LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Monday, April 15, 2019
Madam Speaker: O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Thee to frame such laws as may tend to the welfare and prosperity of our province. Grant, O merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy will, that we may seek it with wisdom and know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen.
Please be seated.
Madam Speaker: Introduction of bills? Committee reports? Tabling of reports? Ministerial statements?
Mrs. Sarah Guillemard (Fort Richmond): Madam Speaker, a little-known fact about the origins of Canadian soccer is that Manitoba hosted the very first meeting of the Canadian Soccer Association in 1912. One might argue that the birth of Canadian soccer happened right here in our keystone province, as it was Manitoban teams that won the first two national championships in 1913 and 1914.
I am thrilled to help celebrate the return of professional soccer to our province by welcoming the Valour FC soccer team to our gallery today. There are many founding members, including myself, who are looking forward to the inaugural first home match on May the 4th of this year. The game will be played at the Investors Group Field, in the heart of the Fort Richmond riding.
Madam Speaker, president and CEO Wade Miller, Coach Rob Gale and his team of assistant coaches will have their work cut out for them as they assemble a talented group of players who will make Winnipeg and Manitoba very proud.
From my years coaching a much younger team, I know that the hours and effort put into identifying skills, planning effective drills, enhancing growth, all while managing different personalities on the field, is quite a challenge. Challenges usually lead to success, with the right motivation.
Madam Speaker, I also have the highly skilled Fort Richmond Collegiate girls soccer team joining us in the gallery today. This FRC team won the high‑school city championship on March the 1st.
They are also a newly formed team who had to learn how to trust each other on the field in order 'achee' their win. Thank you to their coach Cass Bruce and teacher supervisor Carolyn Kornelsen for your leadership and patience.
To the Valour FC players, I want to thank you for joining a team that I know will provide many exciting moments for the fans. But more importantly, you will be role models for the next generation of players and citizens in our great province.
Madam Speaker, I ask all my colleagues in the Chamber to join me in celebrating the inaugural season of the Valour FC team.
Thank you.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Fort Richmond?
Mrs. Guillemard: Madam Speaker, I ask leave to add the names of all of my guests in the gallery into Hansard.
Madam Speaker: Is there leave to include all of those names of the guests in Hansard? [Agreed]
Fort Richmond Collegiate girls soccer team: Elaria Basily, Fay Bruce, Sabrina Concepcion, Ailen Costamagna-Soto, Isabella Cotroneo, Annlise Guillemard, Jessica Hall, Hanna Hashi, Carolyn Kornelsen, Jon Manness, Howard Monson, Ishika Patel, Misbah Rashid, Madison Rosnes, Claire Stein, Edita Vucicevic, Jessica Waytiuk, Aniqa Zaki, Najla Zec.
Valour FC: Martin Arguiñarena, Tyler Attardo, Louis Béland-Goyette, Dylan Carreiro, Tyson Farago, Calum Ferguson, Nicolás Galvis, Raphaël Garcia, Josip Golubar, Diego Gutierrez, Stephen Hoyle, Mathias Janssens, Glenn Muenkat, Jordan Murrell, Ali Musse, Raphael Ohin, Federico Peña, Michael Petrasso, Dylan Sacramento, Skylar Thomas, players; Wade Miller, president and CEO; Rob Gale, head coach and general manager; Damian Rocke, assistant coach and assistant general manager; Patrick Di Stefani, goalkeeper coach; Michelle Lissel, manager of public relations; Tony Mazza, equipment manager; Derek McLennan, physiotherapist; Sam Calvert, social media.
Mrs. Bernadette Smith (Point Douglas): April 10th marked the International Day of Pink, an opportunity to celebrate diversity and work together to combat bullying, discrimination, homophobia, transphobia and transmisogyny.
We have to remember that LGBTQ2S* people, gender non-conforming and non-binary folks experience acts of discrimination and hate daily. They face higher levels of discrimination that can affect their safety, their ability to get a job, and their relationships. The Canada trans youth health survey found that the risk of suicide amongst transgender youth is 16 times higher than cisgender youth.
As legislators and community leaders, we have to be loud in our support for the LGBTQ2S* community and stand up against all forms of bullying and harassment whenever we see it. In doing so, we set a precedent for our constituents, our communities and our children to follow.
By voicing our support for the LGBTQ2S* community, we make our legislature a safe place for people of diverse backgrounds to express themselves. Democracy is only really functional when all different kinds of people are participating, so we need to be the ones to stand up and welcome our LGBT2* relatives to the table.
The Day of Pink is a commitment to being accepting, respectful and encouraging of people's differences. For–diversity is for our constituents. As change makers, we need to strive for a society in which equity, equality, fairness and acceptance are our foundation.
Miigwech.
Mr. Kelly Bindle (Thompson): Madam Speaker, across Canada, many people are in need of organ transplant operations, and although 90 per cent of our population supports organ donation, less than 25 per cent have signed up as donors. For those patients that receive a transplant, the results are life changing. But sadly, many pass away hoping for an organ that never comes.
This past April 7th, 2019, on the one-year anniversary of the Humboldt Broncos bus crash, Canadians remembered the victims of that tragedy.
In honour of the Lethbridge player who signed up to become an organ donor mere months before his untimely death in that tragedy, there is a simple way to preserve the memory of those victims. It's called the Logan Boulet Effect.
Boulet's organs helped save six lives, and word of his act spurred an increase in organ donation registration in the immediate aftermath of the Broncos tragedy. To those recipient patients and their families, Logan Boulet is simply an angel.
Before the Humboldt tragedy, a living angel from Thompson, Inge Robinson, decided to give the gift of life by donating a kidney to her brother, Ken Leong. After finding out in 2017 that her brother needed a kidney, Inge qualified as a healthy match and donated her kidney in January 2018 at a hospital in London, England.
Inge does not suffer any adverse effects and is back managing projects at the Vale mines in Thompson, and is happy she made the decision to help her brother.
Inge is in the gallery today with her husband Mark Robinson and their son Michael. And she has also signed up to be an organ donor after her death, and encourages others to have their health card numbers ready, go online to signupforlife.ca, sign up to be a donor and be sure to inform your family about your decision.
Please join me in thanking Inge for her courage and sacrifice and her family for supporting and promoting organ and tissue donation here in Manitoba.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Mohinder Saran (The Maples): There is a rumour that the Premier (Mr. Pallister) is ready to call an early election.
Before he calls the election, he should look into the following matters, at least.
First, fulfill the promise of the last election that seniors will get a school tax rebate up to $2,300.
Second, introduce a compulsory second language other than English or French to graduate from high school.
* (13:40)
Third, involving the three levels of government to establish an appropriate system in the community centres so that people on social assistance can report, take trades training to develop skills, go about physical exercise and workouts and socialize to break isolation. This system will reduce crime.
Four, support culturally sensitive personal-care homes and culturally sensitive affordable housing for the seniors.
Thank you.
Mr. Greg Nesbitt (Riding Mountain): Joining us in the gallery today are members of the administration, faculty and staff from the University of Manitoba College of Nursing, which is celebrating a very special anniversary this year: 75 years of quality nursing education in this province.
We are very pleased to have Netha Dyck return to Manitoba to lead the college into the future with innovative programs provided in several locations across the province.
The College of Nursing has 9,251 alumni to its credit. Both undergraduate and postgraduate nursing programs are available, attracting local and international students and faculty. Leading age–edge research is undertaken within the college, and with the first doctoral program graduate in 2017, the college proudly promotes the development of outstanding scholars.
The nursing college held several special events last fall, taking the opportunity–reflect on the past and look towards the future. Activities included tours, receptions and a 75th Anniversary Dinner. A 75th anniversary legacy fund award has been established in order to provide scholarships for students in the College of Nursing.
Our government is pleased to continue to support the College of Nursing as we consider them a valuable partner in post-secondary education in Manitoba. We continue to support the need for sustainable nursing supply in order to meet the increasingly complex health-care needs of our population. Nurses are an integral and valued component of our care teams.
On behalf of all members, I would like to congratulate all former and current students, faculty and staff on reaching such a significant milestone. On behalf of all Manitobans that we proudly serve, we thank you for your continued excellence in nursing education and that–the role you undertake as one of our important health-care system's stakeholders.
We know that graduates from your nursing programs provide safe, compassionate, competent and ethical nursing care prepared to best meet the increasingly complex health-care needs of our residents throughout the province.
Thank you.
Introduction of Guests
Madam Speaker: Prior to oral questions, we have some guests in the gallery that I would like to introduce to you. We have seated in the public gallery, from St. Charles Catholic School, 20 grade 6 students under the direction of Justin Vechina and this group is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding).
On behalf of all honourable members here, we welcome you to the Manitoba Legislature.
Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): Too many families in Manitoba have stories about how this government has damaged the quality of health care that they're receiving in this province. We know that there are fewer nurses working in Winnipeg because of the cuts that this Premier (Mr. Pallister) has made. We also know that they've cut spots in nursing programs at Red River College and those nurses that do remain are being worked off their feet with successive shifts of mandatory overtime.
We know that the cuts will get worse later this year when the Premier closes the emergency rooms at Concordia and at Seven Oaks hospitals here in the city of Winnipeg. And we know, whether it's physiotherapy or occupational therapy, sleep apnea machines or other coverages under Pharmacare, that this Premier has done nothing but cut, cut, cut when it comes to health care in our province.
So I'd simply ask him to reconsider.
Will the Premier commit today not to close the emergency rooms at Seven Oaks and Concordia hospitals later this year?
Hon. Cameron Friesen (Minister of Health, Seniors and Active Living): The member is simply wrong. He understands that we are investing more than $400 million more in the provision of health care, including nurses, than the NDP ever did.
Beyond that, he also knows he's wrong when he cites figures. We know that when it comes to nurse overtime hours, they were more than 400,000 hours in the year we took government and a 26 per cent decrease since that time.
Madam Speaker, we are making good investments in health care. It is necessary; it is based on evidence; it is designed to get better health care sooner for all Manitobans.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a supplementary question.
Mr. Kinew: Well, it's getting more and more clear every day that even the minister has a tough time keeping a straight face when he's sent out here to share those kind of lines.
Madam Speaker, we know full well that this government just cuts, cuts, cuts when it comes to health care in the province of Manitoba.
We also know that that 2016 election platform is full of broken promises. Nowhere in the 2016 Progressive Conservative election platform did they promise to close the Concordia emergency room. They didn't talk about that in the last campaign, and yet here they are hurtling full speed ahead, at the expense of the member for Radisson (Mr. Teitsma), at the expense of the member for Rossmere (Mr. Micklefield), at the expense of the member for River East (Mrs. Cox), Madam Speaker. It's a very serious issue.
