4th-36th Vol. 43-Oral Questions

In past years we have had some very challenging issues on international water flows and projects that would affect Manitoba. We have had the Garrison Diversion proposal that we dealt with in this province. We worked in an all-party, all-citizen way to lobby the U.S. Congress and representatives of the U.S. Senate to allow us to let them understand the impact of biota transferred to our waters and its impact on fishing here in Manitoba and the quality of water in this province.

We have found that this method, along with the direct message from the Premier to the U.S. government and the activity with the IJC has been very, very effective. I would like to ask the Premier: what is the present status of the Devils Lake diversion, and what is the present agreement that the government has with the U.S. government on this proposal?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my honourable friend for the question. My understanding of the current situation with Devils Lake outlet is that there are various proposals being developed in the United States, in the state of North Dakota, by people concerned about the massive rising of the water levels in Devils Lake and the flooding that that causes there. We have had an ongoing monitoring of that; in fact, at many of the public meetings that are being held in North Dakota we have had members of the Intergovernmental Affairs staff, principally Bob Oleson, who I think is known to members opposite, attend those meetings and provide us with briefings, ongoing updates as to the status of proposals.

We have said consistently that we will oppose any attempt to have an interbasin transfer of water from the Missouri watershed to the Hudson Bay watershed because of the potential damage to our freshwater fishery the biota transfer could cause. I have communicated that directly to Governor Schafer, and we have also employed the services of our Foreign Affairs department, Minister Axworthy, Ambassador Chretien and others to get that message as strongly across as we could not only in North Dakota but in Washington, D.C. Our position remains consistent that we would oppose any proposal that had that interbasin transfer. At this point, all we know is that North Dakota continues to seek solutions to their problem in Devils Lake, and our bottom line remains as I have stated it.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, the Premier will recall that when they were in opposition and we were in government, the present Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns) was part of an all-party delegation, but more importantly than just the political activity that took place, we had a number of the fishermen attend to Washington, local mayors, people along the Red River and Lake Winnipeg communities that would be directly affected and in northern Manitoba that would also be affected. We had people going directly to the U.S. Congress because the U.S. Congress apparently has already passed a $10-million fund for this project to begin. We had people going directly to the legislators of the United States and talking about what it would mean for their future livelihood and what it would mean for the future quality of water here in Manitoba in terms of a transfer from the Missouri River system watershed to the Hudson Bay system.

Will the Premier, along with the activity he is taking--I know he has threatened court action if he is not successful with the authorities--also look at having citizens involved directly with the U.S. legislators?

There is, and I would say not to get political, a Republican Congress, a Republican Senate right now. Would we look at having citizens speaking directly to those legislators if other courses of action will not work? I think that that sometimes is more effective than court action, and it certainly was in terms of stopping the Garrison Diversion project here in Manitoba.

* (1340)

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Yes, Madam Speaker, there is no question that we would welcome and include the members of the opposition and the public in any effort that would be required for this kind of initiative.

The Garrison project, of course, had, I believe, several hundred million dollars of funding allocated by Congress and was in very, very advanced stages. This funding from Washington is principally, I think, directed at seeking the engineering solutions and the costs of that. I do not think that there is any construction money allocated. So we are at a bit of a different stage, but should we get to a stage that requires us to turn up the volume and the intensity of our efforts, there is no question I would welcome an all-party approach to it.

We know that in the past there have been no politics in our joint opposition. All three parties in this Legislature went on record in the '70s as opposed to Garrison, as the member recalls and mentioned the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns) was part of that from our side. Obviously, we would be more than happy to go on an all-party basis in the future if we felt that we were at that stage and required that kind of effort, including members of the public. So I thank him for that suggestion.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): A new question to the Premier. In 1994, his government changed the policy for 16- and 17-year-old children in care of the provincial government and established what was called the noncompliant policy that exists today. These are children that are under the legal guardianship of the provincial government.

In 1997, the Mason Report talked about the massive increases in caseloads for Child and Family Services workers across the province and the reduced resources. We are quite worried about the situation under the noncompliant category, because on the one hand you have the Province of Manitoba that is the legal guardian or parent of these children and on the other hand they sign or agree to a policy of noncompliance in terms of any supervision and programs for these children.

