ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

Pharmaceuticals

Institution Costs

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier.

Consumers, health care systems and now potentially hospitals have been affected by changing drug policies and exorbitant raises in prices to people across Canada. We have heard today that there are further problems in the drug industry in terms of prices for our health care system in Manitoba. Prices have been quoted to be doubling in our hospitals to have a potential impact at the Health Sciences Centre of close to $1 million over the long term in terms of prices to our health care system.

A lot of people want to know why these drug companies are making profits the way they are, and what is the impact of changes in drug pricing at the Health Sciences Centre on top of the cuts the government has made and at other health care facilities across Manitoba.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the member opposite recalls that this administration, I believe with the support of his party, opposed the federal government's introduction and passage of Bill C-91, I believe it was, the drug patent protection act. That act we clearly--and, in fact, the former Minister of Health the member for Pembina (Mr. Orchard) and the Minister of Finance both made presentations in Ottawa to the federal government, clearly putting on the record our opposition to that legislation passing.

It is my recollection that the federal Liberal Party, in running for office, said that they would review with a view to cancelling that bill.

That, of course, ultimately, is the kind of action that would help solve the problem that the Leader of the Opposition raises, but, of course, we see no initiative on the part of that federal Liberal government, and, of course, we see not a whimper of support from the provincial Liberal Party for that, despite the fact that, at the time, when it was a Conservative government involved, they were only too willing to criticize that bill.

Today, of course, they remain silent on the issue, Mr. Speaker.

* (1340)

Mr. Doer: We, of course, agree with the Premier on C-91, but what we are dealing with here is an additional problem in terms of drug pricing and potentially shafting the health care system in Manitoba and continuing to deal with, we think, indefensible profits at the expense of our health care system.

It is quoted at the Health Sciences Centre that a generic drug company will be raising one medication, potentially one medication, from 4.10 a hundred to 10.33 a hundred, Mr. Speaker, and apparently they are doing so to have a situation where the hospital sector will have to pay the same prices as the private sector.

Now, the companies, the private generic companies, are saying that this is in part due to, quote, governments generically. I would like to ask the government, what is the impact going to be on our health care budgets, which are already being cut by this provincial government?

What will be the cost and what is the strategy of the provincial government to deal with this change in pricing from the institutional health care costs to the so-called private sector.

Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, the hospitals, of course, have not measured that yet. The tendering system is still in effect, and they will be putting out proposals for the various drugs that they require.

I will say this, that governments, when he says "generically," are responsible in some way for the increase in prices, this government has put no increases of cost on drug manufacturers in this province or on any other businesses in this province.

This government has kept taxes down. This government has done everything possible to maintain an environment in which corporations and individuals are better off because of our ability to spend less and keep taxes down, Mr. Speaker, so certainly that comment would not apply to this administration.

Mr. Doer: The term "governments" is being utilized by the private generic firms to justify their changes in prices to almost more than double the prices of drugs to hospitals, Mr. Speaker, to allegedly bring them in line with the alleged private sector, but people out there believe, whether it is the generic drugs or the pricing of the patent drugs that have had profits go up by 14 percent, that they are, at the end of the day, the ones paying for it, both in terms of medicare costs, which will go up $7 billion, and now in terms of costs at the hospital, Health Sciences Centre, that is quoted to be $1 million.

The Premier did not answer the question. What is the strategy to deal with these changing prices, and how will this government ensure the drug companies are not just using this to increase their profits at the expense of the health care system here in Manitoba, Mr. Speaker?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, a major part of a strategy would include the assistance of the Leader of the Opposition and the assistance of the Leader of the third party in this House to address the issue addressed by the Premier (Mr. Filmon) in the first answer he gave, that is, to ask our federal counterparts to do what they said they would do. They have not done it, and now we see the threats that the honourable member is raising today in the House and quite legitimately so.

We do need his assistance in working with our colleague from the third party and the federal government to keep their promises. If they did that, that would go some distance.

In the meantime, hospitals are under the same pressure that they have been under each and every year and so are governments right across this country. The western provinces have still been able to retain a Pharmacare program for people under the age of 65, Manitoba being one of them. Our benefits here are on a par or better than those in other provinces.

You can see by looking to the east of us what could happen if we do not get the co-operation of the honourable Leader of the third party here today, as well as his colleagues in Ottawa to address this problem.

* (1345)

Health Care System

House Calls

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, every time the government cuts health programs, they promise to replace it with something in the community. There is a real need in the community for visiting doctor services. What steps will this government take to replace the services provided by Envoy to those people in the community who need the service?

