LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Monday, June 8, 1992
The
House met at 8 p.m.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY
(Concurrent Sections)
HOUSING
Mr. Deputy
Chairperson: Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to
order. This evening, this section of the
Committee of Supply meeting in Room 255 will be considering the Estimates of
the Department of Housing.
Does
the honourable Minister of Housing have an opening statement?
Hon.
Jim Ernst (Minister of Housing): Yes, I do.
I
am pleased, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, to present the 1992‑93 spending
Estimates for Manitoba Housing. In this
fiscal year, we are proposing expenditures of about $50.1 million, an increase
of about 4.6 percent over last year.
These figures reflect the transfer of responsibility for landlord/tenant
affairs to the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, and apart from
this, the department responsibilities remain virtually unchanged.
My
department looks forward to meeting the challenges of continuing to work with
Manitobans in support of the building of new quality housing to meet their
needs and preserving the current housing stock.
However, in the field of social housing development we are facing some
serious difficulties. I regret many of
these problems have arisen because of the steady decrease in recent years of
financial support from the federal government.
In
1992, there will be a 21 percent decrease in new federal social housing
allocations. Additional cuts scheduled
in 1993 and 1994‑‑and perhaps cuts is not the most appropriate word‑‑but
the cap on CMHC expenditures scheduled for 1993 and 1994 will produce a total
effect of about a 50 percent reduction from the 1991 base. That is on top of a 35 percent reduction in
the unit allocations from 1989 and 1990.
So we are significantly reduced.
I think in 1988 we delivered something close to almost 1,000 units, and
we will be lucky to deliver 200 at the end of this current period.
Not
only does this loss in support make it much harder to add to our social housing
stock, it also means fewer jobs, as much as 1,500 person‑years of
employment during the prime construction season, which has always been an
important factor in strengthening
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson, the potential of reducing the program to the point where,
in many provinces, it will be uneconomical to keep it alive, period. If the number of housing units falls below a
certain figure, the associated cost to the program may destroy their efficiency
and viability for delivery purposes.
Besides
the constructions losses,
* (2005)
This
program has been an important means of maintaining existing inner‑city
housing rental stock.
As
a result, we were unable to raise our concerns in a forum where an informative
discussion could have produced beneficial results and understanding. The next meeting of housing ministers is
scheduled for the end of June, and we are hoping that at this time the federal
minister will be able to be there to continue those discussions.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson, I would like to return now to one or two highlights of
Manitoba Housing's programs and plans for the fiscal year. The transition from the former local housing
authorities to the Manitoba Housing Authority will be completed in '92‑93. Already we have experienced significant
savings and greater efficiency as a result through such benefits and
standardizing procedures, tendering practices and a more rational
organizational structure and use of resources.
Also,
we have achieved savings without having to wield a heavy axe on the staff. Instead, most have been retained, and we have
deployed and employed them better. We
are continuing our practice of enhancing tenant involvement in the operation of
housing. Last year we doubled the grants
to tenants' organizations, and under the new management structure we have a
branch devoted to dealing with the concerns of tenants in local communities.
This
is an innovative departure from the former practice of dealing with these
matters as an adjunct of ordinary property management functions. We believe it will promote greater efficiency
and consistency and policy, as well as facilitating innovative initiatives at
the tenant and the community levels.
We
are also trying to ensure that local community involvement is encouraged
through social housing advisory groups which will represent community views and
concerns to the MHA. The tenant and
community relations branch will work over the next few months to start up these
groups.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson, I am pleased to report that we have finalized a new program
arrangement that holds out great promise for senior citizens nonprofit
housing. This program replaces the
previous Seniors RentalStart program and will produce significant reductions in
cost and risk from those associated with that program while still maintaining
its best features. As before, the new
arrangement will cover housing for seniors who need or wish nonprofit
congregate‑type housing but do not meet the federal‑provincial
criteria for low‑income assistance.
Rather
than provide grant subsidies and direct low‑interest financing, the new
program encourages private lenders to participate by the province providing
partial loan guarantees for a limited period of time with a maximum exposure to
the province of 10 percent of project costs.
By this method, not only is the risk to the province reduced, but also
Manitoba Housing will no longer be subsidizing higher‑income seniors
housing projects while still being able to facilitate their preferred housing
choices.
I
might add, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, that as with the previous Seniors
RentalStart program, provisions exist to provide subsidies where required to
qualified low‑income tenants and that the program is open to nonprofit
and co‑ops making for good income‑integrated community‑based
projects. I can also report that the
first eligible projects are currently being finalized for approval.
We
are all aware of the recessionary situation facing this country and our
province in particular, and we recognize the importance of housing
expenditures, not only from the standpoint of facilitating affordable housing
for our people, but also as an instrument for maintaining levels of employment
in our construction trades. My colleague
the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) has mentioned many times that the
During
1992‑93, based on both projects already underway and new projects
approved to date, we anticipate the expenditure of some $15 million on
modernization and improvement projects in our public housing stock. A further $27 million will be spent on new
construction projects, $20 million of which will be directly financed by the
province, but the balance of finance through private lenders on the strength of
provincial guarantees.
So
that, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, concludes my opening remarks.
* (2010)
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: We thank the honourable minister for those
comments. Does the critic from the
official opposition party, the honourable member for Burrows, have any opening
comments?
Mr.
Doug Martindale (Burrows): Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I would like to thank
the minister for his opening statement which I note he read. I would like to try and talk intelligibly for
five minutes without reading notes this year.
An
Honourable Member: That may be tough.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. The honourable member for Burrows has the
floor.
Mr.
Martindale: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Chairperson. I note with interest that almost every area
that the minister talked about were topics that I was planning to raise, and
the one item that I was not sounds like a new program, the seniors nonprofit,
and I look forward to hearing more details about that when we get to it.
I
would like to talk a little bit about the government's overall housing policy
since it seems that this government is cutting programs and they have also
transferred responsibility for Landlord and Tenant Affairs to another
department. In fact, I noticed that on
several occasions the Minister of Housing (Mr. Ernst) was the acting government
House leader in the Chamber and thought maybe he needed more responsibility and
so he was asked to act as acting House leader.
I think part of it is explained by the Core Area Initiative expiring and
many of the programs coming to an end, but in any case I would like to talk
about the government's overall housing policy perhaps under Minister's Salary.
I
will spend some time asking questions about Manitoba Housing Authority and the
problems in the transition, and would like to hear a progress report on what is
happening and where they are at now. I
have some detailed questions about the internal audit at Winnipeg Housing
Authority, which I raised in the Chamber.
I was not satisfied with the answers that I received and would like to
ask more detailed questions.
I
have some concerns about the termination of the federal Co‑op Housing
Program, which I know the minister shares with me, but nonetheless, I would
like to ask and will ask more questions about this minister's response to that
federal government cutback.
We
have already discussed constitutional negotiations and the possibility of housing
responsibility being devolved to the provinces and the impact that will have on
From
time to time, there are issues that I think are nonpartisan, and I was going to
raise one of them, and the minister already raised it. That is the problem of aging housing
stock. I do not really think that has
anything to do with what government is in office, although I note that one of
his predecessors was heckling me in the Chamber one day saying that his government
inherited a problem in deteriorating older public housing stock. I prefer to think that it is mainly a
function of age, that as housing units get older there inevitably are more and
more problems.
I
am pleased to see that the government plans to spend $15 million in this area,
and I would like to hear more details about how the government is coping with
this problem and what the Minister of Housing and his staff are going to do in
this area.
That
concludes my opening statement. Thank
you.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: We thank the honourable member for Burrows for
those comments.
Does
the critic from the second opposition party, the honourable member for The
Maples, have any opening comments?
Mr.
Gulzar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Deputy Chairperson,
first of all, I just want to let the minister and the members of the committee
know that this is my first time as a critic for this area. I will be just going through many areas of
concern I have, and I do not pretend to let anybody know that I know everything
about Housing. It is sort of a learning
process for me, and I just want to ensure at least that the government's main
objectives and missions which are part of this department are met. I will ensure that wherever I find some
deficiencies I will be raising issues. I
will just add my remarks and learn from the staff and other people who are
involved in the minister's office.
Certainly,
after the next session I probably will have a more fruitful discussion and I
would like to probably then be more critical.
However, at this stage I think I would like to express to the staff
that, certainly it is going to be a learning process for me. Thank you.
* (2015)
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: We thank the honourable member for those
remarks.
Under
At
this time we invite the minister's staff to join us at the table and we ask the
minister to introduce the staff members present.
(Mr.
Jack Reimer, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)
Mr.
Ernst: If I can, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson,
introduce Mr. Saul Schubert, who is the Deputy Minister of the Department of
Housing. Mr. Ken Cassan is here, who is
the director of planning and program development. We have Mr. Henry Bos, who is the Finance and
administration officer; Mr. Ron Fallis, who is the general manager of the
Manitoba Housing Authority; and Mr. Roger LaFleche, who is our Personnel
Director. At the back, Joan Miller, who
is the Assistant to the Deputy Minister, and Brian Brown from our Finance
division.
The
Executive Director of the other side of the department, Mr. Julius, will join
us a little bit later. It is his parents
52nd wedding anniversary today so I gave him the opportunity to go and wish
them well, so he will be along shortly.
The Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr.
Reimer): Item 1. Administration and
Finance (b) Executive Support: (1)
Salaries $307,700.
Mr.
Martindale: Yes, I have quite a few questions on this
page. I would like to start with the internal audit of the Winnipeg Housing
Authority, if this is the appropriate page to do this.
Mr.
Ernst: Well, let him ask his questions.
Mr.
Martindale: It is my understanding that at the former
Winnipeg Housing Authority there were four staff who received authorization
from Manitoba Housing staff on
I
guess my first question would be: If the
overtime was authorized, why was it not paid?
* (2020)
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, first of all
the member's question is inconsistent.
On the one hand, he said it was authorized by Broadway, and on the other
hand, he said when Broadway discovered what was happening they put a kibosh on
it and they called in the auditor. So
you cannot have it both ways; it is either one or the other.
Let
me give you a little history of this situation.
Perhaps it might settle the issue in the mind of the member for Burrows
(Mr. Martindale). In the city of
At
the time that the Manitoba Housing Authority question was raised and so on, and
there was some internal juggling of staff within the department, and a number
of these issues were coming to the forefront, we enlisted the support‑‑following
the retirement of Mr. Keith Moffat as well who is the manager of the city of
Subsequent
to that I received a phone call in my office expressing some concerns with
respect to potential overtime payments in the City of
* (2025)
Mr.
Martindale: Could the minister tell us what the internal
audit found and if there were any recommendations to the minister attached to
it?
Mr.
Ernst: The auditor found that there was a fair bit
of confusion as to whether it was Mr. De Porto only who was to obtain overtime,
whether there was additional staff which was to obtain overtime, whether that
overtime applied to‑‑because of the change of MHA coming on and so
on and these additional units of workload were brought on as well, there was
general confusion in any event as to the whole question of overtime.
The
auditor found that because of the confusion, particularly on the part of Mr. De
Porto, this was a gray area. I do not
think there was any intent to do anything other than to follow instructions,
but the instructions were not clearly understood, and quite frankly, probably
should have had written direction from senior management at some point or other
as well.
People
were in a fairly flexible mood in attempting to see all these things come
together quickly and with the minimum amount of administration in trying to
sort out a number of problem areas. So
that was what the auditor found. There
was no wrongdoing, there was a fair bit of confusion.
However,
the auditor did recommend that Mr. De Porto only now receive payment for his
overtime because of the question of mishandling of the whole thing and it could
have been a lot clearer and so on, it was our determination that no overtime be
paid and that was accepted by Mr. De Porto without question.
Mr.
Martindale: Well, I am still confused. It seems normal that is people are salaried,
that they normally do not get paid overtime.
However, you said in the case of Mr. De Porto he took on extra
responsibility. In fact, I think he had
responsibility for 11 sponsored seniors' buildings, so I can understand if
someone is given substantially more responsibility, that overtime might be
authorized. My information is that there
were three other people involved and at least one of them was a salaried
employee, if not all three of them, why would overtime be authorized for those
three people if they were hourly employees?
Mr.
Ernst: First of all, let me be very clear. No one authorized any overtime. No overtime has been authorized. Simply, the
statement was made to Mr. De Porto that he should keep track of his hours when
these additional responsibilities were assigned. As I indicated, it has been very flexible and
so on, but nobody has authorized any overtime.
I wanted to make that clear.
Mr.
Martindale: Why were people asked to keep logs of their
hours if overtime was not authorized?
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. De Porto misunderstood the direction he
was given, and for that overtime by certain other people who were in part or
not in part, as the case may be, assisting him in terms of either replacing his
work while he is involved with the sponsor projects or assisting him directly
with the work associated with the sponsor projects.
Mr.
Martindale: So Mr. De Porto misunderstood what I believe
it was Mr. Fallis said about authorizing overtime. Is that correct?
Mr.
Ernst: That was the finding of the auditor. I have no reason to disbelieve it.
Mr.
Martindale: We are blaming it on the front‑line
staff rather than on senior management in
Mr.
Ernst: Let me suggest to the member for Burrows that
those are not my words, they are the words of the auditor. If you are going to question the veracity or
the capability of the auditor, then say so, but do not dilly‑dally around
trying to suggest that somehow this was being foisted off on some front‑line
staff as opposed to anybody else. I did
not say those words. That was what the
auditor said. As a matter of fact, I am
prepared to give him a copy of the auditor's report if he wants, or, at least,
let him read it.
Mr.
Martindale: I would be interested in having a copy of the
auditor's report to read.
Mr.
Ernst: I am prepared to let him read the report. I do not know that I am prepared to give it
to him because, quite frankly, the way he has treated staff previously, the
member for Burrows has not been aboveboard and has taken to attacking the staff
on a number of occasions when I think it is inappropriate, particularly when
they are not able to defend themselves.
To ensure that the member for Burrows understands what the auditor said,
I am quite prepared to let him read the report.
* (2030)
Mr.
Martindale: Well, I appreciate the minister letting me
read the report. It suggests that the
minister is vindicated; otherwise he probably would not let me read it.
I
do not know what situation the minister is referring to when he says I have
attacked staff. In this case, appeals
were made to me because people were making allegations about unfair
treatment. That was why I wanted more
detail and to ask more detailed questions in Housing Estimates. I would really prefer to read it before
Estimates are over, but I probably will not get that opportunity, although
there are other opportunities in the Chamber I guess.
I
would like to go on, then, to another topic.
I am not sure that this is the correct line, but I will try anyway. The Housing department dropped what I thought
was an excellent program, the Co‑op HomeStart program. I am not sure why they dropped it. I do know that an evaluation was done. I requested under Freedom of Information a
copy of the evaluation of the Co‑op HomeStart program, and I was told
that it was not complete. I find that a
little strange.
I
cannot understand why your department would terminate a program before the
evaluation was completed. Nonetheless, I
would be interested in knowing if the minister, and now I will ask the minister
directly, if I could have a copy of the evaluation of the Co‑op HomeStart
program.
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the Co‑op
HomeStart program was cut as a budgetary reduction measure by the
government. Subsequent to that, it was
determined by staff that they should conduct an evaluation study into programs
to see how it did work overall, apart from the general understanding that the
staff would have with working with it on a regular basis.
The
expectation at the time was that because the program was cut and the fact that
budgetary measures were such that we were not likely to have departmental
funding restored for that program that the allocation of limited staff
resources to conduct that evaluation was relatively fruitless.
As
a result, the project was abandoned. No
report exists with respect to the evaluation because it was never completed,
mainly because the staff indicated, what was the point in continuing to spend
staff time and resources on a report that was not going to result in any major
benefit, because the program had been cut, and had anticipated it would remain
cut from the budget.
Mr.
Martindale: Well, I guess I can understand the logic of
that, although I would still be interested in any parts of the evaluation that
were completed. I believe that members
in Co‑op HomeStart projects were interviewed. Were the results of those interviews
summarized and would that be available to me?
Mr.
Ernst: I am advised that basically it is just raw
data at this point. It was never at a
point where it was analyzed and put into a format that would be suitable for
analysis. So the answer I guess is no.
Mr.
Martindale: Well, I am disappointed, because I believe it
was a good program and I am disappointed that it was eliminated. I think if
there was a positive evaluation or if there was an evaluation that it could be
used to argue to reinstate the program at some future date. We know that it rehabilitated vacant existing
buildings and that has been important in keeping people living in the inner
city in
Mr.
Ernst: I am advised also that about half of them we
have had to flip into the nonprofit housing program because they were
financially not viable and that there are a number of others that are presently
walking a very tight rope with respect to financial viability. So that might be a very good analysis of how
the program worked.
There
have been a couple of success stories as well, but I think overall, if you look
at the total numbers advanced through that program, it might not be terribly
successful.
Mr.
Martindale: Well, I hope the one that I was involved with
is one of the successful ones.
Going
on to another topic, is it correct that there was an official opening at the
new Manitoba Housing offices on Broadway attended by approximately 300 people,
a wine and cheese reception to inaugurate the new building?
Mr.
Ernst: Yes.
Mr.
Martindale: Could the minister tell us how much that
reception cost?
Mr.
Ernst: Approximately $2,000 to $2,500.
Mr.
Martindale: Is this a normal event when a new building is
occupied, to have a reception?
Mr.
Ernst:
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the minister's
staff has to be patient with my questions.
For them they may not be very appropriate at times, but I just have to
go through some of the questions for my own knowledge.
First
of all, can the minister tell us in terms of the Executive Support staff, are
there any positions which are vacant?
Mr.
Ernst: We are finding the answer, but I suspect no,
that there are none.
Mr.
Cheema: Can the minister tell me how the decisions are
made in terms of the internal audits and when you decide to audit
somebody? Are there any criteria, just
on random audits through the department or, as the member for Burrows (Mr.
Martindale) was asking the question, there may be specific allegations from
outside or from inside, but what are the criteria? How do you decide which part has to be
audited?
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the internal
auditor has a cyclical audit plan that he deals with on a regular basis. I
think it is every five years he hits every area in the department. In addition to that, there are a number of
special projects, problem areas, something maybe identified by the Provincial
Auditor in his annual review of the operations.
Then problems like the one the member for Burrows referred to from time
to time pop up and so we have to employ his services in those cases as
well. That is generally what he does and
how he goes about it.
Mr.
Cheema: Can the minister tell us, for the last almost
a year, have you found any major disparities within the department in terms of
the internal audits done by your department?
As the member for Burrows was asking the question, I will also be very
interested in seeing a copy of that audit.
Mr.
Ernst: No.
* (2040)
Mr.
Cheema: Can the minister run through with me on this
then, the chart of the department. I
just want to ask him a question. What is the rule of the housing boards? Do we have housing boards anymore and, if
not, when was the policy changed?
Mr.
Ernst: Can you tell me which board you are referring
to now? There are housing authority
boards and there is the board of the
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I am referring
to the housing board in both categories.
If this is not the proper place, I will wait until I go to the right
page.
Mr.
Ernst: I can tell you that the Manitoba Housing and
Renewal Corporation is a shell corporation.
The members of the board of directors are myself, as the chairman; the
deputy minister; the director of program development and support; the executive
director of administration and finance, the Deputy Minister of Urban Affairs;
and Mr. Clarkson from the Department of Natural Resources who is a former long
time employee of the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation, are the members
of the board.
That
board exists there basically as a shell corporation in order to deal with the
federal government on assistance programs.
The federal government requires there be a corporation, a housing
corporation, so the legislation requires that only civil servants sit on the
board as well as the minister. Now, that
is Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation.
The
former
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, first, about
the second part which the minister says they do not exist. Who is performing the function of those
boards now?
Mr.
Ernst: The Manitoba Housing Authority, one single
housing authority under the general managership of Mr. Fallis and for the most
part existing staff from former housing authorities and from the property
management division of MHRC or Manitoba Housing.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, can the
minister tell me when that policy was abandoned?
Mr.
Ernst: The decision was made public, I believe, in
February of 1991.
Mr.
Cheema: Can the minister tell me what was the
rationale behind such a major change in the policy? I am not criticizing, I just want to know why
it was changed and if your new group of people are substituting that
board. If they are the same individuals
who are functioning within your department, how are they dividing up their time
and how can he justify everything, whatever they are doing now, and the extra
work?
Mr.
Ernst: The rationale by and large was greater
efficiency, better money management, standardized tendering procedures and
policies, standardizing tenanting practices which previously were erratic, to
say the best, and with significant problems identified in a number of
areas. So that was the rationale for
doing it.
What
has happened is that the former staff from the Department of Housing were
transferred to the Manitoba Housing Authority, which is an arm's length
situation. They are no longer civil
servants, they are functioning today as the Manitoba Housing Authority, really
started on May 1 this year. It has taken
some time to pull it all together. There
were five different unions involved.
There was a number of issues that had to be straightened out, final
decisions in terms of direction, branch offices and a whole variety of issues
that were surrounding that whole question of the Manitoba Housing Authority,
but we finally got it all sorted out, the last part being the question of the
union involvement, and that was settled at the end of March, and matters
proceeded from there, and by May 1 most of the staff were in place and all of
the offices.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, if the minister
would have a look at Schedule 2 on page 5 under the Manitoba Housing Authority,
does the new board fall under that category?
Where can I find the line for the new boards under the expenditure? Have
they been given separate funding or are they going to function within the same
parameters?
Mr.
Ernst: The function of a housing authority by and
large is best seen in the place you are going to see it. The functioning of a housing authority exists
based on‑‑it has a certain revenue base and it has a certain
expenditure base. Unfortunately the two
do not meet. The expenditure base is,
generally speaking, much larger than the revenue base, so what happens is that
it is subsidized, and it is subsidized through transfer payments from MHRC.
Mr.
Cheema: Can the minister tell me in dollars how much
is the part in terms of revenue and how much is in the expenditure part, and
out of that how much is coming, as the minister said, from MHRC and how much is
coming from the minister's department?
