speaker, I would remind this minister that this is not a civil servant but a political appointment and a high-ranking member of the New Democratic Party.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Government House Leader, on a point of order.

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, this was a supplementary question from the member opposite, and the member knows full well the rules of this House. He has been a member of this House for quite some time. Beauchesne's clearly says, and it is a long-standing tradition and rule that is enforced almost every day in this House, that a supplementary question should need no preamble. Please, would you direct the member's attention to that rule of this House.

Mr. Speaker: The honourable Official Opposition House Leader, on the same point of order.

Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): The honourable Government House Leader might be correct in his assertions on his Beauchesne's, but Beauchesne's 417 provides that ministers should not provoke debate. If the minister would be answering the question instead of provoking debate, we might be able to move ahead in this House with a little better decorum.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Government House Leader, on the same point of order?

Mr. Mackintosh: No, Mr. Speaker, there was a point of order already raised–

Mr. Speaker: Order. I have to deal with the first point of order before I can accept another point of order.

On the point of order raised by the honourable Government House Leader, he does have a point of order, and I would kindly ask the co-operation of all honourable members that Beauchesne's Citation 409(2) advises that a supplementary question should not require a preamble. I would ask for the co-operation of all honourable members.

Mr. Speaker: The honourable Government House Leader, on a new point of order.

Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, I am just responding. The Opposition House Leader raised the issue of the minister's answer. That is a new point, and it should have been raised at the time of the minister's response, not to get up later on and say: Oh, by the way, back then, there might have been an issue.

Mr. Speaker: The honourable Official Opposition House Leader, on the same point of order?

Mr. Laurendeau: On the same point of order, I was rising to answer to the point of order being raised by the Government House Leader. I was only quoting directly from Beauchesne's that says a minister should not provoke debate.

Mr. Speaker, it is when ministers provoke debate that they will end up getting responses back from this side of the House–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Laurendeau: Mr. Speaker, it is very simple. We will respond to all allegations brought from that side of the House.

Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Speaker: Order. I would kindly ask the co-operation of all honourable members. A point of order is a very serious matter.

On the point of order raised by the honourable Government House Leader, the honourable Government House Leader does not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts.

Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet, to put his question.

Mr. Praznik: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My supplementary question to the minister is this: Does the term of reference to the Civil Service Commission for this investigation include the mandate to demand of this individual the financial records which would justify why he was receiving $50,000 a month for the rental of trailers that were owned by the centre and not fully paid for?

Ms. Mihychuk: Mr. Speaker, I find it somewhat odd that this is a member who in 1997 had an audit from a certain Addictions Foundation treatment centre, then in 1997 introduced a bill to this House which reduces accountability and which I, as a member of the Opposition, rose, and we spoke against it on the grounds that this would break the fundamental rules of public accountability. He then forwards $100,000, and now he rises to demand from us accountability.

I suggest that we reflect on his actions as Minister of Health.

* (10:50)

Mr. Praznik: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the people of Manitoba, I ask this minister again in the interest of accountability that she talks about,: Is she prepared today to table the terms of reference to ensure to the public that when a high-ranking member of the New Democratic Party is being investigated, there are fair terms of reference, and will she tell this House whether those terms of reference include the requirement of Mr. Courchene to justify why he was receiving $50,000 a month for trailers that were not paid for and that he did not own?

Will the minister now prove if she can be accountable?

Ms. Mihychuk: I have assured the House and the public that there is a full investigation as well as the Civil Service Commission. There is a federal audit underway. We are going to ensure that all matters are investigated and be as up front and open as possible.

I would like to ask the member across the way why he did not table the full audit the other day when he came to the House and withheld information from the public.

Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): My question is for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines (Ms. Mihychuk), and before I ask my question, I would like to table the business name registration document showing that one Mr. Steve Courchene is the sole owner of SJC Consulting, the same company that received $50,000 a month for trailers owned by the treatment centre.

Mr. Speaker, my question to the minister: Can the minister indicate to the House today whether, when she learned of issues and involvement of Mr. Courchene and ordered the civil service inquiry, did she also order the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs to investigate the treatment centre and Mr. Steve Courchene and other directors with respect to violations of The Corporations Act, which prohibits directors and members from profiting or receiving financial gain from the corporation?

Hon. MaryAnn Mihychuk (Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines): I want to assure the House that a full investigation is going to be conducted.

Mr. Speaker, we have requested a full investigation by an independent body called the Civil Service Commission, the same process that the previous government used to investigate several members very prominent in the Conservative government. So I would ask that members allow the process, allow justice, allow the process to continue and the investigations to take place, the Civil Service Commission and the federal government. If there are any illegal activities, they should be referred to the proper justice officials.

Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speaker, with the greatest of respect to the minister, this question is with regard to The Corporations Act. I want to ask the minister, when she learned about Mr. Steve Courchene's involvement back in October, why at that time she did not forward this matter to the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs and to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Lemieux) to investigate the issue when it is clear that there was a violation.

I would like to quote from the act: That the corporation has no authorized share capital and shall be carried on without pecuniary gain to its members and that the profits or other assertions to the corporation shall be used in furthering its undertaking.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Why did she not forward this matter to the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs and the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs?

Ms. Mihychuk: Mr. Speaker, I think that the record shows that as soon as the allegations were raised, this Government took action.

When that government had information, they chose to reduce accountability and to forward money directly to the treatment centre. If there are any questions about accountability and taking due process, it should be on the previous government.

Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speaker, the minister just said that she took action. Is she telling me that she forwarded this matter to the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs and to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Lemieux) for investigation?

Ms. Mihychuk: Mr. Speaker, as soon as the allegations were raised, our Government took action. We followed procedures that had taken place by previous governments. We are doing a full investigation. If it warrants further action after there is an investigation, that will be taken.

Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): I understand the Minister of Conservation has ordered the Rural Municipality of Brenda, one of the R.M.s in southwestern Manitoba in the area which was badly affected by the flooding in 1999, that the minister has ordered the R.M. to start filling in a drainage ditch. Now we know why the Government is so interested in an insurance program if there is a flood.

I ask the minister to provide more details of his insurance plan and tell us how it will protect people in southwestern Manitoba if there is a flood next spring, particularly if it is as a result of his ordering that drainage ditches be filled in.

Hon. Oscar Lathlin (Minister of Conservation): I would like to advise the member at this time I do not have detail at that level, but I will endeavour to get that detailed information and get back to the member.

Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): My supplementary to the Premier who has huge planning efforts in place to follow up on the 1997 flood in the Red River Valley: When will the Premier set up a task force to provide, Mr. Speaker, the effective future planning for people in southwestern Manitoba following the flooding of 1999, so that residents in that area can be assured that they will be treated equitably and equally with people in the Red River Valley?

Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Well, Mr. Speaker, I find it rather strange that the member opposite would ask this question given that not once, not twice, but on three separate occasions the federal Liberal minister responsible for the Disaster Assistance program has said no, no, no to a cost-shared program proposed by our Government.

Our financial support is on the table just like it was. There is a more recent example. With the Winnipeg west and Headingley residents we were able to achieve an agreement with the federal agreement under disaster assistance to deal with those families. It further illustrates a contradiction and an inequity in the federal disaster assistance program, where the Red River Valley can be treated one way, the citizens of west Winnipeg and Headingley can be treated with a federal-provincial program, and disaster assistance in the southwest portion of the province is treated without federal recognition.

Mr. Speaker, when I met with the Prime Minister in June, I raised this issue. He said there was no statutory authority to proceed. That was wrong. The federal government in February in a press release issued subsequent to that by Minister Axworthy indicated that they had now recognized through Order-in-Council, federal Cabinet authority, the disaster assistance in southwest Manitoba.