To that end, I will table a letter that the minister has from the Manitoba League of the Physically Handicapped saying there is a real need for these people and others in the community for visiting doctor services.

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the honourable member suggests, the house call has been, remains and will be a feature of the health care system in Manitoba. Special call fees claimed for visits made to a patient's home, when more than 10 percent of the physician's total payment, is what we have been talking about. That is what raises the honourable member's question.

I hope the honourable member joins with the hundreds--no, thousands of Manitobans who have been reminding me that every area of the inappropriate use of the health care system ought to be addressed. Surely the honourable member is not saying that a physician ought to be able to bill $25.50 in addition to whatever other services he or she provides for some of the kinds of cases that we have been discussing the last few days.

The ability for the house call is still there. Indeed, I challenge physicians in this province to carry on with that part of their practice. No one is intended by this policy in any way to be put to any hardship.

Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, the minister totally missed the point of the question.

The fact is, physicians have always had the opportunity to make house calls. The minister knows that a lot do not and most do not, and the emergency wards are generally full of people because they are told to go to an emergency ward.

My question to the minister is, will he guarantee today that those individuals who cannot attend an emergency ward or who cannot attend at a doctor because of physical or other reasons or who have difficulty will have access to a visiting physician or other resource service in their homes to take care of them?

Mr. McCrae: Mr. Speaker, it is not expected that this policy, which has been put into effect by the Manitoba Medical Association, would take from anyone the opportunity to have a house call, should that be required.

I think what the Manitoba Medical Association is addressing, on behalf of their membership, are issues that relate to possible inappropriate use of the system. I do not think the honourable member wants to defend the inappropriate use of our system. I certainly do not, because there are too many people in Manitoba who need our system and too many doctors in Manitoba who want to use the system fairly.

Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Speaker, again, the minister did not answer the question. That must be 21 times in the last week he has failed to answer a question. He rivals the record of his predecessor in that position.

My final supplementary to the minister: Given that the minister is prepared to give $100 million to the Royal Bank of Canada for computers, will the minister look at service-at-home care or hiring some doctors on salary through Public Health to provide a home service for people who cannot attend at the office?

Mr. McCrae: Mr. Speaker, the approach taken by the honourable member in his question hardly even deserves a response. In spite of the tactics used by the honourable member, the people of Manitoba are entitled to responses, and that is what I propose to give.

I am quite happy to debate and discuss the public health information system that we announced a couple of days ago with the honourable member. I have offered him a briefing. He has not taken me up on that, with respect to the kinds of benefits we can achieve there.

The honourable member mentioned the Home Care program. I was very pleased today to join with a number of individuals and organizations in announcing the enhancement and the expansion of our self-managed Home Care program.

On this particular day, Mr. Speaker, it might be appropriate, indeed, to call attention to my predecessor. Many disabled people in Manitoba say to me, I hope you will thank Mr. Orchard--sorry, I hope you will thank the Minister of Energy for having begun the self-managed Home Care program. On their behalf today, I would like to thank my predecessor for pioneering that particular program in Manitoba.

* (1350)

School Boundaries Review

Release

Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier.

Today at one o'clock, it is our understanding from speaking to Mr. Backman, who is the executive director of the Boundaries Review Commission, that five copies of the completed boundary review report have been handed or are currently in the process of being handed to the Minister of Education (Mr. Manness), and from there, it is our understanding that they will be translated prior to public release.

My question for the Premier: When can we expect to have public access to that report, given that the former Minister of Education released a report back some years ago on education legislation reform, and unfortunately, it took 16 weeks apparently to translate 65 pages.

This is a 200-page report. I assume that we will have that report, and the school boards will have that report, in far better time than that. I wonder if the Premier can indicate when that will be completed.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, certainly we will want to make that report public as soon as it is reasonable to do so. I will have to check and see what is the expected time for translation.

Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, secondly, for the Premier and on the same topic, school boards are currently planning their budgets for the coming fiscal year, and there is some significant degree of concern about the impact of this report on that current fiscal year. The Minister of Education (Mr. Manness) spoke to the Association of School Trustees recently.

My question for the Premier: Can he indicate whether or not this report will, in fact, have any impact on school boards for the next fiscal year, or can they continue to plan as in the normal course, not having the fear that this report will, in fact, jeopardize any of their plans for the coming fiscal year?

Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, not having access to the report, I cannot anticipate whether it will or will not.

