Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, my question is to the First Minister. Yesterday, we tabled the final report of the steering committee, made up of health experts, which made one recommendation on the awarding of a contract. On 20 occasions yesterday the Minister of Health, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) and the Premier (Mr. Filmon) stated that there were, quote, two acceptable bids, two qualified bidders.

Madam Speaker, we have heard from representatives and experts on the health committee in the past, and today we have quoted in the Free Press that it is not a situation where either candidate is acceptable. It is unanimous that the one company is head and shoulders above the other company that was awarded the bid.

I would like to ask the Premier whom should we believe, the Premier or the members of the committee that are speaking out on behalf of the quality of this contract, Madam Speaker.

* (1335)

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I think we should believe the committee which indicated that there were two bidders that were successful on quality. That was what the committee's mandate to do was, to identify the bidders who could meet the quality requirements.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, yesterday in a CBC newscast, a committee member stated that Rimer Alco had access to confidential health reports prior to the other companies receiving same. Has the minister investigated this allegation, and can he report back to the people of Manitoba on this part of the process?

Mr. Praznik: Once again in checking allegations that members of the New Democratic Party have brought to this House, in checking with staff in my department, I have no reason to believe at all that the allegation is correct, Madam Speaker. It is not correct.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, we have talked to a number of patients, and we have talked to Mrs. Tait who is the wife of an elderly patient that relies on this Oxygen Therapy Program. Many patients are telling us that they do not want to change the service that they are getting. They do not want this government to award contracts to people that they favour at the expense of their health care and the quality of their health care.

I would like to ask the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) has the government considered the care and quality of care for patients when it has awarded this contract to a company that the health care committee, the internal committee, has stated that this company has absolutely no experience in the field? Are you surprised that patients are worried about the quality of patient care on this very vital home care service?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, think about the implication of what the Leader of the Opposition is saying. He is saying that no one should ever change a contract provider because that provider has provided the service in the past. It is absolutely ludicrous.

The process on many of these things in health care where we are contracting--and, by the way, we have contracted for oxygen in the past; it is not necessarily a new issue. But the fact of the matter is, to make sure that whatever standard of care is required, that the bidders are able to meet that standard and then we look at the monetary costs of that contract. If they cannot meet the standard, their envelope on the monetary side should not even be looked at. We have done that with respect to home care, in this case as well. The same arguments, by the way, were used against Rimer Alco when they came into Manitoba as a small company bringing an established United Kingdom technology here. The same arguments were used, and the fact is they have delivered in the hospitals and saved taxpayers 34 percent of the cost of oxygen.

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, is the Minister of Health saying that he is prepared to risk the health of some 800 Manitobans on a company that has never ever in Canada or the United States delivered this service to vulnerable people in their homes, which is not simply hard equipment that is being plugged in? It is patient education, education of caregivers; it is technical advice. Is he saying he is prepared to risk that to a company that has absolutely no track record of delivering this service and has no staff with any track record?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): If we adopted that philosophy, we would never get into using nurses to do more work in health care. We would not be looking at using--midwifery, we would never get into because it is something new and there may not be a track record in Manitoba. So, Madam Speaker, you would never have change or improvement in the system if you adopted that kind of philosophy in delivering service. Rimer Alco, the same arguments were used against them when they brought the oxygen concentrators into our province, and they have been extremely successful. Members opposite have never raised, to my knowledge, a complaint about that service. They have reduced the cost of oxygen.

This committee has indicated, and I know in the minutes in checking through this, that they clearly did meet the quality requirements. The member for Crescentwood also forgets that the sister company of Rimer Alco has done this same kind of work in the United Kingdom I understand for many years, so there is a track record.

* (1340)

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, I want to give the Minister of Health the opportunity to quote from this document.

I would like to ask him to quote from the final minutes of the home oxygen therapy committee program meeting, the final report. I would like him to quote from it any reference to the equality of Rimer Alco or even its appropriateness for being considered as a contractor. Let him find one phrase, one recommendation, from his committee's report. Will he do that? Find a phrase.

