4th-36th Vol. 29B-Oral Questions

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 eighteen Grade 9 students from Neepawa Area Collegiate under the direction of Mr. Harold Repko. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Cummings).

Also, we have 25 journalist students from Red River Community College under the direction of Mr. Donald Benham. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Wellington (Ms. Barrett).

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

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, in January of 1992, questions were raised in the public about the issue of Linnet Graphics. At that time, on January 8, 1992, the Premier moved Linnet Graphics from the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, the Minister of Finance today, to the then Minister of Finance because the brother-in-law of the corporation was dealing directly with the government.

We thought that was a prudent course for the ethics of the government and for the ethics of the minister, and I would like to ask the Premier why today does he not see a similar if not more serious situation where you have a minister responsible for the golden share dealing with a brother of the same individual who is eligible for up to a million dollars in stock options, as he is still minister responsible for the golden share?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, we do not believe that there is any breach of our conflict-of-interest guidelines, and if the member believes so, then I invite him to make the challenge and to seek legal counsel to pursue it.

Mr. Doer: There was no challenge of the conflict-of-interest guidelines at the time of Linnet Graphics, but good sense and ethical decision making was in place. The minister at the time said that this issue was a problem for him, even though his brother-in-law was an employee of the corporation and did not hold shares in the corporation which would have then presented a situation of conflict in terms of the financial or pecuniary gain.

I would like to ask the Premier: does he not see the ethical disadvantages and ethical problems and challenges of having a minister responsible for the golden share who acknowledged yesterday he is responsible for the debt payments in the new private telephone system to the government, a minister responsible for the golden share, when some of the assets of that corporation are not going to debt repayment but are going to his brother in the form of stock options? Does the Premier not see that that is a definite difficulty, and why can he not do as he did with Linnet Graphics and move the file?

Mr. Filmon: As the member has been fully informed, Madam Speaker, the Manitoba Telephone System has not only kept up to all of its responsibilities to the Crown but has exceeded them in terms of its early repayment of debt. So there has been no breach in any way of the relations or the obligations with respect to the corporation and the Province of Manitoba.

* (1340)

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, I cannot believe that the Premier does not see the ethical problems with a minister responsible for the golden share also having individuals who are related to him gaining up to a million dollars in stock options and others gaining tens of thousands if not millions of dollars as well, but particularly in this case, a direct relative of the minister.

I cannot understand, and I would like to ask the Premier: under Section 10 of the act, which provides for a special share, that the minister is entitled to vote, what action did the minister responsible for the golden share take under Section 10 of the act to deal with the golden stock options that were provided to the relatives of the minister responsible for the golden share?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): I am glad that the Leader of the Opposition refers to the act, and I would assume that he is referring to the Manitoba Telephone System reorganization bill that was passed back in 1996. I do encourage him to read then--he is referring to Section 10--the sections of the act give us the ability to appoint four directors as members of the board of directors of MTS. We have done that as we are allowed to do. I have named those four individuals.

I also encourage him to read Section 11 which outlines very clearly the conditions attached to the issuing of that share. I think he will find that all of those conditions are being met; they have been met. As the Premier has indicated, the debt repayments are actually, if anything, ahead of schedule and, Madam Speaker, the conditions are clearly outlined in legislation. My responsibility as Minister of Finance--[interjection]

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Finance, to quickly complete his response.

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, as I have indicated, we appoint four members to the board of directors. My responsibility as Minister of Finance is to be absolutely certain that all of these conditions are being met, and I can assure this House today they are being met, and certainly the issue of paying back the debt is being met. In fact, it is being exceeded.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): It is clear that the minister responsible for MTS still does not get it. He is the minister on behalf of the Crown that owns a special share. It is outlined not only in Section 11(1)(g) of the act, but he might want to refer to The Corporations Act, 170(1)(d). His responsibility is to protect the public interest. It was not in the public interest for a stock option to be given to his brother and other directors, $3.5 million, Madam Speaker.