Regrettably, after that point no dollars flowed in this program. We remain committed to our financial support, but it is important, and it is crucial for Manitobans no matter which political party you are part of, that we have got to have disaster assistance programs treated with federal partnership. We cannot, with all the flooding we are looking at next year and all the flooding we have had in the past, even the issue of the building of the floodway, under Roblin it was 60% federal money and 40% provincial money.

* (11:00)

We need a federal partner, and I would urge the member opposite to get his federal Cabinet on side to approve the amount of money that we are willing to support for disaster assistance in southwestern Manitoba.

Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, the member from Concordia is the Premier, and he can act.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): On a point of order, aside from the entire lack of decorum of members opposite, which, by the way, began on day one, when the Queen's representative was providing to Manitobans the Throne Speech, I raise the question, the point of order with regard to the supplementary question.

The supplementary question requires no preamble. The member got up and made a very loud preamble. Would you please call him to order and remind him about the rules of this House?

Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker, given the latitude that the Premier is taking within his questions in slam-dunking the Member for River Heights, I think the Member for River Heights had no other option but to come back at the Premier with a one-liner, and I do believe he was about to put his question.

Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for River Heights, on the same point of order?

Mr. Gerrard: On the same point of order, I was just about to put my question.

Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable Government House Leader, he does have a point of order. I would ask the co-operation of all honourable members that Beauchesne's 409(2) advises that a supple-mentary should not require a preamble.

Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for River Heights, please put your question.

Mr. Gerrard: Mr. Speaker, my second supplementary to the Premier: Why does he continue to fail to provide at least equivalent, forward-thinking planning efforts, and why do you not at least set up a task force, if this is a continuing problem, to look at how you can achieve equivalence in southwestern Manitoba and the Red River Valley?

Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, in terms of acting, one can choose to act responsibly or one can choose to act irresponsibly. It would be absolutely irresponsible for any premier of this province, no what their political party, to develop a disaster assistance program where a hundred percent of the money is paid for by the taxpayers of Manitoba.

Let me tell you why. Because that would mean that the taxpayers of Manitoba would be paying for part of the ice storm disaster assistance in Québec and Ontario, paying part of that, and the federal government would be paying no part of the disaster assistance in southwest Manitoba. That is an absolute recipe for irresponsible leadership.

Now the member opposite may be able to flip-flop on his resolution position in southwest Manitoba, but we believe in a national disaster assistance program. We know what it is. It is 90-10 on the issues of the weed recovery program, 90-10 on fertilizers and other inputs that were lost in the southwest region. It is 50-50 in terms of businesses like the JERI program. Those areas are well identified to us. We have put them forward to the federal government. We have put them forward as high, Mr. Speaker, as to the Prime Minister. In the last federal election, I was disappointed that his party did not have a promise in that election campaign to deal with a national disaster assistance program.

We know what is needed, but we are not going to have a 100% disaster assistance program paid for by the taxpayers of Manitoba in Manitoba and then a federal-provincial program in Québec paid for by Manitobans. If that is what the member is asking for, he is dead wrong, Mr. Speaker.

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, fetal alcohol syndrome is a challenge for all of us. It has huge implications–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Ms. Cerilli: I was saying that fetal alcohol syndrome is a challenge for all of us. It has huge implications in terms of costs and hardships for families, for communities and for government. I know that it is a focus of the Healthy Child plan, and there have been recent meetings in Edmonton of ministers from across the country.

I would like to ask our Minister of Family Services and Housing for any progress in reports and results on these initiatives.

Hon. Tim Sale (Minister of Family Services and Housing): Mr. Speaker, first of all, I am delighted to report that at the recent meeting of ministers in Edmonton an agreement was reached to extend the Prairie Northern Partnership on Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and Fetal Alcohol Effect for another three years.

This is a remarkable partnership, Mr. Speaker, of governments of all political stripes and persuasions. We were very pleased to extend the partnership to include the territories last year, Nunavut, Northwest and Yukon territories.

I should note that the partnership was begun during the previous government's time, and we have been pleased to build on the strengths of that program and to expand it. Yesterday I was able to announce that we have expanded the Stop FAS program, which has been extremely successful in its early going, to sites in The Pas and Thompson, totalling $264,000 annually on a long-term basis.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to report to the House that 70 percent of the women who have been involved in the Stop FAS sites at the Aboriginal Wellness Centre in Norwest are now abstaining from alcohol–

Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Official Opposition House Leader, on a point of order.

Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, Beauchesne's 417: Answers to questions should be as brief as possible.

If the minister wants to make a ministerial statement, he has got plenty of opportunity to do so. It is right on the Order Paper. It says ministerial statements and tabling of reports. That is where the First Minister (Mr. Doer) did not rise to speak about the good news in Manitoba on other days, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: The honourable Government House Leader, on the same point of order?

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker. This point of order is raised because the Opposition is saying they feel so bad that they never thought of asking that very important question.

Mr. Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable Official Opposition House Leader, I have been monitoring times taken by ministers, and I have allowed a certain amount of time, and the honourable minister was just approaching that time. Any member that goes over that time, I do get up to let the member know that their time has expired. At this point, the honourable member's time had not reached that point.

So the honourable member for the Official Opposition does not have a point of order.

Mr. Speaker: The honourable Minister of Family Services, to conclude his remarks very, very quickly.

Mr. Sale: Mr. Speaker, I would just conclude by saying I would have expected the Opposition to be pleased to be part of a non-partisan effort to avoid the most avoidable of all birth defects.

Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Mr. Speaker, we have very patiently waited that this Premier and his minister would provide us with a plan over the last 14 months for agriculture. A recent poll shows that rural Manitobans have expressed their greatest concern about the loss of the family farm, and yet this Government has not demonstrated any vision, nor have they brought forward any plan for rural Manitoba and the retention of the family farm.

Can the Premier explain why he allowed his minister to participate in a signing of an agreement that gave Manitoba farmers the least support of all the provinces in Canada when she signed the CFIP program?

* (11:10)

Hon. Rosann Wowchuk (Minister of Agriculture and Food): Mr. Speaker, well, you know there used to be a time when they talked about a member of our caucus who raised his constituency questions on Friday, and it looks like Friday is going to be the day for agriculture questions.

I wish the member would get more serious about some of the challenges facing agriculture, because the issue he is raising is a very old issue. I have to remind the member that in fact those were very difficult negotiations we were in, and in fact what we got out of the agreement was that we were able to maintain the level of funding in the Manitoba safety net program while other provinces did have their increases.

The other thing that we did get was that we would have the program reviewed to see what the impact of this change was to moving away from insurance based on risk rather than cash receipts. So the member is way behind in asking this question at this time.

Mr. Jack Penner: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask then the minister how she can justify signing an agreement that would see Ontario farmers get 38 percent more under this agreement, Québec farmers get better than 30 percent more, Maritime farmers 100 percent more and British Columbia farmers 95 percent more, and we do not get anything in this province. How can she profess to be in support of the farm community when she will sign that kind of an agreement?

Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, I have no difficulty at all in indicating and saying that I am a supporter of the agriculture community. It was under our leadership and our negotiations that we got a hundred million dollars into the rural economy, money that was targeted to family farms and that the Opposition did not support us on, I do not believe.

But I would ask the member to talk to the former Minister of Agriculture and discuss with him the fact that this process of moving towards cash receipts rather than risk was started way before our time, under the former Minister of Agriculture.

Mr. Harry Enns (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, it is always important to be accurate in this House.

Mr. Speaker: Order. Is the honourable member up on a point of order?

Mr. Enns: Yes.

Mr. Speaker: On a point of order, the honourable Member for Lakeside.

Mr. Enns: The minister is accurate when she says that process had started during the period of time that I was the minister, but the difference is I did not sign the agreement and would not sign the agreement.

Mr. Speaker: Order. On the point of order raised by the honourable Member for Lakeside, he does not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts.

