Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, United Way agencies produced a report that should be ringing the bells in all of our heads in terms of the major crises of both offloading and the lack of focus on preventative programs to give our kids hope, rather than some of the despair that some kids are feeling at very, very early ages.

Madam Speaker, we have raised questions in the past in this House about an issue that is somewhat a symptom of adolescent difficulty in our communities, the highest teen- and adolescent-pregnancy rate in Canada. A subcommittee report that has not been released by the government yet linked the high teen pregnancy rate to the lack of adequate education and self-confidence, violence, abuse and poverty.

The Premier (Mr. Filmon) in the last election campaign promised to develop, and targeted, strategies for community-based prevention to prevent unwanted pregnancies with our adolescent population. I would like to ask the Premier today: What action has he taken on his specific promise of two years ago?

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Madam Speaker, I thank the honourable Leader of the Opposition for that question, because indeed it is an issue in Manitoba, something that has to be addressed and has to be addressed in a very comprehensive way.

We do know from statistics and from information that has been gathered by the Department of Family Services and dealt with through the Children and Youth Secretariat that those that are born to adolescent single parents are six times more likely to need use of the child welfare system than those who are born to two-parent families and, Madam Speaker, we are working very aggressively through the Children and Youth Secretariat. By the way, I want to indicate to the Leader of the Opposition that the steering committee reports are available to the public through statutory publications, and I am sure that members of the opposition have seen them--they were working documents--and our strategy that has just been released by the Children and Youth Secretariat will deal in a very proactive and aggressive way with that issue.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, I have read the report, the sanitized report released by the government dealing with teen pregnancy. Again, we see many of the recommendations from the government for action are offloads onto other agencies, voluntary agencies, community agencies, co-ordination with this group and that group, and when it comes to specific action, this government is somewhat hypocritical in what it says it is going to do and what it actually does.

In light of the Postl report and the other reports that this government has had, I would like to ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon) specifically, in terms of our high teen pregnancy rate: Why has this government and this Premier cut the funding, the total funding for the committee for unplanned pregnancy, and why have they cut the education funds for planned parenthood? Does that make any long-term sense at all for prevention of unwanted pregnancies and teen pregnancies here in Manitoba?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Madam Speaker, I want to indicate to the Leader of the Opposition that in order to find the solutions--it is very difficult for me or any of us in our age group in this Legislature to believe that we can solve the problems or get the right messages to the adolescents who are experiencing the problems of teen pregnancy, both the males and the females. We have been doing some focus groups with young males to try to see how they can be involved in trying to solve the problem, and we need to be dealing with young females and asking them for their input on what messages will have an impact on young people, and we are. I have held meetings throughout the city of Winnipeg and in other parts of the province with groups of individuals from all different disciplines throughout the community, whether they be guidance counsellors in our school system, church leaders, and other professionals, to try to find a comprehensive plan and solution.

* (1345)

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, perhaps it will be the guidance counsellors who have been left after the massive cuts by this government on our public education system.

The Postl report recommends the primary preventative strategy site for adolescents--obviously before that it is at the family--must be at the school. The government's censored report, which they did not release and has been released by the NDP, recommends that programs provided in schools must provide information on a range of options to prevent unwanted and unintended pregnancies. The government's sanitized report which they have released does not have any of these recommendations dealing with the school.

I would like to ask the Premier: Is the reason why they have excluded these recommendations dealing with the school based on the massive cutbacks that have taken place in public education that will not allow our primary site to be located in the schools because of the some $43 million this government has cut away from preventative and educational programs in the public education system?

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, for starters, as part of the questioning the member put forward, we have an increase of $115 million in public schools' funding today more than we did when we took office. I think that needs to be repeated every time he indicates cuts, because it leaves a false impression that there has been an overall cut instead of a fluctuation on a steady scale going up, which is what has happened.

I should indicate as well, Madam Speaker, in terms of the main thrust of the question, this is something that Manitoba Education and Training is very aware of. It is something that we have been working with together as ministers through the Child and Youth Secretariat. We have done a number of things in the public schools to address teenage pregnancy in terms of educating the people who are in the schools now. We have put in place infant labs in a variety of schools--and I can name them if the member wishes me to in a subsequent answer--to enable young mothers to continue their education so their children have a better advantage.

Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Natural Resources. With the severe flooding along the Red River likely to begin unfortunately in just a number of days, for the second year in a row I would ask the Minister of Natural Resources whether he can explain to the House today why his government did not act on the request last year to get a hovercraft, test it on the Red River this year.

