LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Monday, June 28, 1993
The House met at 8 p.m.
ORDERS OF
THE DAY (continued)
COMMITTEE
OF SUPPLY
(Concurrent
Sections)
LABOUR
Madam Chairperson
(Louise Dacquay): Order, please.
Will the Committee of Supply please come to order.
Hon. Darren Praznik
(Deputy Government House Leader): Madam
Chair, I would like to suggest the committee temporarily interrupt its
proceedings so that the Speaker may resume the Chair so as to determine whether
there is unanimous consent of the House to vary the sequence of the Estimates
consideration by allowing the Department of Urban Affairs to be heard in the
committee outside of this Chamber prior to the Department of Northern and
Native Affairs, and whether or not there would be unanimous consent to allow a
second department to begin hearing Estimates tonight after 10 p.m. inside the
committee outside of the House.
Madam Chairperson: Is it the will of the committee to temporarily
suspend the proceedings of Committee of Supply to deal with the order of the
Estimates? (agreed)
IN SESSION
Hon. Darren Praznik
(Deputy Government House Leader): Madam
Deputy Speaker, I would ask you to please canvass the House to see if there
would be unanimous consent to vary the order of the Estimates for the section of
the Committee of Supply meeting outside of the Chamber in that the Department
of Urban Affairs may be allowed to be heard prior to the Department of Northern
and Native Affairs, as well to canvass the House to see if there would be
unanimous consent to allow a second department, for tonight only, to begin its
Estimates after the hour of 10 p.m., in the section of the committee sitting
outside of the Chamber.
Madam Deputy Speaker
(Louise Dacquay): Is there unanimous consent of the House to
vary the order for the Estimates to deal with the Department of Urban Affairs
outside the Chamber prior to dealing with the Estimates for the Department of
Northern and Native Affairs? (agreed)
Is
there unanimous consent of the House to allow permission to start the Estimates
of Northern and Native Affairs after ten o'clock this evening only, if
required. (agreed)
The
House will now convene in Committee of Supply.
URBAN
AFFAIRS
Mr. Deputy Chairperson
(Marcel Laurendeau): Good evening.
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 Urban Affairs.
Does the honourable Minister of Urban Affairs
have an opening statement?
Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister
of Urban Affairs): Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I am pleased, at long
last, to present the '93‑94 Estimates for the Department of Urban
Affairs.
The
message contained in the Estimates is the same one that my cabinet colleagues
have emphasized throughout the current legislative session. Specifically, they have said that
My
department has kept the city informed of the financial realities facing the
province in determining budgets and allocating grants for the '93‑94
fiscal year. In the wake of reductions
in federal transfer payments to
During this fiscal year, the City of
The
province has changed the Transit Operating Grant so that it is now
unconditional. This has been done to
provide the city with greater autonomy and to encourage it to operate as
efficiently and productively as possible.
The new funding formula will allow the city to change its operation if
it desires and to retain the full amount of any operating efficiencies
achieved.
The
province has made $15.2 million in commitments under the urban capital projects
allocation. That commitment includes
$8.1 million for infrastructure renewal projects. These projects will not only upgrade existing
infrastructure within the city but will also create jobs and have beneficial
effects on the economy. The province is
committed to infrastructure renewal and strongly supports the initiatives of
the city in this area.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson, in addition to providing financial support to the City of
Before going any further, I would like to pay
tribute to a man who made many significant contributions to the growth and
character of
The
city has recently undergone some other major changes. After 13 years of
dedicated service in office, Bill Norrie retired from the mayor's chair.
My
department looks forward to a positive working relationship with Mayor Thompson
and her colleagues at City Hall. I
anticipate that a legislative program will be introduced this fiscal year which
will bring further amendments to The City of Winnipeg Act including some
revenue improvements. Well, we have
already been through all of that, respecting the collection of parking fines in
particular.
The
City of
* (2010)
With respect to urban development, the final
projects under the renewed Core Area Initiative are being completed. Funds have been allocated to an archeological
centre in the redeveloped Johnston Terminal building at The Forks and to the
first phase of The Forks Plaza. A total
of $931,000 from the Core Area Initiative will be spent on these projects with
Like other projects under the agreement, it is
a joint undertaking of the City of
Still at The Forks, we have budgeted $1
million for The Forks Renewal Corporation.
These funds represent the province's portion of the commitment that was
made by the three levels of government under the equivalency agreement for The
Forks. The funds will enable the
continuation of the redevelopment of this important area of the city of
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson, we have also included $2.5 million in this year's budget
for a new urban redevelopment agreement.
We are still hopeful that we will be able to convince the federal
government to enter into a tripartite agreement that will address the needs of
I
would like to close by touching briefly on a couple of items concerning
planning. The Capital Region committee
established by our government continues to meet regularly. Members will recall
that this committee gives
In
the coming year the committee will continue to focus its efforts on developing
the Capital Region strategy which is one of the components of
My
staff of some 18 people have come through an eventful year. They have dealt successfully with a variety
of challenging issues and these dedicated professionals deserve a great deal of
credit for their very hard work and fulfilling the mandate of the
department. This is a very small
department. These individuals do a great
deal of work and have demonstrated regularly great professional expertise and
dedication. I thank them for that.
Mr.
Deputy Chair, that concludes my introduction.
I invite questions and discussion on these Estimates.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: We thank the Minister of Urban Affairs for
those comments.
Does the official opposition critic, the
honourable member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway), have any opening comments?
Mr. Jim Maloway
(Elmwood): Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I think I will make a
few opening comments, then perhaps the member for the Liberal Party would like
to do the same, and then we could get into some questions of the minister.
I
note that the Urban Affairs department was set up as a separate department in
1971, and I am wondering whether it may be time to review the role of the
department and see what it really has accomplished and is accomplishing,
because I would not want to see the department be simply a make‑work
project for another minister. I really
wonder what the minister has been doing over the last couple of years. I know that we were talking about a third
Core Area Initiative, and I see nothing has been done in that area. Now just before an upcoming federal election,
there is some sign that there might be something perking.
Perhaps it is time, when governments are
looking at reducing costs and so on, that they might look at getting rid of
some redundancy in the cabinet perhaps and look at reassessing some of the
cabinet positions with a view perhaps to amalgamating some of the departments.
I
say that with the utmost respect for the minister, because of all the ministers
I have dealt with since I have got here, I have to say that in the short time
that I have had dealings with him, he is probably the best of the bunch so far
and seems open to talk about different ideas.
I
would like the minister to respond to that because, by his own admission, it is
a very small department. It only has 18
staff positions in the entire department, and I do not think that any
department's longevity should be carved in stone. I think government should reassess, every
once in a while, the role of departments with a view to making things perhaps
more relevant to the times.
So
either this minister should get more active and do something about a third Core
Area and take a more activist role in this area, or perhaps they should look at
another role for him.
Anyway, with that, I would pass to the Liberal
critic to make her opening comments, if she will.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: We thank the critic from the official
opposition for those remarks. Does the
critic from the second opposition, the honourable member for Crescentwood, have
any opening remarks?
Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood): Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I thank the minister
for his comments, in particular his kind words for the staff. That is always good to hear, when the
minister is in public complimenting staff who do spend a lot of hours and
basically serve the people of
The
comments from the official opposition I find quite interesting. I am pleased to hear that the member for
Elmwood is talking about efficiencies in departments. That was certainly one of the questions that I
had, and I am sure the minister will take an opportunity to comment on that in
terms of looking at the viability of this particular department as it exists
and if there should be any potential changes to structure in government.
I
know we, as the Liberal Party, have been calling on government to look at
restructuring since at least '88, and I am very pleased to hear the same
sentiments from the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway), given most of us lived
through the NDP government for over 10 years and certainly saw a lot of
inefficiencies. So I am pleased to hear
this positive approach, and I will leave it at that. I would like to basically get into questions
and discussions.
I
think what we may do as we go through the department, rather than going section
by section, if there is agreement from the minister, is probably pass the
sections until we get to the Minister's Salary and then we can ask our
questions at that point. Although you
want to have your staff here, and I do not know if you are able to do that
unless there is leave for the deputy minister to be here.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: We thank the critic of the second opposition
party for those statements. Under
At
this time we invite the minister's staff to join us at the table, and we ask
the minister to introduce his staff.
Maybe the committee can give me the will of how they decided they want
to carry on this evening.
Mr. Ernst: I have no objection to handling matters as
outlined by the member for Crescentwood, with the exception that if you get to
the Minister's Salary and my staff are prohibited, not all of the questions may
get answered to your satisfaction, simply because I will not have all of the
detail. So if you are agreeable, then I
would prefer to have my deputy minister present.
I
would like to introduce, for those who do not know, Mr. Jim Beaulieu who is the
Deputy Minister of Urban Affairs.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Would there be unanimous consent then for the
minister to keep his staff here during the Minister's Salary? (agreed)
Then
we are going to go ahead and we are going to pass the lines necessary, and we
will come back to the Minister's Salary.
Item 1. Administration and Finance (b)
Executive Support (1) Salaries $231,400‑‑pass; (2) Other
Expenditures $43,700‑‑pass.
(c)
Administrative and Financial Services (1) Salaries $158,900‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $36,900‑‑pass.
2.
Financial Assistance to the City of
(b)
Unconditional Transit Operating Grant $17,100,000‑‑pass.
(c)
General Support Grant $8,240,000‑‑pass.
(d)
Dutch Elm Disease Control Program $700,000‑‑pass.
Resolution 20.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $46,540,000 for Urban Affairs, Financial Assistance to the
City of Winnipeg, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1994.
3.
Urban Policy and Agreement Management (a) Salaries $436,400‑‑pass.
(b)
Other Expenditures $129,800‑‑pass.
(c)
Canada‑Manitoba Winnipeg Core Area Renewed Agreement (1) Payments to
Other Implementing Jurisdictions zero‑‑pass; (2) Payments to Other
Provincial Departments zero‑‑pass; (3) Departmental Expenditures
zero‑‑pass.
Resolution 20.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $566,200 for Urban Affairs for the fiscal year ending the
31st day of March, 1994.
4.
Expenditures Related to Capital (a) Financial Assistance to the City of
4.(b) Canada‑Manitoba Winnipeg Core Area
Renewed Agreement (1) Payments to Other Implementing Jurisdictions $310,300‑‑pass;
(2) Payments to Other Provincial Departments zero‑‑pass; (3)
Departmental Expenditures zero‑‑pass.
4.(c) Urban Initiatives $1,800,000‑‑pass.
Resolution 20.4: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $18,110,300 for Urban Affairs for the fiscal year ending
the 31st day of March, 1994.
* (2020)
We
will now return back to 1.(a) Minister's Salary.
Ms. Gray: The minister in his opening comments talked
about the Core Area Initiative and negotiations that were continuing on. I am wondering if the minister could give us
an update of where those negotiations are at.
Mr. Ernst: Well, I have been up and down with this
program so many times and had great confidence it was going to happen, and you
know the range or the spectrum of anticipation has, I think, covered just about
every juncture along the way.
Currently, we have simply put to the federal
government that if they are going to participate in a third Core Agreement, it
has to be with real money. We are not
prepared to accept recycling of existing programs simply by placing them under
the umbrella of a core area agreement, when the money and the program is going
to be delivered and is being delivered at the present time in Winnipeg. I mean it is just not on.
If
they are going to participate, they are going to be part of a Core Area
Initiative, then they have to provide real money, they have to provide new
money. The original proposal was not
acceptable. We went back to them and
told them that. The Premier and the
Prime Minister had a little visit, and we had expected some changes to occur
back in January. That did not occur‑‑changes,
not with respect to the Prime Minister's job, but with respect to their outlook
on this agreement. There was a new
minister and a number of matters have intervened in the process.
Virtually, everything comes to a halt when all
of a sudden there is a new minister, and then that new minister now with huge
additional responsibilities in addition to those that were assumed for being
lead minister for
So
there was a lot of work on the table, and I must say that we launched,
initially at least anyway, into this issue with some confidence that it was
going to be dealt with. Then of course
what occurred was the federal budget process, which saw everything being held
back, constrained and so on, created some further difficulties, but still
anticipation that money could be found internally within departments of
government.
I
do not care, quite frankly, if it is old money coming from
I
am hopeful now that that is all out of the way.
We have a new Prime Minister. She
will be embarking, with a new cabinet, upon attempts to reconfigure the
government, and I am hopeful that this issue will be one of those things that
can be included. We have been
unrelenting in our pressure upon the government to try and conclude a new
agreement. We recognize very well the
high desirability of a new agreement; we recognize the kind of good things that
occurred in past agreements; we recognize some of the things that did not work
so well in the last agreements as well.
Those kinds of things, I am sure, will be changed should a new agreement
occur.
The
bottom line is, and the Premier has indicated it on a number of occasions, that
if in fact we do not reach some kind of an agreement with the federal
government at some point, and when that point is has not yet been determined,
we are prepared to go it alone with the city in an attempt to try and at least
address some of the issues that confront Winnipeg.
So
in a sense, I did not want to carry on too long, but that is basically where we
are at and kind of how we got there.
Ms. Gray: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, there have been
comments made by governments and people who are involved in Core I and Core II
about the positives of the program, the negatives and some evaluation has been
done. If the province is fortunate enough
to get some type of agreement from the federal government for another
initiative, and I will not call it Core, but another initiative of Phase III,
can the minister tell us what types of changes he would like to see in that
type of an agreement, and would the emphasis be on rehabilitation programs,
social programs and education or would there be more emphasis on infrastructure
programs, or might there be a combination?
Mr. Ernst: It is hard to say just at this point. There were a number of general areas that
were dealt with: urban aboriginals,
What I have committed to all along was that I
would like to hear from those people who are the ones who are going to be the
beneficiaries. I would like to hear what
they have to say, where they think the money should be spent, where they see
their lives heading and how it can be assisted by this. It is fine for a whole host of urban planners,
social workers and a variety of other professionals trying to create their view
of what these people should be doing and how they should be affected. It might be pretty interesting to hear what
they have to say for themselves, where they see the benefits lying, where they
see the assistance that is required, and where they ultimately see themselves
headed. So that public hearing process
is something that I have agreed with all along.
Whenever you deal with the federal government,
I have come to learn, is that the money coming from any line department‑‑and
that is generally where it comes from in the federal government is from a line
department‑‑it always comes with strings attached. Sometimes you have to live within the range
that those strings allow you to operate, and it does not always allow you to do
exactly what you want to do. Sometimes
you have to adjust your thinking to meet the program guidelines of federal
government departments. So within those
constraints, I guess we are pretty open to what we might be able to do.
Ms. Gray: Was there not an evaluation that was done of
Core II though that had some specific recommendations in terms of what worked
well and what did not, or a final report of some sort?
Mr. Ernst: Let me point out that this document was
produced on behalf of the Core‑‑I do not know whether you have seen
that‑‑which basically talks in glowing terms about most things and
really did not get into anything else than kind of stressing the positive. And there were lots of positives to stress, I
do not mean to demean that for one second.
Part of the original Core II Agreement was a detailed evaluation to be
done, to spend‑‑I forget, but I think it was in excess of $100,000
or more on detailed evaluation. When it
came down to the end on whether we were going to spend that money on detailed
evaluation or fund some fairly worthwhile projects, we opted to fund the
projects and not spend it on the evaluation.
We did not do the detailed evaluation that was contemplated initially.
* (2030)
Ms. Gray: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, if for some reason an
agreement with federal government for a trilateral agreement is not possible,
and at some point the minister has to basically come to the realization, if
that ever happens, that that is not possible.
You have indicated that you are prepared to enter into a bilateral
agreement with the city, does the minister have any idea as to what kind of
dollars the province is looking at, and are those dollars‑‑is there
a different amount of dollars depending on whether it is a bilateral agreement
or whether it might be a trilateral agreement?
Any sense of that?
Mr. Ernst: We had talked with the city and the federal
government at $25 million each. I think
the city has budgeted in their five‑year capital plan for that level of
contribution. I do not think it matters
particularly whether we are with the federal government or without the federal
government. Our contribution level would
be in the same area at $25 million for five years.
Mr. Maloway: Just to expand a little bit on the question
of the Core Area, you had said that you would go alone with the city. I was wondering when you would make that
decision. At one point are you going to
give up on the federal government if it does not participate and go it alone in
terms of‑‑I would like some kind of date on this‑‑(interjection)
Yes, like just before the election.
Mr. Ernst: But do not tell me when the election is going
to be.
The
whole question of levering the federal government into an agreement is a matter
that has certain potential windows of opportunity. One of those windows of opportunity is a
federal election campaign and/or just ahead of a federal election
campaign. So I do not care, quite
frankly, if that is an election gimmick, if you want to use that terminology,
as long as we get the money. As long as
the program is in place, I do not care how it comes. If somebody wants to use it for political
benefit, that is the name of the game.
Mr. Maloway: So having said that then, would the minister
tell me at what point he plans to get really active with the federal
government? Is now the time to be
phoning them and being aggressive with them, or does he think maybe another
month or two might do? When is he going
to do this?
Mr. Ernst: I have been doing it for a year and a half
with a variety of different people. The
players change and the budgets change and so on, but I mean, as I indicated
earlier, we have not let up on this issue at all. It is not a question of getting active.
The
fact of the matter is, we have been and are continuing to be and raise it every
time we meet and several times in between to determine what potential is on the
horizon for this issue. It is a constant
issue to be dealt with with the federal government.
Mr. Maloway: So presumably then, once the federal election
is over and if nothing has been done at that time, then that is the point in
time that the minister will go to the city and do it with the city then as
opposed to the three.
Mr. Ernst: I do not want to commit to any particular
time lines, but there are, as I said, windows of opportunity that occur from
time to time that avail themselves for issues of this type.
Mr. Maloway: The member for Crescentwood had a resolution
last week on the Core Area, and I remember making a few comments on that. One of them had to with the boundaries, and I
felt the previous boundaries of Core I and Core II tended to be fairly
political in their drawings. In Core I
the boundaries ran way out into
It
just seems to me, you know I have a couple of problems with that. Another problem that you have, of course, is
that if you have wide boundaries that go beyond the core and you only have so
much money to spread around, you spread it kind of thin.
Mr. Ernst: I think, in terms of a third agreement, I
just want to make one comment with respect to what we have been able to
accomplish up to this point, in terms of the new political minister for
Manitoba from the federal government, is that we have concluded an agreement to
merge North Portage and The Forks into one corporation. With the new mayor, the new minister and
myself, we have been able to reach agreement on that, and we are proceeding on
that. We hope to get that accomplished
sometime this fall and to save some, I think, significant operating monies and
some greater operating efficiencies in terms of the overall operation of those
two public corporations.
The
question of the boundaries was always a difficult one, and I admit that it is
pretty obvious why boundaries got to be where they were. But there were three parties to those agreements,
and the three parties and their representatives of those days ultimately
determined that was acceptable to them.
In
Core I, for the provincial government it was my former colleague and now Mr.
Justice Mercier. In the second Core
Agreement, it was your Leader, Mr. Doer, the member for Concordia, who
ultimately had agreed on behalf of the provincial government that those
boundaries were adequate. But very
often, the issues that are trying to be addressed do not know any boundaries‑‑geographic
boundaries, that is. I think what we
have talked about in all our discussions up to this point was that we would try
and aim at issues and try and solve specific problems with this new agreement,
as opposed to trying to simply carve up a piece of real estate and say this is
what is going to happen in this area.
If
somebody needs training and is on social assistance, and has the potential to
remain there for a long period of time, it does not matter where they live
within the city boundaries. If we are going
to try and target some of those things, we will try and target on the basis of
need and problem areas as opposed to geographic areas.
Mr. Maloway: I take some comfort with what the minister has
said, although history kind of shows that things do not work out that way. They use the best of intentions to direct the
money to those in need, but the political boundaries decisions of the past‑‑and
I do not want to absolve any party of its role in there. I mean, it is just a fact of life, just the
nature of the beast, having a tripartite situation like this means that each
party is trying to get the best deal it can.
So you have something that, I guess, probably should be unworkable, but
I assume it has worked out all right in spite of it, but I cannot see where it
could be overly efficient having a structure like that.
* (2040)
Now, I wanted to ask the minister about the
situation regarding St. Germain and Headingley.
Headingley has been gone now for, I guess, about a year and St. Germain
is still talking about it. Could you
give us a bit of an update on what has transpired in those areas?
Mr. Ernst: With respect to Headingley, it no longer
falls under the jurisdiction of the Department of Urban Affairs. It is part of rural
They are doing well. Part of Headingley is in my constituency, and
I visit there from time to time. They
are doing very well. They have a sense
of community that I do not think anyone really appreciated, the fact that they
were in fact a rural community for a long, long period of time, whether the
boundary said they were in
When
they put out their tax bills this spring there was a 15 percent reduction over
levels of last year. At the same time,
they invested significant capital in terms of acquisition of a building for
their municipal offices and fire hall.
They also acquired a couple of vehicles to start a volunteer fire
department, and they had a very successful weekend on the 13th and 14th of June
with the Headingley Homecoming. I think
they are well on their way to having their self‑government, shall we say,
operations conducted in the fashion in which they had anticipated.
St.
Germain‑‑I hear from Dr. Shapiro who is their spokesperson from
time to time‑‑brought a petition to the Legislature almost two
years ago, I guess, now, requesting us to undertake a study similar to the
study that was undertaken by Headingley under the Pawley government and under
the leadership of Urban Affairs Minister Doer at the time. They wanted to have us undertake that study
on their behalf to determine whether financially it was viable for them to
separate.
I
asked them to hold a public meeting in St. Germain subsequent to that to
determine the level of interest. It is
one thing to sign a petition; it is quite something else to come out to a
public meeting and express your views.
The member of the Legislature for that area held a public meeting in St.
Germain, actually in St. Vital, but for St. Germain residents and somewhere in
the area of 400 to 500 people showed up.
I mean, it was a very, very well attended meeting, and I heard an awful
lot of very good comments from people with respect to what they had anticipated
for themselves in the future and so on.
Their situation is somewhat different in some
respects to Headingley but in many respects it is also the same. Their attitude was not quite the same. Headingley started off on the basis that they
wanted to secede. They wanted to be on
their own and they wanted to form their own municipality. I did not get that sense of feeling from the
meeting at St. Germain. I think there
are an awful lot of people that are interested in some recognition of the fact
that they do not receive all the services that the serviced area of the city
receives, yet they are taxed the same.
They are looking more for some recognition of the reduced services they
received in the form of a tax reduction than they are necessarily about
sucession.
I
have been encouraging the city all along.
I have written to the mayor two or three times offering suggestions as
to how they might be able to recognize that concern of the residents of St.
Germain. Up to this point it has not
been terribly successful. The city has
tended to simply ignore the issue, although they have paid some service to the
fact after the councillor for the area and Dr. Shapiro last appeared before
executive committee, I think, in the last two or three weeks, that they have
asked for some 60 days to look at it and so on.
I
think I am prepared to wait until they consider what they might do and then we
will see where we go from there.
Mr. Maloway: I would like to ask the minister about the
whole business of hydrogen, I think it is.
In
I
recall 20 years ago, at least, the Schreyer government had electric cars here,
they had Renault 12s, I think they were from
Now, the program did not work all that well
evidently over time, and that was 20 years ago, but the point is that that
government was at least showing some forward thinking in the area of electric
cars and so on. Now, surely the
technology has developed quite a bit over the last few years and I think this
government should be looking at something to do with electric cars or hydrogen
cars or whatever.
Now, could you tell me whether you are looking
at it or whether you have done anything at this point?
Mr. Ernst: The government has a Department of Energy, it
has a Department of Environment, it has a number of areas quite apart from the
Department of Urban Affairs that deal with a great number of these issues.
From time to time, when those issues occur
then in conjunction with
Mr. Maloway: The minister does sit in the cabinet. I would expect that he would be aware of any
initiatives on this part, so I would ask him whether anything is being done in
this area, and if not, why not?
Mr. Ernst: I said there are a number of issues energy‑related
in other departments in the government, not in the Department of Urban
Affairs. The fact of the matter is, I
think that, there being those kinds of issues and so on, they are being
evaluated on a regular basis, not only by ourselves, but also by, for instance,
the city fleet vehicles or city transit or those kinds of things.
I
remember the days of the electric cars.
I was at City Hall at the time when those electric cars came along and
did not work.
An Honourable Member: They worked.
Mr. Ernst: Well, why are they not widespread if they
worked?
Nonetheless, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, it is not
going to serve anybody's purpose to get into an argument about whether
something that happened 20 years ago did or did not work. The fact of the matter is, a number of those
kinds of things are being evaluated, but they have to be evaluated in the sense
that it is not simply good enough to say, yes, we can‑‑we do not
have the luxury anymore of spending huge amounts of money just trying these
things out to see if they work. They
have to have careful evaluation based on technology, expert opinion and
engineering analysis before any of these kinds of things are undertaken.
* (2050)
I
know there are a number of vehicles both in the Crown corporation fleet and, I
believe, in the city's fleet that are fired by propane, ethanol and a variety
of substitute fuels to try and determine if they are more efficient, better
than the standard gasoline or diesel fuel.
There are a number of issues being undertaken,
considerations being undertaken, alternate fuels being given consideration from
time to time, not necessarily because of the Department of Urban Affairs, but
because of technologies that come along.
Mr. Maloway: Following from that then, what has the
minister done specifically over the last year to encourage the city to get
involved in curbside recycling and other recycling sort of areas?
The
Minister of Urban Affairs may be able to argue that he does not have direct
jurisdiction in these areas.
Nevertheless, he should be involved in this area, at least trying to get
some results from the city.
Mr. Ernst: Interestingly enough, Mr. Deputy Chairperson,
whenever you make a suggestion to the city, they have their hand out‑‑a
suggestion of any kind. In fact, they
have their hand out even when you do not make any suggestions to the city.
The
fact of the matter is, for a long period of time, there were conditional grants
being given by provincial governments to the City of
(Mr. Bob Rose, Acting Deputy Chairperson,
in the Chair)
With respect to recycling programs in general,
what the Minister of Environment has done, and I think should be commended for‑‑and
you read a little bit about it. I guess
it was either in today's or yesterday's paper with regard to the Grocery
Products Manufacturers association and the negotiations that he has been
having, I guess as a result of the WRAP Act, to come up with basically a new
industry.
That is a private‑sector funded industry
to recycle not just newspapers and tin cans, but to recycle virtually
everything that these people produce.
They recycle it at their cost, and they are the ones then that are
driven to find solutions or uses for their materials.
It
is quite one thing to collect it, but we could be like Toronto and have a
curbside recycling program that costs millions and all we have are warehouses
full of empty liquor bottles and warehouses full of paper and things that
cannot be used because there are no or very limited uses for them.
The
pressure is on the industry, I think, in general, and they are responding.
I
am kind of excited. As a matter of fact,
I happen to sit on a committee that is dealing with this issue, which is why I
know a little bit more about it than might otherwise be expected. I think there is an opportunity here to
create not only some very good sustainable development activity, but to create
an industry along with it, that industry without government money, hopefully,
that will carry out the kinds of things that we want to be carried out.
I
think there are some great opportunities here.
I am hopeful that they all come to fruition and we do gain the benefit
of that.
Ms. Gray: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I would like
to ask a few questions and refer specifically to the Financial Assistance to
the City of
I
am wondering if the minister could assist the committee in going through the
expenditures and perhaps providing a bit more detail, if he has any, beginning
under Urban Capital Projects Allocation I, a total of $90 million for Capital
Commitments, if he could give an explanation of some of these.
Mr. Ernst: Under the $90 million fund, that was the
capital project allocation that was made between 1985 and 1990. Most of that has been delivered, although
there are some commitments under that program that still remain
outstanding. I guess the biggest one
would be the York‑St. Mary extension through The Forks for $8 million,
which, I believe, is the amount.
Although I am going from memory, and so I stand to be corrected, I
believe it is about $8 million. There
may be one or two others that are not quite completed or whatever. That one is pretty much over with.
In
terms of Urban Capital Projects Allocation II, that was divided into three
basic categories. It is $96 million
altogether. Thirty million dollars was
to be for city priorities. The city
could spend it on whatever it wished, no strings attached, so to speak.
The
second component of that was $40 million.
That was to be spent on infrastructure renewal. We felt it was a high priority item that
should be addressed. Therefore, the
strings attached were that they had to spend it on infrastructure renewal.
The
last component, $26 million, and the smallest component, was on joint projects
between the province and the city where the province viewed that it had an
interest.
I
can tell you basically, I think‑‑if you can just grant me a moment
here.
If
I could ask the member for Crescentwood (Ms. Gray), are you looking for
something that is particular? I can go
through reams and reams of paper and give you '91, '92, '93 and our projections
to the end of the agreement, if you like.
If you have some specific issues, I can try and answer those, or I can
give you the whole nine yards, as you wish.
Ms. Gray: In response to the question, Mr. Acting
Deputy Chairperson, if the minister has written information that he would be
prepared to table for us for our information‑‑that would be one
question.
Mr. Ernst: I recently wrote the mayor outlining the
balance of the $26 million commitment.
The others are at the city's choice, and they are block funding, so I
cannot tell you very much about those other than what they might have spent
them on after the fact.
The
$26 million, I can give you some indication of that. I am not sure whether I have that
letter. If I do not have it with me, I
can undertake to get you a copy at a later time. Just give me a sec. here to see if I do have
a copy of that letter. As a matter of fact,
I do have it. This is the copy that was
tabled by the Leader of the Opposition in the House. It is the same letter and the information is
the same. Basically what it is, is our
$26 million under the urban projects capital location is being spent on a
detoxification centre for the Main Street Project, $150,000; $150,000 for a
downtown weather‑protected pedestrian system; $105,000 for a
nitrification study, phase two. It is a
waste water treatment. I can go into the
details if you like.
A
transportation study, $154,000; $2.268 million towards the reconstruction of
St. Anne's Road twinning from Sterling Avenue to Novavista Drive that will
ultimately lead to a connection to the Perimeter Highway, which is the
provincial interest; the La Salle River bridge which is part of our commitment
on Pembina Highway reconstruction within the city of Winnipeg south of the
Perimeter Highway. It is part of the
Highway 75 twinning program; $1.788 million for the reconstruction of
* (2100)
Ms. Gray: I thank the minister for that.
I
am wondering in regard to the $154,000 for the transportation study, what
particular study would that be?