Mr. Mervin Tweed (Turtle Mountain): More than 15 months have passed since the Rose task force tabled its report on the impact of the '99 flood. Mr. Speaker, the report stated: Business and organizations were unanimous in stating that if sufficient money were give to farmers it would go a long way to solving the problems rural businesses are encountering.

We know that that issue is still out there, Mr. Speaker, and I would ask a very simple question of the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs (Ms. Friesen): When are you going to act on the Rose report?

Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): We made public the Rose report. Members opposite did not make that report public. It was available before the election.

There were a lot of other promises they made in the election campaign. For example, they made a promise in the election campaign to take 25 percent of all the proceeds of export hydro-electric power and turn that back to northern economic development. Mr. Speaker, that was a promise they made in the election campaign, so why did they not promise to do anything on the Rose report that they held back all the way through the election campaign?

We did make it public, Mr. Speaker. The report was completed in August of '99. It did say very clearly that part of the problem obviously was the flood and also that was part of the problem for rural southwestern businesses, and I would argue all rural businesses. The report further goes on to say that if the income of farmers can be improved, the success of businesses in southwest Manitoba and all across Manitoba will improve.

Subsequent to that report, Mr. Speaker, we negotiated a hundred-million-dollar income program in February of 2000, after the report, before the crop year of 2000. We also negotiated an improved crop insurance that now covers excessive moisture. The members opposite say they had that ready to go, but this Minister of Agriculture did not sign the agreement with the federal government because he did not have it with the federal government.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, we remain committed to the southwest Manitoba situation. Our money is on the table both for the 50-50 part of the program and the 90-10 program. We remain committed to the improvements in crop insurance. Members opposite voted against the reduction in crop insurance rates that we will target to the grain and oilseeds industry. Members opposite voted against a reduction in hydro rates for rural Manitoba and northern Manitoba. Members opposite voted against the extension of the ethanol tax holiday for 10 years.

We are doing everything we can to improve the situation in rural Manitoba, and we are pleased to note that the retail sales indications for this year are much more positive–

Mr. Speaker: Order. The honourable Official Opposition House Leader, on a point of order.

Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, on a point of order.

There has been an understanding in this Chamber that leaders' latitude would be accepted. Let me tell you now, Mr. Speaker, in front of the House, that we will not accept leaders' latitude under this type of abuse that the Premier has been doing throughout this session. We will deny that leaders' latitude in the future if this continues to be abused.

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

Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, as much as we would like to have denied the previous premier's latitude, we always had to abide and did abide by the respect to the Chair and the traditions of this House, obviously something the member opposite is mentioning in a way that does not–[interjection]

Mr. Speaker: Order.

Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the point of order raised by the member opposite, the member opposite raised the issue of reports and recommendations arising from the Rose report. Now, I understand the member opposite may not have read the Rose report, because it certainly was not made public.

The Rose report deals with the effect of southwestern Manitoba on the flooding. It deals with its income effect in southwestern Manitoba. It deals with taxation issues. It deals with tuition fees. I have not even got at the issue of tuition fees, which is also contained in the Rose report.

* (11:20)

Mr. Speaker: Order. I would just like to remind honourable members that points of order are to be raised in breach of House rules and not to be used for continuing debate.

On the point of order raised by the honourable Official Opposition House Leader, at this point, I have to rule that he does not have a point of order because of Manitoba standards on latitude of leaders. I would welcome a meeting with House leaders. If this is creating problems for individuals, I welcome that. [interjection] Order. I have to deal with the point of order raised first. I have not finished yet. If there are concerns, I would gladly meet with individuals in this Chamber.

Mr. Speaker: The honourable Opposition House Leader, on a new point of order.

Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): No. Mr. Speaker, I challenge your ruling.

Mr. Speaker: Okay. The ruling of the Chair has been challenged.

Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of sustaining the ruling, please say yea.

Some Honourable Members: Yea.

Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to sustaining the ruling, please say nay.

Some Honourable Members: Nay.

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

Mr. Laurendeau: Yeas and Nays, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: A recorded vote has been called for. Call in the members.

The question before the House is shall the ruling of the Chair be sustained.

Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Yeas 29, Nays 22.

Mr. Speaker: The ruling of the Chair has been sustained.

Time for Oral Questions has expired.

Mr. Leonard Derkach (Russell): I would like to take this opportunity to put a few words on record regarding the relatively new and promising business enterprise in my constituency. Asessippi Ski Hill and Winter Park kicked off its second season on the last weekend of November as some 500 to 600 skiers headed to Russell to take to the slopes. The facility just completed over $2 million in expansion and upgrading and is expecting an excellent second season, having enjoyed both adequate snowfall and suitable temperatures. It was able to open almost one month earlier than last year.

The winter park has also had a tremendous effect on the economy of its surrounding rural communities. Business for hotels and bed and breakfasts in the nearby communities of Russell, Roblin and Inglis has increased since the opening of the Asessippi Winter Park. The spin-off effects created by the businesses like the winter park in rural Manitoba's economy cannot be overstated. Such endeavours truly show the entrepreneurial spirit in rural Manitoba to be alive and well. Despite its inaugural season shortened by both construction and a mild winter, Asessippi's management foresaw that an expansion of the operations' capabilities would be the key to unlocking the future success. The facility has expanded to about 20 runs, and prospects are good that most of the them will be open all season.

I would like to extend my congratulations to all those involved in turning this business venture into a reality that can be enjoyed by thousands of skiers and snowboarders each winter.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Conrad Santos (Wellington): I rise to make a statement on the importance of Crown corporations in Manitoba. Crown corporations provide necessary services to Manitobans in ways that best serve the public interest. With easy access and flexibility, Crown corporations complement and help complete the work of departments of government in order to serve the needs of our people in this province, improving their quality of life. Unlike government departments, Crown corporations are not subject to the co-ordinating authority of the Civil Service Commission or the Treasury Board Secretariat. They do have a role to play in working to the betterment of the conditions of our people by bettering the quality of life. For example, Manitoba Hydro, through efficient generation and distribution of electricity, provides our people with environmentally clean and renewable sources of energy at a rate which is the lowest almost in North America. The Public Insurance Corporation also provides the drivers and car owners in this province with affordable car insurance, the lowest in Canada.

If governing is about priorities and policy direction, I think it is acceptable public policy that Crown corporations should be allowed to help improve the quality of life of Manitobans. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Government House Leader, on a point of order.

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Yes, just given the time constraints, Mr. Speaker, could you canvass the House to determine if there is consent to waive the remainder of members' statements?

Mr. Speaker: Is there a willingness to waive the rest of members' statements for today? [interjection]

Order, the honourable Member for Portage la Prairie, on a point of order.

Mr. David Faurschou (Portage la Prairie): Mr. Speaker, I would be accepting of the honourable Government House Leader. I would like to request, though, that my member's statement be tabled, deemed as read.

Mr. Speaker: Is there agreement of the House that the honourable Member for Portage la Prairie table his–[interjection]

The honourable Government House Leader, on the same point of order.

* (11:50)

Mr. Mackintosh: Yes, if we could ask that the Member for Flin Flon (Mr. Jennissen) also be allowed the same privilege.

Mr. Speaker: Is there agreement of the House that the remainder of members' statements, if the honourable member who was scheduled to rise on a members' statement wishes, be tabled and printed in Hansard? Is that agreeable? [Agreed]

So, with a short drive to Portage la Prairie this Christmas season, I would encourage you to take some time and visit this wonderful display. I know you will be filled with the spirit of the festive season with this experience. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): On December 6 at 10:10 a.m. there was a house fire on the Mathias Colomb First Nation, Pukatawagan. The community fire department responded promptly, as did the RCMP. One of the four occupants of the burning house was a teenager, 17-year-old Roderick Colomb. When Roderick became aware of the fire, he did not panic. He kept his cool. He remembered the training received from community advanced safety programs. To avoid most of the thick smoke, Roderick crouched low and tried to make his way out of the burning building. Suddenly he heard a child crying. Instead of leaving the building, he crawled towards a stairwell. There he found a disoriented and crying 7-year-old. Keeping very low, he dragged the child towards a dim light that turned out to be a kitchen window. He opened the window and lowered the child to safety before he left the burning building. He saved that child's life.