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, as it turns out, and the member is well aware, the equipment that would have been required is unavailable at this time. There is a piece of equipment that is available that could probably be purchased, and if the member is advocating that purchase, then perhaps he should say so.

Mr. Dewar: Has the minister contacted authorities in Quebec to see whether the hovercraft there, which is used on about 10 to 12 rivers in that province, can be shipped here in time for the anticipated flooding of the Red River?

Mr. Cummings: Madam Speaker, the information that we were given is that that craft is not available, and it is under contract to the Coast Guard to deal with, I believe, some 15 river breakups that it is contracted to do in that province.

* (1350)

Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): My final question: Will the minister ensure that the drilling of holes in the Red River continues until it is no longer safe to do so?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, I will undertake to review that. Certainly we are attempting to use this process as much as possible, and we certainly do not want to endanger anybody's life, but we are quite prepared to continue. The fact is that no one yet nor would we expect anyone to be able to tell us whether or not this will be highly effective or partly effective. We are hopeful it will be of some use, but, again, as I indicated yesterday in Estimates, we have to warn the people in that area that there is still a potential for ice jams as there is every year but some years more so than others. The main danger to flooding in the area that the member is concerned about would be as a result of ice jams, and of course we are looking to make sure that there is a warning system in place as well.

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, south Transcona, like many other areas in Manitoba, is preparing for flooding this spring. The difference is that in south Transcona there was hope that this would be the last year that they would have to make these preparations. In the Estimates for Urban Affairs, the minister stated that he would be prepared to fund the south Transcona flood protection pond at $1.75 million from the Urban Capital Project Phase III fund. He is waiting for a new motion from City Council to request these funds.

I want to ask the minister if he will confirm that the allocation for the Urban Capital Project fund Phase III is $16 million for this year. Can he assure us that there is room in that fund this year for the $1.75 million, and can he tell us how much of that fund has been allocated?

Hon. Jack Reimer (Minister of Urban Affairs): Indeed, it is a very serious problem, the flooding that is facing various sectors and particularly as the member for Radisson and the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid) have brought forth this problem to me along with the councillor for the area, Shirley Timm-Rudolph, and the concerns that all three of them have expressed. I agree with them in a sense that this is a problem that can be addressed. We have indicated that we are willing to address the problem through our Urban Capital Allocation fund to the tune of I think it is $1.75 million and a 50-50 cost-share arrangement. The City of Winnipeg in their request to the province had indicated that they would like to participate but with new money. We have set up an allocation fund. It is totally unique in Canada in the sense where we have dedicated funding to a municipal government like the City of Winnipeg. So this is someplace where they should be looking. I will endeavour to expound a little further in my next.

Ms. Cerilli: Madam Speaker, the question I would ask the minister is if there is room in the fund for this year. I want to ask the minister further if he has had any discussions with the city requiring them to submit for money from this fund, as opposed to new money which they are requesting, and why would they not have applied for the money in this fund in the first place so we would not have this delay?

Mr. Reimer: Far be it from me to speculate on the thinking of some of the councillors that comes about on Main Street other than to the fact that we respond in a very conscientious manner to the resolutions that are brought forth by the City Council.

City Council had brought forth a resolution specifically asking for the cost-share on a 50-50 basis for the retention pond in Transcona. The stipulation that they put with it was that it was not to be the UCPA III funding but it was to be new funding from this provincial government.

Madam Speaker, we are of the opinion that UCPA III, that fund of $96 million over five years, is totally unique. It is specifically made for this type of project. It is an allocation for capital improvements in the City of Winnipeg. It is the natural area where this money should be applied for. Where there is the availability to fund it, we have made the offer. We feel that this is the only possibility for them to pursue.

* (1355)

Ms. Cerilli: Can the minister confirm for the House when his Department of Urban Affairs must have the request for money under this UCPA fund for this year in order for the retention pond to be constructed this construction season to prevent another flood next spring?

Mr. Reimer: I am led to believe that this is a topic of discussion, as we speak right now, at City Council. They brought it forth for discussion I believe yesterday at their council meeting. I would think that I would be given some sort of confirmation or direction or some sort of resolution, hopefully, within the next week or two from City Council as to what their direction is.

