4th-36th Vol. 36B-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 twenty-four Grade 5 students from Christ The King School under the direction of Mrs. Shirley Gendron. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for St. Vital (Mrs. Render).

We also have 13 English as a Second Language students from the Applied Linguistic Centre under the direction of Ms. Greta Gibson.

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

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): A few minutes ago we received the interim report that the government had received three weeks ago on the review of the Red River flood. I want to ask a number of questions pursuant to that report.

On April 24, I asked the Premier (Mr. Filmon) a number of questions about the flow of water through the floodway and he responded that opening up the floodway beyond 59,000 would have impacts both downstream and upstream and that they would have to use human judgment in the application of the floodway, obviously a point he made in this Legislature. This report indicates that the operation of the floodway--the protocol was not followed during the flood of 1997. I would like to ask the Premier: who made that decision not to follow the protocol, and what was its impact on residents in the Red River Valley?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, we have always acknowledged that the operation of the floodway was at 24.5. In reviewing the implications of that, the department has indicated that for a number of years 24.5 was the operational median which they looked to, but that policy was not written and appropriately conveyed to everyone, including the media and members of this House. But that was not operating any differently than the gates have been operated for a significant period of time.

The second part of the question, in terms of what are the known or what would be the estimated impacts of anything that would have occurred as a result of the operation of the gate, that is still pending, given the results of some studies and some modelling being done on behalf of the commission. That information will be shared as soon as we have it.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): I did not get the answer to the question of who made that decision in government.

A second question: on May 5, 1997, I asked a number of questions about the flooding at Grande Pointe. The report indicates that the forecasts were eight feet off initially at Grande Pointe, and the timing was off for those 150 families, the majority of which were ultimately flooded. The report goes on to say that the people were ill prepared based on those predictions that were made.

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister: have any of the layoffs and firings and reductions of staff in the Department of Natural Resources, have any of those decisions made by the government and the Premier (Mr. Filmon) led to the inaccurate predictions on flooding at the Grande Pointe area?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, the short answer is no, but I want to make it very clear that there is known difficulty in providing modelling, and direct information flowing from the modelling, when the water begins to flow at the extreme distances that it did across and overland and coming in from sometimes unpredictable areas.

The issue that the opposition consistently raised had more to do with monitoring than anything else and the question of whether or not there was adequate information coming from the monitoring to go into the modelling that we have been using. The fact is that budget was enhanced by the province over the last couple of years, but we know that we need to have a better computer-driven modelling for the entire valley, which is part of the IJC recommendation and certainly is recognized and recommended in this report as well.

* (1345)

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Subsequent to my questions about the flooding in Grande Pointe, the Premier stated in this Chamber and then in the hallway and to all flood victims in Manitoba that people living on a flood plain must accept responsibility for where they have chosen to live.

In light of the fact that the government has not followed the protocol on the floodway and in light of the fact the minister has acknowledged deficiencies in forecasting in the direct Grande Pointe area, will the Premier today do what we asked him to do in November of 1997 and apologize to those flood victims for his statements that showed a lack of heart, a lack of compassion and a lack of community in terms of the flood victims here in Manitoba?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I think it is unfortunate that the member opposite only sees a tragedy like the worst civil disaster ever experienced in the province's history as an opportunity to have some cheap political gain on his part. I think that he ought to be much more concerned about ensuring that there is accuracy in what he says.

In terms of the protocol and the floodway, what has been well publicized and well reported is the fact that the protocol that had been in place for two decades was followed, and everybody, including the operators and the advisory committee to the operations of the floodway, assumed that that was the protocol. They did not realize that it had not been changed in writing back for three decades, even though they had been operating under that protocol for more than two decades. So it was not a change in protocol for this year. It was a protocol change that had occurred more than two decades ago that had never been reduced to writing, so in fact they were following the protocol as it was understood by the operators and by the advisory committee.

Number two, Madam Speaker, as the minister has indicated with respect to the Grande Pointe area, there is a limit, a limit to the ability to forecast things that are going to happen as a result of all sorts of man-made and other construction activities that have occurred with each successive flood that have changed the river hydrology to some degree. The placement of, for instance, rail lines and the construction of new major culvert systems, the placement of roadbeds and all sorts of things over the decades have made it impossible to predict what will happen at times of flows and circumstances that were unprecedented.