Mr. Ernst: The City of
(Mr. Deputy Chairperson in the Chair)
Ms. Gray: That transportation study, is part of that
looking at the viability of a southwest transportation corridor, or is the
study that specific?
Mr. Ernst: Oh, very likely that will be part of it. That has been around since I started in
politics 20 years ago at City Hall, so no doubt it will raise its head
again. The question, I do not think at
any point, is that it is not a good idea; it is a question of how can you fund
it. It is significantly expensive. The
last time I heard it was somewhere around, upwards of $75 million or $80
million using just the bus option, not light rail transit. If you are looking at the LRT, it is probably
about two or three times that.
Ms. Gray: The Charleswood bridge allocation, the $13
million, this is under the section of Provincial‑City Priorities. I was under the impression‑‑I
could be wrong‑‑that the Charleswood bridge is not a city priority.
Mr. Ernst: I think you are wrong.
Ms. Gray: Is the minister indicating then that the City
of
Mr. Ernst: It is my understanding that money for a
design and the property acquisition were contained in prior years' and this
year's budget, the capital budget for the City of Winnipeg, and that they
intend to proceed with full‑budget allocation for construction in 1994.
Ms. Gray: If the city already has decided, or should
the city decide for whatever reason, particularly if they complete a study to
look at transportation needs in the city in general, that they have
reprioritized and that the Charleswood bridge is not a priority, what impact
does that have on the minister's budget allocations here?
Mr. Ernst: I suppose we have to cross that bridge when
we come to it. There are no time
constraints or years indicated on this commitment. It is a commitment under the agreement, and
they have until whatever the latest time is to claim under the agreement to
claim for this project, so they have lots of time to deal with it.
I
could suggest that one or two or three years, in one way or another, it is
probably not going to affect it materially.
Ms. Gray: The reason I asked that question is I know
some of the councillors, and I think the mayor as well, are particularly
concerned about the entire transportation system, or lack thereof, in the
southwest part of the city. I know,
certainly with the development in Whyte Ridge and Linden Woods and in the south
part of the city that really, as a city, we have not built adequate
transportation systems to accommodate that development, which is why‑‑and
I am pleased that there are at least some dollars going into some repair of
Kenaston, although $1.78 million is probably not a lot of dollars considering
what may need to be done.
I
am sure the minister is aware of the transportation study that is going on in
the Crescentwood‑River Heights area which is looking at traffic flows, et
cetera, and the problems that people in that area are experiencing because of
through traffic, or the perception of through traffic, going through
Basically, my real question to the minister
would be, what type of leadership can the minister take or has the minister
taken in encouraging the city that, before they look at any future development,
that part of any type of development, residential development or even
commercial, but particularly residential, can only be developed and planned
along with looking at transportation systems, which I would suggest the city
has not done a good job of in the last number of years.
Mr. Ernst: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, historically, we have
had all kinds of great plans for transportation routes in the city of
That plan is as relevant today as it was in
1968. The problem is that the NDP
government took over in 1969, and the Highways minister of the day, Joe
Borowski, said there will be no major routes of transportation in the city of
Notwithstanding that, the city has tried from
time to time to build bits and pieces of that to try and utilize some of the
benefits that were predicted from that plan, and have been more or less, more
successful or less successful, in many cases, with respect to that.
* (2110)
But
the fact of the matter is that the overall transportation plan at that time was
one that should have been implemented and should have been implemented then, in
advance of a lot of the residential development that has occurred since,
because once you build the residential development you can never build the
highways after because the people who are there now do not want to have the
noise, do not want to have the problems associated with it.
When you build a road in advance to that
development, then the people know. When
they get there, they know that is going to be there and that is going to be
either a benefit or a problem for them, as the case may be. But at least it is there and they know, and
it is not coming along after the fact.
It
is no longer any good just to retain the right‑of‑way. We have got all kinds of right‑of‑way
all over
So
I am hopeful that this transportation plan, as it deals with the future, will
look at not only just putting it on paper but look at the implementation
process as well, how it should be implemented, when it should be implemented,
how it should be funded and a number of those issues, because otherwise, you
are simply creating once more a very nice document that will gather a lot of
dust and will not ever see the light of day.
Mr. Maloway: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I wanted to ask the
minister about the Marwest contract that he promised a couple of weeks ago, and
I am wanting to know when that is going to be given to us.
Mr. Ernst: When we were dealing with the Annual Report
of The Forks Corporation, the member asked if The Forks Corporation would
provide a copy of the lease agreement they had with Marwest. I have not heard back from them yet, so I will
inquire.
Mr. Maloway: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, can the minister tell
us when the committee will be meeting again to consider
Mr. Ernst: That will be at the direction of the House
leader.
Mr. Maloway: What the minister is telling me is that he
does not know when the committee will meet, if it will meet, even.
Mr. Ernst: I am not the House leader. House leaders of all three parties, and the
member knows that, determine these things from time to time, so we will have to
see what the House leader has organized.
Mr. Maloway: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, well, I detect a bit
of reluctance on the part of the minister and the people from The Forks
Corporation to provide the information.
I know we have a lot of questions that we want to ask about the North
Portage report and the
I
wanted to ask a question about the Dutch Elm Disease Program and so on. The minister has had this program brought
into his purview from the Natural Resources department. Now, what is currently happening with that
program?
Mr. Ernst: What is happening is that we are spending
twice as much money on it this year as we did last year. As a matter of fact, I have not had a single
question from the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) on the question of Dutch
elm disease since we put $700,000 in our budget for that purpose. In fact, what we are doing in concert with
the city is‑‑and I think there was a major article yesterday in the
paper dealing with that whole issue of dealing with sanitation of elm trees.
Ms. Gray: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I am pleased there is
$700,000 that is going into the Dutch Elm Disease Program. It is a very important program, and I am
pleased to see the dollars being spent in that area. It took a lot of lobbying on the part of a
lot of people, but the point is, the money is there and it will be used to good
purpose.
I
was wondering, since the change in the City of Winnipeg's boundaries with
respect to the number of councillors, et cetera, and I know that a lot of the
concerns or issues would go directly to city councillors or to City Hall, but
has there been any feedback, at the minister's level or his department, from
taxpayers in Winnipeg about the changes in the boundaries and the
redistribution of the number of city councillors, et cetera?
Mr. Ernst: Initially, when the proposal was announced,
the reactions at the size of council‑‑I think it represented probably
at least two‑thirds of the people of Winnipeg‑‑were in favour
of that initiative.
Since the election of 1992, and the fact of
the matter is that there are now 15 councillors in operation at the City of
Ms. Gray: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, earlier on there were
comments made about the efficiency of the Department of Urban Affairs. In some of the other departments that I have
been in, I have asked about any type of reviews, explanations or discussions
ongoing about restructuring of various departments.
I
am wondering if the minister could indicate if the Department of Urban Affairs,
if his department has looked at that not necessarily with the view of
amalgamating with other departments. It
could be sections of other departments amalgamating with Urban Affairs. So I am wondering if the minister could
comment on that.
Mr. Ernst: I can say that, both from the perspective of
minister of this department and the Department of Housing and from my role on
Treasury Board for the past five or six years, we have looked at restructuring
and reorganizing a number of departments in the government.
I
do not think any are immune from that analysis and that ongoing review of their
function. It has been a fact of
life,given the kind of fiscal constraints that we are under, that it has really
forced a lot of reorganization, trying to do things better, trying to do them
smarter, trying to do them for less money than we did them in the past, and has
prompted an awful lot of creative work on behalf of the staff in those
departments and on behalf of ministers of the government in attempting to
deliver as much programming as possible with the dollars available.
In
that sense, yes, we are, and have been for the past number of years,
continuously analyzing the operations of our departments.
Ms. Gray: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, with the continual
analysis of the department, any suggestions and recommendations for potential
changes in the departmental structure that the minister would be prepared to
share with this committee?
Mr. Ernst: The answers to those two questions are yes
and no. That was slightly facetious.
Yes, we are looking at some things at the present time, and I am not
really at liberty yet to discuss those with members of the committee. They are not far enough down the line yet to
warrant that.
Ms. Gray: In regard to The City of Winnipeg Amendment
Act where we were sitting in committee the other day and had discussions
surrounding the potential of giving authority to the City of Winnipeg in regard
to charging library fees, can the minister perhaps indicate if he feels that
the City of Winnipeg should have the authority to make those decisions and be
held accountable to the taxpayers for those decisions?
* (2120)
Mr. Ernst: It was determined by the committee that they
ought not, and you and I and the other members of the committee unanimously
supported that position, did not vote against it. There was no recorded vote,
so that the motion passed unanimously, and that issue has been dealt with.
Ms. Gray: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I know what the
committee did, but I am wondering what the minister's opinion is on the
question in regard to authority to the City of
Mr. Ernst: I expressed my position on Friday.
Mr. Maloway: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I wanted to expand a
little bit on the member for Crescentwood's question about the reduction in the
size of City Council. It seems to me,
and we said this would occur last year, was that when you would reduce the size
of City Council to 29 or whatever, that the costs‑‑there would be
no administrative savings in cost, because what would happen is, when these
people took their seats, they would find ways to spend more money on assistants
and stuff like that.
That is, in fact, what we have seen happen
here, that the councillors have now surrounded themselves with offices,
expenses and salaries for staff and stuff like that. Is the minister aware of whether there is, in
fact, any cost saving or whether this 29‑person council is even more
expensive than the previous one?
Mr. Ernst: The council, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, is 15,
not 29.
I
think at the time, I clearly indicated that it was never my expectation that
there would be specific line savings from salaries, for instance; that taking
the salaries of 29 councillors, and then comparing that to the salaries of 15
councillors, there would be any, materially, net saving. In fact, I said on a number of occasions, I
did not think there would be, and I said that publicly. I think that, if you check with your critic
of the day, she will, in fact, agree that that was my position.
The
expectations were that, ultimately, in the overall operations of the city, that
15 councillors making decisions on its operations would be more efficient and
be able to deal with it on a more efficient basis. Whether that is the case or not, we all read
the budget machinations that went on in the news media over a protracted period
of time when the city was trying to reach its operating budget‑‑whether
that is more or less efficient, or whether they spent more or less money than
they would have if there were 29 councillors, your guess is as good as
mine. I still hold great expectations
that they will, ultimately, be more efficient.
Mr. Maloway: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I thought I had said
15‑person council, but there was so much noise over here to my right that
I could not hear myself at the time.
I think
that ends the questioning that I have.
Unless the member for Crescentwood (Ms. Gray) has any more, I guess we
could pass the Minister's Salary and the department.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: 1.(a) Minister's Salary $10,300‑‑pass.
Resolution 20.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $481,200 for Urban Affairs for the fiscal year ending the
31st day of March, 1994.
Is
it the will of the committee to take a five‑minute break before we move
on to Northern Affairs? Five minutes.
The
committee recessed at 9:26 p.m.
After
Recess
The
committee resumed at 9:32 p.m.
NORTHERN
AFFAIRS
Mr. Deputy Chairperson
(Marcel Laurendeau): 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 Northern Affairs.
Does the honourable Minister of Northern
Affairs have an opening statement?
Hon. James Downey
(Minister of Northern Affairs): Yes, I
do, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson and members of the committee, I am pleased to introduce the
Estimates for the 1993‑94 fiscal year for the Department of Northern and
Native Affairs.
As
Minister of Northern Affairs and of Native Affairs, it has been a distinct
pleasure to play an active role in the development of new initiatives for
northern and native communities over the past year. Through the dedicated efforts of staff and
the department and the Native Affairs Secretariat, we have taken steps to implement
a number of proactive initiatives to promote sustainable development of the
North.
In
addition, we are accomplishing our goals to resolve outstanding issues and
focusing on attention on enhancing the quality of life enjoyed by people who
live and work in our northern and native communities.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson, the credit for our accomplishments over the past year goes
not only to the staff and the department but also to the northern residents and
aboriginal peoples who are working with us in partnership to target and achieve
our goals.
I
would like to take this opportunity to extend my thanks and commendations to
the many Manitobans whose outstanding contributions, support and participation
have helped to create a positive climate for growth and change that will
benefit all Manitobans.
Through our government's partnership approach,
we are working to ensure that northern residents and aboriginal people have a
greater voice in the institutions that serve them and greater administrative
control over specific programs.
It
is not our job as a government to make arbitrary decisions about what we think
Manitobans want or need; rather, it is our responsibility to consult with a
broad range of men and women from
We
must listen carefully to their concerns and their suggestions on what we can do
as a team to provide responsive programs and services to meet those needs. We have made a strong commitment to do this,
and, as a result, we are seeing the successful creation, development and
completion of a number of initiatives.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson, our efforts to ensure the long‑term viability and
prosperity of
It
is equally important to develop programs and local services that will enhance
and improve the quality of life for
Finally, we must address and resolve
outstanding issues through co‑operation and consultation. I am pleased to note that we are doing all
these things and then some. Laying a
solid foundation for the future through sustainable development must include
targeting areas for economic development and diversification, as well as
improvements to local infrastructure.
The
bottom line is that, although we continue to face difficult economic times,
there are opportunities to boost our northern economy to create more jobs and
long‑term prosperity. This is what we need to keep Manitobans and their
children living and working in the North.
Part of our department's efforts to target areas for economic
development includes our ongoing effort to promote consultation and a united
vision for the future through the Northern Manitoba Economic Development
Commission.
The
commission had a productive year, and has completed its consultation with
Manitobans. The success of the
commission is based on the support of the many northern
The
department is also embarking on a number of new initiatives to support northern
residents and encourage entrepreneurial enterprise. We are currently finalizing the transition of
one Crown corporation, Moose Lake Loggers, to private ownership of the
community. We anticipate this transfer
will ensure greater control is in the hands of the local experts who know best
what the demands of the region are. Our
department is also providing technical assistance to people in northern
As
I mentioned, infrastructure development is also an important aspect of long‑term
sustainable growth. With improvements to
infrastructure, communities are in a better position to propose new business or
industry ventures for their local area.
One of the major initiatives to provide infrastructure that is conducive
to economic growth and improves the quality of life in remote areas is our
North Central Hydro line initiative.
Native Affairs took on a leadership role in the negotiations with
In
the interest of maximizing resources by doing more with less and making
effective use of services already in place, our department has introduced three
initiatives for construction and maintenance of infrastructure. We are dedicating $3.9 million over one and a
half years to support the infrastructure programs in northern communities. This capital program will provide lead time
to communities in remote northern areas with a considerably shorter
construction season. The benefits of
this lead time include extra time for staff and communities to plan prior to
the construction season. They will be
able to co‑ordinate service delivery by other agencies, tender projects
and acquire necessary approvals for funding, subdivisions and environmental
guidelines well ahead of the construction date.
This lead time also enables communities to arrange for material and
storage, choose a site and prepare all drawings and specifications so that they
are ready to start as soon as the construction season begins. The cost‑savings benefit and efficient
use of staff hours make this capital program an excellent use of resources, and
we are getting better value for our investment.
Another way to reduce cost is to prolong the
life of the infrastructure through preventative maintenance. Our department is continuing to allocate
significant resources to provide maintenance that will extend the life span of
provincially owned infrastructure, some $96 million in our 56 Northern Affairs
communities. This is being accomplished
by investing time and money towards a public works program in each
community. We are providing training in
a preventative maintenance system, and we have introduced a system in 28
communities that provides direction and guidance for maintaining the physical
facilities.
* (2140)
Not
only does the maintenance training ensure hands‑on experience at a local
level to keep infrastructure in good running condition, it also ensures careful
safety measures are met and reduces the risk of injuries in the public works
area. While training is being maintained in some areas, department staff have
highlighted other areas where the department could make better use of limited
resources by providing procedural manuals in place of training sessions.
There are a number of manuals which have been
or are in the process of being revised this year. Those include instruction manuals for
preparing local budgets, following Local Government Development policies and
hiring and supervision policies. There
is also a clerk reference manual, a mayor and councillor manual and a fire
program booklet.
We
have also introduced an initiative to assist local contractors. In the past, bonding companies were reluctant
to provide bonding to contractors on small water and sewer projects of up to
$150,000. This prohibited small local
contractors from undertaking projects they would otherwise be capable of
handling.
In
order to provide these local businesses with opportunities to bid on small
projects, the Department of Northern Affairs will now accept an irrevocable
letter of credit in lieu of performance and materials bond, again a move that
was taken at the request of the industry to assist smaller local operators in
our northern and remote communities.
Another initiative in progress is the
establishment of new gaming agreements through the Indian Gaming Commission
policy of the
In
1992‑93, we successfully negotiated Indian Gaming Commission agreements
with seven First Nations, namely:
These programs and agreements are integral to
the sustainable development and long‑term growth of new enterprise in the
North and in our native communities. I
remain committed to promoting these programs, and I am proud of the
contributions my staff has made in these areas.
We
are equally committed to improving the quality of life enjoyed by northern and
native residents. This includes meeting
needs that go beyond employment, such as healthy environment and opportunities
for recreation activities for all ages.
The
protection of our environment has become interwoven with any new development,
whether it is for infrastructure, improvements or economic expansion. Hence, the creation of sustainable
development principles. The Department
of Northern and Native Affairs strongly supports the concept of sustainable
development in any new endeavour.
Furthermore, we have made a strong commitment to protect our environment
with particular emphasis on water quality, sewage disposal and the reduction of
solid waste in our northern communities.
A
study was carried out by the department to evaluate potable water and sewage
disposal in all 56 Northern Affairs communities. Based on these studies, our department will
begin upgrading a number of water and sewage disposal systems in our northern
communities.
We
are also exploring the possibility of developing joint facilities for water and
sewage management to be shared by neighbouring communities as well as
consolidation of waste disposal sites.
The
Department of Northern Affairs is working in partnership with the Department of
Environment to support a water management program involving 15 modules for
water operators in northern communities.
Through this program, 20 water operators have completed the 130‑hour
course to receive their certificate in water management.
Our
department will continue to support this training program and staff are
encouraging water operators to acquire their certificates. While I am on the topic of specialized training,
I would like to acknowledge and commend the 14 recreation directors who
graduated from our pilot program last August and the four participants who
received a certificate of achievement.
These individuals provide recreational services to our Northern Affairs communities
and northern reserves.
The
northern Recreation Directors' Program was introduced in October of 1990 to
address concerns raised by our northern community leaders. They felt young people had too much idle time
on their hands and would greatly benefit from organized, recreational activities. I want to acknowledge the work that was
carried out as well by the Department of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship and
my honourable colleague who was involved as well in the pilot project.
We
have received a very positive response from the many young people who are
participating in the recreation programs in their areas. Our department is very pleased with the great
success of this program, and we are reviewing the allocation of funds to
continue the recreation director initiative as an ongoing program.
Programs such as this provide a healthy outlet
for young people. They also promote
cross cultural awareness because sports and other activities transcend cultural
boundaries and create a team spirit. In
this way, recreation programs leave a lasting impression and are a valuable
tool in promoting youth involvement in the community for both personal and
professional development.
The
success of the recreation programs in the North prompted by my departmental
staff to explore other opportunities to get young people involved in fun
activities that will teach them interpersonal skills.
We
are pleased to provide increased funding this year to support the Northern Fly‑in
Sports Camps program to enable instructors to bring the popular sports camps to
some of
In
1992, more than 500 children‑‑I think this is extremely important‑‑from
northern communities participated in this program which teaches young people
leadership skills and improves their self‑esteem through social and
recreational activities.
We
believe strongly that programs like this greatly enhance the quality of life in
our northern and native communities. We
are also working to provide support services for aboriginal people in our
province. We are now halfway through the
year dedicated to indigenous people around the world.
I
believe Manitobans share a desire to preserve and promote the unique culture
and heritage of our province's first people. We must also work to resolve
outstanding issues through consultation and implement new policies and programs
that support the aboriginal people and meet their needs.
Over the past year we have achieved a number
of important goals to recognize and address concerns expressed by aboriginal
people in our province. Our government
introduced
The
Native Affairs Secretariat does an excellent job of meeting with and assisting
aboriginal groups throughout the province.
The secretariat also assisted the Kekinan Aboriginal Seniors group in
planning for the operation of Phase 1 of the Kekinan Centre which consists of
seniors' rental housing. My colleague
the Minister responsible for Seniors (Mr. Ducharme) played a very important
role as Minister of Housing and continues to do so as Minister responsible for
Seniors.
In
addition, the secretariat helped Kekinan to complete an updated needs
assessment of the aboriginal seniors in
The
tripartite technical group have made progress in several areas. In housing, a property management initiative
has been developed and is being implemented on a phased‑in basis. In education, there is a concept paper, and I
compliment my colleague the Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey) who has taken
the leadership role in this area.
Education has developed a concept paper and proposal which have been
developed on the Louis Riel Institute and are now being considered by both the
provincial and federal governments.
Open communication links have also played an
important part in resolving a number of outstanding issues. In particular, we have participated in
negotiations with 26 Indian bands and the federal government regarding
settlement of outstanding treaty land entitlements. I anticipate we will reach settlements with
several bands in the upcoming year.
* (2150)
We
have also been actively pursuing settlements for compensation claims related to
hydro development projects. I am pleased
to say we have made significant progress in completing settlements with Grand
Rapids, The Pas Indian band, Easterville, Moose Lake and Cormorant to
compensate them for damages resulting from hydro development in the 1960s.
We
have also made substantial progress in resolving claims settlements under the
Northern Flood Agreement. In the past
year our government signed a comprehensive agreement with the Split Lake Cree
First Nation to fully and finally settle
I
was further delighted to join the federal government and Manitoba Hydro in the
signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with Nelson House First Nation. By signing this agreement, all four parties
made a formal commitment to begin intensive, determined negotiations to develop
a comprehensive agreement to be completed by the fall of this year.
Last week, a Memorandum of Understanding was
signed with York Factory First Nation.
This Memorandum of Understanding will enable negotiations to proceed
toward reaching comprehensive settlement agreement. We will also continue to negotiate on a claim‑by‑claim
basis with Norway House First Nation and Cross Lake First Nation, but at the
same time we will continue to promote final and comprehensive settlements as
the most effective means of resolving this long‑term outstanding issue.
These types of agreements help to ensure local
bands have a greater control over local affairs. I believe it is important for local
communities to have control over decision making that affects their
communities, because they are most aware of their needs and can target their
goals for the future. I am sure we all
agree that having control over our own destiny is an important aspect of
planning for the future.
Increased independence in the North can be
achieved through incorporation and block‑funding arrangements. A printed guideline on the process of incorporation
is now being shared with all communities under the jurisdiction of The Northern
Affairs Act. This was accomplished in
May of 1992.
As
the word about incorporation and its many positive benefits spreads, there is
an increasing number of communities who are inquiring about their options under
this initiative. There is also increased interest in the potential for greater
local autonomy through our block‑funding arrangements.
In
keeping with the objective of the Local Government Development Division to
progressively transfer authority, funds, resources and responsibility to
councils and committees, six additional communities have shown interest in
entering block‑funding arrangements.
With these programs and initiatives, the
Department of Northern and Native Affairs is working to promote partnerships
with northern and aboriginal people and to improve and enhance the quality of
life for the northern and native communities we represent.
We
will continue to foster new communication links in the upcoming year, and I
anticipate we will witness a number of progressive and exciting achievements in
1993‑94.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson, members of this committee, this concludes my opening
remarks for 1993 Expenditure Estimates for the department.
In
closing, I want to acknowledge and thank the citizens of Wabowden and the city
of
I
am pleased with the way in which it was handled, all the departments that were
involved, but particularly acknowledge those individuals in whose home lives
and community the disruptions took place.
They moved very co‑operatively, and the community of Thompson, of
course, opened their doors and their services one other time when we faced the
forest fire devastation of a few years ago.
Again, I want to acknowledge and thank the support of those communities.
Mr.
Deputy Chairperson, those are my opening remarks.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: We thank the Minister of Northern Affairs
(Mr. Downey) for those comments.
Does the official opposition critic, the
honourable member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes), have an opening comment?
Mr. George Hickes (Point
Douglas): Yes, I do, Mr. Deputy Chairperson.
Listening to the comments of the minister, I
am very surprised there is no one in northern
There has been some good work done; I will
grant that to the minister. He has tried
to accomplish some things, like the 14 recreation workers that he mentioned. Yes, it is very important that we have
adequate recreation programs for northerners, especially for the kids when they
are out of school, because right now in the North, and you hear it from
northern leaders over and over, there is a real serious problem with solvent
abuse.
This is one area that will help alleviate that
problem, because children will be more active and more involved and idle minds,
hopefully, will not turn to abuse.
The
other thing that the minister did was gave $50,000 towards a contribution to
the northern fly‑in camp. The
Northern Fly‑In Sports Camp has been ongoing for quite a few years. It is a wonderful program, and it has
benefitted a lot of the communities. It
does train a lot of the northerners, gives them a lot of leadership skills and
works very closely with the communities.
I hope those kinds of programs will continue getting the support of this
government and the minister.
The
other positive events that have taken place are the settlements of some of the
Hydro agreements. The only problem I
have with that is, when we were in negotiation stages and environmental
assessment hearings on Conawapa, one of the things I was hoping to hear from
that was the past damages to all of the North, and I think that was one of the
areas that the environmental assessment hearings was going to be addressing,
from my understanding. If that was the
case, I wish the minister would have continued on and finished that assessment,
instead of stopping halfway through.
On the
negative side, there are quite a few.
One of the big things that I heard the minister speaking about was team,
team, team, teamwork, co‑operation with the community, northern
communities, co‑operation with the community leaders and working closely
with the community leaders, and I was very surprised when I saw some of the
cuts to our leadership that represents all of the reserves in
I
am talking about the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, that got their total funding
from the province cut right off. It is
just like any other government or any council.
You are elected by the people to represent the people, and the Assembly
of Manitoba Chiefs was developed by the chiefs to represent the chiefs who
represent the community. By losing that
voice, I think it is a disgrace to the aboriginal people because that was the
voice, hopefully, that was going to some day negotiate aboriginal self‑government.
I
was surprised that I heard very little from the minister on aboriginal self‑government,
because that is what the aboriginal people want, that is what the aboriginal
leaders are looking forward to. Even in
the Estimates, you see under Native Affairs Secretariat, it says right in
there, "Provides policy development, research and planning, policy
analysis, federal‑provincial negotiations, interprovincial negotiations,
co‑ordination and organizational activity."
Then, when you look further into it, it also
has a line where it talks about helping the aboriginal people implement self‑government. I was very shocked when I saw some of the
cuts that were made, because it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out
that the success of aboriginal self‑government and the key to aboriginal
self‑government is education. When
you see the education measures that have been taken, and trial and error, and
you see such successful programs as the ACCESS programs where we have
aboriginal doctors, dentists, teachers, social workers, and on and on, who have
graduated with the proper support from those programs and who go back into the
North, a lot of them into their own home communities to help their own people.
Those are the kinds of programs that are key
for aboriginal self‑government.
Without those programs, it will just be the same old story where you
will have nonaboriginal bureaucrats running a system that is supposed to be run
by aboriginal people, and once it fails‑‑which under that system,
it would be set up to fail‑‑you will be able to hear the I told you
so's. I was very disappointed in that.
* (2200)
The
other thing is, a lot of aboriginal people had really high hopes and had a lot
of confidence in the minister, and I think that is slowly disappearing. I do not know why, because I hope his heart
is in the right place, but when you see the massive, massive cuts directly
affecting aboriginal people, I wonder where the minister is around the cabinet
table, because a lot of the people whom I have spoken to believed the minister
representing them would be the minister who would be standing up for the people
whom the minister should be representing as a Minister of Northern and Native
Affairs.
When you look at jobs in the North, you can go
to almost any community in northern
It
is a real shame because northern
When you talk about the remote northern
fisherman who are devastated right now‑‑a lot of them are not even
putting their nets in the water‑‑most of those are aboriginal
people. For some unknown reason, the
freight subsidy was cut. Even their
auditing service was cut. They are fighting
two things, the freight subsidy cut plus the low fish prices they have to battle
with.
The
other area the minister addressed briefly was the recreation programs. Like I mentioned earlier, those recreation
programs are positive because they tie directly into the whole problem we have
in northern
We
have been raising this issue, and we have even organized an information session
by various chiefs and committed individuals from northern
I
think, as a Minister of Native Affairs, the minister has to stand up and show
his commitment to the aboriginal people and sit down and have a meeting with
the aboriginal leaders, because they are not asking this government to go into
One
of the areas this government could be doing and the minister could be leading,
is to sit down with the northern leaders, Sydney Garrioch, for one, and his committee,
and arrange a meeting with the federal government, as long as the provincial
government is in support of a treatment centre somewhere in the North; and
support the community and the aboriginal people to lobby the federal government
to get that established; and also, for the provincial government to look at
committing dollars, and that could be done in per diems, because not every
solvent abuser we have in northern Manitoba is treaty.
Some of them will be coming from Northern
Affairs communities. Others will be
coming from other towns. Those could be
committed provincial dollars in lieu of per diems for individuals going in
there. If they had that kind of a
commitment‑‑and even look at helping the community offset some of
the operating dollars‑‑but what they want is a meeting with the
minister and a meeting with the federal representative and with the health care
givers, to try and find something that is workable before we lose more young
people to this tragic problem we have in, well, I guess it is all over
Manitoba. It not only pertains to the
North.
The
other area this government could be leading the charge and working in co‑operation
with native leaders in the North‑‑and it does not have to come in
capital dollars‑‑is if you look at the area of Island Lake and the
area pertaining to Bloodvein, Berens River and the whole southeast area and the
number of individuals who live in those areas, there is not even one personal
care home.
I
know past governments have been to blame too, but there is always a chance to
start. What it takes is a minister who
will meet with the individuals, sit down with those individuals, support them
when they go to
That would be a recommendation I would make to
the minister is to look at‑‑and I am not talking about dollars and
cents here‑‑but it is to look at setting up a meeting with those
chiefs and let them know that the government supports them in their endeavours
and will do what is possible if they do not have the money to lobby the federal
government to try and arrange for the federal government to at least send
someone up and have a good look at some of the serious problems. A lot of the people that are responsible for
the delivery of programs and dollars for aboriginal people, a lot of them that
make the yesses and the noes, have never stepped foot in a lot of those
northern communities and do not know what is really happening.