As I mentioned, this is a unique situation here in Canada where we form a partnership with the City of Winnipeg for the allocation of funds of a magnitude of $96 million. As mentioned, this is the third allocation of funding. The first one was for $90 million over five years. The second was $96 million over five years. Now we are into a third allocation of $96 million over five years. It is a tremendous opportunity for the city to look at capital improvements. The south Transcona retention pond fits the criteria. That is where they should be looking at.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, in the coming school year in September '97, Manitoba students will be able to graduate from high school without studying Canadian history at a senior level. To the hundreds of Manitobans who have protested this, the minister has always said: Trust me, everything is in place; there will be new curricula for Grades 1 to 10 with added emphasis on Canadian studies to compensate for this loss.

I would like to ask the minister today whether she could confirm that this new curriculum for Grades 1 to 10 is not available and in fact will not be available for September '97.

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I have to indicate to the member that when she indicates that students can graduate without history, she is wrong. Students do have to take history up until the end of Grade 10. Right now they take it up until the end of Grade 11. I have indicated to the member that they will be learning in those first 10 years the information that they currently learn in 11, plus they will have the additional opportunity to take advanced history in their final two years. They also have to take, from a list of complementary subjects, four out of six, and one of those six is history.

Madam Speaker, schools also have the opportunity, should they wish it, to make history compulsory at higher grades if that is their community choice. Through school plans and those types of things, that opportunity is available. So I indicate to the member that we will not be having students graduate without understanding and knowing Canadian history, as she is wanting to imply.

Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, it is the minister's intention then to withdraw the requirement for senior level Grade 11 Canadian history at a time when the minister clearly does not have the new curriculum for Grades 1 to 10 that she has talked about in Estimates, that she has talked about in this House before. That curriculum is not ready. Is the minister going to withdraw the requirement for the senior level requirement for graduation in Manitoba schools?

Mrs. McIntosh: Madam Speaker, the history curriculum is being worked upon in two areas. Western protocol, with the coming together of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories, is embarking on common curricula preparation for a number of subject areas, one of which is history, social studies. While the history curriculum is not complete at this particular date, she is wrong to assume from that that the history curriculum will not be ready in time for teaching when it is required. I indicate to the member, give her my assurance that the teaching of history in our schools will continue to be emphasized and enhanced and not neglected, as she continues to want to imply.

* (1400)

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister confirm that her staff have indeed advised her that the proposed new curriculum in Canadian studies, which was the prerequisite to the withdrawing of the requirement for the Grade 11 course, is not ready, that no texts have been written, no resource materials have been prepared, no pilot projects have been developed, that it cannot be put in place for at least three years and that in fact what we are looking at is the minister's millennium project?

Mrs. McIntosh: I indicate to the member that I do indeed have a millennium project. By the year 2000 we expect to see in place outcomes, measured standards in a variety of subject areas. Indeed, the target area for many of the introduction of those is in fact the year 2000, because the member knows that you cannot prepare things overnight the way she seems to be inferring that we can.

Madam Speaker, I will check and get back to the member as to the status in terms of the specific completion date, because the member is implying that I have been advised that it simply cannot be done until after the new millennium. That is not what I have been informed by my department, but out of not wanting to call her a person who would deliberately put false information on the record, I will check on what she alleges and I will respond to her with the latest update from my department as to status.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, under this government, the beer-brewing industry has not done well. First, we lost Labatt, and there we lost 150 jobs. Now we are going to be losing Molson and that is somewhat 91. [interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Lamoureux: The member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) should be somewhat patient. We are talking about very important jobs here in the manufacturing industry.

My question is: Will the government do something not only creative but very positive for the industry by allowing or bringing forward legislation that would allow for brewing pubs in the province of Manitoba? I ask that question of the Minister responsible for the Liquor Commission.

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister charged with the administration of The Liquor Control Act): Madam Speaker, the member, I believe, knows--and I did have a discussion with the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer) and a member of City Council--that it is possible at this time for groups or for business people to open brew pubs if they would like to. Representatives of the Liquor Commission have been more than willing to meet with people who wish to open brew pubs under our current legislation. I believe the member may be aware of that.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I would ask the minister if she will then clearly clarify there are no impediments that will prevent brewery pubs from opening today, that in fact it can happen.

