Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have this afternoon thirty Grades 7 and 9 students from Shady Oak Christian School under the direction of Mr. Darrel Goosen. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Cummings).

We also have twenty-three Grades 7 and 8 students from Amos Okemow Memorial School under the direction of Mr. Reg Toews and Mr. Mike Borgfjord. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson).

On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the Acting Premier.

Madam Speaker, last October, Bristol Aerospace, a company that employs close to a thousand people in Winnipeg and is, obviously, a very significant economic benefit to our community, announced that it was putting the local plant up for sale. It was indicated that the sale would be completed within four to six months, and later in the winter, early January, February, we were told that the sale is imminent within the next four to six weeks. We hear now that the end of the month is the target date for the sale.

Can the Minister responsible for I, T and T please inform this House whether any sale has been arranged, and can he advise the people of Manitoba on the success of keeping those people working in Manitoba?

* (1340)

Hon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): I thank the Leader of the Opposition for that question, Madam Speaker.

The presence of Bristol Aerospace in the province of Manitoba and the over a thousand employees that they have in their factory, their plant, are extremely important to this province. It is truly a cornerstone for the aerospace industry and the transportation industry for Manitoba. I do not disagree, the member has--there was some information as to the time which they were projecting in which they would have the sale complete. We have been in ongoing discussions. The department has been part of discussions with them, not directly as to who the purchaser would be, but trying to keep track of the fact that there is, in fact, a buyer, and it will take place sooner rather than later. We also are aware of the fact that it is hoped to be concluded by the end of June, and we look forward to a company that purchases it, carries it out and expands its opportunities here in the province of Manitoba.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, with the phasing out of other work that this company was providing to the federal government, the number of employees has decreased almost by 50 percent over the last couple of years. In July of 1996, the federal government secretly awarded, without tender, a $216-million contract to Bombardier and did not allow any tendering for that work to take place by the Bristol Aerospace company. This untendered contract, I think, works totally against the interests of Manitoba.

I would like to ask the Deputy Premier: What impact has this untendered contract going to Bombardier had on the economic situation for Bristol, because they announced the sale of their company shortly thereafter?

Mr. Downey: Madam Speaker, I cannot indicate to the House any direct relationship as to that contract and to the sale of Bristol by the Rolls Royce company of the U.K. The reason for the sale is that it is not along the type of business that the Rolls Royce company traditionally has carried out. However, any business that the plant would have here in Winnipeg would augur very well for anyone that was trying to buy it and/or anticipating purchasing it.

The province, I can tell the member, is involved through the MIOP program which is supporting the further redevelopment of the plant to change its direction from being so closely tied to military construction activity to more civilian aircraft. We are committed to Bristol to help them do that and are, in fact, actively involved in a project currently.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Deputy Premier--in 1986 when the former Conservative government rigged the tendering process and awarded the maintenance contract of the CF-18 to the Bombardier corporation, all Manitobans joined together to call on the federal government to treat this region and this province fairly. This contract of $216 million was awarded without any tendering whatsoever to a competitive company to the Bristol Aerospace company.

Madam Speaker, we also understand that close to $1 billion in retrofitting and refurbishment work is being let out by stealth, if you will, in terms of work that is being provided to Bombardier.

Has the Deputy Premier raised this issue in a public way with the Prime Minister, with the federal M.P.s? What are we doing to say that Manitoba should be treated fairly in a tendering process, whether it is a rigged process in 1986 or no tendering process in 1997?

Hon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Madam Speaker, there is no secret that this government has stood strong as it relates to the aerospace activity in the province of Manitoba and also--and I give credit to the opposition, joined with us when it came to the Air Command to make sure that we tried to save some of the jobs that the federal Liberals were proposing to and did in fact move out of the city of Winnipeg, which is extremely important to this province.

I can also say, Madam Speaker, we are currently working with some of the proposed bidders--by the way, it just happens to be on a helicopter contract which was cancelled by the current Liberal government and is now being reintroduced under another name. That cost the city of Winnipeg a tremendous amount of aerospace jobs and was callously taken away for political reasons.

We, this government, will stand strong for the aerospace industry in Manitoba and will do what we can to bring as much business to the province of Manitoba.