When you talk about effects that it has on
aboriginal people, one of the biggest impacts right now on our elders is sugar
diabetes. It is escalating, and it is
growing at a much more rapid pace than the nonaboriginal community. They built a home, Dial‑A‑Life,
which is great, and what they are hoping for now is‑‑they already
have the office space and they have the facilities ready‑‑if they
could put in a couple of dialysis machines.
What they are scared of is that, once the dialysis machines are all
filled up‑‑and from what I have heard in the past few weeks, that
is happening‑‑the last on the list will be first to be transferred
out of province. A lot of the aboriginal
people are last on the list, and that is what they are very, very worried
about.
When I talk about the comments that the
minister made of teamwork, co‑operation, those sound nice, and they do
make a lot of sense; but it has to be much more than just a commitment that is
on paper. Without the confidence and
without the support of the aboriginal leadership, not much will really be able
to be developed for the community. For
instance, I have a copy of a letter here from the First Nations Confederacy,
and it is a letter‑‑I was sent a copy and the honourable Minister
of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey) was sent a copy, and the Leaders of both
parties were sent copies. It was to our
Premier, Gary Filmon.
This is from the chiefs of the First Nations
Confederacy, and if anyone figures it is only a letter from one organization, I
warn you that this organization, the First Nations Confederacy, represents the
following First Nations in Manitoba: You
have Dauphin River Band, Fairford Band, Lake Manitoba Band, Lake St. Martin
Band, Little Saskatchewan Band, Crane River Band, Ebb and Flow Band, Gamblers
Band, Keeseekoowenin Band, Pine Creek Band, Rolling River Band, Waterhen Band,
Sagkeeng First Nation, Valley River Band, Waywayseecappo Band, with a total
population‑‑and it says, in total, the First Nations Confederacy
represents 16,308 aboriginal people on and off reserve as well as any
aboriginal seeking assistance in our Winnipeg office.
* (2210)
In
this letter it states: The chiefs of the
First Nations Confederacy are appalled by your lack of support for the
aboriginal peoples of
It
goes on to state, in a letter dated March 15, by the Deputy Minister of
Northern Affairs, Mr. Tomasson, who states:
I
would also like to point out that individual Manitoba Indian bands now have the
opportunity to access new sources of revenue through their agreements with the
province on gaming as well as on tobacco and gasoline taxes.
With your recent raids on Manitoba First
Nations and seizures of gaming equipment, it is inconceivable that any
aboriginal community in Manitoba should ever realize any funding from that
avenue, much less enough funds to provide resources to other aboriginal
organizations. There are enough
statistics readily accessible from both federal and provincial government
sources to prove that aboriginal people are the poorest people in
It
goes on to list the communities. It also
says: The funding cuts have sent a loud,
clear message to
That is why I think it is important. I have to restate it. It is so important that
the minister arrange meetings with aboriginal leaders and ask and work out
solutions. I know the government does
not have all the answers. The aboriginal
people do not have all the answers, but in co‑operation, hopefully, some
answers will come about for the betterment of aboriginal people.
I
did not bring this forward just to be negative.
I brought it forward because it is very important to aboriginal peoples,
and I think it is very important to this government that they look at some of
the negative cuts and some of the negative results that happened from the last
budget. I do not know how well thought
out it was, but when you look at cuts to all the various organizations that
affect directly the aboriginal people it is not very positive.
When you look at the friendship centres, right
across Manitoba‑‑it took them years and years to develop the
friendship centres to where they are today.
They help all aboriginal people, whether they are treaty, non‑Status,
Inuit, Metis. They work with all
aboriginal peoples, and they provide such valuable service. They also do provide a lot of services to our
elders.
I
hope the government, in its wisdom, will look at some of the cuts and,
hopefully, find some ways of reinstating some of those measures, because when
you look at another article from the Winnipeg Free Press‑‑and I am
sure this was not written by an aboriginal person.
The
letter from the chiefs, that is an aboriginal letter, but this article that was
written by a reporter for the Winnipeg Free Press. I will just read parts of it.
Statistics released last week show that for a
variety of reasons
If
anybody in this room could imagine any community in southern
Yet
the aboriginal communities have to live with that year in and year out, and
they are trying to overcome it, but it is such a hard battle that they need to
work co‑operatively with both levels of governments.
It
also talks about some of the programs that have been cut, and it says, what has
been the government's response?‑‑terminating the Student Social
Allowances Program, cutting off provincial funding for Indian and Metis
friendship centres, many of which ease the transition from the reserves to the
city.
Then it goes on and talks about, where is the
urban‑aboriginal strategy? I think
that is one area that I would like to address, in a short time, is the whole
urban aboriginal strategy that we have been hearing about since I was elected.
I
do not know how much money has been spent.
I do not know where it is at, but I hope when that urban‑aboriginal
strategy is developed it will be in conjunction with aboriginal people,
hopefully, between the aboriginal community and the government, that some
answers could be found.
It
is not all doom and gloom, but the aboriginal communities are getting very
tired and they need help. You heard that
letter from the First Nations Confederacy.
They are willing to work with the government, they are willing to work
closely with the government and they are willing to work co‑operatively
with the government.
I
think it is the responsibility of the minister to initiate contact with the
aboriginal leaders and start getting some of these decisions that were made in
the last budgets reversed, and work in co‑operation to try and get some
positive training programs and job opportunities for northern people.
With that, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, those are
my initial remarks.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: We thank the critic from the official
opposition for those remarks.
Does the critic from the second opposition
party the honourable member for Crescentwood have any opening comments?
Ms. Avis Gray
(Crescentwood): Mr. Deputy Chairperson, no, I do not have any
opening statements. I prefer to get into
questions, but I thought that the member for Point Douglas's (Mr. Hickes)
comments were very well spoken.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: We thank the critic from the second
opposition for those remarks.
Under
At
this time, we invite the minister's staff to join us at the table, and we ask
that the minister introduce his staff present.
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I have David
Tomasson, who is the Deputy Minister of Northern and Native Affairs, and also
Rene Gagnon, who is the Director of Administration, whose office is in
Thompson.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: 1.(b) Executive Support (1) Salaries $462,500‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $139,800‑‑pass.
1.(c) Financial and Administrative Services
(1) Salaries $435,100‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $101,500‑‑pass.
Item 2. Local Government Development (a) Programs
and Operational Support (1) Salaries $265,400‑‑pass; (2) Other
Expenditures $93,600‑‑pass; (3) Community Operations $4,454,800‑‑pass;
(4) Emergency Response Program $48,600‑‑pass; (5) Community
Training $46,000‑‑pass; (6) Regional Services $692,300‑‑pass;
(7) Grants $258,900‑‑pass; (8) Recreation Directors' Program
$317,700‑‑pass.
2.(b) Thompson Region (1) Salaries $375,700‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $155,800‑‑pass.
2.(c) The Pas Region (1) Salaries $207,900‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $100,100‑‑pass.
2.(d) Dauphin Region (1) Salaries $330,100‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $108,700‑‑pass.
* (2220)
2.(e) Selkirk Region (1) Salaries $386,700‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $154,000‑‑pass.
2.(f) Technical Services (1) Salaries $355,000‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $105,700‑‑pass.
2.(g) Audit Services (1) Salaries $159,300‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $31,000‑‑pass.
2.(h) Inter‑Regional Services (1)
Salaries $293,500‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $89,700‑‑pass.
2.(j) Northern Affairs Fund (1) Salaries
$115,800‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $13,600‑‑pass.
Resolution 19.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $9,159,900 for Northern Affairs, Local Government
Development, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1994.
Item 3. Northern Development and Co‑ordination
(a) Northern Development (1) Salaries $305,500‑‑pass; (2) Other
Expenditures $108,400‑‑pass.
3.(b) Northern Flood Agreement (1) Salaries
$98,200‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $26,000‑‑pass;
(3) Northern Flood Program $2,003,500‑‑pass.
3.(c) Economic Development (1) Salaries
$377,300‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $133,200‑‑pass;
(3) Corporate Projects $250,000‑‑pass.
3.(d) Northern Manitoba Economic Development
Commission (1) Salaries zero‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $120,000‑‑pass.
3.(e) Communities Economic Development Fund
$1,643,800‑‑pass.
Resolution 19.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $5,065,900 for Northern Affairs, Northern Development and
Co‑ordination, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1994.
Item 4. Native Affairs Secretariat (a)
Salaries $404,700‑‑pass; (b) Other Expenditures $165,700‑‑pass;
(c) Aboriginal Development Programs $772,600‑‑pass.
Resolution 19.4: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $1,343,000 for Northern Affairs, Native Affairs
Secretariat, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1994.
Item 5. Expenditures Related to Capital (a)
Northern Communities $2,379,600‑‑pass; (b) Community Access and
Resource Roads $235,000‑‑pass.
Resolution 19.5: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $2,614,600 for Northern Affairs, Expenditures Related to
Capital, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1994.
We
are now going to revert back to line 1.(a) Minister's Salary.
Rule 64.(4) states, in part, " . . . such
officials of the government as are required by a minister may be admitted to
the Legislative Chamber, and shall be permitted to sit at the table placed on
the floor of the House in front of the minister, but this rule does not apply
during the debate on a minister's salary in the Committee of Supply."
With unanimous consent at the committee, we
will allow the minister's staff to remain at the table during debate on his
salary. Is there unanimous consent?
(agreed)
1.(a) Minister's Salary $10,300. Shall the item pass?
Mr. Hickes: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the question I have
to the Minister of Native Affairs is the whole urban‑aboriginal strategy,
as I heard has been ongoing for five years.
(Mrs. Shirley Render, Acting Deputy
Chairperson, in the Chair)
I
have heard about it since I have been elected, and we keep getting promised
every year that it will come forward. I
would just like to ask the minister where he is at with the urban‑aboriginal
strategy.
Mr. Downey: Madam Acting Deputy Chairperson, let me at the
outset say to the member, who I believe was genuine in his comments and his
criticisms to date at the committee in which we are hearing the Estimates of
Northern and Native Affairs, I think, I say this, that it is very much with
heartfelt thought that he has made his presentation and, as I said at the
outset, genuine in his approach to try and accomplish without an overdose or an
overinjection of political‑‑(interjection) Well, I was thinking of
a little different word, Conrad‑‑without an overdose of political
jazz, okay, barbs. That is appropriate,
but I say genuinely, I think it is helpful and it is productive for myself, as
the minister, and for the department to hear not just negative sides, but to
hear constructive criticism as it relates to the Urban Native Strategy. I guess this is one that there are not any
clear answers for, and I would appreciate some of the thoughts that the member
may have as it relates to some of the potential policies, some of the things
that could be accomplished.
We
have approached it on a multilateral basis as it relates to the federal and
city governments and the province. We
have a lot of people, as he has identified the tremendous growth that we have
seen in the city, particularly of aboriginal people moving in out of their
communities because‑‑one of the reasons, when you look at some of
the communities, particularly where they have not got the same amenities that
there are in some of our southern communities, for example, they do not have
the same hydroelectric service, and that in itself, I think, would encourage
people not to continue to live in some of their communities.
So,
for whatever reasons, we have seen a tremendous exodus of our northern native
people coming to our urban centres. What
that does, of course, is to put pressure on those individuals who move. They certainly in a lot of cases, I am sure,
do not find themselves in as a comfortable situation as they should have.
Housing becomes a problem. The education
certainly becomes a concern, and at the end of the day, a job opportunity. I think that is pretty much critical for
those individuals who want to find a new way of life and find it necessary to
move to their communities.
Over the past few years, and I say this
genuinely, we have attempted to try and find some of the solutions working with
our native people. I have made some
reference to some of the services that have been put in place, particularly for
some of the seniors, through the Kekinan housing‑‑not enough, I
know. We have put in place some of the
supports and some smaller amounts of funding for the safe house program for the
youth, support programs for the native women's shelter, but there seems to be
an increasing number of people that need services and need some assistance.
The
member is critical about the fact that we have reduced the support for the
native leadership, and I guess I have been somewhat confused over the role that
the assembly feel that they would play in the urban setting.
We
have not totally eliminated the support for the Aboriginal Council of Winnipeg,
they saw a reduction of some 10 percent like a lot of the other organizations,
but we maintained some funding as we maintained some funding for the Indigenous
Women, which carry out a lot of work in the city of Winnipeg.
As
it relates to where do we go from here, I will look for more input from the
Aboriginal Council as I will look for more input from the Indigenous
Women. How do we structure ourselves so
we can effectively get input, provide services, and where do we get the
funding? Well, again, I go back to the
comment that I put on the record, and that is we have to look at the federal
government, because we have certainly a joint responsibility with a lot of the
aboriginal people coming to town that constitutionally we have felt the federal
government has a major responsibility for, as it relates to the the city of
Winnipeg, certainly have a responsibility with the province.
* (2230)
We
have attempted to put together an ongoing group which I think was a little bit
ambitious in its requests. That is why I
have, quite frankly, taken the route of trying to, through the limited means
that we have with our department, some of the programs that we have encouraged
to be put in place, and I have mentioned a few of them.
The
answers do not come easy, and I look for member's input, like the member for
Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes), as to how he sees the resolve to the problem that
these people are facing. I am sure there
are a lot of people who are frustrated, who, when they reach the urban
settings, find very little opportunity.
So I ask him what his thoughts and comments are.
We
certainly have not given up, and I believe the answers lie within the native
community as well. That is where a lot
of the solutions will come from. I
respect the member in his judgment. I know he said this a few minutes ago, that
you just have not got the unlimited resources, so you have to deal with the
limited resources you have.
We
do have some monies allocated in the budget for this program. We have monies allocated for the AJI program
as well, for which some of the urban native people qualify, so it is a
combination of things that have to be done.
There is no clear solution.
Mr. Hickes: Madam Acting Deputy Chairperson, in response,
before I ask a question, I know that this government has done some good things
with Phase I of Kekinan and the aboriginal elders are looking for Phase
II. From my discussions with some of the
aboriginal community leaders, if there was a meeting set up, especially with
the Minister responsible for Native Affairs and the Minister of Health (Mr.
Orchard) with the Kekinan board, and discussions took place pertaining to in
this given time that there is a shortage of dollars, maybe Phase II is not
possible‑‑but if that was explained.
A
lot of the problems that are facing aboriginal people today are that there does
not seem to be a commitment to work together in co‑operation with
aboriginal people. Almost every citizen
of
If
that was explained to the board and a meeting set up‑‑I have met
with the board, they are very understanding.
I know that they would realize that it, maybe, cannot be built this year
or next year, but as long as the commitment is there somewhere down the road
when the economy picks up and more dollars are available. Maybe if there is some kind of an agreement
with the federal‑provincial cost‑shared somewhere down the line, I
think it would be beneficial to this government to try and approach it in that
manner.
When the minister said, maybe the member from
Point Douglas might have some ideas, the minister was on the right track, when
he mentioned in co‑operation with indigenous women and the Aboriginal
Council of Winnipeg. But there are two
very important organizations that are missing from his statement and they have
to be included‑‑the Winnipeg Tribal Council which had been
developed in the city of
Also,
when you talk about the Urban Aboriginal or the Native Affairs Secretariat,
Northern Affairs, we cannot leave out the MMF.
They have to be included on any urban aboriginal strategy that is
developed in
When we look at urban aboriginal strategy, the
reason I raised that is because I thought it was completed or nearly completed,
because that is what I was hearing since 1990.
But if that is not the case, then what a lot of these shortfalls, badly
needed programs and badly needed dollars for training and job opportunities for
urban aboriginals in the inner city, maybe there could be an emphasis put to
the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Ernst) to try and incorporate that into a
Core Area, whenever that is developed, because when you talk about Core Area
Agreements, it has to include the urban aboriginal people because the highest
population of aboriginals in the city of Winnipeg are living in the core area. The highest concentration of aboriginal
people are right in the core area.
When you look at a Core Area Agreement, that
could easily be tied in with the visible minority population and the aboriginal
peoples, because a lot of our issues and a lot of our problems are very similar
with the minorities coming from a different country and faced with a lot of the
same issues and problems that a lot of the aboriginal people face when they
come from remote northern communities and reserves. It is a whole adjustment to bigger centres
and the whole adjustment process.
So,
in response to the minister, I say in all honesty and with commitment, because
I have been‑‑September 11 will be three years, but I still believe
that there is a time and place for politics and there are times and places
where we have to work together for the betterment of the citizens of Manitoba.
I
have made some comments and, yes, I have been negative in some of my comments
to the minister, but I did that because I have travelled extensively in the
North. Even in my constituency, there
are a lot of aboriginal people.
Something has to be done; there has to be hope given somewhere.
When you see such a high increase in
statistics pertaining to aboriginal people, when it jumps so high in a couple
of years, and if you look at the years where it jumped, two of the biggest
reasons for the increase in the numbers of aboriginal people living in the city
of Winnipeg are, a lot of them are through reinstatement of their treaty with
Bill C‑31, and the other one has a lot to do with the newfound pride that
the aboriginal people have today.
A
lot of times in the past some of the aboriginal people would not admit they
were aboriginal, and because of what happened over
A
lot of the people, when they filled out the census form, they were not ashamed
to put down their aboriginal ancestry, and that is why the numbers have greatly
increased. A lot of the people were
already here in
A
lot of that has been brought about by a newfound respect, a newfound commitment
and the understanding of taking advice from our elders, and that is coming more
so now‑‑a lot of the cultural awareness programs that are being
developed in some of our school systems and a lot of the cultural programs that
are now practised by the aboriginal people‑‑so that pride is passed
down to children.
* (2240)
That is why you see a higher number of
aboriginal people today than you did 10 years ago. At least I think that from my conversations
with various people.
Getting back to some of the comments I made, I
think it is important that the government work with everyone. There is a part for the Assembly of Manitoba
Chiefs to play, and I really, really think that someone from this government,
and I hope it is the minister, will take the lead role, patch up whatever
differences there are there and try and work together for the betterment of all
Manitobans. Sure, we all hold little
grudges here and there, but if we are not big enough to set those aside, I
think we will be still butting heads 10 years from now.
I
would like to get back to the Urban Aboriginal Strategy. The reason I raise
that is I wonder how much money has been spent to date on the Urban Aboriginal
Strategy.
Mr. Downey: Before I answer the numbers, I think it is
important that I address a little bit broader range for the member for the
reasons for the decisions that were taken as it relates to some of the funding
cuts. I can tell you that I do not have
any differences with the leadership of the aboriginal community. In fact, I feel we have a good ongoing
relationship. I have had productive
meetings. Yes, the assembly were not
happy with the loss of their $325,000, but faced with the tough decisions and
how we were going to deal with some of the reductions and maintain some of the
programs they wanted, that was one of the decisions that was made.
Just let me try to explain to the member why
that decision was taken. As it is a
political body and they do have, through the federal system, budgets
established through the federal government to their individual bands‑‑and
I believe there are some 61 bands in
The
same applies for the indigenous women, they do not have funding sources of any
other capability. So that was the reason
behind it, because the Assembly of Chiefs, in fact, do have the ability and do
represent legal entities of the 61 bands in
The
other thing that we have to point out is that some of the positive moves that
have been made by this government as it relates to gaming on reserves, as it
relates to some of the taxation policies, gives the individual bands the
ability to have additional funds if they want to take some $5,000 from those
additional funds and support the Assembly of Chiefs. When I look at the Chemawawin Band, when I
look at the Moose Lake Band, when I look at the Split Lake Band, they have
settled substantial agreements with the province which in fact give them access
to additional monies which, if they want to support the Assembly of Chiefs,
they still have that ability of additional monies to do so.
Just to go back to the urban native issue, I
think it is important that we spend some time on it. That is why I have continually stressed the
need to resolve some of the outstanding agreements, for example,
Madam Acting Deputy Chair, it is absolutely
essential that these long‑term agreements that are outstanding get
resolved because, until we do, there will be a feeling of an uncompleted or
just a breakdown between the native community which are owed by the rest of
society, and until that debt is paid, then I think there is every reason for
them to feel that there is less than desirable commitments fulfilled.
So
I think we are on the same track; if I can judge what I am hearing the member
say, I think we are on the same track.
We have got to do things with the leadership within those individual
bands and communities that give them the resources to create the employment
opportunities.
I
mean, that is where it will come, and I would like to go back to
I
look at
I
think what he said was that there were some concerns as to whether or not I was
really standing up for the aboriginal community. I can tell you that when one looks at the
amount of monies that I have had made available to the Northern Affairs
department through Hydro to settle the claims that have been settled that add
up to millions of dollars, if you look at South Indian Lake, if you look at the
Chemawawin, at Easterville, if you look at Moose Lake, if you look at the
community of Split Lake, I mean, there are a lot of dollars that have gone.
What we anticipate will happen in those
communities will be employment creation through their own leadership, through
culturally equal opportunities, understanding, whether it is in the resource
harvesting, whether it is in the education or training fields, it is a matter
of giving them the basic resources to direct their lives with.
The
recreation program, I thank the member for his compliments on the recreation
program. Again, it is the opportunity to
turn young people's lives into productive futures.
I
have to say as well that I do not think the member and the government are on
opposite sides of the solvent abuse treatment centre that he talks about. We realize that it is the federal
government's responsibility.
It
is not only federal government, it is not only provincial government, it is a
societal responsibility to work towards trying to prevent these young people
from falling into the need to use these substances, whether it is gasoline
sniffing, whether it is drugs, whether it is alcohol, whatever the product that
they are using to forget either about the circumstances that they are in, or
they have to find themselves doing this because they have too much idle time on
their hands, for whatever reason. We
have to work on two fronts. We have to
try to cure those individuals that have fallen into the grip of a solvent
abuse, but we also have to work to the preventative side.
I
thank the member for his compliments on the Northern Fly‑In Sports
Camps. Five hundred young northern
people with a $50,000 grant from the province and from other sources‑‑have
in fact given the opportunity for 500 of those young people to turn their
summer into a productive way of life. I
mean it just has to be. When I go to my colleagues for the funds to help those
things, I stand up and I stand up strong.
* (2250)
When my colleague the Minister of Culture,
Heritage and Citizenship (Mrs. Mitchelson) and I went forward with the pilot
program for the Rec Director Program, it was absolutely clear that we had to
work to make sure those funds were not only there for a pilot project but were
on a continuing basis.
The
member says a meeting with the aboriginal leadership would be important. I will tell you, I am prepared to sit down
and meet at any time. I am prepared to
try and find resources, both, from federal government sources, if I can do that
and help, I am more than pleased to be able to do it, because it is the future
of those communities that are hanging on the need for, yes, treatment but as
much prevention and job opportunities.
I
say that is why I continually am pressing for the north central hydro
agreement. The fact we have the
agreement in place, we are doing the environmental work, I see two major, up‑front
benefits: employment opportunities for
those young people in those communities for the development of the hydro system
but as important is to give them the same hydro service that we have in
southern Manitoba, that they can have the amenities that have been developed in
other communities, that they do not have to leave their homes‑‑and
they are their homes‑‑to come to Winnipeg to find a better way of
life. They can get employment, they can
get a better lifestyle within their community.
I mean, it is a shame.
I
know the member is fair in his criticism.
He said "future governments" when he said there are things
that could have been done. It is a shame
that we have had the kinds of hydroelectric power generated in the North and
have bypassed those communities that are only a hundred miles away from one of
the biggest generating systems that we have in the world, let alone North
America and northern Canada. So, with
his support, putting this together, I think, will help. Answers are not immediate, and I want him to
acknowledge that. I am not even going to
get into a political debate with the member, because I do not think that will
accomplish anything at this particular time.
What we need to do, I think, is to lay all our
cards on the table and say what can we do.
Well, I have told him some of the things that we can do. Let me just elaborate a little bit more about
another initiative that I know the member is aware of, and that is the Northern
Economic Development Commission.
I
want to acknowledge the work of the commissioners. I think they put in a tremendous amount of
time and effort to make sure the communities spoke to them. It was not a group of people going out into
the communities that set up an intimidating system. They went out and genuinely asked the people
to speak to them as to what they saw the future of the North being.
I
have the report which has now been presented to me; and, within the next period
of time after we have had a time to review it, we will be presenting it
publicly. I hope that the member
genuinely takes a look at it, gives us some support in areas that we feel we
can move on it. It is a pattern. It is recommendations to be taken
seriously. That is where we go.
Now
I know the member has talked in the past about a Northern Development
Agreement, that we do not have one any longer, and, no, we do not. But I hope with this basic blueprint that we
have with what I would see as the communities of the North speaking out. It gives us a document of which we can speak
to the federal government with.
The
other one, and I will get a little political and let him know this just a
little bit. I was extremely
disappointed, and I say this genuinely, when we were not able to proceed with
the Conawapa project and the Bipole III.
I think the member opposite was, too, if I might say so. I am not putting words in his mouth, but the
indication I got from him that it was a disappointment, that there were a
number of jobs, a considerable number of jobs that would have been available to
the aboriginal people and northern people, a major investment that would have
assisted tremendously the North and also the suppliers of product from southern
communities.
That is where I have to just ask my colleague
if he has been able to sort out with his own colleagues where they stand. I mean, if one were to push and try to get
this back on the agenda, have the member and his party got it sorted out‑‑this
is not political; I am asking genuinely‑‑as to their support? I think if I recall some of the debate that
took place previously in the House with my colleague from Point Douglas, I got
the impression he was supportive. Yes,
do the environmental work, but at the end of the day it was a project worth
proceeding with. That in itself is a
major economic‑‑would be a major economic boost to our northern communities.
When you add a lot of these things together, I
think things will change. They will
change for the better. Instant jobs, I
cannot promise instant jobs. The member
I know would like to see some. I would
too, but I think if we can continue to work with the communities, we can
certainly see some improvement.
The
mining sector, I think there is going to be some positive news breaking loose
in the mining sector which will again add to some of the supporting of our
northern communities. All in all, it is
there and the member is correct, we are going to see a turnaround in the
economy. When we do, I think the North
is positioned and poised to take full advantage of the resource development
opportunities, of the service industry opportunities, of the training and
teaching opportunities, the medical profession, all those areas that depend on
people for supports will open up to the people of the North.
I
say this genuinely, I think that what I am hearing and seeing from the people
who have been, very much a part of the development of the North will be
there. I hope the job opportunities open
up so some of the people who have found themselves with the need to move into
the urban settings will find the opportunities to move home to take advantage
of some of the opportunities that are created, but it is a time factor which
will take a considerable amount of continued building.
I
say that there are certain areas I am not happy with. I am not happy with some of the progress in
certain areas. I would like to have seen
job opportunities and development come about quicker but to try to force it
would not be right either. The
communities have to be a major part of the development of it, and that is again
why I go back to say, to resolve the outstanding land claims, to resolve the
outstanding flood agreements, to resolve a bunch of these traditional areas of
dispute are critical.
I
would hope the member would continue to be positive in his approach because it
is helpful.
* (2300)
(Mr. Deputy Chairperson in the Chair)
Mr. Hickes: I would just like to say a few things before
I ask many questions, is whether the positive development is that whole hydro
line going into various communities, which is correct and has been lacking for
years and years. It is nothing new. That was under all the various governments
that initiative could have been taken place.
When we talk about some of the
responsibilities, some of the shortfalls for aboriginal people and especially
northern
I
see no one better than the Minister of Native Affairs taking that lead role to
pull the federal government together and the aboriginal leaderships and the
provincial government and make sure all the individuals lay the cards on the
table and clear the deck and say that this is what we have, this is what we do
not have, okay, what can we do co‑operatively for the betterment of
northerners?
I
hope the minister will take that on and initiate some meetings with the
northern leadership, federal government and provincial governments. There have been a lot of good things that are
happening. Some of them are ongoing
negotiations. The Hydro settlements are
great. They have been a long time
coming. Some agreements will take many more years to come, but as long as the
willingness is there and people keep working towards that same goal.
The
minister briefly touched on the whole issue of aboriginal gaming with working
out agreements with individual bands.
One of the things that the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs was looking at and
were hoping to resolve was the whole jurisdiction on gaming, not worrying about
agreements for this band, that band and other various bands, because there are
61 bands in Manitoba. Are you going to
sign an agreement with every one? Is
every community going to be able to raise enough funds from their
community? You look at Shamattawa,
What they were looking at was a gaming
agreement with the province. What they
were looking at was jurisdiction for gaming on reserves undertaken by
aboriginal leaders. They were looking at
setting up what we have here in Winnipeg on McPhillips Street and Regent, I
guess is the other one, developing casino operations in various‑‑I
do not even know how many, but various reserves, and the funding coming to the
organizations to be filtered to all reserves in Manitoba and not just one
community that has a bigger population.
If
you take Sagkeeng's ability to raise funds and compare it to Shamattawa, you
cannot even compare it, because Sagkeeng could raise a lot more money than they
ever will in Shamattawa or
What they were looking at was an umbrella
system just like we have in
That is a whole different issue than just
signing agreements with various bands. I
know that is what I was told in discussions with the Assembly of Manitoba
Chiefs. That is what they were hoping
for, was a system set up just like we have in
When you talk about Conawapa, the minister is
right. I stated from Day One when I was
critic of Manitoba Hydro that I had no problems developing Conawapa, as long as
all the requirements were met. I made
that very clear at the start. If you had
the environmental impact assessment completed and it passed damages and it
passed all the requirements, I know the importance of job creation for dams
that are built in the North. As long as there is appropriate training and job
opportunities for northerners, and there are power sales, I have never been
against it. I stated my case very early,
and I stuck with it all the way through because I believe strongly in that.
When you talk about hydro systems in the
Also, when you go into that, there are
opportunities for various local aboriginal people to develop, or even the bands
to develop, small contracting companies.
When you look at appliances like toasters, kettles, irons and what have
you, washers, dryers, stoves‑‑when they start to break, someone has
to be able to fix them, because you cannot fly them in and out of the community
or bring in an electrician to fix them all the time.
So
there are some beautiful, beautiful opportunities for individuals to start
small appliance repairs, businesses right in those communities, with the proper
supports from the community leaders and the government, even if they had to set
up short training programs to get people to set up those kinds of businesses. If they are owned by local people, they will
train and hire local individuals to work in their appliance repair companies.
There is going to be such a big need, and that
is such a golden opportunity, but a lot of those individuals that we are
talking about have not had the opportunity to train in those areas. I think now is the time to start and to
assist the individuals to be entrepreneurs or at least to help the bands. So
has the government initiated or been in discussions with any community leaders
or community people in that direction?