Mrs. Vodrey: Under the legislation as it exists, provided they conform with the legislation, the hours of opening and what is required, then it is possible for brew pubs to in fact open now. If the member is asking for something further from that, I hope he will make himself clear in his next question.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Will the minister request that the MLCC consider, or if not in fact act on, promoting locally brewed beer, as in the past they have promoted the sale of imported beer?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister charged with the administration of The Liquor Control Act): I believe that the members of the Liquor Control Commission have been very willing to meet with any person who is an entrepreneur who would like to examine the opening of a brew pub or other facilities which require licensing. If the member has any concerns that have not happened, then I hope he will let me know about that, but to my knowledge, the Liquor Commission has in fact been very willing to meet and to explain to any entrepreneurs whatever the requirements are and what they would be expected to conform to under the current legislation.

Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, yesterday this government was wrong again. Neither the Manitoba Medical Association nor the College of Physicians and Surgeons has given a green light to SmartHealth's plan to computerize confidential health care patient records.

My questions are for the Premier. When both the Manitoba Medical Association and the College of Physicians and Surgeons say no to computerizing these records, how can ordinary Manitobans believe that their confidential and private records will remain just that, confidential and private?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): The interesting thing is that the member opposite is attempting to suggest that somehow medical records today are very, very secure. I recall--and this goes back for many, many years--instances when the New Democrats were in office where there was an entire set of records from a clinic in Transcona that was found blowing down the back lanes of the street, the back alleys. More recently we found private, confidential medical records in dumpsters in downtown Winnipeg because of the so-called security that people have of their medical records. The fact of the matter is that electronic record keeping can be far more secure than any record keeping that we currently have today.

The other thing is that the member opposite has alleged that there were not doctors represented in the current process of developing the health information network. There are 19 doctors that are part of the development process currently. So again she brings information that is not accurate to the table, and she somehow alleges that people have something to fear from having their records electronically stored versus today when their records are open to the public by virtue of mistakes and mishandling of the information under its current form.

Ms. McGifford: Clearly the Premier has misunderstood and misdirected my question.

An Honourable Member: Again.

Ms. McGifford: Again.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Osborne, to pose a supplementary question.

Ms. McGifford: To the Premier again: I wonder if the Premier could tell us today, will SmartHealth computer network include, as Dr. Brian Ritchie understands, medical charts, billings, office charts and other confidential materials?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I will indicate a couple of things to the member opposite. Firstly, contrary to what she alleged yesterday, the information will not be the property of SmartHealth. It will be the property of Manitoba Health as it is today and always has been, so she is wrong on that. Further, I would indicate that--[interjection] No, she alleged. She alleged.

I will also indicate that this House will be dealing with, prior to the implementation of anything on SmartHealth, privacy legislation that will govern, whether it is SmartHealth, whether it is a public health information network or any other public information, the privacy rights of Manitobans, and it will supersede any information that can be used for any other purpose in the public domain.

So those issues will be dealt with prior to the SmartHealth implementation, and she ought not to be attempting to raise fears. What she ought to be doing is coming here and debating the privacy legislation to ensure that it does indeed do as we want it to do which is to protect the interests of the public and the individuals in the public.

* (1410)

Ms. McGifford: Madam Speaker, I wonder if the Premier understands that the difference between a breakdown in paper documents and computer documents is that when a computer breaks down, all records are at risk, not a few paper documents. However, that is not my question.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. It is my understanding that that indeed was a question. If I heard the member correctly she asked if the First Minister understood the difference between paper documents and computer documents.

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, in fact, it is the opposite. When the computer breaks down--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Osborne, on a point of order.

Ms. McGifford: On a point of order, Madam Speaker. I was merely trying to pass a piece of information to the Premier for his edification. It was not my question.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, I am sure that--[interjection] Sorry.

Ms. McGifford: Madam Speaker, a new question.

Madam Speaker: A new question. Yes.

Ms. McGifford: Is it not time for this government to finally admit that SmartHealth is just another example of the government's fascination with technology, to date a $26-million dive into a computer system without having legislation at hand, in mind, in draft, not even knowing if protective legislation is indeed possible?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I just spoke at a luncheon today with a group of scientists and engineers who were involved in the technology development in our province. This statement of course speaks volumes about the position of the dinosaurs who are sitting opposite us, who have absolutely no--

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable First Minister, to complete his response.

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, they keep arguing against any change that takes place in society. They want to be back as far as they can go in the past, in the horse and buggy days. This is what we are dealing with, and that is the tragedy of it when a group of presumably intelligent people who are elected to be in a position of trying to lead public opinion can be so backward as to suggest that technology is automatically bad for society. It is a dreadful position to take. It is an embarrassment to the New Democrats and it is why they will stay in opposition for a long, long time.

