Mr. Chairperson (Ben Sveinson): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This section of the Committee of Supply will be considering the Estimates of the Department of Government Services. Does the honourable Minister of Government Services have an opening statement?

Hon. Frank Pitura (Minister of Government Services): Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman. If I may proceed.

* (1620)

I am pleased to present the 1999-2000 fiscal year spending Estimates for the Department of Government Services and for vote 27, the Emergency Expenditures. Even though I have lived in Manitoba all my life, it was not until I became Minister of Government Services that I became truly aware of the disastrous effects of nature on so many Manitobans who year after year live with the threat of floods, fires and other natural disasters.

Again this year, Manitobans in southwestern and western Manitoba experienced above-normal precipitation levels causing 25 percent to 30 percent of the farmland to be flooded with the devastating effect that some 1.25 million acres may not be seeded this year. The Manitoba Emergency Management Organization of Government Services established two flood recovery offices in Melita and Neepawa. The offices are staffed with MEMO personnel who are assisting area residents with advice and information on disaster financial-assistance claims, as well as referrals to stress business and financial counselling.

The Manitoba Emergency Management Organization is also working in conjunction with six provincial departments in assessing and responding to the needs of these farming communities. I have written to the Honourable Ron Duhamel, federal western economic diversification minister, seeking a commitment from the federal government to aid programs for farmers and farm-related businesses.

Over 300 disaster financial-assistance applications have been sent out or picked up by residents in the effected communities. MEMO is co-ordinating a central task team made up of senior official representation from departments and agencies, as well as the Association of Manitoba Municipalities to continue to assess the situation in determining the needs of the communities and individuals affected by the 1999 flooding.

The flood of 1997 for the Manitoba Emergency Management Organization and Manitobans is not over. The emergency response helped minimize the effects of the flood, but some Manitobans are still recovering and rebuilding their lives and homes two years after the floodwaters have receded.

Of the 5,428 private claims handled by the Manitoba Emergency Management Organization, 86 percent have been finalized. Approximately 14 percent, or 762 claims, have remained open.

In another aspect of emergency preparedness, we were well prepared to meet the forest fire threats earlier this spring because of the foresight the Minister of Natural Resources and I had in purchasing two additional CL-215 water bombers last year. Manitoba now has a fleet of seven water bombers to provide protection to the citizens of rural Manitoba and northern Manitoba to protect our province's forestry resources.

Manitoba Government Services, through the Desktop Management Unit, will provide provincial departments with a well-managed desktop and network infrastructure capable of supporting government-wide corporate initiatives and program-specific delivery requirements in a reliable, cost-effective, secure, flexible, and continuously improving environment.

The Desktop Management Unit has successfully transitioned over 7,000 units at 589 departmental locations in 74 cities and towns throughout Manitoba. By November of this year, some 9600 units will have been transitioned when the departments of Health and Family Services are moved into the managed desktop environment. The desktop initiative provides the information technology tools and support to government employees to enable them to enhance the manner in which they perform their job functions and therefore provide service to the citizens of Manitoba.

Through a province-wide computer information network that will be accessible to all provincial offices, including those in rural and northern Manitoba, all Manitobans, regardless of geographic location, will have greater access to government services and information.

We believe the desktop initiative has promoted growth in the information technology sector in the province and created approximately 260 information technology jobs. In addition, it has brought new technology to the province resulting in the expansion of a skilled workforce.

It was over two years ago now that we began putting into action a strategy to modernize Manitoba's information technology and ensure that the Manitoba government would be ready to move into the next millennium. We will be ready. As technology continues to change in the next millennium, the Desktop Management Unit will ensure government departments and programs keep in step.

As a critical component of the province's year 2000 solution and the Better Methods initiative, Manitoba Government Services has played a major role in developing and implementing a government-wide business system using SAP. My staff in procurement services will continue to take a key part in the application of the government-wide procurement component of this system to ensure that its benefits are fully realized. The procurement services branch is anticipating developing government-wide procurement strategies to achieve these benefits for government.

The Agreement on Internal Trade, AIT, came into effect in 1995. The procurement chapter of the agreement calls for a reduction of trade barriers by stipulating that procurements be subject to an open and fair tendering process.

In co-operation with the Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism, Manitoba Government Services is currently implementing an extension of the procurement chapter to the mass sector, which is comprised of the municipal sector, academic institutions, schools, and health and social service organizations. The extension to the mass sector will assist to ensure that Manitoba and Canadian suppliers have equitable access to this broader public sector market.

To better serve client departments, the Mail Management Agency undertook a feasibility study to determine the need and relevancy of electronic documents management, which would complement the mail finishing and processing activities of the agency. We believe an electronic documents program could reduce costs and paper usage and waste by government departments. If the outcome of the study supports our initial findings, Mail Management Agency will introduce an electronic documents management service this fiscal year.

The property management functions of the Department of Government Services over the past year have been assessing alternate methods of service delivery. Through the assessment of service delivery, the department investigates which means of providing services is best suited to the client and the location.

Manitoba Government Services is taking a very active role in the Public Utilities Board hearings to ensure that the department can plan for continuous fuel supply for government facilities across the province as the local gas market evolves toward a competitive environment. In order to help mitigate increasing gas costs, my department has an ongoing program to improve the efficiency of our heating plants. Savings over the last six to eight years have reduced energy costs by 12 percent to 15 percent. Saving taxpayers' dollars is always an easier task for a minister to speak about.

During the previous fiscal year, the Telecommunications branch of Government Services issued requests for proposals for both outbound and inbound long-distance services. In both instances, Manitoba Telecom Services was the successful bidder. These tenders will result in voice communication savings for provincial government departments of approximately $1.1 million per annum over the next two years. This means a reduction of approximately 50 percent in telecommunications costs and demonstrates the government's ability and willingness to select the lowest-cost, highest-value services in a competitive telecommunications industry.

* (1630)

In the area of Accommodation Development, 1999 is already proving to be a year of significant construction activity. The Brandon Courthouse, built in 1906, has long been outmoded and obsolete in terms of size, functionality, fire safety provisions and barrier-free accessibility. Phase I involving the establishment of a three-storey addition is scheduled for completion later this fall. Phase II, which is the refurbishment of the existing courthouse, is scheduled for completion later this fiscal year.