People in their constituencies are standing up and speaking with a united voice asking for this Premier to back off–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Kinew: –his plan for cuts. So I'd simply bring the voices of the people of the constituencies in northeast Winnipeg forward so that they can finally be heard.
Will the Premier please keep the emergency room at Concordia Hospital open?
Mr. Friesen: Madam Speaker, Monday is always a good opportunity for a refresher course. Let me refresh this for the member.
The changes we are bringing to Manitoba in health care are because they are necessary. For years and years Manitobans waited too long at the bottom of the list: 10th out of 10 when it came to wait times.
These changes are based on evidence–two separate reports–and those changes were actually solicited for by the previous NDP government. They had the report on the shelf. The only difference between them and us: we're actually relying on that evidence, moving forward and getting a better system–better aligned, better care for Manitobans.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a final supplementary.
Mr. Kinew: Allow me to clarify for the minister: the closure of the Concordia emergency room is absolutely not necessary.
Now, we know that emergency room wait times have been going up since this government started to close emergency rooms, Madam Speaker. If they were serious about reducing acute-care wait times, they would expand access to primary care.
But they're not expanding access to primary care in Manitoba. They are cutting primary care. Just recently the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Lamont) saw a clinic in his own constituency close: the Family Medical Centre. This follows closures at clinics right across the city, in every quadrant of Winnipeg, even cuts outside the Perimeter, Madam Speaker.
So I would simply ask the minister: Will he stand up today and admit they've made a mistake, and instead announce that they are not going to close the emergency rooms at Seven Oaks and Concordia hospitals and, hey, while they're at it, expand access to primary care in Manitoba?
Mr. Friesen: Madam Speaker, if you listen closely to the words of the leader of the opposition, his message is clear: go back. Go back in time. Go back.
Manitobans do not want to go back to the days of longer–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Friesen: –wait times, to the ways of–the days of not being able to find a family doctor.
Madam Speaker, we are making good investments, including the ones we made just a few weeks ago when we invested another–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Friesen: –$3.2 million in new neonatal-intensive-care-unit nurses, both at St. Boniface Hospital and Health Sciences Centre. It is only one example of the kinds of good investments we are making to strengthen our health-care system.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question.
Mr. Wab Kinew (Leader of the Official Opposition): Madam Speaker, it was very heartening in the media this morning to hear the story of Travis Veilleux. His courage and his resilience in overcoming his addiction to methamphetamines is certainly a glimmer of hope in what has been a very bleak few years with respect to the addictions crisis in Manitoba.
But we should keep in mind that it took Travis some 16 years to be able to overcome his addictions. And it shows the depths of the challenge that we face, but also hints at the level of commitment required to overcome such a thing.
So far, we know that the Premier (Mr. Pallister) and this government have not taken enough action to be able to combat the addictions crisis in Manitoba.
Will the Premier announce today that he is committed to investing new supports to address this long-standing and severe addictions crisis in Manitoba?
* (13:50)
Hon. Cameron Friesen (Minister of Health, Seniors and Active Living): Manitoba is facing challenges in respect of rising levels of the use of illicit drugs in our communities. It affects our neighbourhoods, it affects our families, it affects every Manitoban. We understand that; we recognize it. So do all the other provinces in Canada.
We are working collaboratively with other jurisdictions. We are bringing good investments like our RAAM clinics. If that member has something to offer, we are willing to hear about it.
We have said from the beginning these are complex issues. This government is taking action.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a supplementary question.
Mr. Kinew: When this minister was the minister of Finance two years ago, I called on him to act to address the meth crisis. He's done nothing, so it's a little surprising at this late hour to have him solicit opinions.
It's especially surprising just a week after we did bring forward a report calling on a full-throated response to the addictions crisis to the Premier. And what did the Premier do on that occasion, Madam Speaker? Well, he turned and he tossed the report on the ground. Apparently not a fan of qualitative research, the Premier is.
Well, hold on. He likes focus groups, but he doesn't like qualitative research when it suggests something opposite his ideological predispositions.
So I would simply call on the minister to announce today that they will set aside partisan ideology and commit to using harm reduction to fighting the addictions crisis in Manitoba, including the creation of a safe consumption site.
Mr. Friesen: Well, I will note for the member that another Winnipeg newspaper noted on the weekend that the NDP was completely misrepresenting the facts when it came to the reviews of that paper offered last week. The member for St. Johns (Ms. Fontaine) tried to present that as a master report. The media says she could not have been more wrong.
Madam Speaker, we know that the NDP pretend that there are magical and easy solutions to what faces our communities. We and all other providers know there is no such thing as an easy solution. Nevertheless, we are making good investments. We are making progress. And there is more to do.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a final supplementary.
Mr. Kinew: So just quickly, the report said that both providers and problematic drug users supported the creation of a safe consumption site, Madam Speaker.
I'm just going to table a document here I'd like the Health Minister to explain. He's talking about action on the addictions crisis. This is a FIPPA request that has just been fulfilled. It shows that during the rise of the addictions crisis in Manitoba, with a particular emphasis on methamphetamines–the meth crisis is what I'm talking about here–during this period, this government has not increased funding to the Addictions Foundation of Manitoba. Striking, Madam Speaker.
Again, the funding from 2017-18 to 2018 to–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Kinew: –2019, what is the increase? The adjustments: nil, Madam Speaker. No increases in funding for the Addictions Foundation of Manitoba during an addictions crisis.
Lives are on the line, Madam Speaker. The backbenchers can chirp all they want, but they know that this government has an abysmal record when it comes to fighting a severe public-health crisis, which is addictions.
Will the government, once he's done–once this minister's done explaining–
Madam Speaker: The member's time has expired. [interjection] Order.
Mr. Friesen: Madam Speaker, I do not have sufficient time to speak to the number of ways in which our government is investing and responding, like additional beds at HSC, like additional women's treatment beds at AFM in Winnipeg, like the creation of five new RAAM clinics.
But one thing is clear: one other person made a comment this last weekend in Lethbridge about the issue of illicit drugs in our community, and she said: There are no easy fixes. You are living in a fantasy world if you think you can unlock this with one or two easy things.
Who said that? The NDP candidate for Lethbridge. [interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): Madam Speaker, it appears the minister is trying to pull a bait and switch when it comes to his education review.
Earlier this year, the minister said the review would not be a financial review. He said: We need to figure out first what the system is going to look like before we predetermine how we're going to pay for it.
Yet, now one of the key areas of focus for his review will, apparently, be funding.
Why has the minister misled Manitobans about the nature of his education review?
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, we made it clear when the K-to-12 commission was launched that the commission would not be developing a new funding formula. We do need to see what the system is going to look like before we determine how we're going to pay for it. That just makes sense.
Now, of course, the commissioners–co-chair, Mr. Manness, did say, I understand from media reports, that if individuals want to come forward and bring their ideas in terms of what a funding system would look like, he's not going to shut them down or not let them speak to the issue. That would be something, of course, the NDP would do–not let people speak to something that matters to them.
People want to make submissions on that, they certainly can, but it's not within the mandate of the K-to-12 commission to bring forward a new funding formula. That was confirmed by Mr. Manness on the weekend.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Concordia, on a supplementary question.
Mr. Wiebe: Not only is this minister's review not going to shut down the conversation about funding, he, in fact, made it a focus of the review itself. In fact, it is labelled as focus area 6, funding, and it includes direct criticism of the approach to education funding that we have here in Manitoba.
Minister went to great lengths to try and convince Manitobans that his review would not be a funding review, and yet now the minister wants to pull all control back into his office to control the funding here in this province.
Why has the minister misled Manitobans about the scope and nature of his education review?
Mr. Goertzen: Madam Speaker, I know that the member opposite doesn't like consultation. He is doing everything that he can to try to throw up roadblocks and try to discredit the commission. He doesn't want to hear from Manitobans. He believes that there's only one solution to every problem, and that's to throw more money at it.
We believe that we need to hear from Manitobans–teachers, parents, students and others who are interested in the education system. I'm glad to see on Friday the commission has launched a series of public consultations. They're going to have their online consultation launched tomorrow, I understand, in media reports. And we look forward to hearing from Manitobans on this important issue.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Concordia, on a final supplementary.
Mr. Wiebe: Madam Speaker, the minister already took the scissors to the Health department and the health system in this province. Now he's trying to make the same cuts in the education system. He wants to orchestrate an education review that directly attacks the funding model here in this province, after saying that wasn't what it was all about.
The sad fact is that the minister has already made up his mind about cuts to education in this province. Funding has–already not keeping up with inflation, let alone the growing school population. Dozens of school divisions have already seen their funding reduced.
Why is the minister looking for more power to cut schools in this province?
Mr. Goertzen: Madam Speaker, as already described by the Health Minister, there is more funding in health care than there's ever been before–$400 million more.
Not only is there more money in health care than there's ever been before, there's more money in education than there's ever been before–an additional $26 million per year than the NDP ever spent.
Far from cutting anything, it's like we've turned on the money machine, Madam Speaker. There is more money going into each of these different departments than there's ever been before under the NDP.
But, of course, it's not just about money–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Goertzen: –it is ultimately about results, and that is why we have the commission, Madam Speaker. We want to ensure that we're getting results in the education system. That's why we're going to consult with Manitobans. We're going to hear from them. We'll hear from teachers, from parents and from students because, ultimately, we want to get better results for Manitoba students.
Ms. Amanda Lathlin (The Pas): The Pallister government move to block funding was about only one thing: cutting costs in the child-welfare system.
This year's budget Estimates show a $40-million cut to the budget for maintenance, which requires significant new resources every year just to keep up. Important services, such as the newcomer report unit–support unit has been cut.
* (14:00)
Why is the minister cutting important supports to Manitoba families?
Hon. Heather Stefanson (Minister of Families): Well, Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question from the member opposite but, in fact, in her preamble she is wrong.
In fact, when it comes to the block funding we are offering, and there will be available to those CFS agencies, some $15 million more, Madam Speaker. And we are continuing to work with the authorities on moving that very important issue forward.
It's very important that the authorities, the–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mrs. Stefanson: –agencies have the ability to pursue preventative matters, Madam Speaker, when it comes–and try and reduce the apprehension of children in our province. And we will continue to work with the authorities and stakeholders in the community to ensure that that happens.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for The Pas, on a supplementary question.
Ms. Lathlin: It's clear that the minister moved to block funding without working 'adequickly' with agencies and partners in the child-welfare system. That's why we've heard from many leaderships and many agencies. They are concerned with how they deal with the increasing costs in the future. They are also concerned that a temporary increase in placements will stretch their resources beyond what they can sustain.