Mr.
Ernst: That information is provided on page 34 of the
Supplementary Estimates book. At the
top, it says Rental Subsidies, for the year ending March 31, 1993,
$32,286,500. That is the net subsidy.
The
other information is contained at the bottom of that page as the gross revenues
and rents and gross expenditures.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I will go
through those numbers. I do not want
those numbers to be repeated. I was not
aware that I can get access to those numbers.
(Mr.
Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)
Can
the minister tell me if these housing boards, how are they performing functions
in terms of the communities outside
Mr.
Ernst: We are getting a little off the topic, but
because the critic is new and so on, I am prepared to accommodate him.
First
of all, there is only one board, the Manitoba Housing Authority. It, at the moment, consists of the former
Minister of Housing and the senior department staff. There will be, within the next month, a
private sector board put into place with expertise from a variety of
disciplines around the province and geographic locations and former Housing
Authority experience and so on‑‑so covering a gamut of interest‑‑private
citizens, for the most part. Their job
will be to run the Housing Authority.
They will be deciding, within a framework, policy directions and so on
like that and operations of the Manitoba Housing Authority.
The
rest of the things like the social housing advisory groups and a number of
those kinds of things are new at the moment and will, over the next few months‑‑very
likely now, I guess into the fall, as we are into the prime summer vacation
months‑‑the tenant relations officers in each of the district
offices job will be to go out and to liaise with tenant groups and community
associations who have an interest in continuing social housing.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: Item 1.(b) Executive Support: (1) Salaries $307,700‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $59,500‑‑pass.
Item
1.(c) Finance and Operations: (1)
Salaries $2,041,500.
Mr.
Martindale: Under Finance and Operations, it says under
objectives, to identify and appraise and acquire land necessary for delivery of
building programs. Is the sale of land
under Finance and Operations, as well, of land bank land?
Mr.
Ernst: Yes.
* (2050)
Mr.
Martindale: Then, I would like an update on the Ladco deal
of several years ago. I am sorry I could
not find the information that I thought I had in my office, but I know that
there were terms and conditions attached to that deal. I am wondering if those terms and conditions
have been met, because I believe that there were time lines applied to them.
I
wonder if the minister could give us an update on what has happened since the
agreement was signed. I believe that
land is in
Mr.
Ernst: The time lines that the member refers to are
triggered only by the start of development; in other words, once construction
starts on the site, then there are certain time lines that apply.
At
the present time, the property has been rezoned by the City of
In
current economic times, and current demands for housing particularly in the
private sector, and the low numbers of new housing starts and so on, it is‑‑well,
not finalized. The determination has
been not to press the issue; that there really is not a big demand in the
market, and we are not going to maximize the benefit for the taxpayer until we
are into a market that has some anticipated growth in it at least, anyway.
Now,
that is somewhat subjective because you do not pluck these things out of the
air when the demand is there. It takes
some lead time in order to bring them on stream, so I guess there is some
judgment that has to take place at a time so that when‑‑you know if
the market is going to go next spring, then we will probably have to start work
this fall to provide services for lots to be sold based on next spring housing
starts. That decision point has not been
reached yet.
Mr.
Martindale: If I understand the minister correctly, no
houses have been built on that property yet.
Mr.
Ernst: No.
Mr.
Martindale: Therefore, none of the conditions of the
agreement have been triggered because there has been no development.
Mr.
Ernst: While there are lots of conditions in the
agreement, no time lines have been triggered as a result of the start of
construction and development. Do not
forget this is a joint venture between a private sector company, with a lot of
expertise and a long history of good development in the city of
The
reason you go into a joint venture is to rely on the expertise of that
development company, who presumably have survived all these years as a result
of reading the market correctly and so on, so it is our intent to be guided to
a large extent by their advice and given the current market conditions, we are
not in any big hurry.
Mr.
Martindale: When the minister said, we have not serviced
the land yet, but if development is going to happen next spring, then servicing
would have to commence sooner than that, by we, did you mean Manitoba Housing
or the City of
Mr.
Ernst: We is the joint venture. The development company puts in the servicing
in any development. That is the purpose
of a development agreement with the City of
Mr.
Martindale: Who pays for putting in the services?
Mr.
Ernst: It is a joint cost.
Mr.
Martindale: So some of the up‑front costs are borne
by Manitoba Housing and the developer, in this case Ladco, and those monies are
recovered when the lots are sold?
Mr.
Ernst: That is correct.
Mr.
Martindale: Is it correct that the
Mr.
Ernst: The property that was purchased is a land
bank, and it was not for the provision necessarily of low‑income housing.
It was purchased as a land bank in the mid‑1970s, I guess as a hedge
against rising land costs because of substantial demand that took place during
that period of time. It did not work out
that way but, nonetheless, that was the intent behind the purchase.
There
is a substantial carrying cost to the
It
was determined that was a joint‑venture development. We called for tenders. It was subsequently negotiated. This all occurred before my time as the
minister but, nonetheless, that is where we are at the present time. We are awaiting a reasonable market in which
to proceed. We are not about to invest
millions of dollars in services in the ground and have them sit there with no
revenue coming back.
Mr.
Martindale: My recollection is that when the agreement
was signed, the NDP criticized the agreement because there was nothing in it
requiring the developer or the province to set aside land for social
housing. I think I recall that the
minister said that on the other hand there was nothing prohibiting social
housing being developed. Could you tell
me if there are any plans to set aside land for co‑op or nonprofit or
seniors housing?
Mr.
Ernst: First of all, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the NDP
criticize everything. There is nothing
they do not criticize. As a matter of fact, we get gloom and doom daily in this
place from the NDP constantly.
As
a matter of fact, we had a situation this afternoon where in fact we had an
excellent program involving a number of youths, 6,500‑and‑some‑odd
youth who are represented by the member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine), and
they criticized that. It was
unbelievable. We had a great success
story and a program that was of significant benefit to the youth of
I
am not surprised that the NDP criticized this agreement, because that is all
they can seem to be able to do is criticize. They do not seem to have any kind
of constructive ideas at all, particularly the member for Elmwood (Mr.
Maloway), who is constantly criticizing everything under the sun and has not
come up with a constructive idea since I have known him.
Apart
from that, there are in fact in the rezoning plan for the development, multiple
sites. Those multiple‑family sites
are available to anyone who wishes to acquire them to construct a project. If there is money available, and if there are
people interested, and if somebody wants to build a project on that site, and
if there is money, say, available from our department or another department to
deal with that, then a project likely will occur there. There are an awful lot of ifs attached to the
project.
Mr.
Martindale: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, that was an
interesting speech, especially since the minister moved a friendly amendment to
my resolution in the Chamber today and we voted on it and it passed. There are occasions when his party and my
party agree on things, contrary to what he just said.
I
suspect, though, that what he is talking about is a fundamental difference, and
that is that we believe in social housing.
I think if our government had been the government of the day that we
would have written into the agreement that land must be set aside for social
housing, because we have a commitment to nonprofit and co‑op housing that
I think our government would have made a much higher priority than his
government.
It
is interesting that he said there are a lot of ifs in this multiple‑unit
zoning in part of the site, so he cannot really predict whether or not there
will be any social housing or nonprofit housing of any kind. We are disappointed that will not
happen. We will watch and see what
happens, but it almost looks as if the minister is predicting that there will
not be, because he says there are so many ifs involved.
* (2100)
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, if some day in the
long, far off future the member for Burrows ever happens to get into government
and then ever happens to have some involvement in the real estate industry in
One
of them is maximum unit price. When you
look at the cost‑‑the cost, never mind the profit‑‑the
cost of land in this kind of a situation in a prime subdivision area where you
are going to get significant value for the land, then the cost may be
prohibitive in terms of maximum unit price.
The taxation on it, because it is in a prime residential neighbourhood,
may well drive the real estate taxes on a project there way out of proportion
to other sites that are available.
There
are a number of factors that have to be addressed when you look at‑‑it
is not simply good enough to say, yes, we will give 20 percent of that
subdivision to social housing. There are
an awful lot of factors that are associated with it, financial factors and
others, that govern whatever anybody does.
I do not care what political party is in office, you have to address
those, because you are not going to get CMHC funding unless you do. Without CMHC funding, the whole thing is in a
cocked hat. There is not enough money in
There
is some pretty basic understanding that is required before you can simply say,
well, if we were in government, we would have set aside a whole bunch of stuff
for social housing because we believe in it.
Well, you can believe in it all you want. I can believe in it all I want. The fact of the matter is, you have to meet
certain financial guidelines and operating procedures or it is not going to
happen.
The
intent, I think, is to provide the maximum number of social housing units for
the dollars available. In order to do
that, you have to seek out wherever you can the best opportunities for dealing
with that, and that is what we do in the Department of Housing.
Mr.
Martindale: Well, I would relish the opportunity to be
the Minister of Housing and to find out more about multiple‑unit prices
and all the problems, and we will hope that is in two years rather than
eventually, as the minister suggests. We
will have to wait and see what the electors in
On
this page, we have the‑‑[interjection! Well, as long as the
Liberals vote with the Conservatives in the House, we will not have to worry
about an election, will we?
On
this page, we have the executive director's office. I believe the executive director for Finance
and Operations has joined us. Is that
correct?
On
the bottom of the page, one of the expected results is to continue to expand
affirmative action opportunities and meet target group goals. One concern I have is that when staff are
laid off, and I believe approximately 200 staff were laid off in housing
authorities when the new Manitoba Housing Authority was established, quite
often people without seniority are the first to be laid off. In this case, I believe there were four or
five unions involved, so it would be my understanding that most of the staff
were unionized, so the seniority principles would be followed.
Can
the minister tell us what the effect has been on affirmative action as the
result of staff layoffs? My concern is
that visible minorities, women, handicapped people, aboriginal people may have
been affected by staff layoffs. I do not
have any evidence of that, but I would like to ask the minister if that has
happened or not.
Mr.
Ernst: The Civil Service Commission guidelines with
respect to the matters raised by the member for Burrows do not apply to the
Manitoba Housing Authority because they are not civil servants. However, it is our intention that they will
apply because we think they are valuable and should apply.
In
exact terms, we cannot answer as to how many natives, women, disabled or other
targeted groups may or may not have been affected. We do not think in general terms that they
were more or less affected than anybody else, but we do not have definitive
information on that at the moment to be able to provide a direct answer.
Mr.
Martindale: Could the minister clarify, did you say that
staff in Manitoba Housing Authority are not civil servants?
Mr.
Ernst: That is correct.
Mr.
Martindale: Perhaps the minister could expand on
that. If they are not civil servants,
does that mean that they do not work for the
Mr.
Ernst: That is correct.
Mr.
Martindale: Since the minister has someone in Personnel
staff who is present here, could his staff find out for me, and provide at a
future time, any data that they do have about how the layoffs have affected the
groups of people that I mentioned? The minister said, in general terms, they
are not aware of anything, but could I ask the minister to ask his staff to
look into this and report to me at a future time?
Mr.
Ernst: I am not going to request them specifically
to undertake that work. They are busy
enough at the present time trying to get on with the operations. We still have 40 or 50 vacancies in the
Manitoba Housing Authority that we have to deal with, and there are a number of
Personnel issues as a result of the changes to MHA, so specifically I am very
reluctant to request, you know stop everything to do this kind of an
analysis. We have limited staff
available to us to undertake this work in any event.
However,
during the course of the next year or so, a number of these kinds of analysis
are intended to be looked at and when that information comes available, I would
be happy to provide that to the member.
I
can give you a little synopsis. For
instance, five of the nine district managers in rural
* (2110)
Mr.
Martindale: Well, I can appreciate that the staff are busy
interviewing. I was told it was going to
be an around‑the‑clock operation for a couple of weeks. I also appreciate his offer to do it
eventually, and I would accept his suggestion of a one‑year time
frame. If between now and Housing
Estimates time next year, if the minister's staff could provide the answers to
that, I would appreciate it.
Mr.
Ernst: As I indicated, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, say
in the course of events, and presumably by next year, I am not going to give a
firm commitment because God only knows when we are going to get into Estimates
next year. If we happen to be first up,
for instance, in the Estimates process that could well be in early spring or
late winter in which case we would be a long way away from a one‑year
time frame. So we will attempt to
conduct an analysis of these things as we go through our regular work. I am sure that by next year sometime, we will
have the appropriate information.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: Item 1.(c) Finance and Operations (1)
Salaries $2,041,500.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, can the minister tell
me, in terms of comparison with other departments‑‑in this whole
department you are spending about $51 million.
I see a lot of staff here and other administration, managerial
positions, professional and technical support staff. Can you tell me where this Department of
Housing falls in terms of the rest of the departments in the government, how
much money we are spending?
Mr.
Ernst: We have about 130 staff or thereabouts in
Manitoba Housing. We are the third or
fourth smallest department in the government and, while $51 million represents
our net expenditure, gross expenditures are in the area of $180 million a year.
We
are building a variety of projects and so on, carrying out expenditures in a
variety of areas. So what you see in the
Estimates reflects the net cost to the government, but there is a substantial
gross expenditure cost associated with the operations of the department.
Mr.
Cheema: I was having a look at chart No. 7 in terms
of the staff. In 1988 we had almost 170
people working then; 168 in 1990; and now we are up to 131, as the minister has
said. Can the minister tell me why there
is such a major shift? I mean, was there
mismanagement at first, mismanagement in the previous years, or something else
has happened which the minister would like to share with us?
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I would like to tell
you that it is the phenomenally efficient Minister of Housing that has been
able to organize this into a much tighter unit with sleek lines and very
efficient staff. I would like to tell
you that. However, the fact of the matter is that program reductions over time
have caused the reduction in staff.
Mr.
Cheema: I am not going to question the ability of
staff. Without any question, the department individuals do their best, but the
question here is: Why is there a major
shift? I do not think I have got the
answer from the minister.
Mr.
Ernst: We have, over a period of time, changed our
operations somewhat. There have been
some Co‑op HomeStart and other Seniors RentalStart programs. There are, oh, eight or 10 programs that one
time or another have changed over a period of time. The staff that were delivering those have
either been absorbed into other departments or are simply not required any
longer. Transfer of staff from the
Landlord and Tenant Affairs Division went from the Department of Housing to the
Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs last year. So there are a number of reasons why the
difference.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, can the minister tell
me, even when we were going on page 10 and 12, and now the same thing here in
terms of Communications, there is always some funding provided. Can the minister tell us, where do we spend
that kind of money, and how can you have Supplies and Communications almost
every year the same? In operations, when
you are dealing with the day to day changes, how can you set a specific number? I know the minister is laughing and saying it
is the budget, but it seems very odd that one could predetermine that this much
money you are going to spend anyway. I
just want to know how you can determine that.
Mr.
Ernst: First of all, I think if you remember in
1991, the Communications staff from all departments were consolidated under the
Department of Culture. The staff were
consolidated there, but the funding for the staff and their related
expenditures were left in the departments for the year 1991. They simply, I think, estimated the amount of
expenditure from the year before, that is why it is the same; brought it
forward into '91; left it in the department, even though the staff were gone to
the centralized Communications division; and then subsequently this year, the
funding was transferred into that department.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, so the minister is
saying all the communication, whatever has to go to the public is done through
the central office, as with the other departments, so we do not have a specific
person. Under the previous NDP
administration, there were a lot of communicators all over the place, so that
has been corrected. Is that a fair
statement?
Mr.
Ernst: Yes.
Mr.
Cheema: Thank you.
That is all.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: Item (a) Administration: (1) Salaries.
Mr.
Martindale: A couple of more questions on this page. I appreciate the minister's honesty in saying
that the reason for the reduction in staff is the reduction in programs, and he
said, eight or 10 programs have been changed.
I think more accurately dropped.
That I believe proves the contention that I made right at the beginning
that a significant number of programs have been eliminated in Housing.
I
have a question. Since we were talking
about the Ladco deal, I believe there was a proposal called for land in The
Maples that was in the newspaper recently.
I wonder if the minister could tell us what is in the proposal call. How much land is involved?
Mr.
Ernst: First of all, MHRC developed a number of
years ago a project called Meadows West, located on the north side of
There
was a proposal came forward from a private development company who was prepared
to buy the property owned by the bank, but in order to develop it, required the
co‑operation and expenditure of quite a bit of money by MHRC to fund
certain joint servicing requirements for the combined site. Appreciate that you are reaching the outer
limits of development potential in the city of
We
proposed that we would invite proposals from interested parties to offer their
suggestions as to how these things might occur, and on what basis, and at what
cost and what benefit to Manitoba Housing as the owner of the property. We are awaiting those. When they come in, we will analyze them and
after we have analyzed them, we will come to a conclusion.
* (2120)
Mr.
Martindale: Will any of this land be set aside for social
housing?
Mr.
Ernst: Maybe.
Mr.
Martindale: Maybe is not good enough. Since you are negotiating now, you must know
now whether or not you intend to set aside any land for public housing.
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we are not
negotiating with anybody. We have
invited people to submit proposals to us for the potential development of this
property. That is as far as we have got
so far. As I said, maybe may have been a
little facetious. At the same time, it
is probably very, very accurate in terms of, no decisions have been made with
respect to this property and nor do we want to preclude any development
proposals that come in.
We
may have somebody come in and suggest that they would simply buy the entire
site from us and pay us a zillion dollars for it, and end of the story. We may have somebody come in to suggest that
we should develop the entire parcel as a golf course. I do not know. There are any number of kinds of proposals
that can come forward.
So
until we see what they are, what the potential is for MHRC, it will not make
any precipitous decisions with respect to‑‑I should suggest too
that there is no shortage of land in
(Mr.
Gerry McAlpine, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)
It
may be inappropriate in this subdivision.
It is a long way from anything at the present time. This would be way out in the sticks, so to
speak, where there are limited services available, both public transit and
commercial and other services and so on.
It may be totally inappropriate to provide land there. So we will look and see what comes in and
then we will make some decisions accordingly as we go along.
Mr.
Martindale: So I take it that the minister has no
preference before the proposal calls come in; you do not have any criteria. I
will put that in the form of a question.
Do you have any criteria as to what you would like to see developed on
that land? It seems to me it makes a
very big difference whether it is developed for housing or a golf course, to
use the minister's example. Have you not
thought about this before the proposal call, or are you just waiting to see
what comes in?
Mr.
Ernst: We have asked the proponents to provide a
conceptual plan for development of the property. There are limited numbers of things that can
be done with that property. Obviously,
you are not going to develop a chemical factory on it. It is slated within the city's long‑range
development plan as a residential reserve.
In terms of residential, it will be low‑density residential,
either single‑family or limited multiple‑family development, under
the city's long‑range development plan.
So
there are limitations on what can happen on the site. I suppose the potential exists that if
somebody wanted to pay us a huge dollar to build a golf course on there and we can
make a substantial profit from it and turn that profit into more benefits for
social housing recipients, then we might be tempted to do that. That bridge we would have to cross when we
come to it.
Mr.
Martindale: Even though it is zoned low‑density
residential by the city, you would be prepared to look at a proposal which
would change it to some other use, such as a golf course, if you thought
Manitoba Housing would be paid more money for that parcel of land?
Mr.
Ernst: Well, first of all, it is not zoned. I said, the city's long‑range
development plan designates the area as low‑density residential. From that perspective, that limits what you
can do on it but, yes, if the government saw an opportunity to sell this
property for sufficient dollars to be able to create a larger benefit for
housing elsewhere in the city or under a different analysis, we would be crazy
not to accept it. I mean, if somebody
wants it bad enough, they are prepared to pay for it. If they are prepared to pay for it, then we
should maximize the benefit to housing recipients in the city of
Mr.
Martindale: You really do not have any criteria. You are just looking for whatever is the most
profitable proposal.
Mr.
Ernst: Yes.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I just wanted
to ask the minister the same kind of question the member for Burrows is asking,
because this land is probably in the area that I represent.
I
just wanted to ask a basic policy question.
How do you decide that, for example, there are a lot of lots that are
vacant, a lot of area which is vacant, many people do not have money to buy a
house, many people are just going bankrupt‑‑how do you set up
another community? Ultimately, the
taxpayers or the city are going to pay.
We are all going to pay for those services. Initially, the cost, the developer would pay
and that could be one of the reasons that the government may seem as very
acceptable.
That
has happened in the past. You do not
want to start up something in which somebody else has to pay your bills. I think we have to look at those things very
carefully, because we have a development in the area in terms of some of the
development by Genstar which was done at
People
are stuck with their own land, but a major developer, I do not care what the
name of the developer is, that is not the issue here, the issue is how that
developer could, with the start up money, attract government to give some
financial incentive in the first place.
Then we end up paying in the long run.
That is the issue which is very important for the taxpayers, then the councillors
are getting a bad name because the councillor has to justify the tax raise.
I
just want the minister to consider those things because those are very real
issues. I think that not only in that
area, but as a general statement in terms of the policy of the government,
considering our population is not growing.
We do not have many individuals who are lined up to buy houses. There are a lot of other vacant lots out
there. There is a lot of inner city area
which needs a lot of improvement. Government
could do a lot of things if you want to look at how the money can be spent
effectively.
I
think it is foolish to get into any of these things without seeing the long‑term
consequences. If you are going to set up
another community half to one mile outside the city limit, basically, provide
all the transportation services, provide the sewer system, provide the
telephone, hydro and everything else, it is very, very expensive. Initially it looks very attractive because
they can build a road, and after they build a road, then that is it. Basically, then, they can set up their own
prices. It is a money‑making business.
You and me and somebody else are going to pay the bills.
I
would like to know if the government could take even a more proactive approach,
as the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) is saying, set up some criteria,
tell us exactly which way the government, from a provincial point of view,
would agree to any kind of major development in the suburbs.
* (2130)
Mr.