My department is responding to an immediate need for high-security youth facilities. A 20-bed high-security youth custody unit is currently under construction at the Agassiz Youth Centre in Portage la Prairie and is scheduled to be completed over the summer months.

In addition to these projects I have mentioned, my department has undertaken a number of major projects at Headingley Correctional Institution. In particular, work has already begun on both a 76-bed medium- and 76-bed maximum-security unit at the Headingley Correctional Institution. Completion and occupancy are scheduled for the summer of 2000. As well, further work is underway with respect to a new structure to house 48 minimum-security inmates within the secure perimeter of Headingley Correctional Institution.

My department is continuing with its work at Red River College, with current activity directed at Building A envelope restoration. This year represents the second year of a three-year project.

In closing, I would like to say thank you to all the staff of the Department of Government Services who work, often without recognition, in assisting their client departments and thereby serving the people of Manitoba.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank the Minister of Government Services for those comments. Does the official opposition critic, the honourable member for Elmwood, have an opening statement?

Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the minister for his comments. I especially appreciate his attention to the plight of the farm community in southern Manitoba and the difficulties of the disasters they face this year. I think that as opposition members, we have done what we can to help the government out in its efforts to achieve a resolution to the problem, and we hope that the federal government will come to the table and fulfill its responsibilities.

I think it would be to the table a lot quicker if this disaster were to have occurred in Ontario or Quebec. I have that distinct impression. I think I am not wrong in that assessment, and it is too bad in a country where we are trying to develop a good working relationship among all the provinces that we continue to have these problems. I guess it is not only related to the current farm crisis but in other areas of our society as well.

We have a number of areas that I want to question the minister on. As the minister knows, we are running out of time. It is getting close to July already. So I would like to suggest that perhaps we could participate and proceed with this department I think in the way we did last year, the way I have done in Consumer and Corporate Affairs this year, and that is, rather than going line by line, that we deal with it on a global basis and essentially call people in as they are required for questioning, so we do not have all of the staff sitting here for the entire time. If that is acceptable, then I would proceed on that basis.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank the official opposition critic for those remarks.

Mr. Pitura: Yes, I would agree with that, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairperson: Under Manitoba practice, debate of the Minister's Salary is traditionally the last item considered for the Estimates of that department. Accordingly, we shall defer consideration of this item and now proceed with consideration of the next line. Before we do that, we invite the minister's staff to join us at the table.

We invite the minister to introduce his staff present.

Mr. Pitura: I would like to introduce the Acting Deputy Minister, Mr. Gerry Berezuk; Director of Administration, Gerry Bosma; and our Director of our Desktop Management Unit, David Primmer.

Mr. Chairperson: Just before we start, it has been agreed already, or is this agreed by the committee, that we have general questioning for now. [agreed]

We thank the minister, and we will now proceed to line 8.1. Administration (b) Executive Support (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $410,200.

Pardon me. Before we proceed, on page 77 of the Main Estimates book.

Mr. Maloway: I am looking to get some initial updates from the minister as to what is happening with the desktop rollouts. I know that the schedule was to have a completion, I believe, of April 1, and we are long past April 1 already. But I would like an update as to how the rollout went and what the government has learned by that rollout process, the bad points of it, the good points of it.

Mr. Pitura: With regards to the current status in the desktop rollout, as of May 31, 1999, is the data that I have here. There was 793 desktops, not including those predeployed, or approximately 100 percent of the original estimate of 7,000 in scope work stations in the Manitoba government have been transitioned to the managed environment. There are also 1,919 printers, not including those predeployed that have been deployed, and 150 servers have been deployed, 397 sites have been transitioned, and they are located in 74 cities and towns in Manitoba. They have been deployed at 589 department locations. As of May 31, 1999, 5,600 applications have been reviewed and 2,038 of these have been engineered and deployed in a management environment. There have been over 13,738 person-days of training provided to prepare users for the transition to the management environment.

Mr. Maloway: Has this project been brought in under budget, on budget, or over budget?

Mr. Pitura: I thank the honourable Chairman for bringing up the issue with respect to answering questions, and I think as we go along if there are some areas where staff can answer directly, if that is okay with the critic.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Faurschou): I would like to clear that with the committee at this time. Is there permission of the official opposition critic for staff to answer?

Mr. Maloway: I do not see why not.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Faurschou): We have unanimous consent of the committee.

Mr. Pitura: One of the things that has occurred with the desktop rollout, of course, is that there have been increases in the number of seats and also some scope changes. The projected costs that are associated with the desktop initiative have been modified to account for these changes.

The original cost projections done in June of 1997 were estimated at $143.1 million, plus applicable taxes over 66 months. Current projections, and these projections are excluding Family Services which has yet to come into the environment, now total $162 million or an increase of $18.9 million.

Mr. Maloway: Can the minister account for the $18 million, as to what the province achieved for that $18 million?

* (1640)

Mr. Pitura: Just briefly, Mr. Chairman, first, the number of seats has grown 8.6 percent, from 7,000 to 7,600 seats. Secondly, the signing of an enterprise software agreement with Microsoft has a cost impact in the range of $6.8 million. As well, there have been some changes with regard to the kind of desktop hardware. In other words, we were estimating desktop units and they were not put on, but the laptop units and things like that which were changes to the system that imparted some of the extra cost.

Mr. Maloway: So the question is: why was this not foreseen in the original estimations in June of 1997?

Mr. Pitura: Generally speaking, when the initial estimate was put together in June of 1997, there was the projection at that time that there would be 7,000 desktop units, and so the cost projections were essentially based on the 7,000 units. Of course, that ended up as being 7,600 units, not including Family Services, so that, in itself, increased the cost. Of course, along with an additional 600 units, you now have additional training costs. Those users had to be trained.

There was also the enterprise agreement with respect to the software, the software that basically just hit the market during the time of our desktop initiative. It was deemed the best possible use of resources in terms of that enterprise software. As well, some of the departments throughout the initiative of the rollout also initiated some new programs such as the common offender program, which utilized an additional number of units. All of these variables came into play as the desktop program and the desktop initiative were being rolled out and so therefore contributed to the increase in the cost.