So it is a matter of predicting the future, and just as the member opposite cannot tell us what might happen in the future, so too can engineers not predict what will happen when water levels reach levels that they have not in the history of this century. So to try and suggest that the engineers were the cause of the problem because of their inability to predict is absolutely shameful on the part of the member for Concordia and his colleagues in their efforts, in their extreme efforts to try and create some cheap politics on their behalf.

Madam Speaker, I want to conclude by suggesting to the member opposite that at no time did I suggest that it was the fault of people who located where they did, but I said that all of us have to take responsibility for the decisions and judgments we make, including knowing the fact that we are locating in an area that does not allow us to get insurance coverage, and that has to be some indication of the fact that people have to know and understand what they are doing when they make those decisions.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, I think the cheapest shot we have ever heard in the public, that I have ever heard from any member of the Legislature from any party was the cheap shot this Premier took at the flood victims when he said, regrettably, you choose to live on a flood plain, you have to take responsibility.

All I have asked the Premier to do, and we all made mistakes before--I have made mistakes before; he has made mistakes before--is act like a member of our community, take the leadership role and apologize for his statements. Take responsibility. I give him another opportunity today. If he chooses not to take it, that is his decision.

Madam Speaker, the International Joint Commission, the Ernst & Young report and now this report from the Water Commission have all stated that in dealing with compensation and allowing people to rebuild their lives, there has been despair and anger in the frustration of red tape and confusion between departments administered by this Premier and this government. Does the Premier take responsibility for three reports now that have identified the frustration, the anger, the confusion? Does he take responsibility for the programs he put in place to deal with this flood in terms of our flood victims?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Absolutely. This is the administration that has commissioned each of those reports, because we believe that no government ever is perfect and cannot possibly be expected in unprecedented circumstances to do everything right. So we take the position that we want to learn from experience, not for the purposes of cheap politics but for the purposes of putting in place better systems so that we can have improved responses in the future. We believe that it is important to learn from history, learn from experience and that is precisely what we are doing.

* (1350)

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, of course we discussed the issue of compensation last year when we proposed the cap be changed because of federal guidelines being changed in other provinces. We suggested a number of other positive changes. But another matter that we had raised in the House is the whole issue of the Premier's decision to combine the Disaster Assistance Board with the Emergency Measures Organization. In the Ernst & Young report they raise the concern of the dual responsibilities during a disaster, and this interim report also talks about the pressures that are placed on staff to deal with both preventing a disaster, which of course EMO is equipped to do, and dealing with the compensation issues and recovery issues that formerly were dealt with by the Disaster Assistance Board.

In light of the two reports the government has received, did the government make an error in combining the two branches, and will the government be reviewing the decision of the Premier and the head of Treasury Board, Mr. Benson, to combine those two bodies? Does it look like it should be, Madam Speaker, where we have the capacity to fight a disaster and we also have an office dealing with the compensation for victims? Should we go back to the former system?

Hon. Frank Pitura (Minister of Government Services): I think that the decision to amalgamate EMO and DFA was the right decision because we did have the ability to take some very quick changes, make rapid changes to the program to try and address the concerns that were out in the flood plain area. As far as for the future, having this combined force together, the two organizations together are going to enable us to be able to put a disaster financial assistance program and an emergency preparedness program in place that will last and be sustainable for the long term in the future.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): I would ask the government to read both the Ernst & Young report--and rapid response, in our view, is to put in writing the conditions that people are facing today in Ste. Agathe, as we have suggested all week.

I have raised questions about the concerns that the impact of the Brunkild dike, the cutting of the Avonlea Road and Road 301 had on the flooding of Ste. Agathe and the flooding of Grande Pointe. Can the government today indicate: does it have an evaluation of the impact of those decisions that the government made--and I have always supported the government in building the Brunkild dike. We thought it was obviously the right move to make in terms of the overall victims. Has it evaluated the impact of that on flood victims in the Red River Valley?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Yes, one of the recommendations in the Water Commission report is that we work with the Manitoba Crop Insurance Corporation to put a precise number to the number of days where some delayed crop seeding occurred. We know that most of that information is assembled. It is a matter of getting an independent body to give it some further consideration.

We also are in the process today of making sure and installing, in fact, screw gates on the culverts that go through, the drains that go through the Z-dike. More importantly, and something that was a very important issue during the post-flood examination was whether or not there were any impacts from road cuts and efforts that were made to deal with the flooding in order to protect, in this case, the infrastructure, being the Z-dike itself that was under some danger of crumbling if some roads had not been removed. The modelling that is being done on behalf of the Water Commission is going to look at that and the operation of the gates and give us some precise modelling--what would have happened with and what would have happened without various pieces of infrastructure. That modelling that is being developed should give us some very precise information as to whether or not there were any known impacts.

Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Madam Speaker, Manitoba's mining sector is in a state of difficulty based in large part on the low metal prices, base metals and low gold prices. This has resulted, unfortunately, in the closure of the Bissett mine, a lifespan announcement of five years for Leaf Rapids, 14 for Flin Flon, hundreds of mining jobs being lost in the Thompson area because of difficulties at Inco.

The Mining Reserve Fund was created for just these times, and I quote from the act. The fund is to be used for the welfare and employment of persons residing in a mining community which may be adversely affected by the total or partial suspension, closing down of a mining operation, attributable to the depletion of ore deposits.

My question to the Minister of Mines: will he confirm to this House, what he has said already in Estimates, that he and his government have withdrawn $6 million from the Mining Reserve Fund, from those mining communities, and withdrawn them for general revenues?

Hon. David Newman (Minister of Energy and Mines): Madam Speaker, the act in question provides for a minimum of $5 million to be kept in the fund. The fund had in excess of $15 million in it, approaching $20 million, and $6 million was moved through the bookkeeping process into general revenue for the purpose of investing in the Manitoba Mineral Exploration Assistance Program which has the effect of investing in exploration in areas which hopefully can result in the development of a new mine. What better solution to a community that has lost or has mining operations suspended.

* (1355)

Ms. Mihychuk: Madam Speaker, will the minister confirm that this is the first time ever in the history of this fund's creation that money has been withdrawn and moved into general revenue and that this is a betrayal of the miners, their families, and the families and the communities that have been affected by the closure or pending closure of mines?

Mr. Newman: Madam Speaker, less than $2 million of that $6 million has been spent up to this point, but that very worthwhile investment in the future of mining in the province for the benefit of those communities will continue. There is also legislation before the House which has the result, when passed, of increasing the minimum amount of the reserve to $10 million. I have also indicated to the members of this House, including members of the official opposition and other opposition members, that the provision allowing encroachment on the fund for exploration purposes is something that I would take under advisement depending on the views of the community and the views of the opposition members.

Ms. Mihychuk: Madam Speaker, I want to ask the Minister of Mines if he will make a commitment to the mining communities and those workers that are being faced with possible disasters and layoffs to appeal to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) and his government and reinstate the money into the Mining Reserve Fund, where it belongs, for those workers and those families in the North.

Mr. Newman: Madam Speaker, I am confident that the people of the North very much appreciate the investment of these monies in mining exploration. The best hope for mining and communities in the North is to find more mines and to have the activity generated by the exploration stimulated by the MEAP program.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. Prior to recognizing the honourable member for Flin Flon, with the indulgence of the House, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the Speaker's Gallery where we have this afternoon members of a Russian delegation representing regional Legislatures from the northwest region of Russia led by Mr. Vitaliy Klimov.

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

Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): My questions are also for the Minister of Energy and Mines. Would the minister confirm that over $30 million from the assets of Manitoba Mineral Resources was placed in general revenue by this administration, money that came from northern Manitoba.

Hon. David Newman (Minister of Energy and Mines): Madam Speaker, the memory that we have on this side of the House of that particular corporation is not a positive one. The fact is that we are investing in MEAP and trying to restore good will in doing business and investing in mining in this province because of the legacy left by the likes of that particular Crown corporation which did nothing but discourage investment in this province, caused mining companies and explorations to fear expropriation, to fear undue government interference in doing business in this province. We are still to this day trying to recover our reputation in the world community because of the NDP's very, very unfortunate approach to the mining industry in this province.

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

Mr. Jennissen: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Leaf Rapids would not exist if it were not for this side of the House.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Flin Flon, to pose his question, please.

Mr. Jennissen: How does this minister justify taking more that $36 million from northern Manitoba mining communities when some of these same communities are at the very edge, fighting for survival, faced with declining ore stocks and mine closures over the next five years?

Mr. Newman: Madam Speaker, the future of the North and northern communities, as has been discussed in Estimates over the last few days, including with the honourable member for Flin Flon, rests in those communities themselves and having alternatives to mining and to have a vision for the future which can include mining but seeing mining as something that does not last forever in direct, approximate geographic location to any particular community.