Will the minister reconsider her approach to block funding to ensure agencies aren't forced to cut valuable programs and supports?
Mrs. Stefanson: Well, Madam Speaker, we heard loud and clear from communities across this province that the perverse incentivization of the apprehension of children based on the previous funding model was not working. The status quo is not an option, we heard loud and clear.
So we acted on that. We have been working with Leadership Council, we've been working with the authorities to ensure that we deliver those funding resources to those communities, Madam Speaker. And we will continue to work with those individuals to ensure that the funding is there for the children who need it the most.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for The Pas, on a final supplementary.
Ms. Amanda Lathlin (The Pas): The minister just wants to cut costs and ignore the damage caused by these cuts.
That's why the minister cut the newcomer unit. This unit helped our newcomers through complex situations to ensure that their families stayed together. It is concerning to see that the minister is cutting an important unit in the child and family services system, a unit that helped keep children out of care.
Will the minister reinstate the newcomer unit today?
Ekosi.
Hon. Heather Stefanson (Minister of Families): I appreciate the question.
And, of course, we care very deeply about newcomers to our province and we welcome them here, Madam Speaker. And I will ensure that those resources are there for those newcomers when they come.
Mr. Dougald Lamont (Leader of the Second Opposition): Madam Speaker, we recently marked the four-year anniversary of the Premier's (Mr. Pallister) article in a community newspaper: A plan is in the works.
It's an evergreen article, Madam Speaker, because even today it's hard to know what this government's plan is. There's a lot of motion, but not much direction, and it's going to take the next government to–some time to dig their way out of the pit of despair this Premier has created. What we see as being the backbone of our province–health, infrastructure and education–this Premier sees as costs to be cut.
Manitobans are worried because they don't know when these cuts will end, and the Premier himself seems to be confused, as he's endlessly reversed himself on issue after issue. He promised municipalities a fair say, but refuses to meet with them, and apparently, will only address issues once they've gone to the media.
Can the Premier tell the House why he would prefer to fight with municipalities than keep his promise to give them a fair say?
Hon. Jeff Wharton (Minister of Municipal Relations): I'll answer the end of that question, I think, because I think that was the question.
The answer he's looking for is simply this: our government has expanded fair say, Madam Speaker, to all 137 municipalities, including the City of Winnipeg. We continue to have open and honest dialogue with all our municipalities as we continue to grow this great province we live in.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Second Opposition, on a supplementary question. [interjection] Order.
Mr. Lamont: The Premier is wonderfully creative, Madam Speaker, as are his ministers, especially when it comes to coming up with statistics that are divorced from reality. He and his Finance Minister have repeatedly claimed the City of Winnipeg receives the most generous funding of any municipality, but was very quickly proven wrong in the article I table now, which shows that per capital dollars–per capita dollars are declining, capital funding is declining and that Winnipeg is at the bottom of the pack, with Regina, Calgary, Edmonton, Montreal all receiving more funding.
Recently the minister–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Lamont: –and his backbenchers have taken to insulting the City of Winnipeg and its staff, councillors and mayor, and the media, on Twitter and in publicly released letters, all while there's a bill about municipal harassment and bullying before the House.
Instead of unleashing backbenchers on social media, will the Premier stop underfunding and bullying our municipalities, who, unlike this government, actually want to continue having services for Manitobans, and give them the fair say they promised? [interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Wharton: Certainly, I'll inform the House, in particular the member from St. Boniface, that approximately two and a half weeks ago, Madam Speaker, we supported 136 municipalities with more unconditional funding to the tune of $10 million for all the municipalities outside the City of Winnipeg. I can tell you that that money is unconditional, and those communities can now spend that money on where they feel it can be best invested in their communities.
And regarding the City of Winnipeg, we are pleased to announce again–and the member should know this–a 35 per cent increase in capital funding this year alone.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Second Opposition, on a final supplementary.
Mr. Lamont: The Premier (Mr. Pallister) has been talking a lot about calling an election this summer. He's been monologuing it, but he hasn't been able to keep his story straight, and it's ironic or it's strange that he would want to call an election having–leading up to it by picking fights with just about everyone, Madam Speaker.
The City of Winnipeg has a $40-million hole in its budget thanks to this government tearing up its agreements, and this is a habit, Madam Speaker. This government has broken promises on most of their platform, agreements with municipalities, Hydro and the MMF, the federal government, the Kelvin gym, community organizations, child care, seniors, front-line service providers, just to name a few. [interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Lamont: So the Minister of Municipal Relations so–went so far out last week as to try to take credit for $40 million in gas‑tax funding from the federal government.
Why is this government following in the footsteps of the NDP, taking credit for others' work while blaming others for their own mistakes?
Mr. Wharton: Certainly, we're pleased to, last week, again talk to the City of Winnipeg as we do on a weekly basis with our senior staff, and Madam Speaker, we are working together to ensure that Winnipeggers continue to get the very generous support–matter of fact, the most generous of any other jurisdiction across Canada.
Madam Speaker, we–again, I'd mentioned the 35 per cent increase in capital infrastructure. We also, too, as well, provided almost $49 million in new road construction–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Wharton: –this year alone, Madam Speaker.
We're proud of the investments we're making in the City of Winnipeg. We're certainly wanting to move on, and I know that the City of Winnipeg as well, for the betterment of Winnipeggers, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Tom Lindsey (Flin Flon): Manitoba's Employment Standards office protects vulnerable workers and ensures that unscrupulous employers follow employment laws. In 2016, the office conducted 439 proactive investigations into workplaces that are subject to abuse, such as child talent agencies and foreign-worker recruiters.
Last year, the minister dismantled the proactive investigation unit of Employment Standards.
Why has the minister made this foolish decision? [interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Hon. Blaine Pedersen (Minister of Growth, Enterprise and Trade): The previous government was all about numbers. The more money they spent, they thought the better results they'd get; the more investigations they thought they could conduct, the better results they thought they could get.
What we've done is a very proactive thing where we base our inspections on actual cases where there needs to be inspection, rather than doing a large number–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order.
Mr. Pedersen: –to make it look better.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
* (14:10)
Madam Speaker: Order.
I'm going to call for some respect being shown in this Chamber. We are supposed to be a democratic institution. We are supposed to be listening to each other as questions are being asked and answered. The amount of heckling and the noise that is increasing this afternoon is not moving us towards accomplishing those in a very functional way.
So I would ask all members to please be respectful of those that are asking and answering. We do have students in the gallery today, and I would just say that this doesn't always set a–never sets a good example for those that are watching oral questions.
So I would ask for everybody's co-operation, please.
The honourable member for Flin Flon, on a supplementary question.
Mr. Lindsey: Manitoba's Employment Standards office actually was protecting vulnerable workers.
In 2016, the division had an objective to protect children from exploitation in the modelling and talent industry, and to protect foreign workers and employers through regulation of 'recuters'–recruiters. That objective has disappeared from the minister's annual report, and I'll table a freedom of information response that shows the minister has dismantled the unit that proactively investigates these areas.
Why has the minister ripped up protections for vulnerable children and newcomers?
Mr. Pedersen: Madam Speaker, it's odd that the NDP would talk about protecting vulnerable people when we know very well that they did a very poor job within their own caucus, in terms of harassment.
We can–this government continues to work to protect workers all across Manitoba, no matter their age, their sex or whatever needs to be done to protect these people. And we will always work to protect vulnerable Manitobans, unlike the previous NDP government.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Flin Flon, on a final supplementary.
Mr. Lindsey: Wow. That's quite the response to children and vulnerable workers.
Manitoba used to proactively search for employment-standard violations against those in the highest risk of abuse, including child talent agencies and foreign workers. The minister has decided to save a couple of dollars, because he's no longer going to look into those areas. It's foolish, it's misguided, and it's letting down children and newcomers to this country.
Will the minister come to his senses, reverse this decision and do proactive inspections?
Mr. Pedersen: Madam Speaker, maybe the member missed it, but we did introduce an online course for safety for youth workers to make sure that they're properly trained, that they know what their rights and responsibilities are, and that was never done before. Instead, there was a director that signed off at them, but there was no training.
There is training now online. They take an online course before they can apply for a job, and that works best for both employees–youth employees–and for employers.
Mr. Rick Wowchuk (Swan River): Our government's made-in-Manitoba climate green plan is recognized as the best in Canada for both the environment and the economy. One of the hallmarks of our plan is a commitment to the conservation and enhancement of Manitoba's natural beauty.
Earlier today, the Premier (Mr. Pallister) and Minister of Sustainable Development made an exciting announcement about our government's Conservation Trust.
Can the minister please share the details of this announcement with the House?
Hon. Rochelle Squires (Minister of Sustainable Development): I thank my colleague for asking that question today. It indeed was an honour to be there for this historic funding announcement with the Premier of Manitoba, along with many of my colleagues from the Manitoba government, to announce $102 million into the Conservation Trust this morning.
This first round will provide funding for 41 projects, with a total of over $2.2 million across four distinct program areas, which include watersheds, habitat, wildlife, connecting people to nature and innovation and conservation planning.
I'd like to congratulate all the funding recipients and all the partners with the Conservation Trust. This offers a lasting approach to funding conservation and helping Manitoba become the cleanest, greenest province in the country.
Ms. Judy Klassen (Kewatinook): Madam Speaker, this government had the opportunity to differentiate themselves from the former government, but it seems that they, too, utilize the NDP's playbook.
Valid concerns exist with respect to the silica mine. The facts are that answers aren't being provided to those concerns. Someone who had the previous authority to sign and enter to agreements that had never 'beencome' public until recently was hired by this government.
Wouldn't it have been more ethical to hire an arm's-length person to enter into consultations with people?
Hon. Rochelle Squires (Minister of Sustainable Development): I thank the member for this question, as it gives me an opportunity to provide an update on–in regards to where the government is at in terms of licensing this project.
The proponents that applied for a licence in December, we've gone through a full section 35 consultation process, which is wrapping up, as well as a full environmental review process that has been ongoing since we received the application. There will be another opportunity for the public to submit comments on this project to the proponent on Wednesday evening, and we are continuing to work through this very stringent environmental process.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Kewatinook, on a supplementary question.
Ms. Judy Klassen (Kewatinook): We have no confidence in this minister. She has not demonstrated that she will work to protect my people, our lands, our air nor our waters.
Canadian Premium Sand is an emergent company in the silica sand industry. What assurances do local residences–residents have that the promises that are being made by that company will actually happen if CPS sells its business off?
Will this minister ensure that any new purchaser would uphold the promises made today? Will the commitments made today be–by CPS be grandfathered?