Mr. Maloway: So where did these 600 units go then? You started out with a projection in '97 of 7000 units. You ended up with 7,600. I would like a breakdown of those 600. On your rollout you gave a breakdown month by month of where the system was rolling out, when it was rolling out so you could look at the different departments, how many machines they were getting, when they were getting them. You could make a judgment as to whether or not the rollout was on schedule or how far behind it was at any given time, at any given month throughout the year. So this is the first I have heard of these extra 600 units. I would like to just know where they fit in that rollout. Maybe you could give me a new rollout picture here as to what actually happened, sort of the rollout in reverse I guess.

Mr. Pitura: Just to inform my honourable friend that we cannot pinpoint for you right now at this present time just exactly where all those units have ended up, but we are able to supply that information to you probably within the next few days if you would be prepared to wait for it, because this goes by department. There are a few units here, a few new units there.

Mr. Maloway: Last year you had the rollout all put out on a single page, I think it was. It was broken down by month and by department and it indicated what the rollout was projected to do on a month-by-month basis. All I had to do was ask you, corner you in the hall there two or three times over the year and I got an update as to where you were. You were behind some months and you assured me that that would be caught up, and then two or three months went by and you got ahead of the game. It went back and forth like that. That is what I am looking at.

Somehow there is a missing 600 units here. I was not aware of them until today. How do they fit in? Presumably they would be added to your rollout charts. When did they appear on the chart? If I had the old chart and the new chart, I could see where these 600, at what point did they surface? Did they surface October 1, November 1, and where were they?

My guess is that I think the original plan, if I am not mistaken, was that I believe that Family Services was out, was not part of the plan in the beginning I think. I do not know that Health was either. Somewhere along the line the plans were changed. Anyway I will let you answer.

Mr. Pitura: In response to the honourable member, we can supply you with a chart similar to the one that you have been looking at. We just do not have it with us here. If you can be patient on that we will supply you with it.

Mr. Maloway: I am not sure whether we will be back into Consumer and Corporate tomorrow or whether we will go back into Government Services, so if you could provide that to me in the morning that would be good. The reason I ask is that I did ask a few weeks ago now for a list of the government leases and more than just a global. I am not interested in a global total. I can look in the annual report to get the global totals if I am interested in that. I wanted a list of the individual leases similar to what was provided to me back four or five years ago by one of your predecessors, Minister Pallister. I believe it was he who provided me the list. This is quite a long time ago now, and I am waiting for it. I know in Consumer and Corporate Affairs I got a nice one-inch-thick list of answers to my questions last year, last June, my questions of June last year. Guess when I got it. January 6. I got it six months later when the information is, you know, pretty much redundant and of really not a great use to me, because I was interested in it at the time. We are all aware that an election is coming up fairly soon. I would hate to think that I would get this information, you know, maybe January 6 of next year, when in fact this government might not even be around by January 6 of next year. So that is why I am a little sensitive about promises for information, a little more than usual, I guess, at this juncture.

The minister has been always pretty straightforward in the past, so I will take him at his word, but I would encourage him to try to be a little quicker with, well, for example, there was that lease information that he does not seem to be too quick to provide.

Mr. Pitura: Mr. Chairman, I would just like to introduce Assistant Deputy Minister Stephen Kupfer, who is with our Accommodation Development department.

I am pleased to table the ACRS leased accommodations portfolio by department. To clarify matters, I will share this document with the honourable critic and thereby save the cost of tabling it and copying it.

Mr. Maloway: I will take a look at this report tonight and see whether it indeed provides the information we are looking for, but I appreciate the minister's attention to the request.

* (1650)

But let us get back to what we were talking about before here. I would like to know then, when the Family Services equipment is added, how many more units will be included in the system when Family Services goes on-line with this system. I think the minister said it was going to be some time this fall. If the minister could confirm that, just the number of Family Services units and what the estimated start-up–or is that to be phased in? I am not sure. Does it start a certain day? Do you hook them all up and turn them on one day, or do you do a rollout with that too?

Mr. Pitura: In response to the honourable member's question, when Family Services comes into the desktop managed environment, they will be adding approximately, we are estimating, 1,800 units, which would bring our total up to just roughly 9,400 desktop units throughout government. The intention is to have Family Services transitioned this fall. They will be starting in two weeks and going through until October 31. So it will be a several-month rollout for the Department of Family Services.

Mr. Maloway: Given the Y2K concerns and so on, I know in a number of other instances that I occasioned to look at in the last few months, organizations are looking at–I am not suggesting you do this; it is probably early enough–any activity too close to the January 1, year 2000, they are putting it off until they see that their current systems work properly. Is there any concern on any potential impact here with this? This is a fairly large number of machines, and I appreciate that they are supposed to be all Y2K, although you can never be sure, I guess. Just what is the potential impact of trying to meld these together so soon to the year 2000?

Mr. Pitura: I think the honourable member can appreciate the fact that if we achieve our objective of having Family Services transitioned by the end of October with regard to Y2K, at that point in time basically the entire provincial government should be Y2K compliant with the rollout. But having said that, October 31, and having Family Services coming into the managed environment at that time, we should be able to ascertain and correct any deficiencies if there are any, and I would probably hazard a guess that they would probably be minimal, if any. We may get caught on some of the software that some departments are using, but other than that, the units themselves and the software that the provincial government is using are all Y2K compliant. So putting them into place on October 31 is probably giving us enough time and enough of a window to make any corrections prior to the new millennium.

Mr. Maloway: Well, it is a judgment that you have to make. I think it may be Autopac, as one example, where I believe they are holding off certain function changes that were scheduled originally say to occur around that period, holding them off until January, February until they make sure that everything is working fine, just during that period. Now I am sure you are in no different shape. You are going to want to minimize any disruptions to the system at that particular time. It just seemed like a fair number of units.

Now I had thought that the original plan did not include Family Services, that you had a separate activity going on there because of the amalgamation and different contracts with different suppliers and so on. So how did that all resolve itself? I mean I think it is probably a good sign that everything is put together in one seamless web, if that is what it really is, rather than having separate solutions. How did you resolve this?