Mining Industry

Status Report

Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): I am going to beg your indulgence, Mr. Speaker, and shift gears slightly on this question. I want to ask the Minister of Energy and Mines a question. He has been here, and we have not yet asked him a question in this brief time, and I do want to offer him that opportunity. We have not agreed on a lot of things--perhaps nothing--in the time that I have been in the House, but I want to ask him to outline for us, if he will, the current state of the mining industry in Manitoba.

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Energy and Mines): Ah, Mr. Speaker, I wish I could quote Shakespeare. Where do I begin? That is a very good suggestion. I want to thank members of the House. Some of them have been here for the almost 18 years that I have been here, and I want to thank them for a lot of very interesting times that I think I will reflect on very generously over the next ensuing years.

I was going to offer to my honourable friend the Liberal Leader a rhetorical response, which might have been accused of being rather quick-tongued and vociferous by observers who may be here and presently observing, and I shall not do that, Sir. It would be contrary to my gentlemanly disposition at this time of year.

* (1355)

My honourable friend and I may not, as he has indicated, agree necessarily on too many areas and too many policies, but I think the one thing my honourable friend and indeed all members of the House will agree on is that the mining industry is being revitalized in Manitoba, not by government and not by writ of government, but by opportunity of investment through the changes in taxation policy legislation. It is a remarkable recovery of a very key and important industry to the province of Manitoba, a key and important industry to the two very significant and major communities of Flin Flon and of Thompson.

I think it speaks volumes as to the opportunity that this industry represents to all Manitobans, when Hudson Bay is able to announce, because of renewed exploration efforts, the first new mine of nickel and copper in the province of Manitoba in the last 15 to 20 years, and, similarly, INCO with their major announcement of the deep pipe discovery.

Those are good signs for the province of Manitoba, and I am sure all members here would welcome the investment that is going to flow from those two discoveries, indeed from the potential of Falconbridge entering a major discovery and a very unique opportunity that Manitobans have.

I think not everyone understands the opportunity of the deposit of titanium at Cross Lake, where for the first time in the history of Canada, we may have aboriginals as full partners in the mining industry, and I think that would be a remarkable first step.

Highway Construction Projects

Northern Manitoba

Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): Mr. Speaker, in the North, tourism, economic development, efficient transportation of products and goods are all issues that have province-wide implication. The state of northern roads is no longer an economic issue, but it has become a very serious health and safety issue, an issue much like the ducks in Oak Hammock Marsh in whose health and safety the Minister of Highways seems to place a high priority.

Paving the road to Oak Hammock Marsh, in my mind, does not have province-wide implication, and yet the minister always tells us that he has to look after all of Manitoba.

Will the minister now take the same concern about dusty roads to his 1995 capital project plans for roads in northern Manitoba?

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, in the process of developing the programs in the past and for '95 and the years forward, the answer is obviously, yes. We have projects that we have completed in the last two years, projects planned for '95 and projects planned for the years beyond, in consultation with community members for the roads in the North that the member is referring to, to try to maximize the use of scarce dollars and to put safe roads in place for all Manitobans.

I know that the member would like to see us do it faster than is going to be fiscally feasible, but the citizens of Manitoba, Sir, have also told us, we must not increase taxes; we must spend responsibly.

I have to admit that I can only do about one-sixth or one-seventh of the projects that need to be done, but I can guarantee to you, Sir, that my department is meeting with members of the North, with the community leaders, to try to determine where the areas of priority are and what standards we can achieve in the next few years to meet the objectives that you want.

Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Speaker, if the number of ducks and geese in the area, and not people, is one criteria that would enhance your chance of getting your roads fixed, will the minister now use that same logic and criteria but remember that there are people there too, and proceed immediately, now, to allocate at least 25 percent of the Highways budget for northern Manitoba, because it needs a lot of catching up?

Mr. Findlay: Well, Mr. Speaker, I can confirm to the member that pretty well every region of the province would make the same request. I am sorry. You know, you have 3 percent of the traffic, and you ask for 25 percent of the budget.

I do not care what grouping you want to talk about, whether it is the Union of Manitoba Municipalities or tourism groups or regional development groups, all want more money spent on highways. We spend a lot of money per kilometre of highway in this province compared to any other area of the country.

Mr. Speaker, I think this is an appropriate time to mention to the House that although we have worked hard, and my previous minister on this side of the House worked very hard, for the National Highways Program--we have worked together as the four western provinces and two territories to ask the federal government to make a commitment towards a National Highways Program. I can tell the House that today we received a letter about an hour ago that said no to putting federal dollars, which they collect 4.5 billion of gas tax dollars across this country, and they do not want to spend it back on the highway system. That is the Liberal government of Canada.