Ernst: Well, that was a mouthful, Mr. Acting Deputy
Chairperson, but I do not disagree with the member for The Maples. First of all, let me say that this matter was
initiated, not by us in the first instance, but by the private owner of an
adjacent parcel, who cannot develop their property without our co‑operation.
At
the same time, we did have an interested party willing to look at purchasing
the privately held parcel on the condition that there was a joint venture
undertaken with us. We were reluctant to
enter into a joint venture without at least canvassing the market to determine
what was out there, and what the potential was, and what private companies
thought might occur over the next five or 10 years. It is just not an overnight wonder. This is a long‑term process. We are talking here about, I think, 150 acres
of land altogether, between the private and the public ownership parcels.
What
we did was, we said, let us invite some proposals and see what people are
prepared to do, to pay to what they view might happen in this area. Before anything occurs in the ground, there
is an awful lot of process to go through yet to determine whether or not we
should undertake this project at all.
That includes a significant rezoning process through the City of
Winnipeg and the analyses of existing development and all the things that the
member raises concerns about, as well as a development agreement in terms of
who pays for what when services are installed.
So there are a host of things, and we are not looking at any immediate
development taking place there. I would
think any development would be at least a couple of years away.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the issue is
very important. If you go on, the next
road is
I
think those issues are very important, and I am sure this issue is going to
become more explosive during the civic campaign, because those roads are not
fixed. We have a person who works in
this building. He has six or eight acres
of land, and the road, the
If
we are going to have two or three blocks away a so‑called big development
area, which we all have to pay, I think those things need to be discussed. I think it is an opportunity for the minister
and this government to have some clear‑cut policy in terms of who should
be developing and not to sell the interest of individuals, because you are
setting up a major community and everyone else is going to suffer in the long
run. We have seen that. There are examples right now‑‑I
do not know about other communities, but I know in The Maples area in terms of
close to the northwest of McPhillips, and those are three or four roads, and
along the side of Pipeline, when you go a couple of miles away.
It
is an important issue, and I would like the minister to note those comments
from me, because those are things individuals have raised with me. I always thought that we could probably go to
City Council and make a case but, when you go to them, they have the same
argument why you cannot divide this‑‑it is personal property. Six acres, you have to have two or three more
individuals in the family to have a subdivision done, and I think it is
unfair. Simply, I just want the minister
to know that is an issue.
Certainly
I am not totally 100 percent knowledgable on the details of the issue but, on
the surface, it looks really very suspicious that a major company, major
developer would come and simply take away what is due the people who have
really had their properties for the last many years. I mean, they have set their houses there for
so many years. Then all of a sudden
somebody else who may have a direct say to the government‑‑who
knows?‑‑that have advantage.
I think it is unfair.
Mr.
Ernst: By and large those issues fall in the purview
of the City of
Mr.
Cheema: That is the way it starts, right?
Mr.
Ernst: True, but it may be two, three, four or five
years down the road that something will occur there. We do not know that. We may get no answers from our proposal
call. We do not know at this point.
The
question of your individual constituents who have problems that need to be
addressed, they need to be addressed by the City of
I
know what the situation is. The people
do not want to front‑end the service costs to deal with it. They want the city to pay the front‑end
service costs, and they want to reap the windfall benefits of selling their
property. Well, I do not blame them; I
would like to do that too, but too bad.
If somebody is prepared to put up their money in order to achieve those
benefits, then the city is quite rightly not‑‑why should the
taxpayer put up the money so these people can reap the windfall when there is
another taxpayer somewhere else who is prepared to put up his own money in
order to reap a windfall?
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I just want to
spend a few minutes on the same issue in terms of‑‑
Mr.
Ernst: Quite frankly, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson,
I do not want to cut off the member for The Maples (Mr. Cheema), and I
understand his situation, and maybe I got a little too carried away in
provoking him, but the fact of the matter is, it has nothing to do with the Housing
Estimates. We have had a discussion
because it related to this proposal, but it really has nothing to do with
Housing.
I
would be happy to discuss it with the member for The Maples on another
occasion. Unfortunately, it cannot be Urban
Affairs Estimates, because we did those this afternoon already but, on another
occasion, I would be happy to talk to him about it.
Mr. Cheema:
I do understand that may not be the 100 percent proper place, but it
still is a concern, whether the minister likes it or not, whether I like it or
not. That is the issue there, an issue
that is a very real one. It is going to
come and, ultimately, the minister's desk will see some of those things,
because those concerns are real.
It
may not be the right place, but probably we can ask the minister in the
concurrence motion, but I am really concerned with that issue in terms of what
is happening out there, why individuals are going to suffer on behalf of
somebody who is bigger and larger and who has more money than the individual
citizen. I think it is unfair.
Mr.
Ernst: I do not disagree. Would the members of the committee entertain
a few moments of recreation and reconvene at quarter to?
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. McAlpine): What is the committee's
will? Recess for eight minutes? Quarter to? Recess. Thank you.
* * *
The
committee took recess at 9:38 p.m.
After
Recess
The
committee resumed at 9:46 p.m.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. McAlpine): I will call the
committee to order. We are currently on
1.(c) Finance and Operations: (1)
Salaries $2,041,500‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $467,400‑‑pass.
Item
2.(a) Administration: (1) Salaries
$133,700.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I was just
looking at the Expected Results here. It
says to "Ensure effective direction is provided to the division in
planning and management of departmental programs." I am simply asking again the same
question: Why do we have too many
managerial and support staff and everything else, to spend a very small amount
of money in terms of in the whole department?
Am I missing the basic point here?
Mr.
Ernst: Yes, I think you are missing the point. There are two divisions in the Department of
Housing. One deals with the question of
financial management and the series of programs related to financial management
including mortgages, administration and all those kinds of things on the one
hand.
This
program development and support is basically the section of the department that
is involved with program delivery. So
under this section, this is where the new housing commitments are being made
and carried out, the new program is being carried under that division of the
department. That is where the SAFER and
SAFFR programs are administered from, and a number of those kinds of things.
While
the $10 million overall relates to this department, there is a whole other‑‑the
question of transfer subsidies and so on to MHRC which appears as the largest
single line, I think, in the departmental Estimates, at $36 million, is where a
lot of their program ultimately gets funded.
In
addition to that, we have capital expenditures related to these program
divisions. For instance, if we build a
35‑unit project and there is a capital expenditure of $2 or $3 million
associated with that, that comes out of the capital line, the $2 million or $3
million for the capital construction of the project. Subsidies come out of the transfer payments
area. This is the administrative area
associated with that program.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. McAlpine): Item 2.(a)(1) Salaries
$133,700‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $12,800‑‑pass.
Item
2.(b)(1) Salaries $339,500.
Mr.
Martindale: Well, now we are into some very interesting
substantial issues, ones that the minister and I have talked about before.
Before
we get to the elimination of the Co‑op Housing Program and offloading of
housing responsibility to the provinces, et cetera, I would like to ask some
questions about the three‑year social housing plan. I wonder if the minister could tell me what it
consists of, for a start.
Mr.
Ernst: To be slightly facetious, about 10 dead trees
for one. It is a very large document
utilizing an awful lot of paper for this ongoing thing, and we have to revise
it on a regular basis and so on. It is a
document about, well, I would guess, an inch thick, relating to a whole series
of social housing parameters and guidelines established by CMHC.
* (2150)
Mr.
Martindale: Would it be possible to receive a copy of the
three‑year social housing plan or any parts of it?
Mr.
Ernst: This is a document between CMHC and Manitoba
Housing. We are not certain if it is a
protected document or not. We will
investigate to determine if CMHC has an objection. If they do not, I do not see
any reason why you cannot have one.
Mr.
Martindale: I would like to thank the minister for
that. If he would follow up, and if they
give permission, I would be interested in reading it. I appreciate him saying that he will ask
CMHC.
Mr. Ernst:
Puts you to sleep instantly.
Mr.
Martindale: Since research and planning provide regular
analysis of the housing market and market trends including starts, vacancy
rates, absorption levels, et cetera, I wonder if the minister could comment on
housing market trends.
We
know that housing starts of new construction are, I think, slightly up this
year over last year, but construction in the '90s is considerably lower than
the '80s. Could the minister comment on
the trends in housing construction?
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the
statistics, by and large, speak for themselves.
I do not need to relay to the member for Burrows that information. I am sure he has it.
In
general terms, interest rates today are probably as low as they have been in
two decades as far as financing of housing is concerned, but there is a
significant malaise in the economy, as well, that I think is holding a lot of
people back from making a major commitment toward the purchase of new housing.
There
is also a very large supply of existing housing in the marketplace which is
being absorbed at a much more rapid rate than has been the case over the last
couple of years, as well. Until you reach a point where the absorption of
existing housing stock is at a point where it starts now to make sense to go
into new housing, given the cost differentials between the two, then it is
potential that new housing starts will be limited for the next period of time
at least anyway.
Notwithstanding
the fact that
We
are very fortunate here that a significant number of renters in Winnipeg have
the option, can afford to buy a home, but the new housing market in particular
is reaching now in excess of $100,000 for a new single family home on a
suburban 50‑foot lot, so those costs are beyond the reach of many.
You
are looking really at kind of the transfer, shall we say, of an existing
homeowner of a more modest home, who has it paid for or who has a substantial
equity, who now can look at a move‑up situation where they can move from
maybe their older, more modest home into a larger or newer home because they
have a significant equity and can handle the financing of that new home, but
that is again much more limiting in terms of new home construction.
[interjection!
Well,
certainly, the economy has a great deal to do with it. If people are in a
position to see some long‑term security in their job and are not living
with the fear that their business may close or whatever in the next little
while, then they will be prepared to make a commitment to that.
I
think the buoyancy of the economy will have to recover before we are going to
see any significant movement in the housing market.
Mr.
Martindale: I believe I have read that
We
know that we need the construction jobs.
We know that those dollars circulate in the community and are spent over
and over again. We know that the money
is probably recovered in terms of taxes paid, income taxes and real estate
taxes, and my understanding is that housing construction provides one of the
highest per capita job creation rates of any kind of housing stimulus. It is one of the fastest and one of the best
ways to get people working again.
I
think I know what the answer is, but I would be interested in hearing whether
the minister believes in stimulating new housing construction or not.
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, our government
is very reluctant to get involved in artificial stimuli to the economy in
general, particularly at the expense of existing taxpayers, because what
happens‑‑you know, there is roughly 1.3, I think, or 1.4 man years
of employment created per home in the city of
There
is no expectation on the part of the government to artificially stimulate the
economy through grants to first‑time homeowners and so on.
Mr.
Martindale: Is the major reason for that because your
government is philosophically opposed to that, or because you believe that the
demand is not there for new housing?
Mr.
Ernst: I suppose it is a little of a lot of things.
Certainly, our government does not believe in major artificial stimuli to the
economy at the cost to the taxpayer. We
saw that when the NDP were in government, and the legacy of that, we are paying
for today.
The
fact of the matter is that those short‑term jobs were created and
disappeared. We are left with a debt,
hundreds of millions of dollars that was borrowed to artificially stimulate the
economy. The
* (2200)
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. McAlpine): The hour being ten
o'clock, what is the will of the committee, to keep sitting? Agreed?
Some
Honourable Members: Agreed.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I just want to
ask the minister one thing in terms of, as the minister knows, the Department
of Health is undergoing a serious, major health care reform. Under the
Can
the minister tell me if he has had any discussion with the Minister of Health
(Mr. Orchard) in terms of having the housing project for the individuals,
specifically with the mentally ill patients, who are going to be discharged
into the community pretty soon? Can he
tell me, and if not, then why not? It is
one of the major initiatives of the Minister of Health who has said that he is
going to get each and every department involved.
Mr.
Ernst: The answer to the member for The Maples (Mr.
Cheema) is yes.
Yes,
we are, as a matter of fact, having those discussions. Officials from my
department are on committees with the members from the Department of
Health. We have over the past number of
years participated in deinstitutionalization projects related to housing. We have one project this year, I think, in
Dauphin. The
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, can the
minister give me a more specific answer in terms of how many units are going to
be part of this new mental health reform which are going to be provided through
the Department of Housing and with the Department of Health because that is a
major component? It is not just having a
few meetings here and there. There has
to be a serious discussion and specific numbers.
Mr.
Ernst: I cannot give‑‑I am sure what the
honourable member for The Maples (Mr. Cheema) would like is 200‑‑a
fixed number. It is a little premature at this point to say that. We have one project in the works for this
year.
We
also have ongoing discussions with the Department of Health with respect to how
they are going to deliver that program and whether in all cases, or some cases,
or no cases, as the case may be, it will be delivered through the Department of
Housing. There may be other vehicles to be delivered. We have a limited ability to carry out this
delivery, so we cannot really give you a definitive answer at this point.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I do not want
to take up too much time in this area. I
just wanted to say that the minister is not aware of what is happening in terms
of mental reform. That is not his
area. But certainly the minister should
know that it is very essential that one of the components in mental health
reform, when you are going to take patients out of institutions, is to provide
alternative care delivery, and that the housing part is going to be very
essential.
I
would ask the minister: Is his
department playing any specific role, or are they part of the Committee on
Mental Health Reform or not?
Mr.
Ernst: I did indicate to the member for The Maples
(Mr. Cheema) that, yes, my department officials are participating with the
Department of Health. I think I have
said that on a couple of occasions. We
are dealing.
But
we may or may not provide all or part of the Department of Health's
initiative. We have limited abilities to
provide that under our federal‑provincial program guidelines. We will provide what we can.
It
may be that the Department of Health will have to find other alternatives, that
we may not be able to deliver it through the Department of Housing. We have some involvement. We have in other cases no involvement. It is all interdependent upon our ability to
deliver within our program allocations.
So
it is not necessarily the Department of Health's view that Manitoba Housing
would provide all of the resources related to it. We may only provide a small portion of
it. It depends on how these programs are
carried out.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I am not
asking the minister to be a major component as a part of your department. But I
think it would be a good idea for you to discuss with the Minister of Health
(Mr. Orchard), because that seems to be the understanding, that when the alternative
models of delivery will be involved in terms of Housing also, and that is being
expected. I do not want any surprises to
come tomorrow, that was not a part of the planning.
It
is very essential in terms of whether the Selkirk institution or the
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, let me try and
explain for the member for The Maples (Mr. Cheema) again that Manitoba
Housing's involvement in the provision of housing is within our mandate, within
our ability to pay‑‑sorry, strike the "ability to pay,"
although it is a factor, so within our unit allocation availability. It is not our mandate to provide the housing
for every other department of the government.
It is not our job to provide housing for every welfare case that is
represented by the Department of Family Services.
We
provide what we can within our limited scope and limited resources. So if Health wants to deliver a program, they
do not necessarily consult us with respect to all of the programs that they
deliver that require housing. We meet
with them. We have our officials
discussing with them what we can provide in the overall context of their
program. But their expectations may be a
lot higher than ours, and that sometimes happens within the bureaucracy of
government where you get expectations that cannot be realized because we do not
have the capability to do that.
I
am glad you raised the question, and we will certainly undertake those
discussions.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, it is not the
routine thing I am asking. Something
which is very important has been happening in the Department of Health, and
that part, the mental health part, is a major component. Out of that major component, there are various
different models or deliveries the government is considering, your minister is
considering.
I
am not saying that there has to be specific money allocated; basically,
departmental research could play a very important role in co‑operation
with the Department of Health. The minister said something is being done, but I
think more discussion may be required.
I
am not saying that the minister is not doing enough. I am simply saying that you probably have to
co‑operate more in terms of research and planning and make sure that some
of your resources can be given to the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) to make
sure that they get the best advice possible, rather than going out and thinking
in six months time what should have been done.
Mr.
Ernst: Well, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I thank
the member for his advice.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the member for
Burrows (Mr. Martindale) was asking a question in terms of any specific program
which will deal with grants to start up new housing in the inner city.
We
had one concern that was under the core area, and that was about eight months
ago, we had a concern raised with the minister.
The program is called the RRAP housing program.
Can
the minister give us the updated information, where we are on that program now?
[interjection! Yes, it is called the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance
Program.
* (2210)
Mr.
Ernst: Yes, the RRAP program is delivered by Canada
Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the federal government's housing arm. They
utilize the Manitoba Metis Federation in rural
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the other
issue here is, as the minister knows, our economic situation. I am not saying this government has to be
totally blamed, but a number of things, I think, have to be done in terms of
stimulating the economy and trying to take advantage of the low mortgage rates,
and see if something can be done to try to develop a program which will provide
grants for individuals to be able to buy new houses.
Under
the new federal government policy, they have to put less as a down payment, but
still, I think if something can be done either to upgrade the houses or buy new
houses in the inner city area, that could be helpful.
(Mr.
Deputy Chairperson in the Chair)
Eventually,
I think that will help, maybe in part, to stimulate some of the economic
situation. I mean, every house has a few
more jobs attached to that. I think it
is an idea worth considering. Some of
the provinces have done it in the past.
Some were not very successful.
The Premier of Saskatchewan, Grant Devine, was probably a failure in
that program, very much so. I just want
the minister to say whether they are considering such an idea.
Mr.
Ernst: No, we are not considering it, but I thank
the member for his advice and take it under consideration.
Mr.
Martindale: I notice that under Expected Results, there is
a goal of approximately 600 units of subsidy for 1992‑93. I wonder if, first of all, the minister could
give me a breakdown of the number of units anticipated to be built in urban
areas and the number in rural areas.
Mr.
Ernst: Okay, it will take me a minute to sort this
out, but let me run through various programs for you‑‑to be
constructed this year. It will be a mix,
some of last year, some of this year.
Actual construction to be done this year will have approximately under
the private nonprofit and public nonprofit, 150 units. Then there are an additional 24 units for
Dial‑a‑Life which is a special project for kidney dialysis
patients. We just had the sod‑turning,
as a matter of fact, on Friday.
That
is roughly a total of 170 units under those programs. We do not have it broken
down between the city and rural at the moment, but I can sort that out. It may take a few minutes to pull it all out. For instance, under the nonprofit program, that
is public and private nonprofit, in 1991, we delivered 288 units, or we
committed to 288 units. Some of those
are delivered, most will be delivered during 1992. Then our commitments for this year,
anticipated, will be 193 units under that program.
Under
rent supplement, in 1991, we committed 183.
This year, we anticipate commitment of 77. Under the rural and native program, delivered
or committed to, 118 units in 1991 and anticipated, 89 units in 1992. The urban native program, 1991, committed 108
units, and in 1992, anticipate committing 81 units, for a total then of 1991,
697, and for 1992, 440. Those are
anticipated only at the moment because we have not yet finalized our unit
allocation with CMHC, and it may be a few more weeks yet before that is
ultimately finalized.
Mr.
Martindale: So it is possible that there could be more
units depending on what is finalized with CMHC.
Mr.
Ernst: You have to understand how these units are
allocated. The units are allocated in
terms of lifetime costs. CMHC does not just write us a letter and say you have
400 or 500 units. It is a dollar figure
and that dollar figure is calculated on lifetime costs, and that has to do with
construction costs and operating costs and long‑term subsidies, and so
on.
It
is a process of working through that number back to how many units you can
commit to or not. It depends, of course‑‑the
same dollar in
Mr.
Martindale: So, in other words, that 440 may increase to
600?
Mr.
Ernst: No, the 440 may increase to 444.
Mr.
Martindale: Where does the 600 number come from that is
in the Estimates book?
Mr.
Ernst: That is what we committed to last year.
Mr.
Martindale: Okay.
In I think every category that the minister read out, there was a
decrease in units from '91 to '92. What
would the main reason be for that?
Mr.
Ernst: Well, in a large part, it is a CMHC cap. We will in fact have included in our numbers
the delivery of some nondesignated units that are related to that new program I
referred to in my opening remarks, where there will be units delivered outside
of the CMHC commitment but part of the same project so that when you have a
mixed project of some designated subsidized units and some nondesignated,
nonsubsidized units, then you are still delivering X number of units, you are
still delivering the construction program, you are still targeting the needs of
seniors, you are still doing all the things, except you are now meeting a
different market segment than you are with the subsidized units. So we are still delivering those number of
units, but by and large, it is the cap.
Mr.
Martindale: I presume that the minister cannot give me
completely detailed information because you have not announced who is getting
what units yet for this year. Is that
correct?
Mr.
Ernst: Yes, that is correct.
Mr.
Martindale: At a future point, could you give me a more
detailed breakdown of rural and urban
Mr.
Ernst: When the program is finalized and the
projects are publicly announced and all those kinds of things, sure. I do not have a problem with that.
Mr.
Martindale: I wonder if the minister could give us a
further breakdown in some specific categories such as special needs, second
stage housing and safe shelters. Do you
know if any of the unit allocations are going to go to any of those or all of
those, and if so, is it possible to give numbers?
* (2220)
Mr.
Ernst: To answer the member for Burrows' question, we
committed last year to 40 beds for special purpose. They were all crisis shelters: one in The Pas; one in Selkirk; one in
Steinbach. This year we are looking at
between two and four projects, depending upon finalized numbers and finalized
projects that are related to crisis shelters again, two in
Mr.
Martindale: Any units going to second stage housing or to
special needs?
Mr.
Ernst: There is one special needs. One of the projects, for instance,
Mr.
Martindale: I would like to move on to the elimination of
the federal co‑op housing program.
I received a document from the Co‑operative Housing Federation of
Canada‑‑[interjection! Well, my colleague for the Maples has a
question on second‑stage housing.
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I just wanted to ask
the minister, he said the Alpha Housing Project has not finalized their
operating budget, or whatever, at this stage, but I have a letter in my hand
that says that they have raised about $30,000 from the church groups, and they
are continuing to approach the community at large through various
organizations. According to them, they
have applied for the second‑stage housing project.
Can
the minister tell us what else they have to do to get funding from the
Department of Housing?
Mr.