Mr. Downey: Two areas that I would like to address: one, the answer is yes there are, I think, a
number of opportunities that the communities will benefit from, and I stated
them at the outset. One would be the
supply of the overland line system that would give them the same type of hydro
service that the rest of the country has; secondly, employment opportunities in
the establishment of the line, which is going to cost something like $117
million in 1996‑97 dollars, which is a 10 percent Hydro, 15 percent
provincial and 75 percent federal split.
Of
course, as well, there is an upgrading of the wiring in the houses, appliance
supply: a major, major economic spin to
this whole thing. That, to me, has the
kind of employment opportunities that we are looking for. At the end of the day you have got meaningful
infrastructure, you have power that will generate other activities, and you
have to upgrade your communities to accommodate the upgrade of power.
It
is just a win‑win situation. That
is why we have continually pressed for it.
I guess I am a little surprised and, again, I think it is fair to put on
the record now that the individual is no longer a member of your party, but the
former member for that area, I would have thought would have been able to make
the case in a stronger way than what he did in the past. That is, I think, the
disappointing part, that for whatever reasons there were not completions of
deals made to support those communities.
* (2310)
As
I say, I do not know what the reasons are, but it would have been, I think,
very appropriate for the former member to have advanced this kind of a project
for his own community. I am pleased to
be able to do it.
In
fact, I say to the member, any time that I will be in those communities and in
the North, I will make reference to it. I say the work that has been carried
out‑‑and he has asked if we have worked with the chiefs. We have been working with the Northeast
Community Futures program, with a board of directors, our chiefs from northeast
Let
me just go back to the gaming one, because we have to make a clarification on
the record as to where we are at. The
Assembly of Chiefs came forward with the position of wanting to establish a
central gaming authority, an Assembly of Chiefs native central gaming
authority.
What I was not able to detect, and still have
not been able to, that those 61 bands out there wanted the Assembly of Chiefs
to collect all the money from all the gaming, from all the reserves, take that
money as an assembly central organization and then redistribute it back to the
communities.
I
have not been able to detect that. In
fact, it is very much the opposite, that the bands have come forward, and now I
have something like 20 bands who have set up gaming commissions. We have 15 to
20 bands that have permits or licences which approximately 40 of them have not
established. We have some that, quite
frankly, have not approached us in any way as it relates to the gaming issue.
So
I am not sold. The member for Point
Douglas (Mr. Hickes), Phil Fontaine, the Assembly of Chiefs has not sold me on
the fact that the individual bands want anything more than the ability to
establish their own gaming activities under their own authority, under their
own gaming commissions on their individual reserves.
I
am not, and I say, I am not convinced that that is what they want to do; in
fact, I say to the contrary. Whether it
is The Pas, whether it is the Dakota bands who have come forward as a group of
people, we are still signing. We have
just signed some recently that, quite frankly, if they did not want to proceed,
they would not be here continuing to negotiate and sign.
So,
I am not saying in a way in which is to be negative or critical of the
assembly, but I have not got the evidence that the support is there for the
approach that the member is putting before this committee.
So,
with the greatest of respect, we are proceeding to fulfill the requests of the
individual bands as they come forward by agreement. I think the member might want to check with
some of the individual bands and the different chiefs as to whether or not they
are still of the mind that he thinks that they are. Again, it is my job to try
and proceed in an objective way with those bands that approach us.
I
want to add something else. That is that
there has been a little bit of a misunderstanding in some of the reporting that
I have seen in some of the northern newspapers as it relates to what we have
done as it relates to our funding and our payment of funds under the rural
initiative and the VLT funding.
We
have established a formula which was approved and accepted by the Northern
Association of Community Councils to pay a certain block fund to each community
and also a per capita grant to them. So
on top of what we have talked about here in funding for our Northern Affairs
communities, we have seen $62,000 in additional funds which have been returned
to those communities.
Again, that is not the total amount of money
that has gone to northern
So
I think we are being fair in our approach.
I think it would have been, and I want the member to acknowledge this,
less than fair if we would have neglected to put monies back in those communities,
because they in fact contribute to the system through the VLT program as well.
The
point I am trying to make is that I think progress has been made, never fast
enough in certain areas, but generally speaking, when one looks across the
board, the areas that I have been responsible for I am satisfied we have moved
aggressively.
I
give credit to the Department of Northern and Native Affairs, the Native
Affairs Secretariat. I give credit to
the Northern Association of Community Councils.
I
want to point out, a year ago, the Northern Association of Community Councils
presented me with a situation where they were in an extremely difficult
financial situation. They looked for
additional money from the province and we did not have any. They made some very, very tough decisions
internally. They said, we will reduce
our staff, we will cut some of our expenditures, and we will get the books
balanced, and they did. They did so by
reducing their expenditures. I
compliment the president and the board of directors, because they have turned
around their difficulties and, I think, are playing a more meaningful role for
the work they do in representing their communities.
So
I just say, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, every time the member‑‑when we
talk it opens up new areas for further discussion. But I think that is helpful. That is what the debate is all about
here. It is debate to raise issues, to
talk pro and con, to how we can improve in certain areas. We are not always going to agree, but at
least we can, I think, honestly debate each side of the issue, and sometimes we
will even agree.
Mr. Hickes: Yes, we agree quite a bit of the time, but we
also at times disagree. When I was
talking about‑‑I did not really want to get into that whole gaming
issue, but what I say about the structure of the aboriginal gaming and when the
minister says, well, would these bands have the various agreements, that was
the whole principle of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs. They were talking about jurisdiction, and
these bands that have agreements with the province, they would still be able to
operate their bingos and their break‑open tickets, but under the
jurisdiction of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs which they are partners
to. That would not change.
They are not saying that you lose your local
bingo, you lose your local break‑open tickets and stuff like that. In all the meetings that I have had with the
Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, I have never heard them say that once. They are talking about jurisdiction where the
bands would be operated under the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs. That way they would have‑‑and
where? Like Shamattawa,
I
was surprised when you mentioned this. I
was not going to bring it up because I thought you would be embarrassed‑‑$62,300
for 56 northern communities. Look at the
population. That is only about‑‑what
is it, about $1,200 per community? What
can you do with that? Maybe if you tied
this into your recreation programs and used it for some recreational equipment
or something, then that would make sense.
That is about as far as it is going to go. You know, this kind of money is not going to
go very far in northern
* (2320)
That is why I did not really want to get into
that, because it is not very much money for all the millions of dollars that
VLT revenues are bringing in. You
mentioned the various bigger communities of Thompson, The Pas, Flin Flon,
whatever, a lot of those VLT revenues that are‑‑if you even looked
at Thompson, a lot of those VLT revenues that they bring in in Thompson is not
only from the citizens of Thompson. A
lot of it is from the various outlying communities, and that is what you are
talking about giving $1,200 to. You take a look at
That will be addressed when they get into
Estimates of the minister that is responsible for lotteries, but I would just
like to veer away a little bit. I would
like to ask the minister a very serious question that was brought to me. It pertained to the aboriginal war
veterans. The aboriginal war veterans
have been trying to get organized to tie in with the National Native Veterans
Association. They have finally got
organized, and they have had a few meetings and stuff. They wanted $10,000 from the minister to
attend a conference in
We
have aboriginal veterans right across
They asked the minister for $10,000 to go to
I
would just like to ask the minister what happened there, because I think it is
a disgraceful way to treat our aboriginal war veterans who are becoming fewer
and fewer every year. They even have
tried to develop their own organizations in
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, let me at the outset
say that government, as well, very much recognizes the contribution of the
aboriginal war veterans and all war veterans.
Without their commitment and their dedication and their sacrifice, we
would not have the kind of country that we have that we can sit here and
debate, without fear of retribution, without fear of military action. I think we are certainly on the same
wavelength.
What I did not have was the kind of amounts of
money that the member is talking about, but we did move to a system the best
way possible that we could to provide some support through airline tickets to
accommodate some of the elders. Not
enough, granted, not enough, but at least there was some funding put together
to make sure those individuals could attend their central function and work
towards their chapter here in
I
guess the question is, because we did not support them to the amount that they
requested, does that make us less appreciative of the contribution? I think not.
I think that the people who went indicated their appreciation to
us. They understood, as many of the
elders and the people that the member represents and brings to this table
understand, the difficult financial decisions that we have to make.
They were there. They were supported by the government. It was to the best of our ability, and I too
want to acknowledge the contribution that they made to maintain and make sure
that we have the democratic society that we all are able to live in and enjoy.
Mr. Hickes: I only have a few more questions. I would like to ask the minister if he is
going to be taking the lead in discussing with his colleagues the possibility
of trying to do something for the northern fishermen through the reduction of
the freight subsidy‑‑well, the cancellation of the freight subsidy‑‑and
the co‑op auditing services?
I
know that Bloodvein, or Berens River Co‑op, the minister had sent a team
in there to help them do the auditing. I
know that because they let me know, and they were very pleased with that
assistance.
What is going to happen now with the freight
subsidy? Is it gone and that is it, or
is there going to be any attempt to assist these fishermen?
Mr. Downey: I appreciate the member raising the
question. It is a matter of dealing, of
course, with the Department of Natural Resources which had been the traditional
funder of this program. I cannot speak for the minister, and I can tell you
that the Department of Northern Affairs has appreciated the support the
Department of Natural Resources has given to the northern communities. I have heard the minister say that he
certainly has not given up, that there may be an opportunity at some point to
try to enhance, either through federal support or other support, the fishing
industry in the North.
* (2330)
Let
me just try and deal with this from a little different point of view, and I am again
encouraged by the approach made by the
Again, there still is a freight subsidy in
place, not to the level at which it had traditionally been, but there is still
some. With some of the ideas that are
coming forward from our communities, with some of the desire to try to enhance
and extend the market opportunities for some of the nontraditional saleable
fish products, I think there will be some future opportunities. I am pleased to
be the minister responsible for what is known as the Fishermen's Loan Program
under CEDF, which I think is playing a more important role than they did in the
past.
For
many years the loan program for fishermen was under the Department of
Agriculture. I think it was important
when changes were made that it became more responsive and more readily
available to the northerners through the Community Economic Development Fund. The member may say, well, it is a loan
program, not a grant. That is true. But again with a difficult situation that we
have all faced, I think it is at least important to say there still is some
form of support through a loan program to help the industry.
The
freight subsidy is one which will take further debate. I would hope that over time we can see the
resource‑based industries‑‑I guess, use the words not revert
back‑‑but to do what it has traditionally done for the northern
communities, and that is provide a base income for our northern and native
communities.
Let
me say as well, just while we are on the resource industries, I think it is
important to again point out some of the beneficial things that are taking
place. There have been ups and downs, as
the farm community sees in the production of the resources that farmers
produce. The wild rice industry I think
has shown that it has potential. Yes, we
have seen some difficulties with it, but the basis, the people, the types of
production opportunities are there, and it needs some continued
confidence. It needs continued
technological upgrade. They need
equipment, and we hope to be able to continue to work to resolve some of the
issues that are there, not unlike the fish industry.
There are issues. There are policy matters and, of course, at
the end of the day, it has to be economical for those individuals to produce
the product and bring it to the marketplace.
Hopefully, though, we can bring it to the marketplace after further
processing in some of our outlying communities, because it is the jobs, it is
those kinds of jobs that are more immediate than anything else, and I think it
is a matter of us working to enhance those opportunities.
I
will be speaking with the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns) as a result
of the questions that are raised here tonight, and I am sure during the debates
which will ensue with the minister that the member will be able to get more
clarification from him on this issue.
Mr. Hickes: Well, the last sentence, that is what I have
been trying to say all night, when the minister said I will be speaking to the
Minister of Natural Resources. That is
what the aboriginal community has always been asking is when the minister who
is responsible for aboriginal people, when he sees something happening, to
stand up and ask questions on behalf of the people the minister represents.
When I listed off all the cutbacks and some of
the initiatives that are in statements right in this paper of the Native
Affairs Secretariat‑‑develops policy and options, negotiates
aboriginal self‑government with aboriginal peoples‑‑I have to
mention again, the key to that for the aboriginal people is education, and the
minister knows that. So when the
minister sees where there are cutbacks to education opportunities for
aboriginal people, I hope the minister stands up in cabinet and says, hey, this
will have a negative impact on aboriginal people.
That is what I have been trying to get across
all evening here, and the minister said it in one sentence. He said he will talk to the Minister of
Northern Affairs about the freight subsidy.
I hope the minister will also talk to the Minister of Health (Mr.
Orchard), the Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey), and in discussions, yes, it
might not be possible, but at least they know that the minister's interest is
representing the aboriginal people. The
aboriginal people need to hear that, that the minister will stand up at the
cabinet table for the aboriginal people.
I
only have one more, I guess a question to do with Aboriginal Development
Programs. What is that on the line here
where it says Aboriginal Development Programs?
You see the dollar figure of 1992‑93 of $1,338,000 and then in '93‑94
it has been reduced to $772,600. Why
would that be?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, let me just take a
couple of minutes and respond to the member in his overall comments. I can assure him, and I will even go back to
some of the positive things that I referred to earlier, and that, of course,
being the work that I have done with my colleague the Minister of Natural
Resources when it comes to, for example, the Split Lake agreement and the need
to bring the Department of Natural Resources, Crown lands. When it comes to the Department of Education
and the nursing program in the Swampy Cree, support was given.
I
stood up on behalf of the communities when it relates to the gaming agreement,
working with the Attorney General's office to press to make sure some of those
issues are resolved; to stand up for job opportunities and the development of a
new overland hydro system; to continue to get support to work with urban
seniors in the Kekinan Centre‑‑a broad range of areas which I say
that my colleagues and I feel are good programs and have worked co‑operatively.
I
can tell the member, he can tell the native people of the northern and native
community that I have stood up and will continue to stand up to represent them
to the best of my ability. I am prepared
to go through the list of accomplishments, not in a boastful way, because that
is not my normal approach. I think it is
a matter of people seeing some of the positive results and reminding them of
where it was initiated. Again, I give a
lot of credit to my colleagues, to our Premier (Mr. Filmon), to the caucus of
which I sit as a member.
I
have never had an individual come forward and in any way say that we were
spending money that we should not be in an area that falls in our northern
communities. In fact, very much the
other way. I think there has been
extreme interest from our caucus colleagues and very supportive. I say that genuinely. The important thing, as
I indicated, was caucus, and I have had extremely good support. I would anticipate that will continue and
would hope for it.
I
want to talk as well just a bit about some of the additional funding sources
that are started on pilot projects. That is the area of tobacco tax, the
working with the communities to allow them to have the tobacco tax maintained
in their communities, as well as the gas tax project, which is another pilot
project which, again, I think, is an important indication as to the importance
our government places on the responsibility of the reserve communities to carry
out some of the responsibilities that they have requested.
I
am going to deal with the reductions that the member talks about, and again I
will reiterate how the funding decisions were made. The reductions that he talks about mainly are
from the areas that I talked about earlier, the Assembly of Chiefs, which was
some $325,000; MKO, $78,500; First Nations 60; and Southeast 15.7.
Again, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the reason
behind those 100 percent cuts are that we have in fact put in place additional
abilities to raise funds, either through lotteries or gaming on the reserves,
the taxation measures which I have talked about. They do have the ability. The assembly does have the ability and the
bands have the ability to fund through their budgets an amount of something
like $5,000 per band to have the assembly speak on their behalf. If they feel strongly enough about the
representation the assembly gives them, then they have the ability to do so.
* (2340)
Now, the urban representation, the aboriginal
council does not have the ability to go to any band to get funding. They are a group of individuals who are
organized collectively to try to improve the situation for the urban native
people. The indigenous women, another
group which does not have any other form of funding available to them, as we speak
of the Manitoba Metis Federation, again, they do not have the kind of funding
sources or the ability to draw funds from the individual bands.
The
Northern Association of Community Councils‑‑and I want to just go
back to the numbers which I talked about earlier‑‑last year they
were in a situation of a $60,000 deficit.
They, through good management and their own desire to sort out their
affairs, sorted it out, and at the end of March 31, 1993, had a $12,000
surplus. I am sorry, they went to
virtually no deficit at all, just a small surplus.
I
think the communities out there are desirous of representing their people. They have been very, and I say this as it
relates to the Northern Association of Community Councils, fair in their
request for support from government.
They played an extremely meaningful role, and I will reiterate it again,
they have worked very closely with the government and the Department of
Northern Affairs as it relates to the incorporation or the future incorporation
of their communities, which would in fact give them the local decision making
that they want, that all approvals do not have to come from the Minister of
Northern Affairs if they want to do something in their community, that it is
truly municipal government being established.
Those are the reasons behind it, and I know
the assembly was not happy. I know that
the other organizations were not happy that we reduced or eliminated their
funding, but I again go back and reiterate the reasons for it. The assembly has the ability to get funding
from the 61 bands if the 61 bands feel that they are doing a service for
them. It just is the way it is, whereas
the aboriginal council does not have the ability to go to the bands as do the
assembly.
The
same applies for the indigenous women. I
know they are all concerned that they saw a 10 percent reduction. Those that did not see a total elimination
saw a 10 percent reduction. Again, that was consistent with what took place
across the board as far as government funding for organizations were involved.
On
balance, and I say on balance, I am prepared to meet and prepared to debate and
prepared to discuss all the reasons for decisions that are made as it relates
to our department. I would continually
work towards‑‑and I say this as we see the recommendations brought
forward by the Northern Economic Development Commission. The work that was done by the commissioners,
I compliment them. There was a good mix
of people. I think all areas of the
North were represented. They genuinely
came forward with their best effort. As
we look at their recommendations, we will be communicating publicly as soon as
possible how we can further advance.
Another area that I was negligent in
acknowledging‑‑and I made reference to the mining industry. We have seen, over the past year, work taking
place in the
I
know the member may recall, because I can recall some of the criticisms, and he
is pretty familiar with the Limestone project.
What a lot of people came forward to me with was the criticism that we
have northern people, yet there are a lot of people moving in from out of
province, or a lot of people coming in to take jobs that our northern people
had. He maybe did not have those kinds
of criticisms, but I am aware of some.
You cannot have exclusive jobs for people in a certain region. You will see people who are very mobile and
move back and forth, but the opportunities that are there, we should maximize
the opportunities for our local people.
Let
me just give some numbers to the member which I think are important and should
be put on the record as it relates to the hiring of people within our Northern
Affairs department, Northern and Native Affairs. Of our workforce in the Northern and Native
Affairs department, 1993, we had some 29 percent aboriginal people working
within the Northern and Native Affairs‑‑(interjection) Okay. I will put them on the record, but I just
thought it would be an opportunity to do so.
It is ranged from 31 percent to 28 to 30 to 29. So it is right in that 29‑30 percent
range.
As
it relates to females, there has been a substantial increase over the past
year. It has gone up, it has gone down, but
we are back up again at some 56 percent of our Northern and Native Affairs
department that is female.
I
think those are the kinds of numbers that he refers to the fact that the member
for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) may ask these questions. I think it is important when we talk about
employment and what we are doing within our own department. I am pleased with the numbers, and I think
that we shall continue to strive to maximize the opportunities for our northern
and native community people.
Mr. Hickes: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, if I heard correctly,
those were employment figures for Northern Affairs.
Mr. Downey: And Native.
Mr. Hickes: Well, okay, I see here under Native Affairs
Secretariat, there is a total of nine people employed. Who is the manager for Native Affairs
Secretariat?
Mr. Downey: Harvey Bostrom.
Mr. Hickes: He had five professional and technical
support people, and how many are aboriginal?
Mr. Downey: There were three out of the five, and one has
just retired.
Mr. Hickes: Okay, and how about with the administrative
support, how many are aboriginal out of the three?
Mr. Downey: I am told they all are.
* (2350)
Mr. Hickes: Out of all of the employees with the Native
Affairs Secretariat, it looks like a very good record‑‑
Mr. Downey: Thank you.
Mr. Hickes: ‑‑from what I see. How about the minister's office? How many direct staff, assistants or
executive assistants for Northern and Native Affairs does the minister have
without secretariat staff?
Mr. Downey: I have been running with a very lean
shop. I have had one special assistant
for the past year who works very hard. We should have more, but at this point I
do not have, but it is one.
Mr. Hickes: For advisory and executive director?
Mr. Downey: Yes, special assistant, and I want to say
that I as well‑‑I am sorry, I said one for the past year. I had an individual who worked for me,
aboriginal, excellent person. Another department came along and found how
qualified he was and offered him a better job than I was able to provide.
So
it is not that I did not want to have an additional person, and I wanted to
have this individual because I can say nothing but top marks for the
individual. He was very good at the work
he does. I was pleased to see him
advance and, quite frankly, am prepared to entertain an individual if there are
other aboriginal people that are looking for that type of work. I would
certainly be prepared to entertain discussing employment with them.
But, George, you would have to quit if you wanted
to apply.
Mr. Hickes: Well, I would not want to try and replace
your special assistant. I know he is a
very hard‑working individual, and you have a good special assistant
there. So I will not get into that. Maybe someday he will get a promotion too,
because I think he deserves one the way I see him around the building
here. I do not really have any more
questions.
I
would just like to thank the minister for his openness and his frank comments,
and I would like to thank his staff that are here that provided some of the
answers. I hope after tonight‑‑I
know in a lot of ways the minister has been working towards the betterment of
aboriginal people, and I hope the minister will dialogue and set up some
meetings with the aboriginal leadership and the federal government, and
provincial, to try and maybe cost‑share some things where it is not so
costly for any level of government, and maybe we could get a lot more progress
done.
I
hope that the minister will stand in cabinet and discuss some of the issues
that we raised tonight and maybe look at addressing the real serious issue in
the North pertaining to solvent abuse and work with his colleagues in the
federal government and the aboriginal leadership and hopefully come up with
some form of answer before we lose any more very talented young individuals
that we need as our future leaders.
So
I thank the minister and his staff for the frankness. I gained a lot of experience tonight. I am learning every day. Thanks a lot.
Mr. Downey: I thank you, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, to the
member for Point Douglas. This has been
a productive debate, and I look forward to the conclusion of the Estimates when
we do our Northern Affairs portion with the member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin).
I
would just like to go back to the comments the member made about the solvent
abuse and substance abuse. When one
looks at the communities, when you look at the devastation that Shamattawa has
gone through, and you look at some of the results and the impact of what
happens to these communities after you have several generations of substance
abuse, it really is a test to all of us.
Whether we are federal, provincial, municipal, church groups,
opposition, all members I think have to put their best minds to try to find
some solutions, because it is truly, in today's world, a very unfortunate
situation that something more cannot be done.
I
take my hat off to the front‑line workers, because when they are dealing
with these situations day after day and the devastation that they see and the
condition in which some of the people get in, and they have to try to make the
best of it with the situation that is not very desirable, and there becomes
certainly violent situations which they have to deal with and family
situations, and it just is very difficult.
So
I think we all have an obligation to try and find some solutions to it, and I
again acknowledge the constructive‑‑and I say that genuinely‑‑approach
that the member puts forward.
I
will conclude my remarks by saying the things that I really have come to
appreciate with the aboriginal communities and the people that I have had the
privilege, and I say privilege of working with, and that is the respect for the
Creator, their concern and their genuine love for their family, and probably as
important as anything is the sense of humour which they enjoy, and the fun they
have and the sense of humour that they have. They still have the ability to
have fun even though they have faced some very, very difficult situations in
their lives.
It has
been rewarding to me. I hope the
friendships that I have made over the many years will continue. I can tell the member I am genuinely working
to try to improve the situation. I know
that there will be criticisms, I know that is what the political arena is all
about, but at the end of the day the important thing is what is done, not
necessarily who has done it. I think we
all have to strive to improve the situation, and we will.
Thank you, Mr. Deputy Chairperson. It has been a productive evening.
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: The hour being 11:57 p.m., committee rise. LABOUR
Madam Chairperson
(Louise Dacquay): Order, please. The Committee of Supply will reconvene. This section of the Committee of Supply is
dealing with the Estimates for the Department of Labour. We will begin with a statement from the
minister responsible.
Hon. Darren Praznik
(Minister of Labour): Madam Chairperson, I will endeavour to make
my remarks as brief as possible as I outline some of the changes that members
may observe in the Estimates of the department.
First of all, funds requested for 1993‑94
represent a reduction of 10 percent from 1992‑93. One major structural change in the past year
which accounts for a significant portion of this financial difference was the
transfer of the Apprenticeship and Training Branch to the Department of
Education and Training. Their estimates
no longer appear as part of the Estimates of this department. We believe this relocation will result in the
revitalization and strengthening of this important program area to better serve
the needs of Manitobans.
The
department continues its policy of actively seeking the advice and input of
labour and business through a number of external advisory committees. The Labour Management Review Committee and
the Advisory Council on Workplace Safety and Health provide valuable advice and
assistance to assure our legislation and policies respond to the needs of
Manitobans. As part of this policy, the
department provides research and administrative support services to these
committees. I am pleased to inform
members of the committee that The Construction Industry Wages Act review
committee has completed a very extensive review and assessment of that
particular piece of legislation. Their
report has been forwarded to the Labour Management Review Committee for
study. I believe that report is in the
process of being provided to my office or has just been received in the last
few days by my office, and I look forward to reviewing the recommendations on
this particular piece of legislation.
Also, I am pleased to inform members that
Ministers of Labour across
The
department has initiated a process to improve general safety in
The
Conciliation and Mediation Services Branch continues to give the labour
relations community unparalleled service.
For instance, staff are currently resolving approximately 84 percent of
their grievance mediation cases and 97 percent of conciliation cases without
any work stoppages. The branch's record
in resolving grievance mediation cases continues to facilitate good relations
between labour and management as well as creating substantial savings in
arbitration costs.
The
Fire Commissioner's office over the past year has taken on a number of
initiatives that are strengthening the awareness of fire hazards and increasing
the number of Manitobans trained in fire response techniques. As part of the Mutual Aid system embracing
the municipalities in individual Mutual Aid Districts throughout the province,
20 in all, the office continued its financial training incentives. These are resulting in higher numbers of
locally trained fire and emergency response personnel throughout our
province. Mutual Aid District grants
continue, and Level I and II fire fighting training tapes are currently being
supplied to those districts.
The
Office of the Fire Commissioner will be acquiring a fourth emergency response
trailer, and additional portable emergency phone banks in this current year for
service in our Mutual Aid Districts.
Like the other three trailers that were developed by the Fire
Commissioner's office, they will be strategically located throughout the
province and made available to Mutual Aid Districts. This becomes particularly important during
the summer fire season.
The
1992 version of the
Completion of the project, expected in the
fall of 1994, will greatly increase the ability of the office to serve and
protect Manitobans and will allow the Emergency Services Training Centre to become
a centre for pre‑employment training for the west and central part of
The
Engineering Safety Unit, which was previously known as Plans, Examination and
Inspection, which was housed with the Department of Rural Development, has
returned to the Department of Labour giving clients a one‑stop shopping
for all public safety services. We, by
the way, are one of the few provinces in
* (2010)
The
Pension Commission of Manitoba, as part of its mandate to promote the
establishment, extension and improvement of pensions, had issued a year or so
ago the discussion paper, The Promotion of Private Pension Plans in Manitoba,
and held a number of days of public hearings on this paper. As a result of this consultation process, the
commission recommended a number of changes in The Pension Benefits Act and its
regulations which were enacted in the last session of the Legislative Assembly.
Many of the regulations are currently in the process of being implemented. One key change was the creation of the Life
Income Fund or LIF, which allows people much more flexibility in designing
their retirement income and specifying a starting date for receiving it.
A
special task force has been struck to investigate the creation of pension plans
for small employers. This has certainly
been an area where we have been lacking in our current mix of retirement plans
and pension plans in the province. These
plans will contain‑‑or this task force will make recommendations
for special provisions which was provided for in the amendments to the pension
act that will accommodate the special needs of small pension plans. We certainly hope this measure will lead to
the creation of more pension plans for employers who have a limited number,
small number of employees. We certainly
look forward to the completion of the work of this task force and the
recommendations which should be received some time in this year.
The
Pay Equity Bureau continues to promote equality in the workplace. In the past year, the bureau has worked with
53 school divisions and districts to implement pay equity practices on a
voluntary basis. I am very pleased with
the work that has gone on in that particular area to date.
With respect to Workplace Safety Health and
Support Services division of the department, the Employment Standards branch,
which is housed in that area of the department, has reduced the backlog for
investigating complaints from six months in 1991 to less than one month
today. The average time to finalize a
complaint is now about two months from the point that the complaint is filed.
Three prosecutions, all successful, were
undertaken in this area in the last year.
Two of those prosecutions, under The Employment Standards Act, were the
first in about 15 years. The other,
under The Construction Industry Wages Act, was the first in about 20 years.
The
Payment of Wages Fund has been restricted to allow for pay out of only earned
wages, not vacation pay, as was previously the case. The fund has consequently been reduced from
$570,000 to $300,000 to reflect this change in policy.
I
am sure there are some issues with respect to that change, and how it fits into
the unemployment insurance scheme that members will want to discuss when we get
to that part of the Estimates.
The
branch has entered into a partnership with the Department of Education and
Training to have employment standards law taught to all Grade 10 students as a
mandatory part of the Skills for Independent Living program.
Another initiative of this branch, with the
Multiculturalism Secretariat, has been to facilitate better links and
understanding with a number of communities within our province. To date, we
have worked with the Cree, Saulteaux, Polish, Vietnamese, Filipino, and Laotian
communities. The branch has provided one
to three months of training to volunteers from these communities to increase
understanding of employer and employee rights and responsibilities under our
various employment standards legislation.
This initiative, which we hope to expand in
the coming years, certainly brings the law home to many Manitobans who
otherwise would not have had easy access to employment standards
legislation. The initiative has also led
to branch material being translated into the languages of the communities which
we have worked with to date and distributed on a more wide basis.
The
Worker Advisor Office has seen a growing demand for services. In 1993‑94, the office expects to
handle about 2,100 requests for service.
Increased staffing, improvements in office operation, and community
interest in education have caused a steady decline in the waiting list from six
months, the worst case this year, where we had some vacancies in our staff, and
we are in the process of filling them to the point where, as of today, we have
virtually eliminated the waiting list altogether.
Other 1993‑94 plans include increasing
public education through programs and information materials, in conjunction
with the Workers Compensation Board and other partners in the community.