I want to ask the minister responsible for MTS what action he took under his responsibilities, as the owner of a special share, as the minister that appointed directly four people to the board. What action did he take to prevent this rip-off of Manitobans?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, what the member for Thompson chooses to ignore or forget is the fact that there are some 70,000 shareholders of MTS, individual Manitobans, in fact the majority originally Manitobans who have invested in MTS, and at a shareholder meeting on May 30, 1997, those shareholders ratified a stock option plan. They delegated the authority to the board of directors to pursue the details of a stock option plan. The board of directors set up a subcommittee of human resources. They retained the professional expertise--I believe a group called the Hay consulting group did a review of compensation right across Canada for telecommunication companies and other kinds of companies, and as a result of the approval given by the shareholders, the board of directors has brought forward the details of that stock option plan. They will be held accountable again by the shareholders, the 70,000 shareholders, at their next general meeting held in April of this year. That is accountability. That is a significant degree of accountability to people who invest their own money in MTS.

Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, speaking of accountability, I am asking the question to the Minister of Finance. The Minister of Finance refuses to answer it. I will ask him once again. What action did he take, given his responsibility under Section 10 of the act, as the minister responsible for the class of shares? What action has he taken in regard to this $3.5-million stock option program that comes ahead of any debt repayment, which is part of his responsibility? What action did he take as minister responsible for MTS?

Mr. Stefanson: Again I encourage the member for Thompson, if he has not done it, to read just a little further in the bill that he appears to have before him, and to read Section 11, and he will see the conditions that are attached to the special share that this Province of Manitoba owns. There are a series of conditions in that section. All of those conditions are being met. As well, Madam Speaker, the $426 million of debt that was due the taxpayers of Manitoba back on January 7, 1997, is now down to $239 million. That is excellent performance in terms of repaying that money to the taxpayers of Manitoba.

In terms of the operations of MTS, as I have said before, there is a regulatory process, CRTC, for them to go through in terms of rates, in terms of expenditures and so on. That is a process that protects the consumer and the public and is obviously working well today because we currently have the lowest residential rates for our telephone company of any telephone company in all of Canada.

* (1345)

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

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Given the fact the minister did not answer the question again, I want to ask the Premier whether he will do the right thing and deal with the clear conflict that is involved here, the clear lack of responsibility being shown by this minister, supposedly to protect the public interest. Will he do the right thing and remove this minister as the minister responsible for MTS?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): As I indicated to his Leader, Madam Speaker, I will indicate to the member for Thompson that if he believes there is a conflict of interest here, he should make that allegation through the legal channels available to him and have it ruled upon.

Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): Madam Speaker, my question is for the minister responsible for decentralization. I say "decentralization" because in the past two years or so decentralization has been nonexistent in this province related to the workforce promised that was to be decentralized to rural Manitoba from the city. In 1990--and I want to table the decentralization memo that was presented for decentralization.

Madam Speaker: Question.

Mr. Clif Evans: I want to ask the Minister responsible for Rural Development: of the 32 jobs from MTS that were promised and moved to rural Manitoba, can the minister tell us, of those 32, how many are still in rural Manitoba servicing the communities?

Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Development): I must say that the decentralization initiative has been a very successful one throughout rural Manitoba, but it is interesting getting the question from the member opposite when, in fact, his party was so opposed to decentralization to begin with.

In fact, the economy of rural Manitoba is very buoyant today. There are indeed many jobs out there in rural Manitoba that are very productive, and we are proud of the initiatives that we have undertaken.

Madam Speaker, it should be noted also that Manitoba Telecom Services is a private industry, and indeed that is something that their management has to decide and not the government nor this minister.

* (1350)

Mr. Clif Evans: I want to ask the Minister of Rural Development: since he did not answer the question about the 32 jobs that were put out to rural Manitoba, can the minister tell us, if the rural economy is so important for the services through MTS or any other service, how can the minister tell us that services are going to be there for rural Manitobans through MTS when Dauphin has lost jobs, Portage has lost jobs, Steinbach has lost jobs through privatization and decentralization of the decentralization?

Mr. Derkach: Madam Speaker, there was a time in the history of this province where indeed there were no jobs in rural Manitoba, and that was during the years of the NDP. Today we have an abundance of jobs that are being created throughout rural Manitoba.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Rural Development, to complete his response.

Mr. Derkach: Madam Speaker, this morning's information about unemployment rates was certainly encouraging to all of us when the reports have indicated that Manitoba can now boast of having the lowest unemployment rate in this country.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, Beauchesne's Citation 417 is very clear: "Answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate."

I have sat here for the last five minutes, Madam Speaker. Not only have I seen this minister blatantly ignore those rules, I have seen members opposite eat up question time and you not intervene either on his irrelevance or their abuse of Question Period. I ask you to call him to order.

Madam Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, I would ask the honourable Minister of Rural Development to respond to the question asked.

Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister of Rural Development, to complete his response.

Mr. Derkach: Madam Speaker, I am very proud of the record this government has with regard to jobs in rural Manitoba and throughout this province, and we will continue to promote jobs through the private sector throughout this province, and indeed that is happening daily.

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

Mr. Clif Evans: Madam Speaker, my supplementary question for the Minister of Rural Development is: seeing that the minister talks about the low unemployment rate in rural Manitoba, seeing the minister talks about the economic boom in this province, what is this minister going to say--will he say those same words to the people who have been laid off through decentralization, after decentralization, after privatization of MTS and all the layoffs that have occurred with the Manitoba Telecom Services in rural Manitoba?

Mr. Derkach: Madam Speaker, the technology that is available today is evolving, and indeed jobs are changing by the day. I only point--

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

* (1355)

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Derkach: Madam Speaker, within the last few years we have seen an enormous number of jobs in the technology area. I think there are something like 7,000 jobs created in this province as a result of the new technology of call centres. So there are jobs out there in rural Manitoba and in urban Manitoba, and indeed if you look at the reports, this province can be very proud of its job-creating record.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, user fees in public schools have been escalating across the province, and every parent is very keenly aware of this. Under this government, parents have been charged a fee to have a teacher in the classroom. I would like to table a letter from the Minister of Education where she says, and I quote: that she is aware that substitute teacher costs are being passed on to parents.

I would like to ask the minister to tell the House whether or not she has written to boards and superintendents, as she did about the God Save The Queen anthem, to inform them that this in fact contravenes The Public Schools Act.

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, of course the member has taken out of context a reference to a fact that for field trips and things of that nature, from time to time substitutes will be kept in the classroom while teachers escort students on field trips. That is not an everyday occurrence. That is not addressing the implications that the member has tried to put on the record by taking a quotation out of context, not set in the parameters, and I would invite all members to read the letter in full context.

The school divisions are fully cognizant of the funding that is provided to school divisions and the rules surrounding when or when not they can use substitutes in the classroom.

Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, could the minister tell the House whether in fact she is going to require reimbursement to those parents who were required to pay for a teacher in the classroom?

Mrs. McIntosh: Madam Speaker, throughout the length and time that I have been involved with schools in Manitoba, which has been some 30-odd years, students going on field trips have been sometimes asked to contribute to the cost of that field trip. My own daughter, who went to school in the '70s and '80s, was frequently on field trips, and we were frequently asked as parents to help pay a fee to cover off the cost of the field trip. That is not paying for a substitute teacher, but if a substitute teacher is used while the teacher is gone on the field trip, that does form part of the expense of that field trip.

This is nothing new. This is not something that has just occurred in the last 10 years. This has been occurring in Manitoba for at least 30 years in my experience in Manitoba. The member tries to make it sound like students paying fees for field trips is something new. It is not.

Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, is the minister saying then that those students who play on a school team and play away and take a teacher with them, must then pay for the substitute teacher who replaces that teacher in the classroom to instruct the compatriots, because that is what I heard the minister say?

Mrs. McIntosh: No, Madam Speaker, that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is that when students go on field trips, and in some school divisions they have gone on field trips as far away as France or other places or they go to Vancouver or they go to another part of Manitoba, there are sometimes costs associated with that and parents are asked to contribute a fee to help cover off the expenses. I am not saying that every time a student goes on a field trip they have to pay a substitute. That is not what I am saying, and I wish to make that clear.

* (1400)

Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, I have a new question. Could I get the minister to clarify then that fees will be paid for a substitute classroom teacher when a student is playing for a school team, but not when the student is on a field trip? That seems to be the distinction that she has made in the last two answers. Will she clarify that now?

Mrs. McIntosh: Madam Speaker, I am not aware--and if the member has information to the contrary, I would be pleased to receive it--of any school where the student has had to pay the cost of a substitute teacher because a school tea is going on.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is again for the Minister of Health. Most Manitobans would recognize the importance that the roles our nurses play in our health care system, and what I would argue is that the government has been slow on the development of the whole field of nurse practitioners.