Ernst: Thirty thousand dollars would last them about
three months. We are not going to commit
a large amount of capital and create a project for them to operate if they are
not going to last any longer than a few months.
We
have told them‑‑and I have had several discussions with the
proponents of that project, and I explained to them that either get a
commitment from Family Services to fund it on a per diem basis or‑‑and
they seem to want to do this from a number of organizations and churches in the
Winnipeg community‑‑I said, go and get a funding commitment from,
you know, if you want to get 10 parishes to commit to funding on an ongoing
process, but we need a three to five year, at least, commitment that there will
be funding available to operate.
Otherwise
it will be there in Question Period, saying, why are we cutting off their
funding when we never provided it in the first place? So we have to realistically, from our point
of view as a delivery agent now‑‑however sympathetic we may be, the
Department of Housing is not in the business of providing first or second‑stage
housing for abused people, children.
We
are in the business of providing housing, period. In this case, the Department of Family
Services becomes a client department of Housing. We have to operate on a reasonably business‑like
basis, and we would like to know when we provide the capital money how they are
going to pay it back and how they are going to be able to fund and operate
their shelter.
We
have made a number of suggestions to them.
As a matter of fact, she even tried to recruit me for her fundraising
program, because I had a number of suggestions for her to pursue, but I say, we
need to have some commitment. As my old
friend, Slaw Rebchuk, used to say on City Council, we need it in black and
writing, because we have to have some basis upon which to advance a project
like this, not that we do not want to do it.
They
have some more work to do yet before it will be in a position to be able to
proceed.
Mr.
Martindale: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I have a very
interesting document from the Co‑operative Housing Federation of Canada
called, One of Canada's Quiet Success Stories.
In fact, there are 15 newspaper articles about the success of housing co‑ops. I believe all of these were written after the
federal co‑op program was eliminated.
A
quote on the front page says: Suppose
you wanted to build the kind of housing that will serve well in the 21st
Century. Ideally, it would be economical to produce, immune to the wild,
speculative swings of the real estate market and designed to foster a sense of
community. People would be proud to live
in it. That sort of accommodation
already exists. It is called co‑operative
housing.
In
another document that they faxed to me, they pointed out that in a CMHC evaluation,
they were found to be much lower in terms of operating costs compared to public
housing. They claim 40 percent lower in
this 1990 CMHC evaluation. They were 20
percent lower than the operating costs of private, non‑profit, rental
housing.
This
has resulted in more than $30 million of savings to the taxpayer each year on a
rent geared to income subsidy in co‑op housing.
The
minister and I have discussed this cutback before, both informally and in
Question Period, and we both agree that the federal government action was
arbitrary and harmful to the
We
have lost unit allocations, we will lose construction jobs in
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, on April 10, I believe
it was, the Housing ministers of
From
that meeting, came concerns expressed by all Housing Ministers in the country
about the loss of the co‑op program as well as the cap on CMHC budget to
reduce our social housing unit allocations.
We, through the ministers' meeting vehicle, where we expressed our
opinions‑‑and I might say that as the senior minister responsible
for Housing in Canada in terms of length of office‑‑you know, by
quirks of fate in elections and other things, I turned out to be, I think, if I
remember correctly, the senior minister at the meeting and led, I think, a
productive discussion of the problems facing us and what we can do about it.
Our
officials have, since that time, been undertaking certain work. We hope, when we meet at the end of the month
with the federal minister, we will be able to provide some alternatives to him
that can see some of this potential loss reinstated. Now, whether that will translate into
additional social housing units, additional special needs units, units for the
urban native community or co‑op housing units, we cannot say at this
point.
* (2230)
If
it comes down to, are you going to provide funding‑‑and I concur
with the co‑op housing association of
However,
much of that is still speculative at the moment. We do not know. We have not received a response from the
federal government to our protestations and hopefully will receive that at the
end of the month when we attend in
Mr.
Martindale: Well, the answer is interesting, but the
minister did not answer my initial question about: Will he table the letter? So I take it you are refusing to table the
letter that you wrote to the federal Minister of Housing or Minister of
Finance?
Mr.
Ernst: The member from Burrows (Mr. Martindale)
can surmise all he wishes, believe what he wishes to believe, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson. We have made significant
protestations to the federal government with regard to the loss of both the co‑op
housing program and social housing program dollars.
We
are very concerned and will continue to be concerned but not simply to jump up
and down and protest. We took the view,
with my insistence, at the ministers' meeting that we need to find an
alternative, because we are all faced with that problem provincially. It does not matter what political stripe it
is either, quite frankly. There are lots
of NDP governments that are faced with the exact same problems. In fact, they are worse off than we are in
So
if we are faced with those problems and you believe in the process and you
believe in what you are doing, then you try and find a way around it, and the
way around it is simply not to throw more money at it, to borrow more money to
throw at it. The way to find it is to
reallocate your resources, re‑create your priorities, relook at your
priorities to determine what you want to spend your money on. So we have charged our officials with the
process of looking into how we can do that, where we can find from within. Where can we find economies like the MHA,
where, for instance, we will anticipate savings of somewhere in the area of $3
million between CMHC and ourselves?
Well, there is the potential for reallocated money within our existing
budgets.
If
we can do more with those kinds of dollars, if we can save some money in the
process‑‑I mean, we ought to be doing it anyway, but quite apart
from that, if we can find other economies, if we can find other means of
addressing the whole issue and how we can find funding to meet the demands and
needs of the people out there, then we will do it.
Nothing
was ever achieved by jumping up and down and crying over something. You have got to get out and get active and do
something. That is what we are doing,
and that is what we are hoping to find so that we can go to the federal government
and say, look, we have an alternative.
Here it is. By some reallocation
on your part, by some work on our part, by some co‑operation between us,
we think we can deliver a similar program or that we may be able to mitigate
against at least the cap that you are living under. I think that is something we ought to be
doing, and we are attempting to do that.
Mr.
Martindale: Well, the minister says he is concerned, but
we have no proof because he will not table the letter. He acknowledged that they met with a
delegation from CHF, but I understand that none of the Ministers of Housing
even asked them any questions, even though this is a group with a lot of
specialized knowledge. They represent
70,000 units of co‑op housing in
Also,
the minister talks about wanting to get more value for their money or targeting
money, maybe using the money for social housing, public housing rather than co‑op
housing, yet tonight we heard, I believe for the first time, an announcement
about a new seniors program which will actually subsidize high‑income
seniors. Now, we will get into the
details of that later, I may be wrong‑‑[interjection! Well, the
minister said in his opening remarks that it was for high‑income seniors,
so we will find out the details of that later.
Could
the minister tell me if all the Ministers of Housing from the provinces were
present at the meeting in
Mr.
Ernst: No, they were not.
Mr.
Martindale: Of those who were present, was there a
consensus, was there agreement that the federal government should be asked to
reverse their decision on cutting the co‑op housing program?
Mr.
Ernst: It was unanimous.
Mr.
Martindale: What views were conveyed to the federal
government, and were they conveyed to the Minister responsible for Housing and
to the Minister of Finance?
Mr.
Ernst: Yes, they were.
Mr.
Martindale: What views were conveyed to the federal
ministers?
Mr.
Ernst: I do not have the letter in front of me, but
Minister Gigantes of Ontario, who is the chair this year of the Housing
Ministers of Canada, on our behalf, both transmitted by mail and went to visit
personally the ministers responsible‑‑at least the Minister of
Housing, I am not sure about the Minister of Finance‑‑to convey our
concerns and to convey our proposal for working together to try to find a
solution to this problem, not simply just letting it hang or simply yelling
that we want more money. That letter
conveyed the concerns both with respect to co‑operative housing and the
social housing program.
Mr.
Martindale: Did the provincial Ministers of Housing convey
their views about the cutbacks of transfer payments to the provinces for
housing?
I
did not put the question correctly.
There have been cutbacks to, I guess, social housing unit allocations,
and you said that you were disappointed in that. What views were conveyed to the federal
government about that cutback?
Mr.
Ernst: I thought that is what I have been talking
about for the last ten minutes, the question of social housing unit allocations
and what we could do internally amongst ourselves as deliverers of the program
and managers of those units so we could create economies that would free up
dollars with CMHC's current budget that we could reallocate toward social
housing and other kinds of units. That
is what I was talking about.
* (2240)
Mr.
Martindale: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I would like to move
on now to the federal proposals for constitutional change affecting
Housing. You have expressed in the House
your concern that this will adversely affect
Mr.
Ernst: It will, in a large part, depend on what
devolution of the powers respecting Housing are as to how
If,
however, it means much more than that, if it means for instance the disbanding
of the CMHC, if it means national policy making in respect to a number of areas
of which CMHC is actively involved, and quite frankly where a good portion of
our entire real estate industry in the country is predicated, that is quite
another matter. So I think quite frankly
for all of the rhetoric that has been associated with the devolution of powers
at the moment, I think, it is awfully up in the air as to what it actually
means and so far have been unable to determine exactly if any work has been
done to flesh that out. So I am hopeful
that when my colleague returns from
Mr.
Martindale: In a letter from the Co‑operative
Housing Federation of Canada dated May 11, which I believe the member for The
Maples (Mr. Cheema) has as well, they say that given the reduction in federal
funds for housing since 1985, it seems more and more likely that if full
responsibility is to be transferred to the provinces it will not be accompanied
by any financial resources. Does the
minister agree with this analysis and are you urging your Minister of Justice
(Mr. McCrae) and your Premier (Mr. Filmon) to take a strong stand in favour of
strong federal powers including financial resources in the area of Housing?
(Mr.
Ben Sveinson, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)
Mr.
Ernst: It has not exactly been a bed of roses with
the federal government having all the powers that they presently have. You know, we have looked at something like
over a five‑year period a 60 or 70 percent cut overall in terms of lost
units. I mean that is not something to
be terribly proud of or to try and cling to.
At the same time, as I indicated, until we can clarify what all of these
things mean in terms of actual devolution of powers‑‑yes, I do not
disagree that there has been a significant cut in financial contributions made
by CMHC. They are right.
At
the same time if it is‑‑and a lot of this as I understand it
relates to the question of
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I have also the
same communication as the member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale), and I am sure
the minister has received the same communication from the Co‑op Housing
Federation of Canada.
Basically,
these are both issues that the member for Burrows has raised; the first one,
the federal cuts, and second, in line with their own proposals in terms of
giving power to the provincial governments.
I
think everyone in this committee knows and everyone outside this committee
knows that the Mulroney government is doing whatever they want to do. Basically, it does not matter what the
minister says here or says in front of the committee. Basically, that government has given up on
many provinces for their own political agenda.
I
think the best thing is that the next time, people should tell them exactly how
they feel. I mean, we can make all the
noise here, but they are the ones who make the decisions. So I think it is so crucial just to see how
the negotiations on the Constitution are going to eventually proceed and how
the decisions are going to be made.
All
those things will be debated in this House, as the minister has said. We will all have an opportunity to let our
views be known, but I certainly have no illusions or delusions about Mr.
Mulroney's performance and his ignorance of our province.
I
think it is a shame that we have two cabinet ministers from this province who
have been very silent on the issues affecting our province. I will certainly see how this government will
campaign with Mr. Mulroney next time. I
think that is the issue for us to see, whether the Tory government of
I
think that is the issue ultimately. I
think it is the issue in terms of how you can criticize the government and at
the same time, be in line with them and campaign with them when they are
cutting everything for the provinces.
I
just wanted to put those remarks on the record and express our distress and see
how this government and this party will campaign in the next federal campaign,
and see how they will defend the rights of the people of Manitoba, rather than
defending the rights of their own parent party.
The Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr.
Sveinson): Order, please. Item 2.(b)(1)
Salaries $339,500‑‑pass.
2.(b)(2)
Other Expenditures $51,900‑‑pass.
2.(c)(1)
Salaries $259,300‑‑pass; 2.(c)(2) Other Expenditures $230,800‑‑pass.
2.(d)(1)
Salaries $707,100. Shall the item pass?
Mr.
Martindale: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, under this
page, we are going to talk about the Manitoba Housing Authority. I wonder if the minister can give us an
update on the number of staff.
(Mr.
Deputy Chairperson in the Chair)
Point of Order
Mr.
Ernst: This is not Property Management, it is Project
Management. Property Management falls
under the Transfer Payments to MHRC, the last line, so that is where we should
be addressing the question of MHA.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: The honourable minister did not have a point
of order, but thank you for the clarification.
* * *
Mr.
Martindale: Well, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, would it be
appropriate on this page to discuss the 23,000 units of public housing stock in
Mr.
Ernst: We should be dealing with it under item
3. That is the appropriate place.
Mr.
Martindale: Then let us talk about the 300 housing units
delivered on an annual basis involving the public and private nonprofit
components.
Mr.
Ernst: We have been talking about that for half an
hour.
* (2250)
Mr.
Martindale: Okay.
Could the minister tell us about the proposal called for in 1992. Is there a proposal call and if so, is there
a deadline for it?
Mr.
Ernst: There is no proposal call as of yet for 1992;
none is anticipated.
Mr.
Martindale: If no proposal call is anticipated, does that
mean that you will be allocating units to organizations that applied last year
or up until the present?
Mr.
Ernst: We have enough carry‑over left from our
previous proposal call that we will be able to allocate virtually all of the
units that we have available at our disposal.
Now, as we work through those proposals, some will fall by the wayside
as they normally do. Not all projects
contemplated ever actually proceed to completion. If there are some units left unallocated from
our 1992 allocation, we may consider a proposal call in the fall for the
balance of the units that are left for '92 and possibly for '93.
Again
that matter is still up in the air because of our significantly reduced numbers
of units, if the ultimate goal of CMHC and the federal government is
realized. So you know to give you what
is a fact today is that there has been no proposal call for 1992. We do not anticipate one yet. We may, depending upon availability of units,
have one later this year for the balance of '92 and for '93, but that decision
is not yet taken.
Mr.
Martindale: Mr. Minister, one of the problems that I see
out in the community is that there is an inordinate time period that passes
between the time that a group begins and the time that their project is
approved, they get the unit allocation, they start construction and open the
doors. I believe CMHC is saying now that
on average it takes about five years, which seems to me to be very discouraging
for any group that is looking at sponsoring a project. I wonder if you can tell me what has happened
to groups that applied in the past. I
believe a couple of years ago there were something like 106 proposals in
response to a proposal call of which about six received unit allocations. What
happened to the other approximately a hundred?
Were they encouraged to reapply?
Did most of them reapply? Were
some of them left in limbo? What did the
department tell these other applicants to do and what did they do?
Mr.
Ernst: Out of the 1990 proposal call, to date about
20 or so projects have been approved. So
that is about a fifth, and that is not bad in terms of numbers of units. We are still living off that list as a matter
of fact, and we have in fact contained in our 1992 still some additional
projects from that proposal call. They were all advised at the time that they
were not successful, encouraged to keep working and so on. Some have fallen by the wayside. Some are still around waiting, and so you
know it is a mixed bag in terms of what happened to all of those applications. One, of some note, for instance, the Flin
Flon Seniors RentalStart project has in fact terminated voluntarily. In fact,
we were prepared to fund, under our new program, that project and they
determined that they were not able to proceed. I do not know if we have
actually ever formally heard from them. I did read that in the Flin Flon
paper. I am told we do have formal
indication.
In
terms of delivery time, it depends I guess a lot on how far advanced the
proposal is. In some cases it is simply
an idea: Gee, would it not be nice to
build a seniors housing project; let us get some money from the government and
do it. That is all there is. There is an
interest by a group of people who want to do something, and that is as much as
was there when it came to us.
Generally
speaking, from the time that a formal application is made to the project on the
ground, and providing it is worked at reasonably well and there are no major
glitches in terms of the program, about three years, which is not a bad time
horizon for major construction projects at all, if CMHC's average is more than
that, then certainly ours is not. So
anyway that is where we are at with those things.
We
think we can deliver a lot quicker than CMHC can in terms of an average. I think our record indicates that where
people are prepared to work at it, where there is a reasonable, kind of, enough
work done in the preliminary stages to flush out a project, but we provide PDF
funding to people to get on with their projects and provide some of the initial
stage planning. These things are invariably driven by committees as opposed to‑‑no,
committees of well‑meaning private citizens‑‑well, boards or
committees, but anyway groups of people where they have to meet, they have to
get together, they have to get everybody together. It is a laborious process, to say the least,
and so it generally takes a little longer to finalize.
Mr.
Martindale: One final short clarification, the minister
indicated that groups working with Manitoba Housing take, on the average, three
years. Is that correct?
Mr.
Ernst: The indication is that from the time a formal
application is made until the project is on the ground, it takes about three
years. Now, that is assuming that‑‑and
a lot of things are in place, that there are appropriate working groups, that
there is a TRG, that there is a number of efforts that have to take place to
reach that kind of a horizon.
The
staff have pointed out that if they hit the tide right, where they have
everything administratively ready in terms of their application, that the unit
allocations are available and those kinds of things, that it could be as little
as a year or a year and a half. But we
are giving the outside saying that over that time frame it is three years
anticipated, start to finish.
* (2300)
Mr.
Martindale: One supplementary question. Would the minister not agree then with the
information that I indicated, albeit secondhand, from CMHC of five years? Is that because groups are working with the
province and the province is speedier?
Mr.
Ernst: The only major program that CMHC delivers here
in
In
terms of our situation, it is very difficult to talk, even in terms of
averages, because every project is different.
Every group is different. These
things are all kind of done on an individual one‑of‑a‑kind
basis because they are all different projects every time. So it is difficult to say, but our guess is
certainly not longer than three.
Mr.
Martindale: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I have a question on
procedure. I have questions on vacancies
and bachelor suites, major improvements to the existing public housing stock,
arrears, waiting lists, et cetera, and is the proper place to ask those under
3. Transfer Payments to MHRC?
Mr.
Ernst: Yes.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: Item 2.(d) Project Management: (1) Salaries $707,100‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $82,000‑‑pass.
Item
2.(e) Client Services: (1) Salaries
$1,078,700.
Mr.
Martindale: I have some questions on SAFER and
SAFFR. Your department is still
administering these programs. I wonder
if the minister has any information on take‑up rates and whether or not
more people are availing themselves of these programs or less people. It seems to me that when people become
unemployed that there is more low‑income people in
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I am looking to see if
we have some detailed information. It is
in general terms. There is an
interesting phenomenon that takes place in recessionary economies, that housing
becomes more affordable for people, not less affordable. What you have is rents either do not go up,
or go down because of recessionary times, vacancy rates that are large and
those kinds of things, more increased competition for units and so on. So in a hot economy, where there is big
demand, rents go up and that leaves people on limited incomes in a difficult
situation.
Generally
speaking, our numbers have not been increasing dramatically at all. They are relatively static, I think if I
remember correctly, for those income supplement programs. I think, by and large, what you have is these
things deal with either seniors on fixed incomes who are of the ability to
afford accommodation or families that are the working poor who are looking for
supplement, because people on welfare are not eligible for these programs. I think in many cases presently you have a
situation where they can either afford to pay their rent or they cannot. They cannot afford to pay 80 percent of it or
60 percent‑‑I either have a job or I do not. If I do not have a job, I cannot afford to
pay any rent. So I guess it by‑passes
these programs and heads directly to Family Services.
Mr.
Martindale: So this would explain, for example, in the
Adjusted Vote, 1991, for SAFER, Shelter Allowance for Elderly Renters, a
decline from the Adjusted Vote of '91‑92 to the year ending '93, going
down from $4,861,400 to $4,841,800?
Mr.
Ernst: Well, it is the actual take‑up.
Mr.
Martindale: Does your department know what the take‑up
rate would be? Would 50 percent of
seniors eligible for this program be in the program, 75 percent? Do you have any idea what your take‑up
rate is of those who are eligible according to income?
Mr.
Ernst: The consensus seems to be that there is not
much reliable information available to indicate as a percentage of what the
actual represents over the potential.
All I can say is this, that this program has been around for 12 or more
years. There is not an agency in town that does not know about it. Senior
support groups and family support groups as well, all over the place, are aware
of the program and what it can do.
But
our demand has consistently been substantially below that anticipated by some
people, which renders their numbers suspect along the way. At this point, your guess is as good as ours,
I guess, as to what the potential number out there could be.
Mr.
Martindale: Well, the reason I asked those questions is
that I have on several occasions found tenants in my constituency who are
unaware of this program. I am wondering
if the minister has ever considered the kind of advertising for this program
that exists for the annual rent increase.
I
think the advertising for rent increases is so extensive that virtually
everyone is aware of whether it is 3 percent or 4 percent, or whatever it is,
every year, because of widespread advertising.
Has the minister ever considered advertising SAFER so that as close to
100 percent as possible of people who are eligible will take advantage of this
program?
Mr.
Ernst: We provide information to a host of
organizations, brochures for landlords and homes, and a variety of
dissemination of information vehicles.
No,
I have not considered running a TV program like the 3 percent rent guideline
because anytime anything is mentioned about this, the department is deluged
with calls most of which, you know, 99 percent of which are irrelevant to the
issue. It really does not serve the
correct purpose. You have to deal with
an individual's circumstances. There are
a number of calculations that are required.
Some detailed information related to those things are disseminated, I
think, as widely as we can, short of mass mailings, which I do not think we are
going to undertake.
* (2310)
If
somebody is not aware of the program and that is quite possible that somebody
has been missed it somewhere along the line or they have not had an opportunity
or did not avail themselves of an opportunity to investigate, that is going to
happen I suppose. If those are brought
to our attention, we are certainly prepared to work with them to review the
case and see if they are eligible.
Mr.
Martindale: Since the main criterion for eligibility is
income and rent being paid, would the minister consider advertising it through
the Manitoba income tax returns?‑‑since you can program a computer
and you can print very easily on someone's income tax return. You would be targeting it to people who are
eligible by age and by income. You could
put an extra line on the printout saying your income indicated you might be
eligible for SAFER depending on how much rent you pay‑‑phone such‑and‑such
a number. Would the minister consider
doing that?