Mr. Speaker: Adjourned debate on the proposed motion of the honourable Member for Dauphin-Roblin (Mr. Struthers), which the debate remains open.

Hon. Gary Doer (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I have to say it is an honour again to rise in this House, but as many disagreements I have had with the former first minister, as many fundamental disagreements, including our inability to speak during the Telephone privatization debate, we always afforded him a minimum of an hour and a half to speak to the Speech from the Throne, and the practice on the Budget and a similar practice today is regrettable. It is symptomatic of an opposition party that has still not accepted the will of the people to make a change in government in 1999.

On a positive note, I am proud of the speech we have presented. I am proud of the vision that we have presented to Manitobans, where we believe in our people. We do not believe in showing people an investment in education as a cost. We believe that investing in our people and lifelong learning is an investment, a clear divide between the ideologies and beliefs of the two political parties challenging in this Chamber.

We also have said in our vision that we believe that our resources should be used for the benefit of all the people of Manitoba. That is why we are disappointed that members opposite are voting against a hydro rate reduction. We believe that rural and northern Manitobans should have the advantage of the resources, have the advantage of their Crown corporations and have reduced rates. I regret members opposite are not joining us in one community for Manitobans, with their resources and with their Crown corporations.

Our vision also includes a vision of inclusion. The statement made today by our Minister of Northern and Aboriginal Affairs, the statements made all through our Speech from the Throne, the action of our Government to include all Manitobans, whether they live in the inner city or our rural communities or our northern communities, put this in stark contrast to the previous government and to the members opposite. We will work hard to include all our citizens in the opportunities for success, in the programs of government and for the needed ability to have a chance in your life.

All the way through the Speech from the Throne, whether it is fetal alcohol syndrome or education or child care or Healthy Child or equal rates in northern Manitoba or ethanol, we are a society and a community and a government that believes that the rising tide should raise all ships. We are proud of the fact that we are an inclusive government, with inclusive membership, with inclusive philosophies, with inclusive ideas, and we are proud to be a party of inclusiveness, not a party of exclusiveness, as we see with the members opposite.

Mr. Speaker, I could speak for 45 minutes, which I had planned to do, on the number of differences between us, but let me choose a couple of examples. One example is health care and one example is the recent announcement made yesterday by our Government that was contained in the Speech from the Throne on doctors. I cannot believe that a caucus that has so many rural representatives would be rising on the issue of the number of doctors in Charleswood.

What kind of Perimeter vision do we have by members opposite? There is one doctor for six hundred patients in Winnipeg. There is one doctor for two thousand patients in rural Manitoba. You are wasting all these questions with the honourable Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Praznik). You are going on and on and on with these kinds of smear campaigns. Why are you not standing up for your rural constituents and asking questions about rural doctors?

Any party that has representatives that have one doctor per thousand and one doctor per two thousand, why are they not prioritizing the doctor-patient ratio in rural Manitoba ahead of the doctor-patient ratio in Charleswood? The priority for doctors, the urgency for doctors is in northern Manitoba, where it is one doctor per five thousand people. The second urgent priority for doctors is in rural Manitoba, where it is one doctor per two thousand people. Yes, there are challenges in the city of Winnipeg, but one doctor per six hundred patients should not be the priority of the new Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Murray) over one doctor per two thousand and one doctor per five thousand. The member opposite wants to talk about cost effectiveness and programs. You start where you have difficulties, not where the issues are of greatest abundance.

We are a can-do government. We have the lowest unemployment rate in Canada. We have the lowest youth rate in Canada. We have infrastructure investments in our universities as part of our economic strategy. Our 50-50 plan was not made up on the back of an envelope in the middle of the election campaign. Our 50-50 plan is for $50 million from the public sector for the University of Manitoba and $50 million to be matched from the private sector to deal with 11 years of neglect by the previous government.

We have announcements today on Red River Community College, where we lowered the cost per student by 50 percent with the announcements we will make today, progress to achieve the increase in students in community colleges in a cost-effective way.

Mr. Speaker, we have more students enrolled in the university than in the last 10 years under the previous government. Our 10% tuition fee cut is working for Manitobans.

We are putting in place a plan for flooding. We have already spent a considerable amount of money. We have moved ahead the plan to deal with the inlet area of the floodway, because we are quite worried about the flooding situation in Manitoba, before the high rains in November and the predictions for the year of 2001.

We believe that the privatization on private-well testing for water was a regressive move by members opposite. It was a regressive move in terms of the people of Manitoba. Again, a caucus with so many rural members privatizing rural private-well testing is absolutely contrary to the interests of those citizens.

Members opposite have turned their backs on their constituents, and we will again embrace the positive ideas all across Manitoba, in rural, northern, other communities.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

* (12:00)

Mr. Speaker: Order, order. Pursuant to subrule 43(4), I am interrupting the proceedings in order to put the question on the motion of the honourable Member for Dauphin-Roblin (Mr. Struthers). That is the motion for addressing the reply to the Speech from the Throne.

Do members wish to have the motion read? [Agreed]

On the proposed motion of the honourable Member for Dauphin-Roblin (Mr. Struthers)

THAT the following address be presented to His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor:

We, the members of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, thank Your Honour for the gracious speech addressed to us at this Second Session of the Thirty-Seventh Legislature of Manitoba.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Yes.

Some Honourable Members: No.

Mr. Speaker: All those in favour of the motion, please say yea.

Some Honourable Members: Yea.

Mr. Speaker: All those opposed to the motion, please say nay.

Some Honourable Members: Nay.

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

Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (Opposition House Leader): Yeas and Nays, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: A recorded vote has been requested. Call in the members.

The question before the House is the motion of the honourable Member for Dauphin-Roblin (Mr. Struthers), that is, the motion for an address in reply to the Speech from the Throne.

Do the members wish to have the motion read?

Some Honourable Members: No.

Mr. Speaker: Dispense?

An Honourable Member: Dispense.

Mr. Speaker: Dispense.

Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Yeas 30, Nays 21.

Mr. Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, would you please call report stage.

Mr. Speaker: Prior to calling report stage, I would just like to inform the House that the honourable Member for Morris (Mr. Pitura) has tabled his member's statement. His member's statement, which has been tabled, will also be printed in Hansard.

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), that Bill 2, The Employment Standards Code Amendment Act (Loi modifiant le Code des normes d'emploi), as amended and reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations, be concurred in.

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance, that Bill 3, The Civil Service Superannuation Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur la pension de la fonction publique), reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations, be concurred in.

* (12:10)

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines (Ms. Mihychuk), that Bill 4, The Manitoba Employee Ownership Fund Corporation Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi constituant en corporation le Fonds de participation des travailleurs du Manitoba), reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations, be concurred in.

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs (Mr. Robinson), that Bill 5, The Helen Betty Osborne Memorial Foundation Act (Loi sur la Fondation commémorative Helen Betty Osborne), reported from the Standing Committee on Law Amendments, be concurred in.

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett), that Bill 6, The Pension Benefits Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur les prestations de pension), reported from the Standing Committee on Industrial Relations, be concurred in.

Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, would you canvass the House to determine if there is leave not to see the clock.

Mr. Speaker: Is it the will of the House to not see the clock? Is there agreement? [Agreed]

Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, would you canvass the House to determine if there is leave to proceed to third readings of the bills that have received report stage?