The
office and the department are also having discussions with the Workers
Compensation Board to improve the operation of the office. These discussions have already led to
improved technological ability. As I am
sure honourable members opposite will appreciate, the ability to communicate
between the Worker Advisor Office and the Workers Compensation Board through
computer links speeds up the information flow and the ability to resolve issues
in a timely fashion.
The
Mines Inspection Branch has been working on a tripartite committee, which has
been reviewing the operations of mines regulations and has continued this work
during 1992. The final draft of its
report has been circulated for comments and responses. This joint project was initiated with the
Department of Energy and Mines to co‑ordinate inspection of pits and
quarries in operations in the petroleum sector.
Inspectors can be now appointed under both The
Workplace Safety and Health Act, and The Mines and Minerals Act and can conduct
inspections under both acts. This change
will provide better coverage and greatly improve efficiency of the staffs of
both departments as 70 to 80 percent of the field time in inspecting aggregates
was spent on travelling.
The
Mines Inspection Branch participated in the evaluations of mine safety and
contributed to the success of a made‑in‑Manitoba mine safety
process to ensure the survivals of miners trapped below ground. This is a good example of a made‑in‑Manitoba
product with industry and government working together.
The
Workplace Safety and Health Branch will benefit this year from a new workplace
information network, a computerized data base program that, when fully
operational, will allow staff to have immediate access to information relating
to branch activities.
For
our Safety and Health Officers this WIN system, as we call it, gives them
access to an accurate and complete listing of all client employers and their
status. It helps determine priority of
action, helps to plan field activities, identify status of safety and health
committees, and assists in a wide variety of related functions.
The
WIN system will also help program managers with a variety of monitoring and
managerial tasks including those relating to staff workloads and performance,
statistics, determining program success, decision making and, of course,
planning. WIN is being introduced in
stages. It is hoped that we will have it
in full operation by this fall.
As
one can appreciate, the prime purpose of all of these types of aids is to increase
the time in which our inspection staff spends in the field, rather than doing
administrative work in the office.
The
Advisory Council on Workplace Safety and Health has made specific
recommendations for updating regulations on first aid, hearing conservation and
Workplace Safety and Health committees. I know these particular regulations
have been the subject of questions in the House, and I am sure we will have
some discussion on them later.
Appropriate amendments are being drafted in
consultation currently with the Department of Justice. I am sure the critic from the New Democratic
Party, who has raised this, will be able to get in some of the details later in
discussion, I would hope, on each of those regulations.
A
protocol on how to resolve indoor air quality problems has been developed
jointly by the provinces of
I
should point out as well that we have various activities. We do joint activities
with other departments. If my memory
serves me correct, we have developed pamphlets, for example, a year or so ago
with the Province of Saskatchewan which helps reduce our developmental and,
ultimately, our production costs where we can share with other provinces.
Also developed is a guideline for the safe
handling, abatement and disposal procedures for asbestos. It provides necessary information where
presence of asbestos may pose a health hazard.
Using Workers Compensation Board data and medical information, the
Workplace Safety and Health Branch is focusing on high‑risk endeavours
and workplaces to more effectively reduce workplace injuries and illness.
A
successful project with the Fire Commissioner's office and Imperial Oil
Limited, aimed at improving safety and health awareness among farm children, is
also continuing.
Complete packages of hearing materials are
being assembled and distributed to the provincial fire chiefs, 4‑H clubs
and Women's Institute chapter organizations.
Materials include comic books, safety kits, learning activities and a
video to focus awareness on farm safety.
Target audiences are the farm children between the ages of nine and 13
years. This has been a successful
partnership between the department and Imperial Oil Limited.
I
would like to point out to members opposite that our largest number of deaths
in the workplace actually occur on farms, and it has been one of the toughest
areas for us to work with, because we do not have the organizational structure
in farm situations as we have in other workplaces. So that is the reason we have certainly been
targeting that particular area.
I
would also like to have the opportunity to describe briefly two pilot projects
that have changed service operations in the branch. From mid‑October to mid‑December
1992, the branch conducted an intake officer project. Although not advertised, 526 inquiries were
received, 50 percent from workers, 34 percent from employers and 6 percent from
professionals. It became apparent that
the service could be expanded to include opportunities for employers and
workers to contact the branch after normal business hours, as well as to assist
with the permit system which gets backlogged in the early morning, as well as
working with research inquiries that could not all be answered at once.
* (2020)
As
a result, the branch moved to offer expanded inquiry services. The service operates to 8 p.m. on Mondays and
to 6 p.m. Tuesdays to Fridays. This
service has been announced in the WorkSafe newsletter, and a bulletin has been
prepared for distribution.
We
have also had our Occupational Health unit working to establish an occupational
health nurse consulting position. In
particular, this position would serve small worksites, such as radiator repair
shops, where lead exposure may be excessive.
The
Labour Adjustment unit of the department has been responsible for helping to
mitigate the effects of downsizing adjustments.
Now more than 30 active workforce adjustment agreements have been
signed. The unit is supporting a broadly
based personnel planning committee of aboriginal communities to develop a plan
to help people in those communities take advantage of forthcoming job
opportunities that may exist.
In
1992‑93, 39 employees became eligible for benefits under the Program for
Older Worker Adjustment, or POWA, as a result of previously approved
layoffs. The cost to
Those are my remarks, Madam Chair, and I look
forward to the discussion with the various critics.
Madam Chairperson: We will now hear from the critic for the
official opposition party, the honourable member for Wolseley.
Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley):
Madam Chair, before I start, I wanted to say
to the minister and to the critic for the second opposition party, that our
party has divided the responsibilities for what is covered by the Labour
department at the moment. That is, the
member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) is the critic for Workplace Health and
Safety, and the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid) is the critic for worker
compensation programs and Worker Advisors, and both of those will be asking
questions at some point during the evening.
I wanted
to start by putting some general comments on the record. This is a department whose goal is to foster
a stable labour relations climate to support workplace training and adjustment. It is attempting to do this in very difficult
times. It is a new era of economic,
global change, particularly characterized by the very fast and free and
unregulated transfers of financial services and of capital.
Those conditions, which have been in place
perhaps for the past 10 years, put enormous pressures upon labour in a time
when capital is easily able to withdraw from any particular jurisdiction,
particularly in areas of industries where there is resource extraction
involved. I think that is one of the
most difficult areas in every country of the globe.
I
would, of course, if we had more time, perhaps discuss the role of the
Conservative Party in the deregulation of capital and the impact that it has
had upon labour across this country and upon the ability of capital essentially
to strike, to withdraw from a particular country or from a community.
We
are, thanks to this government and their colleagues in
The
Free Trade Agreement with the
So
we find, for example, in Manitoba the loss of over 1,500 jobs, primarily in the
resource sector over the last two or three weeks with the expectation of more
to come. This is really a continuation
of a trend that we have seen in
What the context of this is, of course, is
that it lowers the resistance of those who are left. It puts pressure upon the employer to extract
more labour from those who are left.
That does not have to be written anywhere. It can be written, I think, or seen on the
faces of every worker in this province.
Duff Roblin encouraged the work of people like
Cam MacLean, for example, who is still working in this field, but they were
both very early in that field of a progressive Manitoba perspective. I would, of course, argue from our
perspective that the governments of both Ed Schreyer and of Howard Pawley had
significant roles to play in expanding the innovative legislative framework of
labour legislation both in
But
what we have seen from this particular government since 1988, since they have
received a majority, is a comparable pressure upon labour to that that is being
exerted in the international market context as well. We have seen a continual eating away at the
rights of labour, at the taking away of the rights to final offer selection,
something which had played a part in enhancing the labour peace in
We
have seen in more recent times, in this particular session, Bill 22, which for
a department and for a government which claims to consult equally with labour
and management, which fosters a stable labour relations climate, which
subscribes to the principle of harmonious labour relations in
I
cannot see that Bill 22 plays any part in the history of labour relations in
We
have also seen from this government, since 1990, certainly, no attempt, no
interest, it appears, in increasing the minimum wage. When you look at the position of
The
Construction Wages Act, again, the government minister‑‑I have
asked him this question in the House.
The wages in the construction industry, the changes to those have been
made almost in every occasion at least a year, if not more than a year, behind
the appropriate time so that people in that industry are looking at wages that
are a year behind in terms of the minimums that can be set. At the moment, the minister is not even
prepared to give us a date when he will look at the recommendations of the
board.
* (2030)
In
Labour Adjustment, as the minister himself has said, we have one of the areas
of the department which has seen a diminution in amounts. This at a time when there are large layoffs,
1500 in just over a week, large layoffs in the public sector, and continuing
layoffs in the private sector, 40 jobs here, 50 jobs there, the removal of jobs
to the southern United States and eventually to Mexico that we are seeing right
across the line. Yet it is at this time
that the government has permitted those areas of labour adjustment to either
fall into abandonment in the case of the older worker, and the minister says
that he is in fact renegotiating that. I
look forward to that discussion. I hope
that there certainly is something happening in that area.
Even beyond that, what we have in Manitoba is
really a patchwork of Labour Adjustment Committees, and what I would have hoped
to have seen from any government faced with the labour conditions, the
employment conditions that we are facing in Manitoba was a strategy which
looked at that from the longer‑term perspective and tried to put in
something which gave much greater security and much greater consistency across
the labour force.
I am
also concerned by the number of existing strikes that continue in
We
have also seen a change in this department with the loss of Apprenticeship and
some aspects of Training, and one of the things that has concerned many people
in Manitoba is that those changes, the taking away of Apprenticeship from the
Department of Labour, were done without any consultation with the Manitoba
Federation of Labour or indeed any other federation of labour, certainly until
after the fact. The minister, I think,
any minister in this area, should be well aware of the concerns of labour about
the relationship of that department to the shop floor, to the trade union
movement and to the craft base as well in many cases. To transfer it to Education, although there
may be some reasons for that, there may be ways of doing that which are
appropriate, to do it without consultation, I again find one of the very
strange things about this department which claims to foster a stable relations
climate in
So
with that, Madam Chair, I will finish my introductory remarks and look forward
to looking at the line‑by‑line.
Madam Chairperson: We will now have the opening statements from
the critic for the second party opposition.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
Like the Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik),
this is now just over five years since I have been inside the Chamber, and when
I think in terms of Labour and mission statement or objectives, whatever you
might want to call it, that this department is responsible for, one which I
believe is most important in terms of labour relations, to provide harmony, and
harmony is something that is in the Preamble of The Labour Relations Act and so
forth.
I
am concerned about the direction this government is taking with respect to
harmony amongst unions and management and so forth with some of the
actions. I have had a number of
opportunities to be able to speak inside the Chamber and outside the Chamber
with respect to labour relations in the
At
that particular time, like the Minister of Labour, I had ample opportunity to
sit down and listen to a lot of the debate that was going on. I think it embodies at least in most part
what my feelings are towards both the Conservative Party and the New Democratic
Party with respect to fostering labour, positive labour relations in the
If
we take a look at the point in time we are at today we will find the importance
of adjusting our work force is crucial. How can we compete at the turn of the
century unless we have a trained and educated work force that will be able to
ensure that we are ready and prepared for the global market, the global
economy?
I
have some very strong concerns in terms of the direction the provincial
government has been taking us with that.
I recall discussions previously with respect to the labour agreement
with the federal government and how much time the ministers responsible, with
this minister and the Minister of Education and the federal counterparts in not
reaching or achieving an agreement, because at least in part, Madam
Chairperson, it gave individuals to some degree a sense of hope that government
was, in fact, thinking in terms of labour enhancement or job creation, training
incentives and things of this nature. To
sit on finalizing of an agreement of this nature, I think, did not do us any
good at all.
There was a report that was released with
respect to the Free Trade Agreement with the
It
is unfortunate that they do not believe there is more of a need for a proactive
approach, a dealing with labour issues and particularly training and
retraining, and the government has ample opportunities to be able to
demonstrate its sincere approach at dealing with that issue by priorities.
We
see what government's priorities are in terms of expenditures on the budget and
the statements that they make, and I believe that there are a good number of
Manitobans, working Manitobans or unemployed Manitobans or individuals that are
facing unemployment because of whether it is free trade or a recession or
downsizing, whatever one wants to call it.
Individuals like to believe that government is
going to be there to ensure that there is something available in terms of
upgrading and training and so forth.
I was
also somewhat concerned, because I do want to keep my remarks somewhat brief,
with respect to the building codes. The
minister made quick reference to them in his opening remarks. We are in a situation in which it has been a
number of years that the minister has had opportunity to implement the changes
from the last go‑around, and we are already into the next round. Yet we have not seen those changes. That does cause concern from within the
industry and so forth, and we will find out in terms of why it was necessary to
see these sorts of delays.
With Workers Compensation, something that the
minister is also responsible for, two years ago I was quite pleased with the
government and its approach to Workers Compensation in the sense that we saw a
tremendous backlog that existed when this government took office. They have been able, at least in part, to
bring that backlog down through computerization and, I believe, making Workers
Compensation offices that much more efficient in dealing with the case‑by‑case
loads.
But
I am still concerned with the number of calls that I am receiving from Workers
Compensation recipients. I am very
concerned with respect to the feeling, and I am getting more as the Workers
Compensation critic, of individuals that are calling up and indicating to me
and asking me the question, if you will, should they be getting a lawyer? That concerns me in terms of the costs and so
forth, knowing full well that the Worker Advisors are in fact overworked and
there seems to be a‑‑well, the minister says that the backlog is at
zero. I know that there still is a
problem in terms of getting individuals from the Worker Advisors to get on some
of the cases in a rather quick fashion.
Again, this is something, no doubt, that we are going to enter into.
* (2040)
The
Apprenticeship program and the transferring of it over to Education I think can
be a positive thing depending on what the Minister of Education (Mrs. Vodrey)
and how the Minister of Education incorporates it into the overall planning of
post‑secondary education and the type of consulting that is done with the
industry at that point in time or at this point in time.
With those few remarks, Madam Chairperson, I
am quite prepared to go into the Estimates.
Madam Chairperson: I would remind members of the committee that
we will defer dealing with item 1.(a) Minister's Salary until all other line
items of this department have been passed.
At
this time, I would invite the minister's staff to enter the Chamber.
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, I would just look to my critics
as to how they would like to handle discussion.
Prior to this year, when the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) was my
critic and there was only one critic for the New Democratic Party for this
particular department, we had a fairly free‑ranging discussion, as long
as we were able to accommodate staff.
However, there is a breaking down of responsibilities this year. I look to their suggestion as to how they would
feel most comfortable in handling this.
All
I ask is some consideration, the ability to get the appropriate staff people
down from the gallery to accommodate specific areas of questioning. Perhaps the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen)
would offer some suggestion.
Ms. Friesen: I think our preference is to go line by line
in order to sort of accommodate the two or three of us.
Mr. Praznik: Sure, good.
Madam Chairperson: Does the honourable minister wish to
introduce his staff?
Mr. Praznik: Yes. I
have with me my new deputy minister just recently appointed, but certainly no
stranger I think to this House and certainly no stranger to my critic for the
Workers Compensation Board. Of course,
it is Mr. Tom Farrell. He is my previous
assistant deputy minister, and he has just completed a stint of almost nine
months at the Workers Compensation Board where he was acting chief executive
officer.
I
also have with me Mr. Jim Nykoluk, who is one of my assistant deputy ministers
responsible for the Management Services and support division of the
branch. They deal with a lot of our
internal management issues and also provide us with our policy development
area. From that branch, Mr. Jim Wood is
here today as well.
Madam Chairperson: We are on item 1.(b) Executive Support, page
112 of the Estimates manual.
Ms. Friesen: I have some general questions here about
overall policy review, but if the minister would prefer to answer them on the
specific lines, we could look at that.
I
wanted to ask first of all about legislative review. Could the minister tell me which acts are
under legislative review at the moment and what stage the reports are at?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, there are a number of areas that
are under legislative review currently.
The first is The Construction Industry Wages Act, and well over a year
ago we charged Professor Wally Fox‑Decent and the Construction Industry
Wages Boards with the task of doing a thorough public review of that
legislation, including asking the question as to its necessity. They conducted public hearings across the province.
They prepared after fairly lengthy discussions a report which we asked go to
the Labour Management Review Committee.
I
must admit to the member, I expected to have the report in my hands sometime
early this winter, but the Labour Management Review Committee took a very long
period of time to examine the recommendations and to debate them. I understand that we have just received in
our office in the last week, if not a few days, the completed report with the
analysis by the Labour Management Review Committee.
I
must admit to her very candidly, I have not yet had an opportunity to even read
it. So that is where that is in
process. My intention, with that
particular report, is to study it over the summer, in the next number of months
and prepare some recommendations for my colleagues as to what we should be
doing based on that report.
The
other area in which we are into a major review is our public safety area. If I may, Madam Chair, distribute for members
of the committee, a copy of our public review discussion paper. If we could perhaps have a Page distribute
that, it may bring on some questions from the critics in this particular area.
This department is responsible for eight
pieces of public safety legislation including The Amusements Act, The Elevator
Act, The Buildings and Mobile Homes Act, The Power Engineers Act, The
Electricians' Licence Act, The Fires Prevention Act, The Gas and Oil Burner
Act, and The Steam and Pressure Plants Act.
All
of these pieces of legislation were developed over the last hundred years. I think The Fires Prevention Act was really
the genesis of what became the Department of Labour back in the 1880s. I believe we had the first prairie fire act,
and of course with new technology we developed different legislation.
The
reason I raise that is these pieces of public safety all deal with public
safety areas but have different legislative schemes difficult to
administer. What we have done, in fact,
I must tell the honourable member, that this has been initiated within the department
by our staff who are charged with administrating these acts. Their suggestion to myself as minister and to
our management team was that we conduct this kind of review of our public
safety legislation with the goal to create one or two public safety statutes
which would encompass in various sections these areas, but give us a common
legislative scheme in which to operate and to basically update those pieces of
legislation and give them greater administrative ease.
This paper, as I have said, was developed by
our staff who will be out conducting public hearings of some sort to elicit the
response of the public and interested groups, and then we hope to be developing
a piece of legislation that at some point will come forward to this
Legislature. It is a major undertaking.
The
third area, perhaps two others, one of course is the retail holiday closing
legislation which this department administers, but currently that legislative
amendment is before the House under the name of the Minister of Industry, Trade
and Tourism (Mr. Stefanson).
The
fourth area, of course, is one that we are going to have to come to grips with
at some point, and that is The Remembrance Day Act, which has a number of very
archaic provisions. I know my colleague
the minister responsible for the Liquor Commission (Mrs. McIntosh) and myself
have spoken about this. Perhaps because
it only comes up once a year, it is not a pressing legislative matter. There are a lot of discrepancies, for
example, you can go to a movie theatre on Remembrance Day, but you cannot rent
a video. That is in need of review. It is not a pressing urgent matter but at
some point will have to be dealt with.
Ms. Friesen: Are there any contemplated changes of The
Employment Standards Act?
Mr. Praznik: None at this particular time. We have not charged Labour Management Review
Committee to do any further review, although I would say to the member for
Wolseley (Ms. Friesen), there are some changes that I referred to a year ago
that we would like to at some point at least seek advice on. There are a number of areas where that act is
short.
* (2050)
I
think she would even agree with me in these areas. For example, we do not have provision for
sick time, et cetera, in our minimum standards.
So
at some point in time, I think Labour Management Review will be asked to give
us some recommendations on how we deal with some of those areas where there are
voids in the act. I am sure she can
appreciate anytime a Conservative government brings forward amendments to that
act, even if they are jointly recommended by labour and management, my previous
critic always made quite a political issue of it. So there is no particular rush, but that
would be another area at some point that the committee should consider, but no
immediate plans.
Ms. Friesen: Could the minister tell us how often the
Labour Management Review Committee has met this past year and what has been
their basic agendas?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chairperson, I am advised that the
steering committee of the Labour Management Review Committee meets about 10
times a year, the full committee about three, but there is some variation
depending on the workload that I as minister send to them for
consideration. The only issues that have
been on their agenda that I have asked them to consider in a thorough way have
been the report on The Construction Industry Wages Act. The year previous to that, they had a fairly
busy year because of amendments that we made to The Labour Relations Act and
The Workers Compensation Act the previous year.
As
the member is aware, I have no legislation on the agenda in this session and,
consequently, there was not a need for that kind of review.
Ms. Friesen: Madam Chairperson, my last question in this
area is a broad one. I am interested in
hearing from the Minister of Labour how he justifies Bill 22 with the expected
results of this particular section which helps to achieve greater fairness,
equity and co‑operation in the workplace.
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chairperson, the member for Wolseley
raises and makes I think a very valid argument.
I will not disagree with her.
Bill 22, certainly like its similar legislation in other provinces
including
It
was legislation that the cabinet of Manitoba, like the cabinet of Ontario and
other provinces‑‑and I am sure she would acknowledge that other
governments of other political stripes have had to do similar things and have
also seen a decline in the traditional harmony in public sector
bargaining. I do not think any of us in
government who have gotten into this type of legislation expected otherwise.
It
was done, as I am sure the member can appreciate, because of a belief that that
option of some constraint on public sector wages had to be undertaken for the
greater good of the province. We can disagree whether that was true or not, but
that is the premise behind it. We
attempted to minimize the long‑term effects on relationships and
certainly benefits that had been won over a number of years, and that is why
our particular model does not affect pensions, does not affect other benefits,
et cetera. So we tried to minimize those.
That, of course, does not necessarily lead to a decline in the debate in
the public sector side, but it is weighing a greater good versus a difficulty
in achieving those at the bargaining table.
I
would point out to the member as well that one of the interesting observations
in negotiations and labour management in a province like Manitoba‑‑and
I ask her not to hold me to my numbers exactly because they may have changed‑‑but
two or three years I recall a quick analysis of the Manitoba labour force being
about 500,000 people‑‑480,000 to 500,000‑‑of whom about
150,000 or so are unionized, of which almost 100,000, and my numbers may be off
a little bit, were in public sector unions.
The
reason I raise that is, over the last 20 to 30 years in
The
public sector side is certainly the strongest in the labour movement today, is
in a very different position from public sector unions, because public services
cannot be shut down or close their doors or go out of business as private
sector can. It makes a very different
relationship between government as employer with their employees.
I
do not think we as a country, quite frankly, on either side have fully come to
grips with that. It has led to, I think,
a great deal of frustration on both sides, much of it legitimate. We have a lot
of mutual growth in that area to undertake.
Not easy‑‑I would agree with her wholeheartedly. It has not improved labour relations in the
public sector. It has happened right
across this country. I think it
demonstrates the need for all of us in the public sector side to do some
rethinking about relationships over the next number of years. I just hope we all have the opportunity to do
that.
Ms. Friesen: Madam Chairperson, I am not quite sure what
the minister is saying by that statement.
Is he saying that the growth of trade unionism is in the public sector
and hence that is the reason for clamping down on trade unions? Is that the overall goal of what this bill is
after?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chairperson, I would not say that at
all, nor would I say that that is Mr. Rae's intention in
The
only reason I raise that as an observation is that the growth in the last 20
years in the labour movement has been, and I think the member can acknowledge
this, very heavy in the public sector side, for a lot of reasons‑‑the
growth of public services in Canada.
One
looks at teachers for example, 30 years ago, very poorly paid, very difficult
working conditions, organized, went a long way to improving those conditions
for teachers, et cetera. They have
become very, very strong unions for a host of reasons. On the other hand, with labour there has been
a decline on the old heavy industrial, resource‑based union
membership. Technology, a host of
reasons have reduced the number of employers.
Within the labour movement the public sector
has become a very, very dominant part, and our whole psyche of labour
relations, to some degree, has grown up in the private sector side. The difference between a private sector and
public sector, as I mentioned, is that a private sector, if you cannot reach an
agreement or you reach a bad agreement that no one can live with, you can go
out of business.
People have a precipice to look over. In the public sector side you do not have
quite the same dynamics, because I have never seen a school system go out of
business or a health system totally shut down.
The dynamics are different. From
my limited experience, on both sides how one handles that, and I take some
responsibility for that as Labour minister as well, are not all that well
developed. The growth in public sector
unions has changed the dynamic, certainly a big part of that dynamic. All of us, on both sides of the table, I do
not think really know how to come to grips with that. That is part of the underlying problem across
the country.
Ms. Friesen: I might say in response that I think the
reason you do not see the precipice there in the public sector is in fact there
is an ethos of public service. It seems
to me that that is what this government has undermined with Bill 22, that it is
the public sector unions which are in fact one of the major groups in
It
is that basis of equality that this government and other Conservative
governments across the country are gradually taking away from the people, and
the government is turning its back on the people. It is, I think, one of the major reasons for
the crisis in public confidence in this country. It is due to particular decisions, particular
policies of Conservative governments.
I
wanted to ask, particularly on Bill 22, the impact on this particular
department. Has the minister decided
which areas are essential services, where the six days are going to be taken
from? Could he give us an account of how
it will affect the department?
* (2100)
Mr. Praznik: I say to the member for Wolseley, I am quite
enjoying this exchange between us. It is
not often, in this Chamber at least, one gets to have this type of exchange,
but I would say to her with all sincerity, her comments about Conservative
governments, you know, the experience‑‑and I do not say this to get
into the usual rhetorical debate of Saskatchewan and Ontario, but I think the
problems facing the country have come to transcend, in my opinion at least,
many of those ideological bases on which a lot of our politics has operated
over the last number of years.
Even governments like Bob Rae's, who has stood
for many of the principles that the member for Wolseley, I believe, sincerely
holds dear to herself and stands for, has had to abandon those for reasons out
of their control.
The
same is true for members on this side of the House, that we have had to make
decisions in budgets that we have not liked, that we have not wanted to make,
but many of those factors that have forced Premiers like Bob Rae to make them
have done the same to us.
So
I only ask, and I know it is difficult to do in opposition, to be judged by
similar standards as other provincial governments, and I think that is only, of
course, fair.
The
member asked the question as to how Bill 22 will affect us in our department. We will be taking the regular formula of
seven Fridays in the summer, beginning this Friday of July 2nd, as well as the
three days between Christmas and New Year's with respect to emergency or, as
some have called it, essential services.
Those are things, of course, like having
people on stand‑by at the office of the Fire Commissioner, boiler
inspectors, should an emergency arise, et cetera.
We
will be operating on a similar model as we do on Easter Monday and other
designated holidays with appropriate call‑in staff and our emergency
number service.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Chairperson, just to continue on, I was
interested in the minister's remarks with respect to Bill 22. He made reference to the private sector, and
the private sector, if they negotiate on a bad agreement, that the business
will go bankrupt or will have to close, or in fact go ahead and change the
agreement.
Can
the minister indicate if in fact he had the opportunity or what he has done in
an attempt to change the agreement as opposed to legislate the change?
Mr. Praznik: Yes, I think the member for Wolseley (Ms.
Friesen) provided some insight into an answer to the question from the member
for
In
discussions I have had with people at INCO, for example‑‑my deputy
minister has a great experience at INCO, having worked there for a number
years. In discussions I have had with
labour people from INCO, both sides ultimately look over a precipice which
could be the loss of the operation, the company's investment, the workers' jobs
and the future income that can be earned.
Whereas the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) pointed out, there is a
different view on the public sector side.
Certainly you cannot necessarily close down all the provincial
government. It is very, very hard to do,
so the dynamic is very different.
I
can tell the member that when we were in the process of building this year's
budget and had decisions to make, we did hold a meeting with Mr. Olfert and
representatives of the Manitoba Government Employees Union who are our largest
union. We asked if they would be prepared to consider some framework for a
renegotiation of the existing contract.
There were, of course, only four logical
options with which to deal with a reduction in available funding for the
year. One of course is renegotiation of
a contract; two is a legislative rollback; three is to use our power under the
collective agreement, which we have as managers, to lay off people, more people
than whose jobs were eliminated this year; or fourthly, go to this type of
reduced workweek model which has plenty of precedent in the private sector,
certainly in many of the resource‑based industries that are prevalent in
this province.
We
were not able to have all of those fully developed when we met with the
MGEU. We asked them to consider on a fairly
short time frame their willingness. They
asked us the question at that time, if they were not prepared to do it what
were our other options? We laid out what
those three options were but not what our choice was.
A
couple of weeks later, the so‑called famous late‑night call to Mr.
Olfert, what I did tell him at that time, although we were unable to talk
earlier in the day because of telephone tag, was that we had settled on an
alternative option, which was the reduced workweek plan. That is what we were announcing that was our
option.
In
fairness to Mr. Olfert, and I am not here to defend him today, there are a lot
of difficulties for anyone in the labour movement, a union leader, to negotiate
concessions. It is a very, very
difficult thing to do. I recognize
that. I think it would be very
surprising to see a leader of a union negotiate those types of things,
particularly if there were other options that an employer could assume that was
relatively palatable like this reduced workweek, and they would not have to be
necessarily part of that decision. It
certainly gives them more maneuvering room politically.
So,
from Mr. Olfert's perspective, I am not surprised at that particular direction,
nor can one necessarily fault him for that.
We all have options and we ultimately choose them.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Chairperson, I could probably go on
that particular debate. No doubt we are
going to have more debate on that particular bill as it continues to go through
the legislative process, so what I am going to do is refer actually to the
Supplementary Estimates, just ask some questions with respect to the
organizational chart on page 9, and ask the minister with respect to a number
of the different boards and advisory boards that are out there, in particular a
couple of specific questions with respect to a couple of the boards, otherwise
just to get some sort of a general idea in terms of meeting times and so forth
and how often these advisory boards meet.
The
first question I would ask is with respect to the Minimum Wage Board and to ask
the minister if in fact that board has been meeting and if in fact there have
been any recommendations coming forward or anything of that nature?
Mr. Praznik: We are in the process now of reconstituting
that board to seek recommendations for appointment to it. Before this, of course, is the preliminary
step to calling it to hold appropriate hearings to make recommendations to the
government. So I am in the process of canvassing now the appropriate labour
management community to seek recommendations to constitute the board.
I
must just point out to the honourable member, of course, one of the
difficulties, if you can call it a difficulty, with our current minimum wage
formula in Manitoba is that some years ago we eliminated the training or youth
rate which, in effect, made our minimum wage the truly lowest one can pay an
individual. It has to be viewed, I
think, in that particular light, given that a number of provinces still have a
youth differential or a training rate, et cetera.