* (1345)

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Education. It is widely believed that the Department of Education has recently rented the entire Ramada Marlborough inn, over 100 rooms, meeting rooms, accommodation, meals for a month for the marking of their ideologically driven standardized exams.

I wonder if the minister could confirm this and whether she could tell us what the cost of the renting of the Ramada inn is and what portion it plays in the entire cost of standard exams at the Grades 3, 6, 9 and 12 levels in three and four subjects.

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): I am not about to confirm the location, the secured location of the marking of the exams.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mrs. McIntosh: We know absolutely that the members opposite are philosophically and ideologically opposed to assessing students to any set measurable standard in schools. It is clear. It is obvious. It is known. It is supported in everything they say and everything they do, so they do not wish to see students assessed. They would prefer to have universities and employers not know what 80 percent means. The total cost of examinations from development right through is around $50 to $60 per student, and that includes everything.

The criteria around marking is very highly confidential in terms of--[interjection] Well, Madam Speaker--

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mrs. McIntosh: Do they want the exams to go out ahead of their being written so that they can all be utilized and have the integrity of the standard compromised? I really--they do not like exams. That is all there is to it.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Wolseley, with a supplementary question.

Ms. Friesen: I tried very hard to hear the answer there, but I wonder if the minister could explain why Manitobans should be collecting books, string, paper to take on a daily basis to classrooms, why they should be selling chocolate and wrapping paper door to door for basic classroom needs when the department's priority is a million dollars per exam to support an expensive and centralized marking system.

Mrs. McIntosh: The members opposite would be able to hear the answers if they would be quiet and listen to them when they are given.

Madam Speaker, I indicate to the member that which she already knows. When she was going to school and I was going to school, we sold chocolate bars and wax paper and grapefruit and oranges by the case. We sold grapefruit like there was no tomorrow. Everybody had vitamin C because we were going door to door selling grapefruit from our schools, and that is many years ago. We also, at that time, bought our own textbooks; we used to buy our own textbooks at that time. So the fact that schools engage in fundraising is not new.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mrs. McIntosh: I know they cannot hear, they do not want to hear. They just do not like exams, and they will bring up any red herring they can bring up to try to get people to say that they will agree with them, that examination and assessment is not good for children. It is good.

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

Ms. Friesen: I will try a third question on the minister; she has not answered the other two.

I wonder if the minister could explain why it is cost--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Education, on a point of order.

Mrs. McIntosh: I am following the rules of a point of order as set by the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton). Now this is the kind of point of order that he raises. He knows Beauchesne, so I am sure it is correct, and I trust you to tell me if it is correct or not. I distinctly answered the other two questions. Hansard will show that, Madam Speaker. I think the member is out of order in putting false information on the record.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Education does not have a point of order.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Wolseley, to quickly pose her final supplementary question.

* (1350)

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister explain why it is cost-effective to spend close to another million dollars on a Grade 12 math exam which students already know does not count.

Mrs. McIntosh: The member obviously and clearly does not understand the purposes of standards exams. Her question reveals her abysmal ignorance on the topic. Maybe that is why she is so ideologically opposed. The whole concept of trying to determine whether or not students have met the outcome designated in the curriculum, whether or not students have achieved the level of learning prescribed by the province as the measurable standard by which Manitoba shall be known has nothing to do with whether or not the marks count for the student.

If you have a mark that is out of 30, and you are able to show by that mark that across the province students have achieved the standard of computation, of problem-solving ability, so that universities and employers and the international market will say, finally, finally, there is a measurable consistent standard of achievement with outcomes that are known, and she thinks it does not matter because it does not count for the student's final grade when the whole understanding--that mark will appear on every report card for people to see and to know what standard has been achieved.

Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): My question is to the Minister of Education. User fees in schools are costing families typically $660 per year for each elementary student, $915 for each secondary student in addition to the already heavy property tax burden due to this provincial government's underfunding of the public education system. On April 29, this minister explained the way user fees, as a result of teacher collective agreements--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. Question, please.

Ms. Mihychuk: My question: Can the minister clarify how she believes that teachers are at fault for user fees because they have lunch breaks? I will quote: There are opportunities now for teachers in many divisions to have lunch hours.