That is the message that should be sent out to those particular communities and, in fact, that is the message they are embracing. Through the Mining Reserve Fund, we are investing in those kinds of economic development visioning processes, including most recently a major investment in an economic development officer in Lynn Lake which the honourable member knows about.

* (1400)

Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): What answer does this minister have for concerned families in Lynn Lake and Leaf Rapids who are wondering why this government is quite willing to take huge amounts of money out of the North but quite unwilling to put significant amounts of money towards mineral exploration in the northwest region?

Hon. David Newman (Minister of Energy and Mines): Madam Speaker, I always welcome the opportunity to remind all Manitobans of the enormous contribution and commitment this government has placed in the development of the North. What greater commitment than the resolution of treaty land entitlement and the resolution of Northern Flood Agreement, something that the official opposition, through the Hydro developments of the '70s under Premier Schreyer, was responsible for causing the damage and responsible for those victims in the North, that we have now been investing over $215 million through a comprehensive settlement and the transfer of tens of thousands of acres of land through the Northern Flood Agreement.

We had on the table another $100 million available to the Cross Lake residents together with acreages of land to resolve that issue. Treaty land entitlement is involved in over a million acres of land being transferred to create healthy, sustainable communities in the North and over $76 million from the federal government towards that end. What better commitment to the North than to resolve those historic injustices.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice.

I was listening to some news, and I understand that in the government of Saskatchewan they actually have a fairly good idea in terms of what is happening with the youth, chronic youth problems, where youth keep on repeating criminal acts in which the government has now allocated out a special fund to do additional tracking of these problem youth. I am sure the government itself would acknowledge that you have repeat young offenders who cause a tremendous amount of problem in today's society.

My question to the Minister of Justice: is the minister prepared to look at an initiative that would in fact see the government of Manitoba have more attention drawn to repeat offenders?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question. I might indicate that the steps that the Saskatchewan government is now taking are steps that we have already implemented for some period of time.

For example, in the corrections area, the intensive support and supervision program has been in existence for some time. The program provides comprehensive management of high-risk young offenders in both pre- and post-custody situations. This program, the ISSP program, in fact intervenes one step before the Saskatchewan program which appeared to deal with addressing the risk of offending youth, whereas what we are trying to do is prevent them from offending.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, can the Minister of Justice indicate that additional government resources are in fact in place so that we can give special attention to the repeat young offenders?

Mr. Toews: Again I thank the member for the question. As he may know, Manitoba is in fact one of the most aggressive jurisdictions in the transfer of repeat violent offenders to adult court, and I think about 40 percent of all transfers in Canada are as a result of an aggressive policy by our Crown attorneys to address that problem.

Furthermore, my colleague the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson), in our recent budget--we will be announcing the intensive bail supervision program for young offenders, which will provide similar monitoring and intensive supervision of at-risk youth who are granted judicial release. We believe that we need to intensify those areas of when youth are released by our courts that there is more intensive monitoring of those youth.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, that is, in essence, what I am looking for.

Will the Minister of Justice then give the assurance that the additional resources will in fact be made available so the tracking of these problem youth is in fact happening?

Mr. Toews: Well, again, I was fairly specific I thought in that respect. Not only is our intensive supervision in respect of releasing offenders one of the leading programs in Canada--and I want to compliment our staff over in the MYC who in fact are supervising that. I know the success of that program has been tremendous, and I have great faith in our correctional officers to deal with the issue of the bail as well. I think that our jurisdiction, especially in respect of these issues, has been proactive, and we will continue to see more programs that address specific needs as they arise. So I thank my honourable friend for that question.

Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Environment. Last summer, without any consultation, without any public notice, the government eliminated the Household Hazardous Waste Program, but under pressure, during the Portage by-election, agreed to restore it for one pickup in the fall. My question is to the minister: what happened to that commitment he made last fall for this year?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Environment): It is interesting how honourable members opposite seem to be able to link everything up so conveniently to events of the day.

When the budget for the last fiscal year had been set, it had been the expectation that consultations regarding oil, used oil and containers and filters would have moved the process along further than it had by the fall of last year. So therefore we budgeted accordingly, and as it turned out, the oil regulation had not come forward and so the funding had to be restored, which it was. [interjection] I am trying to figure out, Madam Speaker, what it is that is wrong with the Leader of the Opposition here today. [interjection] But all is well that ends well.