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, I think if you read the document, the committee may have indicated a preference, but it was a preference of two companies that they considered. The committee considered five companies. Three of them are not there because they did not meet the quality requirements. The prime task of that committee was to determine which of the proponents were able to meet the quality requirements and they eliminated three and included two. Their preference was a recommendation but on price on a two-year contract Rimer Alco was the lesser-cost bidder and was awarded the contract.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, let the record show that he absolutely avoided the question or refused to--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I would remind the honourable member for Crescentwood that on a supplementary question it requires no preamble or no postamble.

Mr. Sale: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

A very simple question: Has the contract been signed or not?

Mr. Praznik: Yes, Madam Speaker.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, people in the Swan River Valley are very concerned that aspen bark and chips are being removed from the L-P yard and deposited in sensitive areas, which is in contravention of L-P's licence. Even though many people have called the department raising this concern, no action has been taken.

Can the Minister of Environment tell us why no action has been taken on this sensitive matter?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Environment): We will provide the honourable member with that information, Madam Speaker.

Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, can the minister tell this House whether he believes that it is acceptable to dump these wastes on riverbanks even though we have been told that this substance is harmful to aquatic life and these rivers will soon be overflooding into lakes? Is it acceptable to put this waste on riverbanks?

Mr. McCrae: If the company is in any way exceeding its licence, I would indeed be concerned and would take corrective action.

Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for that answer, and I ask him if he will immediately send staff to the Swan River Valley to look into this matter and ensure that wastes that have been put in sensitive areas such as riverbanks are removed but not at the expense of taxpayers.

Mr. McCrae: The question is essentially the same as the first question and the answer is the same.

Hon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Madam Speaker, I am tabling a letter that I was asked to table yesterday for the member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett).

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, in the last week we have had another dozen individuals contact us regarding concerns regarding patient care at personal care homes. The minister's response was to say, write to me the minister, phone me the minister, talk to me the minister and that will solve your problems, but that has been done by many of these people. That was done by us in the fall regarding Holiday Haven, and there was no adequate follow-up on our complaints until someone had to get, unfortunately, killed in a nursing home.

My question for the minister is will the Minister of Health today do what the previous Minister of Health did in the home care crisis in 1993, and set up an independent panel or board that will hear complaints regarding personal care home service, so individuals will be assured that someone will be there to listen to them other than the minister's office?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, first of all, with respect to the preamble of the member's question, there is an inquest being conducted by the Medical Examiner, and I think in fairness to everyone involved, before one judges the cause of the death, we should wait for that result.

With respect to the question, Madam Speaker, the particular point the member makes is an excellent one. In fact, I am already working with my department to consider options to do just that.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, can the minister explain to this House why the instructions with respect to the inquest are so narrow, and in fact say--determine what measures could be taken to prevent a death occurring in similar circumstances?

In other words, they are so narrow they only deal with the particular incident of that death at Holiday Haven and will not deal with all of the other concerns regarding patient care at Holiday Haven and other personal care homes.

* (1345)

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): The member's question is probably more properly put to the Chief Medical Officer who ordered the inquest. I am not part, nor are ministers part of writing that particular framework, but from what I understand in the contact we have had with that office, that term of reference includes determining the circumstances surrounding the death of that individual, address concerns regarding safety of elderly persons in personal care homes, as well as to determine what measures could be taken to prevent a death in similar circumstances. So I think the member should put his one point in the context of the three.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, my final supplementary to the minister: can the minister give assurances to this House today, since he has already indicated that he is considering some kind of framework, that every individual in Manitoba who is concerned about care in a personal care home both in the past and in the future, will have an opportunity to have their concerns heard by an independent body and have those issues dealt with by the government, so we do not have to go down the road of inquest after inquest?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I certainly want to be able to very shortly give a process to this House. I know one critical piece of that--that some work yet has to be done--is a process for dealing with complaints within facilities I think as a mandated part of their operation. We also have to have some means of dealing with complaints where there is not a satisfactory resolution of them.