Does this minister think that teachers do not deserve--

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

* (1355)

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, first of all, I will check the figures the member has put forward, and I would appreciate her providing me with copies of how they were arrived at. I would hope that unlike the other day when I asked twice if she could tell me which schools would not let students in if they did not pay a membership fee or a registration fee--she did not give me that information. I would appreciate this so I could check it out.

Madam Speaker, I have to indicate that which is well known. Of course teachers deserve lunch and never would anybody say they would not, but we are talking about--

An Honourable Member: You did.

Mrs. McIntosh: And no, I will not accept him twisting or a misinterpretation of words. It is very clear and well known and verified by school boards across the province--it is not a judgment; it is not a bad thing; it is not blame. The member says "blame." There is no blame attached here; it is just a fact. Many school divisions now have collective agreements which free up teachers from supervising lunchroom duty at lunchtime, taking a tour of lunchroom duty, as we always did in the past where teachers would take every six or seven days and supervise the lunchroom. That has resulted in a cost to school divisions where they have to hire lunchroom supervisors, and they will often charge students to pay for that. That is just a fact; it is not blame. There is nothing--I do not know why she reads blame into reality.

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

Ms. Mihychuk: Madam Speaker, the minister has called on me to reveal how many school divisions are charging fees. It is shameful this minister does not know what is going on in--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for St. James, with a supplementary question.

Ms. Mihychuk: Will the Minister of Education confirm that the St. James-Assiniboia School Division, the Fort Garry School Division, the River East School Division, the St. Vital School Division and the Assiniboine South School Division all charge mandatory registration fees? Will she get up to date and know what is happening in public schools?

Mrs. McIntosh: I had called upon the member to give me the names of schools which would deny students the right to enter the classroom because they had not paid a fee, which were twice the accusations she made. She still has not done that. She is talking about registration fees, which many school divisions charge and always have charged. For example, St. James Collegiate charges a registration fee of $25, $18 of which is for the student fee and the lockers and so on, and the rest which can be easily not paid if the student does not have the money.

So this is not unlike what my daughter paid in 1981, my daughter who paid money, a hundred dollars, a hundred and fifty dollars here and there for band trips when she was in award-winning bands and once could not go to one because we simply could not afford to send her. In 1981 when they were in power and their minister was the Minister of Education, we were paying user fees to that amount and that level.

School divisions do have extra costs associated with new realities in collective bargaining--nothing wrong with that, but it does result in extra costs for parents.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for St. James, with a final supplementary question.

Ms. Mihychuk: Madam Speaker, when will this Minister of Education recognize that the increasing trend of charging user fees to students is the result of this government's underfunding of public schools? When will they take the responsibility for that?

Mrs. McIntosh: I have three things I need to say to that. First of all, Madam Speaker--it is a three-part answer--one, we are not underfunding education. Funding to education has increased by $115 million since we took office, a huge increase and a real increase. In addition, there have been other monies pumped into the system in terms of technology grants, in terms of money for special needs, in terms of nurses in school, in terms of all kinds of things, and that is right, that is correct and that is a reality. So she cannot say we are underfunding.

The other thing I can say is that we are doing this, all of this, in spite of the fact that the transfer payments from Ottawa are huge transfer cuts that they would be the first ones to complain about if they had to deal with them. If they had to deal with a $220-million cut to health and education, they would be the first ones to complain, and they would not be able to continue sustaining the education system to the degree that we do if they were in power.

Third, Madam Speaker, when will they take the blame for the user fees that we had to pay when they were in power?

* (1400)

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, yesterday in the Sport Estimates, the member for Kirkfield Park (Mr. Stefanson) stood by the Pan Am Games budget of $122,064,000. He maintains that there will not be a deficit for the games. However, he admits that there are budget revisions occurring and that the Pan Am Games Society has approached and is in discussion with the government to secure a need for increased funds.