* (1400)

Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Speaker, the Finance minister (Mr. Stefanson) has been going around holding pre-budget consultation meetings. He was in The Pas and I went there to listen to him. I heard people urging him in The Pas to spend more money on northern roads. It says right here. I do not see ducks here telling the minister to spend more money on a road to Oak Hammock Marsh.

Will the Finance minister now make the decision that we have a crisis situation in northern Manitoba in terms of the condition of the roads and allocate at least 25 percent of the Highways budget for northern Manitoba?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, again, I will confirm for the member that the request he mentions about people at the Minister of Finance's meetings talking about highways, it is the highest priority everywhere. The minister found out that 99 percent said, do not increase taxes, and when he asked, department by department, where the extra expenditure should be, every region raised highways--every region. So what he asked for is being asked by everybody, and in the process of making decisions, in the interest of fairness, we have to make decisions that reflect all the province.

I have already committed to that member and to that region significant consultation with the communities to try to determine where the priorities are, how we can use scarce dollars to maximize road safety and road driving experience for the citizens of north, south and all of Manitoba, particularly the commercial people and the tourism industry.

Oak Hammock Marsh

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I took as notice a question yesterday from the member for Osborne (Ms. McCormick). Could I respond at this time?

Mr. Speaker: You sure can.

Mr. Findlay: The member for Osborne asked about whether the process we are doing at Oak Hammock Marsh on a four-kilometre stretch of road is the appropriate one.

I want to tell the member that some analysis was done, and the traffic count there is an average of 400 vehicles per day. On the Thanksgiving weekend in 1993, there were 2,000 vehicles on the Sunday and over 2,000 vehicles on the Monday--high use. It is a road of--we will call it for lack of a better term--substandard for that kind of traffic--[interjection]

Mr. Speaker: Respond to your question from the other day, sir.

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, that road needs to be upgraded. It needs to be graded and gravelled before you put any surface on. The grading and gravelling will cost about $350,000; then you look at surface. The AST surface that is being proposed by the department is an additional $350,000, and it will last for 20 years.

The process the member talked about to treat the gravel and grade it and then re-treat it every year costs about $60,000 a year, so in six years you have already spent the $360,000, so you are net ahead to do the AST surface to that road for that volume of traffic.

With regard to the number of people visiting which the member made a misrepresentation on, DU said that over five years, the attendance will get up to 210,000. She said they did not achieve that. In year one, 100,000; in year two, 150,000. Now, we have three more years to get to the 210,000.

So I can guarantee to the member that the citizens of Manitoba want to use that as a tourist region, and we will fix the road to accommodate that.

Highway Construction Projects

PTH 220

Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Mr. Speaker, last week, we learned that the Minister of Highways jumped queue and spent nearly $2 million to repave a highway in his constituency.

Now this minister is going to spend nearly $1 million to pave Provincial Road 220 from Highway 67 into the Oak Hammock centre.

My question for the Minister of Highways and Transportation is, can he explain why he is going to pave 8.2 kilometres of Provincial Road 220 south of Provincial Trunk Highway 67, when that road does not currently serve the Oak Hammock Marsh?

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I have just given the member the information on the four kilometres to Oak Hammock Marsh--$700,000 to do the grade, gravel, land acquisition and AST that is needed to bring that road up to an adequate standard.

The standard used for paving or for ASTing is over 300 vehicles per day, and I have already told the member, in answer to a previous question, that the volume is over 400.

With regard to the other section the member is asking about, I will bring that back to the House tomorrow.

Mr. Reid: Oak Hammock Marsh is currently served by Highways 7, 8 and 67, Mr. Speaker, all paved surfaces.

Will this minister explain why he is going to spend nearly $2 million on this 8.2-kilometre piece of road in addition to the $1-million road to Oak Hammock centre, when there are no major communities along this route and while northern residents are forced to travel on substandard, dangerous roads?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, I have heard members opposite talk about tourism--we have to do things to promote tourism. They have talked about education--we have to help our young people understand wildlife. They have talked about the environment.

All of that is encompassed in Oak Hammock Marsh, where I have said up to 2,000 vehicles a day on long weekends when people want to go to the country and educate their young people, as schools take tours up there. That member is doing a discredit to rural Manitoba. He is doing a discredit to the educational institutions, and he is certainly doing a discredit to the wildlife that we can exhibit to our young people in this province.