I know the previous Minister of Health, in the area of home care, developed an excellent model that I think has worked well. Whether we use that particular board, whether we find another, or options that I am considering right now, but I think it is very evident and I agree with the member, to give Manitobans a sense of security we need to have some process for dealing with complaints and some independent way of sorting it out between complainants and the facility.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, yesterday I asked the Minister of Health if the Rimer Alco deal was in fact signed. The day prior I was of the impression that the agreement was not signed by the minister.

My question specific to the minister is when was the deal between Rimer Alco and his department actually signed?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Yes, the final signature was yesterday.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Lamoureux: I would ask the Premier will he acknowledge that this is indeed the height of arrogance? How can the government, given the controversy over this issue, when it had the option to be able to review this legitimately--the Premier himself had the opportunity to look into this case, did not take the time to investigate the case. Instead they signed the agreement yesterday. How do you have the tenacity to see this agreement signed just yesterday? Why did this Premier not take action and look into the agreement itself?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Speaking of tenacity, the reasons obviously should be clear to everyone that members opposite for three days have brought forward questions and allegations that required several ministers of the government to go back and review step by step every aspect of the decision that was made with respect to awarding of a contract to Rimer Alco. What we found in going back step by step was members opposite alleged that the bonding requirements had been changed, and examination found out they were wrong. They had not; they were exactly as they were in the tender process.

Members opposite alleged that Rimer Alco was found not to be a qualified bidder in terms of their ability to provide the service. We examined that very carefully, found out they were wrong. The committee acknowledged that they were one of two qualified bidders who were capable of providing the service. Members opposite alleged that they were not the low bidder. We examined it carefully, found out they were the low bidder. They were wrong again, opposite.

So, under all those circumstances, having had several different ministers examine the process, we found out that every single allegation they made was wrong, Madam Speaker, and in fact the only correct way to respond to this tender process was to award the contract to the lowest qualified bidder who was able to be bonded for the process. Having examined and confirmed that that was the case, the contract was awarded.

* (1350)

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, did the Premier himself review this case before the actual document was signed, and if so, will the Premier tell this House who ultimately was responsible for overturning this particular decision, recommendation, from the committee? Which minister is going to have the courage to stand up and take responsibility for that overturning of that recommendation?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, there was no overturning done. There is a requirement in the actions of government for us to award contracts in keeping with a proper tender process. That means the lowest qualified bidder, and that is exactly what happened in this case. Now you can imagine what we would have gone through in this House if we had not awarded it to the lowest bidder, if we had in fact ignored a qualified bidder who was actually the low bidder, as well who happened to be also a Manitoba-based company. What would members opposite be doing? They would be going nuts in this House, saying to us, how on earth could you not give it to the lowest qualified bidder who is a Manitoba company; what is wrong with you? That would have been their tack.

Madam Speaker, we have taken it through the examination in accordance with the questions asked, and we have been satisfied that indeed it met all of the requirements.

Mr. Lamoureux: Beauchesne's is indeed quite clear in terms of that the Premier--and the honourable Premier knows that the answer should be somewhat brief and address the question posed. The question that was posed was: was the Premier aware prior to the agreement being signed and did he review it? That was the actual question: was he aware of it? I would appreciate he answer the question, not necessarily bafflegab around the question.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Inkster does not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts.

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, the Minister of Health has just confirmed that this government had the gall to sign this contract just yesterday. I want to ask the minister: can he confirm that his department Home Care Branch had released confidential records to Rimer Alco before they signed this contract on Tuesday?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I am not quite sure what point the member is making. In the process such as this, you know, obviously the parties were informed who would be receiving the contract. The bidders who were not successful have taken their efforts to attack the particular process. The department begins work with the successful bidder; the paperwork of completing the contract moves through the system. Is the member alleging that there has been some improper use of records, some improper use that they have been given to someone who was not to be the successful bidder?