Mr. Pitura: Mr. Chairman, maybe just to take the honourable member back a little while and prior to even the desktop initiative being brought into government. The Department of Family Services was one of the first departments to outsource its computer resources and being able to provide computer programs through the department. So when the desktop initiative was put into place, it was then assumed at that point in time that–and Family Services also indicated that perhaps it would not be part of the desktop rollout because it already outsourced its computerization. However, as the desktop moved along and discussions took place with Family Services, they then in conjunction with the Desktop Management Unit agreed that it would probably be wise for them to make the transition into the environment now within the existing framework rather than waiting until such time as they could come in at a later time. So it was thought to be beneficial that they could come in now and be Y2K compliant as well as being in the new desktop initiative. When the tender was placed for the desktop initially, it was indicated in the tender proposal that there could be a potential for the transitioning of Family Services, although at that time it was not known whether they would be in or not.

Mr. Maloway: Mr. Chairman, so the fact that they got transitioned into this thing was part of the overall plan all along. Is that what the minister is saying?

Mr. Pitura: Mr. Chairman, it was just part of the process I think that as a provincial government providing a desktop rollout right across some 17 departments of government, it would be probably astute of us when we were looking at the transitioning and going into a desktop to say that potentially Family Services could be part of this group. But we were also very much aware of the fact that Family Services had outsourced, and certainly there was a situation there where they were going to have to make a decision themselves as to whether they wanted to stay in that environment or come into the desktop environment. They have since made that decision that they would like to transition into the environment earlier rather than later.

Mr. Maloway: Who did they outsource to? I know that IBM was involved in there at some point. I would just like basically a brief rundown as to who all the players were over at Family Services and just what exactly they were doing. Were there Y2K people over there? If so, how much did they cost? Were there other software developers over there? How much did they cost? Were there other hardware people over there? What did it cost? At the end of the day, was all this stuff scrapped and then Family Services went directly into desktop, or did whatever they spent and used over there, was that all part of the process of getting them into the system?

Mr. Pitura: I am not sure I can answer every question the member has put forward. Certainly Family Services, when they did their first outsourcing, entered into an arrangement with IBM Canada Incorporated. They called their Partners in Progress agreement that was initially established for three years in November of 1995, and there was an option to renew for an additional two years. So what happened was that the three-year term was set to expire in October 1998. If they had terminated it at that time, they may not have been able to move into the desktop environment and make a smooth transition into the desktop environment because of the logistics in the timeline. So they decided that they would continue to outsource with their computer needs with IBM.

This is now 1999, so in terms of making the transition over to the desktop initiative, it allows them to make a transition. I explained earlier that we are starting in two weeks and working through till the end of October; therefore, they will not have the downtime or potential for downtime that they would have had, had they made the decision in 1998 to move over completely because then we would have had to transition them at once, all at one time. So this way we can do it over a period of time.

* (1700)

Mr. Maloway: Mr. Chairman, so is the minister saying that they essentially extended their three-year contract beyond what was originally intended so that they could ease the transition to the new environment?

Mr. Pitura: Mr. Chairman, I was just indicating to the honourable member that they initially had a three-year contract and they had an option for a two-year renewal, so they exercised the option.

Mr. Maloway: So then they have used up the entire option. They exercised the option in October. The option is a two-year option. They are getting out of the option after only six months. Correct or not correct?

Mr. Pitura: Mr. Chairman, just a point of clarification for the honourable member. I am advised that with the two-year option, Family Services exercised a one-year option to that agreement. So they will be terminating October 31, 1999, which will be at the point at which we are totally transitioned into desktop.

Mr. Maloway: Mr. Chairman, so it sounds like a smooth transition then, that we are not paying for something we did not get, and we are not paying any penalties. There are no problems in that regard.

Mr. Pitura: I do not think, from the standpoint and concern of the honourable member, that there should be that concern with–it should be a smooth transition.

Mr. Maloway: So to get the answers for the question then, the remaining answers, I wanted to know: at the end of the day, what did the old system cost for Family Services outsourcing? When Family Services outsourced to IBM, that very expensive option that they took, and I know that there are different views as to what happened over there, but when they embarked on this, I would like to know just what at the end of the day was the total cost. What did it cost Family Services to exercise that option, that whole outsourcing option that they exercised? What was the total bill associated with it?

I include there the whole business of the hardware component, the software component and all of the consulting and Y2K activity and so on that was involved in that contract. I am asking because I do not know what the answer is, right, and I do not know how much of these activities were going on. So clearly there must be some sort of–the project is now over, right? Originally when I was asking questions it was ongoing so the answer that I was getting was that, well, you know, we are in the middle of the process right now. It was separate from desktop, and so I was chasing around in two or three different places to find out information because you did not have the whole thing under one sort of umbrella at that point. Because the project was still in progress, there were no final costs available. Well, now the project is over so those costs have to be available now.

Mr. Pitura: I do not have the answer for him on that because it was Family Services that facilitated the outsourcing and made the agreement with IBM with regard to their department. I can certainly share the costs that the desktop unit has incurred in terms of projecting those costs per seat for Family Services now, but the original costs of that agreement, you would be best directed to Family Services.

Mr. Maloway: I appreciate that. I am directing the question to the minister though because I believe Family Services, if they are not finished, are in another committee, and I cannot be in two committees at the same time, unless the minister wants to shut down the committee and I will run next door to Family Services. You know, I would do that, but I do not think that either one of the House leaders would appreciate that. So take it as notice and dig it up, if you can.

Mr. Pitura: Mr. Chairman, I think that we can take that question as notice for the honourable member and attempt to get the information for him from Family Services.

Mr. Maloway: Mr. Chairman, the Health department is included in this desktop project. I assume that the hospitals, Winnipeg Health Authority and so on are totally excluded. That is a totally separate operation because I know that they had separate Y2K estimates, Y2K costs associated with their projects, but I am just wondering how close the connection is between your operation and the WHA. I mean, it is all government one way or another. It is not strictly the government proper, but the taxpayers are paying the bills all around here, so I assume there is some sort of co-ordination between the government, health services, WHA, things like MPIC, our Crown corporations, but you have Hydro, and the province has an interest.