I would like to ask the Premier: how many children are in the noncompliant category, and has the government reviewed the many reports it has received to look at a new policy dealing with these children?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I would just--in taking that question as notice on behalf of the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson) because I do not have that detail at my fingertips--indicate that certainly, in terms of funding for Child and Family Services, our funding has continuously increased since we have been in government, both in total dollars and as a proportion of our budget, but I would be happy to have the minister come back with a full response to that question.

Mr. Doer: We are very concerned about a situation, according to many workers, that takes place with noncompliant children in the care of the provincial government where cheques are sent out, but there is no outreach, no supervision, no treatment programs, and cheques are sent to these children of 16 and 17 years of age.

Madam Speaker, I would like to know from the Province of Manitoba: will you be looking at changing the policies to provide mandatory follow-up, mandatory supervision, mandatory contact for this so-called category of noncompliant children for their future benefit and also for the benefit of our communities?

Mr. Filmon: I thank my honourable friend for the question. I, again, will take it as notice on behalf of the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson).

* (1345)

Mr. Doer: The government has received reports from the Child Advocate, has received reports from the Youth Secretariat in 1996, and one of the startling areas that the Youth Secretariat report of '96 identified is the numbers of youth at 16 and 17 years of age in prostitution. Six hundred, the Youth Secretariat projects in the city of Winnipeg alone, are 16 and 17 years of age, many of whom were the Child and Family Services' responsibility. I think we all in this Chamber must be concerned about that.

I would like to ask the Premier: how many of the noncompliant category children that this government has created, how many of those children are now regrettably in child and youth prostitution in Manitoba?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I will take that question, as well, as notice on behalf of the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson).

Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Madam Speaker, in 1994 the Children's Advocate in his second annual report said that many 16- and 17-year-olds are on their own. He said that these older adolescents contacted him during the past year and listed their primary concern as refusal by workers to provide them with any service or assistance. It is now four years later, and we followed up with workers and the Children's Advocate, and we find that little has changed. In fact, we are told that this noncompliant policy opened a Pandora's box to ignore these kids.

I would like to ask the Premier or the Acting Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer): what is this government doing four years after the Children's Advocate raised this concern to address it in a meaningful way? What is being done four years after it was raised with this government?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I will take that question as notice on behalf of the Minister of Family Services, who can bring a thorough and complete response to the member.

Mr. Martindale: I would also like to ask what alternatives are being sought, if any, for children, for young people, for 16- and 17-year-olds who have been living in independent living arrangements but who want other arrangements, and in at least one case they were refused by Child and Family Services some other appropriate arrangement. What is being done to help these 16- and 17-year-olds to have a secure and safe environment?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I will take that question, as well, as notice on behalf of the Minister of Family Services.

Mr. Martindale: I would like to ask the Acting Minister of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer): what is being done to investigate allegations that not only are some of these 16- and 17-year-olds involved in prostitution but involved in gangs as well while they are in independent living arrangements? Is the government concerned about this, and what are they going to do about it to see that there is proper supervision of these young people while they are in independent living arrangements or to find other suitable arrangements for them?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I will take that question as notice on behalf of the Minister of Family Services. I point out to the member that the Estimates of the Department of Family Services are up now, and they will be available tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. for him to enter into that kind of direct discussion with the minister.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

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

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I assume that members opposite are asking questions because they want to have this information, not because they want to make a bit of a spectacle in Question Period. If they do, then the Estimates process provides for extensive dialogue, question and answer and review of the policy with the minister. That is what I am recommending to the members opposite so that they can have a thorough examination of this policy and an ability to get all of the information that they desire on this topic.

* (1350)

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): My question is to the Minister of Government Services. Madam Speaker, this minister refuses to release a copy of the government's top-secret computer agreement with SHL. This minister refuses to release the point system used to select the successful hardware bidder. I would like to ask this minister whether he could confirm that the hardware bidder with the lowest price per computer was not accepted.

Hon. Frank Pitura (Minister of Government Services): Madam Speaker, I thank the honourable member for that question. It gives me the opportunity I think to share some information on the desktop management area.