Hon. Rochelle Squires (Minister of Sustainable Development): Well, Madam Speaker, our government is committed to a stringent environmental review process which ensures oversight after a project does receive a licence. We do continuously monitor and work very collaboratively so that there is ongoing compliance with all the conditions that would be set out in a licence.
And, of course, I am speaking hypothetical, because Canadian Premium Sand does not have a licence yet. They are still working through the process. But I can inform in the House that we have had very positive conversations with Chief Barker and chief and council from Hollow Water First Nation and many other First Nations groups in the area who have been working towards the–with the proponent and were–and helping government get the information that we need to process–to go through the environmental review process.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Kewatinook, on a final supplementary.
Environmental Licence and Reporting
Ms. Klassen: For a project to take place anywhere in our province, its residents have a basic right to be informed. CPS has said that it will resubmit the N 43-101 technical report and the hydro-geological report.
This minister responsible is for–is responsible for ensuring due diligence and transparency. What other reports have yet to be submitted and where are we in the process of the environmental licence? Will she issue the licence without giving people–with giving–without giving people time to read and respond to the reports? Will she ensure that those reports are made public?
Ms. Squires: Well, Madam Speaker, I would like to point out for the member's benefit–and all members of the Legislature's benefit–that all the reports and all the information that we gathered in regards to this project is posted on the public registry, and she's certainly welcome to go and read that.
And we are working with all the resource groups in the community and throughout Manitoba, listening to what they have to say. As I had indicated earlier, there will be another public meeting on Wednesday evening, and we will be reviewing all the information. As well, every other proponent in the province reviewed this information before a licencing decision is made.
* (14:20)
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): An investigation into the Independent Investigation Unit has revealed some concerns in the last days. The IIU's recent investigation has led to a disagreement between the IIU and the Winnipeg Police Service on whether police must turn over cadets' notes under the current legislation and regulation under–governing the IIU. The minister's review of The Police Services Act should be tasked with reviewing this apparent gap.
Has the minister's review of The Police Services Act begun? If not, when will their review begin and will he provide a date of when it will be completed?
Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I do appreciate this question from the member.
We certainly are working and finalizing the terms of reference. I will remind the minister–or, the member, sorry–opposite, that we did bring in some new people in terms of staffing here, and a new associate deputy minister with many years of policing, and he has offered his expertise in terms of developing the terms of reference. So we thank him for his work in this regard. And certainly, in terms of the Police Commission, we've put some new people in place there and we have great work going on in terms of the commission with David Asper at the helm.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. Johns, on a supplementary question.
Clarity on Independent Oversight
Ms. Fontaine: The ability of the investigation unit to acquire needed documentation is paramount to its effectiveness. The minister has a responsibility to ensure this occurs.
Currently, it has been stated cadets are not considered police officers, but instead are civilian employees which exempts the release of their documentation to the IIU. There should be greater certainty and clarity on these matters, Madam Speaker.
Will the minister ensure that his forthcoming review clearly defines who is subjected to independent oversight?
Mr. Cullen: Clearly, the member's question speaks to the point.
The NDP legislation left gaps in it. Clearly, that's why we said we would conduct a complete review of the public–Police Services Act, and we're going to be doing that. It will be a comprehensive review. We will be engaging Manitobans to clean up the mess they left.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. Johns, on a final supplementary.
Transparency and Accountability
Ms. Fontaine: I remind the minister it's under–our government that established the IIU.
Police Chief Danny Smyth has said–[interjection]
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order.
Ms. Fontaine: Police Chief Danny Smyth has said he is open to addressing and resolving this apparent legislative gap in The Police Services Act.
It is important that all of those who enforce our laws, Madam Speaker, be held to the same level of accountability and transparency. Will the minister ensure his review addresses the apparent legislative gap to ensure accountability across all Winnipeg Police Services employees?
Miigwech.
Mr. Cullen: Madam Speaker, we are finalizing the terms of reference.
We think we have a comprehensive review under way. We will be engaging Manitobans, and for what the NDP did not get right, we will get it done. And we'll get the job done, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Derek Johnson (Interlake): My constituents in the communities of St. Laurent, Inwood and Teulon received some great news a few weeks ago when the damaged portions of highways 415 and 416 were finally reopened after being closed for eight years.
The community has been waiting so long for this reopening that I was still a councillor with the RM of St. Laurent when we began lobbying the 'forner'–former NDP government to get these roads repaired.
Can the Minister of Infrastructure please tell the House why it is so important for our government to get this critical road-repair project completed?
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order.
Hon. Ron Schuler (Minister of Infrastructure): Well, Madam Speaker, I'd like to thank the member for the Interlake for that question. In fact, no one knows better than the member for the Interlake the impact it had when highways 415 and 416 were washed out in 2011, 2014, and the former NDP did nothing. They wouldn't listen. School buses had to be rerouted; students were forced to attend different schools; first responders were hampered.
Madam Speaker, our government was listening and I would say congratulations to the member for Interlake for getting the job done. Now the road's open and people can have access once again.
Where the NDP failed, we succeeded, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: The time for oral questions has expired.
Madam Speaker: And I have a ruling for the House.
Following the prayer on March 15th, 2019, the honourable member for Concordia (Mr. Wiebe) raised a matter of privilege regarding a letter sent to the Speaker of the House by the Leader of the Official Opposition in 2017 regarding the need for the Assembly to include a treaty land acknowledgement in the operation of the House.
He concluded his remarks by moving, and I quote: That the issue of treaty land acknowledgement be immediately referred to the Rules Committee for consideration and that the committee report back to the House at the earliest opportunity. End quote.
I took this matter under advisement in order to consult the procedural authorities. I will note that I will be addressing this matter first from a procedural perspective, as that is my primary responsibility in such matters, and then I will address the issue from an operational perspective.
Before I proceed any further, however, I will offer general caution that members should take great care when raising matters in the House relating to the Speaker. As noted on page 620 of the Third Edition of House of Commons Procedure and Practice by Bosc and Gagnon, reflections must not be cast in debate on the conduct of the Speaker and other presiding officers.
It is unacceptable to question the integrity and impartiality of a presiding officer and if such comments are made, the Speaker will interrupt the member and may request that the remarks be withdrawn.
As the House knows, in order for the matter raised to be ruled in order as a prima facie case of privilege, members must demonstrate both that the issue has been raised at the earliest opportunity while also providing sufficient evidence to establish that the privileges of the House have been breached.
Regarding the condition of timeliness, the honourable member for Concordia stated that he raised this matter as soon as he could in the House. However, he also stated that the basis for this matter of privilege is a letter sent in 2017, which makes it difficult to see how he could not have raised this issue earlier.
With this in mind, I must rule that the honourable member did not meet the test of timeliness in this matter.
Regarding the second condition of whether a prima facie case of privilege has been established, I must respectfully inform the House that a matter concerning the methods by which the House proceeds in the conduct of business is a matter of order, not privilege.
Joseph Maingot, in the Second Edition of Parliamentary Privilege in Canada states, on page 14, that, and I quote: Allegations of breach of privilege by a member in the House that amount to complaints about procedures and practices in the House are, by their very nature, matters of order. End of quote.
He also states, on page 223 of the same edition, and I quote, "A breach of the Standing Orders or a failure to follow an established practice would invoke a 'point of order' rather than a 'question of privilege'". End quote.
On this basis, I must rule that the honourable member does not have a prima facie case of privilege.
However, I would conclude my remarks on this matter by stating that there is–that if there is a willingness amongst all three House leaders to consider the question of some sort of treaty land acknowledgement in the operation of this House, I would encourage them to arrange a meeting to discuss that topic.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (Official Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, respectfully and ever so gently, I challenge the ruling.
Madam Speaker: The ruling of the Chair has been challenged.
Voice Vote
Madam Speaker: All those in favour of the ruling, please say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Madam Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Madam Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it.
Recorded Vote
Ms. Fontaine: A recorded vote, please.
Madam Speaker: A recorded vote having been called, call in the members.
Order, please.
The one hour provided for the ringing of the division bells has expired. I am therefore directing that the division bells be turned off and the House proceed to the vote.
The question before the House is shall the ruling of the Chair be sustained.
* (15:30)
Division
A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Yeas
Bindle, Clarke, Cox, Cullen, Ewasko, Fielding, Goertzen, Graydon, Guillemard, Helwer, Isleifson, Johnson, Johnston, Lagassé, Lagimodiere, Martin, Mayer, Michaleski, Micklefield, Morley‑Lecomte, Nesbitt, Pedersen, Piwniuk, Reyes, Schuler, Smith (Southdale), Smook, Squires, Stefanson, Teitsma, Wharton, Wowchuk, Yakimoski.
Nays
Allum, Altemeyer, Fontaine, Gerrard, Kinew, Klassen, Lamont, Lamoureux, Lathlin, Lindsey, Maloway, Marcelino (Tyndall Park), Smith (Point Douglas), Swan, Wiebe.
Deputy Clerk (Mr. Rick Yarish): Yeas 33, Nays 15.
Madam Speaker: The ruling of the Chair has been sustained.
Mr. Cliff Graydon (Emerson): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
And the background to this petition is as follows:
The loss of sleep associated with the beginning of daylight savings time has serious consequences for physical and mental health and has been linked to increase in traffic accidents and workplace injuries.
(2) According to the Manitoba Public Insurance news release, collision data collected in 2014 showed that there was a 20 per cent increase in collisions in Manitoba roadways following the spring daylight savings time change when compared to all other Mondays in 2014.
(3) Daylight savings time is associated with a decrease in productivity the day after clocks are turned forward with no corresponding increase in productivity when the clocks are turned back.
(4) There is no conclusive evidence that daylight savings time is effective in reducing energy consumption.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to amend The Official Time Act to abolish daylight savings time in Manitoba effective November 4, 2019, resulting in Manitoba remaining on Central Standard Time throughout the year and in perpetuity.
And this petition has been signed by Roxann Godré [phonetic], Art Godré [phonetic], Matthew Prechuck [phonetic] and many, many more fine Manitobans.
Madam Speaker: In accordance with our rule 133(6), when petitions are read they are deemed to be received by the House.
Mr. James Allum (Fort Garry-Riverview): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Early learning and child-care programs in Manitoba require increased funding to stabilize and support a system that is in jeopardy.
(2) Licensed, not-for-profit early-learning and child-care programs have received no new operating funding in over three years, while the cost of living has continued to increase annually.
(3) High-quality licensed child care has a lasting, positive impact on children's development, is a fundamental need for Manitoba families and contributes to a strong economy.