Mr. Speaker: Is there leave for bills that have received report stage to move into third readings? [Agreed]

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs (Mr. Robinson), that Bill 5, The Helen Betty Osborne Memorial Foundation Act (Loi sur la Fondation commémorative Helen Betty Osborne), be now read a third time and passed.

Hon. Eric Robinson (Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity by thanking the members opposite and also some of our members that were in committee the other night, I believe it was Monday last, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Murray) and other members that heard the family of the late Helen Betty Osborne appear as witnesses, in showing support to the bill that is now before us for third reading. It was indeed an impressive showing by all honourable members in listening to the family, the mother, Justine Osborne.

As I indicated the other night in committee, Helen Betty Osborne aspired to be a schoolteacher. At the time of her death, she was 19 years of age. I am very pleased to speak at this final stage in the passing of Bill 5. I believe that this is the right thing to do. It has been a long-standing issue for the Osborne family and for all Manitobans, I believe, because it was truly an injustice that occurred. It is something that we are not really proud of in our history as fellow Manitobans. It has been a long journey to reach this milestone. The Osborne family has endured a lot of pain, and the healing has truly begun, I believe, with the introduction of this bill, and the dreams and goals of Helen Betty Osborne have finally been partially realized.

In the conclusions of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry, Volume 2, the commissioners wrote that the murder of Helen Betty Osborne clearly was motivated by racism. In that section of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry, they went into great detail. Had Betty Osborne not been an Aboriginal woman, chances are she may have been alive to this day.

So the four men who took her to her death on the streets of The Pas that night had gone looking for an Aboriginal girl with whom to party. They found Betty Osborne. When she refused to party, she was driven out of town and murdered. Those who abducted her showed a total lack of respect for her and regard for her as a person or her rights as an individual. Those who stood by while the physical assault took place, while sexual advances were made and while she was being beaten to death, showed their own racism, sexism and indifference. Those who knew the story and remained silent for all those many years must also share the guilt.

The AJI commissioners go on to point out a litany of other instances of racism that tarred the investigation, including the treatment of the Osborne family. I remember talking to Mrs. Osborne some years ago and it was pointed out in the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry report, Volume 2, that she was notified of her daughter's death a day after it occurred on November 14, 1971, and not to hear from the RCMP again for another 16 years until charges were finally laid. So I do not think anybody in this House can really appreciate the turmoil that this family went through as a result of her death. There were a number of children that were a part of the Osborne family. As I said the other night, Betty Osborne was the eldest of, I believe, 12 children in the Osborne family, and Betty Osborne was not much older than I am. She would have been a 48-year-old woman today and I am sure a proud leader, a schoolteacher perhaps. One can only wonder what she would have been today had she been spared her life.

The mother told me that she had dreams; the first portion and what was the practice of the past was that she went to The Pas and attended the Guy Hill Residential School which existed at that time. During that time, of course, Mr. Speaker, while the policy of the governments, the federal government particularly in this case, was to have Aboriginal students integrated, assimilated really is the proper term into, society. Eventually, after two years of being a student at the Guy Hill Residential School, she eventually integrated or wanted to integrate, and they placed her with a family in the town of The Pas and then she commenced and continued on with her schooling at the Margaret Barbour Collegiate. They point that out in the AJI, Volume 2, something I would recommend for reading for everybody if they want to know about a black eye in our history as Manitobans.

The Osborne family, as is the case with Aboriginal people, I regard Justine Osborne as an aunt, even though I am not biologically related to her. I remember as a little boy, Betty Osborne was just a little older, as I indicated, we used to travel up the Nelson River to Rossville from where we were growing up, and this was during the summer time when we were out of residential school and we would go to Rossville and it would be a time of great celebration. In those days alcohol and things like that were not part of our lives. It would be in those camps that we would settle in for a few days at a time, and I remember Betty Osborne as a little girl, a little older than me but nevertheless a small girl, and she was one that played with the other children, so from a personal perspective, Mr. Speaker, I feel that I, too, lost a sister and I believe many of us feel the same way, and I know that the Member for The Pas and now the Minister for Conservation (Mr. Lathlin) spoke out during the review of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry and the submissions that they heard from various individuals surrounding the death of Helen Betty Osborne and J. J. Harper.

* (12:20)

The exhaustive investigation and report by the commissioners should be read by anyone interested in the justice system. They noted that while there was no way of knowing if the murder case would have come more quickly to a conclusion if more Aboriginal people were part of the police force or the Crown, it was, in fact, a special effort made by a gentleman by the name of Constable Urbanoski. I know that Mr. Urbanoski wanted to be here today to hear us debate this particular bill, but because of work commitments he might arrive later. I want to pay special tribute to this gentleman, Mr. Speaker, Robert Neil Urbanoski, who, I understand, is now staff sergeant with the division here in Winnipeg with the RCMP. It was this police officer that went the extra distance, and it was pointed out by the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry that the case probably would have not gone anywhere had it not been for the effort that this man put into the case.

The AJI states that he began his involvement by conducting a complete review of the file. He read it four or five times, checked the physical evidence to make sure it had been kept safe. He located all four suspects, interviewed all the officers who had worked on this file in the past. This review took July 1983 to March 1984. He then followed up on the recommendations of the Criminal Information Services Manitoba by resubmitting the evidence.

In December of 1984, Staff Sergeant Urbanoski submitted a plan to headquarters. They called for him to work full time on the case. Since he knew that the four suspects and their friends still talked about the crime, he had wire taps carried out here in Manitoba, Alberta and British Columbia. There were 11 full-time investigators as well as himself in this operation. The AJI commissioners concluded that, had it not been for the determination of Constable Robert Urbanoski, charges might never have been laid against anyone.

I, along with many others, deeply regret that further charges were not laid against the other three people involved. The AJI commissioners stated that they believed that the Crown should review the matter to determine whether the evidence against James Houghton warrants the laying of other charges. This did not occur until near the end of the mandate of the former government more than seven years after the report was tabled. It was only done when we presented a confession by the only man who ever served any time for the abduction and murder of Betty Osborne. The Crown reviewed the transcript and decided against further charges at that time.

It was through the efforts of the Aboriginal people that we had the opportunity of meeting with the only man convicted. If I could refresh the memories of the members in this House about what occurred: As we all know, Manger was not charged; Houghton was acquitted for first-degree murder; and Colgan, of course, gave testimony in exchange for his freedom. It was Johnston who was sentenced to life imprisonment with no chance of parole for 10 years.

We had the opportunity of meeting Mr. Johnston. We went through our own practices of healing. We brought Mr. Johnston face to face with a member of the family, asked him to be honest, asked him to detail what, in his memory, he could recall of the night of the murder. He gave us the details of what he felt occurred. At no given time did Mr. Johnston ever take away any responsibility for the part he played. The story he told us is that the part he played was truly regrettable. It is something that he had to live with for the remainder of his life, and he appreciates and accepts that responsibility on his part.

In private discussions with him, he has also told me that the portrayal of himself of being a racist and a sexist and a person that hated Aboriginal people was not true. You know, after going through the healing journey, if you will, between himself and the Osborne family, I have no reason to disbelieve him. Nevertheless, that does not mean that anybody, including the Osborne family, should forgive him for the part that he had in the murder of this beautiful woman in 1971.

In the gallery this afternoon, Mr. Speaker, we have Cecilia Osborne, the sister of the late Helen Betty Osborne. She was 10 years old when the body of her older sister was brought back to Norway House for the funeral. As a 10-year-old child, can we imagine when we see our older siblings and remember the way they looked, and a body is brought back, and a 10-year-old child is there to look at the body and cannot recognize that body lying in a casket. That was the experience that Cecilia had. Nevertheless, she had fond memories of her sister and how big sisters will take care of younger sisters. That is how Betty Osborne was.