Certainly, we have been at this current
area. We have been about traditionally
the middle of the pack. Other provinces
have started to go through the consideration in keeping what has been the
general policy of this government to be in that mid area. It is time, no doubt, to have another look at
this particular issue, and that is why I am in the process of preparing to seek
advice as to new members of the board.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Chairperson, can the minister give the
Chamber an indication in terms of when the last time that board was constituted
and in fact had an official meeting?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chairperson, if my recollection serves
me well, the board was reconstituted I believe in the spring of 1990, about
this time, and made recommendations which I received shortly after my
appointment as minister. It was one of
the first issues with which I had to deal following my appointment in late
September of 1990.
Mr. Lamoureux: I was not the Labour critic at that point in
time, and I am wondering if the minister could indicate what the
recommendations were that came out of that particular board at that time?
Mr. Praznik: We accepted the majority view to raise the
minimum wage to the current level of $5.
There were also some recommendations for changes to some of the
deductions that are allowed for meals and board, where that is applicable. I believe there was also a joint application
recommendation not to reinstate a training wage. I am looking to my assistant deputy minister
whose memory is a very good one. There
was that recommendation not to reinstate a training wage or youth differential,
which we accepted.
* (2110)
Mr. Lamoureux: What I would ask the minister, if it is at
all possible, as opposed to going through each and every board or advisory
board, to get some sort of an indication over the next few weeks from the
office as to which board is in fact constituted, and some idea in terms of what
has been going on with these boards, in particular if the minister has been receiving
recommendations of any sorts from boards, just to get an idea in terms of what
type of direction the minister is going in a number of different areas, which I
think would be very important. In
particular, there are a couple of them, for example, the trade examination
boards, which indicates that there are four boards that stem from that
particular line, or how does that work?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chairperson, just to point out in
context, unless a board has a statutory requirement to fulfill, then most of
these boards are there to advise the minister in certain areas. Where I charge them for advice, one gets that
back. As I have indicated to the member
for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen), in a number of areas we have not been dealing with
legislation, et cetera, so the charges have not been going to those
boards. We use them as they are
required. But we will undertake to get
you some analysis of our boards and their meeting and, where it is in the
public realm, certainly their agendas.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Chairperson, I am quite prepared to
pass this particular line but just again to emphasize the importance. What I am
really trying to get out of here is some sort of a sense in terms of usages of
these advisory boards to get a better idea in terms of what the minister and
the department are in fact up to.
Madam Chairperson: Item 1.(b) Executive Support (1) Salaries
$337,300‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $73,200‑‑pass.
2.
Labour Programs (a) Management Services (1) Salaries.
Ms. Friesen: Madam Chairperson, I am interested here in
the research support to the Labour Management Review Committee, the three
construction industry wages boards and the minimum wage board. Could the minister indicate what kind and how
much research, what reports have been prepared in the past year?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chairperson, the support to the
construction industry wages review committee came from the Support branch, our
staff there, as required. As well, Mr.
Jim McFarlane, who is the Director of the Employment Standards branch, did also
provide advice and support to that branch, primarily advice and statistics, et
cetera, as was necessary, given that Employment Standards is the enforcement
body for The Construction Industry Wages Act.
So what was asked for was provided.
Ms. Friesen: Can I assume then that since the minimum wage
board has not met that there has been no research done into the impact of the
minimum wage freezing, stabilization‑‑what the heck can I call it‑‑and
the fact that the minimum wage has not been raised in
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chairperson, first of all, there have
been times in the history of the province where the wage has not gone up for
two, two and a half years, three years.
Some of them have been under previous administrations and some in fact
during some periods of higher inflation.
So I do not say that to be critical, but it is not just this period in
which there has been a three‑year wait.
As
that board is constituted, the Research branch will provide the information
that is requested, will staff that committee.
I know from the last time we went through this process, there is a fair
body of literature actually that may be of interest to the member on the
effects of how one determines the minimum wage.
I know there was an experiment in
If
memory serves me correctly, because I have read parts of that report or at
least a review of that report, there were some effects that were unexpected at
the time in terms of ending up with a minimum wage that ended up in the loss of
more jobs and the purpose that it was serving.
So I am sure if one examines the issue, you will find that there is a
balance to be maintained. We may in fact
err from time to time on exactly where that balance is or the best way to
obtain it, but I know that there is a fair body of that material and if the
member would like access to it, I am sure that our staff can provide you with
some of that material that is traditionally always available there to boards on
considering this issue.
Ms. Friesen: The issue that I want to raise is the
relationship of the minimum wage to the poverty line, the percentage of the
poverty line that the minimum wage represents.
That, I think, is what has been declining in
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chairperson, I note the point with
respect to the number of people working at minimum wage levels. It is about two‑thirds I am advised by
my staff, but the point is still taken.
It is a significant number of women who are in that area.
One
factor that has to come into play, of course, is the‑‑and I
recognize it is a very complex area because one is balancing‑‑by
doing away with the differential, we have obviously brought that down
somewhat. How much, I am not sure, but
brought our ranking down somewhat for fear of losing positions for particularly
high school students, because that is the minimum. Perhaps there is an argument
to look at a pre‑18 minimum wage.
I do not know if one can do it.
There are a lot of pros and cons to it, but
that has certainly affected the minimum wage rate in
The
member raises the issue of the poverty line.
I have to say I certainly appreciate her comments with respect to the
inner city of Winnipeg and other parts of the province where the cost of living
certainly would be somewhat higher because of urban life as compared to some
areas where there is a greater ability to earn nonmonetary income, whether it
be a garden‑‑just a simple issue‑‑or other ways to
supplement one's income and how the minimum wage affects the family earning,
having only that source of income. It is
certainly a difficult issue to deal with.
The
issue though of a poverty line is one where there is some room for
examination. I know our national
statistics include within what is the poverty line a host of things, a host of
costs that may not be reflective of the true cost of living in, say, a province
like Manitoba or may include items that we may debate as to whether or not they
should be done in that calculation.
I
think her point is a valid one that one has to take into account many of those
issues and that will be part of what the Minimum Wage Board does do, and,
again, trying to balance employment with what that minimum wage should be, and
making the recommendations to government.
We did accept last time the majority report of the board.
* (2120)
Ms. Friesen: Can the minister tell us what proportion of
the
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chairperson, I cannot provide the exact
comparison to the member for Wolseley.
Data collection is the problem here.
I
understand from our staff that in 1988 there was a labour force special survey
in Manitoba that determined approximately 6 percent of wage earners were at the
minimum wage level. The majority of
those, a significant majority I understand‑‑I do not have the exact
breakdown‑‑but certainly the majority were people who were either
students in school or had left school or were just out of high school. So they were the younger age people. Another
2 to 3 percent approximately of the labour force were near the minimum
wage. So again one has to look at what
you are talking about in the labour force.
That would include all students who have some sort of employment.
The
staff advise me that there has not been, to their knowledge, another study with
the same data. From their sense of the
issue in some of the discussions that they have had, they feel that has not
changed very much since 1988. I would
imagine it is fairly significant across the country, or fairly similar across
the country.
Madam Chairperson: Item 2.(a) Management Services (1) Salaries
$1,241,000‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $343,600‑‑pass.
2.(b) Mechanical and Engineering (1) Salaries
$1,602,000.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Chairperson, I would like to ask the
minister, and I believe this would be the line here, if he could give us some
sort of an indication in terms of the building code and what stage the
government is at.
Mr. Praznik: The member for
We
had advisory boards for literally each one of those codes. The problem of course is they interwind in
the construction of the building, so what we did in the last year and a half or
so was reconstitute those boards into a building standards board with various
subcommittees for the specialties, but one body to deal with the appropriate
codes. They all deal with a building and
we did not want to have things that were contradictory in each code, so we had
to reconstitute our building advisory boards.
When I received the recommendations from the
national committee‑‑there is a whole process in developing these
things in which one goes through the provincial committees up to the national
committees, recommendations are made, they come back to the provincial
level. At the time they were coming back
to us, we were reconstituting our committee, so we put the codes to our new
building standards board for their speedy review. Then they had to come to me as minister to
take forward to cabinet committee and then to cabinet.
I
do not know if we have copies of them here.
If the member were to see the copies of the codes, the recommendations
are very intricate and very involved.
Perhaps someday the member for Inkster will have the opportunity to work
in the cabinet process, but to take the codes forward with a host of minute
recommendations and ask colleagues to pass them holus‑bolus without
reviewing them is, in any kind of cabinet that pays attention to what it is
doing, almost an impossible feat.
So
what I had to do is take the codes to cabinet committee with representatives of
the Building Standards Board to explain the recommendations that were being
sought. We had some very legitimate
questions as a cabinet on specific items.
More information had to be sought and then finally‑‑and
appreciate the length and size of some of these sets of amendments. So it took a fair length of time to establish
a comfort level with those of us who have the responsibility to adopt them into
law, to gain a comfort level and to finally pass them. Then, of course, they had to go to printing
and be distributed. So they are now in
place, and we are beginning the process.
I look to my staff. We are
beginning the process now for the next round of consideration on the various
codes.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Chairperson, I guess what concerns me
is the fact that there were a number of years, not months but years, before we saw
anything of any worth coming out in terms of recommendations or whatever it
might be. From what I understand, in
1988, I believe that is when the request from the province was to review, to
make submissions, and then it came back to the province, after the submissions
were made, for approval. Now some
provinces had, from what I understand or what I was led to believe‑‑and
the minister will have to excuse me. I
did not expect to be in the Labour Estimates this evening, so I did not get the
opportunity to pull all my files on it.
I
understood that there were some provinces that have had the building codes as
recommended from the federal government in place well over a year and a half
ago. Now we are under the process where
the federal government is once again requesting for input on the current
building codes for the next series of changes that could be implemented in
terms of national standards. I am
wondering if he might want to comment on the whole question of time.
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, the process, first of all, it is
not the federal government per se who has the regulatory responsibility. The National Research Council, which is an
arm of the federal government, co‑ordinates the administration and the
development of a variety of codes on a national basis so that we are not having
vastly different codes across the country. There is a movement on the part of
all of the provinces to try to standardize our codes as much as possible with,
of course, the necessary variances from province to province, particularly
those that are based on climate.
Every five years, the process goes through a
cycle. In 1988, I believe, was the last
time the national committee chaired by the National Research Council came out
with their recommendations for amendments, national amendments to the various
provincial codes. There has never been a
time in that period when we have not had a building code and a fire code and a
plumbing code and an electrical code and our various codes. We have had codes.
What we are talking about is making the
amendments to them recommended by the national committee. The decision to do that ultimately rests with
the Lieutenant‑Governor‑in‑Council in
I
should just put on the record for the member's benefit that the Manitoba
Plumbing Code, in other words the amendments to our code, came into effect on
November 19, 1992, 90 days after being passed and gazetted. The Manitoba Building Code came into force
December 18, 1992, 90 days after being passed and gazetted, and the Manitoba
Plumbing Code came into force March 5, 1993, 90 days after being passed and
gazetted. I think the difference in
times represents the process of taking those codes forward.
* (2130)
I
share with the honourable member the fact that there were some particular
recommendations which I as minister had some difficulty with, needed more
information. There are some of those
amendments we did not accept. It is a
very lengthy process. I do not think one
can expect a minister or a cabinet committee or a cabinet to deal with these
issues in five, 10, 15 or 20 minutes.
They have effects on a host of other things that we wanted more
information on, and we wanted to deal with it in a very extensive way, which we
did. It took longer than I expected.
There are a number of other parts in the
process that took longer than I expect, the review by our Building Standards
Board for one, but we have got those amendments into place and we are now
starting the new process again for amendment.
It will take some time, but I think we are going to be back on a little
bit better schedule. So I was a little
disappointed in the timing, but I do not think, ultimately, that it could have
been helped.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Chairperson, that is at least in part
the reason why I was asking at the beginning about the organizational
charts. I had received a call from an
individual who had indicated some disappointment in terms of these‑‑here
you have one committee that is falling apart, whether it is the chair or
whatever it might be, but the bottom line is that there were some things that
needed to be done and they were not being done.
That is really where the concern comes from.
Hopefully, we see through the Building
Standards committee that the government, that this particular minister, in
terms of the amalgamation of different codes, in hopes that we will be able to
expedite, because now I understand we are in fact under the 1993, because it is
again that fifth year, and they are going to be looking for input on what
impact those changes had.
The
only other question, and again it is more one out of curiosity in terms of the
number of inspectors that the government actually has that go out to do some of
these building inspections, in particular, in the commercial area.
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, just to make a comment to the
member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), there are a lot of very, very good people
who put a great deal of work into the development of recommendations to the
codes. They become very, very
enthusiastic about those recommendations.
I
just say to him, my experience as Labour minister, we ultimately in cabinet and
I as minister have a responsibility to judge those recommendations against the
public interest. Although sometimes people are very enthusiastic about them,
when they come under scrutiny, there are issues and questions that come up in
the public interest point of view that have to be answered. Sometimes people who work on them become very
enthusiastic with the expectation that they will be passed without question
tomorrow because of the work they have done, and one always has to balance
those interests.
So
I appreciate his comment. I know some of
the individuals who served on that have spoken to me and we have discussed
that, but I think our new Building Standards Board will speed this process up
somewhat in dealing with those kinds of questions that we have asked as
ministers, the integration of codes and amendments and how they affect the
overall scheme. By bringing those people
together at the board, I think we will eliminate some of those difficulties in
the future.
The
number of inspectors we have in Mechanical and Engineering‑‑our
staff complement is, I believe, approximately 35 people altogether in the
inspectorate.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Chairperson, can the minister indicate,
is this an increase or decrease in staff years?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, it is the same.
Madam Chairperson: Item 2.(b) Mechanical and Engineering (1)
Salaries $1,602,000‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $432,000‑‑pass.
2.(c) Fire Prevention (1) Salaries $1,768,700.
Mr. Daryl Reid
(Transcona): Madam Chair, I just have a couple of questions
dealing with Fire Prevention, and the minister can probably educate me on this
aspect of his department. I know that
there is, I believe, a member of my own community who is a member of the
minister's staff. Yes, I believe he is
up in the gallery. I thought that maybe
he would be down here and have a chance to answer these questions, because I am
uneducated on that aspect of it. Does
the Fire Commissioner's office deal with aspects relating to the installation
of fire alarms and detection equipment in either public housing facilities or
in facilities such as apartment blocks?
Is that the responsibility of this department?
Mr. Praznik: Yes.
Madam Chair, to my colleague the member for Transcona, if I may
introduce the famous Fire Commissioner for Manitoba, Mr. John Matheson, J.R.
Matheson, who is a constituent of the member for Transcona. I think the member for Transcona will agree,
Mr. Matheson has educated us both well on a lot of these subjects.
(Mr. Ben Sveinson, Acting Chairperson, in the
Chair)
Mr.
Matheson advises, in fact I know this already well as to the question the
member asks, the responsibility for determining the regulation rests with the
Fire Code. The requirements for safety
alarms, fire alarms, smoke detectors, are established by the code, but the
inspection and the enforcement of that rests with the local municipal fire
department.
Mr. Reid: Mr. Acting Chairperson, then the minister's
department is only responsible for the policy aspect of it then, and it is up
to the municipalities to proceed and enforce that. The reason I ask this question is there were
some concerns not that long ago where it was thought that certain apartment
blocks were not upgrading their services, their fire detection equipment within
those apartment blocks, potentially putting the residents of those blocks at
risk.
I
am just wondering what type of an enforcement mechanism we have to protect
people that are living in older structures that do not have the upgraded
equipment. Is there a time frame that is
used to enforce the installation of this protection equipment and detection
equipment, or is that left up to the municipality as well?
Mr. Praznik: Yes, Mr. Acting Chair, very good questions,
certainly important ones to people living in those facilities.
Firstly, the Fire Code is not a retroactive
document. So if the particular building
was meeting code at the time it was constructed, then as long as it continues
to meet the code in force of that day, it is valid. It would be a legal nonconforming use with an
upgraded code.
However, municipalities have the ability to
pass upgrade bylaws. I am advised that
the City of
One
other point I may make to the member is that the Office of the Fire
Commissioner does provide support to fire departments, whether they be the
volunteer fire departments in rural
If
we receive a call from a resident, we will try to accommodate that as best as
possible, either directing it, getting the local fire department involved to do
the inspection. There has even been cases where, I think, we have gone out and
inspected where there has been an unwillingness on behalf of the fire
department to inspect or an inability to inspect.
* (2140)
Mr. Reid: I am sure that the Office of the Fire
Commissioner provides various levels of support services. I believe, if I recall, the supplementary
document, it indicates that there were training programs as well. Could the minister just give me a brief
explanation of the types of training programs that the department would
provide, and who they would be provided for? Would it be the various
municipalities that do not have those skills available to them, say, outside of
the major centres like
Mr. Praznik: Mr. Acting Chair, the member for Transcona
(Mr. Reid) has hit upon my true love in the Department of Labour, the Fire
Commissioner's office. We have a very
intricate system of Mutual Aid support across the province, very unique in
We
have 17 Mutual Aid Districts in southern Manitoba involving virtually all
municipalities that have a fire department, and three in northern Manitoba that
provide support to one another. We
support our local fire departments through those Mutual Aid Districts.
We
have provided up until recently a $10,000 matching training grant to them. That was reduced by $1,000 this year to
$9,000, in which they are able to bring in appropriate training people that we
provide. We also provide training tapes
and other supports where at the Mutual Aid District level they will train the
trainer to then carry it back to the departments within their district.
We
also provide, through the
When one appreciates that most of our
firefighters outside of
Mr. Reid: I know time is short and I do not mean to
belabour the point, I am just trying to educate myself a bit on the aspects of
it. The minister mentioned a fire fund
here that is used for the training of people from the various
municipalities. I know the minister is
anxious to answer these questions, and maybe I am playing right into his hands
by asking these questions, but I would like to know how that fund is arrived
at, where the monies come from and how it is dispersed.
Mr. Praznik: This is probably one of the most wonderful
aspects of the Department of Labour in being able to fund, on an ongoing basis,
support to our fire services. We have a
fire fund in
I
would just point out to the member for Transcona‑‑I think he will
appreciate this comment‑‑the levy was increased at one point to 2
percent to build up a reserve to build the fire college. We have brought it down to 1.25 percent,
because we have a fair amount of dollars there.
We are doing the expansion out of that fund, and we did not have the
need or the call. At the time we did
that, the insurance industry met with me.
They would have wanted that reduced faster and to a lower amount. I put the question to them, if we reduce the
levy would that result in a lower cost on insurance premiums to
Mr. Reid: In the training that the department provides
for the various volunteer firefighting forces around the province, do we also
teach those forces‑‑because they may not always encounter the
similar circumstances that firefighters might find themselves faced or
confronted with in the larger population centres with respect to chemical
blazes or blazes involving dangerous commodities. Do we also provide that level of training,
expertise and education for those volunteer firefighters?
Mr. Praznik: Yes, Mr. Acting Chair, the member has hit
upon a very important part of the area we are now getting into in our training
work for firefighters. We are getting
into more and more the handling of dangerous goods.
I
have attended some training sessions now with the use of propellants on fires,
which is a phenomenon in the U.S., burning rocket fuel, for example, where you
expect a blaze to take so long to burn and it flares up a fast burn where
firefighters could be put at risk, common in arson situations, as I am sure the
member will appreciate.
One
particular area in which we are most proud, and I know our Fire Commissioner
has scribbled a note to remind me of it, was Oakville this year, where our
experience in handling the chemicals in the derailment was the first time in
the world in which these chemicals had to be handled in that type of dangerous
spill situation. Our Fire Commissioner's
office‑‑not only did we supervise that and were very much involved
in that process, we used volunteer firefighters from a number of detachments
which were circulated through the derailment over the weeks that it took place
to give them the experience. But we also
did a video tape of the procedure which is now going to be used for training
purposes, not just in Manitoba, but we hope to be able to market it outside of
our province to other fire departments and other fire services because it was
such a unique process, developed right here in Manitoba by our firefighters.
Mr. Reid: Does the Fire Commissioner's office‑‑this
is my last question. I am not attempting
to filibuster these Estimates. I know the
minister is anxious and almost jumping out of his skin when I ask these
questions. He seems to be quite excited.
Obviously, it is a strong interest of his.
The
minister mentioned arson cases. Does the
Fire Commissioner's office investigate all of the arson cases, or suspected
arson cases, and can he give me an idea of some kind of statistics that would
be associated with the number of cases they would be asked to investigate and
any kind of success rates they might have?
Mr. Praznik: A very, very important part of the training
and the work that we do, in fact part of our ongoing training now for our
firefighters across the province has been in arson investigation, because the
first people on the site of a fire often are firefighters, so we want them to
be cognizant of certain things that may suggest an arson situation for two
reasons. Obviously, one, it helps in
making a case later on for a charge and conviction, but more importantly, it
alerts the firefighters to dangerous flammable, explosive product that may be
used in the arson and be a dangerous situation for them as firefighters, so
there is a dual purpose. We are
expanding our work in that area, to develop that particular training, and it is
an important part of what we do.
I
believe in 1992 we had 383 arson investigations by our staff, of which 15, I
believe, resulted in conviction. The
most interesting number which I do not have today is the number of those
investigations where maybe not enough evidence was collected to result in a
charge, but at the end of the day, no insurance claim was ever filed. So certainly that 1.25 percent levy on
insurance premiums which funds this kind of training and this kind of support
at the end of the day probably pays for itself well.
The Acting Chairperson
(Mr. Sveinson): 2. Labour Programs (c) Fire Prevention (1)
Salaries $1,768,700‑‑pass; (2) Other expenditures $1,329,700‑‑pass.
(d)
Conciliation and Mediation Services (1) Salaries $389,500.
Ms. Friesen: Mr. Acting Chair, I indicated at the
beginning that I wanted to ask the minister about two of the long‑standing
strikes in
Mr. Praznik: Yes, Mr. Acting Chair, to my critics, just on
a House business issue, I understand that before ten o'clock we will have to
seek permission to go back into the House to change, to provide for the ability
to start a new segment of Estimates in here after ten o'clock, so we may want
to do that about five to ten and then come back and resume our discussions on
this department.
I
look to my colleague who will have some discussions.
* (2150)
With respect to the questions from the member
for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) on those two particular labour disputes, both of
them long‑standing, difficult disputes obviously, in the case of Northern
Blower, Chicago Blower as some call it, we have appointed, two weeks ago I
signed the documentation appointing as a mediator Mr. Lou Plantje, so that
particular dispute is into mediation.
I
should point out to the member that whenever we have a long dispute or tough
dispute, a very difficult one, there is a difference between conciliation and
mediation. A practical concern is,
mediation costs the department money in which we bring in an outside party and
pay the bill, often several thousands of dollars. We usually like to have some sign from one of
the two parties that there is a willingness to go into that process.
We
received that kind of signal in the case of the Northern Blower situation, and
I know I had some conversations with some of the parties. We determined that at this particular stage
there now was a willingness. We of
course sought a mediator that would be acceptable to both parties, and Mr. Lou
Plantje was appointed and is currently in mediation. If I am correct, the work of Mr. Plantje, I
do not think it is appropriate that I speak to this time.
In
the case of Trailmobile, I have not yet been in a position to look at that
option, but we certainly want to explore it with the parties as a vehicle to
hopefully resolving that dispute.
I
should point out to the member as well, another long‑standing dispute in
this province has been one between Building Products and the Teamsters
Union. That particular issue has come
back to conciliation.
In
fact, our conciliation officer I believe got both parties back to the
table. They are in very extensive
conciliation at this particular time, and I hope that within the not too
distant future we will be able to have some similar progress with Trailmobile.
Ms. Friesen: Mr. Acting Deputy Chair, can I just follow
some specific questions on that.
Mr.
Plantje has now been appointed the mediator at Northern Blower. Could the minister tell us whether in fact
both parties are at the table now and what the expected date is for a report?
Mr. Praznik: Mr. Acting Deputy Chair, as I am sure the
member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) can appreciate, I must be careful in some of
my comments here because there is a lot of sensitive information, and I would
not want to jeopardize the work of the mediator.
I
understand that discussions have begun with both parties to arrange the
scenario for mediating this dispute, but there were some personal complications
involving one of the parties to do with health.
That is in the process of being dealt with. I do not really want to go into greater detail
at a public forum because it does involve the private health of an individual
involved in the dispute, but the process is underway.
As
to the date for report, I can assure the member for Wolseley that I will
continually extend the date for report as long as there is any hope in
mediating that dispute. So although I do
not want to have it open‑ended, I want to keep the pressure on. That will be amended to suit the
circumstances of the party and the work of the mediator.
Ms. Friesen: Just to clarify then, I understand the
minister is saying that they are not yet at the table.
Mr. Praznik: Yes, that is correct, and that has to do with
the personal health of one of the parties.
Ms. Friesen: Can the minister explain why it has taken it
over a year to come to the process of mediation in this particular instance?
I
am comparing it, for example, to a particular strike situation in the
minister's own riding,
Mr. Praznik: Yes, Mr. Acting Chair, as I have indicated
earlier, one of the practices that I have followed in appointing mediators is
to have some signal of willingness on the part of at least one party that
starts that process.
In
the case of the lockout situation in
(Madam Chairperson in the Chair)
I
should point out to the member that all through these disputes, conciliation
officers are appointed and are working with the parties. If I receive the advice from a conciliation
officer that there is a chance to settle the issue with the mediator, we will
also act on that.
But
I rely as a minister on either that request from one of the two parties or from
my own staff in Conciliation.
Ms. Friesen: Could the minister then give us a sense of
the history of the relationship between the conciliator and the Northern Blower
situation? How many times did they meet? Was there no indication from that conciliator
of any willingness to go to mediation?
Mr. Praznik: Yes, Madam Chair, if I may answer this
question then we can make the appropriate changeover.
My
recollection, there had been several meetings throughout that process, but in
terms of a request to me or advice to me from my Conciliation staff, I did not
have that recommendation to them. But I
say very publicly, when we have these disputes if I have any sign from anywhere
that there is a willingness to go that route, I am prepared to proceed with
haste to accomplish that.
* * *
Mr. Praznik: If I may ask now, with the members'
indulgence, if there is a willingness on the part of this committee to have Mr.
Speaker take the Chair on some House business, particularly to ask if there is
a willingness to waive the rules to allow a new section, if necessary, to begin
in this Chamber after 10 p.m.?
Madam Chairperson: Is there unanimous consent of the House to
interrupt the proceedings of this committee to deal with House business?
(agreed)
* (2200)
IN SESSION
House
Business
Hon. Darren Praznik
(Deputy Government House Leader): Yes,
Madam Deputy Speaker, I would ask if you could please canvass the House to see
if there is a willingness to amend the rules with respect to the Committee of
Supply to allow a second department to start in the Committee of Supply sitting
in the Chamber tonight after 10 p.m.
Madam Deputy Speaker: On a point of clarification, I would ask the
honourable deputy government House leader if it is the intent to continue on
the assumption that that department's Estimates have concluded and to continue
that department's Estimates?
Mr. Praznik: Yes, upon the completion of the Estimates of
the Department of Labour.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Is there leave of the House to permit another
department of Estimates to convene in the Chamber after the conclusion of the
Estimates of the Department of Labour, which therefore would be after 10 p.m.
this evening?
Some Honourable Members: Leave.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Leave has been granted.
LABOUR
(continued)
Madam Chairperson
(Louise Dacquay): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please
reconvene. This section of the Committee
of Supply is dealing with the Estimates for the Department of Labour.
Would the minister's staff please re‑enter
the Chamber?
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): Madam Chair, I wanted to ask the minister
about the situation in
Hon. Darren Praznik
(Minister of Labour): Madam Chair, I have
not heard the use of that term in that context to
If
the member is asking me the question in the broader context, which I believe
she is, of the so‑called continental workweek‑‑and I gather
that leads into the whole issue of Sunday shopping and how it fits in this
province. If that is what her question
is, I must tell her that as a member of this House I have very mixed feelings
about the issue of Sunday shopping and working on Sunday‑‑very,
very mixed feelings about that, as I am sure many members have, many members on
this side of the House, because there are very valid reasons for wanting to
have one day in seven as a common day across our society for families and other
activities. One thing that has happened
on the other hand, of course, is we have had a growth in Sunday business.
Even under our old law in
It
is a very complicated issue in that there are many changing factors of society
in it. I think in many ways you can take
either side and have a very firm argument to be made. I think all of us, whether we support
expanded Sunday shopping legislation or not, maybe believe deep down that our
society has given something up, no doubt, in going to losing that sort of
common day when families and people could have a day off from the routine of
their week.
We,
as a society, may pay a price for that at some time, but there are certainly a
host of factors in our society that have pushed forward that ability or that
desire or that want to shop on Sundays.
Most provinces in
Ms. Friesen: Madam Chair, it was not my intention to get
into the entire Sunday shopping issue at this point. My question was really directed at the
minister and the issue of the requirement to work, the possible requirement of
working seven days a week at regular pay, and whether that had been considered
as a policy issue in the department.
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, the policy considerations that
this department became involved in, and myself as minister, was certainly
advice to the Minister of Industry (Mr. Stefanson), who is the lead minister on
the Sunday shopping legislation. The
advice we gave, which was incorporated into the legislation, was for some
protection of employees not wishing to work on Sundays to be incorporated into
that legislation, which it was.
We
fully recognize there are pressures and difficulties that can be brought to
bear on employees. I fully recognize
that. We are going to have some
difficulties, no doubt, in monitoring and supporting that, and it is a
problem. It is one of those issues that
is not easily dealt with, no matter what one does, because you can have that
same pressure applied in a store that is opening now with less than four
employees on a Sunday.
It
is a delicate one. We would hope, and I
know, as minister, during the trial period, whenever anyone would listen, I
encouraged companies to respect that fully.
Our department has encouraged companies to respect that thoroughly, even
with the pain of prosecution, because given the number of people who are
probably willing to put in those extra hours, it is hard to imagine, other than
someone who would be just wanting to be very stubborn about it, where you could
not find people who would be willing, voluntarily, to work those particular
hours, but there are cases where the member's concern is going to be warranted,
no doubt.
Ms. Friesen: Madam Chair, in this trial period, have there
been any complaints to the Department of Labour? What would be the procedures for a worker who
felt under those kind of pressures?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, to date, I am informed that we
have received no complaints that have been filed through the Employment
Standards branch with respect to this provision. Of course, the worry that I share with the
member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) is that there are people who either are not
aware of their rights or afraid to pursue them, but where we have complaints,
we will certainly investigate, and upon the passage of this legislation, will
have the ability to enter into appropriate prosecutions.