I want to ask the Minister of Finance and of Sport: Given that in 1994 the Commonwealth Games received $105 million from federal and provincial governments, does the minister think that it is fair or reasonable that the federal government is reported--gave $62 million to the Victoria games when they had only 11 sports and that now for the Pan Am Games which have 41 sports, they are giving $37 million?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister responsible for Sport): Madam Speaker, we had quite a lengthy discussion in Estimates yesterday with the member for Radisson. When you look at budgets of various games, there are some differences. Some communities have greater needs in terms of their facility development and so on. We are fortunate here in Winnipeg and Manitoba; we do not have a tremendous need in terms of enhancing our facilities to host the 1999 Pan American Games, but I believe her numbers are correct when she focuses on the federal contribution. In fact, the federal contribution for the 1999 Pan American Games is approximately $30 million in cash and $7 million in services and in kind. There still is some uncertainty around the value for that $7 million in-kind service, so actually the federal contribution to date is $30 million in cash compared to approximately, I believe, about $62 million in cash for the Commonwealth Games in Victoria.

Ms. Cerilli: I am wondering if the Minister of Finance and of Sport can explain why the federal support for the Pan Am Games is $25 million less than the Victoria Commonwealth Games even though the Pan Am Games five years later are a larger event but are now operating on a much smaller budget.

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, I think that question is certainly more appropriately addressed to the federal Liberal government or perhaps the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) who likes to speak on behalf of the federal Liberal government quite regularly in this House. But to date, as the member said in her first question, the current budget is $122 million. All of the financial requirements of that budget have been met in terms of the development of that budget but, as we discussed yesterday, the Pan Am Games are now going through a comprehensive review of all of their expenditures. There are some changes to their expenditures based on numbers of athletes, lengths of stay during the games. There also are some changes to the revenues based on the recent agreement with CBC and TSN and so on.

So we are expecting a revised budget document from them very shortly and, subject to what that shows, we will be into discussions obviously with the society but, probably more importantly, we will be into serious discussions with the federal government.

Ms. Cerilli: I would ask the Minister of Finance and of Sport what he is prepared to do more specifically about this $25-million shortfall as compared to the Commonwealth Games, especially since there is currently a lot of uncertainty about the Pan Am Games securing an American television network, and this would, again, affect the budget in Manitoba.

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, I think initially we have to let the Pan Am Games Society go through the review that they are going through. In fact, the chairman of the games this morning announced or indicated that they are going through that comprehensive review, expect to complete that fairly shortly.

So I do not think we should necessarily prejudge what the outcome is, but if there is need for additional financial support, I think there is a very compelling point to be made with the federal government based on the level of support that the federal government has given for games in Edmonton and Calgary and Victoria and elsewhere in Canada, that by comparison their support for the Pan Am Games here in Winnipeg and Manitoba is certainly less as a contribution to the games. So I think there is a compelling point to be made, if need be, in terms of future discussions with the federal government.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): My question is for the Minister of Finance. Time and again, whether it is the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik), the Minister of Education (Mrs. McIntosh), the minister of social services, anything that goes wrong in the province of Manitoba, they want to blame the transfer payments from Ottawa.

My question to the Minister of Finance is: Once we start to see the increases to these transfer payments as promised, will the Minister of Finance then in return direct that money directly--increases to our public education and health care in order to compensate this government's inability to provide proper resources?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, I am totally confused where the member for Inkster is coming from when he refers to increases. I think I should point out to him that this year, 1997-98, the federal government is providing $12.5 billion to provinces for health, post-secondary education and support to families. They were scheduled to reduce it down over the next couple of years to $11 billion. All that the federal Liberal government has done is halt the reductions at this particular point in time. So they are not providing any increases; they are just stopping further reductions. There is a big fundamental difference.

He talks of increases. There are no increases coming. All that is happening is there are no more reductions, but this is on the heels of a 35 percent reduction in funding for health, post-secondary education and support to families. In the case of Manitoba, it is a reduction of $240 million, and I say shame to the federal Liberal government.

Mr. Lamoureux: Nice to see the Minister of Finance, Mr. Charest and--

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Lamoureux: My question to the Minister of Finance is: Will the Minister of Finance commit that his government will provide additional financing for public education and our public health care system when we start to see the increases in transfer payments towards the block fund? Will he make that commitment today?

Mr. Stefanson: I do not know if the member for Inkster did not hear my first answer, but I really do encourage him to look at the facts. There are no increases coming down the road from any federal Liberal government. Right now the funding for Canada Health and Social Transfers on a national basis to all provinces is at $12.5 billion. All that the federal government has indicated, the federal Liberal government, is that they will freeze it at $12.5 billion instead of reducing it down to $11 billion which was their original plan.