Cecilia has, through her own courage and perseverance, spoken out as a family representative over the last five years as the family publicly fought for justice for Betty Osborne and for other victims of crime and the justice system. I commend her because I regard her as a sister, as a younger sister to me, because she, too, has had her own challenges in life. I believe that when Johnston made the revelations about his version of the events that occurred on November 12 and November 13 of 1971, it brought about some reassurance to the family, and by our actions here as legislators in the province of Manitoba who are concerned about human rights.

All of us here always speak out about racism of any form. Mr. Speaker, I do not think any of us here tolerate that. I am happy that people like the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Murray), the Member for Lac du Bonnet (Mr. Praznik) and the Member for Morris (Mr. Pitura) were at the committee the other night to witness first-hand the loving ways of Aboriginal people in spite of the injustice that they had to experience for so many years.

I want to also salute everyone who has supported this cause over the past few years. It has been a frustrating and challenging fight. The Osborne family has taught us all a lot, more so than we realize, Mr. Speaker, about dignity and about determination and about honour. I hope that they can truly now heal following the most horrific murder that they experienced and the long fight for justice.

Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, the Osborne family are not the only ones who have gone through such traumatic experiences in their lifetime, but this bill that we are talking about and the woman whose memory we are honouring is one that stands out in everybody's minds, from the very young–my young daughter talks about this, having read the AJI, having seen video clips, having seen newspaper articles about the matter.

* (12:30)

The people who really deserve all the credit are people like Bob Urbanoski, Cecilia Osborne, her beautiful mother Justine and the Osborne family. They are the ones who deserve credit, but at the same time, Mr. Speaker, we must give credit to the Justice Minister (Mr. Mackintosh) who has taken on the role of a warrior in this case. I do not talk about a warrior because it has a bad connotation now because it has a reflection of being a street gang member. But a warrior is a person who will advance, stand beside a family to help them wipe away the tears in their time of trouble, tribulation, and that is what the Justice Minister has demonstrated by sponsoring this bill.

The rest of us are minor players in assisting the family–a case that still stands out for all of us, for Aboriginal people, but it was a crime against women, most particularly towards Aboriginal women, and I am very glad that our Government has moved on the recommendations of the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry. Again, Helen Betty Osborne, J. J. Harper, their names will stand out in history, because we acted on the AJI based on their unfortunate deaths.

The Helen Betty Osborne Foundation will be a monument and symbol for justice in this province. I am very pleased by the strong interest in the foundation by people from all walks of life, and I have high hopes that many more donations will be made to the fund, enabling it to assist larger numbers of students wanting to further their education like Betty Osborne wanted to.

I strongly commend all members of the Legislature to support this bill, Mr. Speaker. I thank you, and I thank the members for their attention while I have had the opportunity to speak to this bill.

Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise and indicate our support for this bill. You know, the death and subsequent tragedy and failed justice of Miss Osborne's case is a well-documented tragedy, but what is very, very clear to me today, as it was in the committee hearing the other night, is the tremendous amount of spirit that remains and is very strong within your community and within the Osborne family. It is most unfortunate that we have to go to this length to try to remember somebody and to remember that strength of spirit, but the strength of spirit that goes through the healing process, that will live on, I think, will serve as a reminder for us of some of the injustices that have been done in the past.

It is important, Mr. Speaker, that all members of this House and all citizens of Manitoba learn and understand how important and how difficult it is to break the spirit of a strong will of people. We commend the family. We commend the Government, and we certainly commend the Member for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson) for putting all of their efforts towards this bill. There is no doubt that this fund will be of tremendous benefit to Aboriginal students.

The scholarship will be a reminder to all of young Helen Betty and her dreams and her ambitions that were cut so short, but it will also be a catalyst for her spirit. I believe that it will help to ensure that future Aboriginal students will achieve their dreams that Helen Betty Osborne was not able to.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to thank, again, the member, the Government, the Osborne family for ensuring that we are reminded that when things are not right, the spirit remains strong and justice is served. Thank you.

Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I rise to support this bill, The Helen Betty Osborne Memorial Foundation Act.

I would like to congratulate the Government for this measure. I would like to acknowledge and pay tribute to the efforts of the Member for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson) on behalf of the Helen Betty Osborne family and on behalf of the cause of justice in this province. I was moved the other night at the committee hearings by the presentations by family members and by people who have been associated with the Osborne family and with the cause of trying to sort out what happened and to provide justice.

This is a sad example of the effects of delays in justice, and it is a sad example of how things went wrong. I think that as a province and as citizens of Manitoba, we have collectively learned a lot from the intensive review of the justice system that has occurred as a result of this, and, hopefully, over the coming years, we can move step by step to put in place a system of justice which will address some of those shortfalls that indeed have occurred in the past.

In closing, let me indicate that this bill, in putting forward the foundation, will provide an ongoing tribute to Helen Betty Osborne and the Osborne family, an ongoing reminder of when justice went wrong in this province, and a commitment from me and, I think, the rest of the citizens in Manitoba that in the future we will dedicate ourselves to improved education and improved justice.

Mr. Frank Pitura (Morris): I am pleased and honoured to be given the opportunity to put a few words on the record with respect to Bill 5, The Helen Betty Osborne Memorial Foundation Act. I would like to personally congratulate the Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs for all of his work that he did in bringing this bill to fruition. My sympathies go out to the Osborne family.

The other evening in committee we listened to former Grand Chief of the MKO, George Muswaggon, Chief Ron Evans of Norway House, AMC Grand Chief Dennis White Bird, Freda Albert of the women's circle at Norway House, and Cecilia Osborne, mother of Helen Betty Osborne, and Sandra Delaronde.

This past November 13 marked 29 years since Helen Betty Osborne was brutally murdered in a racist and sexist act near Clearwater Lake. Helen Betty Osborne was born on July 16, 1952, at Norway House. Helen Betty wanted to be a schoolteacher. She left Norway House to pursue her goal in life, her dream. It was a very cold night in The Pas, I am told, the night that she was taken from her family and friends in a brutal, senseless act of murder.

I was moved by the presentations at committee, in particular the presentation from Sandra Delaronde. She indicated that when she was young, growing up in The Pas, she would walk to the arena in the early mornings for her skating lessons. Each and every time she would see headlights approaching, she wondered: Is this the murderer? So, for sixteen years while this case was being investigated, young Aboriginal women lived for fear of their lives in that community. What a traumatic experience that must have been.

I am very pleased, personally, to support this bill that creates a Helen Betty Osborne Memorial Foundation. This foundation will ensure that Helen Betty's name will remain with each and every one of us, and the foundation will create an opportunity for young Aboriginal, Metis, and Inuit people who wish to pursue post-secondary education. The opportunity to do so and also the opportunity for those who do to in turn carry the message that we are all created equal and racism and sexism should not and will not be tolerated.

Mr. Speaker, we unanimously support the passage of this bill and call upon Manitobans from all corners of this province to support the Helen Betty Osborne Memorial Foundation financially to ensure that Helen Betty's dream will result in thousands of dreams for others coming true. Thank you.

* (12:40)

Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?

Some Honourable Members: Question.

Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is third reading of Bill 5, The Helen Betty Osborne Memorial Foundation Act.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt a motion?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered.

Mr. Mackintosh: Yeas and Nays, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: A recorded vote has been requested. Call in the members.

The question before the House is third reading of Bill 5, The Helen Betty Osborne Memorial Foundation Act.

Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): Yeas 48. Nays 0.

Mr. Speaker: I declare the motion carried.

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett), that Bill 2, The Employment Standards Code Amendment Act (Loi modifiant le Code des normes d'emploi), be now read a third time and passed.

Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, very briefly I just want to again thank all members of the Legislature, particularly the Opposition parties for agreeing to pass this piece of legislation expeditiously, so that all the parents in the province of Manitoba who will be having children on or after December 31 of this year will be able to take full advantage of the changes in employment insurance that were passed by the federal government.