I
say sincerely to the member for Wolseley, as Minister of Labour, in discussions
I have had from major employers in this province who have spoken to me about
the operation of this act, I have said very firmly that not only do they have
to respect it, not only will we prosecute, but it is just bad business,
particularly in a large establishment like a major grocery chain, not to look
for employees who are willing to work those hours voluntarily. It is just bad management and bad business.
So
I am hoping, between good sense and the power given to us under the act and the
willingness of people to come forward if they are in that position, we will be
able to at least reduce the valid concerns the member makes.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, during 1993, as of June 28 of
this year, we have had nine work stoppages, whether they be strikes or
lockouts, going on in the
Mr. Lamoureux: A while has passed now since the repeal of final
offer selection. I am wondering if the
minister can give us some sort of a cross‑comparison of‑‑and
I am more interested in the private sector versus the public sector‑‑in
terms of the private sector, the type of days or strike days lost in those two
time spans, if that is at all possible.
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, I will endeavour, if the member
will permit me, to get that information for him, but there are some distortions
in those statistics. One has to
appreciate that in not all disputes was final offer selection sought after or
would be sought after by the union or the company involved. One of the major time lost, days lost of work
occurred when final offer selection still was an available tool, and that was
the nurses' strike a couple of years ago.
So that will show up in the statistics of days lost during the ability
to use final offer selection.
* (2210)
The
Manitoba Nurses'
So
many of these disputes, although one could argue this particular method would
have perhaps provided a vehicle, that is certainly true.
I
would also point out to the member that one element of our final offer
selection in
There is one particular case, from the history
of that provision, where the company requested the use of FOS when the window
became available. The employees vetoed
its use, went into a strike, and then applied for its use in the secondary window.
I
know during discussion which members had during the repeal process, the
suggestion was thrown out that perhaps FOS could be amended to provide equal
ability to either side to impose it, that if it was such a good tool, that
either labour or management should have the ability to impose it on the
other. That suggestion, regrettably, met
with much disdain from many in the labour movement and its supporters in this
House to make it a dual‑sided tool.
So there were some specific problems with it in
Whether or not it would have been the solution
to these problems, I do not know. There
are many disputes that we have had where the number of days lost did not get to
the point where the window was available, the secondary window once you are
into a work stoppage. So we will provide
what data we have, and we will let the member sort that out as he may, but I
just caution him that there are a lot of different issues that I think have to
be worked through when looking at those statistics.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Chairperson, if the minister could get
those numbers‑‑I am more interested in the commercial union. Mr. Christophe, who I know had used final
offer selection on a number of occasions, but I do believe that there is‑‑and
the minister is fully aware of what the Liberal Party's position was on final
offer selection in the terms of having it going to a review committee that
would have looked at what I am hoping to be able to get out of the Minister of
Labour, and that is some sort of a database established on which we could base
in terms of how successful final offer selection is. Unfortunately, because there are so many
other factors that are out there, all of them have to be taken into account. As I say, I would be especially interested in
hearing in terms of the number of days lost and the unions that are going on
strike now as opposed to when final offer selection‑‑
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, I certainly do not want to get
into the whole debate again on final offer selection today in the Estimates. If the members want to do that, I would be
prepared to do it, but I just point out to the member for Inkster that there is
still‑‑and I have to be careful how I phrase this, because I am on
record as making some comments about a very different environment in the public
sector than in the private. At least in the private sector, there is a very
different dynamic or very important dynamic in reaching agreement.
From my observation and the observations of
those who advise me and my senior staff, the best agreement is one that is
always negotiated and where people have come to an agreement. One of the difficulties with final offer
selection‑‑in fact, one long‑time practitioner in the
province in discussing this issue with me the other day said one of the flaws
in our system was there was not a mediation process that could have brought all
of the issues where there was agreement.
Seal those up and then have a process dealing with the ones for which
there were not agreement, and then you get back to the argument of you are
looking at a whole package or part of a package and how do you make your
compromises and trade‑offs.
So
I would still argue to the member that the best solution is one where the
parties have worked through and put together their agreement, whether that be
on their own with the help of independent advice, a conciliator or a
mediator. If parties agree to put their
issues, mutually agreed, to a third party to settle, I think that is great, but
they have to mutually agree to do it.
Our
Conciliation and Mediation Services, certainly in the experience I have seen in
cases where we have appointed a mediator, they have helped parties work through
the problems that have led to the impasse, which may have nothing to do with
the final agreement that is cast on the table.
Again, my experience in some of these
situations are that things are said, relationships break down, people are not
listening to one another, and those issues a selector is not going to solve,
but if they are not resolved, you are going to have lingering difficulties in
the relationship. So there is more than
just the final agreement that has to be dealt with; there is the relationship
between the parties. Sometimes they
break down over the strangest, funniest, odd reasons and have to be fixed. That has been my experience and the
experience of many of our long‑time experts in labour relations.
I
would also point out to the member that the New Democratic Party government in
Ontario, which has gone through a major change in their labour law, did not
include FOS as one of their tools in their recent reform package, and they
certainly had access to all of the data out of Manitoba and I believe requested
it to be sent to them, the public information.
So I think those who have been in labour relations for a long, long
period of time appreciate some of the difficulties with that and there is no
replacement ultimately in the private sector for the kind of bringing parties
together and working at a host of problems.
Ms. Friesen: Madam Chair, this line of questioning I think
is based upon concern about lost days and lost productivity in
Mr. Praznik: There is no lockout with Bill 22.
Ms. Friesen: Perhaps the minister then would care to put
on record the number of lost days of productivity as a result of Bill 22.
Mr. Praznik: I say to the member for Wolseley, we could
try to endeavour upon a quick calculation of the total number of public service
days lost, but I would suggest, she could have that question put to me in the
Civil Service Estimates, when I have our staff there who have been dealing
specifically with these questions. I see
in the gallery Mr. Gerry Irving from our Labour Relations Division, and I think
he will endeavour to prepare those numbers for that appropriate time. So if the member for Wolseley will wait till
that time, we can give her a more exact number than I could put together for
you today.
Ms. Friesen: Thank you, Madam Chair, I would be delighted
to raise it again.
Madam Chairperson: 2.(d) Conciliation and Mediation Services (1)
Salaries $389,500‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $97,300‑‑pass.
2.(e) Pension Commission (1) Salaries.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Chairperson, just to seek clarification
from the minister with respect to Bill 22 and the impact on the pension it is
going to have, can the minister indicate what the impact will be on the pension
plan?
* (2220)
Mr. Praznik: For the member's information, the Pension
Commission is the governing body. Our
Civil Service Pension Superannuation Fund is one of the pensions that are
governed by the Pension Commission. So
the more specific information I can provide to him during the Estimates of the
Civil Service Commission where we will deal with those specific plans.
In
general, in most plans, the Teachers' Retirement Allowances is somewhat
different because of the nature of the time in which teachers work. But in general, for example, for a civil
servant, if their expected retirement date was, say, January 1, by working an
additional number of days that they have lost in the reduced workweek, they
would make up that time lost to their fund and consequently their pension would
not be, I am advised, affected. That is
one of the reasons we opted for this particular plan was the ability to make up
that particular time on pensions.
Mr. Lamoureux: I know one of the things that is in this
particular line is to protect the rights of individuals that do have pensions,
and that is the primary reason why I had asked at this particular line as
opposed to waiting for the Civil Service.
Madam Chairperson: 2.(e) Pension Commission (1) Salaries
$257,400‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $82,000‑‑pass.
(f)
Pay Equity Bureau (1) Salaries $101,400.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Chairperson, just one question and that
is with reference to a while back, and this is again prior to myself being the
Labour critic, there was concern that was raised about pay equity amongst the
nurses in the health care field. I am
wondering if the minister can give us some sort of indication in terms of what
is being done with that particular piece of legislation that prevented the pay
equity.
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, the difficulty in that
particular area was that The Pay Equity Act, which was passed by this
Legislature prior to 1988 for, I imagine, good and valid reasons, identified
only the largest 23 health care institutions for inclusion under the act. I believe the member for
We
were consequently left with that scenario where we‑‑and so when pay
equity was brought in for health care in the 23 institutions, it was provided
there, negotiated in the next collective agreement for the non‑23
institutions. Where we had a difficulty
was the provision in the act brought in by the member for
So
consequently where we had equality, we had to add an additional step, I think a
fifth step, and for the information of members of the committee, Beth Stitchell
is with us who is in charge with that particular bureau. So we had to add a step in concurrence with
the court decision for the 23 institutions for which the law applied and used
the method suggested in the bill to deal with the other institutions at the
time of the collective agreement. I
understand that was now done, that was part of the funding mandate to Manitoba
Health Organizations, and has been included in the collective agreement with
the Manitoba Nurses'
Madam Chairperson: 2.(f) Pay Equity Bureau (1) Salaries $101,400‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $87,600‑‑pass.
2.(g)
2.(h) Workplace Safety and Health.
Ms. Marianne Cerilli
(Radisson): Madam Chairperson, I am concerned with the
change in policy in this area to move from inspections as a focus to move more
to education. There are a number of
concerns in that area with the number of hours or the time that the staff in
that area are now devoting to inspections.
I would say that education is important, but it should not occur at the
expense of inspections, and I can see from the annual report of the previous
year that there is quite a dramatic decline both in inspections and in
improvement work orders. It seems to be
that there is then going to be less enforcement of Workplace Safety and Health
regulations under the policy. So we
would have some explanation, I hope, of what the rationale was for this kind of
move.
I
would also like some kind of indication of how this change is going to be
evaluated and when that evaluation is going to happen.
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, I can appreciate the member for
Radisson's concern in this area when one looks at the statistics. They suggest the kind of changes that she is
suggesting by way of a question. The
only correction I would make is that there has not been a change in policy to
education from inspection. A very, very
critical change in my opinion at least took place in the last year or so and
that was our ability to gather specific information.
When I became minister in February of 1991 of
the Workers Compensation Board, I had both our staff‑‑Mr. Farrell
was the assistant deputy minister responsible for that area‑‑by the
way Mr. Geoff Bawden, who is the director of this particular branch, has now
joined us. I had these two gentlemen
working with me as well as the Workers Compensation Board, and I asked a very
legitimate question, how do you exchange information? Up until that point there was not the kind of
specific information provided by the Workers Compensation Board to this branch
that they could use in targeting their inspections. So virtually all of our inspections up to
that point had been either complaint‑driven or‑‑just correct
me if I go astray here‑‑at random.
I
think if you go back to the mid‑'80s you will find that we did a lot of
inspections and came up with a host of work orders that were very small work
orders. The one that staff talked about
the most is the literally thousands with respect to fire extinguishers.
Now, you have to remember at that particular
time, the branch was very new. Jay
Cowan, colleague of the member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli), was instrumental in
establishing this branch, bringing in people.
So it was very new, it was feeling itself out, it was getting itself
organized.
After we were able to get these two groups
together and establish the technological link, and I should just add as well,
up to that point, what the Workplace Safety and Health division got was sort of
generic data saying we had so‑many‑thousand back claims. We might get so‑many‑thousand
back claims in a specific industry, but we did not get the specific workplace
where we had those back claims. So our
staff did not have really the data in which to target their work.
Now, we have built a fairly good information
link. We are still working with it. Our technical staff have been perfecting it,
and since we have made that link, we are now able to get specific data on
specific workplaces in the province where we are having the largest number of
claims.
* (2230)
So
our staff is now able to target their inspections into not only complaints, not
only complaint‑driven, and we also still do random inspections, but we
are able to target the bulk of our work into those workplaces that have
problems. So our emphasis has changed
somewhat from just being the sort of the spot checkers out there and being
driven by complaints, but an emphasis to being able now to identify workplaces
that have very significant problems, going in and spending a fair bit of time
with them, and not just writing an order but working with them to solve longer‑term
problems. So our success rate, I think,
is improving. We have to develop
criteria, I think, to establish that, how we are judged, but we are able to be
more effective.
We
are also working in a way to reduce risk.
One of the areas in which our two parties have had a dispute is on the
whole surcharge system under WCB. I think
it is a legitimate dispute. I think there are legitimate concerns on both
sides, but one thing that it did produce was a list of companies in the
In
one area, half of our claims at WCB are ergonomically related. They are strains and sprains. We now brought on staff new Workplace Safety
and Health officers through the re‑employment program who have experience
in industrial design. So we are going to be able to offer more and more
services to actually getting in, working with companies, reduce risk, improve
their operations, and get the number of injuries in the workplace down.
So
although on the surface it appears we may be doing less, in terms of
inspection, we are now getting into where we have bigger problems in trying to
deal with them. I would think that the
member would agree at the end of the day, although we still have to deal with
complaints, we still have to do a spot‑audit function across the
province, because we now have better data than ever before. Because of technological improvements, we are
able to target our work, and I think at the end of the day make a real dent on
reducing accidents and hazards in the workplace.
Ms. Cerilli: Madam Chair, I can appreciate the improvement
to using information from the WCB to conduct inspections, but that does not deal
with the question of the reasons for moving towards emphasizing the time that
inspectors spend focusing more on education.
It says in the explanatory notes on page 44 of last year's annual report
under the improvement orders, the notation is:
"The number of inspections decreased as more of the safety and
health officers' activities were directed to proactive activities with specific
industries, more sophisticated health related investigations and delivery of
education programs to clients."
I
notice that there is an increase in consultations, so there are two questions
there. Are the education activities
shown on this chart? I was assuming that
they were client consultations, but specifically what I was asking before was,
what was the rationale for moving in this direction, and is the minister not
concerned that it is going to take away from the actual enforcement of
Workplace Safety regulations?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, I think it is very important to
make the point that a lot of work that our officers are now doing with specific
firms that have problems are not to just go in and write improvement order
after improvement order, because in many cases, particularly when the problems
are related to erogonomic issues, they may not be in breach of a regulation,
but they still have injured workers, they still have claims at WCB, they still
have a problem.
Our
emphasis has been to work with them on an ongoing basis to improve the safety
and health performance of that worksite. Sometimes that means a lot of
additional training. Sometimes that
means a lot of work with that particular company, with that particular
workplace, a lot of work with the Workplace Safety and Health committees. Sometimes they are a big problem, sometimes
small, but because we now know where we are having accidents, we are having
claims, we are having problems, we are able to target our people and go in and
invest the time in that particular operation.
So
the approach is somewhat different because of the information base, but the
member may be of the impression that we are out doing seminars here and there
to the general public or general groups.
A lot of the work we are doing in that education training component are
with companies, with worksites, with Workplace Safety and Health committees
that have a problem. So every hour of
time that we can invest in improving that over the long run, we are going to
bring our accident and claim rate down.
I
can appreciate her concern, but I think if one looks at where that time is
being spent, you will see it is being spent, a good deal of it, with places
that have problems in trying to improve that situation.
Ms. Cerilli: The other question I had asked was: Are there plans to evaluate the focus for
this program, for the Workplace Safety and Health programs in this area? Can I have some indication of when there will
be an evaluation and what that will encompass?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, the member raises a very good
point, because I think whenever you are trying to judge the performance of any
branch, you have to have some measure by which you are going to judge to see if
you are achieving your results. From a
fledgling Workplace Safety and Health division in the mid‑80s, really the
only criteria the branch had on which to judge itself were improvement orders
written against the company: Was there a
decline in the number of improvement orders written against a particular
company? That still did not answer the
question as to whether or not you had people being injured.
So,
given our new information base, given our change in our ability to get in and
do deeper work, we needed to change our evaluation system. We are in the process of doing that now, and
the branch has developed a paper to basically provide those kind of objective
standards. I would like to table it
today. Do we have additional
copies? No, okay. I will table it today, and I have one copy
with me, but I will endeavour to have a copy made available to my appropriate
critics. You may want to have a look at
this now.
To
go, as I have indicated, to that kind of standard where we are looking at, have
we reduced the number of injuries in that workplace? We are moving towards that kind of goal, and
time will tell if we are successful. I
think we will be. I think we have seen
some successes already. We still have a
lot of work to do. There is no doubt
about that.
Ms. Cerilli: I am sure the minister would appreciate that
a lot of the problems we are looking at, especially in the changing workplace,
are not just injury related, but they are illness related, which would have to
do with chemicals, and would have to do with heating and lighting and various
things that are more accumulative rather than injury.
I
am not convinced as yet that the approach by moving away from inspections is
going to address those kinds of concerns that we need to have people that
appreciate, that are going to follow up and do the kind of consultation and
education along with the inspections, that the inspections in those areas are
particularly important, especially as we move into, unfortunately, workplaces
using more and more chemicals, often chemicals that are not even tested before
they are introduced into workplaces.
So
it looks like the minister may have some comments on that. I was going to also ask, are the client
consultations the kind of education that this department is now focusing more
on, or are there other kinds of programs?
I had raised questions in the House about the workshops or seminars that
have been offered in the department that now charge fees, that where now there
are fees charged. I was going to ask,
with the client consultations, how are these consultations initiated?
* (2240)
Mr. Praznik: The member asks a host of questions, and I am
going to try to sort through them as best as I am able to do.
Firstly, let me just indicate that several of
the areas she has addressed in terms of long‑term cumulative effect of
chemicals, lighting, a host of things in the workplace, we do have WHMAS, for
example, the Workplace Hazardous Information Materials System developed
nationally that plays a role in that. We have spent a great deal of time on
implementing and bringing the workplaces of Manitoba up to snuff in that
particular area with I think a fair bit of success.
What we have done, is our department has a
chief occupational medical officer, Dr. Theodore Redekop. We also have a number of occupational
hygienists, and they are working on an initiative currently to deal with many
of these long‑term issues, working across the province with workplaces as
our information base grows, making people aware of these difficulties and
trying to address them as best we are able.
We
also work fairly closely with the Manitoba Federation of Labour Occupational
Health Centre which is an excellent facility.
We have a close working relationship with them. But our Occupational Health services
currently is targeting a lot of high‑risk industries, particularly lead
in radiator shops, for example, silocosis in mines, and general occupational
health issues.
As
I indicated in my initial statement, we are in the process of establishing an
Occupational Health nurse, I believe, who will be working with a lot of smaller
employers, primarily like radiator shops and things and a limited number of
employees who can develop the expertise to go in to deal with these types of
issues.
So
we are identifying industries. We are
identifying the types of industries and workplaces where we see some of these
long‑term health problems today, and systematically working through the
province with our staff to be able to ensure that we are minimizing or
eliminating those types of risks. So I
share that concern, a very valid one, and we are very fortunate to have some
excellent people. I know in the area of
occupational hygienists, they are like literally hen's teeth to recruit. I keep trying to literally steal some from
the Manitoba Federation of Labour Occupational Health Centre. We had a number of postings in this
department that we, quite frankly, were not able to fill after advertising
nationally for them. So the ones we do
have we try to hang on to. They work
very well, they are excellent, and it is certainly an expanding field.
With that kind of support, we are trying to
address many of those long‑term issues that the member raises.
Madam Chairperson: Item 2.(h) Workplace Safety and Health (1)
Salaries $2,893,600.
Ms. Cerilli: Dealing with the other part of the question,
how are the client consultations initiated?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, my apologies to the member. Again, a long question and a lot to answer.
About 60 percent of our inquiries or our
consultations are initiated from the employee side, either through individuals
or through Workplace Safety and Health committees who want us to come in and
provide specific information or advice or assistance in solving a problem or
identifying a problem.
The
remainder is often initiated by the employer side, many of them as a result of
us identifying that they are a worksite that has a very above‑average claim
rate at WCB and they have a problem.
That is pointed out to them, and the request that, okay, come in and
help us solve the problem and identify it.
So it is about 60‑65 percent employee‑union initiated, about
one‑third employer initiated.
Ms. Cerilli: The minister mentioned the lack or the
shortage of occupational hygienists, and it has been suggested to me that there
is an opportunity here for employment creation.
I do not know if
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, I know a year or so ago I had a
meeting with the association, here in
There probably would not be enough demand to
justify establishing necessarily a faculty or school. That is one of the problems in a province
with only a million people, but we certainly are encouraging this particular
profession. As minister, I would think
that over the next couple of decades, it is certainly going to be a growth area
in the medical profession.
We
are very encouraging of it, whatever we can do to provide the experience. I know some of our training programs in the
department that many avail themselves of, particularly those with prior medical
training, nursing for example, assist in developing that body of knowledge
which would allow them to be occupational hygienists.
So
we help in the ways that we can, and certainly at some point it would be nice
to have a school in
Ms. Cerilli: I have had a few specific worksites brought
to my attention that might require an inspection. I would just ask for three of them here, if
the minister can tell me if they have had inspection, when the most recent
inspection was. First would be
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, I do not have the specific
information, as I am sure the member can appreciate, on those specific
worksites. We will endeavour to get that
information for the member. But I can
tell the member just with respect to those types of operations, both Palliser
Furniture and Abitibi‑Price have approached the department or been part
of the development of our ergonomics program, because again this is one area
that we have identified through our statistics where there is a problem on both
sites, so they are working with our department in developing that now.
I
know from personal experience that Abitibi‑Price, the mill operation and
the woodlands operation, have been very much involved in working with this
department on regular safety issues. I
know the woodlands division won a major safety award and was recommended
jointly by the union and the company.
The mill still has some way to go towards achieving that kind of award,
but there has been a fair bit of work done by those operations with the unions
there to improve safety.
* (2250)
In
fact, in our whole forestry industry back some years ago, if I remember
correctly, Manfor, as it was then known when it was owned by the
In
the area of
For
example, is a teacher a worker or an employer?
In relationship to the administration, they are a worker. In relationship to the students, what are
they? How does the act apply to those
various relationships? Who is
representing the student, in essence, in Workplace Safety and Health
committees?
So
there is a desire to look at that, and I have charged the Workplace Safety and
Health committee currently to look at those issues from the perspective not of
weakening the application of safety and health legislation to schools, but
certainly from an administrative point of view.
I
know that members opposite may find that a little amusing on the role of the
teacher, but certainly it is a very valid concern. Where do they fit in in that process in their
authority relationships?
So
we are looking at revising somewhat our act specifically with relationship to
schools. If recommendations come forward
that are reasonable and make sense, there may be some amendments forthcoming. I look to the member for Wolseley. That may be one area which I omitted in her
question about legislation, but that would only be if we could arrive at some
recommendation that would make sense administratively.
So
we will endeavour to get the member for Radisson the specifics on last
inspections.
Ms. Cerilli: I do not want to belabour this too much, but
I understood from looking through the act that both teachers and students were
workers under the Workplace Safety and Health legislation. I think that that makes sense to me anyway
from my limited experience.
The
reason I was asking about
The
minister mentioned that there was a protocol for indoor air quality. I would like some explanation of what other
activities the department is undertaking in this area.
Mr. Praznik: Firstly, with respect to the worker teacher,
yes, the act does define both as workers, but there are different relationships
there that it is easy to make that definition that often break down. Those were questions that were legitimately
raised. I asked the Workplace Safety and
Health committee to review the issue and make recommendations to me.
With respect to sick buildings and sick
building syndrome, there is no doubt that we have many buildings in which
people work where at either entirely or at various times during the course of
the day or week or year, there are a host of problems created by the air
exchange system and heating system, fumes that are brought in that make them
difficult places in which to live or work.
Our
department, as I have indicated, has developed, along with the appropriate
officials in
So
we do not maintain a specific inventory, but there are cases where we have been
asked to investigate. I understand that
we have made recommendations in many cases to improve the air quality of a
variety of buildings, and we will continue to do that. I would actually invite the member for
Radisson (Ms. Cerilli), because this is an area that gets into a fair bit of
technical information, I would extend the invitation to her and the member for
So
I make the offer. I hope she would
accept it.
Ms. Cerilli: Madam Chair, I feel like I am trying to rush
along here, but I want to also ask in a similar vein if the Workplace Safety
and Health division or other areas under the responsibility of the minister
recognize environmental illness or chemical sensitivity syndrome as illnesses?
Mr. Praznik: Yes, Madam Chair, this is a particular area
where our chief occupational medical officer and our occupational hygienist
have been doing some work, and the branch advises me that they recognize, first
of all, very clearly there are a host of chemicals that they refer to as
sensitizers which can induce allergies or other reactions. In areas where we have been able to clearly
identify those, and the literature and the material identifies the problem, we
have been attempting to address it.
One
example that my staff advises me of is in the case of body shops where spray
paint is being applied. There are
certain chemicals that can be used in those processes that can result in that
reaction on the part of the people working around it. We have been working to awareness and
eliminating that risk with the use of other chemicals, et cetera, in making
people aware of those problems.
If
the member is referring to some of the larger issues, because there is a whole
body of reactions, and I am somewhat familiar, not in any technical way, but
somewhat familiar with those kind of cases that come into the Workers
Compensation Board, for example, that are hard to explain. As our body of knowledge is expanding as to
the effect of various chemicals on the human body, we are certainly aware of
those particular areas, that growth of medical knowledge, and will be wanting
to, from a Workers Compensation Board perspective and Workplace Safety and
Health perspective, be following that body of knowledge as it grows worldwide
to address those particular chemicals when they are in the worksite and to deal
with and recognize those places where we have claims for illness as a result of
exposure to them.
Currently, many are difficult to prove now,
and that is part of the problem and part of the frustration on the part of the
claimant. So the more knowledge that we
can gather, the better it is to deal with those people who have become ill
because of those chemicals. So I
appreciate her concern, and it is one we are trying to address as best we can.
* (2300)
Ms. Cerilli: It is good that there is expertise in the department
dealing with that area. I will follow up
on that later. I just want to deal with
another area that the minister referenced in his remarks, and that is the
regulations for Workplace Safety and Health committees. This has been an area of considerable concern
for a number of people, and I have asked questions before about the slow
enforcement of these regulations that would do so much to empower and develop
Workplace Safety and Health committees.
I
will start off with just the general question, if the minister wants to update
the committee as to the status of the regulations, when we are going to see
these enforced, and some explanation of what has been happening to create the
kind of amendments that we have seen. I
have the draft with me that shows the kind of changes that the department is
proposing.
I
have a number of specific questions. I
do not know if we will be able to get into those, but some of them just seem to
be actually weakening the powers of these committees and weakening the onus on
the department's requirement to act. So
I think there are a number of concerns in this area.
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, I am not sure which draft the
member for Radisson is working with, because I know there are a number floating
around from members of the advisory committee.
I am assuming what she is working with are the verbatim recommendations
of the committee as opposed to a legal text that the Department of Justice
would have. Not that that really matters
all that much, but I just would caution the member, there is lots of
information floating around.
First of all, there are three regulations that
have come forward from the committee.
The member is right in that they have taken a long time to come forward. The particular reg of which she speaks, the
Workplace Safety and Health reg, has been in process, actually been worked on
by the committee, I am advised, since about 1980, '82. So it has been around for a long time, as the
member can appreciate. So I bear some
responsibility with respect to it, but certainly there are lots of other
ministers of different governments as well that have to accept some of that
responsibility.
I
want to deal firstly with the other two regulations that have come
forward. One, of course, is the hearing
conservation and noise control regulation.
When this came forward to me about the same time, as part of this
package, I had a difficulty with it. I
share that with the members. Three came
together as a package, and I just want to deal with them. I had some difficulty because the language of
the regulation was virtually impossible for the layperson to deal with. So I asked it if could be reworked and
updated into laypersons' language, which is being done and, I am advised,
should be completed by the Department of Justice this fall.
The
first aid regulation was also another one that needs some additional work, and
we are, again, with the Department of Justice as it is being put in final form.
The
committee reg, and that is the one the member is most interested in, presented
a problem because of the way it was in fact put forward. The member talked about weakening the role of
the department in relation to the committee.
Yes, in terms of the initial proposal that was made by the committee,
but no in terms of the current operation of the committee. What the initial recommendation did was
require if a matter stayed, I believe, on an agenda of a Workplace Safety and
Health committee for three meetings, I believe it was‑‑two or three
meetings‑‑then by law, our department would have to send in an
officer to deal with the issue.
Well, that sounds okay on the surface of it,
but what that could do is, you could have a relatively minor issue. I do not mean to deprecate in any way from
the importance of these issues, but we have to, the department has to be able
to prioritize where it puts its effort.
So you could have a relatively minor issue under that regulation require
a member of the department to go out and deal with it when there could be more
important matters, quite frankly, on a priority list that have to be dealt
with. So our staff, our management in
that department, had some difficulty with this reg in essence dictating the
priority with which they had to deal with matters. I think that is a legitimate concern.
I
raised that with the Manitoba Federation of Labour Occupational Safety and
Health Committee when I met with them last fall, and they acknowledged that,
yes, that was a problem, that was not their intent. When we got down to brass tacks, their
concern was, at least my recollection of it, if a matter remained on an agenda
for a Workplace Safety and Health committee for a length of time, they wanted
an ability to force the issue to resolution by having the ability to go to the
Labour Board. There was also a bit of a problem from my department's point of
view. They did not want to necessarily
be the party that was involved in mediating in a dispute at the committee. I do not think it is fair to ask them to do
that.
If
it is a major issue that contravenes a regulation, we will inspect anyway, we
will answer a complaint anyway. We will
deal with it. So we are not necessarily
talking about issues where there is a violation, we are talking about
nonviolation issues‑‑just to separate that because I think it is
important to understand that. We talked
about developing the reg that actually took out the step of that officer, which
really met the concerns, the administrative concerns. They said, yes, that is really what we want
to do. So we went about drafting another
set of recommendations. They went to the
Department of Justice. The Department of
Justice reviewed them. I am being quite
frank with the minister. The opinion we
now get back from the Department of Justice is we do not have the authority
under the statute to create that avenue of appeal.
The
member's reaction was mine, when I learned this. What? We have worked on this for all these
years, and now you tell us that we do not have the statutory authority to
create that avenue of appeal? That was
exactly my feeling about it.
But
this is what we were advised by the Department of Justice, and one can
appreciate that if it is ultra vires the statute, then passing that regulation
is going to be thrown out the first time it is challenged, and it inevitably
will be challenged.
So
now the Workplace Safety and Health advisory committee has to struggle with
this issue, and it may result in a recommendation to amend the act to provide
the authority to do it, but I say this sincerely to the member, it is not for
lack of‑‑I as minister have not wanted to hold this regulation
up. I have no interest in doing
that. I think it raises a valid point,
but there has been a host of issues that have come up in dealing with it that
have to be sorted out, quite frankly that are beyond our control.