We dealt with this in Consumer and Corporate Affairs, that our interest goes beyond just what is happening here in the government; we are interested in what is happening in industry overall, what is happening in the banking system, what is happening in the mining system, what is happening in the entire province to make certain that we have as few failures as possible come next January. So I would like to know just how you tie into all these other things, including, by the way, the Pan Am Games.

Mr. Pitura: I think the honourable member brings up a good question, but at this point in time Manitoba Health is transitioning into the desktop environment as the Department of Health. At this point in time there is no indication that this environment will be transitioned into the Winnipeg Health Authority or the Winnipeg Long Term Care Authority or the regional health authorities that are in rural Manitoba. However, there is probably a good argument to made that perhaps that should be looked at in the future. However, at the present time that is not occurring.

Of paramount importance, of course, is the Y2K issue that the hospital authorities may encounter. To that end, our people involved in Y2K are working with the hospital authorities to address any issues they may have with Y2K. But I think the honourable member makes I think a very valid point about the entire health care system in terms of discussions. They probably should take place in the future.

Mr. Maloway: Now the Pan Am Games are probably a different issue, but the government I think is providing the old computer hardware for use of the Pan Am Games. At least that was my understanding last year, but I would like to know just what is the connection. We have all these high-priced, high-paid experts here, Y2K people pulled in for this job, and this government seems to have gotten ahead of the game faster than some others. I have been paying attention to what has been happening in the United States for the last couple of years and other countries and other provinces and so on, and certainly Manitoba, I do not know whether it is the most advanced jurisdiction, but it has certainly taken an interest in it as early as or earlier than most, so I would expect to see less problems here.

With all this expertise floating around, I just wondered what the assistance that the department was making to the Pan Am Games. We are not worried about Y2K because that is not going to be a problem for the Pan Am Games, but I am wondering about–the games are a big-ticket item here, and I do not think that any of us wants to see big disruptions of the Games. We want to see the Games to be successful, and I do not think that we need computer glitches and computer problems that could cause disruptions or cause problems for the Pan Am Games, so I just wonder what the department is doing or what has the government done or what is it planning to do as regards the Pan Am Games, other than maybe be spectators at the Games themselves.

* (1710)

Mr. Pitura: In response to the honourable member's question, with the Pan Am Games being held in Winnipeg this summer and with Family Services coming into the transition at the back end of the summer, it has allowed us to facilitate the inclusion of 800 units that would be transitioned into Family Services to be used by the Pan Am Games committee during the period of the Games. After the Games are completed, the units will be transitioned into the Family Services department which will, in terms of timing, just happen to work very well. Our people are also providing technical advice to the Pan Am Games committee with regard to the desktop units and to the software as well.

Mr. Maloway: So these 800 units then, are they in addition to or they are in place of or instead of the units that were planned to be put into the Pan Am Games a year ago when we talked about this whole issue? A year ago the plan was that the old noncompliant equipment was to be given to schools, was to be given to the Pan Am Games. That is what you told me last year, so what happened? Are these 800 in addition to what you were planning to give them or are these in place of? If that is the case, then why the change?

Mr. Pitura: The 800 units that we brought in as a result of the Family Services coming into the environment are being used instead of the old computers that were taken out of service. Again, it basically occurred as a result of the Family Services transitioning into the desktop environment which created the opportunity to utilize those machines, and as well the Pan Am Games Society had a requirement to have uniform standard equipment throughout all aspects of the Games. So again, these 800 units were much better to be put into place rather than the old units because they were not a standard issue, so we solved several problems by doing it this way.

Mr. Maloway: The question is: when did you discover that? When did you discover because it seemed like a very smart idea to me that when I asked you last year what is happening to the old units, your answers were at that time: well, we are going to give them to the schools. It makes sense to me. Before we give them to the schools, we are going to use them for Pan Am Games.

I can understand the Pan Am Games because they are going to occur before. The schools are going to be using these things after the Y2K problem becomes a problem, so I was not quite clear about that one. But nevertheless, that was the intention, but using them for the Pan Am Games sounded like a good idea. Now somewhere after that time you found out that the equipment you were going to give the Pan Am Games was not compliant, so when was that, and how did you discover this?

Mr. Pitura: I think, just to share with the honourable member the fact that if we take a look at the Department of Family Services with regard to their option to renew, okay, you are looking at October 1998. At that point in time they decided that they would renew for one year which gave them to October 1999. When the member was asking me these questions last time it was probably around May or June of 1998. So, between that period of time and with Family Services going for a one-year option instead of a two year option and coming into the desktop environment, created a change whereby now they were being part of the desktop environment but not being fully transitioned until the end of October, it made sense to take the units that they were using and provide them to the Pan Am Games Society, and so they would have a standard set of equipment.

Had that not occurred, the Pan Am Games Society would have been still looking at the utilization of the used government computers, but things happened that allowed them to use the new units rather than the old units.

Mr. Maloway: It is a fortunate development, I guess, but the question is though that had you been forced to go with the old equipment, at what point would you have discovered that the Pan Am Games could not use it? I mean, we are not talking about Y2K compliance here. We are talking about their requirement of uniform equipment. At what point did somebody phone them or they phoned you or where in the process, what time last year did you discover that you could not use all this equipment that you were planning to donate to them?

Mr. Pitura: I am advised that the computers that the Pan Am Games Society were originally looking at, and needing some 800 units, when they started to put the logistics of standardizing all the units together, they could not physically get the job done in the time frame that they would like to have. So it then became apparent that the units, in order to be able to satisfy their requirements, would be best achieved through this other process. So that is what occurred at that time.

I also would like to leave with the honourable member the fact that those units are designated for computers for schools and libraries and at the present time are going through that process where they are getting distributed–well, they are going to schools and libraries. They are getting upgraded if they need upgrading, and then they are being distributed to the schools and libraries with the emphasis in northern Manitoba.

Mr. Maloway: Mr. Chairman, I am just operating from memory now, but it seems to me that we were talking about, the minister kept talking about 7,000 computers. I thought we were talking about 9,000 or 10,000. Nevertheless, whatever the number is, who is upgrading them, who is distributing them and at what stage are we at with the distribution?