I would ask the Minister of Health: does the Minister of Health have any sort of time frame whatsoever to deal with the eventuality, hopefully, of having more nurse practitioners practising in the province of Manitoba?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): We discussed this yesterday, and I would expect that the member for Inkster may want to pursue this in greater detail in Estimates debate which is now going on, but there is no doubt that there is a role and will be a growing role for nurse practitioners. But there are some realities of making that work with other health care professionals, particularly the medical profession, that require some changes there, I think significant ones. So to see the growth in the use of nurse practitioners, these things must happen. Otherwise, I think we are creating a problem where we will not have the success that we intend. Like so many things in health care, it is interrelated to other things that are happening, physician remuneration models being one of them.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, will the Minister of Health acknowledge, when he says that there is a role, that we can only say that for so long? For years we have been talking about it, and for years we have done nothing.

The question specific to the Minister of Health is: when are we going to actually see some action? Where this is what we talk about, spending money smarter and positive health care change, these are the types of ideas that we should be talking about. When are we going to start seeing it? Not the talk, but the action.

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, the use of nurse practitioners in a variety of places in health care is certainly developing, and one of the fundamental changes in the administration of organization of health care at the regional health authorities now makes it, I think, even easier to bring about those changes because the RHAs have, I think, a much better ability to co-ordinate and develop the use of new health care professionals. But one thing we have seen is where physicians and nurse practitioners may be working in a primary health care model, if fee for service is the basis of payment for that physician, there is no incentive in using nurse practitioners or nurses or other primary care providers in an effective manner. So, until you have models of remuneration established and relationships between different professional bodies worked out, you set up these particular new professions or new roles for people in health care professions that are not going to be as successful as we all would like them to be.

Mr. Lamoureux: Will the minister then acknowledge that one of the ways in which you can maybe overcome some of the problems is in fact to designate some sort of a pilot project where we actually see nurse practitioners working with medical doctors and other nurses and health care providers? Will the Minister of Health make a commitment to coming up with a very tangible pilot project some time within this particular mandate that the government has been given?

Mr. Praznik: In many ways, the Assiniboine Clinic pilot project, which was established by my predecessor, the member for Brandon West (Mr. McCrae), the former Minister of Health, is one such example where the change in means of remuneration should encourage, we suspect, the greater use of nonphysician health care providers in providing care. The evaluation process, I believe, is now beginning on that particular model or will be beginning shortly, and we will learn some more from that process. But where we have found mixing allied health care providers with physicians on fee for service, the desire or the method of remuneration where fee for service is in place has encouraged physicians to continue to do more of the work that we intend for other providers. So you have to have those correct models in place or the system, from what we know so far, will not work.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, yesterday in this House the minister gave the fourth version of the Olsten contract extension fiasco, indicating that, well, if it was extended, even though I have said it was not extended, but of course I went in the hallway and said it was extended, but it was not. Even though he said that, he said, well, anyway, it is the responsibility of the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority or the long-term care authority.

Is the minister saying that if the new health authority were to privatize home care services, he as Minister of Health would allow it?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the member for Kildonan talks about fiascos. The fiascos are when members bring information to this House. The member brought a memo that had indicated a contract had been renewed where that had not been the case. I am not accusing him of doing it wrongly; there was a memo.

Part of the reason, of course, is there is a transition period that is underway with respect to home care in transferring it to the Winnipeg Long Term Care Authority, and if we have learned a number of things out of the process with the tendering process, and we were conducting the evaluation now, was that we have learned ways to make our system more effective, but we have also learned of the cost-effectiveness of our current system.

I can tell the member that things are on track from all of the statements that we have made here, and major policy decisions respecting some of these issues obviously would have to be made in consultation with the government. But we are awaiting the result of the evaluation, as we have indicated, and we also know what the results of the tendering process were.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, is the minister saying what I heard him say--and you never know with this minister, given the experience of the last few days in this Chamber--but is the minister actually saying that if the new health authorities, hand-picked mostly Tories by this government, come back and say we are going to privatize home care, that this Minister of Health, who several months ago said the privatization plan was over, will allow that privatization plan? Is that what he is saying?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, the whole trouble with this debate on home care that we are having with the New Democrats is they are trying to create an issue where one quite frankly does not exist. We in government have a responsibility to ensure that services are provided in an effective manner, that they are high-quality services and they are done in a cost-effective manner. We approached, like we have many other services in health care and in government, an experiment in home care. We have the results of the tendering process that speak to that process, and we will have the evaluation of the experiment here in Winnipeg.

But I think if the member spent some time speaking to people involved with various regional health authorities, one of the issues that became very practical in the issue of home care, in running of service, that there was never a great interest in many parts of the province in private companies even providing that. So that becomes such a hypothetical question, it is just not real.