For information purposes, in October of 1997, Manitoba entered into a 66-month contract with Systemhouse to provide desktop management services to Manitoba. It is expected that the whole transition to the managed environment will be occurring around March 31, 1999. The desktop management includes all management, acquisition and support activities related to microcomputers, common personal productivity software, local area networks and all the network enabling software and hubware. This includes the management of file print servers, network servers and hubs. The desktop management unit working with the vendor is responsible for developing architecture standards, specifically in relation to hardware and software. IBM computers and Hewlett-Packard printers have been confirmed as--

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, on a point of order, Beauchesne's Citation 417 states very clearly that answers to questions should be as brief as possible, deal with the matter raised and should not provoke debate. The question was about the lowest bidder. If the minister wishes to read the detailed notes into the record, probably the best thing to do would be to table it. We would certainly appreciate whatever information the minister can provide, but the question was on what happened to the lowest bidder.

Madam Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, I would remind the honourable First Minister that indeed Beauchesne Citation--Government Services, sorry, the honourable Minister of Government Services--that answers should be as brief as possible and respond to the question asked.

Mr. Maloway: The minister is clearly refusing to answer the question. The question was: did the successful bidder have the lowest price for the actual hardware provided?

Mr. Pitura: In response to the question that the member has asked, the RFP was issued in October on the government open bidding system. There were approximately 11 respondents to that open bidding system. The RFP process that the province uses is clearly in place, and that process is followed with regard to all proposals that the province puts out. The selection criteria I shared with the member the other day in terms of the point system and the evaluation criteria. That criteria was used to evaluate that process, and as a result IBM was selected as the supplier of the hardware.

Mr. Maloway: Madam Speaker, my final supplementary to the same minister is this. The minister is refusing to answer the question. Yes or no, did the successful bidder have the lowest price for the actual hardware provided?

Mr. Pitura: Madam Speaker, to be as brief as possible to the member's question, there is evaluation criteria that was put in place with respect to the contract. I indicated this to the member the other day. Product quality, general qualifications, technical specs, current costs and ongoing costs were the areas of evaluation under that contract.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice, again wanting to recognize the importance of judicial independence, something which I personally believe very strongly in, but there still is a need for some sense of accountability. I have asked the minister previously, and I guess I would ask him again today, what the minister is prepared to do other than wait for the task force report from Alberta to come down. Is this government prepared to do anything in terms of rectifying the situation within our judicial system in the sense of some sort of an independent review?

* (1355)

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): As the member well knows, it is not a matter of statutory jurisdiction that determines the independence of the judiciary. It is a matter of constitutional jurisdiction that was recently reinforced by judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada, in fact involving our own provincial judges here. So, Madam Speaker, I believe I, like all members, want to see every aspect of the public service, including judges who are independent of the executive, respond appropriately in their own context to concerns that arise from time to time. I know that in many respects the judiciary has been responding in the area of mediation, in the area of civil work, and there is the other area of criminal work where we have to I think take a strong look at that issue. I know my colleague in Alberta, the Honourable John Havelock, is looking at that particular situation. I have been invited to participate there, and I believe other Justice ministers will be there either before or after that conference to look at that issue.

Mr. Lamoureux: Will the minister acknowledge there are very serious concerns expressed from your Crowns, your lawyers, your police, and most importantly, the public of Manitoba, dealing with our courts and the way in which our courts are operating today? The question specific to the minister is: will the minister acknowledge the need for an independent review today? Let us not wait to see what is happening in Alberta; let us do what is right here in the province of Manitoba.

Mr. Toews: I know what the public of Manitoba are saying. They say it every day to me. They are concerned about that aspect of the justice system. I know that there is very strong support for our police, for our Crown attorneys, but there seem to be some concerns about the other aspect of our justice system. So, before I make any direct undertakings as to what this government or my department is prepared to do to improve that, I want to spend some time to reflect on that issue and determine if there is anything that we can do here in Manitoba. I might indicate to the member that the solution will have to be a Canada-wide solution because of the constitutional nature of the issue, so it is nothing that this province could do by itself, given the amending formula under our Constitution passed in 1982.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I am sure the Minister of Justice then, given what he has said, would recognize that Manitoba, at the very least, can advocate through an independent committee what we believe is more of a just system to ensure that the concerns expressed from the public, our lawyers, our police and Crowns are in fact at least being listened to.