I appreciate again–and I know I speak on behalf of all the families in the province of Manitoba–the support that is being received from the members of this Legislature.

Mr. Stuart Murray (Leader of the Official Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today and speak on this bill, which, we feel, is very important for all Manitobans and families. Our caucus supports this bill because of the advantages it does give to all of Manitoba families. It improves the maternity and parental leave, the benefits of non-federally regulated workers in this province to bring them in line with the changes previously made at the federal level.

I think it is significant that all members of the Legislature were supportive of this legislation and co-operated to see its speedy passage. I hope it is a sign, Mr. Speaker, when there are issues that are important to families and to Manitobans that we as legislators can do the right thing together. Thank you.

Hon. Jon Gerrard (River Heights): Mr. Speaker, I rise to indicate my support for this measure. I believe that this is a significant and important piece of legislation in extending maternal and parental leave benefits and that the primary beneficiary, in fact, will be the children of Manitoba, who will have more time with their parents early on in life, a time which is very critical in the development of children and important not only at that particular time but important for its effects on those children as they grow up and become adults and become contributors to society.

I think it is perhaps appropriate to note that there are occasions when there is federal leadership and the provincial government follows, and there are occasions when there is provincial leadership and the other approach can happen. On this occasion, let us acknowledge the federal leadership and the co-operation of the Government in following that.

I hope that in other areas like southwestern Manitoba that we will see the provincial government coming forward with some leadership and initiatives. I look forward to that in the coming months.

* (12:50)

Mr. Marcel Laurendeau (St. Norbert): Mr. Speaker, that is a hard act to follow, but we just have to correct a few statements made by the honourable member. Federal leadership is one thing we do not have in this country. They have been taking direction from ministers across the country to bring forward this type of legislation, and that is why they brought it forth.

But, Mr. Speaker, this legislation was important for one reason, and that is for the children. We have accepted that the children needed that parental support at home in their earlier years of life. I think that this legislation goes a long way towards that, but I am hoping that in the future, the minister will also work to get the federal government to recognize the parents of handicapped children, that the important years for those children could be in their later years.

I am hoping that the minister will recognize that and help us forward to the federal minister that maybe the parents of handicapped children could use their paternity leave at a later time in life, so that the children would have an opportunity to have that care and nurturing.

Mr. Jack Penner (Emerson): Mr. Speaker, I will just take a moment to put a few short comments on record. I want to do this as a representative for the farm community in general.

It is not very often recognized the extreme responsibility that is being put on partners within a given operation, especially in agriculture these days, and the importance of recognizing the combined effort of the two partners in raising a family, especially on farms these days. When ministers of this Crown say that it is important to recognize that the viability of a farm depends now on the ownership of a section of land and a full-time employment off the farm to support the family and the farm, that becomes a criterion of the maintenance or the recognition of the family farm. The recognition of that full-time employment requirement in the maintenance and the support of a family needs to be recognized by this Legislature, and it also needs to be recognized by members of Parliament and legislators all over this nation.

The farm communities and the farm families are the essence of sustainability of the human existence. If there are no food producers, there will not be any human activity on this globe, and the sustainability of that farm very often depends on the wife or the husband maintaining employment off the farm, and they very often are not allowed the participatory programming that would be afforded to other employees through employers because very often there is only the one employer.

The other thing of importance that needs to be recognized is that if and when a farmer is required to operate the farm and the spouse, whoever that may be, he or she, is required to hold a full-time job off the farm in order to maintain that farm, then there is not an opportunity for those people to jointly participate in the raising of a child. That is where we are heading to now, Mr. Speaker, the family farm. The severe crisis initiated by this Government because of their inaction to make the case before the federal government and this minister's inaction to carry the case of the family farm forward in negotiations and participation in federal-provincial discussions are important to note.

The viability of educating those children, those very young children from the first day on, is dependent on that farm family to have an income that will be at least subsistent enough to allow those two family members that raised those children the same latitude that others in society have which is not now the case.

So I say to you, Mr. Speaker, that this bill carries with it a lot greater degree of responsibility by this Government, this Premier (Mr. Doer), and these ministers, than what is implied when you just look at the bill as it is written. So I say to you that it behooves all of us to pay very careful attention to the plight of that young farm family and how we want to direct the activity on those farms to maintain a sustainable operation with the application of this bill to allow for the latitude and the freedom to educate and be part of, to indeed allow that child to develop a close relationship very early on in life with both partners.

So I say, first of all, I congratulate the Government for bringing this bill forward. I think we all agree with it. We agree with the principles of the bill. Yet I think now it is up to this Government, this Premier (Mr. Doer), to make the case that our family farms are indeed in true distress and that those two partners operating that family farm trying to raise a child and a family will have the same parameters under this bill and the same allowances under this bill that others in society have.

Mr. David Faurschou (Portage la Prairie): I rise in support of the bill, only with the comment that in recognition of the importance of parental guidance when rearing children that I encourage this Government, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), the Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett) to use the litmus test on all of the taxation to which they review in the upcoming budget and in budgets in the future that analyze very much in depth the disparity that is hoisted upon families under the taxation regime if one parent chooses to remain at home to raise children. We in this Chamber in fact must reinforce and keep consistent with what we are enacting here today. The importance of parental guidance at home and our tax regime within this province should be one reflective of the intent of this bill, and I encourage the Government in its budget deliberations to in fact look very carefully at this point so that parents that choose to stay at home in fact are not penalized through the taxation system. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question? The question before the House is third reading of Bill 2, The Employment Standards Code Amendment Act.

Is it the pleasure of the House do adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered.

Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Wellington (Mr. Santos), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources be amended as follows: Inkster (Ms. Barrett) for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen), Lord Roberts (Ms. McGifford) for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin), La Verendrye (Mr. Lemieux) for Fort Rouge (Mr. Sale), Transcona (Mr. Reid) for The Maples (Mr. Aglugub).

* (13:00)

Mr. Dewar: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck), that the composition of the Standing Committee on the Rules of the House be amended as follows: Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes) for Rossmere (Mr. Schellenberg).

Mr. Peter Dyck (Pembina): I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Tuxedo (Ms. Stefanson), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources be amended as follows: Emerson (Mr. Jack Penner) for Arthur-Virden (Mr. Maguire).

Bill 3–The Civil Service Superannuation Amendment Act

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett), that Bill 3, The Civil Service Superannuation Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur la pension de la fonction publique), be now read a third time and passed.

Hon. Becky Barrett (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, yes, for the second time, I am pleased to rise and thank all members of the House for supporting this piece of legislation, which will enable the current and retired members of the civil service to have benefits increased as per their negotiations, which benefits are fully funded out of the employee portion of the Civil Service Superannuation Fund.

Again, I thank all honourable members for supporting this so that those employees will be able to have access to those increased benefits as of September 30 of this year.

Mr. Harry Enns (Lakeside): Mr. Speaker, I believe we are supporting this bill. I certainly want to support the bill, but it may be slightly out of order the few comments that I make. I choose to make them because you cannot find too many other occasions to make them.

Mr. Speaker, we in Manitoba traditionally and to this day pay ourselves modestly. I believe we rank with Prince Edward Island on the list of remuneration. I appreciate that in 1995 the previous government, with the co-operation of the then-Opposition, made some substantial changes with respect to the resources that we individual MLAs have with respect to being an MLA, office support and so forth.

Members will recall, certainly some of the veterans will recall, that those of us who had earned some credits on the now defunct and the old MLA pension plan at that time would in fact be grandfathered, but in fact that did not happen. I, on behalf of myself, would declare my vested interest, and a member that used to sit here for many years, a member from Brandon East, I believe the Member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), I know the Member for Russell (Mr. Derkach) and others. There are others that are involved, Mr. Speaker. I take this occasion to address specifically to the members of the LAMC committee to consider this because in fairness I think it was an oversight.