Mr. Reid: Mr. Speaker, I will table or send a copy of this provincial road map over to the minister, so he knows that the road which I am talking about does not currently serve the Oak Hammock Marsh. That is served by paved services that are already in existence.

Can the Minister of Highways justify spending $2 million on a road in his constituency plus another $3 million on Provincial Road 220, when his department cut the winter road contract with Norwin construction by 50 percent?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, that member should do a little homework. Highway 15 is a two-lane road that runs 6,800 vehicles per day. I challenge him to find another two-lane stretch of road that is that busy in the province of Manitoba. We will run 11,000 vehicles on No. 1 east and west. It is a four-lane road.

Mr. Speaker, there have been a number of accidents there. There is high community interest for safety on that road. That road might have been four-laned in the future if we knew a decision on the Reddit subdivision for CN, if they are going to abandon that line.

In the current period of time, I want to improve the safety. That member probably does not realize there were two deaths on that road last week--serious deaths, so it is responsible for this department, this minister and this government to upgrade roads to try to protect public safety where the volumes warrant it.

Urban Aboriginal Strategy

Status Report

Mr. Neil Gaudry (St. Boniface): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Native Affairs.

In 1989, this government came out with an Urban Aboriginal Strategy. In the 1991 budget, the aboriginal development budget was underspent by $270,000, which was absorbed back into the government coffers.

In 1992, the former Minister of Native Affairs said during the Estimates process that he was not satisfied with the situation, that they should have done more things. He reiterated these concerns in 1993.

Within its first year, the federal Liberal government was able to come up with the head-start program for urban native people.

My question for the Minister responsible for Native Affairs, why have we had no progress from this provincial government on aboriginal concerns?

* (1410)

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister responsible for Native Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for St. Boniface for this question. He mentions some very small amounts of money that his federal Liberal colleagues have put into aboriginal issues in this province, but let us not forget that the current federal Liberal government that wants to somehow pretend that they have this great concern has carried on with the policy of the previous government not to provide funding for status aboriginal people off reserve, and that has cost the taxpayers of the province of Manitoba nearly $60 million.

Let us not forget, as well, that I have not seen the federal Liberal government come back in to a number of the educational programs that were reduced. Their contribution has been paltry compared to withdrawals of funding that have taken place over the last number of years.

Urban Aboriginal Self-Government

Status Report

Mr. Neil Gaudry (St. Boniface): In 1992, the Aboriginal Council of Winnipeg gave this government its urban aboriginal self-government proposal. What has this government done since it has received this document two years ago?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister responsible for Native Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to answer this. Obviously, this is an area where we can have a very long and detailed discussion, and the format of Question Period limits that, no doubt.

But I have to tell the member for St. Boniface that, obviously, a lot of things are happening in the aboriginal community today because there are a lot of processes that are underway. Obviously, the signing a week or so ago of an agreement between the federal government and the Manitoba chiefs is part of that evolutionary process.

To be quite blunt to the member, we as a government have done many things in terms of just backfilling the costs that we have had to make up for withdrawals of federal support that the people of Manitoba used to receive and that Mr. Chretien has acknowledged and supports now by his actions.

So, quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, I think it is unfair to ask, while we are trying to backfill all these particular areas, that we can come up with new dollars to spend in these particular areas.

Tourism

Bilingual Documents

Mr. Neil Gaudry (St. Boniface): Mr. Speaker, I have a short question to the First Minister. Yesterday, he sort of indicated that he would like more questions from the Liberals. First of all, I would like to congratulate him for what he has done for bilingualism and French services so far.

But to my surprise, this week I got a call from one Manitoban who indicated that his wife, a school teacher in an immersion program, requested from the Department of Tourism that they wanted some standard forms for the school. It was indicated to them that it was a year that they did not have the documents, but they would be available sometime next year.

Why, to the First Minister, have these documents not been available, especially when they promote tourism and bilingualism together?

Mr. Speaker: I thank the honourable member for St. Boniface with that new question.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for his comments.

I know that he attended the conference a week ago Saturday in which the bilingual municipalities and the Francophone chambers of commerce in Manitoba had a first-ever major economic development conference which flowed from a breakfast meeting which cabinet held with the Francophone chambers of commerce in Manitoba earlier this year.

That was, I think, a substantial success and, in fact, we are funding, through the Canada-Manitoba Agreement, the Canada-Manitoba Community Agreement on French Language Services, services to those municipalities. We, of course, emphasized for them the strength that it gives us to be able to promote call centres, for instance, in Manitoba to have the bilingual capability that we do have for all areas of economic development in our province. Certainly, many of the things, such as the bilingual signs that are on our roadways, are designed as a tourist attraction for bilingual service to people in communities throughout Manitoba.