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Radisson, with a supplementary question.

Ms. Cerilli: Madam Speaker, I am asking the Minister of Health to confirm, as we have the information, that Rimer Alco had access to the Department of Health Home Care records on Tuesday prior to signing this contract yesterday, which was Wednesday. Can he confirm that to the House today?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, I am not going to confirm that statement. We have allegation upon allegation coming to this House that prove--not being looked at. I still fail to see the great issue that the member is attempting to raise here.

* (1355)

Ms. Cerilli: Madam Speaker, I believe that in due course that is the fact and it will be confirmed.

I want to ask a supplementary to the minister. Is it not true that the Minister of Health held off in signing this agreement until yesterday because of pressure put on him by the industry, from the community, and he has only signed this contract yesterday because he knows that his department has issued these confidential records from Home Care to this company?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, in the life of a Minister of Health in this province, with all of the work and paper that passes my desk, I can tell you in the last few days in dealing with issues related to personal care homes and some of the issues we talked about earlier in Question Period, with the work intendance in this Assembly, this particular document was walked over to my office yesterday for completion of that work because of the scheduling of when it could be signed, to have it in and signed so operation can take over on the expected date. None of the allegations, untoward comments or any of the other things the member tries to make to appear something ill has happened are just not true.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): One of the fundamental difficulties the public has with the government's privatization role is that confidential patient records are becoming accessible to private companies. It is clear in this instance, before the contract was even entered into, before there was even protection for individuals regarding their confidentiality records, confidential information was provided to a company that the contract was not even signed for.

How does the minister explain this issue, in light of the fact that confidentiality is one of the crucial problems with respect to contracting out by this government to their private friends?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the confidentiality of people's health records is very important to all of us. That is why this government will be introducing legislation to protect that information. It becomes all the more important as we get into the age of high technology.

I think members should appreciate, in any contracting process when you have entered into a bidding process and you have a successful bidder, you have the documents in which you are preparing. There is a transition period in which you are planning to gear them up. Documents are being signed and being put into place. They are the successful bidder. They are covered by the legal requirements of confidentiality. There is a transition going over in which to do it.

Somehow in their desire to make an issue, they are trying to imply that the Ministry of Health cannot get into a transition with a successful bidder to deliver a service to Manitobans. This is, quite frankly, silly.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, is the minister not concerned that the patient records of 800 patients, including 30 children, were given to a private company that the minister had not even signed the contract for, on a contract that was controversial from the very start, on a contract the minister held off signing because he had concerns?

Is the minister not concerned that it, in fact, is not only wrong but may, in fact, be illegal?

* (1400)

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, I would be very concerned if the Ministry of Health was giving out confidential information on patients to people for whom we were not in a contractual or entering into contractual relationship to deliver a service. That is not what has happened here.

Madam Speaker, as in many things with government, once the bid was accepted, certain legal obligations were imposed on the parties in putting that together. There is a transition. The normal administrative work of completing and signing agreements takes time as we move it through the system.

What is important with Rimer Alco taking on that service is that the people receiving it, that the flow of information takes place so that we can have a successful implementation of this particular service. That is what it is about. Surely to goodness, members are not saying that the officials in the Department of Health were wrong because they got on with the job.

Some Honourable Members: Patients have rights.

Mr. Praznik: Well, members opposite say patients have rights. They do; they have a right to receive the service.

Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the Minister responsible for Culture, Heritage and Citizenship.

Once again the federal government has based recent changes to immigration laws on the Toronto experience. The new law will apply mostly to the sponsorship of parents and grandparents. In Manitoba, the cost of social assistance due to sponsorship breakdown is extremely small. By and large, parents and grandparents live with the sponsoring family and contribute economically to the family, to the community and to Manitoba as a whole. The new requirement to use an income means test for immigrants shows once again that a means test is simply meanspirited.