(4) The financial viability of these programs is in jeopardy if they cannot meet the fiscal responsibility of achieving a balanced budget as all operating expenses continue to increase.
(5) The workforce shortage of trained early childhood educators has continued to increase. Quality child care is dependent on a workforce that is skilled and adequately remunerated.
(6) Accessible, affordable and quality early learning and child-care programs must be available to all children and families in Manitoba.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to increase funding for licensed, not-for-profit child‑care programs in recognition of the importance of early learning and child care in Manitoba, which will also improve quality and stability in the workforce.
Madam Speaker, this petition is signed by Paula Rozenman, Melanie Leroux [phonetic], Barbara Hotz, and many other Manitobans.
Mr. Rob Altemeyer (Wolseley): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. The background of this petition is as follows:
(1) On March 11th, 2019, the Manitoba government announced steps to address the sustainability of the Lake Winnipeg fishery. As part of this initiative, the Manitoba government offered the option of voluntary individual quota entitlement buybacks to fishers working on Lake Winnipeg. Fishers were given until March 21st, 2019 (11 days, eight business days) to decide whether to voluntarily surrender their individual quota entitlement. The deadline for completed documentation is March 31st, 2019 (21 days or 15 business days). The quota entitlement surrender is permanent.
(2) The Manitoba department Sustainable Development states that it is committed to "develop comprehensive shared management strategies in consultation with First Nations, Metis and licensed hunters and anglers to give local communities a greater voice and ensure long-term sustainability of our fish and wildlife populations."
(3) The Manitoba government did not consult with fishers prior to the March 11th announcement. A 30-day consultation period was announced at the same time as the voluntary quota entitlement buyback initiative.
(4) Fishers did not receive copies of the documentation and data regarding the state fish stocks in Lake Winnipeg that were the basis of the Manitoba government's decision to proceed with the quota entitlement buyback initiative.
(5) The quota entitlement buyback will have a significant impact on the economy and well-being of the Fisher River Cree Nation and other First Nations communities.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
(1) In support of the Fisher River Cree Nation, we request that the government of Manitoba begin a process of consultation with indigenous peoples about the future of commercial fisheries on Lake Winnipeg.
This petition is signed by Fred Cross, Matthew Delaronde, Emily Ready and many more.
Mr. Tom Lindsey (Flin Flon): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba. The background to the–to this petition is as follows:
(1) Access to quality health care is a fundamental right of all Manitobans, no matter where they live.
(2) The Premier has slashed budgets and cancelled projects for northern communities, making it harder for families to get the primary health care they need.
(3) The budget of the northern regional health authority has been slashed by over $6 million, which has negatively affected doctor retention programs and the northern patient transport program.
* (15:40)
(4) With limited services in the North, the Premier is forcing families and seniors to travel further for the health care they need.
(5) On November 6, 2018, the northern regional health authority announced that obstetric delivery services at the Flin Flon General Hospital would be suspended, with no discussion regarding when they will be reinstated.
(6) The result of this decision is that mothers in Flin Flon and the surrounding area will have to travel at least an hour and a half to The Pas, creating unnecessary risk for mothers and babies.
(7) The people of Flin Flon are concerned for the health and safety of mothers-to-be and their babies, including the extra physical and financial stress that will be placed upon them by this decision of the provincial government.
(8) There has been no commitment from this provincial government that mothers and their escorts who have to travel to The Pas will be covered by the northern patient transport program.
(9) Flin Flon General Hospital is a regional hub that serves several communities on both sides of the Manitoba-Saskatchewan border.
(10) Because this provincial government has refused to invest in much-needed health-care services in The Pas, the hospital in The Pas may not be able to handle the extra workload created by this decision.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to reinstate obstetric delivery services at Flin Flon General Hospital and work with the government of Saskatchewan and the federal government to ensure obstetric services continue to be available on a regional basis.
And this petition, Madam Speaker, has been signed by many Manitobans.
Ms. Flor Marcelino (Logan): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
The background to the petition is as follows:
(1) Early learning and child-care programs in Manitoba require increased funding to stabilize and support a system that is in jeopardy.
(2) Licensed, not-for-profit early learning and child-care programs have received no new operating funding in over three years, while the cost of living has continued to increase annually.
(3) High-quality licensed child care has a lasting, positive impact on children's development, is a fundamental need for Manitoba families and contributes to a strong economy.
(4) The financial viability of these programs is in jeopardy if they cannot meet the fiscal responsibility of achieving a balanced budget, as all operating expenses continue to increase.
(5) The workforce shortage of trained early childhood educators has continued to increase; quality child care is dependent on a workforce that is skilled and adequately remunerated.
(6) Accessible, affordable and quality early learning and child-care programs must be available to all children and families in Manitoba.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to increase funding for licensed, not-for-profit child-care programs in recognition of the importance of early learning and child care in Manitoba, which will also improve quality and stability in the workplace.
Signed by many, many Manitobans.
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
And the background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Early learning and child-care programs in Manitoba require increased funding to stabilize and support a system that is in jeopardy.
(2) Licensed, not-for-profit early learning and child-care programs have received no new operating funding in over three years, while the cost of living has continued to increase annually.
(3) High-quality licensed child care has a lasting, positive impact on children's development, is a fundamental need for Manitoba families and contributes to a strong economy.
(4) The financial viability of these programs is in jeopardy if they cannot meet the fiscal responsibility of achieving a balanced budget, as all operating expenses continue to increase.
(5) The workforce shortage of trained early childhood educators has continued to increase; quality child care is dependent on a workforce that is skilled and adequately remunerated.
(6) Accessible, affordable and quality early learning and child-care programs must be available to all children and families in Manitoba.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to increase funding for licensed, not-for-profit child‑care programs in recognition of the importance of early learning and child care in Manitoba, which will also improve quality and stability in the workforce.
This was signed by Veronica Berg, Richard Ponslip [phonetic] and Samantha Sommerfield, together with other fine Manitobans.
Mrs. Bernadette Smith (Point Douglas): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Addictions are a health and social problem that require co-ordinated responses from the health‑care, social services, education and justice systems.
(2) It is well known that the number of people addicted to alcohol, drugs and other substances is on the rise in Manitoba, with a notable increase in use of methamphetamine and opioids, two highly addictive and very destructive drugs.
(3) Between April 2015 and April 2018, drug abuse and alcohol abuse were two of the top three risk factors identified by the community mobilization Westman HUB when dealing with persons with acutely elevated risk.
(4) Recent Brandon Police Service annual reports show a steady increase in calls for service for crimes against property and person.
(5) In Brandon and western Manitoba, individuals seeking addictions treatment and the families trying to help them do not have local access to the services or supports they need.
(6) There is no publicly available, centralized list of addictions facilities in Manitoba.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
(1) To request that the provincial government consider establishing a cross-departmental team to provide leadership on a culturally appropriate, co‑ordinated response to the growing addictions crisis in our province that includes an aggressive, widespread education campaign on the dangers of use–of using methamphetamine and opioids, along with addictions education for front-line medical staff in health-care facilities.
* (15:50)
(2) To request that the provincial government consider providing additional supports or services in Brandon and western Manitoba across the continuum of care, including acute responses, detoxification, long-term rehabilitation, transitional housing and support for managing co-occurring disorders.
(3) To request that the Minister of Health, Seniors and Active Living consider establishing a publicly available inventory of all addiction facilities in Manitoba.
(4) To request that the Minister of Health, Seniors and Active Living consider providing support for the families of people struggling with addictions, including counselling, patient navigation and advocacy, and direct access to free 'naloxalone'.
This is signed by Pat Simmons, Helen Dya [phonetic], Sharon Oakden, and many, many other Manitobans.
Mr. Dougald Lamont (Leader of the Second Opposition): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly. To the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba:
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Early learning and child-care programs in Manitoba require increased funding to stabilize and support a system that is in jeopardy.
(2) Licensed, not-for-profit early learning and child-care programs have received no new operating funding in over three years, while the cost of living has continued to increase annually.
(3) High-quality licensed child care has a lasting, positive impact on children's development, is a fundamental need for Manitoba families and contributes to a strong economy.
(4) The financial viability of these programs is in jeopardy if they cannot meet the fiscal responsibility of achieving a balanced budget, as all operating expenses continue to increase.
(5) The workforce shortage of trained early childhood educators has continued to increase; quality child care is dependent on a workforce that is skilled and adequately remunerated.
(6) Accessible, affordable and quality early learning and child-care programs must be available to all children and families in Manitoba.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to increase funding for licensed, not-for-profit child‑care programs in recognition of the importance of early learning and child care in Manitoba, which will also improve quality and stability in the workforce.
Signed Carl Lundgren, Evan Andrew, Mandy Young and many others.
Mr. Andrew Swan (Minto): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Early learning and child-care programs in Manitoba require increased funding to stabilize and support a system that is in jeopardy.
(2) Licensed, not-for-profit early learning and child-care programs have received no new operating funding in over three years, while the cost of living has continued to increase annually.
(3) High-quality licensed child care has a lasting, positive impact on children's development, is a fundamental need for Manitoba families and contributes to a strong economy.
(4) The financial viability of these programs is in jeopardy if they cannot meet the fiscal responsibility of achieving a balanced budget, as all operating expenses continue to increase.
(5) The workforce shortage of trained early childhood educators has continued to increase; quality child care is dependent on a workforce that is skilled and adequately remunerated.
(6) Accessible, affordable and quality early learning and child-care programs must be available to all children and families in Manitoba.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to increase funding for licensed, not-for-profit child-care programs in recognition of the importance of early learning and child care in Manitoba, which will also improve quality and stability in the workforce.
And, Madam Speaker, this petition is signed by Dawn Campbell, Vijay Chandrasekaran, Savanna Clifford and many other Manitobans.
Mr. Matt Wiebe (Concordia): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
And the background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Early learning and child-care programs in Manitoba require increased funding to stabilize and support a system that is in jeopardy.
(2) Licensed, not-for-profit early learning and child-care programs have received no new operating funding in over three years, while the cost of living has continued to increase annually.
(3) High-quality licensed child care has a lasting, positive impact on our children's development, is a fundamental need for Manitoba families and contributes to a strong economy.
(4) The financial viability of these programs is in jeopardy if they cannot meet the fiscal responsibility of achieving a balanced budget, as all operating expenses continue to increase.
(5) The workforce shortage of trained early childhood educators has continued to increase; quality child care is dependent on a workforce that is skilled and adequately remunerated.
(6) Accessible, affordable and quality early learning and child-care programs must be available to all children and families in Manitoba.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to increase funding for licensed, not-for-profit child-care programs in recognition of the importance of early learning and child care in Manitoba, which will also improve quality and stability in the workforce.