The specifics of his question with respect to a particular form in the Department of Tourism is something I cannot answer off the top of my head, so I will have to take that as notice and bring him back further information.

Parent Advisory Council

Teacher Representation

Mr. Harry Schellenberg (Rossmere): I have a question for the Minister of Education (Mr. Manness) or the Premier.

Trustees, superintendents, principals and parents have great concerns about the new guidelines which give teachers only very little representation on the Parent Advisory Council. Mr. Speaker, it is a teacher that is the main caregiver. It is a teacher that is the main link between home and school. It is a teacher who has professional expertise to offer.

Mr. Speaker, why is the minister not giving teachers meaningful representation on the Parent Advisory Council?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, it appears as though what the member opposite is saying is that we should not have parents involved, that in terms of a Parent Advisory Council, all we want to do is have teachers advise the teachers.

That would not make sense, so what we have done is to try and ensure, because I do not believe that there have been any studies, any credible studies, that have not demonstrated that children learn better when their parents are involved in the process of their education and are fully supportive of and involved in the school system.

That is the whole concept of Parent Advisory Councils. As a teacher, I would think he should understand that, that it is absolutely imperative and certainly a great benefit to teachers and to the schools, themselves, to have the parents fully involved with the process. That is the whole concept of the Parent Advisory Councils, Mr. Speaker.

Education System

Suspension Policy

Mr. Harry Schellenberg (Rossmere): We want to develop a partnership with trust and co-operation, not a power struggle.

It is obvious that this government has declared war on teachers, and the morale of teachers is at an all-time low in this province.

Mr. Speaker, the minister wants to pass legislation which gives teachers the authority to suspend disruptive students. Suspending students is always a traumatic experience.

Why does the minister not give his powerful parent advisory council the authority to suspend students?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, I do not think that I have heard more foolishness in a long, long time than suggesting that we ought to give the parent advisory council, which is not in the school, which is not dealing with the children, which is not dealing with their problems on a day-to-day basis in their classes, the power to suspend.

Mr. Speaker, the concept is, the people who are on the firing line, the people whose jobs are being impacted by the behaviour of the specific individual in the classroom are the ones who have to make the judgement, whether or not to sacrifice the needs of 25 students in favour of having one disruptive student disrupt the efforts of an entire classroom.

That is the kind of thing that many, many people have asked us to address. That is something that teachers have asked us to address, Mr. Speaker, and having the power and the authority I do not accept, as he does, and I think it is a terrible commentary that he is making on teachers, to automatically assume that teachers will abuse that power, that teachers will use it inappropriately. What a terrible thing to say about teachers. He ought to be ashamed.

Mr. Schellenberg: I am embarrassed for the Premier. Teachers do not want this power.

Mr. Speaker, does the minister not have faith in the present system, where trustees, superintendents and principals are responsible for the overall discipline in our schools?

Mr. Filmon: Now, we really see how out of touch New Democrats are, when he comes and makes a statement like that, that is absolutely contrary to the position on the record of the president of the Manitoba Teachers' Society who said that teachers welcomed that initiative.

I cannot believe it. Perhaps, Mr. Speaker, he has been in the Legislature too long and has not been out there listening to and talking with people in his old profession.

Northern Manitoba

Hydro Rates--Equalization

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister responsible for Hydro.

It is well known that most of the hydro power in this province comes from northern Manitoba, and northern residents continue to pay higher hydro rates. Before the minister retires from office, will he try and get cabinet to equalize hydro rates, as was promised two years ago?

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend errs in his preamble. Residents of northern Manitoba pay the same rates as southerners do for communities of similar size. That system existed when my honourable friend's party governed and was not changed.

I think it reflects two principles, adequately reflecting cost of service, No. 1, a principle embraced by the New Democrats when they governed this province, and, secondly, a principle where northern Manitobans ought not to pay more or less than southern Manitobans in communities of the same size.

Power Outages

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Mr. Speaker, northerners do not just pay more for hydro, they also face more power outages. I have raised this issue with the minister in a letter I sent to him on September 19, 1994.

The minister will recall I asked him back in September what could be done to reduce these outages, given that these outages continue to be a major problem in many communities, such as Little Grand Rapids, which I would like to report to this House that on December 11, this past weekend, they had no power from 5 a.m. to 3 p.m. that day.

When can these residents expect to see these problems solved in the future?

Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Mr. Speaker, again, I want honourable members to know that my honourable friend erred in his preamble, saying that northerners pay more for electricity than southerners. That is not accurate, Sir.

Secondly, I want to point out to my honourable friend that from time to time, the power system is out, but I want to also remind my honourable friend that the Manitoba Hydro system has the highest reliability of any utility providing electric service in Canada, an exemplary record that serves all of Manitoba in that fashion and is a significant tribute to the many men and women who provide that electric service to Manitoba.

Mr. Speaker, I remind my honourable friend that what he is asking for from opposition, his party did not deliver in government. He might reflect on that.

Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.

* (1420)

MATTER OF URGENT PUBLIC IMPORTANCE

Transportation Infrastructure

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin), that under Rule 27.1, that the ordinary business of the House be set aside to discuss a matter of urgent public importance, namely, the condition and future transportation infrastructure in northern Manitoba due to federal government cutbacks to airports and rail infrastructure and provincial government cutbacks to northern highways.

Mr. Speaker: Before recognizing the honourable member for Thompson, I believe I should remind all honourable members again that under our Rule 27.(2) the mover of a motion on a matter of urgent public importance and one member of each of the other parties in the House is allowed not more than five minutes to explain the urgency of debating the matter immediately.

Mr. Ashton: Mr. Speaker, nothing is more important to northern Manitobans than our transportation infrastructure. On a daily basis we see it under attack. We see it under attack from a minister in this government who suggests that the only criteria for fixing up roads should be volume.

We have seen under this government that the expenditures on northern highways construction has gone from between 15 percent and 20 percent of the budget to 4.8 percent.

We have seen a minister who takes letters, giving a long-term commitment to surfacing highways in northern Manitoba and personally strokes out any long-term commitment. We see on a daily basis with the answers of this minister that in this province, to get roads fixed, it seems you have to be in the minister's constituency or you have to have a lot of ducks.

We say it is urgent that we get highways for people, Mr. Speaker. There are at least 80,000 to 90,000 Manitobans--we probably have most of the ducks too, if you want to use that argument--in northern Manitoba. We are 8 percent of the population.

The minister says we have 3 percent of the traffic. Has he looked at the highways map, Mr. Speaker? The highways map shows that a lot of northern communities do not have roads, so we cannot exactly drive a lot.

But you look at the condition of our roads. They are in terrible shape. Just ask the former Minister of Highways about 373, 280 and 391.

Why do we need to deal with that today? Because this may be one of the last opportunities to deal with this before the government makes yet again a decision in terms of Estimates that shafts northern Manitoba. We are not going to stand idly by while they do that, so we have to debate that.

Not only that, the minister himself indicated just a short time ago that now the federal government is indicating it has no commitment to a National Highways Program.

It goes beyond the cuts that we are also faced with that have urgent implications for northern Manitoba. Just today, Mr. Speaker, I have received further information on the federal government's wholesale slaughter of the transportation infrastructure of this country.

I have a list which I can table of some of what they call modernization which will have a drastic impact on airports in northern Manitoba and rural Manitoba, whether it be in Thompson, whether it be in The Pas, whether it be in Lynn Lake, Norway House, Gillam, Island Lake, there are many airports that will be affected. There are drastic consequences if we do not deal with those--I will table a copy for all members, a copy which I received today--drastic consequences that we could see from the commercialization, the privatization of the air navigation systems in this country that could affect the margin of safety for many northern and rural Manitobans.

This is an urgent matter, Mr. Speaker, because these cuts are going to destroy the Department of Transport and the kind of safety standards we have worked hard for in this country.

The federal Liberal government is looking at making these decisions over the matter of the next number of days at the departmental level. They are looking--and the schedule is, by the 12th of December which has already gone by, a briefing to the minister. There is a steering committee in place, the ministerial decision by the 20th of January. There will be a cabinet decision in January or February, and there will be a budget decision in February of 1995.

Once again, the same lack of logic. The federal Minister of Transport has suggested that there is some problem in Canada because we have 90 percent of the air traffic going through 10 percent of the airports.

Well, Mr. Speaker, what would happen to this county if we followed that logic and we shut down rural and northern airports. I would be interested to see how this province and this country would do without the wealth of companies like Inco, of HBM&S, of Repap in northern communities and much of the rural economy that contributes to the welfare? This is important to northern Manitobans.