So there are no increases, and the facts are that over the last three years the federal Liberal government has reduced funding in those areas by 35 percent and in the case of Manitoba, $240 million. Those are the challenges that are facing Manitoba and challenges faced by provincial governments right across Canada because of the wrongheaded policies of the federal Liberal government.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Finance: Why is he attempting to mislead the public on this issue? Either that or he does not know what he is talking about. My question--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable government House leader, on a point of order.

Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, I invite the honourable member to review what he has just said and perhaps rephrase his question.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Inkster, on the same point of order.

Mr. Lamoureux: On the same point of order, Madam Speaker, I do understand that "misleading" is in fact unparliamentary, so for that reason I would withdraw it even though--I will just leave it at that.

Madam Speaker: I thank the honourable member for Inkster.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, the Minister of Finance himself admits that there is going to be a freeze. Your ministers say there is a $220-million decrease. You cannot have it both ways. What is this Minister of Finance going to be doing with the money that was not originally budgeted? Will he give the commitment that it will go towards public education and public health care?

* (1410)

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, the current federal Liberal government was elected three and a half years ago, I remind the member, and immediately in their first budget they started reducing the funding in transfers to provinces for health, post-secondary education and support to families. Over the last three budgets, that reduction from the federal Liberal government is $240 million in the case of Manitoba, and across Canada it is 35 percent. Those are the facts. Even the federal Liberal government, even the federal Liberals do not deny that those are in fact the facts. All that they have announced is they have stopped the reductions, they have stopped the freezes after that major reduction and are holding the floor at 12.5.

I have provided the member information in the past. I will provide him all the information he wants. I even encourage him to talk to the federal Liberals in their attempts to justify these massive reductions, but those are the facts. In the case of Manitoba, we have $240 million less today than we did three years ago for those three very important areas.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, bone density scanner waits of 18 months, hip and knee replacement waits of one year to 18 months, cataract surgery or eye surgery where typically a doctor will say, go on the waiting list or for a thousand dollars I will do it in my office today, this is what Manitobans have been living with for years.

For years we have been prodding the government to do something about waiting lists and yesterday, finally, the Minister of Health indicated that the government was going to do something about surgical waiting lists. I would like the minister today to explain to the thousands of Manitobans who are presently on those waiting lists what and when the government will be offering some relief with regard to these terrible waiting lists we have had in this province for the past few years.

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, no doubt the issue of waiting lists for various procedures comes up from time to time and is an important one for Manitobans, but the member for Kildonan asks his question as if it exists in a void.

Madam Speaker, since this administration came to power, my predecessors, the former member for Pembina and the current member for Brandon West (Mr. McCrae), have worked very hard to improve procedures and the offering of procedures.

I can inform the House things like cardiac surgeries increased 48.8 percent; cataracts 44.7 percent; hip replacements 24.1 percent; knee replacements 125.5 percent, so I am not disagreeing with the member that there is a need out there that we are attempting to address, but let us not make it sound for one moment that work has not gone on to try to increase the number of procedures, because that has happened, and there is need that we still have to address.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Can the minister, Madam Speaker, who did not answer the specifics of the question for Manitobans, explain why in Manitoba today the waiting lists for diagnostic services like CAT scans, magnetic resonance and ultrasound are the longest and the highest in all of Canada today and were yesterday and last year and have been consistently under this government?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I am not for one moment going to accept the premise that our waiting lists are significantly, as the member would have us believe, out of line with the rest of the country. But there are a host of reasons that go into waiting lists that we discussed yesterday. Some of those reasons have to do with the way in which we organize many of those diagnostic procedures, the way we make use of existing equipment.