One
thing I have learned out of this‑‑and our department has I think
bemused this problem over the years‑‑is we have to change somewhat
our process at the Workplace Safety and Health advisory committee. We have to involve the Department of Justice
much earlier in the process. We all
learn by these things.
Quite frankly, to my astonishment, no one over
there has involved them in the process.
Traditionally, the process that evolved did not involve Justice until
the final end of it. So it is great to
develop a regulation. It is great to
deal with an issue, but if you find out at the end of the day you do not have
the authority to pass the regulation, it is all for naught.
So
we are consequently now looking at how we can change our process at the
Workplace Safety and Health advisory committee to make sure we are dealing with
Justice early in the process.
So
yes, there is a concern. Yes, we have a
bit of a mess here. Yes, we have to sort
it out in the next while. It is my
intention to do that, but I think the member would agree it is one of those
things that happens in the process. A
lot of good work has gone into this. We
do not want to have that lost. We just
have to figure out how we take it from here.
Ms. Cerilli: Well, the number of changes that have come
forward from the department seem to go beyond the kinds of concerns that the
minister has just explained, such things as changing "shall" to
"may," which is one of the concerns, but then, specifically, one
section that strikes me is Section 12(5)(d) which seems to enable the Safety
and Health officer to actually do nothing.
There are a couple of other sections similar
to that which seem, as I said before, to take away the responsibility of the department
or the incumbency on the department to act.
I would ask, is that the section the minister was referring to?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, I am not quite sure what the
member is referring to. I think what she
is talking about is how the Workplace Safety and Health Branch becomes involved
in the process.
The
original proposal was if a matter was unresolved after three meetings, a
department official would have to come out and, in essence, try to mediate the
dispute or deal with the particular issue.
They would have to do that under the authority of that regulation. If they could not resolve it, it would then
go to the Labour Board.
* (2310)
It
comes back to the administrative issue that I was discussing with the member,
and that is, it interfered or could interfere significantly with the ability of
staff in the department to prioritize where they put their efforts because,
again, we are not dealing with violations of regulation in this case. We are dealing with other issues, and there
may be other matters that are, in the opinion of the staff, of greater
priority, but yet they would have to, under the original draft, deal with this
particular issue even if it was a very minor matter that just had been as a
matter of course on the agenda for three meetings. So that was a problem.
The
second concern on the part of our staff was they did not want to be the
mediators, did not feel it was appropriate to be the mediators between disputes
on this board. So when I met with the
MFL, the impression I got from the Labour caucus in the committee, their main
concern was not so much the involvement of the Workplace Safety and Health
officer in the process. They had put the
Workplace Safety and Health officer in as a first step, but what they were
concerned about was the end of the process, which is the ability to go the
Labour Board to settle this issue, a power they do not currently have.
So
when we discussed that with them, the answer was simple: take out the
department as a necessary step to get to the Labour Board. If we could solve the problem we would, but
if it was not one where we should be, for whatever reason, then the committee
could go directly to the Labour Board, which is what I think Labour intended this
to do. So we went ahead. We drafted accordingly, and then Justice
advised us that that end‑step, which is really the goal I think of the
Labour caucus on the committee was, in fact, ultra vires the statute. So I thought I had it resolved, and it turned
out I did not.
Ms. Cerilli: One of the other issues that has been raised
with me is that inspectors are not at all times having a worker representative
go with them when they do their inspections.
That is something, as I understood it, that is required. Does the minister have any comments in that
regard? Would there be some redoubling
of effort to make sure that that regulation is followed and that worker
representatives are involved in the actual inspection with the inspector?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, I recognize very fully that this
is an important issue with labour, and the member is right. I am advised by staff that it is our policy
to conduct those inspections with a worker representative. If there are cases where that is not
happening, I would very much appreciate if they were brought to the attention
of our department, and we will pursue them.
Ms. Cerilli: One of the other concerns is with the
confidentiality that is afforded a worker when they make a report or a request
for an inspection. I have one letter from
an individual who‑‑it is obvious that somehow the information was
disclosed, and they ended up losing their job.
So again, I would ask if there is a policy that requires that there is
protection for the worker that requests an inspection?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, this is a concern I share very
much sincerely with the member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli). I myself have had calls at home from people
in specific worksites who have raised problems, and I have asked staff, without
revealing names, to do an inspection, to go in and check out those areas. I know how sensitive that can be, because
there are workplaces in this province where that is viewed as an affront and
reasons are found to get rid of the staff.
The
comment I can make, and this is always the difficult part of it, is if someone
figures out who made a complaint and decides to get that person fired and can
find grounds to do it and all of those kinds of things, you are getting into a
realm that is very difficult to find redress, particularly if they are let go
for legitimate reasons in the process.
We
tried very, very hard, me as minister, my senior staff and particularly our
officers, to maintain as much confidentiality as we possibly can. For the system to work, that has to happen,
but again, there are going to be circumstances where given the size of
workplaces and individuals, et cetera, I am sure there are people who have lost
jobs who have not even complained but have been suspected of that, and they
have lost jobs for‑‑and I put in quotations‑‑legitimate
reasons that have not allowed for proper redress.
So
I appreciate that concern, how we deal with that, and human nature being what
it is, I do not know, but we are very cautious about that, and I share that
concern with the member, and I know I can tell her that I have had cases where
I have had to ask for inspections and we have done them with as great respect
for confidentiality as possible. For the
system to work, that has to happen, so we continually struggle with that.
Ms. Cerilli: I have a report that was prepared by the
Department of Sociology at the
Mr. Praznik: Yes, Madam Chair. My director of the department vaguely
remembers the report. I think it was out
a year ago, and if the member will indulge my staff, we would be prepared to
give her a response to that or our response to the report in a week or so, if
we could have some time to go back for information. My staff who have read the report and dealt
with it‑‑quite frankly, they deal with quite a few reports‑‑do
not have the specific information the member is requesting. We will endeavour to get it for her.
Ms. Cerilli: It raises a number of serious questions,
particularly concerning the disproportionate reporting of illnesses and
accidents between men and women, showing that men are much more likely to
report, and that is something that is of concern. But I would just ask that the department make
a commitment to not only do a review and supply me with that, but that they
would outline what kind of action they are going to take based on this report.
There is one final question I will ask
regarding regulating of hazardous substances.
There is, I think, the awareness to move away from just monitoring
levels of hazardous substances to developing an emphasis on prevention and
developing some kind of procedures that are going to be regulated to ensure
better prevention of problems with hazardous substances. I would just ask the minister if it is a
policy of the government that would agree with that‑‑that it is the
direction that we should be moving in terms of hazardous substances, and what
is the department doing to fulfill that.
Mr. Praznik: I appreciate the request of the member for
Radisson. It is more than just how do we
handle this now and the responsibility under our Workplace Health Hazard
Regulations putting an emphasis on employers and monitoring that. I think the member recognizes in her question
the importance of continually being at the forefront of knowledge on chemicals
and their toxicity and their hazard in the workplace.
Through Dr. Redekop, our chief occupational
medical officer, through people in the department, we continually want to be
part of the development and the gaining of that knowledge. We work with a number of national organizations
now to keep our knowledge base as current as is possible.
* (2320)
We
are committed to that, as is the member, and obviously there is still and will
always be a great deal of work to do in this area. That is why I am very pleased that we at least
have an occupational medical officer and hygienist on staff who can deal with
this kind of information and plug us into that network and make the kind of
recommendations that ultimately have to be made.
Madam Chairperson: 2.(h) Workplace Safety and Health (1)
Salaries $2,893,600‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $981,900‑‑pass.
2.(j) Worker Advisor Office.
Mr. Daryl Reid
(Transcona): I have a few questions
on the Worker Advisor. I will try to run
through them fairly quickly if at all possible.
I had
written to the minister recently with respect to the Worker Advisor Office
because some concerns had been raised through my office by claimants that the
Worker Advisor staff was being changed around with short or no notice to
claimants, who found themselves having to face an appeal within a day or so and
then having their advisor switched on them.
The
minister did respond to me just as of June 24 saying that the problems have
been ironed out. I would like to find
out how they have been ironed out. Maybe
the minister can indicate if there were vacancies that had existed in the
Worker Advisor Office. If so, how many,
and was it a changeover in staff, staff quitting or reassigned? What were the reasons?
Mr. Praznik: Yes, I very much appreciate this question and
the concern the member raises, because I am not surprised at all he has had
complaints. We have had complaints. We had a very rough year in this branch. We had a turnover of some three, four, five
staff I believe in the course of the year.
We had to recruit new staff to fill those positions.
As
I am sure the member can appreciate, a Worker Advisor Office is a very
demanding job. It is, as the member I am
sure knows from his homework on Workers Compensation, if one's hair is not gray
when you start, it gets gray very quickly.
The same is true of those officers.
The
work there is difficult and leads to a fairly high turnover. The difficulty, of course, if you have a
block leave in one year, a number of people leave in one year, is recruiting
new staff and training them and bringing them up to speed so that they are able
to operate fairly effectively.
I
am pleased to say that despite the vacancies we have managed to recruit, we now
have two people who are lawyers by profession on staff, which I think augments
the whole operation of that particular branch, the professionalism of that
particular branch.
There was another very significant
change. Within the context of some
reorganization within the department, the member should be aware that the
manager of that branch, Mr. Harvey Miller, left early in the year, summer or
last fall, to take up a new position as director of the Apprenticeship and
Training branch, which was then in the Department of Labour. Consequently, we
had an acting director who then had to struggle with all of these vacancies.
We
now have in place a manager of that office, one of our very experienced
managerial staff in the department, and due to restructuring, Mr. Jim
McFarlane, who joins us today, who is also in charge of the Employment
Standards branch, also now has ultimate responsibility for the Worker Advisor
Office.
When Jim took over that particular branch, we
had a six‑month wait for a worker advisor, which is totally unacceptable‑‑totally
unacceptable. I have to give Mr.
McFarlane full credit. He and the new
manager did a survey of similar operations across
Part of it also, and I am sure the member will
understand this, is helping people help themselves to some degree, because as
the member well knows, often a piece of information may be missing in a claim,
a doctor's report, et cetera, and if one expects the worker advisor to handle
every piece of paper flow, it can bog people down very quickly.
So
there has been a bit of a change in emphasis in working with people to help
them help themselves in the process, in essence, by saying, for example, listen,
you need that doctor's report. You go
and hound the doctor to get the report in, instead of me calling all the
time. So it gives people some
involvement in their file and, consequently, allows us to handle more workload.
So
with those kinds of changes, the staffing complement, the new staff coming up
to full ability, I think we are down to an acceptable level.
Mr. Reid: Well, I appreciate when the minister says he
has his complement of staff there now. There
were some serious problems with the Worker Advisor Office with respect to their
caseload and what they were required to handle as far as claimants' cases were
concerned.
Can
the minister give me an idea of the total number of active worker advisors who
are there, if that is the full complement, and can he give me an indication of
what their caseload would be?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, one correction I would like to
make is we have nine officers currently, and we have a secondment coming from
the Civil Service Commission beginning in September. So we have in place arrangements for our full
staff load of ten worker advisors, one to come and join us in September. We also have two support staff.
The
caseload now is averaging about 85, and that would include from the most
complicated case where the worker advisor is advocating on behalf of the
individual at the Appeal Commission to the case where a file has been opened to
provide some advice and direction and assessment of a particular decision.
Mr. Reid: The minister makes references to varying
degrees of difficulty of the cases. Can
he give me an indication on whether or not a caseload of 85, as he has just
indicated, is considered reasonable?
What would be an acceptable work level for a worker advisor?
Mr. Praznik: Yes, Madam Chair, I am advised that the
Mr. Reid: The minister neatly skated around the answer
to that question by pawning it off onto other jurisdictions again. He has become somewhat of a master at that.
What my question was, what he would consider
to be a reasonable caseload, considering‑‑because it is my
understanding in talking with some of the advisors that they are up to the top
of their heads with work assignments in there, that they are having difficulty
keeping up with even the more modest cases themselves, and that they feel in
their own estimations that they are having difficulty doing justice to all of
the claimants that come to them for assistance.
That is why I asked the minister what would be
considered a reasonable level so we could provide a top quality level of
service to claimants that require that.
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, I did not in any way mean to
skate around the issue. My apologies to
the member for Transcona. Asking the minister what is the correct caseload is
like asking what is the correct amount of rain we should get. It varies on so many circumstances.
I
appreciate that many of the staff in that department have had a very difficult
time of it over the past year, and I am not quite sure when the member would
have talked to staff most recently. I
think the situation has improved‑‑
An Honourable Member: Three weeks ago.
* (2330)
Mr. Praznik: Three weeks ago, yes. The situation is improving almost weekly, and
as Mr. McFarlane advises me, with our new manager in place, with the coming on
board of an additional staffperson in September, and of course with the
increased efficiency of our new people as they gain experience in the system, I
think you will see steady improvement and a greater comfort level on the part
of our staff over the next number of months.
Mr. Reid: I hope that is the case and the people who
perform the services, the minister's own staff who are obviously doing a good
job, trying to do their best‑‑and I have great respect for the
people who are performing these services on behalf of the people of the
province. It is a difficult task that
they are undertaking, and I am sure that they are trying their best. I know in my dealings with the Worker Advisor
Office, they have been very, very co‑operative in providing a level of
support.
Can
the minister give me an indication‑‑because there are, I believe,
three Worker Advisor Offices in the province, if I am not mistaken,
Mr. Praznik: Yes, Madam Chair, the
Mr. Reid: It is obvious by the population for the city
of
My
concern here is Thompson, which is obviously a heavy industrialized centre for
our province, being that it is more or less the heart of the mining industry
for this province and for the North, as well.
Can
the minister tell me the number of injuries that his records would show through
the Worker Advisor Office? How many
injuries would occur in the major centres that would have to be dealt with by
worker advisors? Can he also give me an
indication why we do not have a Worker Advisor Office in Thompson, which is a
major heavy industrialized centre for our province?
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, one is able to sleep easy at
night when you have good administration managing a branch. Mr. McFarlane advises me that in terms of caseload‑‑first
of all, our officer in The Pas also spends time in Thompson and other northern
centres. I understand he has regularly
scheduled time in Thompson. As we do in
the North, often our staff do travel on a regular basis to meet demand in
various centres.
The
caseloads, I am advised, of both our rurally based officers are somewhat lower
than the
The
Mr. Reid: The minister had indicated in discussions
that I had with him that he had seconded the services of someone from the
Worker Advisor Office. Is that also the
case now? Does the minister have someone
who is assisting him with his caseload, the concerns that are brought to his
attention?
Mr. Praznik: It is somewhat correct, or is correct in that
when I became Minister responsible for the Workers Compensation Board, as the
member can appreciate, one is inundated with inquiries from claimants, and also
a host of letters, et cetera, that have to be done, and what I wanted to have
as minister was a somewhat independent source dealing with the claim, not just
get the inquiry answered at the Comp. Board, but somebody from outside the
board, from the Worker Advisor Office, who could say, yes, there is a problem
there, or, no, there is not a problem.
At
that time, Nancy Anderson, who is a barrister and solicitor by trade‑‑they
were not seconded to work directly in my office, but we made arrangements to
second part of that time to deal with ministerial inquiries.
Because of the increased efficiency of my own
staff and their growth of knowledge in handling claims, and also I think a
reduction in the inquiry level at my office, we have not needed that service to
the same degree as we did in the past.
So that also freed up some time.
Mr. Reid: I am not sure if I missed it there or
not. The minister, did he indicate that
there was an individual who was providing the same level of service to him and who
that individual was?
Mr. Praznik: Yes, Madam Chair, I have an individual from
the Workers Compensation Board who handles all of the various inquiries in my
work with the Workers Compensation Board in my office. That is Mr. Scott Ransome. That expertise has developed since he came
into that position.
I
know the member opposite is probably thinking, is that Brian Ransome's
son? The answer is yes, but it is the
Brian Ransome from Teulon, not the one who used to be a member of this House.
(interjection) May have thought it though.
Mr. Thampi from the Free Press thought enough about it to call Mr.
Ransome to ask him today or within the last week.
But
the point I make is our inquiry level, because of that person coming on and
taking over the entire correspondence function and the inquiry function out of
our office, including inquiries from MLAs, that reduced the demand my office
had to make on the Worker Advisor Office.
I
should share with the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid), as well, prior to that happening,
I was, I must admit, very frustrated in the service I was receiving from the
board in terms of information. I
remember one night where I had 25 letters they had drafted for me that I went
through, and I think 24 of them got sent back to the board because they were
just inappropriately done and did not really answer the concerns, one of the
reasons we are running plain language classes now over at the Workers Comp.
Board.
So
by putting that person in place, it freed up time on the Worker Advisor Office
and also staff time at the Workers Compensation Board, so it has managed to
solve that problem.
Mr. Reid: Can the minister give me an indication of
where he would draw his work advisors from, and what type of training do we
provide for them prior to their commencing their duties as worker advisors?
Mr. Praznik: The worker advisors have come from a variety
of particular fields. Many of them
though have had experience in the labour relations area. We have had a number of people who have come
from the labour movement who worked in the workers compensation field for
various unions, for example.
* (2340)
We
have also had in the last number of years‑‑and I have asked that we
look to recruiting not entirely lawyers there, but a number of people with legal
training and background simply to augment the skill level and provide a‑‑
An Honourable Member: No‑fault lawyers.
Mr. Praznik: I think the member is suggesting we develop a
bar of people who can deal in the no‑fault system, a very noble cause, no
doubt, but we have recruited‑‑I think we have two now on staff‑‑people
who have legal background.
We
also have a number of people, two or three, who have moved to us off the
redeployment list, whose positions had been eliminated in budget rounds, and
came to us as part of that system. Some
of them have some experience in advocacy or those types of skills.
We
have also incorporated part of our training into the WCB training program so
that our people are able to go there and learn first‑hand the policies,
procedures, legislation, et cetera, and also familiarize themselves with how
the place works, because I am sure, as the member appreciates from his own
caseload experience, often it is knowing where something has gone amiss or
astray in the system, that if you know the system, you can identify that
particular spot and with very little effort often solve a person's problem when
it is one of those kinds of problems where something has just bogged down, or
the right information has not got to the right person in a timely way.
So
we have integrated that training and, of course, we do some on our own in the
Worker Advisor Office, and I think we are building a pretty highly skilled
group of people.
Mr. Reid: The advisors, after they have received their
training and, of course, have put some years in on the job as advocates on
behalf of injured workers, on behalf of the claimants, have developed a skill
level.
Does the minister have any difficulties with
any of these advisors going out into the community and continuing to act as
advocates on behalf of claimants and, in fact, lecturing on the workers
compensation system?
Mr. Praznik: I am not quite sure as to the question of the
member. I will try to answer it. There are maybe two points to his question.
Firstly, we have endeavoured to spend some of
our time in working with various labour organizations, unions, the Injured
Workers Association, for example, to use our people to teach, train the trainer
or train the advocate to develop skill levels in other organizations that
service claimants at the Workers Compensation Board so that they are able to do
their job in representing, as best as possible, claimants before the board or
the Appeal Commission.
We
have no difficulty with our people taking on those roles in providing
information.
If
the member is suggesting that if a staff member leaves the Worker Advisor
Office and goes in to advocate‑‑the more people in my opinion who
can learn and develop the skills to advocate and to deal with the process in a
proper fashion‑‑in other words, dealing with what is there and
helping people push forward their cause or their claim‑‑I am very
much for it, and we have taken many initiatives to try to do that and expand
the knowledge base of the advocacy community.
Mr. Reid: I thank the minister for that. What I was referring to was advisors acting
as advocates and people with knowledge of the workers compensation system who
would go out in the evenings or on weekends and provide lectures to people who
do not have the same level of experience, in a way educating others to act as
advocates and providing that training.
So I thank the minister for giving his assurances that it is all right
for these advisors to continue with those activities or move in that line.
Can
the minister indicate‑‑he mentioned two lawyers on staff. Are these lawyers doing legal advice to the
worker advisors, or are they actually taking part in the worker advisors'
caseload activity?
Mr. Praznik: The only caution I put, of course, is if one
of our worker advisors goes out and does a seminar, et cetera, and then comes
back without the approval of the administrator and asks to be paid for that time. That would not be appropriate, and I do not
think the member is suggesting that. I
do not want to leave that impression.
With respect to our two members who have legal
training, I must be careful because they are not practising law, in that sense
of the word, under The Law Society Act or breaching any of the conditions, to
my knowledge, of that legislation. What
we wanted to have on our staff in an advocacy role, which is perfectly
legitimate, is people with legal training who have a better understanding, to
some degree, of process, of administrative tribunals, of how to make an
appropriate argument before the Appeal Commission.
They serve not only in carrying out a caseload
as they are hired to do, but I think they augment the general skill level of
the overall team in the Worker Advisor Office, just as having some people, of
course, who come from unions and the labour movement who have an appreciation
of some of that area and how some of those internal workings may help in
advocating a claim is important, just as having some people who have some
ability in Workplace Safety and Health issues and understanding of injury is
important to the skill mix.
Mr. Lamoureux: I am going to also use this time just to ask
one or two questions dealing with workers compensation. I did have the opportunity to have a tour of
the facility a number of months ago.
One
of the discussions that I entered into was the concern about the worker advisor
and the role that the worker advisor was playing in workers compensation
cases. One of the things that concerns
me greatly, and I had made reference to it in my opening remarks, is the
constituent, if you will, who gives his MLA a call and asks him, is it in my
best interest to get a lawyer in order to go through the appeal process, not
necessarily wanting to say no with the idea that if you go through the process
and you are unsuccessful, they say, well, maybe had I had a lawyer, the results
could have been different.
I like
to believe that the worker advisor and the advice that is given through the
worker advisor to go through the appeal process is sufficient and will, in
fact, get the individual through the process as quickly as possible, fairly,
and if, in fact, the chances of overturning at the appeal stage and the
percentage‑‑and this is really what I want to get at, is the
percentage, the success ratio of, let us say, lawyers versus the worker advisor
cases going through the first appeal level and the final appeal level and if,
in fact, the worker advisor or the minister is tracking what those percentages
are.
Mr. Praznik: I am not sure if I caught all of the member's
question. I believe he was asking about
the success rates in the appeal level?
Yes, getting the answer from our staff as we analyze that‑‑first
of all, it is always a difficult question. Should a person retain a lawyer to
represent them? Can they have success
with the worker advisor or the MLA or on their own?
I
should tell him an interesting statistic that has always impressed me. In the
* (2350)
So
we do not really have in
When we look at some of our success rates, and
again, one has to be careful what you do with these statistics, but I am
advised that there is a greater success rate on behalf of claimants by the work
advisor than there are for claimants represented by professionals, whether they
be lawyers, doctors or other professionals advocating on their behalf, or on
their own.
This is certainly at the review office level,
and I think that carries forward to appeal.
How high it is, I do not have the exact numbers with me, but again, it
depends to some degree on the vetting of the cases.
That is one factor you have to take into
account‑‑if you have someone who knows what they are doing, and you
seek their advice, and it turns out you really do not have a successful claim,
that you may have a back injury, but there may not be sufficient medical
evidence to support it being work‑related. It may be due to a degenerative back problem,
for example. You may be in pain, you may be suffering, you may not be able to
work, but you may not have the evidence to relate it to a work‑related
injury.
You
may still want to go for the claim because you need the income. With the bar, with another advocate or on
your own, you may proceed and be unsuccessful, whereas a work advisor, when
they assess the strength of your claim, may advise you that there is just not
the evidence to proceed, and you may decide not to come forward. So that could affect the statistics, as well,
in terms of the initial advice that you get.
So
it is hard to say. I would not want to
give advice to an individual. That is up
to them to make that decision, but I think our Work Advisor Office has proven
in the long run that it provides a very effective representation to injured
workers.
What we are trying to do‑‑I tell
you this was not always the case there‑‑we are trying to give our
clientele as objective advice as possible on the strength of their claim. It is no use helping someone, advocating all
the way through to appeal when you know from the evidence that they do not have
enough evidence, or they just quite frankly do not have a claim that is going
to go forward.
That was the case some years ago where we took
people right forward and fought the case and we hashed it. Now we are trying to develop that
professionialism where we can give people as objective advice as we possibly
can.
So
it is a good service and I would highly recommend it, but I would not want to
advise a person whether or not they should get legal counsel.
Mr. Lamoureux: Can the minister indicate if, in fact, legal
counsel is something that has been increased in terms of the number of
presentations before the appeal board in particular, but also the first appeal
level?
Mr. Praznik: I do not have that information, as I am sure
the member would appreciate. That is a
question staff from the Workers Compensation Board can best advise on. I would ask my staff assisting me today,
perhaps we could ask the Compensation Board to get that information for the
member.
The
experience, as I say, in
So
it is important to those thousand or less people who make appeals, but in the
overall scheme of things, generally speaking, a lot of decisions are not
challenged nor are there grounds on which to challenge them. So we do not really have the well‑developed
bar in
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Chairperson, I understand there are a
number of different factors in any appeal system, whether it is legal counsel,
worker advisor, or someone decides to go through it on their own, but the
overriding concern I have on this particular issue is that on the one hand,
government does have worker advisors. I
personally believe they are doing a good enough job, that individuals who are,
in fact, injured workers, should feel relatively comfortable that these
individuals will do an adequate job in bringing them through the process.
I
believe that having‑‑as a critic, I know anyway‑‑some
statistical information in terms of success ratios to be able to give them some
sort of peace of mind that, in fact, you do not have to have a lawyer‑‑because
it is a question that is quite often put to me.
Whatever statistical information you can provide in terms of the appeal
process would be much appreciated.
The
only other question I would have with respect to workers compensation is some
sort of an indication‑‑and again, because of time constraints, if
the minister can get back to me‑‑just of the number of individuals,
not from this fiscal year, but the previous fiscal year. There was a significant change in legislation
that many argued‑‑particularly different unions‑‑would
have an impact on the number of individuals applying for workers compensation.
What I am interested in is the actual number
of individuals staking claim, new cases staking claim for workers compensation
benefits prior to legislation and for one year after if that number is actually
available.
Again, this is not something that I need
shortly‑‑over the summer or something of this nature. I am sure the minister is kept informed as to
some of the results of legislation that has been brought forward, just to keep
up to date on that particular issue.
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chair, although this is not the
appropriate place to deal with those issues, I will ask staff here to see if we
can get that information from the Comp. Board for you. But I would say to the member that the number
of accident claims are down, partially because of the recession and the reduced
workforce, but also, too, because of our directed work with our Workplace,
Safety and Health, where we have been able to reduce the number of accidents in
the province, and a number of workplaces that have had traditionally a certain
amount of accidents every year have considerably less because we have been
putting the effort there.
So
the numbers are down, but I do not think that is because people are not making
the claims because they are injured and are afraid to. I think it is, quite frankly, because we are
having less accidents in the province and a somewhat smaller workforce, those
two factors.
Mr. Lamoureux: Finally, Madam Chairperson, we have another
major concern that is brought up on an ongoing basis in workers compensation,
and that is the fact that when individuals have gone to the adjudicator, the
adjudicator has made a decision that does not necessarily favour the injured
worker or is not what the injured worker was wanting to hear, and then it sets
off the first appeal process.
The
number of individuals who are going into the appeal process, that percentage‑‑and
again, I have to work by percentage‑‑has that, in fact, increased,
the percentage, the number of individuals seeking the first appeal level?
Mr. Praznik: I do not have the exact numbers for the
member, and again, it is not part of the Estimates of the Department of Labour,
so I do not have staff with me to answer that, but my understanding is we are
down on our applications for appeal‑‑I would have to check on that
for the member‑‑and I think a lot of that has to do with the
efforts we have been making to provide better information to people in making
their decision, so that sometimes it is simply a matter of getting information.
I
will be the first to admit that plain language was not something for which the
board was noted, but through the efforts of Mr. Farrell during his tenure over
there on our new board, we have made some major improvements in that area, and
we have many more to make.
Madam Chairperson: Order, please. The hour being 12 a.m., what is the will of
the committee?
Is
there leave of the committee to pass the line by line? (agreed)
2.(j) Worker Advisor Office (1) Salaries
$508,100‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $99,100‑‑pass.
2.(k) Employment Standards (1) Salaries
$1,447,700‑‑pass; (2) Other Expenditures $280,900‑‑pass.
2.(m) Labour Adjustment (1) Salaries $285,100‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $423,900‑‑(pass).
* (2400)
Resolution 11.2: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $15,474,400 for Labour, Labour Programs, for the fiscal
year ending the 31st day of March, 1994.
Item 3. Labour Special Programs (a) Payment of
Wages Fund $300,000‑‑pass.
Resolution 11.3: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $300,000 for Labour, Labour Special Programs, for the
fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1994.
At
this time, I would ask that the minister's staff please leave the Chamber.
Item 1.(a) Minister's Salary $20,600.
Ms. Friesen: I just want to put on the record that we have
passed a number of lines with no questions or comments, and this is, for our
part, not an indication of a lack of concern for these areas, but it is a
question of time, and there are other departments whose Estimates must follow
ours.
I
do want to put on the record that we do have some concerns about The Employment
Standards Act‑‑and I will be putting that in writing to the
minister and looking forward to his reply‑‑some of the issues I
raised in my opening remarks about labour adjustment and the decline in the
amount of monies for labour adjustment at a time when unemployment is
increasing rapidly in Manitoba and also our concerns for the vacation pay issue
in the Labour special programs, the Payment of Wages Fund.
I
think there are some serious and continuing concerns there, but in the interest
of looking at other departments, we will simply pass them today without the
particular questions on the record.
Mr. Praznik: Madam Chairperson, very quickly, I appreciate
the comments of the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) and recognize what has
happened.
It
is a tradition in my department, I always make a presentation to critics. I believe the member for
Madam Chairperson: 1.(a) Minister's Salary $20,600‑‑pass.
Resolution 11.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $431,100 for Labour, Labour Executive, for the fiscal year
ending the 31st day of March, 1994.
This concludes the Estimates for the
Department of Labour. As previously agreed, the hour being after 12 a.m.,
committee rise. Call in the Speaker.
IN SESSION
Madam Deputy Speaker
(Louise Dacquay): The hour being past 12 a.m., this House is
adjourned and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow (Tuesday).