And this petition is signed by Marilon Alviz, Meghan Carr, Andrea Tod and many other Manitobans.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Early learning and child-care programs in Manitoba require increased funding to stabilize and support a system that is in jeopardy.
(2) Licensed, not-for-profit early learning and child-care programs have received no new operating funding in over three years, while the cost of living has continued to increase annually.
(3) High-quality licensed child care has a lasting, positive impact on children's development, is a fundamental need for Manitoba families and contributes to a strong economy.
(4) The financial viability of these programs is in jeopardy if they cannot meet the fiscal responsibility of achieving a balanced budget, as all operating expenses continue to increase.
(5) The workforce shortage of trained early childhood educators has continued to increase; quality child care is dependent on a workforce that is skilled and adequately remunerated.
* (16:00)
(6) Accessible, affordable and quality early learning and child-care programs must be available to all children and families in Manitoba.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to increase funding for licensed, not-for-profit child‑care programs in recognition of the importance of early learning and child care in Manitoba, which will also improve quality and stability in the workforce.
Signed by Katrina Limberatos, Holly King, Christopher Garrioch and many more Manitobans.
Madam Speaker: Grievances?
Hon. Kelvin Goertzen (Government House Leader): Could you please call for second reading debate Bill 16, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2019.
Madam Speaker: It has been announced that the House will consider debate on second reading of Bill 16.
Madam Speaker: I will therefore call Bill 16, The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2019, standing in the name of the honourable member for St. Johns, who has unlimited time.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): I did want to take a couple of moments–I learned some interesting facts, Madam Speaker, from my colleague, the esteemed–[interjection]
Oh, miigwech, thank you so much. That's excellent.
So I did learn some facts that I want to put on the record–[interjection] all at once, all at once.
The–actually my esteemed colleague, the Government House Leader (Mr. Goertzen) shared with me this morning, Madam Speaker–we were talking about how competitive I am, particularly when competing against men, but he actually did qualify that the member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen) actually has the record for unlimited speaking time, so I just want to congratulate the member on that, which is about 16 hours, apparently. So we will see how that goes, but I do want to just congratulate him on that before we start today's debate.
So we're debating Bill 16, BITSA, Madam Speaker, as you know. We know that there is a provision in BITSA which attempts to dissolve rebates that both parties and candidates are currently entitled to. I think it's important in the discussion on rebates and the role that they play in enhancing democracy.
I thought that it would be interesting today to spend the next bit of time together actually reviewing what other provinces and territories have in respect of rebates. So we're going to start with–and again, these are different provinces' and territories' election laws, just to qualify–and again, just to qualify, are in specific reference to the provision in the BITSA that refers to and gets rid of the 50 per cent rebates.
So Elections Saskatchewan, Manitoba–or Madam Speaker, sorry–an important part of Saskatchewan's electoral system is the provincially financed program that supports registered political parties and candidates. This program includes reimbursements for appropriate election expenses and tax credits for political donations. This program makes it possible for everyone to participate in the election process regardless of wealth.
And I think it's important to note that this is some of the research that we found online and so it's interesting that, online, Elections Saskatchewan has put in there and felt it was important to put in there and to ensure that constituents, that citizens of Saskatchewan realize that the Saskatchewan government is trying to ensure–and again, I quote: makes it possible for everyone to participate in the election process regardless of wealth.
And, as you know, Madam Speaker, since the introduction of BITSA, we have been very concerned with the Premier's (Mr. Pallister) approach to legislative reform in respect of election laws here in Manitoba.
And, again, I think it's imperative to put it on the record, which tilts elections in his and his party's favour, and what we've been saying is that, you know, to get rid of the rebate fundamentally impacts on individuals who don't necessarily typically have the opportunities to sit in this space. And so, i.e., I would refer to single moms, indigenous peoples–all, you know, disenfranchised and marginalized, and particularly economically marginalized individuals, who, I would suggest to you, Madam Speaker, would make–would only enhance the work and the productivity of this Chamber.
So, you know, I–Elections Saskatchewan seems to be on the same page with what we are discussing over here on this side of the House, and so to go back to what Elections Saskatchewan does, in order to be eligible for reimbursement, a registered political party's candidate must have received at least 15 per cent of the valid votes cast. Eligible parties may have up to 50 per cent of appropriate election expenses reimbursed once their chief official agent submits an audited election expense return. Candidates who received at least 15 per cent of the valid votes cast in their constituency are also eligible for reimbursement.
And I find this very interesting, Madam Speaker: in Saskatchewan, candidates may be reimbursed up to 60 per cent of their election expenses, once their business manager submits their audited election expense return.
So we have seen, obviously, different percentages than Manitoba but we are certainly seeing a legislative elections framework that works to make sure that there is a level playing field in Saskatchewan during provincial elections.
Just for process, Madam Speaker, Elections Saskatchewan indicates that after election day, business managers must file a Candidate Return of Election Expenses, form E-412, in order to have their candidate's nomination deposit refunded, and so auditors are responsible for preparing and submitting election expenses return of a registered political party or individual candidate.
Auditors must generally–must use generally accepted accounting principles, which I'm sure we can all agree are very, very important accounting principles, and auditing standards when conducting their review of financial records of a party or candidate. As well, Madam Speaker, auditors are entitled to all information and documents necessary to conduct a proper audit. If an auditor believes that proper accounting records are not kept by a party or candidate, the auditor must report this to Elections Saskatchewan.
Again, Madam Speaker, I know that you are riveted by what I am putting on the record today and I think that it is important to put these facts on the record when debating the BITSA bill, Bill 16, particularly in respect of the provision that seeks to get rid of the 50 per cent rebate for candidates and parties. And so, you know, part of that is, obviously, tax credits.
* (16:10)
And so for Elections Saskatchewan, the rules for tax credits on political donations are outlined in their political contributions tax act, 2001–the tax credit act. Individuals and corporations may donate to registered political parties, as well as individual candidates. Tax credits, Madam Speaker, are only for monetary contributions. Receipts may be issued for contributions over $25 and must only be issued by a chief official agent for a registered political party or a business manager for a certified independent candidate. Official receipts for income tax purposes will only be issued in the name of the contributor.
The chief official agent of a registered political party must file the annual reconciliation of tax receipts used in the preceding calendar year with the chief 'electorial' officer. Copies of each issued, spoiled and duplicated receipt must accompany the filing.
As you can see, it's pretty stringent for Elections Saskatchewan, but it goes on, Madam Speaker: business managers of independent candidates must file, within 30 days after the election, a reconciliation of tax receipts, including the total amount of receipts–a total amount of receipted contributions, copies of each receipt, spoiled receipts, duplicated receipts and all unused receipts, so quite a bit of paperwork that auditors have to go through after each election.
And so the–we have, on top of all of that, Madam Speaker, for Elections Saskatchewan, in respect of their rebates for both parties and candidates, public financing of candidates is intended to encourage participation and is not intended to result in personal financial benefit.
I think that that is super important, that Elections Saskatchewan put that on the record because I think that sometimes there's this erroneous narrative out there that somehow you make money or you get personal benefit out of it. It is, simply–rebates are simply meant, in a democracy, to ensure that there's a level playing field and that no one particular government tilts any election within their particular favour.
As I'm sure, Madam Speaker, you would agree, I know that all of us in this House watch on the news periodically, when we see different countries going through elections, and some of the things that people have to go through, (a) to cast their vote, (b) to actually put their name on a ballot and (c) some of the things, the lengths, that governments will go to to absolutely tilt an election in their favour.
Madam Speaker, to that end I want to just break a little bit and note that for women in different parts of the world, when they put their name or they intend or they pursue to be a candidate for whatever political party, you know, we know that in particular places around the world that women who put their name on a ballot are exponentially more at risk for violence.
I think the member for St. Vital (Mrs. Mayer) and I had the honour, a couple of years ago, of going to a Daughters of the Vote, the inaugural Daughters of the Vote, and–I hope it was there–or perhaps it was another conference that both the member for St. Vital and I were at, and actually there was a really amazing presentation about women participating in the political process and the levels of violence that are executed against women, to the point, Madam Speaker, that actually women are murdered. There are many, many cases around the world where women are actually murdered because they put their name on the ballot or because they are sitting politicians.
And so I want to acknowledge that in the House, in the context of the discussion here because it's important that we put in an infrastructure that not only are women candidates safe, but that women candidates have the equitable means to be able to participate in a political process, and so I wanted to just put that on the record as well
So back to Elections Saskatchewan, there–the election act of 1996 requires that a candidate's campaign surplus must be remitted back to their nominating registered political party or a constituency association. Independent candidates will have any campaign surplus submitted to the provincial treasury.
So, certainly, I think we could all agree and could–you know, we don't agree on a lot of things in this House but I think we could all agree that Saskatchewan–Elections Saskatchewan has put measures in place–I'm very thirsty for some reason–put measures in place to ensure a fair playing field.
And so Madam Speaker, let us move on to Elections New Brunswick. The political process in New Brunswick is partially funded from public treasury. The legislature annually authorizes appropriation for two payments required to be made to registered political parties: (1) An allowance for qualifying registered political parties, and (2) a reimbursement of auditing expenses.
A third payment is available to registered district associations for the reimbursement of election expenses of qualifying candidates, Madam Speaker. This payment is made from the funding provided to Elections New Brunswick, to hold a provincial general election or by-election.
These payments are described in the following sections: 2.5.1. Annual allowance for qualifying registered political parties; 31. An annual allowance shall be payable for each fiscal year to the following registered political parties: (a) every registered political party 'representeded' in the legislative assembly on April 1st of that fiscal year, and (b) every registered political party which, although not represented in the legislative assembly, had at least 10 official candidates at the preceding general election. I think we can all agree in the House that again we see a legislative framework for equitable and fair elections in New Brunswick.
I'm not even finished, Madam Speaker. 34(1):–[interjection]–Yes. The annual allowance shall be used by the registered political party–my, this is honestly very, very interesting. The annual allowance shall be used by the registered political party to pay the costs of the current administration, to propagate their political programs and to co‑ordinate political activities of their members; 34(2): if during a calendar year, a registered political party fails to incur costs for the uses set out in subsection (1), which are equal to or greater than the amount of the annual allowance paid to it during that calendar year, the difference between that amount and the cost actually incurred by it for those uses during that calendar year shall be remitted to the minister of Finance to be paid into the consolidated fund.
A sample calculation of annual allowances is provided in appendix A. I'll find appendix A so we can read that all together. Where was I here?
An Honourable Member: Start from the beginning.