Mr.
Ernst: I was trying to think of what the implications
would be. It is something we could look
at. I could not commit to it.
Mr.
Martindale: Would the minister or his staff be willing to
talk to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) and find out if it is feasible or
not?
Mr.
Ernst: I am also advised by staff that any changes
all have to be approved by the federal government as well, because the income
tax system and what the dangers are and so on, I think it is something we would
want to have a long and hard look at. I
do not think it is just the Minister of Finance's say. It is a question of looking at the
implications of it, the logistics of it, what is involved, what are the costs,
what are benefits. Are you really
solving the problem? It might be a nice
idea, but does it really do anything?
All of those questions and then, of course, if the answers to all of
those are yes, then who has to approve it and so on. It is not something that is going to happen
overnight.
Mr.
Martindale: Well, I am going to pursue this, because I am
asking this on behalf of incredibly poor people who live in the Burrows
constituency. I remember meeting people
on
Mr.
Ernst: The first step before talking to the Minister
of Finance, as I indicated to the member for Burrows a moment ago and perhaps
he was not listening or did not understand, is to determine, is there a benefit
from doing this, or are we simply wasting resources? Are we going to hit the target people? All of those kinds of questions have to be
addressed before we get to the question of even discussing the matter with the
Minister of Finance. We have to be sure
we want to do it before we discuss matters outside of the department so, as I
indicated, we will have a look at it.
Mr.
Martindale: Well, I think that is an absolutely
ridiculous answer. We get all kinds of
printed messages on all kinds of things,
I
cannot see why the minister would not at least talk to the Minister of Finance
(Mr. Manness) and investigate it, and I will ask him again, would you be
willing to do that?
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, either the member for
Burrows is deaf or stupid. But let me
say this, that‑‑
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: Order, please.
Point of Order
Mr.
Martindale: I would like to ask the Deputy Chairperson if
those terms, since they are quite derogatory, are parliamentary.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: "Deaf" is parliamentary, but the
other word is unparliamentary. I would
ask the minister to withdraw the second part of his statement.
Mr.
Ernst: I will withdraw the statement.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Minister. I would also advise honourable members, as we
get into the later hours of the evening, sometimes the heated debate gets the
better of us, and I would ask that we please try and keep the decorum at the
same level we have had to this point.
* * *
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I have said twice
already, for the member for Burrows' (Mr. Martindale) edification, and I am
prepared to again say for the third time, that we are prepared to look at it,
and to suggest for a moment that our department's wishing to look at his
suggestion is ridiculous offends me. [interjection! Yes, you did.
Mr.
Martindale: We will see the Hansard in a few days.
Mr.
Ernst: The answer was that the department would look
into the question to see if there is a benefit and what the cost of that
benefit would be? Is it worthwhile to
undertake, so we reach the proposed targeted individuals and so on? We will look at that information, and that
was deemed by the member to be ridiculous, and that offends me, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson, which caused my latter outburst for which I apologize.
Nonetheless,
for the fourth time now, let me suggest to the member for Burrows, we are
prepared to look into it.
Mr.
Martindale: Well, I appreciate the minister's apology,
but the original question was whether or not he would talk to the Minister of
Finance (Mr. Manness), and the minister refused.
Point of Order
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the member for
Burrows (Mr. Martindale) dearly loves to sit there and make his cute little
word games of trying to put words in my mouth.
I did not refuse to talk to the Minister of Finance. I said I would investigate the situation
internally in the department and if it was feasible, then I would talk to the
Minister of Finance. So I did not
refuse, and he should not try and put words in my mouth or information on the
record that suggests certain comments by myself.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. The honourable minister does not have a point
of order. It is clearly a dispute over
the facts.
* * *
Mr.
Martindale: I think I would like to move on to another
aspect of the same issue. Several
seniors have been talking to me and I hope to the minister as well about the
problems with SAFER because when they have an increase in income, for example,
from old age security and guaranteed income supplement or any increase, it
seems that their benefit from SAFER goes down.
I
do have an analysis of the Shelter Allowance Program. I am sorry, I do not have the source, and
actually it looks like something that your department might have written. Perhaps Bill Mudge or somebody got a hold of
it. I am not sure where I obtained
it. You might recognize the name Bill
Mudge though. I think he has been
lobbying on the SAFER issue for quite a few years.
In
the first paragraph it claims that there is ongoing backsliding of the benefits
provided under the program. I am
wondering if the minister and his staff agree with that as to whether there is
backsliding in the program because seniors who have talked to me indicate that
when their income goes up slightly, their benefits go down, and they feel like
they are falling behind.
Maybe
that is the way the program is supposed to work, and if so, I think it would be
good if the minister could put that on the record. I could then pass that on to the seniors who
have been lobbying me and possibly the minister as well.
* (2320)
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, it is a function of
rent and income, and formulas applicable for those seniors. But it stands to reason if their income goes
up, their ability to pay is increased, and therefore, they may have to
contribute more. However, we also increase the rent guideline by 3 percent,
whether it goes up or not, as a potential adjustment.
Generally,
the income calculations try and reflect inflation as time goes along and so on,
so that in most cases‑‑well, since we have been in government at
least anyway‑‑most, if not all, members of the public generally get
a little increase in their SAFER components.
There may be some who do not or some who, for other reasons, are not
getting the desired result.
Before
we took office, there were some years when, in fact, no increases were
provided, by the former government. Some
of these concerns may stem back to that time.
But I can tell you in the year and a bit that I have been the minister,
I have not received any complaints with regard to SAFER program, at all.
Mr.
Martindale: I appreciate that clarification. I would just like to read from this document
again to see if what it says is the case.
It
says: To ensure a constant portion of
income paid for rent is maintained between 28 percent and 30 percent, it is
recommended that the Board of Directors of MHRC be encouraged to continue to
adjust the maximum rent figures and the income levels annually. In conjunction with this annual review, the
rent control board increase and the Consumer Price Index should be used as the
basis for establishing the annual adjustments.
Is
that still the case, that there is an attempt to keep it between 28 and 30
percent of income paid for rent?
Mr.
Ernst: The answer is yes.
Mr.
Martindale: Okay, I appreciate that. Actually I would like to share this document
with you to find out if it is something that Manitoba Housing published. I do not know where I got it. But if the
figures are accurate, I would be interested in knowing the source.
Mr.
Ernst: It is highly unlikely my department would ever
produce something that referred to "backsliding." If they did, I would certainly want to know
about it.
Mr.
Martindale: Well, that is why I raised it, because that is
the kind of language that seniors have been using in discussions with me, and I
do not really understand it. They seem
to understand it quite clearly. They
have all these figures, and they try to explain it to me, but I have yet to
understand it or be convinced. So I will
have to send Hansard out to these individuals and see what they say.
I
am ready to pass 2.(e). My colleague for
The Maples (Mr. Cheema) is going to be back shortly, I hope, and he has some
more questions on SAFER which I guess we could ask under 2.(f). Is that correct, Mr. Deputy Chairperson? We sort of skipped ahead anyway.
Mr.
Ernst: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, either we are prepared
to pass it or we are not.
Mr.
Martindale: Let us pass 2.(e) and ask further questions
on SAFER under 2.(f). Is that
acceptable?
Mr. Ernst:
Fine.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 2.(e) Client Services: (1) Salaries $1,078,700‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $938,000‑‑pass.
2.(f)
Grants and Subsidies $6,829,800.
Mr.
Martindale: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, on this page I see:
"Elderly and Infirm Persons Housing:
Approximately 3,000 Elderly and Infirm Persons Housing units will
benefit from annual grants based on capital costs."
There
is a building in my constituency, St. Josephat Selo, run by the‑‑well,
I guess it is a nonprofit board. I think
it was originally sponsored by the Knights of Columbus. I have had tenants in that building complain
to me that in the summer during thunderstorms the windows leak water, some
units on the west side of the building.
It looks like a fairly new building because it has been very well
maintained. It seems to be good construction
except for these windows.
I
am wondering if any action has been taken to provide for replacement
windows. Has there been a request by the
manager? When did that request happen, and will they be getting some capital
cost money to replace windows or repair windows?
Mr.
Ernst: This is St. Josephat's?
Mr.
Martindale: Yes, I think it is 114 McGregor, McGregor and
Stella.
Mr.
Ernst: The indication is that we are not aware of, at
this point, any problem with the windows.
There were some other concerns which we have addressed in recent time,
but we are not aware of any windows. Now
that is not to say that somebody did not talk to somebody somewhere along the
line, but we will investigate further.
Offhand we are not aware.
Mr.
Martindale: Just one more brief question on the same
topic. I have talked to staff in the former local housing authorities, and I do
not want to name the community because they did not really want to talk to me
in the first place. So, rather than
using a specific example from a former local housing authority, I would like to
ask a general question, and that is, how are capital improvement monies
approved?
The
particular complaint was that they had asked for capital repair funds to repair
a house in a small community, and the general manager claimed that it took
months and months and repeated calls to
Mr.
Ernst: With respect to the former system, it is kind
of academic. We received the want list
from‑‑you know, some of those housing authorities wanted everything
painted every year. They wanted all kinds of demands that were excessive and
beyond anybody's reasonable ability to accommodate.
So
what would happen is the department did an analysis of those requests, and
prioritized them within the funds available, and those were done. Under the new Manitoba Housing Authority, we
will have, in fact, maintenance supervisor personnel in every district office;
hopefully, we will have a much better handle on the fact that we will not see
money spent needlessly, but will deal directly with urgent repairs and matters
that need to be addressed on a proper basis.
At
the same time, we hope to institute ongoing maintenance programs that will see
certain preventative maintenance activities take place which, in the past, very
often were not. They were simply left to deteriorate until such a point that a
major repair was required instead of a preventative maintenance situation. So there are a number of those kind of things
will be addressed.
* (2330)
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I want to ask a few
questions of the SAFER program. I just
want to add a few comments to what the member from Burrows (Mr. Martindale) has
asked, one very positive suggestion, and I do not want the minister to get
upset over anything. Simply, I think it
is a positive suggestion, and we should have a look at this; secondly, whether
it can be done through 55 Plus program.
We
know that those people receive payments from the government, and whether simply
a reminder can be sent. That is not
going to cost anything extra. Many types
of information are being mailed for specific purposes of the government or for
some other purpose. I think it can be
done, but that is up to the minister to decide.
Can
the minister tell us how much money the department spent last year on the SAFER
program?
Mr.
Ernst: That information is in the Supplementary
Estimates book there, 4 point‑‑Is it not?
Mr.
Cheema: That is the amount that was supposed to be
spent. I am asking whether that was
actually spent? Was there any saving
from that allocated funding?
Mr.
Ernst: The actual is $4,293,600.
Mr.
Cheema: Given the economic circumstances and many
things that the seniors are facing, how can the minister feel confident that
every person, every citizen in that category has the information which they can
apply for this program? I think it is
premature to set up a target without knowing the full implication and without
giving the benefit of doubt to the people who are really going to benefit from
this program. That is why I think it is
very essential for them to develop an understanding that such programs do
exist.
Mr.
Ernst: For the sixth time, I will indicate again for
the benefit of the member for The Maples (Mr. Cheema), I said I will look into
it. I will look into it. I just do not want to have you and the member
for Burrows (Mr. Martindale) accuse me of politicizing it if we decide to do
it. Then all of a sudden we will now be
using these to try and collect votes.
An
Honourable Member: That would be terrible.
Mr.
Ernst: Well, it would not be the first time such an
accusation has occurred.
Mr.
Cheema: I want to assure the minister that this time
of the hour and this time of the day, in front of many individuals who are not
particularly affiliated, if you do something good, we will applaud that, and we
will take partial credit for that because that is the way things operate in
this building.
But
can the minister tell us now, in terms of the other program, how the‑‑first
is Shelter Allowance for Family Renters. Is that the actual monies being spent
in that program or has there been some saving?
Mr.
Ernst: Actual expenditures under SAFFR are
$1,561,700.
Mr.
Cheema: So this year the government has allocated more
than $1.7 million and last year this expenditure was‑‑the minister
has outlined already. Now, where is that
money? I mean how come when so many
individuals are asking, that they are not able to get access to the program? How come you are saving money from a very
important program?
Mr.
Ernst: SAFFR expenditures went up. SAFER, seniors, went down, which I think
indicates that seniors are relatively well housed in
Mr.
Cheema: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I think it is a very
interesting statement the minister has made.
I am not totally, as I said from the beginning, in tune with the whole
housing department, but it is a major statement in terms that the seniors are
in a good economic state than the other parts of the community, and that seems
very, very strange. There are a lot of
individuals that, the member for Burrows has said, have indicated that they are
having a tough time making ends meet and I am surprised that the government is
saving money in that area.
There
must be something which we are missing or the seniors are missing. I will be very interested to follow up on
that question. I may have to do some
more research, but I would give the minister another opportunity to, probably
he might like to, correct the record.
Maybe he just said it without having the proper information in front of
him because I am sure, like myself, the member for Burrows and other people
will be very interested to see whether that is really a factual statement.
Mr.
Ernst: Well, it is interesting. We have 309 vacant bachelor units in the city
of
Now,
they are bachelor units. They are not
one bedroom or two bedroom and the discerning interests of the low‑income
tenant has deemed that these units are not acceptable, but if you want good,
affordable, clean housing we can provide it.
We have 300 vacant units and we would love to rent them but
unfortunately the discerning renter again has determined that if you pay 25
percent of income, why pay it for a bachelor suite when you can get a one
bedroom? Well, that is fine, but if
people are in dire circumstances or concerns that they need affordable housing,
we have it.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: Item 2.(f) Grants and Subsidies $6,829,800‑‑pass.
Resolution
84: RESOLVED that there be granted to
Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $10,663,600 for Housing, Program Development
and Support, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
3.
Transfer Payments to the
Ms.
Rosann Wowchuk (
I
want to ask the minister a few questions on particularly the Swan River area
and the Roblin area and the fact that one proposal was put forward earlier on,
in February of 1991 I believe, that would have seen the housing office in
Dauphin and have two people in Swan River.
That plan was changed and the map was redrawn, having an office in
Dauphin and in Roblin. Why was that
decision made to have the office go to Roblin and no staff in
* (2340)
Mr.
Ernst: If you also look at that same map, you will
note that the whole southern part of the province was also redrawn, all the
boundaries were redrawn, and that principally came about as a result of the
transfer of rural and northern administration of housing units to CMHC and
urban native housing units transferred to CMHC.
CMHC as of April 1, 1992, is handling the administration, property
management and delivery of those programs that are no longer delivered by
Manitoba Housing. As a result of that,
that impacted on the numbers and the administrative duties and on the operations
of the Housing Authority offices or property management offices under Manitoba
Housing Authority.
So
the boundaries were rejigged around the province to reflect those issues, and
you will notice that the whole east side of the province is now taken into
Selkirk with the exception of a little bit down in the south by the U.S. border
which is now taken into Altona which was not previously an office. Then we took in the Interlake now as a new
office under Gimli because of the increased load on Selkirk. So there were a number of changes made. That is certainly not the only one, but it
was as a result of that program change.
Ms.
Wowchuk: Is the minister saying then that the number of
houses that were being run by the Housing Authority in the
Mr.
Ernst: The number of offices, the district
boundaries and the delivery mechanisms were changed as a result of that housing
program change. That required, for
instance, that areas that were formerly in the
Ms.
Wowchuk: Was there any consideration given to looking
at
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: Before the minister answers, could I ask
the honourable member to bring the mike up?
Hansard is having some problems picking up.
Mr.
Ernst: Well, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I think I have
indicated to the member on a number of occasions,
Ms.
Wowchuk: Can the minister tell us how many units there
are in that district? Are those numbers
available?
Mr.
Ernst: I am advised approximately 500 in the Parkland
west district and 500 in the
Ms.
Wowchuk: If the minister will bear with me‑‑I
guess what I am trying to find out is how many of those units would be in
Mr.
Ernst: About 169, I believe.
Ms.
Wowchuk: In
Mr.
Ernst: There are another 30 or so there.
Ms.
Wowchuk: So roughly 200, more than a third would be
located in the northern part of the area.
I
guess I have to tell the minister that the people in Swan River are very
disappointed in what has happened and with the number of units that are in the
area, and I know the minister has received this from people in the area as
well, that considering all the other impacts that Swan River has felt from
moves made by this government, to then lose jobs because of the housing
authority was a bad blow to the community, and it is unfortunate that this
should happen, and it very much looks like a political move, to move the office
into a Conservative riding.
I
would hope that this is not right, but that is the impression that is being
given to people, and‑‑[interjection! No, I am not fostering it, I
can assure you. That has been going on
its own quite well without my fostering it.
I
want to ask the minister, however, as far as the office in Roblin goes, where
is the office now, in what building?
There is no provincial building, as I understand, in Roblin. Out of which building is it operating? Is a new building being built in Roblin?
Mr.
Ernst: There is a temporary location in an existing
retail outlet in Roblin. Government
Services is investigating a variety of possibilities for permanent office space
which we anticipate having in place over the next period of time. Whether that will be a new building, whether
it will be an existing building, whether it will be in combination with some
other activities, we are not sure at the present time. Government Services is looking into that.
Ms.
Wowchuk: Last week, we raised the issue of the staff at
that office. I want to ask the minister,
have the interviews been held for permanent staff because that is just being
filled temporarily from Dauphin, as I understand it. Has anything happened with permanent staff in
that office?
Mr.
Ernst: We had a large number of applications for
the positions that were advertised in the newspaper. The competition closed, and we have a huge
number of applications. Staff are going
through those at the present time. We
anticipate holding interviews over the next two or three weeks and from that,
filling the positions.
Ms.
Wowchuk: The other issue that was raised was the phone
services. The minister had indicated the
possibility of a toll‑free line into some of the offices, and then we had
spoken about collect calls. Are collect
calls being accepted now at all the regional offices, and I think in particular
of the office in Dauphin that has a switchboard. Are there any problems with collect calls
going through there, or is that working smoothly? What are the plans for toll‑free
lines into those offices?
Mr.
Ernst: As I indicated to the member privately last
week, there is one toll‑free line for the whole province for service to‑‑it
is direct to
All
the tenants have been advised at least twice with a letter that they could call
collect. The staff are aware. If it goes through a provincial government
office building switchboard, who knows whether some switchboard operator will
turn somebody down, but it should not happen.
Beyond that, we will attempt to resolve any issues that come up.
* (2350)
Ms.
Wowchuk: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I want to ask the
minister, how many jobs were there in this department and the housing
authorities prior to the change of boundaries, and how many jobs are there now?
Mr.
Ernst: Let me seek some clarification. Are we talking about all of the Housing
Authorities in the province?
Ms.
Wowchuk: Yes.
Mr.
Ernst: How many jobs were contained in all of the
Housing Authorities in the province previously, and how many jobs are there
now? [interjection! Okay.
There
was a myriad of people who worked for Housing Authorities on a part‑time
basis‑‑one day a week, half a day a week, two days a week, two
hours a day. We had a number who opened
the building in the morning and came back and closed it at night. That was their job for which they received $6
an hour or whatever it was. So to be
fair in terms of a comparison, there were 320 full‑time equivalent jobs
contained within the former Housing Authorities and Manitoba Housing's
department staff. Under the MHA, there will be 280 full‑time jobs, for a
net loss of about 40.
In
addition to that, we will have a number of contract positions, again, dealing
with individuals who are not included in those numbers, contract positions that
will be dealing with part‑time work associated with individual properties
or individual villages or towns or whatever.
Interestingly enough, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, under the new Manitoba
Housing Authority, there are actually more full‑time positions than there
were contained in the previous configuration of the 98 different Housing
Authorities.
Ms.
Wowchuk: These are all in rural
Mr.
Ernst: That is the whole‑‑
Ms.
Wowchuk: That is the whole thing. Okay.
What
I am wanting to get at is: Have any jobs
been decentralized out of the Housing Authority, or have any jobs moved? We hear a lot about the decentralization plan
of this government and the jobs that are going to rural
Mr.
Ernst: I do not know that you can make a kind of a
direct comparison. Obviously, there were
Housing Authorities in rural
Ms. Wowchuk:
So there have not been any jobs designated out
of this department that have been designated to move from the city into rural
Mr.
Ernst: I can say that in the first instance, when
decentralization was being considered, it was determined by the government,
both in terms of Housing Authorities and in terms of property management staff,
that we are well decentralized as a department.
In fact, we are excluded from the process of decentralization because of
that, the fact that we did operate offices in addition to the housing
authorities. Manitoba Housing operated
offices of its own staff in Brandon, Dauphin, The Pas, Thompson and Churchill,
so we are reasonably well decentralized.
No,
the head office function of the MHA is in
Mr.
Martindale: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I think I will go
into speed‑up; otherwise I am going to miss my ride home from the good
doctor from The Maples. So I will cut
out my preambles. [interjection! How could I ask questions now, after he tells
me that?
People
who did not receive positions in the new Manitoba Housing Authority, were they
encouraged to apply for positions in the Civil Service or for decentralized
positions in other departments?
Mr.
Ernst: Perhaps because of the banter, I missed the
earlier part of the question.
Mr.
Martindale: Some people did not get positions that they
applied for in the new Manitoba Housing Authority. Were those people encouraged to apply for vacancies
in the Civil Service Commission or for decentralized positions in other
departments?
* (0000)
Mr.
Ernst: The simple answer is no. These people are not civil servants,
therefore, not eligible to go on the re‑employment list of the Civil
Service Commission. However, those
people who were unionized or under a collective agreement have gone on a re‑employment
list with the Manitoba Housing Authority, and in the event that positions open
up for them, they would have the opportunity of being considered for those
positions.
Mr.