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, will the Premier, who I know does not want to leave false and misleading information on the record, first of all start by confirming that patient records are not the possession of Manitoba Health? They do not belong to Manitoba Health; they belong to patients. They are entrusted by patients to doctors and courts have made that clear many, many times. That is the essence of this issue, the question of who owns these records and who has the right to put them on what forms of media. So will he confirm that he was wrong in indicating that Manitoba Health owns my medical records? It does not.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, what I can confirm is that they will not be the property of SmartHealth as has been alleged by the New Democratic Party falsely.

Mr. Sale: On a new question, Madam Speaker. The Premier, I believe, has confirmed that he misled the House in the sense that the records would be owned by Manitoba Health. I believe that he has clarified it, but he has not done so unequivocally. I hope he will do so, that the patient records of Manitobans are owned by Manitobans.

My question is to the First Minister. Will the Premier now act to protect Manitobans' privacy by directing the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) to abandon now any plans to put comprehensive, confidential patient medical files on the SmartHealth system?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the system is being developed with some of the most extensive consultation that has ever gone on to the development of any system in Manitoba. It involves many, many stakeholders. It involves people whose major interest is to protect the records of the patient that are kept in trust by Manitoba Health as they are today. We will ensure that privacy is protected both in the health information system, the health information network that is being developed. It will be enhanced as well by this process, and we will ensure as well with the privacy legislation that is going to be introduced in this House that all information that is in the public domain is subject to the very most stringent regulations possible to protect the interests of Manitobans.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, will the Premier explain why it is in the public interest in any way that my confidential health records, including charts, drug information, genetic disease, background of any kind, that that information should be available at pharmacies and hospitals and doctors' offices across this province? What is the public benefit that is being gained by this?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I think it is in the interests of individual patients, as well as the public, that we not encounter circumstances in which people are prescribed medication that might be in contradiction with something they are already taking. I think it is in the interests of individual patients, as well as Manitobans, that we not encounter damage to a person's health by virtue of the fact that a doctor does not know some information that may have been obtained from previous examinations and previous treatments that should be a part of the patient record.

I think it is in the interests of individual patients that they not be overmedicated, that they not be overserviced in terms of having successive repetitions of the same tests that they already have had within the last short while--where we have had instances of people being admitted into a hospital in southwestern Manitoba to get one series of tests, to be transferred to Brandon 48 hours later to have the same set of tests repeated, to be transferred to Winnipeg 72 hours later to have the same set of tests repeated. That is in nobody's interest; that is not in the individual's. It is not good medicine, and it is not good for the health care of the individual or of Manitobans. That is the kind of nonsense that he wants to preach, this dinosaur from the past, in this House.

Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Culture and Heritage. In the 1993 federal election the Liberals promised to make family-class immigration a priority. This, of course, is just one of the many broken promises on immigration made by the federal Liberals.

Family reunification has been made much more difficult, thanks to the Liberal government's head tax and other huge fee increases imposed by them. Has the province been invited to appear before the pre-election federal advisory committee reviewing the Immigration Act?

* (1420)

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Madam Speaker, the member identifies an issue where I believe we have some agreement, and that is our concern to continue family reunification and to speak up on behalf of the people of our province, where we believe steps taken by the federal Liberal government have interfered with family reunification.

There was to be a hearing in Manitoba--I believe it was on Monday--which was cancelled, but the answer is yes, we had made arrangements to appear before that committee. We will be making sure that we do submit the position of Manitoba before that committee.

Mr. Hickes: Given that this province has had the most significant loss of potential immigration of all 10 provinces, why has this government not made scrapping the head tax the priority of negotiations with the federal government on immigration issues?

Mrs. Vodrey: This government has in fact registered its concern around the federal head tax. My colleague, now the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gilleshammer), the former Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship, made that very clear previously, and I have continued to make that position known to the federal government. Most recently, I have had a communication with the federal government outlining that issue.

Mr. Hickes: Can the minister tell the House how much money Manitobans have had to give the federal government in immigration fees, including the head tax, since 1993? How much has it cost us as a province?

Mrs. Vodrey: I am certainly prepared to find that figure for the member for the Estimates process. I do not have it with me, but he does outline a very important point in that people in Manitoba, people wishing to immigrate to Manitoba, are charged a very significant amount of money by the federal Liberal government. Our province, Madam Speaker, has been making every effort to attract immigration to our province. We are on the Internet. We have participated in countries around the world to let them know that Manitoba is the place to come and to live and to settle. We have made our position known to the federal government; we are not happy with this detriment to our immigration.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.