Mr. Toews: I want to assure the member that indeed the police, the Crowns and the concerns of the public are being listened to, and we respond to those concerns on a daily basis. The member's point is a good one. Again, I am not prepared to make any undertakings at this time, but I am not saying that his suggestion is without merit. The member raises a good point.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, if the current, most recent rate application from MTS is approved, Manitobans are looking at upwards of $6 a month additional on their phone bills. That will double the cost for local service since the government started the process of privatization. Manitobans, in addition to paying for the stock option program--the 12.75 percent rate of return that MTS wants--will also be stuck paying the bill for the taxes that the privatized MTS will have to pay.

I would like to ask a very simple question to the minister, since he did not respond to this when I asked this question last week. As the minister responsible for MTS, what will his position be? Will he speak out against the increase that will be once again asking Manitobans to pay for these additional benefits for the privatized company?

* (1400)

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Again, Madam Speaker, I believe the member for Thompson is wrong with some of the information he puts on the record and certainly wrong with the impression he leaves in terms of rate adjustment potential in the province of Manitoba. As I said to him the other day in Question Period, there is a process in place through the CRTC which is available to any individual to make representation relative to a rate request being made by telephone companies across Canada other than the province of Saskatchewan. That opportunity is there for all Manitobans; to date that process has worked very well. We just saw an example where MTS made a request for a rate increase of some $3; CRTC ultimately approved a rate adjustment of 84 cents. As a result, today we have the lowest residential rates of any major telephone companies in all of Canada right here in the province of Manitoba. So that process is in place to protect consumers, to make telephone companies justify any of their expenditure adjustments, and I have confidence in that process.

Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, will the minister recognize that the only reason that the previous rate application was rejected was because Manitobans spoke out, whether it was the Manitoba Society of Seniors or more than 50 municipal councils and the New Democratic Party? Why will the government not speak out on behalf of Manitobans to say no to this $6 increase?

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, one reason it did work was because individuals, individual organizations had the opportunity to make representation, and they did just that. Also, CRTC do their analysis of the telephone companies of the impacts of rate adjustment requests and so on. Again, the member is making my point, that the process works. It is there designed to protect consumers, and the process works very well. We just saw a recent example of that with the last rate adjustment requested by Manitoba Telephone System.

Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister in a final supplementary: since he is supposedly the minister responsible for MTS and had no problem appointing people to the board, in fact directly appointed four members, at one time appointed all 11 of the current members, will the minister take direct action, because these four, his appointees, are clearly in a position of conflict of interest because of the stock option program? Any time there is a rate increase, the value of the stock goes up and they benefit financially. Why will not this government and this minister speak out against the rate application?

Mr. Stefanson: Again, the member for Thompson as usual on this topic is wrong. The members of the board have no conflict of interest. He makes the quantum leap that because there are any rate adjustments they necessarily lead to an automatic increase in profit. That is not necessarily the case. Sometimes they are to recover costs that are being incurred as a result of the additional technology and a whole range of issues in terms of delivering services to Manitobans. The facts are there is a process in place for consumers, for the public to make representation. That process works very well. We have a recent example of where it worked very well right here in Manitoba, and as a result of that process and the efficiencies of Manitoba Telephone System, we today in Manitoba have the lowest residential rates of any of the major telephone companies in all of Canada right here in Manitoba.

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Madam Speaker, I have a question to the Acting Minister of Health or the Premier (Mr. Filmon) regarding the very serious situation that is developing in Brandon. Doctors have now issued a press statement stating that doctors in Brandon will stop delivering babies at the Brandon General Hospital beginning Friday because they deem the Brandon General Hospital is unsafe due to a lack of adequate pediatric support. Expectant mothers and their families are very upset; they are very concerned with the serious situation.

I ask the government therefore: why has it allowed this situation to develop to a crisis stage when the problem has been known for well over a year, and has the government a plan to handle this crisis beginning this Friday?

Hon. Leonard Derkach (Acting Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I would like to assure the member for Brandon East that the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) is aware of the situation and has been working very aggressively to try and arrest the situation. I will take the details of his question under advisement and have the Minister of Health respond to him.