* (1410)

Mr. Chomiak: Will the minister, who definitively said both in this Chamber and in the hallway, that the privatization experiment, the fiasco of this government, was over--will the minister definitively say whether or not the new health authority in Winnipeg has the authority of this government to contract private home care services or, if they in fact do, he will not allow it? What is he saying? What is the government's position?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, you see this question illustrates the difficulty in providing what I would believe to be a very accurate answer because of the ideological position that the New Democratic Party takes over and over and over again.

This administration has always tried to be very practical, to deliver what works best. We have not privatized anything for ideological reasons. There are many things; there are many services. Take, for example, Fleet Vehicles. We looked at privatization and created a special operating agency within government because it was the best thing to do. We dealt with oxygen. We have had no complaints about that service. It has worked very, very well, and the New Democrats were wrong. It was not an ideological position.

Madam Speaker, from all of the work that we have seen today--and I have said the public health care system looks to be one that is delivering the service. I am not going to bind any future government by making a statement today, nor am I going to prevent the Winnipeg committee from time to time hiring some additional support as they do today and be accused of breaking a promise.

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Highways. Last December the minister agreed that northern airports needed to be reviewed, and of course the task force--we are anxious to hear on their progress. Also, the minister indicated that many improvements were needed, such as Little Grand Rapids. It had to be replaced entirely in fact, is what he said.

I would like to ask the minister how much longer or how much this minister has budgeted in this year's budget for improvements to northern airports.

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Madam Speaker, I am sure, as the member is aware--I think I have given this to him in a previous answer that the task force has been set up with individuals from the North and from the aircraft industry and from the government to look at what needs to be done. Before those decisions are in on what are the most appropriate things for improving safety at the northern airports, then you look at what the costs will be and how you arrive at paying for those costs. But the budget line in the Department of Highways for northern airports is the same this year as it was last year.

Mr. Robinson: I noted today that there was a press release issued by the Manitoba government indicating that there would be $300,000 made available for capital improvements to southern airports, but five years after he admitted that Little Grand Rapids airport needed to be scrapped or replaced, still has not done anything to now.

Mr. Findlay: Madam Speaker, of the 22 northern airports in Manitoba, the Province of Manitoba pays 100 percent of operating and maintenance and construction costs--100 percent. Southern airports are maintained by municipalities, and the capital cost of building those was done by the federal government. It is very important that the capital structure of those airports be maintained, particularly for medivac operations.

So in consultation with municipalities, a 50 percent support program is in place for those municipalities that come up with their 50 percent and make application. It is 50 percent coverage in the south, and 100 percent coverage in the north.

Mr. Robinson: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister to tell the people of Little Grand Rapids, Berens River, Poplar River and other northern Manitoba communities how much longer they have to wait to see basic navigational aids upgraded in their communities.

Mr. Findlay: Well, Madam Speaker, I really do not understand what the member is asking because I think he approved of us setting up a task force of people to come forward and make the appropriate recommendations. Now he is asking me to preempt their work, and I will not do that.

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Madam Speaker, the Minister of Rural Development commented a moment ago about Manitoba's low unemployment rate, and I think we should all be happy. We should all be happy about that, but I would ask the minister: has he seen the latest interprovincial migration figures which show that Manitoba has had a huge increase in the exodus of people to other provinces?

In fact, Madam Speaker, it is well over 6,000, two and a half times the number of 1996, the worst situation we have had since the last five years. In fact, we have even lost a thousand people to the province of Saskatchewan, so my question to the minister: is he prepared now to acknowledge that this low rate of unemployment has certainly a lot to do with the fact that we have lost just so many people from our workforce to other provinces?

Hon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Madam Speaker, first of all, the only part of the preamble I will acknowledge is the complimentary part which he has provided for the government. In fact, the fact that we are for the month of March at a 5.2 percent unemployment rate, the best since February of 1981, Manitobans should be very proud. It is the private sector that is producing those jobs, and they are full-time jobs that we are seeing in the province of Manitoba.

Madam Speaker, the member talks about out-migration. We actually had turned around the out-migration; up until a year ago we were virtually balanced. Yes, there is an area of concern; one has to be conscious of it. In fact, we will be putting a program in place or a campaign in place to fully advertise how strong the economy is in Manitoba and the job opportunities that are here in Manitoba. All those people, particularly those that left during the NDP years, they are welcome home.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. Time for Oral Questions has expired.