One of the prime conditions of the old MLA pension plan was that the formula used to calculate the benefit was based on the member's five last best years of earnings. That is not the case. The case is it is based on the years '90 to '95, and for "Landslide Ashton," as I like to call him, who came into this House, who has no signs–but I appreciate he may have nine or ten years in the old plan. I do not know. Is it?

An Honourable Member: More, 20.

Mr. Enns: More. I know that my colleague here has plans. I know that the former member for Brandon East has plans, but it does make a difference. I understand that in contractual terms, when you talk about grandfathering something, the conditions apply, that the same conditions are in fact grandfathered. The condition of the old MLA plan meant that the formula used to calculate the benefit was based on the last five years or the best five years of MLA service. Is that not the understanding that most members have?

Anyway I raise that, Mr. Speaker, simply take this occasion to raise it, ask the members for the LAMC committee to give that some consideration. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?

An Honourable Member: Question.

Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is third reading of Bill 3, The Civil Service Superannuation Amendment Act.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered.

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines (Ms. Mihychuk), that Bill 4, The Manitoba Employee Ownership Fund Corporation Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi constituant en corporation le Fonds de participation des travailleurs du Manitoba), be now read a third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?

Mr. John Loewen (Fort Whyte): Mr. Speaker, I am sorry for the slight delay. I did mistakenly think that the minister might have a few comments to make on her first bill, but understanding that the last time she spoke or misspoke about the bill, maybe she has some reticence to stand up in the House. When the minister, to give fairness to the issue, when she did speak on second reading, she did talk about fairness and the need to proceed with this amendment to put the Crocus Fund on a level field with the other labour-sponsored fund, the ENSIS Fund. I will ask at this time that in the interest of fairness the minister recognize that in many ways the ENSIS Fund is at a disadvantage to the Crocus Fund in terms of its parameters on investment and that some time maybe in the next few months the minister could put a little attention to this issue and look at ways and come back to this House with a piece of legislation that would, in fact, make it a level playing field for all labour-sponsored funds and bring in some legislation that would amend both funds to put them on equal footing.

I do also want to make a couple of remarks just about fairness because I think the minister, in her statement regarding this bill, did talk about fairness. In fairness, she entered some comments on the record the other day with regard to the Manitoba Chamber of Commerce, in particular, as well as the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce and the Manitoba Business Council that I think need to be responded to a little bit just to ensure that there is fairness on the record. She tried to build the case during her address that both the Chambers and the Business Council were supportive of the Throne Speech. To be honest, to be fair to them, they were supportive of some measures in the Throne Speech, as members on this side of the House are in support of some positions taken by the Government in the Throne Speech.

I would refer her to the published articles and quotes from Graham Starmer, whom she quoted yesterday as being in favour of the Throne Speech. Mr. Starmer is concerned that this Throne Speech contained no substance on tax credits, no substance on cuts. There is a very, very grave concern of Graham Starmer, and so I want to make sure it is on the record.

I would also like to quote the president of the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce; the minister was kind enough to enter some of his comments on the record yesterday. In fairness, in balance, I would also enter this quote from Dave Angus, President of the Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce, and I quote: However, this is a Throne Speech, and it is meant to be pretty big. We will look closely at it at the Budget.

So even the president of the Chamber of Commerce is saying there is really no substance in this Throne Speech. It is vague. There is nothing there that is very positive, and I think it is important that this gets entered on the record.

* (13:10)

I think at the same time, just in closing, I would refer the minister to the facts update set out by the Manitoba Chamber of Commerce entitled "Can I Buy a Vowel?" The substance of the article from Graham Starmer, the President of the Manitoba Chamber of Commerce, is basically the Throne Speech leaves few clues as to the Government's real intentions. So when we look at the reaction from the business community to the Throne Speech, and I think it is important that we are fair in this House when referring to comments by people from outside this House and we do reflect the true breadth of their comments. It is important for the minister, the minister who is supposed to be responsible and react to the business community, the minister who is responsible for growth in investment for the health of the business community. It is important for her to understand that the business community has issued some very grave concerns with regard not only to this Government's performance, not only to their Throne Speech, but to the real intentions behind this Government's purpose.

So, in closing, I would once again reiterate that while we are supportive of this bill, in fairness to the Crocus Fund we ask the minister to take to Cabinet some of the comments that have been directed to this Government through the Chambers of Commerce as well as through the Manitoba Business Council. Then I would ask that in future this minister in particular at the Cabinet table stand up for business and try and help them, work with them in an open and honest way, not behind the scenes but in an open and honest way, and that the next time when she has the opportunity to be present at a business forum that, in fact, if there is labour legislation pending, as has been indicated by Rob Hilliard, that she bring that forward for an open discussion in spite of the wishes of many of her colleagues to keep it hidden.

I hope she realizes her responsibility to stand up for business at the Cabinet table, to make sure that business is aware of what are the real intentions of this Government and at the same time that she comes back to this House with legislation that will ensure that in future all labour-sponsored funds are on equal footing. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Hon. MaryAnn Mihychuk (Minister of Industry, Trade and Mines): Mr. Speaker, I would like to just put on the record on Bill 4, in response to the questions raised by the Opposition, that indeed the Government is working with full funds and is looking at a number of areas that require review and that we hope to be bringing forward additional legislation as soon as possible. But this one is urgent at this time to provide equity, and RRSP season is just around the corner.

Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?

Some Honourable Members: Question.

Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is third reading of Bill 4, The Manitoba Employee Ownership Fund Corporation Amendment Act.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered.

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Labour (Ms. Barrett),

[ that Bill 6, The Pension Benefits Amendment Act (Loi modifiant la Loi sur les prestations de pension), be now read a third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker: Is the House ready for the question?

Some Honourable Members: Question.

Mr. Speaker: The question before the House is Bill 6, The Pension Benefits Amendment Act.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered.

* * *

*(13:20)

Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, I understand the Lieutenant-Governor is being summoned.

By leave, I would move, seconded by the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs (Ms. Friesen), that when the House adjourns today it shall stand adjourned until a time fixed by Mr. Speaker upon the request of the Government.

Deputy Sergeant-At-Arms (Mr. Blake Dunn): His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor.

Mr. Speaker: May it please Your Honour:

The Legislative Assembly, at its present session, passed a bill, which, in the name of the Assembly, I present to Your Honour and to which bills I respectfully request Your Honour's assent.

Madam Clerk Assistant (Monique Grenier): Bill 2, The Employment Standards Code Amendment Act; Loi modifiant le Code des normes d'emploi

Bill 3–The Civil Service Superannuation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la pension de la fonction publique

Bill 4–The Manitoba Employee Ownership Fund Corporation Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi constituant en corporation le Fonds de participation des traivailleurs du Manitoba

Bill 5–The Helen Betty Osborne Memorial Foundation Act; Loi sur la Fondation commémorative Helen Betty Osborne

Bill 6–The Pension Benefits Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur les prestations de pension

Madam Clerk (Patricia Chaychuk): In Her Majesty's name, His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor doth assent to these bills.

Hon. Gord Mackintosh (Government House Leader): I want to take this opportunity to extend to all MLAs and the staff and their families season's greetings.

I move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Selinger), that this House do now adjourn.

Mr. Speaker: It has been moved by the Honourable Attorney General, seconded by the honourable Minister of Finance, that this House do now adjourn. Agreed?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

* (13:30)

Mr. Speaker: Agreed and so ordered.

I, too, would like to extend a very merry Christmas and all the best to each and every member and staff's families, and all the best in the year 2001.

The hour being past 12:30 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned at the call of the Speaker.