Martindale: One more question on the Manitoba Housing
Authority, and then I think we will shut it down and ask the rest of the
questions in the House‑‑[interjection! Well, the minister will just
have to answer without his staff, but I am sure he is quite capable of doing
that [interjection! Well, on and off.
Within
the last year, concerns have been raised to me by people in rural communities
where there were small numbers of housing units, and they were afraid that they
were going to lose staff in those communities.
Now, I raised this in Question Period, and the minister indicated that
none of those communities would be left without staff in their community.
I
am just wondering if the minister could expand on that and assure me that there
will be some kind of staff on call in those communities, and if so, would it be
somebody responsible for maintenance or who would it be?
Mr.
Ernst: The expectation is that there will be a
contact in every community‑‑now, whether you can deem it staff,
considering there are two units in some little community, but there will be a
contact available on an emergency basis or something like that‑‑[interjection!
Presumably the member‑‑I am just waiting for him to complete his
conversation so I can respond to his question.
Presumably,
there will be some contact arrangement put in place for those people so that
they will have a "local" person. These contracts will be entered into
for that purpose.
Ms.
Wowchuk: I have just one question on that. When does the minister expect to have those
kinds of things in place, because again, and we talked about this‑‑the
uncertainty in the communities. There
was a service there, the service is changed, these are elderly people.
When
can we expect to have those people identified in the community whom people can
contact?
Mr.
Ernst: I would think relatively soon, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson, another month or so perhaps.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson: Item 3. Transfer Payments to the
Resolution
85: RESOLVED that there be granted to
Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $36,082,700 for Housing, Transfer Payments to
the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation, for the fiscal year ending the
31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
Item
4. Expenditures Related to Capital (a) Emergency Home Repair Program $500,000‑‑pass.
4.(b)
Canada‑Manitoba
Resolution
86: RESOLVED that there be granted to
Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $500,000 for Housing, Expenditures Related to
Capital, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
The
last item to be considered for the Estimates of the Department of Housing is
Item 1.(a) Minister's Salary. At this
point, we request that the minister's staff leave the table for consideration
of this item.
Item
1. Administration and Finance (a) Minister's Salary $10,300‑‑pass.
Resolution
83: RESOLVED that there be granted to
Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $2,886,400 for Housing, Administration and
Finance, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
This
concludes the consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Housing. The next department to be considered is
Consumer and Corporate Affairs.
The
hour being after 10 p.m., committee rise
. STATUS
OF WOMEN
Madam
Chairperson: Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to
order. This section of the Committee of
Supply is dealing with the Estimates for the Status of Women. Estimates begin on page 146 in the regular
Estimates book. Does the honourable
Minister responsible for the Status of Women have an opening statement?
Hon.
Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister responsible for the Status of Women): I
am pleased to introduce the Estimates for the Status of Women portfolio for the
1992‑93 fiscal year. As the
Minister responsible for the Status of Women, I am pleased to touch on the
successes of the past year and to anticipate some of our successes for the
coming year.
As
the members are aware, this portfolio includes both the Advisory Council on the
Status of Women and the Manitoba Women's Directorate. Each plays a significant role in improving
the status of women of
The
advisory council is made up of women from all regions of the province
representing a variety of backgrounds and interests. Council's role is to advise government on issues
of concern to
The
Women's Directorate is a department of government charged with the
responsibility for researching, analyzing and evaluating government
legislation, policies and programs. It
provides government with the research support and analyses that are needed in
order to make informed decisions. The
directorate assists other provincial government departments to ensure that
their services reflect the needs and concerns of
Too
often, and to our detriment, women's concerns are seen as exclusively social
issues. These issues are not solely the
concern of women but of all society.
During the past decade or so, we have seen the fields of economics,
financial planning, business, the Constitution and others recognized as being
of concern to women. In short, Madam
Chairperson, all issues are women's issues and women's issues are everybody's
issues.
Earlier
this year, I introduced Bill 5, The Manitoba Advisory Council on the Status of
Women Amendment Act. I introduced this
legislation to resolve the confusion of names between the Manitoba Advisory
Council on the Status of Women and the Manitoba Action Committee on the Status
of Women. Confusion arises from the
frequent use of their identical acronyms.
While the name will change, the mandate of council will remain the same.
As
members are aware, Bill 5 has passed committee stage and is awaiting third
reading in this Chamber. I anticipate
that this legislation will be passed and that the change of name will proceed.
Council
has directed much of its energy to the issues and concerns of single parenting
and will soon release the single parent handbook, Just Me and the Kids.
I
am also pleased to note that council is in the process of reviewing alternative
substance abuse treatment programs for women.
I anticipate their report will be completed this summer. Council also
acted as a catalyst in setting up the
Council
has assisted in the development of a nonpartisan network which is working
toward enhancing the representation of women judges. Council continues to monitor constitutional
proposals to determine their effect on women and recently hosted a caucus of
Issues
relating to the health and well‑being of
Council
anticipates the sponsorship of special events, research, community consultation
and co‑operation and collaboration with government will be undertaken to
meet its goal and mandate of enhancing the status of women in
During
the past year, the Manitoba Women's Directorate, in carrying out its dual
mandate of research and analysis, outreach and consultation, has contributed to
the development and implementation of a number of government initiatives.
One
of the most significant successes of this past year was the collaborative
development of the aboriginal women's policy by the Native Affairs secretariat
and the Women's Directorate. The
introduction of the policy is part of our government's International Women's
Day celebrations.
Over
200 aboriginal women participated in the provincial forum, the five regional
meetings and in numerous local and individual meetings, which were held
throughout
Through
this policy our government acknowledges the aspirations and recognizes the
potential of aboriginal women in
The
next step, therefore, is to dialogue with aboriginal women throughout the
province in order to explain the policy and to jointly identify priorities.
Our
government has demonstrated its commitment to aboriginal women through the
provision of operational funding for Ikwe Widojiitiwin, the first urban‑based
shelter specifically for aboriginal women, as well as for the toll free
provincial crisis line housed in this shelter to ensure access to assistance in
a number of native languages.
We
also provide funding for Ma Mawi Wi Chi Itata and the Native Women's Transition
Centre. The transition centre recently
celebrated the official opening of its newly constructed facility, jointly
funded by the federal and provincial governments in partnership with the
community. We also facilitated the
establishment of the Opasquiak Women's Resource Centre in The Pas.
In
October of last year, our government released the Domestic Violence
Review. At the time of the report, the
Justice minister announced that 45 of the 75 recommendations made in the report
were already being implemented or would be implemented immediately.
Among
others, these measures include directing police to lay charges in all cases
where evidence of partner abuse exists, mandatory prosecution of all partner
abuse offences, initiatives to allow women quicker access to restraining
orders, and expansion of the
An
advisory committee of community representatives and an interdepartmental
committee were established shortly after the report was received to address
some of the report's longer‑term recommendations.
To
meet the challenge of violence against women, we have introduced a number of
initiatives. We have increased and
stabilized funding for crisis shelters.
Most recently, the Family Services minister, Harold Gilleshammer,
announced the infusion of an additional $500,000 into the crisis shelter system
representing a 10.4 percent increase.
This
new funding has been earmarked to enhance a wide range of services for women
and children. The Department of Housing
has developed and implemented a special priority‑placement policy and
procedures for victims of domestic violence.
Our government has supported community initiatives such as the
Alternatives for the '90s conference and the inclusion of informational flyers
in Winnipeg Hydro billings.
I
am particularly proud of the national listing of violence‑prevention
materials produced last year by the Women's Directorate. This publication is currently being used in
schools nation‑wide and has received much acclaim. This document is currently being updated and
will be tabled at the Status of Women federal/provincial territorial ministers'
meeting in
The
directorate has continued its work in support of the federal/provincial
territorial Attorneys Generals' initiative: Gender Equality in the Justice
System.. In fact,
Ministers
responsible for the Status of Women look forward to the release of
recommendations resulting from this initiative following the next meeting of
Attorneys General this fall. Partnerships have been forged with organizations
such as the Women's Institute. Working
in collaboration, we have designed a model for our rural child care
demonstration project.
The
model, which builds upon existing programs, establishes a registry which will
match available community caregivers with families in need of child care during
peak seasons of farm operations. Plans
call for the pilot registries to be set up in time for the 1992 harvest.
* (2010)
As
Minister responsible for the Status of Women, I am most interested in the
education and training of
This
evidence indicates that the under‑representation lies at the post‑secondary
levels. I am pleased to note that
The
establishment of Women's Directorate Outreach offices underscores our
commitment to all
Staff
have established and maintained a toll‑free information line. Outreach staff have assisted in and
facilitated community development in rural and northern
I
am proud of the progress and the success of both the Manitoba Advisory Council
on the Status of Women and the Manitoba Women's Directorate. During the coming year, each of these
organizations will continue to respond to issues of concern and importance to
Madam
Chairperson: Does the critic for the official opposition
wish to make an opening statement?
Ms.
Becky Barrett (
This,
as I think we always say, is a very small department in terms of money and in
terms of staff, but a department that has the potential for having an enormous
impact on the workings of government. It
is frustrating not to be able to spend an adequate amount of time dealing with
the issues that cross many, many departments and find, or should find, support
in this department.
I
would, however, like to talk briefly about just one report, actually, that the
Manitoba Advisory Council on the Status of Women produced in November 1990, the
Single‑Parent Families Report. As
I read this report today, I was struck, Madam Chairperson, by the fact that it
is a year and a half old and yet the information and the concerns that are
raised in this report, produced by the Manitoba Advisory Council on the Status
of Women‑‑the currency of the issues and the concerns raised in
this report.
I
think, for me, Madam Chairperson, it symbolizes what still needs to be done as
far as dealing with the issues around the status of women. The minister earlier said that too often
issues that deal with women or that are important to women are seen as
exclusively social issues and that all issues are women's issues and women's
issues are all issues. We have had this
discussion regarding Bill 5, and will have at third reading. I have absolutely no quarrel with the
statements made by the minister.
However,
I think that what this report, the Single‑Parent Families Report, points
out is that, exactly that: all issues
are women's issues. Particularly,
financial issues are women's issues. I
think that is where, in many cases, this government has fallen down, frankly,
Madam Chairperson, particularly when we are talking about women in poverty,
which make up the single largest group of poor people in our province; that‑‑I
am quoting from the report‑‑it is necessary to recognize and
understand the social, economic and political factors which interact to
maintain many single‑parent families in low‑income situations.
We
all have to do that. We must continue to
be aware of the wide range of issues and problems that all come together in
producing the problems that face women in
The
statistics are abounding and we all have heard them in the last few weeks. I will not repeat them other than to say that
women are the most poor in our province, in our country, throughout the
world. Women do 65 percent of the work
and have control of 10 percent of the assets throughout the world. Those are approximate figures, but it still
is a very unequal world that we live in.
While
statistics say that
We
need to look at the fact that when women are poor, children are poor; that the
vast majority of women in this country and in this province who are poor are
parents of children. We all again know
the problems that have occurred and continue to occur when single‑parent
households are not adequately supported in a financial sense.
Another
thing that the Single‑Parent Families Report states that I think is
incredibly important, and I quote:
Living conditions for families are strongly tied to level of family
income. Access to housing, child care,
developmental opportunities for children, education and training opportunities,
material rewards and social networks are influenced by the availability of
financial resources.
I
think that sentence states that for us on this side of the House, that it all
comes back to adequacy of financial resources and access to those financial
resources. Women in this province are
still unable to adequately and fairly and equitably access those resources.
Madam
Chairperson, I would like briefly to speak to some of the recommendations that
this Single‑Parent Families Report made in November of 1990. In income maintenance, for example, which is
an area of Family Services that I am familiar with, the recommendation is that
the standard social allowances rates and special needs allocations be
substantially increased and that shelter allowances be increased to meet actual
shelter costs.
Now
this has not happened. In the latest
round of increases, this still makes the social assistance rates, even the
highest social assistance rates, only about half of what is identified as the
poverty line. So social assistance
recipients, the vast majority of whom are women, and the vast majority of whom
are women with children, still have no access to even that basic minimum
statement.
* (2020)
Again,
the special needs allocation, $150 a year, has not been changed in 30 years,
and 30 years worth of governments‑‑or at least 20 years worth of
governments‑‑have to take responsibility for that. I am certainly prepared to agree to that, but
I have asked time and time again that that be looked at, a fairly small
additional source of income, perhaps, that could make a major difference to
many women.
Other
recommendations deal with the provincial minimum wage being increased and
particularly, Madam Chairperson, that pay equity and affirmative action be made
priorities by the
In
November 1991, some of the women on that original committee stated publicly
that they were worried that their concerns were not being addressed
appropriately by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik). Finally, at the end of March of this year, the
Minister of Labour has appointed an advisory committee to help implement or
talk about or do something about the Hay Report. In the meantime, women in the Civil Service
are still being dealt with unfairly in many ways, as far as their access to pay
equity and their access to an equal opportunity for employment.
Another
major set of recommendations in this report put out by the Manitoba Advisory
Council on the Status of Women dealt with child care. I will not go through them, but there were
several major components. This report
did say that this was one of the major areas that was a problem for women with
children, being able to access affordable, high‑quality child care.
Again,
we, on this side of the House, have very often shared our concerns with the
year‑old change in the fee structure for the child care system. The negative impact it is having on the
availability of spaces, on the affordability of those spaces for families, and
the increase it is having on families being forced to change their preferred
type of child care, and in many cases to go to unlicensed and perhaps
potentially dangerous situations. So
again the government has access to a very positive report with many good
recommendations and is not, in many important ways, we feel, dealing with these
issues.
The
minister talks about the need to deal with single parents and talks about the
single‑parent handbook that is being produced, which I am looking forward
to seeing. The title is certainly
evocative and, I am sure, will be very helpful.
It would really, really be nice if the handbook, Just Me and the Kids,
could be part of the resources available at, let us say, parent‑child
centres, which were a very successful part of the core area programming, and
which were not picked up by the provincial government as a cost‑effective,
very grassroots, volunteer‑driven program.
Madam
Chairperson, I will briefly conclude my opening remarks. We are talking about the implementation of
reports that the various ministers of this government have had, the Hay report,
the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry, the Suche report, the Pedlar report, again, the
Single‑Parent Families Report, other reports, all of whom say much the
same thing: for women to fully take
their place in our society, the government must be proactive; the government
must do all that it can to ensure that all of its own departments, all of its
own programs, all of its own initiatives have as one of their keystones an
understanding of the impact that those programs and initiatives have on the
status of women. Because underlying all
of this is the fact that no matter what indicator you use today, the status of
women in the
While
there are some positive initiatives that the minister has brought forward
tonight, I think that there are still very many areas where the government has
chosen not to make positive proactive stands.
I will be asking some questions and look forward to the rest of the
Estimates.
Madam
Chairperson: Does the honourable Leader of the second
opposition party wish to make an opening statement?
Mrs.
Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second Opposition): Madam Chairperson, I am delighted to
participate in the Estimates of the Status of Women and with the Minister
responsible for the Status of Women (Mrs. Mitchelson). I want to just highlight some of the remarks
that the minister made and to indicate where I will be coming from in the
questioning this evening.
She
mentioned Bill No. 5, and I have to say that I was disappointed with the
progress of Bill No. 5, not because I did not recognize there was some
confusion about the name, but because I thought there was a willingness on the
part of the minister to listen to individuals who made representation and was
interested in making a change that would be appropriate to their needs. It certainly appeared to me during the
committee stage of that bill that the women who came, for the most part, wanted
some reference to Status of Women, in some way, shape, or form in that
particular title. The fact that the bill
passed without that necessary phraseology, I think, indicated a lack of
willingness which I thought the minister had had when she proceeded with the
bill.
In
addition she addressed a number of issues which the
There
has certainly been the suggestion that the notwithstanding clause should be
extended. Well, every time the
notwithstanding clause is extended, the Charter is weakened. The provinces have the right to use the
notwithstanding clause, the federal government has the right to use the
notwithstanding clause, and now there appears to be a general willingness to
extend the use of that notwithstanding clause also to the aboriginal community.
It
seems to me that we are moving backwards.
If there is to be any change in the notwithstanding clause, then it
should be one that removes it from the governments that now have it, not extend
it to an additional level of government; that the Manitoba advisory council
would be well‑served to look at this issue now in some detail to make
representation because I can not imagine why we would want to weaken the
Charter further. Certainly that has been
contrary to the position of the advisory council repeatedly, over and over
again.
* (2030)
The
minister also mentioned that the council and indeed the directorate have been
involved in the whole issue of midwifery. We now have an inquest on the death
of a twin as a result of a midwifery delivery.
There may be a whole series of positions taken on the issue of
midwifery, but it seems to me it is very clear that we need rules and
regulations, and we need to have clear standards. More and more women are turning to midwifery
as an option. Some of them are also
turning to home births.
I
have serious reservations about home births.
I know that certainly physicians do as well, and so do the registered
nurses. But I do not think that anybody
doubts that if we are going to have people functioning as midwives in the
community, then there must be some regulation of those midwives, some guarantee
that there is training, so that we do not see the loss of another child when
that loss could have been prevented with clear protocols established by
regulation.
The
minister indicated that there would soon be released a single‑parent
handbook and I am pleased that it is going to be released, but the minister has
a contract with a Sheena Walsh McMahon, which she signed, which does not seem
to be in compliance at the present time.
I want to know from her, if this single parent handbook is going to be
duly noted as the work of Sheena Walsh McMahon, or whether it is going to be
ascribed to somebody else, in what I think is in clear violation of a contract
signed by the minister on September 6, 1991.
In
terms of the issue which is now uppermost for the council as well as for the
directorate, in terms of Education and Training, I was particularly interested in
the Manitoba Advisory Council on the Status of Women's report on women in
nontraditional occupations, its review and analysis of recent recommendations
which I received in December of 1991.
That particular report outlined the need for the concentration of the
council on women. It clearly shows the
underrepresentation of women in certain professions and particularly in the
trades and in the technologies.
The
Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey) must be aware that our community colleges
have not served women particularly well in the technology areas. There still is highly underrepresentation in
their training. The minister pointed out
that the recent study conducted by the Department of Education indicated that
it seemed to be mostly a post‑secondary educational problem.
Well,
I would point out to the minister that the criteria to graduate from high
school means that there has to be the achievement of certain levels of skill in
math and science. What it does not do,
however, is to encourage those young women to go on into post‑secondary
education training. So to indicate that
it is a post‑secondary education training issue is, I think, understating
the real fact.
The
problem is that young people begin to look at occupations as early as junior
high and if in that junior high milieu and senior high milieu there is not the
role model, there is not the encouragement of these young women, not just to
take the courses necessary for high school graduation, but in fact to pursue
careers in the technologies, in the sciences, in the business administration
fields, then obviously they are not going to choose to do so. So it is important that the council continue
to work in this area in order to achieve, I think, a change in direction for
young women in the
The
As
to the issues of interaction with other departments, we frequently ask
questions about that, but I have to say that I do not see much action, whether
it is in prevention programs, in health.
We have, for example, the highest teenage pregnancy rate in the country,
statistically, and yet we are the only province that does not have a compulsory
family life education program. I do not
understand that. The Minister of
Education (Mrs. Vodrey) knows I do not understand that, and I would like to see
more lobbying going on, quite frankly, from this department to change that
orientation.
We
know, for example, as of a recent report last week, that teenage girls are now
smoking at a rate of 20 percent as opposed to teenage boys at a rate of 12
percent. It seems to me that teenage
girls right now should be targeted for educational programming, so that the
fixation we have with weight in our society is not used by these young women as
an excuse to begin a life of addiction to nicotine, which not only causes them
serious health problems but, as the minister knows, causes their babies serious
health problems because low birth‑weight babies are a clear result of
smoking during pregnancy.
I
have asked the Minister charged with the administration of The Liquor Control
Act (Mrs. McIntosh) to be more proactive with regard to fetal alcohol
syndrome. We know that women in
pregnancy should not drink even as little as a drink a day. The costs of looking after a child with fetal
alcohol syndrome can be as much as $2.1 million.
I
have asked for signs in liquor stores.
You know, we can make up signs on our Xerox machines. I would donate the Xerox machine and get them
out, but we do not seem to be able to move. I do not understand why we are so
mired in concrete in issues that are so simple to resolve as that one.
I
do not even have a commitment from the minister to write a letter to the
national Minister of Health who said, he will not act about labelling until he
hears from ministers across the country.
Well, surely it would take the minister all of 15 minutes to dictate a
letter to the national Minister of Health saying he would be interested in
seeing labelling warning women of the dangers of consumption of alcohol during
pregnancy.
If
we can put signs on cigarette boxes, certainly we can put signs on liquor
bottles which could prevent what is an extremely costly and very debilitating
illness for the youngsters who are born with this particular syndrome.
So
it is not that I do not feel that this particular department has a lot of
functions, I just do not feel that it has the influence with other ministers
that I believe it should have. There
does not seem to be nearly as much advocacy work going on from this particular
department as I think there should be.
In Family Services issues which were addressed by the member for
Wellington (Ms. Barrett), and which I will not address, but in health issues,
in education issues, in liquor issues, in apprenticeship training issues‑‑because
without that effective lobbying I do not see that the status of women issue as
it affects all women in the province of Manitoba is going to undergo a
significant change. With that, Madam
Chairperson, I think we can begin the questioning of the minister.
* (2040)
Madam
Chairperson: At this time I would request the minister's
staff to please enter the Chamber.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I would just like to introduce the staff that
are here tonight. On my left immediately
is Theresa Harvey, the Assistant Deputy Minister of the Women's Directorate and
beside her is Olivia Flynn who is the executive director of the Manitoba
Advisory Council on the Status of Women.
On
my immediate right is Myroslava Pidhirnyj, manager of the Policy Unit in the
Women's Directorate and Dorothy Hill who is the manager of the Outreach Unit in
the Women's Directorate.
Ms.
Barrett: So I am hoping that we can range throughout
the department since the staff from both sections are here tonight. I have a
question about the Women's Directorate.