Mr. L. Evans: Madam Speaker, I wonder if this government realizes and understands the situation that not only are we increasing the risks related to expectant mothers having to travel over two hours either to Winnipeg, Yorkton or to Regina but also the considerable expenses involved, in some cases ambulance and accommodation for the family members. But here is the crisis. I have confirmed it now with the doctors in Brandon. As of Friday, there will be no babies delivered at the Brandon General Hospital, and I ask the government: does it have a short-term solution, an interim solution, as has been asked by an expectant grandfather in Brandon? Will the government hammer out a short-term solution in the interim while they wrangle over the long-term answers?

Mr. Derkach: As I indicated, the minister is aware of this situation, but I will take this question as notice for the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik).

Mr. L. Evans: Madam Speaker, I do not know whether the people of Brandon will be very happy with the rather lackadaisical attitude of this government and this minister.

Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Will this government acknowledge that the Brandon General Hospital has suffered in the past several years because of millions of dollars of cutbacks, laying off of nurses, the loss of various specialists, inadequate medical equipment, an aging building that the former minister was going to build many years ago, and that the Brandon General Hospital's role as a true first-class regional hospital is now being jeopardized?

Hon. Leonard Derkach (Acting Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I cannot accept any of the comments that the member for Brandon East has put on the record, but let me say that the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) has been working, along with the Brandon Health Authority, to ensure that those kinds of issues are addressed. But, as I indicated to the member in my previous response, I will take this question as notice for the Minister of Health, and he will get back to him.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, I have had discussions with parents and students from the Ethelbert Collegiate who have the same concerns as many families when it comes to the provincial math exam. Students who did not write the exam will retain their full mark in that course, but those students who did write the exam will have the mark from their exam included in their averages. In many cases their averages are going to be lowered.

I want to ask the minister if she recognizes the negative impact this is having on many students who are trying to get funding for their education in the upcoming year, but this lowered mark is now going to affect them. Does she recognize this as a problem, and how is she going to correct it?

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): If the member will just forgive me, I missed the first part of her question. Was she talking about Grade 12? [interjection] Grade 12 mathematics exams. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I can say to the member that certainly it is a vast improvement over what was experienced five years ago, 10 years ago, 15 years ago when there was no consistency whatsoever across the province. These students now, the superintendents and the field--we have discussed with students who do not write exams or who missed the provincial exam that the divisional mark can apply if the divisions so wish. That is the same policy that is used in other provinces. That is the policy that the field agreed to as a suitable substitute for missing the provincial exam, that the divisional mark could apply.

Right now, of course, we are only talking about 30 percent in any event. At least there is some consistency now versus none at all before.

Ms. Wowchuk: The minister says "in any event." In any event, this is going to put students' funding in jeopardy.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): I want to ask the minister, Madam Speaker, on behalf of these students, why they have to pay $15 to get a copy of their exam when the copy of the document that they get back has no meaning. There are no marks on it; there are no comments. What is the purpose of sending this document back and collecting $15 for it? Is it a souvenir for the students of the test that you put out?

* (1410)

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I am very pleased to have the opportunity to clarify for the member the detail that students do receive. Every school receives a student profile on every student who writes the exam. It goes through question by question. It says student A in answering question 1 showed a good understanding of spatial relations or whatever the question was about. On question 2, student A showed that they did not understand whatever it was; question by question by question, an analysis not only of what the mark was on the question but what the problem was that needs to be corrected or learned. That student profile is sent to every school for every teacher to share with every parent and every student.

The reason there is no marking on the paper is because the paper is double-marked. It is a blind marking system. The marks are scored on a different and separate sheet so that the first marker cannot compare with the second marker. It is known to be one of the best methods of marking. People across the nation in North America are asking for that particular model to follow in their own jurisdictions.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the minister--even though she gave this long answer--whether she recognizes what a serious problem has been created, and that parents are now saying that they are not going to let their children write the provincial math exam next year if it is going to put them at risk of not being able to get the funding that they need to go on to university where the fees have increased as a result of this government's actions.