Ms. Fontaine: Start from the beginning. Okay, here we go. A sample calculation of annual allowances is provided in appendix A, which is payments to registered political parties for fiscal year 2018-2019.
An Honourable Member: Slow down.
Ms. Fontaine: Okay. The member for Flin Flon (Mr. Lindsey) has asked me to slow down, Madam Speaker, just so we can all get everything that I'm trying to say.
An Honourable Member: Absorb it.
Ms. Fontaine: Absorb it, thank you.
Beginning with the fiscal year 2019-2020, the formula for calculating–I'm actually very grateful to the Government House Leader (Mr. Goertzen) for bringing me water. It's coming in handy actually; I'm very thirsty.
* (16:20)
The formula for calculating the annual allowance rewards for those political parties, Madam Speaker–for political parties which had female candidates in the proceeding general election by weighting their votes received by a factor of 1.5 times over those of male candidates. I would suggest that both–and I probably agree how important it is to have women candidates, and we're seeing by these documents that Elections New Brunswick puts even additional measures in place to ensure that women are supported to be able to be a candidate in the provincial election. I have to lift that up. I think that that's pretty amazing.
So some ongoing financial activities including contributions, financing and non-election expenditures–it's telling me to refer to Elections New Brunswick website for the current calculation of annual allowance.
An Honourable Member: What's the website?
Ms. Fontaine: Madam Speaker, the website is www.electionsnb.ca/content/enb/en/parties_assoc/fpp.html.
An Honourable Member: Micklefield needs it read again; he didn't catch it.
Ms. Fontaine: Micklefield.
Madam Speaker, 2.5.2, the Reimbursement of auditing expenses for Elections New Brunswick states: the act authorizes the supervisor to reimburse each–wow, this is–honestly, this is amazing–to reimburse each registered political party for its auditing expenses of up to–I don't know what this is–either it's $70,000–it's either $70,000 actually incurred or it's $7,000. I'm not sure. This is not clear. I'll research it and I'll qualify that.
Incurred by it in a calendar year for the purposes of submitting its annual audited financial return–so, Madam Speaker, here's what we can draw from this, is that Elections New Brunswick even supports parties with their auditing expenses, right? And I think that that is very good as well, ensuring that there's an accurate reflection financially of what costs were incurred.
This amount will be adjusted by–for inflation on January 1st of each year based on the Consumer Price Index for Canada as published by Statistics Canada. A sample calculation of the reimbursement of auditing expenses is provided in appendix A: Payments to Registered Political Parties for the Fiscal Year 2018-2019. Please, if anybody is interested, Madam Speaker, in learning more about Elections New Brunswick's rules, they can refer to the Elections New Brunswick's website. [interjection]
I am. Yes, I–and so, Madam Speaker, just to be clear because I know I've been talking for quite a bit right now, I do want to just ensure that folks in the Chamber know that we are discussing what other provinces and territories do in respect of their legislative framework to ensure that there is a fair playing field in respect of provincial elections because, as we sit and debate Bill 16, BITSA, we know that the Premier (Mr. Pallister) has opted to get rid of what every–almost every other province and territory has across Canada.
So 2.52–no, 2.5.3 Reimbursement of election expenses, this act also, Madam Speaker, provides for a reimbursement of a proportion of the election expenses up to a maximum amount of qualifying candidates. This reimbursement is payable to the registered district association of a candidate to his or her registered political party if no district association is registered.
So, Madam Speaker, that was a little bit–just a little bit–on Elections New Brunswick. I think that we can all agree in the House today that Elections New Brunswick puts measures in place to ensure that there is a fair playing field for candidates and political parties, recognizing that not everybody has–first off, that not everybody starts at the same level; not everybody has access to wealthy donors, and so it is important to ensure that there is an infrastructure, a democratic infrastructure that allows for those individuals that want to and have a right to run in our provincial elections, that they will be supported financially.
So, Madam Speaker, we move on to Élections Québec and their allowance to political parties.
So, Madam Speaker, an annual allowance distributed in proportion to the percentage of valid votes obtained in the last general election may be given to authorized parties conforming to section 82 of the elections act. This allowance is revised annually.
In addition, within 10 days of the order to hold general elections, Quebec will pay an additional allowance to political parties. This additional allowance will be calculated in the manner prescribed in the first paragraph of section 82 and distributed in the same way as the regular allowance.
So not only does Élections Québec give annual allowance to political parties within 10 days of an order or the writ for general elections, they are given actually additional dollars as well. So we see that Quebec has gone even a little bit further as well to ensure that there's a level playing field.
Under paragraph 2, section 86 of the elections act, no later than April 1st of each year the Chief Electoral Officer must publish in the Gazette officielle du Québec, a summary of the sums paid to the official representative of any party targeted by paragraphs 81, 82, 82.1, 82.2 and 82.4 of the act.
From January 1st to December 31st, 2018, allowances totalling–yikes–$9,576,374.60–nine–almost $10 million, Madam Speaker, were paid to the official representatives of political parties mentioned below in respect of section 81 and 82 of the elections act, and they actually mark off all the numbers, and I think it's important for our discussion here today that I read out each of these numbers.
So, Madam Speaker, allowances paid to political parties in 2018 is incredible: Parti libéral du Québec, the Quebec Liberal Party, was paid $3,585,635.01.
The Coalition Avenir Québec-L'équipe Francois Legault was paid $2,561,813.49.
The Parti québécois was paid $2,237,471.78.
The Québec solidaire was paid $990,193.55.
The Parti vert du Québec, the Green Party of Quebec, was paid–wow, Madam Speaker–the Green Party of Quebec was paid $79,999.45.
* (16:30)
Oh, here we go–le Parti conservateur du Québec, also known as the Conservative Party of Quebec, was paid $63,277.04, okay. Le Parti nul was paid $15,003.97. There's a lot of parties in Quebec, Madam Speaker–like, a lot.
Okay, le Nouveau Parti démocratique du Québec was paid $13,687.20. Oy yoi yoi.
Le 'citrione' au pouvoir du Québec was paid $10,436.59.
Bloc Pot was paid $7,359.97.
We're–Madam Speaker, we're literally only halfway down the list of parties in Quebec.
Le Parti marxiste/'leninsiste' du Québec, which would be in English the Marxist and 'lenist' party of Quebec, was paid $4,448.96. This is incredible.
Le Parti équitable–so, the equitable party, Madam Speaker, was paid $2,795.88.
L'Équipe autonomiste was paid $1,361.12.
Le Parti libre was paid one thousand four hundred–no, $1,004.56.
Le Parti 51 was paid $668.74.
Changement intégrité pour notre Québec was paid $414.91.
Alliance provinciale du Québec was paid $311.88.
Le Parti unité nationale was paid $180.99.
Voie du peuple was paid $113.72.
Le parti 'culiminaire' du Québec was paid $101.18.
And, finally, le Parti indépendantiste was paid $94.61 for a total of all the dollars that were paid by Élections Québec to political parties in 2018 is $9,573,000–no, five hundred and seventy-three–oh, my Lord, sorry, Madam Speaker, let me begin again–$9,573,374.60.
On top of that, Madam Speaker, in the general election of October 2018, which I know we all watched unfold, additional allowances totalling $6,012,440 were paid during the calendar year of 2018 to the official representatives of the political parties mentioned below in relation to section 82.1 of the election act. And so they've broken it out again, so I think it's important to read that out.
So again, those additional allowances went to le Parti liberal du Québec, Quebec Liberal Party, for $2,505,883.59; le Parti québécois was $1,531,878.72; le Coalition avenir Québec-L'équipe Francois Légault was paid $1,391,382.34. Québec solitaire was paid $504,000–no $504,609.22. Le Parti vert du Québec, the Green Party of Quebec, was paid $33,034.40. Le Parti conservateur du Québec, again, Madam Speaker, the Conservative Party of Quebec, was paid $23,430.56. Le Parti nul was paid 10 thousand dollars–$10,751.90. Again, this is incredible.
Bloc Pot got $3,836.40. Le parti marxiste et 'léniste' du Québec got $2,875.16. Le Parti équitable got $2,346.05. I have a hard time with this word–Citoyens au pouvoir du Québec was paid $1,841.19 and Équipe autonomiste was paid $570.47 for a total of $6,012,044.00. I actually wouldn't mind calculating that, what the total would be of that.
So, Madam Speaker, if we were to calculate–I don't even know if I can do this, but–if we were to calculate what the Quebec government, give or take–I'm just going to do it like this–paid in total for elections–wow, give or take a couple of hundred dollars because I'm just doing this fast while I'm trying to also speak, in 2018, the Quebec–Élections Québec paid, out to support democracy in Quebec, paid out $15,588,787, if that made sense. That's a lot of money to invest in democracy, and I would suggest to you that it is money well spent to ensure that there is democracy in Quebec.
And I suspect what I'm going to do, Madam Speaker, tomorrow–or well, if Bill 16 is called tomorrow, with my unlimited time, what I'd actually like to do–and I should have done this–but I was–had a really busy–I should have actually–we should have had the composition of all of the elected members.
So with the dollars that are invested in democracy in each of these provinces that I've talked about so far, I think it would have been informative for all of us to actually look at the composition of everybody elected. So I think I'm going to do that tomorrow.
But again, Madam Speaker, so, you know, again, getting us back to discussing what other provinces and territories do in respect to their rebates for political parties because we are debating Bill 16, where we see the Pallister government, the Premier (Mr. Pallister) more specifically, get rid of the rebate for candidates.
On top of all of the other things that he's put in place in respect of, really, as I've said many, many times in this House, dismantling democracy and tilting the election in his favour.
So let me finish up with Quebec, Madam Speaker. In accordance with section 83 of the election act, these sums are used to defray expenses related to particular day-to-day operations, the propagation of a political program, the co-ordination of the political activities of the members or supporters of the party and certainly, election expenses. They are also used to reimburse the principle of loans.
* (16:40)
So I think that everybody in this Chamber would agree that, again, as we've seen thus far–although I would suggest maybe Quebec–Élections Québec, so far from what we've read and undertaken, has so far in the last 40 minutes of our discussion, taken the lead in respect of democracy and enhancing democracy and ensuring that there is a level playing field.
So, Madam Speaker, we move on to Elections Ontario. Quarterly allowances–the chief 'electorial' officer, CEO, shall determine for each quarter of a calendar year an allowance payable to a registered party whose candidates in the last election before the current quarter received at least (a) 2 per cent of the valid–no, 2 per cent of the number of valid votes cast, or (b) 5 per cent of the number of valid cast–votes cast in an electoral district in which the registered party endorsed a candidate.
So these allowance are distributed by quarter, Madam Speaker. So quarter 1 is January to March; quarter 2 is April to June; quarter 3 July to September and, of course, quarter 4 is October to December.