There was recently or has been a staff position in the North, in The
Pas/Thompson. I am wondering if the
minister can give us an update on the status of that position.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Yes, there was a vacancy in the Outreach
office in The Pas. Edith Young, who was
in that position went to work to do some, I believe it was, consulting for The
Pas Indian Band. So a vacancy did
occur. We had a bulletin, a competition
process, and there has been a person hired by the name of Catherine Cooper, who
will be working out of that Outreach office.
Ms.
Barrett: Can the minister tell us if that Outreach
office is going to be located in The Pas?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: That Outreach office has been in The Pas
since it was opened. As a result of the
Outreach office being there, The Opasquiak Resource Centre has been established
in The Pas. That does meet some of the needs.
There is also a need in Thompson for some outreach work. Therefore, Catherine Cooper will be working
between Thompson and The Pas so that we can expand services to Thompson as well
as to The Pas.
Ms.
Barrett: I am not completely familiar with the
distances between The Pas and Thompson, but it is several hours. I think, usually, that trip is made by car
rather than plane. I do not see in the
Women's Directorate Estimates any change in transportation allowances at all,
which I would have expected to see since the position originally, before the
vacancy occurred, was only in The Pas and now the position is being split. So I am wondering if the minister can share
that with me.
I
also see a decrease, actually, a slight decrease, in the communication
budget. So I am wondering how that fits
with the fact that this position is going to be split between The Pas and
Thompson.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: There is significant travel throughout the
northern region of our province in dealing with the Women's Directorate, so we
do not anticipate that there will be terribly great additional travel costs as
a result.
I
would like to indicate that because the Seniors Directorate and the Women's
Directorate share outreach activities, part of the travel budget is in the
Seniors Directorate and part is in the Women's Directorate also. But we do not anticipate there will be a
greater amount of travel. The person did
travel throughout the North and will continue to do that. Part of the time will be spent in an office
in The Pas; part will be spent in Thompson.
Ms.
Barrett: The position which was fully in The Pas, or
based in The Pas, and now is split between The Pas and Thompson, can the
minister explain why, when Thompson is a much larger community and has perhaps
not enough but more resources to service the women of that community, why it
was felt necessary to split this position between The Pas and Thompson, when
The Pas has far fewer resources to assist women?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: At the time the Outreach office was
established in The Pas there was a women's resource centre in Thompson. That has since moved to Flin Flon, so there
is no resource centre and there is no Outreach component in Thompson at the
present time.
In
The Pas, as a result of the Outreach office for the Women's Directorate
opening, there was established a women's resource centre and that was sort of a
spin‑off, if you might say, of the Women's Directorate having a presence
in The Pas. Now that that resource centre is up and running, we feel that we
need to concentrate some effort on providing some resources for the large area
that Thompson and the surrounding communities, the large number of women that
Thompson and the surrounding communities serve.
Ms.
Barrett: Yes, the resource centre that is in The Pas,
that the minister talks about, is that the Opasquiak Women's Resource service?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Yes.
Ms.
Barrett: Can the minister tell us how that resource
centre is funded?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: They are funded through the Department of
Family Services. It is a northern
women's resource centre and it is a satellite.
Ms.
Barrett: It is a satellite of the resource service that
is located in Thompson?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Madam Chairperson, it used to be located in
Thompson, it is now located in Flin Flon.
Ms.
Barrett: So the funding for both the parent, if you
will, resource centre which is now in Flin Flon and the resource centre in The
Pas is out of the grants to external agencies from the Department of Family
Services then?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Yes, Madam Chairperson.
Ms.
Barrett: I would like to ask a different question on
something that the minister spoke about earlier in her opening remarks and that
was‑‑excuse me, if I do not get the title exactly correct‑‑the
rural child care registry. I am
wondering if the minister can provide us with a little more detailed
information on that.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Madam Chairperson, on an annual basis, the
members of the provincial cabinet meet with the Women's Institute when they
hold their annual meeting and discuss issues of concern. A few years in a row or since I have been‑‑I
know I have attended at least two or three yearly meetings with the Women's
Institute.
They
have always raised the issue of the unique circumstances of farm families and
farm women, who are certainly very much a part of the process during seeding
and harvest time and are doing more work actually on the farm than looking
after children these days. There is a
unique circumstance where there are not always caregivers or women do not know
where they can find caregivers to come into the home and look after their
children through the extended hours that might be required for a farm woman to
be out of her home and not able to care for her children. As a result, I think sometimes we see
children being taken along and, ultimately, in some cases, see some very severe
accidents as a result of that kind of thing happening.
* (2050)
So
the Women's Institute has raised this to government, and probably has been
raising it for many years, even through former administrations. Last year, as a result of my becoming the
Minister responsible for the Status of Women, I made a commitment that I would
look into the issue and see whether in fact there was a way that we could work
with them to develop a program that might meet the unique circumstances of farm
women during these really tough times.
I
came back and met with the Women's Directorate and asked my colleagues in the
Department of Family Services and the Department of Agriculture, whether our
staff could get together and try to help in some way the Women's Institute in
developing a program that they felt could specifically meet the needs of farm
women. Our departments got together,
have met with the Women's Institute; and, as a result of those discussions and
having the Women's Institute know what kinds of things are currently ongoing,
there is the‑‑and I just have to get the names‑‑Manitoba
youth employment services registry through the Department of Family Services,
and in the Department of Agriculture, agricultural employment services
branch. They already have offices up and
running: six for Agriculture and 44 for
the youth program in the Department of Family Services.
Anyway,
there are some services available out there.
The Women's Institute has a sense that if a registry could be developed,
and people could put their names on a registry indicating their willingness to
provide support for farm women or farm families, I guess, in those very
specific times, that in fact they would be prepared to develop and run that
kind of an initiative.
So
the Women's Institute in conjunction with working with the Department of Family
Services, the Department of Agriculture and the Women's Directorate I think are
prepared to put forth a pilot project in three different communities throughout
the province in time for harvest of 1992.
Ms.
Barrett: So the
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Madam Chairperson, that is correct.
Ms.
Barrett: Could the minister tell us which communities
are going to be part of this pilot project?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I think the Women's Institute just issued a
news release last week with their intent, and they are going to be consulting
with communities and looking for community response to the initiative. Then we will pick the communities based on
the support from the community and the response that they receive.
Ms.
Barrett: Can the minister say whether, other than
having the access to the office base through the Family Services and
Agriculture departments, there will be any other government funding going into
this pilot project?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Madam Chairperson, at this point in time
there is no other funding. I know the
Women's Institute is the one that is driving this.
Ms.
Barrett: Will this then be‑‑and I am
trying not to use the word in a pejorative context‑‑but simply a
registry? I guess what I am asking, is
there going to be any assurances that the individuals who put their names on
such a registry are, in fact, capable and qualified to not only provide child
care, but are going to provide a quality of care that the farm families can be
comfortable with. Is there any check
list of background or anything of that nature?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Given that it is not a government‑run
program as such, it is a Women's Institute initiative, the cautions of course
that we shared with them were that, in fact, those that are hiring people and
accessing a registry of any sort, should in fact ensure or ask that criminal
backgrounds and records be checked.
The
responsibility or the onus, I suppose, would lie with the family that is hiring
the care giver to ensure that those checks are done and ask for the opportunity
to review personal records and also information, I guess, about the kind of
training that they have had.
Ms.
Barrett: This is getting down to the problem that I
have had since this kind of registry was first brought forward and discussed in
this House in Family Services Estimates.
I again will share with the minister our deep concern that I do not
think that it has ever been more apparent than through the situation that has
taken place outside
I
know that this is a different situation and that we are looking at a much more
specific time‑limited kind of care that is being asked for here, and
there is not the time nor the resources, probably, to go through the kind of
checking and the kind of training that we do in our licensed child care spaces.
* (2100)
But
I do think the idea that if the government is involved even only in giving
moral support and providing office space to the Women's Institute to do this,
the government has the responsibility to not have this child care registry be
simply operated on a caveat emptor situation, "let the buyer beware."
I
cannot say strongly enough that when we are dealing with the lives of our
children we have to ensure that basic regulations and basic training is in
place.
I
know that the problems are enormous that these farm families are facing and the
safety concerns of these families for their children, particularly when they
are either left in the home because both parents have to work on the seeding
and harvesting or taken with their parents while they are undertaking, that is
a real problem, and we must address that.
But
I think that not providing for some basic guidelines is a mistake and that the
Women's Institute and the government perhaps should look at instituting some
basic questions that are asked or some basic investigation that is done, not
just in the criminal backgrounds and records, but also, as the minister spoke
in her last answer, the training; that there be first‑aid training or
some type of training or orientation undertaken by these people.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: As I said earlier, given that the Women's
Institute is going to be running this pilot, I think we have stressed the issues
with the Women's Institute. I just have
to sit back and put myself in a situation where I come from a small community
where you might not have people with major skills sort of sitting around
waiting for seeding or harvest time to come in and look after my children while
I have to go out and help my husband on the fields.
Very
often in those communities there are women that would love to go around and ask
all of their neighbours, in fact, whether they would be prepared. They would even prefer to have their
neighbours put their name on a registry that would indicate that they might be
willing to baby‑sit and look after children, and it makes it a more
approachable type situation.
I
know training is an issue, but I also do know, too, that there are many women
that have brought up their families, and may have been just farm wives, who
certainly know how to care for and look after children. In fact, if those women were willing to put
their name on a registry and be utilized in a situation to help a neighbour or
someone in the community, I believe that is what the Women's Institute is
looking for, those kinds of people that will put their names forward.
Now
I do know that if you are in a community and looking on a registry when people
within the community are not familiar to you, I think those are the issues that
we have more concern with, and I think you and I would be more concerned if I
did not‑‑you know. Yes,
there is an issue around checking criminal records and we have indicated that
we would certainly help the Women's Institute implement that kind of a process
and help them to access records.
I
might tend to think that training, and first‑aid training certainly would
be a prerequisite, but there probably are‑‑I would say that the
best person that ever looked after my children was my mother who had a Grade 8
education and was at home and brought up three children, and I think we have
all been fairly successful in our lives and our careers.
She
was the very best person that could look after my children. She did not have a lot of credentials; she
did not have a first‑aid course.
She baby‑sat for a little bit of extra money when we were growing
up for many people in the community. I know there is the other side to the
issue too, but sometimes I think in a small community where people are fairly
well‑known and they are not quite sure whether somebody might be
interested, but you do know that if they put their name on a registry, you
could approach them to baby‑sit.
That
might be part of the solution, so there are two sides to this issue. There is one side that tells me that you have
to be very careful whom you are having come into your home to look after your
children, and if it is a total stranger to the community and to you, I think
that the checks and balances and the training might be extremely
important. I do think too that there are
probably some pretty qualified women out there that might not have the
expertise and any background formal training, who might be very capable and
very competent. I think that is what the
Women's Institute that has dealt with the community that they represent for
many, many years feels is a need in the community, and it is something that is
going to have to be watched closely.
Ms.
Barrett: Just one final comment. I agree that there are very many capable,
qualified‑through‑experience people in all communities, and we all
know many of those. I think the concern
I have is not with the 99.99, it is that one‑tenth of 1 percent. I know
the problems that are inherent in establishing something like this and the
flexibility that is required and I wish the Women's Institute all the best of
luck. I just hope that it works out
well, and we will be looking forward to seeing, I hope, some more press
releases and information as it unfolds.
Frankly, I will be figuratively crossing my fingers, because I hope that
it is very successful, but I am still concerned.
I
have another question, if I may, on something the minister referenced in her
opening remarks about, I believe, the examination of the existing substance
abuse programs for women. Is that what you were talking about in your opening
remarks? It is part of the Expected
Results on the advisory council, and the paragraph talks about: to present recommendations to the government
dependent on the conclusions drawn from preliminary studies, and it has a date
of April 1992. I think that has not
happened yet, and I am wondering if the minister can give us an update on that.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Madam Chairperson, in the Expected Results it
did say April of '92, and I guess the project was put aside and delayed because
of some other priorities that did come up.
One of the priorities, of course, was the briefs that had to be prepared
through the
Ms.
Barrett: I just have a couple of informational
questions and then I will turn it over to the Leader of the Liberal Party (Mrs.
Carstairs). In the Salaries, item 4, the
Women's Directorate‑‑that is page 21 of the Supplementary Estimates‑‑there
is an item called Interchange agreement for $51,800. I am wondering if the minister can share with
us what that Interchange agreement is.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Janet Fontaine, who used to work in the
Women's Directorate as manager of Outreach, is on an interchange with the
federal government. Her salary is
$51,800. It shows up in the Estimates in
the Salaries line, but in fact it is recovered by the
Ms.
Barrett: A follow‑up question, if I may. May I ask why the Minister of Finance does
not return that money to the Women's Directorate, or has that question already
been asked?
* (2110)
Mrs.
Mitchelson: That is a normal process that is followed when
monies are expended, that usually revenues do come back into the ministry of
Finance. What you see here, though, is a
major increase in the Salaries line, which does, in fact, increase the budget
of the Women's Directorate by $51,800, more so because we have filled that
position, but we are still paying it. So
we got an increase in our budget line, but the money goes back through to the
Department of Finance.
Ms.
Barrett: One other question. I do not know if this is really a serious
question or not, but I was struck when I went through the book, on page 9,
Schedule 2, the organizational chart, there is no connection either with a
dotted line or something else between the Minister, the ADM and the advisory
council. Is that traditionally how it
has been, that it is just two separate‑‑
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I am informed by staff that, when this
document was sent over to the Queen's Printer for printing, there was a dotted
line. I guess I may have to‑‑yes,
take issue, given that I am responsible for the Queen's Printer also‑‑ask
that question of them. It was there when
it was sent over, and it got inadvertently left out.
Mrs.
Carstairs: Madam Chairperson, I am glad to hear that the
minister is responsible for the advisory council even on charts. She certainly
signs her contracts. Would she now like
to tell me if the contract which she signed on September 6, 1991, is in fact
going to be fulfilled with regard to Sheena McMahon?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Madam Chairperson, yes, the contract is
signed with the government of
Mrs.
Carstairs: The contract is far more explicit than that,
Madam Chairperson. The contract states,
and I quote: The contractor will prepare
the report in consultation with the advisory council. The contractor will be acknowledged as author
of the text.
The
minister indicated that this handbook will soon be released. Is Sheena Walsh McMahon going to be
acknowledged on this handbook as the author of this handbook?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Madam Chairperson, she will be recognized as
the researcher but not as the author.
Mrs.
Carstairs: Can the minister explain why she will be in
clear violation of her own contract which says she will be acknowledged as the
author of the text?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Madam Chairperson, I am informed that because
not all of the text was used, that in fact what she produced was compiled into
a handbook, that she will not be credited as the author.
Mrs.
Carstairs: Is it normal for the minister to sign a
contract saying that somebody will be acknowledged as author of the text, then
produce a text to which the individual will not be credited as being the
author?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Madam Chairperson, in Schedule A of the
contract that was signed, it indicates that the services to be provided by the
contractor are as follows, and I will read them into the record:
Preparation
of a written report; satisfactory in form and content for the Manitoba Advisory
Council on the Status of Women containing:
(a) written information on access to services for single‑parent
mothers; (b) incorporation into the text a listing of service agencies; (c)
initial draft to be prepared for September 30, 1991; and (d) such other matters
that may be reasonably requested by the council, and the contractor will
prepare the report in consultation with the advisory council, the contractor
will be acknowledged‑‑it says here‑‑as the author of
the text.
But
the author of the text that was requested by the
Mrs.
Carstairs: Madam Chairperson, did the minister choose to
exercise Section 12, which was termination of this contract, which could have
been done at any time giving 15 days notice in writing to the contractor? If they did not exercise that, then why are
they denying the authorship of this particular contractor?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: In fact, I was not involved in the
negotiations between the
Mrs.
Carstairs: If they want to indicate that somebody has
edited the text, it is quite appropriate to say that somebody has edited it;
that does not take away from the authorship.
Editing is to delete, remove certain materials, but not to deny the work
that has been done by an individual. We
are talking about a women's issue here, where a Minister responsible for the
Status of Women and women whose rights, under a contract, are being violated,
and the minister stands here and says, I am wiping my hands of this thing,
despite the fact that she signed it. She
cannot say I signed it because I am the minister responsible, but I do not have
anything to do with this organization.
* (2120)
She
signed the contract because she is the only one who can legally sign it and she
is, therefore, legally liable for everything included in this contract‑‑everything‑‑and
any legal counsel will point that out to her.
Now what is she suggesting that I tell my constituent, that she should
sue the minister because the minister has failed to exercise the requirements
of a contract duly signed by the minister?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Madam Chairperson, it is my understanding
that the information that was provided by Sheena Walsh was altered so
significantly that she could not be given credit for the authorship of it, and
any legal advice that we have indicates that the advisory council made the
right decision.
Mrs.
Carstairs: Madam Chairperson, on what basis are they
listing Ms. McMahon as the researcher?
If none of the information she provided was valid for this particular
report and none of the information is going to be used, then why in heaven's
name would they declare her to be the researcher?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Madam Chairperson, it is my understanding that
she gathered information on a lot of services that were available to single‑parent
families and it had also to be added to before it was in the final form. Not all of the information that was required
was provided.
Mrs.
Carstairs: Madam Chairperson, I am going to move on to
some other topics that I want to discuss, but I want to lay on the record that
I think it is a tragedy that the Minister responsible for the Status of Women
would in fact abuse a woman in the way in which this woman has been abused by
this particular department.
(Mr.
Ben Sveinson, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)
I
would like to ask the minister some questions with regard to the program which
will be set by the Women's Institute with regard to farming families, an
initiative that they have been looking at for some time and which I am pleased
to see will come to fruition, and ask if they will have at their disposal the
right to access the Child Abuse Registry for all individuals who register with
this particular program.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Chairperson, yes they will.
Mrs.
Carstairs: Is there to be any limitation placed on the
number of children that any one individual will be able to register to care
for, similar to, for example, family daycare requirements presently in place?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I think indications
from the Women's Institute are that a caregiver would go into a family home to
look after the family children, so it would be one family.
Mrs.
Carstairs: I asked that question because in my
discussions with the Women's Institute, there was also some discussion about
perhaps making some unused classrooms available as centres that they might be
able to use. I gather from the minister's
nods, these are not going to be part of this present initiative.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: At this point in time, no, this is purely to
meet the needs in the home of those women or those farm families who are in
need.
Mrs.
Carstairs: Is there to be a structured length of
time? I know this is primarily for
seeding and for harvesting, but will there be any limitations placed on this
pilot project, for example, a six‑week time limit, and then, with the
option, of course, of the parents, if it is a workable situation, of
continuing?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: There is no formal time limit on it. I guess the pilot projects‑‑they
are hoping to get up and running for this fall's harvest season, and probably
the pilot then, if you look at it, starting now and going through till the end
of that would be about six months, would be evaluated at that point.
Mrs.
Carstairs: Would it be the Women's Institute that is
doing the evaluation, or will someone from the child care office be asked to do
any kind of an evaluation as to whether this is a workable project and
something that may even be worth funding sometime in the future?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: It will be the Women's Institute that will be
evaluating. It is not an initiative of
the daycare office; it is an initiative of the Women's Institute. We were able to facilitate finding places
where they could keep registries and that kind of thing, but, in fact, it was
not developed by the child care office.
Mrs.
Carstairs: In terms of the set of appropriations for the
Advisory Council on the Status of Women‑‑and if the minister wants
to know where I am coming from, it is the Supplementary Information for
Legislative Review, page 17‑‑it indicates that there are four staff
and no change from the previous year. In
terms of the Managerial and the Administrative Support, the salary increases
are well within the normal range, in fact, for the managerial position, very
low. But, in terms of the
professional/technical person, there was an 18 percent wage increase. Can the minister explain why there was such a
major increase in salary for this particular staff year?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I am informed that the person in the position
went from a term position into a permanent position and was reclassified to the
working level.
Mrs.
Carstairs: At first glance, it would appear that this
department received a 13.8 percent increase.
The member for
* (2130)
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Yes, Mr. Acting Chairperson.
Mrs.
Carstairs: Can the minister tell me if the Manitoba
advisory council's group that has been and has done excellent work in looking
at the Constitution is presently engaged in monitoring the constitutional
proposals presently being debated in Ottawa, which our minister tells us there
are no texts for to date, and the national minister Mr. Clark indicated, in a
Globe and Mail article today, that there were indeed texts and there were in
fact signed agreements?
Mrs. Mitchelson:
Any information that our Minister of Justice
(Mr. McCrae) has passed on to us, he has passed on to the House. In fact, there
are no signed agreements from our Minister of Justice, and there is no prepared
text.
I
sometimes wonder, from the reports that we read from Joe Clark and the reports
that we receive from our Minister of Justice, whether they have been at the
same meetings. But, nonetheless, we have
nothing that is prepared text and nothing that I am aware of that is in
agreement.
Mrs.
Carstairs: The minister will know that I feel this is all
part of a national government strategy.
It has very little to do with the provincial government but everything
to do with the way in which negotiations were conducted two years ago and are
presently being conducted second time around.
Has
the advisory council raised with her the concern that I raised a few minutes
ago about the extension of the notwithstanding clause and the weakening of the
Charter effect as a result of another level of government being given the
opportunity to access that notwithstanding clause?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Chairperson, no, that issue has not
been raised by the advisory council, although, you know, I do not know whether
in fact they have taken a formal position or have done any consultation as a
result of the new development that has been announced looking at extending the
notwithstanding clause to the aboriginal community.
I
cannot indicate, and I would have to go back and ask the chair of the advisory
council whether in fact they have pulled together the PC caucus, what they are
monitoring and what their sense is. I
would tend to think that they would be opposed, but I would hate to prejudge
that based on not having heard.