You have a total phase-in as of April 1, according to your rollout plan, April 1, this year. It is now almost July 1, a couple of months later. What percentage of these computers now are actually sitting in schools and libraries, and what numbers of them were upgraded? What kinds of upgrades? What is the typical upgrade, and who did the typical upgrade? Who is delivering them to where they are at right now?

Mr. Pitura: Mr. Chairman, I am advised that Computers for Schools and Libraries have distributed approximately 1,232 units through its program to date, and they have 120 units awaiting pick-up from schools. The remainder of the equipment is being reviewed, upgraded and readied for distribution through this program. Within the next few days I am advised that Computers for Schools and Libraries will be supplying us with a second-quarter update in terms of where it is at in the distribution of the computers.

* (1720)

Mr. Maloway: Mr. Chairman, so can the minister then tell us who is doing all of this? Who is doing the upgrading, and who is doing the distributing?

Mr. Pitura: The organization named Computers for Schools and Libraries is the group that is responsible for receiving the computers from the provincial government and assessing whether there was a need for upgrading and completing the upgrading and getting them ready for distribution to schools and libraries in Manitoba. It is, I believe, a nonprofit organization that has been set up to facilitate this. It consists of some people from the private sector as well as they have some computer experts that helped them out, I believe, on a volunteer basis with this upgrading and getting the computers ready for distribution.

Mr. Maloway: Can the minister then provide us with a list of the people on the board of this organization and also tell us who is doing the upgrades?

Mr. Pitura: We do not have the names of all the people who are involved with the computers in the schools and libraries with us here, but we will talk to them and certainly, if they are prepared to do so, we will share that information with the member. I would advise the member, too, that when we first made this announcement, we did have and held a press conference out at the facility for schools and libraries where they have their offices and shops and warehouse and distribution point, and they were all present there. I had the opportunity to meet them, but I unfortunately do not remember their names. I am advised as well that computers for schools and libraries have a website, so if the honourable member is on the Internet, he can probably pick it up fairly quickly.

Mr. Maloway: So I will take that as a commitment from the minister then to provide us a list of the directors of this organization, I take it.

The government's deputy ministers are being briefed quarterly on the state of Y2K readiness in this as far as the government is concerned. Your last briefing was supposedly allegedly held the end of May, the last few days of May. I would like to know just what was discussed at this meeting. What is the state of readiness as far as Y2K is concerned as of your last report, the end of May?

Mr. Pitura: Mr. Chairman, I will ask my deputy minister, Mr. Berezuk, to answer that directly.

Mr. Gerry Berezuk (Deputy Minister, Department of Government Services): Generally the information that was provided at that meeting showed that the province was doing quite well with respect to its state of readiness to go through the year 2000 changeover date.

Mr. Maloway: Is there a written report that comes with this meeting? I assume that when the deputy ministers meet that there is some sort of a written documentation of the problems you are encountering and how things are being resolved?

Mr. Berezuk: It seemed to me that there was a PowerPoint presentation that was made I guess at that meeting. I think there was written documentation as well, and the source of that information would be with the CIO's office, like actually the Y2K office, and the chief information officer.

Mr. Maloway: So they do not give you a written report then after each meeting? You do not get a written report of where things are in your department? Well, in your case, it would be the overall system.

Mr. Berezuk: Yes, there was a report that was provided, yes, when I think about it.

Mr. Maloway: Can I get a copy of that report?

Mr. Berezuk: I would suggest that perhaps the request for that should be directed to the CIO, Kal Ruberg.

Mr. Maloway: Mr. Chairman, I would expect that it would be a low-risk venture here, because after all we are looking at brand-new computers. We are looking at Y2K compliance systems and computers. So what could there possibly be in the report that would reflect badly on the organization? What would be the difficulty in giving me the most recent–and the reason I ask is because I have asked the Securities Commission for reports. They require companies to provide reports as to how they are dealing with their Y2K issues. They are endeavouring to get me copies of reports.

They get quarterly reports and their last report was June 15, which was only a couple of days before I had asked the question. So obviously, I would be looking at three-month old information if I was to try to get information from the previous quarterly report, right. So I was interested in a more up-to-date report, and I have to wait a little while on that. Likewise, I mentioned the Securities Commission is one but also the financial institutions, they have their own regulatory body who are looking for updated reports. The PUB are getting updated reports from the people they regulate.

The regulators have to be asked these questions about how confident are you that this thing is going to work. We can all talk about things being compliant, but we have no way of knowing until we are actually in the environment as to whether or not things are actually going to work properly.

Mr. Pitura: Mr. Chairman, I just want to advise the honourable member that–I am not trying to be difficult with the so-called minutes of this meeting–however, we do have to be very much aware of protocol within the government. Basically, the broader aspect of Y2K comes under the Department of Finance. The Department of Government Services is solely responsible for the desktop unit. But I will share with the honourable member some of the information that we get back from the department with regard to the year 2000 project as it pertains to the Department of Government Services. So I will share that with the honourable member as to where we are and how comfortable we are.

Firstly, in terms of our accommodation cost-recovery system, this is fully tested and it is year 2000 compliant. There is development of an interface to SAP is not required until the first billing date that normally does not occur until July. So we are in good shape with accommodation cost recovery. Accommodation development information system is fully tested and year 2000 compliant. The property management accounting system, this project was originally identified as a year 2000 contingency for SAP. However, this contingency is no longer required as the application has been replaced by SAP functionality which is–well, no, that is not it. You have the accommodation development there.

The purchasing related applications, these applications have been subsumed by SAP and have been deleted from the project register. The IT request for service, this internal tracking system is not required until December 1999. So it has been put on hold, in order to deal with other year 2000 projects of higher priority. The job costing system, the redevelopment of this application from the legacy environment is targeted for July 31, 1999. Timesheet application, the redevelopment of this application is targeted for the end of July 1999. The contract system has been redeveloped and installed and is targeted for completion at the end of June of this year.

* (1730)

Our parking inventory, which the member might be interested in knowing, is that we will keep tabs on him in terms of where he parks and how much he is going to pay.

An Honourable Member: Who is parking in my stall, that is what I want to know?

Mr. Pitura: Well, we want to get our money.