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I think the member has to understand the situation in Manitoba prior to the very welcome emergence on the scene of standards, these tests and exams, which are not yet fully in place but which are in the process of being implemented across the province.

Prior to this time, an 85 percent mark in Swan River may or may not have meant the same as an 85 percent mark in the city of Winnipeg, which in turn may or may not have meant the same as an 85 percent mark in Brandon. There was no consistency; there was no set standard. Universities, employers, anybody those students turned to after school, had no idea if they were comparing similar results. At the university, the marks have long been ignored at the university because they meant nothing. All they indicated was that in terms of--

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Education, to very quickly complete her response.

Mrs. McIntosh: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. They meant nothing in terms of being able to compare on an apples-to-apples comparison whether a student in division A had learned the same as a student in division B. That is well known, and the changes we are making are most welcomed by the people of Manitoba.

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, it is a matter of public record that the Manitoba Telephone System applied in the last month for rate increases which escalate to $38 million over the next period of time and that that equates to over $6 a month for every residential telephone. This is not a matter of conjecture; it is a matter of record. The minister responsible seems not to understand the CRTC process.

Will he acknowledge today that the rate shock, spoken of by Mr. Nugent, is exactly what MTS says in their current application they are attempting to avoid by having a gradual increase to pay their income taxes? Will he acknowledge that Mr. Nugent was correct, that MTS is correct, that Manitoba ratepayers face rate shock in very significant terms?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, no, I will not, but I will acknowledge, as was indicated in this House, the fact that there was a tax advantage to some write-off of some pension allocations by MTS, some $360 million, that that benefit at this particular point in time is flowing to the consumers through lower rates.

Everybody has acknowledged that ultimately Manitoba Telephone System will become taxable, which is the case with all of the companies that they compete with here in the province of Manitoba. That will happen from the day of privatization, about three to four years out. That is the issue that MTS is starting to address. They are talking about potentially an eight-year phase-in to deal with that issue, but again, as I said in response to the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), there is a process in place, which is the same process followed by all telephone companies across Canada, other than in the province of Saskatchewan, to make representation to the CRTC to request any adjustments. That allows for consumer and public input into that process. We certainly have confidence in that process.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, will this minister acknowledge that last year, during the debate about the sale of MTS, he and the First Minister indicated the sale would produce a revenue-neutral situation? The company would not have to raise rates as a matter of having become privatized.

Now, today, he is saying that obviously everybody knows that would have to happen. Did he then mislead the House all the way through the debate, or is he misleading the House today?

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, there has been absolutely no misleading of the House. The fact is that, in the short term, MTS is benefiting from the tax deduction of the pension allocation. They will become taxable. Paying taxes, as members opposite do not seem to understand, is one element of doing business. There are various elements. All of their expenditures, all of their items have to be reviewed. Any adjustments to rates have to be approved by CRTC, so there is a process to go through where they have to justify any of their expenditures and the rate adjustment request.

We have said all along that the process is the same whether it is under public ownership or private ownership. Evidence is that that process works very well. The last request for rate adjustment by MTS, again, they made a request for some $3 rate adjustment. They received 84 cents. Again, the process works. As a result, we have the lowest residential rates in all of Canada right here in Manitoba.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, will this minister not acknowledge that if the CRTC agrees to the rate increases, the stocks in his brother's stock options will stay up in value; if they do not agree, the stocks in the stock option value will go down? Is he totally ethically blind, or he will he now remove himself from this portfolio so that the conflict of interest that is evident to every Manitoban will be evident finally to him?

Mr. Stefanson: Again, the member for Crescentwood is up to his usual tactics, talking about misleading, ethically blind, and again, all he need do is look in the mirror and he will see proof of an individual who represents those kinds of characteristics.

Again, what I would encourage him to do is to read a document that was provided, I believe, to his Leader yesterday, a document prepared by the MTS financial advisory group that outlines very clearly why what was done to MTS was in the best interests of all Manitobans, and that is a fact today. If you look at the service being provided, you look at the lowest residential rates in all of Canada. Again, I encourage the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) to share that document with his colleagues, particularly the member for Crescentwood, so he will understand--along with the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton)--why it was privatized, why it was the right thing to do, and why it is in the best interests of all Manitobans to have done that.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.