I know, in one area that the member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans) has brought to my attention in terms of bone scans, as I have gone back with my department to find ways of reducing that waiting list, it is quite interesting what one finds in terms of the proposals that come forward to solve it which range from a very high amount of money to a very nominal amount because there is a host of factors that fit into it. We are trying to address those as those issues arise, and I hope we are going to be able to bring down some of those lists that we have talked about in this House.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, can the minister explain how it is that we in this House who are Manitobans and the thousands of Manitobans on these waiting lists are going to have any confidence that the minister is going to bring these waiting lists down, when, in fact, he does not acknowledge the fact that we have the longest waiting lists for CAT scans, the longest waiting lists for MRIs, the longest waiting lists for ultrasound, horrendous waiting lists for hip and knee replacements, and the minister will not even acknowledge these waiting lists exist and attempts to find excuses?

Will he tell the House specifically what the government is going to do and stop making excuses?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, the member's comments are very far from the truth. Neither myself nor the previous minister has not acknowledged that there are from time to time and are currently waiting lists for various procedures that we do not find acceptable in the system. We have acknowledged that. We also know that similar lists exist in other parts of the country from time to time.

What is important is not that one just say, well, the only way to solve this problem is just throw some money on the issue today and it will be solved. One has to understand and appreciate what causes that particular waiting list. In some cases, in fact in the case of the bone marrow or bone density scan, it is not a question of money for equipment. It is the way we utilize the existing machine and the need to staff it more than it is done now in terms of priorities and programming. So if we get to the root of what the problem is, then we can solve the problem in a meaningful way. That is our intention.

Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimli): Since Manitoba has had such a large increase in hog production this past number of years and was the leading province with the largest increases, I understand that Maple Leaf Foods was looking at building a world-class hog processing plant somewhere in western Canada.

Can the minister bring this House up to date as to where the negotiations are with this company?

Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): I thank the honourable member for that question and I can indeed indicate to all members of this House and, perhaps more importantly, to the farming community that Maple Leaf Foods, Canada's largest food processor, by the way, is very much looking at the province of Manitoba for a major, major operation that could employ upwards to 800 people, 125 millions of dollars of capital investment.

My information is that Manitoba and Alberta are the two provinces that are still currently being considered as a potential site for this development, and I can assure you, Madam Speaker, and all honourable members that together with my colleague the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Downey) and my colleague the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) we are doing everything we can, of course, to ensure that the Manitoba advantage is being presented to the principals of Maple Leaf at every occasion that we have.

Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimli): Madam Speaker, on a further question to the Minister of Agriculture: Can you confirm that the Province of Saskatchewan is also looking at some changes to their marketing system similar to the marketing plan that we have here in Manitoba?

Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): It is of interest, Madam Speaker. You will recall that just about this time last year, very frequently we had visitors up in the public galleries from pork producers, from hog producers that were concerned about some of the changes that were being contemplated in Manitoba. Since those changes have been implemented in Manitoba, let me first of all say that Manitoba Pork is doing an excellent job in marketing the hogs in the province of Manitoba. Alberta has followed suit on the leadership shown by Manitoba and, to answer my honourable member directly, I understand legislation has been introduced in the Saskatchewan Legislature to do precisely the same thing in Manitoba.

Madam Speaker, it is of interest to note that that is being done by a New Democratic Party government in Saskatchewan that has seen the wisdom, the visionary future that Manitoba shows.

* (1420)

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, it is surprising to find the kind of compensation people can be promised, especially the farming community, when it falls during a federal election. However, it is one thing to make promises and it is another thing to deliver. Will the Minister of Agriculture ensure Manitobans, whether they live in the Red River Valley or in other parts of the province, whether they are flooded during a federal election or at another time of the year, that they will all be treated equally and that we will have a long-term plan as to how farmers in this province will be compensated when a disaster like a flood strikes them?

Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): I do appreciate very much that question, because I understand that it is of obvious concern to many primary producers, farmers, not just in the Red River Valley but throughout the province, about the issues that she raises.

I think my Premier, the First Minister, made it very plain, in response to questions by the media that were widely reported, that we are insistent that a program that is developed be province-wide, that it treats farmers the same whether they are in the Swan River Valley, the upper Assiniboine or along the Portage Diversion or along the Souris, that a flood is a flood is a flood, and to that property owner that is impacted, affected by it, it is a disaster to that particular farm operation. That, by the way, is one of the reasons why there has been a delay in presenting a co-ordinated program to the producers, and this has been made known to the principal ministers in the federal government, Minister Axworthy in particular, and it is my hope that we can bring the officials together.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.