My question is will the minister, given that our immigration population contributes to our economy and to the social fabric of Manitoba, write to the federal minister to oppose these changes.

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Madam Speaker, as the member knows, my colleague the former Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship did in fact write to the federal minister very much opposed to any increase in the income-level requirement. As I understand it now, the changes are stable income for over a 12-month period.

The member is quite right in saying that this is very much aimed at Ontario and particularly Toronto and that Manitoba has, I understand, a default rate of less than 1 percent. So I will want to very carefully look at any impact on Manitobans because we very, very much support family unification, and in fact, in the Canada-Manitoba immigration agreement signed by my colleague on behalf of our province, family reunification is noted. So I share the member's concern, that we would like no effect on immigration in Manitoba.

Mr. Hickes: I thank the minister for her response.

Will the minister, given that sponsorship of family members was already severely restricted in 1992, recommend that the federal minister drop any proposed changes that involve income means test on Manitoba immigrants?

Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Speaker, our signing of the Canada-Manitoba immigration agreement does allow us to have discussions with the federal minister to make our concerns well known to them. So I will be taking opportunities on behalf of our province, especially to again restate our commitment in the area of family reunification and that commitment noted within our agreement.

Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): My questions are to the Premier (Mr. Filmon). The president of Manitoba Hydro today confirmed in the committee dealing with Manitoba Hydro that upcoming changes will allow for competition for Manitoba Hydro's retail customers, exactly the condition the Premier referred to yesterday in this Chamber as a precondition for him to consider the sale of Manitoba Hydro.

When the Premier was wrong in regard to the time frame of deregulation and he was wrong again yesterday when he referred to retail competition, was he merely uninformed or was he deliberately misleading Manitobans? Will he stop using those weasel words and tell Manitobans the straights facts?

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I would remind the honourable member for St. James that she used some very unparliamentary language. It has been ruled unparliamentary on several occasions--"deliberately misleading." I wonder if I might ask her to withdraw those words.

Ms. Mihychuk: I withdraw those words.

Madam Speaker: I thank the honourable member for St. James.

Hon. David Newman (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Madam Speaker, the tone of the question is so different from what I thought was a very civilized meeting where reason prevailed that I find the transformation surprising. However, it is a mountain made out of a molehill.

In my initial remarks at the standing committee on Tuesday, March 18, I indicated the very kind of competition which she must be referring to here today that the president of Manitoba Hydro spoke about. He spoke about the theoretical kind of possibility of a thermal generating plant being created out of the supply of natural gas and then be hooked up to a major customer like Inco or Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting or a chemical plant in Brandon. Of course that is possible, and that kind of competition would be possible. That would be a kind of retail competition.

Ms. Mihychuk: Madam Speaker, my question to the Premier, since it is the Premier who has been making the comments about what are the conditions of privatization, will the Premier tell Manitobans today that he will take it to the people of Manitoba for a vote prior to any consideration of privatization?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, as I have said before, I believe that Manitoba Hydro is being very well managed, that it is operating very efficiently in public ownership and that I cannot see anything in the near future that would cause anybody to look at privatizing it. Maybe New Democrats would want to privatize it, but we certainly do not intend to, and we do not see it as being something that we would want to look at. If there was the kind of retail competition that would see them being able to--

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the members opposite do not want to hear the answer.

Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Yesterday the minister responsible for Land Titles told us that historical documents were not for sale and yet in Headnotes and Footnotes, a publication of the Manitoba Bar Association, the expression "willing to sell" appears and prospective readers are advised to contact the Registrar General of Property Rights in the Department of Consumer Affairs. I would like to table this page. Madam Speaker, we are left with a web of inaccuracies, another case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing.

So I want to ask the Minister responsible for Consumer and Corporate Affairs to explain why the Registrar General of Property Rights is apparently privatizing historical documents while the minister says he--that is the minister--is not.

Hon. Mike Radcliffe (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, I thought I had made myself very clear yesterday, but I will say again for the benefit of the honourable member for Osborne--

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, to complete his response.