This is currently operating parallel with existing systems, and technical issues with the managed environment delayed this project, so this project is now targeted for completion at the end of June of this year. Then, our store's inventory is targeted for completion at the end of June of 1999.

So that provides the honourable member with kind of a quick update in terms of where we are within the Department of Government Services with the year 2000.

An Honourable Member: That is your May 31 report there? That is not three months before.

Mr. Pitura: The report is the May 31 report, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Maloway: I mean, see, that was not so hard after all. Other departments I have asked these questions of, and there is just this protective shield that comes up. You would think you were trying to get the nuclear bomb secrets. Of course, then suspicions arise because, I mean, after all, the whole reason for this exercise is to buy equipment and so on that is compliant. So, if it is not compliant, we really do have some problems, after spending all this money.

Now that brings me to my next point. I would like to know what you have on file in terms of promises from these suppliers as to their guarantee of compliance.

I will just flesh that out a little bit more. For example, two years ago, almost to the day, if you were to phone, say, Dell–I usually say Dell and Gateway, but let us say Gateway Computer. They will tell you that they spent millions to update their plants to make sure their computers are Y2K compliant. They will tell you they are Y2K compliant. The more you push them, the bottom line is they will not give you something in writing. Have you ever tried it? Try it. Nobody will give you any absolute guarantees. They will tell you all sorts of things verbally, as salespeople do all the time. They will tell you they are compliant, but they will not put it in writing. So you have to kind of write it on the invoice, you know, yourself, right? That is the only way you are going to get it from these people.

So what I want to know is what guarantees do you have that this stuff is going to work, and are there any penalties built into these contracts that if the stuff does not work and you have downtime and people are unemployed and people are sitting around that you have to pay and no work being done, and you have to subcontract the work out or go back to the old manual system, you know, the hieroglyphic route, if you have to go back to that, then who is going to pay those costs? Will that be borne by the people, your suppliers that you have paid all this money to, who you have been sharp enough to get guarantees written into the contract that, if this stuff does not work, they are going to pay penalties? So what is the situation with that?

Mr. Pitura: The desktop management services agreement does have a Y2K compliance for goods and services supplied under the agreement. There is also a written guarantee within that agreement that the goods and services supplied under that desktop management services agreement will and are Y2K compliant.

Mr. Maloway: Are there any financial penalties on these suppliers, if in fact they are not? You and I can give all the written guarantees we want in writing, but you know that is not very good if we do not win the next election. We are not here to honour those guarantees, so that is what I want to know. It is fine to have these guarantees, but if there are no financial penalties and the thing does not work, then what is the point of the guarantee? There has to be some sort of penalty here written into these contracts.

Mr. Pitura: I am advised that we have within the parameters of the agreement that of course if there was a situation where there was supposed to be Y2K compliance and we found out that there was not, then what it does is, in terms of a penalty, kicks in under the agreement, the thing known as service credits, so that basically the service credits would be then credited to the Province of Manitoba's account for future use, so in effect that is the penalty that exists under the agreement.

Mr. Maloway: So is this penalty then in only the one agreement, or is it in multiple agreements?

Mr. Pitura: This is, I am advised, particular as we know it within the Desktop Management Unit as part of the desktop management service agreement that these service credits. So, within that context, that is the extent of our knowledge in terms of the agreement.

Mr. Maloway: But surely you would have similar requirements in all these Y2K contracts that you have all over in the various departments. You have a number of Y2K activities going on, work being done. I mean, that is where you would want to have the guarantees. The guy takes a big chunk of your dough to fix the Y2K problem, rewrites all your software and then it does not work, then that is where you would want to have some penalties that he is going to come back and work until the day he dies fixing all this stuff or at least paying for the fixing of it.

Mr. Pitura: I am advised, and I will share this with the honourable member because there is within the provincial government, the Manitoba Government Services is of course responsible for the Desktop Management Unit. As such the hardware that we have put into place and the SAP software is Y2K compliant, and that is part of our–not SAP. Okay, just the hardware is Y2K compliant. If we get into some of the contracts that the member is referring to about Y2K projects that are going on elsewhere in the province within the provincial government, then I suggest to the honourable member that this does occur under the CIO, chief information officer, so therefore they would have the responsibility for those Y2K projects.

Mr. Maloway: Can the minister provide me, then, with a copy of the wording of that particular paragraph or paragraphs that encapsulate this concept of responsibility for Y2K screw-ups in the contract? It has to all be on one page that he can just photocopy and give me a copy of. I would like to read it over, because it would be an interesting read, I am sure.

* (1740)

Mr. Pitura: I am advised that, with respect to the exact wording in the contracts, there is a confidentiality clause in the agreement, so therefore I am unable to share the exact portions of the contract that the member is looking for. However, our staff in the Desktop Management Unit would be well able to supply the honourable member with our written interpretation of what those clauses are, but we do have a restriction in terms of photocopying or releasing the exact wording in the contract.

Mr. Maloway: When could the minister provide me with that legal opinion of the contract?

Mr. Pitura: Mr. Chairman, just to clarify with the honourable member that it will not be a legal interpretation I presume that he is after but an interpretation. I am advised that if it is basically an interpretation of that agreement, then we could probably have it to the member on Wednesday.

Mr. Maloway: Mr. Chairman, I will basically take what I can get. So the best thing would be to actually have a copy of the section of the contract, and I am sure that the minister could, if both parties were agreeable, it could be done. Right? So that if the other party agreed to just allowing that one section of the contract to be provided, then I am sure that if the minister was agreeable and the other party to the contract was in agreement, it would not be a problem. But in the absence of that, then some sort of a departmental opinion as to what it is that you have signed would probably suffice.

Mr. Pitura: I will just share with the honourable member that we have already discussed some of the penalties or the penalty within that agreement, and we talked about service credits for noncompliance with any part of that desktop management services agreement, so in effect, the honourable member already knows that if there is a follow-up or something is supposed to be Y2K compliant and it is not, that it will kick in service credits to the account of the provincial government. So, in effect, that is the penalty within that agreement that we are sharing with him right now.