So, Madam Speaker, the chief electoral officer, the CEO, shall determine an allowance payable to each eligible registered constituency association for each quarter of a calendar year, starting from the year 2017.
For 2017, Madam Speaker, a quarterly amount of $6,250 is assigned to each electoral district, which is shared amongst associations based on the percentage of the valid votes their party candidate received in the last election. A party candidate must have received at least 2 per cent of the valid votes cast in order for the–that party's constituency association to qualify for the allowance.
As you will recall, Madam Speaker, in Bill 232, our private member's bill that we introduced two weeks ago, we had also attempted to lower the threshold to 2 per cent, which would open up rebates to more parties and to more candidates, as well. An allowance is only payable to a registered constituency association for a quarter if all documents required to be filed with Elections Ontario in the four-year period immediately before the quarter have been filed and are complete.
So that's not a heck of a lot on Ontario. I think that what I'll do tomorrow, on top of looking at the composition of different constituencies, I'm going to go back to Elections Ontario, because that seems to be not a lot of information. I think you would agree, Madam Speaker.
So, if we were to look at Elections Canada, Madam Speaker, there's quite a bit that we can hopefully get through today. Yes, I think we will.
They talk about limits on contributions, loans and loan guarantees, and so–political entity for the 2019 annual limit–the limit per election called between January 1st, 2019 and December 31st, 2019, which is–we're about to go into an election, Madam Speaker, as you know.
To each registered party is $1,600. In total to all registered associations, nomination contestants and candidates of each registered party, $1,600. In total to all leadership contestants in a particular contest, $1,600, and to each independent candidate, $1,600.
The contribution limits applying to total contributions, the unpaid balance of loans made during the contribution period and the amount of any loan guarantees made during the contribution period that an individual is still liable for–the sum of these three amounts cannot at any time exceed the contribution limit.
A nomination contestant is permitted to give an additional thousand dollars in total per contest in contributions, loans and loan guarantees to his or her own campaign. A candidate is permitted to give a total of $5,000 in contributions, loans and loan guarantees to his or her campaign.
A candidate is also permitted to give an additional $1,600 in total per year in contributions, loans and loan guarantees to other candidates, registered associations and nomination contestants of each party. This includes, Madam Speaker, contributions to the registered association in the candidate's electoral district and contributions to the candidate's own nomination campaign.
A leadership contestant is permitted to give a total of $25,000 in contributions, loans and loan guarantees to his or her own campaign. A leadership contestant is also permitted to give an additional $1,600 in total, per year, in contributions, loans and loan guarantees to other leadership contestants. This limit increase–this limits increase by $25 on January 1st in each subsequent year.
Again, Madam Speaker, I think it's important for us to discuss what goes on for Elections Canada, as I think that we're all curious as we move into a federal election, but I will go back to provinces, as we're discussing rebates in different jurisdictions and territories as we discuss Bill 16, BITSA.
And again, as I indicated, because the Premier (Mr. Pallister) is attempting to go–do away with the rebate, I think it's important for Hansard, for prosperity–is that the right word? No? Okay. It's not the right word. I think everybody knows what I mean: to have it on the record what other provinces and territories do.
So, Elections BC: Under the election act, the chief electoral officer must pay an annual allowance to a registered political party whose candidates, in the most recent general election, received at least 2 per cent of the total number of valid votes cast in the electoral districts in which the political party endorsed candidates. Allowances paid to date are shown below.
Political party amount: So the BC Green Party, wow. Madam Speaker, BC Green Party was paid on January 1, 2019 three hundred and seventy-three thousand dollars, eight hundred and–no. I never read that properly: $373,872.38. Almost $400,000 was paid to the BC Green Party, which is probably, you know, why it contributed to them having more seats than other places across the country.
The BC Liberal Party–interesting–BC Liberal Party was paid $896,843.25. Oh, Lord. The BC NDP were actually paid less than the BC Liberal Party. They were paid $894,967.88.
* (16:50)
And, Madam Speaker, just in case people are interested, because I'm sure everybody is riveted and wants to know how BC–Elections BC calculates, BC's election act establishes how annual allowances are calculated.
Allowances are based on the number of valid votes received in the last general election and are calculated as follows: in 2018, $2.50 per vote received; in 2019, $225 per vote received. The chief electoral officer must pay allowances in two equal installments on January 1st and July 1st in the applicable year.
So I think that that's pretty interesting. The money that's been paid out to the Green Party, almost $400,000, and then the BC Liberal Party and the NDP–only, like, a thousand-something difference. But, still, the BC Liberal Party was paid more than the BC NDP.
So now we move on to Elections NWT–Northwest Territories.
So, for Elections NWT, as we are debating Bill 16, BITSA, and putting on the record what other provinces and territories do in respect of supporting and enhancing democracy, NWT states that all contributions must be made through an official agent. Contributions may not be received until after a candidate's nomination is accepted by Elections Northwest Territories. Money collected by an official agent must be deposited in a bank account.
This is fascinating. In communities without bank services–right, because of course there are probably some communities that don't have banks, right? As we–I'm sure we all are fully aware in this House–an account at an approved institution such as a co-op or northern store is acceptable. That I did not know. That is fascinating.
Campaign contributions come in various forms. A contribution may be money, services or property. Only residents, businesses, organizations and corporations operating in the Northwest Territories may contribute to an election campaign, to a maximum of $1,500.
Now, if you juxtapose that to what the Premier of Manitoba–the First Minister–this Pallister government did when it took government–they 'upted' that limit to $5,000. But here in the Northwest Territories, the maximum value that you can for–and, again, I think it's important that we put this–residents–so, individuals, businesses, organizations and corporations–the max that you can donate is $1,500, juxtaposed to the Premier's $5,000 for individuals.
Where am I–the–a contribution may only exceed $1,500 if it is for transportation or office space. Ah, the value of contributions other than cash–I hear the member for Radisson (Mr. Teitsma) starting to chirp on. He's been very quiet all afternoon. I actually have to say I appreciate–[interjection]–oh, I don't know where he's from–it's the minister who–anyways, Madam Speaker, we're talking about maximum levels of contributions in the Northwest Territories.
So the value of contributions other than cash, for example, a computer or furniture, will be assessed at fair market value.
Monetary contributions are eligible for a tax receipt, up to a maximum of $1,500. Non-monetary contributions are not eligible for tax receipts. That actually makes perfect sense, Madam Speaker.
There is no limit on what a candidate may contribute to their own campaign–interesting. Candidates may spend their own personal funds during the pre-election period as well as during the campaign period so long as all total cumulative expenses do not exceed $30,000.
Anonymous contributions are accepted–huh–but may not exceed $100 per contribution. Anonymous contributions are not eligible for tax receipts.
A detailed accounting of all contributions must be included in the candidate's financial statement filed by the official agent within 60 days after polling day.
So, we are still on the Northwest Territories. The total value of all election expenses for a candidate may not exceed $30,000. Election expenses are any costs incurred or money paid to promote or oppose, directly or indirectly, the election of a candidate.
Election materials that are reused from previous campaigns–oh, interesting–are considered an election expense, will be assessed at a fair market value and must be reported by the official agent.
So, Madam Speaker, I put on the record this afternoon just some examples of what other provinces and territories do in respect of campaigns, in respect of democracy, in respect of enhancing democracy, in respect of ensuring that there is an equitable playing field, ensuring that we do not tilt an election to one government or one party or the other.
We've seen an infrastructure in different parts of the country that seeks to ensure that women are represented in their political–in their legislatures, and I think that it's important to have that discussion. It's important to put on the record those provinces and territories that do have an infrastructure.
And I also want to say, Madam Speaker, is that at one point Manitoba also took the lead in respect of democratic legislative reforms and legislation and infrastructure in Manitoba that only sought to enhance our democracy; for instance, doing away with union and corporate donations, and we know that BC is in the process, you know, did that already as well.
I think it's important to be proud that at one point across the country Manitoba stood on the side of political parties–whether or not you agree with, you know, a particular party, we, at one time in Manitoba, stood on the right of political parties to exist, to be able to participate in democracy within the province.
Madam Speaker, at one point in time, we took a lead at ensuring that women, indigenous peoples, people of colour, LGBTTQ, marginalized individuals, disenfranchised individuals, had the opportunity and the right and the infrastructure to be able to participate in democracy in Manitoba.
I would suggest to you, as we're winding down, that–[interjection]–well, yes, for the five. I'm just getting started, Madam Speaker, but I would suggest that the–what we see legislatively right now in Manitoba will actually have consequences for years to come, and I've said this many times in this House that one of the blessings of being an MLA, it's not getting up and yammering on and listening to heckling and–it's actually the transformative effect that it has in our communities, and I know that the member for Point Douglas (Mrs. Smith) and myself, we repeatedly and routinely have, in particular, indigenous women–[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member will have unlimited time.
The hour being 5 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until 10 a.m. tomorrow.
CORRIGENDA
On April 11, 2019, page 1178, first column, the fourth paragraph should have read:
I will not take that much time because other members will like to speak, but I would like to say a few words about the Sikh religion. Maybe I can speed it up, and perhaps Hansard people may not understand because, first time when I said: Waheguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji ki Fateh. [The Khalsa belongs to God, Victory belongs to God.] They did not write it. That was about two years ago, when I have a member's statement on April 11th, 2017. And at that time, I asked the minister that this month should be–could be declared. And so, somehow, we are coming close.
On April 11, 2019, page 1211, second column, the fifth and sixth paragraphs should have read:
When I was telling you yesterday why near–not–the real issues are brought front. Actually, I was real–little bit 'spectical' about other issues, religion bringing in the Legislative Assembly. Do we really need that or not? This is something to be–think about.
Perhaps I can say–being Sikh, I can say I am Sikh. And Sikh is not a religion; it's a movement and–to talk about the human rights and to talk about the equality of women and to talk about a casteless society. Maybe there is some point perhaps we can discuss this issue.
On April 11, 2019, page 1212, second column, the seventh paragraph should have read:
And those should be taken care of because, as I said, personal-care homes and senior affordable housing–only people will stay over here if they think they will be taken care of in–when they are seniors.
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Monday, April 15, 2019
CONTENTS
U of M College of Nursing Anniversary
Concordia and Seven Oaks Hospitals
Early Learning and Child-Care Programs
Lake Winnipeg Commercial Fisheries Consultation
Flin Flon General Hospital Obstetric Services
Early Learning and Child-Care Programs
Addictions Services– Brandon and Western Manitoba
Early Learning and Child-Care Programs
Bill 16–The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, 2019