The other thing about it is that we are recovering so much more household hazardous waste with the program that we have been running--well, Miller Environmental has been running, with assistance from the government. It is really tremendous to review the amount of household hazardous waste that is no longer finding its way to the wrong places.

* (1410)

Mr. Dewar: Madam Speaker, I do not think he answered the question. I am not entirely sure what he answered. The question is: is there a program this year? The program last year collected over 200,000 kilograms from over 30 communities in this province. Is there a program this year?

Mr. McCrae: Well, so pleased we are with the outcome of this type of programming in Manitoba, all of which has been brought in in the past 10 years with the present administration. Previous to that, virtually nothing had been put in place to look after our environment and set the path for a sustainable future for our children and grandchildren. I am very proud to be part of that record and proud to be a part of the continuation of the program that will take proper care of household hazardous waste materials.

I look forward, with great anticipation, to getting the Estimates of the Department of Environment before the committee so that the honourable member and I can swap statistics and enjoy, revel in the glory of the improvements that have been seen in the last 10 years under this administration, unfortunately improvements in environmental stewardship that we never saw before that.

Mr. Dewar: It appeared that the program is not on, Madam Speaker, and that is regrettable.

Madam Speaker, my last question to the Minister of Environment is: how much household hazardous waste, paints, oils, solvents, antifreeze and so on, ended up or will end up in landfills by a bad decision from this minister?

Mr. McCrae: None, Madam Speaker, because those depoted days were indeed scheduled and it all happened.

An Honourable Member: Cancelled.

Mr. McCrae: No, they were not cancelled. They happened.

The important thing is that waste stream articles like oil, containers, filters, tires and all of those things covered by the Manitoba Product Stewardship program, Madam Speaker, all of those things are taking huge chunks of garbage out of the waste stream and they are now being recycled, which in the past were leaving the wrong kind of message not only for ourselves but for future generations.

When we talk about sustainable development in our economy, we mean business. Unfortunately the previous government in this province never displayed any inclination towards that but somebody had to make that happen, and we did, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): I have a question for the Minister of Health. The Carberry-North Cypress Health Action Committee and many good people in the community of Carberry recognize that the current hospital is totally inadequate. It is over 50 years old, the roof is leaking, the plumbing is inadequate. The local health action committee recognizes that not only do they need a new facility but a new approach where they are going to emphasize wellness instead of illness, and they are proposing a new integrated health care facility.

My question to the minister: can he indicate today whether the government is prepared to respond favourably to this proposal from the good people of Carberry?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Thank you very much, Madam Speaker, for that question. The member for Gladstone (Mr. Rocan), who represents Carberry in this Legislature, has been working with me very closely over the last while on this particular project. The community of Carberry I think has come to appreciate, as the member has indicated, that integrating their acute care services with their personal care home allows for delivering those services and continuing services in the community, where if one just had to replace the hospital it really would not be feasible. That is the Shoal Lake integrated facility that we have talked about and we have approved for Shoal Lake.

I will be attending a meeting in Carberry within the next couple of weeks. I know it is on my schedule, and I am looking forward to meeting with the community. I can tell the member, like in all of these projects, there is a lot of work that has to be done between the community, the regional health authority and the ministry in getting down to exactly what that community needs in its services as opposed to what it may want or desire. But those are exactly the types of projects that we are entertaining and approving, and I would expect when the project has worked through the detail it will receive approval, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Leonard Evans: I thank the minister for his answer, and indeed I was going to ask him if he would meet with the delegation from the community, and this is very good.

I wonder if the minister is knowledgeable and aware that the Marquette Regional Health Authority fully supports this proposal, recognizing that it is a growing community and does have legitimate needs.

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, I have attended many meetings with the Marquette Regional Health Authority as they work at reorganizing health care in that particular area on a regional basis. They were there when we developed with them the principle of the integrated facility in Shoal Lake. We will be working with them.

I can tell the member that the real issue around Carberry now is being able to work through exactly what kind of services work and can be supported in a community like Carberry. That is going to take a fair bit of detailed work by the RHA, by the Ministry of Health with that community. So that is really the issue; we want to get down to it. I will be in Carberry with the member for Gladstone (Mr. Rocan) at a public meeting to discuss these issues. There is a lot of detailed work to do, but the principle is certainly supported. In fact, it is exactly the kind of thing that regional health authorities and we are encouraging in the redesign of rural health delivery.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.