As my colleague the member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) pointed out before, we are getting desperate in terms of the conditions of our roads in northern Manitoba. We are seeing the destruction of our infrastructure, whether it be the rail line, whether it be airports. We, in the New Democratic Party, we stand for fairness for all regions of this province, all regions of this country. That is why we urge all members of this House to join with us to discuss this so that we can get some fairness for northern roads, fairness for northern airports and fairness for our rail system from the federal Liberal and the provincial Conservative governments.

Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, someone from the opposite side explained priorities, and obviously, the members in the opposition party do not have their priorities very straight. They had nine days to raise this as a matter of urgent public importance. They did not. They had an opportunity for eight days of debate during the Throne Speech Debate at which every single member of their caucus could well have raised that issue again and again. They did not.

So I think what we are really seeing here is a party flush with their own self-importance over a small item that occurred the other evening, by delaying a vote, wants to come back into the House, they say, to work, but they had a matter of urgent public importance yesterday. To show you how hard they wanted to work, when they challenged your ruling, they walked out of the House for half an hour. They were not prepared to work. All they are prepared to do is play games in this House, have some kind of game playing across the way that has nothing to do with working in this House, but rather try to enhance their own political image.

I do not believe for a minute, Mr. Speaker, that they have a matter of urgent public importance. This matter is clearly out of order.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Second Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, let me start off by indicating that much of the preamble that the NDP House leader put on the record with respect to this particular issue, I would disagree with I must say right upfront. It does address some very serious issues in terms of northern roads and the transportation infrastructure and so forth. I think there is a sense of urgency. [interjection] I am supporting your motion, so you should be supportive of what I am saying, at least in part.

Mr. Speaker, I do believe that we are looking at possibly coming back some time in, no doubt, the month of March unless the government comes forward with some other date. Yesterday I alluded to reasons as to why it is that we do not have too much left on the agenda that we could deal with an issue of this particular nature.

When we look at the winter roads and the importance of the winter roads to northern Manitoba, it might be an opportune time for a number of members of the Legislature to get up to express their thoughts, not only on issues such as the winter roads, but other roads, local airports.

I think there are some valid arguments on all sides that could be expressed and might be beneficial for this government and possibly even for the government in Ottawa to take into consideration when they are coming down with their plans with the transportation industry. In fact, Mr. Speaker, if I was the drafter of this particular motion, I might have even expanded it to include the transportation industry as a whole because there are some concerns that we have. We all recognize the importance of our rail, airlines and so forth. Thank you.

* (1430)

Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank all honourable members for their advice as to whether or not the motion proposed by the honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) should be debated today.

In accordance with our Rule 27.(1), I did receive notice of the proposed motion. I had some difficulty deciding whether or not the motion discusses only one matter as is required by our Rule 27.(5)(a). I am now satisfied that the broad subject matter of the motion is the condition and future of the transportation infrastructure in northern Manitoba.

According to our Rule 27 and Beauchesne Citations 389 and 390, there are two conditions which must be met in order for a matter of urgent public importance to be proceeded with.

They are: a) the subject matter must be so pressing that the ordinary opportunities for debate will not allow it to be brought on early enough; and b) it must be shown that the public interest will suffer if the matter is not considered immediately.

I acknowledge that the subject matter of the honourable member's motion is important. However, I am not satisfied that the conditions which I have just set out have been met.

Therefore, I am ruling that the motion is out of order as a matter of urgent public importance.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I challenge your ruling.

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

Voice Vote

Mr. Speaker: Shall the ruling of the Chair be sustained? All those in favour, please say yea.

Some Honourable Members: Yea.

Mr. Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay.

Some Honourable Members: Nay.

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

Formal Vote

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

Mr. Speaker: A recorded vote having been requested, call in the members.

The question before the House is, shall the ruling of the Chair be sustained? All those in favour of the motion will please rise.

Division

A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:

Yeas

Cummings, Dacquay, Derkach, Downey, Driedger, Ducharme, Enns, Ernst, Filmon, Findlay, Gilleshammer, Helwer, Laurendeau, Manness, McAlpine, McCrae, McIntosh, Mitchelson, Orchard, Pallister, Penner, Praznik, Reimer, Render, Rose, Stefanson, Sveinson, Vodrey.

Nays

Ashton, Barrett, Cerilli, Chomiak, Dewar, Doer, Edwards, Evans (Brandon East), Evans (Interlake), Friesen, Gaudry, Gray, Hickes, Kowalski, Lamoureux, Lathlin, Mackintosh, Maloway, Martindale, McCormick, Plohman, Reid, Robinson, Santos, Schellenberg.

Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): Yeas 28, Nays 25.

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