I
am meeting with the chair of the advisory council tomorrow afternoon, I
believe. So that certainly is an issue
that I could raise with her and ask whether there has been any formal or
informal discussion throughout the province on that issue.
Mrs.
Carstairs: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I would ask the
ministers to do that, and if there are any positions taken by the
I
would like to move into the initiative.
The minister indicated that the primary initiative this year will focus
on education and training. Can the
minister outline for us how they intend to pursue this particular challenge?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I cannot at this
point in time indicate to you exactly what the plans are by the advisory
council and how they are going to approach it.
I guess they have just, as a result of a fairly new council being
appointed, had a few meetings and have discussed around the table that
education and training is an area that needs to be focused on by an advisory
council to government. So I have not had
a clear sense of exactly how they are going to approach the issue and what they
are going to recommend.
Mrs.
Carstairs: In the publication called Women in
Nontraditional Occupations, they highlighted a number of areas that were of
concern to them.
Has
the minister discussed with them the fact that many of the areas that they
raise as a concern, particularly training in the technologies and training at
the community college level, have in fact been reduced by this government over
the last two years so that there are fewer community college positions now
available for men and women in 1992 for the academic year '92‑93 than
were available in 1990‑91?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I guess if we want to look to Red River
Community College specifically and what they might be doing to address some of
the gender issues that do exist, they have initiatives underway, and the Red
River Community College's women's programs department does continue to
emphasize the importance of girls and women in math and science. There are different ways that they attempt to
accomplish that. They introduce female
junior and senior high school students to the engineering technology programs
through the School Career Symposia. They
are actively participating in outreach activities in the community, such as the
planning and co‑ordinating of the Manitoba Museum of Man and Nature's
Women of Invention exhibit.
That
is one I do not know whether either of the opposition critics has had the
opportunity to see, but we had the opportunity at the Women's Institute banquet
to hear‑‑I am trying to think of the woman inventor, who was just
absolutely dynamic, speak; it is a very nontraditional job that she does
have. Her name does escape me now. But I think it is a very worthwhile exhibit.
They
are doing writing at
Mrs.
Carstairs: They may be attempting to do it, Mr. Acting
Chairperson, but the reality is there are fewer places, and that means there
are fewer places for young women. I want
the minister to know that so that she can increase her lobbying efforts with
the Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey), because we can have all the
programming in the world, but if there are fewer young people who are going to
get into those programs, that means fewer young people who are going to get
into those programs, and that impacts on her ministry.
The
advisory council also went on to say in this report that it wished to
acknowledge and commend several efforts which are now underway in the
Apprenticeship branch, Manitoba Labour.
For the first time women have been appointed to the trades advisory
committees, which direct trade qualifications or vocations. Public education
initiatives targeted at recruiting more women into the trades have also been
launched, including an arts contest featuring women's trades in the '90s. Not coincidentally,
Well,
unfortunately, we no longer have the first and only female director of
apprenticeship in
Can
the minister tell us if she knew of that lateral transfer and if she does not
think that is a backward step according to her own advisory council's report?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I know Ms. Kenney had been
given the dual responsibility of the Apprenticeship and Training branch and the
executive director of the Pay Equity Bureau and due to the very heavy workload
of the two branches and consideration to her health, in fact, she was given
sole responsibility for the Pay Equity Bureau.
I do not think this should be interpreted in any way as a demotion or an
indication of any dissatisfaction with her performance.
* (2140)
In
fact, the position that is open right now in the Apprenticeship and Training
branch of the Department of Labour will go through the competitive process and,
hopefully, we will have some positive results in recruitment and filling of
that position.
Mrs.
Carstairs: Well, I was very careful to say that it was a
lateral transfer, because I do not think that it was, in any way, a
demotion. I would not want it to be seen
as that. The interesting juxtaposition
is that it would have been a very interesting position if a man had been made
head of Pay Equity, an interesting role model for a man to find himself in,
just as it was a wonderful role model for women that the director of
Apprenticeship in the
The
minister also addressed, and I know I am jumping, but I know we also want to
get through that.
The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Sveinson): Would the committee like to take a five
minute recess? [Agreed!
* * *
The
committee took recess at 9:43 p.m.
After
Recess
The
committee resumed at 9:48 p.m.
(Madam
Chairperson in the Chair)
Mrs.
Carstairs: In her opening remarks and again on page 19 of
the Supplementary Estimates reference is made to the production of an updated
edition of Violence Prevention Materials in the Schools ‑ a National
Listing.
Can
the minister comment on the statement of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness)
the other day in this House, in which he indicated that education does nothing
to prevent violence and indicated that he regretted that, but that he did not
believe that education materials or indeed education within the schools would
do anything to prevent family violence?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Madam Chairperson, I am not going to comment
on the Minister of Finance's statements.
I am not sure in what context they were spoken.
We
do know and we do believe that violence issues can be and should be addressed
through the education process, and there are all kinds of activities ongoing
throughout communities and provinces across the country. It was an initiative that was undertaken with
Manitoba as the lead a few years ago to compile the list of initiatives that
are ongoing throughout the country to be shared, so that in fact you know if
something was available there would not be duplication of that initiative
undertaken by one province when it had already been tried and worked and was
successful in another. We have compiled
that.
We
have been dealing through the Ministers of Education. There was a joint meeting
last September with the Ministers of Education and the Ministers responsible
for the Status of Women. Subsequent to that, after raising the issue, I wrote
to all the Ministers of Education across the country and asked for their
assistance in updating the listing of what was happening in their
provinces. We have had good co‑operation
from the Ministers of Education across the country, and as a result we have a
major update to be undertaken on the national listing.
* (2150)
Mrs.
Carstairs: Can the minister tell us just where this
listing can be accessed? Is it available
in every school in the province? Will
the updated listing also be made available to every school in the province?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Madam Chairperson, we are just in the process
of compiling and having that updated document printed. It will be available on a broad basis. Yes, it will be provided to every school
throughout the province.
Ms. Barrett:
Madam Chairperson, on page 19, under the Women's Directorate, Expected
Results, it talks about developing a database which will include information
respecting community contacts and resources, statistical information which will
facilitate government decision making as it affects women.
Can
the minister explain a little more in detail what elements will be in that
database and the status of that database now?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: It will be a database that will include
information regarding occupations of women, salary ranges, the demographics, et
cetera.
Ms.
Barrett: The occupations, salary ranges and
demographics, will that be done on a geographical basis so that we will have
data, for example, for The Pas, so we will know how many women there are in The
Pas, what their occupations, salary ranges, and the demographics are that are
found for those women?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Some of the information is available
presently through Stats Canada. There is
information available in some other departments. There are organizations like the Social
Planning Council that have some statistics and data. What we are trying to do is pull all of that
together, and there will be some in‑house work, also, done on compiling
that data. But there is some of that information
there, out there and available, in not a terribly comprehensive or co‑ordinated
fashion.
Ms. Barrett: What position would be responsible for doing
that work?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: That would be done out of the Policy Analyst
division.
Ms.
Barrett: Also under Expected Results in the Women's
Directorate is an intriguing line:
"The development of a women's perspective for input into the
government's economic strategy" at page 18. I am wondering if the minister can clarify or
put some meat on those bones of that sentence.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I wonder if I could ask, was it under Expected
Results and which‑‑
Ms.
Barrett: At the bottom of page 18 under Women's
Directorate.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Madam Chairperson, you know, I really believe
that it is important that we look at what women might have to contribute and
might have to offer as far as our economic strategy in government goes, and you
know we do know and I listened to the opening remarks very carefully of the
member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett) when she indicated that women are still
disadvantaged financially in our province, that we are still on a general broad
basis earning less than men, and possibly working harder.
I
guess what will be happening through this, looking at what women across the
province feel is, through the outreach component of the Women's Directorate,
listening to women and their perspective on what they can bring to the table
and to government so that in fact we will have the opportunity for first‑hand
input into development of our ongoing strategy to deal with the economy, to
deal with unemployment, to deal with job creation and to deal with the issues
that do directly affect women.
If
I might sort of regress a little bit and look at, you know, the high number of
teenage pregnancies that we do have in our province, and I did some
consultation last year with several communities throughout the province on what
some of the issues were surrounding teenage pregnancy and how communities,
especially outside the city of Winnipeg, were feeling about the problem. You know, some of the comments that were made
go beyond just the significant numbers of teenage pregnancies, but in fact go
to the reasons in some instances why teenagers do become pregnant and end up
being single mothers at a very young age.
The
community input that I received indicated to me that, you know, there were many
young women out there who felt that they would have a better life as a result
of becoming pregnant, having a baby, keeping that child, being set up by social
services in their own apartment, and that in fact they came from very troubled
home situations for whatever reason and that in fact they felt it would be a
better way of life to be on their own and to have some support systems in
place. It is a real concern to a lot of
communities. So I guess the issue of
teenage pregnancies sort of goes beyond just the numbers of young women that
are becoming pregnant and keeping their children and looking for an escape from
the kind of life that they had been living.
You
know, I guess the problem is even deeper than what we might expect, and there
are no easy solutions to solving that problem because unless you get to the
root of the problem and find out why girls are doing this, and why in fact,
counselling is not done to provide‑‑I suppose we have to look at
information regarding‑‑I am sort of talking in circles, but‑‑
An
Honourable Member: No.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Yes, I am.
But, first of all, information provided to young girls on options, and I
suppose if they think that getting pregnant and keeping a baby is going to give
them a better way of life, why are we not doing more counselling to provide
options to young girls, encouraging them to continue along with their education
and possibly encouraging them to give up that child for adoption? In fact, I know many, many families that are
waiting up to seven, eight, nine years now to adopt a child.
* (2200)
You
know, we see higher and higher instances of young girls keeping their children,
so there are many problems that are associated with some of the reasons for
women being in lower income brackets.
You know, it is off to a pretty bad start in life when you might be 16
years old, have a baby, decide to keep it, to have difficulty getting back into
the work force or being retrained and having the additional burden of a young
child to look after.
Ms.
Barrett: I certainly will not respond as fully as I
would like to, to some of the interesting things the minister has raised in
this area.
I
think in a partial answer to the minister's discussion about needing to get to
the root of the problem and asking the question, why are we not providing more
counselling and information and options to young women in this particular area?‑‑I
am sure the same question could be asked in many areas.
I
would suggest that‑‑and I am not being facetious here, I am being
very serious‑‑the Minister responsible for the Status of Women ask
that question, not of the opposition, but of her own colleagues in cabinet; that
she ask that question of the Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer);
that she ask that question of the Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey); that she
particularly ask that question of the members of Treasury Board who are the
ones who make the ultimate determination as to what the bottom‑line
figures are going to be.
It
is those decisions; it is not the not the decisions made by the Minister
responsible for the Status of Women (Mrs. Mitchelson) with less than $1 million
in her budget. It is the decisions that
are made by the rest of the government that are part of the answer to that very
legitimate question.
It
gets back to what I said earlier, that the basic answers to many of these
questions are economic. That is,
perhaps, too narrow an answer, but it is one of these, I believe seriously, one
of the single most important answers to the questions that are raised very
legitimately by the minister, and I am sure, by the rest of her department.
When
she talks about the women's perspective into the government's ongoing strategy,
I would suggest that the women's perspective in the ongoing strategy of this
government has been sorely lacking. It
is not being seen to the extent that it needs to be seen, and I think that I am
coming full circle to my opening remarks.
While
I would like to get into much greater detail on many of these issues, there are
many other Estimates that need to come before this House, and there are other
opportunities for us to discuss these issues.
So, with that general kind of comment, that I think this department has
an enormously important linkage and educational and influential role to play in
this government, that the minister‑‑I strongly urge her to figure
out a way to break into that economic strategy, whatever that might be, and
make even more serious inroads into the decisions that are made by this
government which do not appear to, in many instances, reflect the needs of the
women in this province.
I
say many instances, because there have been some initiatives that have been
very positive, some in Family Services and some particularly in Justice. I would not want to take away from those
initiatives, but they are also the kinds of initiatives that deal with one side
of the continuum and do not yet address the basic causes. They deal more with the symptoms and less
with the causes. The challenge is
enormous and needs the assistance and full support of all members of the
government and of the Legislature to implement.
I wish the minister well, because she has got, obviously, an enormous
job ahead of her. Thank you.
Mrs.
Mitchelson: Yes, Madam Chairperson, and I think we all
recognize as women that women have a long way to go, and we have a lot of work
to do. I know that we have been in
government just over four years and, in fact, a lot of the problems that exist
within the system are problems that have been there for many, many years. They did not just happen in the last four
years that we have been government, and I think what any government has to do
is set their priorities within the fiscal reality of what the taxpayers of the
province they represent can afford.
There are many, many issues that need to be dealt with and, you know,
require a lot more infusion of dollars, scarce dollars I might say, in these
days of very tough economic times. We
have made a decision as a government that we are not going to raise taxes and
provide any more hardship in that way on the people of
A
lot of the taxation that exists today, of course, is due to the policies of
prior governments when they spent more than they earned year after year, and we
had a terribly high debt load that we were faced with when we came into
government. Then, of course, with
recessionary times, that has just added‑‑when there are no new tax
dollars coming in, it is pretty difficult to increase programs anywhere.
We
all do know that Health and Education and Family Services have been the
priorities of this government over the last five budgets. We have made some progress. I know there is still a long way to go, that
we have not been able to address every issue and every concern that is out
there, but we have made, as the member for Wellington‑‑I get
I
think the one area that we can boast major accomplishments in is on the
domestic violence side of things, when we have over the last four years gone
from three wife abuse shelters to 11 shelters.
We have increased our funding substantially, 193 percent, $2.5 million
over the last five budgets. Just this
year alone we have had an increase of $500,000 to the shelter system, which, as
I indicated in my opening statements, was a 10.4 percent increase. I think the increase went into the right
places to do a lot of the right things.
* (2210)
The
things that we did this year with the increase in funding were things that were
recommended to us by the shelters and the shelter system. They have gone into counselling programs for
children in all the shelters. The money
has gone to follow‑up workers at all of the shelters to provide services
to women who re‑enter the community after a shelter stay. The length of stay in shelters has increased
from 10 days to 21 days, and I think that was a major accomplishment and a
major step in the right direction.
We
also provided with that money an increase in support to Klinic's Evolve program
for counselling of abusers. I think we
all know that there are some major undertakings that still need to be done in
the area of counselling for abusers. But
our first priority, of course, had to be to provide a safe place for those
women and children who have to be removed from a very volatile situation. We also did, with that extra $500,000,
provide additional support for long‑term counselling to the North End
Women's Centre, the Women's Post Treatment Centre and the Fort Garry Women's
Resource Centre, and I know that all of these organizations are very supportive
of the new initiatives and, of course, the increased funding.
We
have some new shelter facilities that we will be opening this year in
We
also have just constructed a new facility for the Native Women's Transition
Centre and were pleased to have been part of that initiative in partnership
with the community and also with the federal government.
Another
area that we have made some major advances in is the area of justice, and I
have to commend my colleague for his very responsible attitude in the area of
violence against women. We did
commission the Pedlar report of which many of the recommendations are underway
or have been implemented already. Of course, there is new legislation that has
been introduced into the House, too, that will provide quicker access to
restraining orders for women without having to go through the hoops that are in
place presently.
As
a result of the Pedlar report and our government's commitment to dealing with
abuse, we are now directing police to lay charges in all cases of partner abuse
where evidence does exist. There is
mandatory prosecution of all partner‑abuse offences wherever evidence
exists. As I said, now women will have
quicker access to restraining orders.
There are stiffer penalties for breaching restraining orders, and we are
developing standard policies throughout the justice system to ensure domestic
violence is dealt with as a priority and in a consistent manner.
We
have extended the
In
those two areas we have made some major advances and, along with new programs
and new initiatives, there is also a request for increased resources through
funding. Ultimately, we know that it is
the taxpayers of
We
have increased funding to child care by $19 million. You know, the total child care funding for
the
I
do know that we have the commitment of our Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey)
to work together in partnership. We will
be doing that over the next period of time to try to ensure that some of the
issues that have been discussed here tonight will be addressed. We will try to do them in a way that will
ultimately benefit our young girls and our women that are going through the
educational process and those that do require retraining to get back into the
work force.
I
do know that the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), in his Women's Health area,
has got some very competent and qualified people working to try to deal with
the issues. As a matter of fact, when I
was talking about the community consultation process last year that we undertook
last September, it was with the Women's Health Directorate in combination with
the Women's Directorate, where we went out and met and listened to the people
who raised the issues that I talked about a little bit earlier.
There
are areas that need to be worked on. We
all know that we have not reached true equality and that there is much that we,
as a government, can do. I make a
commitment as the Minister responsible for the Status of Women to work in the
areas that we can work in to try to effect change, to hopefully accept some
congratulations for some of the good things that have been done. I would hope,
that as positive changes take place in the future, those in the opposition
would provide their positive support for new initiatives that can make a
difference for women in
Mrs. Carstairs:
Yes, I have just two very brief
questions. The first one has to do with
Bill 70. It is presently before us. It will in fact eliminate any differential
between social assistance payments; I think that is positive. What I do not think is very positive is the
fact that the government will not give us any inkling as to what their formula
is going to be. What it appears their
formula would be will be to cut the benefits of 89.3 percent of all social
assistance recipients in the
Can
the minister tell me what advice the Women's Directorate has given to the minister
with regard to setting the rates that will be paid in social assistance
benefits in the
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I think we all recognize and realize that
there is a need for some standardization in the social allowances throughout
the
I
think the intent of the bill very definitely is to ensure that all Manitobans
do have equal access to social assistance no matter where they reside. That is a fairness issue. I think it is an issue that‑‑I
would be very surprised if anyone in this Legislature would submit to
unfairness in the system. I know that
the Department of Family Services is presently consulting with UMM and MAUM,
the two municipal organizations that represent all communities throughout the
province, and there has been no determination yet on what the levels will
be. That will be a process of
consultation.
I
think we are a government that has committed to broad consultation throughout
the community, and we will continue to do that.
I cannot with any confidence give an indication of exactly what that
rate will be.
* (2220)
Mrs.
Carstairs: I can only assume that the Women's Directorate
has not made a recommendation with regard to the impact on women of reducing
their social assistance benefits. So let
me try it with one other aspect the minister addressed in Expected
Results: Representation of women's concerns
on working committees dealing with the implementation of the recommendations of
the Aboriginal Justice Inquiry.
One
of those women's concerns have to do with children. It was very clear throughout the AJI that
women expressed over and over again their concerns for their children and the
quality of life of their children within aboriginal society in
The
Aboriginal Justice Inquiry went on further to recommend the independence of a
Child Advocate Office, not one that would report to a ministry, but reporting
directly to this Legislative Assembly.
What position has the Women's Directorate taken with regard to
representing these women's views to the minister responsible for Bill 64, which
deals with the Child Advocate and does exactly opposite to what the AJI
recommended, it makes it responsible to the minister and not to this
Legislative Assembly?
Mrs.
Mitchelson: I think I have expressed in this Legislature
and committee on several occasions my sense of commitment to aboriginal women
and aboriginal communities throughout our
I
guess, without wanting to sound repetitive, I would like to express again sort
of the sense of frustration I felt as a result of meeting with aboriginal women
in some of the more remote communities up around The Pas, specifically Moose
Lake, the women I had the opportunity to listen to and hear their stories first
hand, and very unselfish women, women that in fact had a great sense of caring
and commitment to their families and to their children, and to their
communities. But first and foremost came
their children that they felt had grown up through abusive years where they
were abused at a very young age. In
fact, the only way as teenagers that they could deal with their frustration and
their anger was to strike out physically, and they were fighting and actually
in many instances ended up killing each other as a result of not being able to
deal with their emotions based on the treatment they had received through their
formative years.
The
women came and indicated that enough was enough, that they could not stand to see
their children abused any longer. They could not stand to see what was going on
in their communities as a result of the acts of violence.
Madam
Chairperson, I was deeply moved and deeply affected listening to those women
speak and tell me and reach out for assistance and for help from our
government. You know, I left feeling
extremely frustrated and very angry, thinking that right here in our
I
was extremely angry and came back and as a result of that had women from the
North, aboriginal women, come and meet with our caucus and make presentation to
them, the women from
We
do know that one healing conference on one weekend is not going to resolve all
of the problems that do exist, but, Madam Chairperson, we have made a
commitment, and I have made a personal commitment, to work with aboriginal
women, and especially those who are in remote communities who feel extremely
isolated and feel that they have nowhere to turn and nowhere to go for help.
We
do recognize also that there is a federal responsibility to support for our
aboriginal people. I made a commitment
just the other day to work with the Indigenous Women's Collective and try to
put together a presentation where both of us could approach the federal
government and try to work in partnership to help aboriginal women access the
resources that could and should be available through the federal government to
deal with some of the issues and concerns that they raise and that they face on
a day‑to‑day basis.
Madam
Chairperson, I believe that the legislation, Bill 64, that has been introduced,
that sets up a Child Advocate is, in fact, modelled after what is successfully
working in other provinces. I am not
sure how many other provinces have the system in place. I know there are a couple that have found
that this legislation works. I think, in
the best interests of the children that this legislation will serve, that we
need to get it expeditiously passed and through the Legislature and get a Child
Advocate in place.
Madam
Chairperson: Item 1. Status of Women (a) Advisory Council
on the Status of Women: (1) Salaries
$162,000‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $116,500‑‑pass.
1.(b)
Women's Directorate: (1) Salaries
$529,900‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $92,500‑‑pass.
Resolution
123: RESOLVED that there be granted to
Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $900,900 for Status of Women, Status of Women, for
the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1993‑‑pass.
This
concludes the Estimates for the Status of Women. The hour being after 10 p.m., committee
rise. Call in the Speaker.
IN SESSION
Madam
Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The hour being after 10 p.m., this House is
adjourned and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow (Tuesday)