Mr. Radcliffe: Neither the Land Titles Office nor this government take responsibility for any comments that are made in Headnotes and Footnotes.

I can reassure my colleagues in this Chamber and the honourable member for Osborne that, as I stated yesterday, there are no public documents that are for sale, that in fact this was a solicitation from the Winnipeg Land Titles Office to solicit contributions from the private bar to frame and matte important documents which were in fear of being destroyed through age and to be displayed in the public domain. Thank you.

Ms. McGifford: Then I am wondering, Madam Speaker, why that famous "s" word "sell"--and not "salacious"--appears in the journal along with the phone number and the name of the Registrar General of Property Rights in the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs.

Mr. Radcliffe: Madam Speaker, I will repeat some of the information that I have just put on the record, which is that Headnotes and Footnotes is a private publication put out by the members of the Manitoba Bar Association. It is not a government publication.

I would also point out to my honourable colleagues in this Chamber that when my honourable colleague and I discussed this matter yesterday, I invited her to phone the author of the information in the article to confirm what I had said in this Chamber, and I would suggest that if she has not done that, that she do her homework in an appropriate fashion before she puts this sort of information before this Chamber to confuse the people of Manitoba. Thank you.

* (1410)

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Madam Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Finance. The Minister of Finance continues to boast about how great the Manitoba economy is doing, using carefully selected various statistics.

Can the Minister of Finance therefore explain to this House why business bankruptcies have increased in Manitoba in 1996 more than any other province? Why are we 10 out of 10? Why are we in the worst situation of any province in Canada with a 39.5 percent increase in bankruptcies?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, I would encourage the member for Brandon East to read the reports of the Toronto Dominion Bank that have been out in the last few days, the reports of Wood Gundy, Nesbitt Burns, all of the organizations that are saying nothing but positive things about Manitoba's economy and nothing but positive things about our finances.

In fact, his own colleague the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale), whom he should probably talk to, on CBC Radio the other day said in a period of record growth and jobs and employment, from his own colleague acknowledging the fine performance of Manitoba's economy--

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): On a point of order, I believe Beauchesne's indicates that the

answers to questions should be brief and to the point raised. The specific question is why is Manitoba 10 out of 10 in terms of bankruptcies and has the greatest increase in bankruptcies of anywhere in the country? The minister is going on infocommercial that has no relation to the issue of bankruptcy as raised by the member for Brandon East.

Madam Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Kildonan, I would remind the honourable Minister of Finance that indeed his response should be specific to the question asked.

Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister of Finance, to respond to the question asked.

Mr. Stefanson: I want to remind the member for Brandon East that we have just had five straight years of decline in business bankruptcies in Manitoba, the best record in all of Canada.

Mr. Leonard Evans: Madam Speaker, my question was, and I asked the minister, will the minister undertake to analyze 1996 where Manitoba was 10 out of 10, the worst situation of any province in terms of bankruptcies. What types of firms are especially involved? What are the causes of these bankruptcies? Why are we doing so poorly compared to the rest of the country?

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, I just told the member for Brandon East that we have now, up until that year, had five straight years of decline in business bankruptcies in Manitoba, the best record of any province in Canada when it comes to consumer bankruptcies. In 1996, we had the best performance in all of Canada, so our record in that whole area is outstanding in a relative sense within Canada.

Today Manitoba's economy, as we all know, including the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale), is performing amongst the best in all of Canada when it comes to job growth, growth in retail sales, growth in exports, growth in manufacturing shipments, growth in private sector capital investment, five straight years of the best performance in Manitoba and on track for its sixth record year and so our economy--in spite of all of the rhetoric from the member for Brandon East.

I would encourage him to talk to people in his community. I was out there Tuesday morning talking about the '97 budget and nothing but compliments about our financial situation and our economic situation. In fact, his own chamber gave our budget a B-plus as an outstanding rating for the performance of this government.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.