Mr. Maloway: Mr. Chairman, I think it is important to have those penalties there because I have read some recent information that basically indicates if you cut through the legal jargon that they warrant, that this particular product will operate in a Y2K environment and is compliant, but they will not warrant that it will work with other pieces of equipment, and that is where the system falls apart. If you are the manufacturer of the product, you say that my product is Y2K compliant, but the weakness evidently is that it may not hook up and work properly with another piece of equipment. That, by the way, is represented as being a kind of a–well, I do not know whether you would call it a weasel clause or not, but it is certainly a bit of an escape hatch.

I will tell you why. The manufacturer of the equipment will simply maintain when the thing does not work and takes down half the province, because all these things are interrelated, he will say, well, look, it works itself. We just did not warranty that it works with other pieces of equipment. That has been a concern, by the way, in Y2K issues all along, is that what happens if you buy all the fanciest equipment in town and then your kid walks in with an old DOS game from seven or eight years ago and plops it into your machine and takes the whole thing down? Then it takes down the next machine on-line. That is the real concern. The chain is only as strong as the weakest link, and you are going to have this really strong chain, and you people have fortified yourselves here, this millions and millions of dollars worth of equipment. You are sitting back here thinking: oh, this is just terrific. Then all of a sudden somebody downstream who is not Y2K compliant is going to take the whole thing down. That has been the fear all the way along.

So I do not know how strong your wording is, and maybe you do not know either. I mean, who really knows about this? It is all kind of speculation at this point. We are not going to know until we get into January, and we may get into January and find that nothing goes wrong. There may be just no problems at all, there may be minor problems, or the whole darn thing might collapse around us, right? And who is going to be there to pick up the pieces? The minister may not be here. I may not be here. I mean, who is going to be here?

So there is a certain amount of speculation. I understand that. So what we have to do is just make certain that we have guarded against as many possibilities and eventualities as possible. You know, it is already too late for you anyway. You have already signed the darn contract. The time to be asking these questions was before you signed the darn thing, but you did not come to me before you signed it to ask any advice; you went ahead and signed the contract. So we are all stuck in this boat together now. It is too late. But I was interested in just knowing how strong are the penalties, and what sort of penalties do you have? You still have some time. If you find some flaws in the system you have some time to fix them. The fact of the matter is that you have pretty well guaranteed yourselves a better possibility of success by buying all this new equipment, but you really cannot be 100 percent sure. That is really the bottom line.

So you can say things are compliant, these companies can assure the Securities Commission, and the companies who file with the TSE in Toronto on the quarterly reports can do all the bloody assuring they want, but at the end of the day you are never going to really know until you actually get in that environment. So if you can get me this information, I think that would be fine.

Now I wanted to know just where you people are going with this whole area of e-commerce. I see this kind of progressing kind of step by step here. First you got rid of all the little home-grown Manitoba computer companies because you had the kind of Tower of Babel here. You actually did have all kinds of different systems and all sorts of different standards, and they did not necessarily reliably talk to one another. That was a good argument for you to use for doing what you did. It is done, so there is no point in crying over spilled milk. So you have moved on, and you have got yourself a state-of-the-art standarized system.

Presumably, one of your next steps is going to be looking at the whole area of e-commerce. There are probably a lot of different applications in your system. I have not really looked at a whole lot of them, but I know that in some departments I am sure it is possible to, if you have to renew your notary public licence or your licence in Consumer and Corporate Affairs that, rather than sending all this stuff through the mail and having the person go down to Land Titles Office or wherever he or she is going and driving down and parking and going in to do this thing, it is quite possible, if you are on-line, to just get on the computer and give your credit card. I mean, that is what your old Internet mall, ManGlobe, was all about. That big failure. But presumably you learned something from that, and you are looking towards some sort of an e-commerce system whereby the government can provide service to the public and get paid for the service and basically streamline the system.

So what I would like to know is: what kind of studies have you done? Because I am sure you have been doing some of them. Where are you at with that now?

Mr. Pitura: Just to respond to the honourable member in the comments he made a little earlier. The fact that the very comments he made was one of the main driving forces behind our government going into a comprehensive arrangement for the desktop services, and it was vitally important to the provincial government that we not only get the desktop rollout that we would like to see, but we would also have the Y2K compliant. So it really stresses a need for–and the reason why we went to a very comprehensive agreement when we ended up with Systemhouse in terms of supplying the whole desktop rollout. So it provided us with a level of confidence, and the agreement is comprehensive from the standpoint that we have all the checks and balances in the system to ensure that we, indeed, are Y2K compliant come the next millennium.

Back in '95, I guess it was or earlier, when this whole process started in terms of the planning, that was one of the major factors in terms of doing the desktop rollout when we did because, No. 1, it was identified as a need; No. 2, the rollout would be in terms of timing prior to the new millennium. So, therefore, the issues of Y2K compliance and being able to function in the new millennium environment were also being able to be addressed.

* (1750)

The member also asked about e-commerce. Certainly, from the standpoint of the provincial government, that area is being looked at and studied, but I would have to share with the member as well that that particular project, e-commerce, is a function that is under the CIO's office, the chief information officer's office and their program, and they are working with not only just a single department. They are working with all departments with regard to potentials for e-commerce from each department. The member alluded to having a licence from the Securities Commission, or what happens if you want to renew your driver's licence, or you want to purchase a fishing licence. You are talking three departments there, different departments, so therefore it made sense that this be operated through the office of the chief information officer.

I would also share with the member, as well, that under the provisions of the AIT, the Agreement on Internal Trade, that in the procurement process that the province now participates in and rural municipalities in the province participate in, is the MERX, which is the electronic tendering process that allows companies from every province across this great country of ours to participate and being able to supply the goods and services for the province of Manitoba or for any municipality within the province. So, in effect, we are on e-commerce within our department through that venue, and our staff within the procurement area in terms of purchasing are prepared and have been out with municipalities talking to them about the AIT and educating them and getting them into the position where they feel comfortable going on the electronic tendering process.

Mr. Maloway: Mr. Chairman, I do not want the minister to say, well, they will not tell me what is going on; it is not in my department, not my area. I mean, we can start on this tomorrow, and if he can get the information from the other office about what the department plans to do with e-commerce, then we can have a long discussion tomorrow about this, because I would like to spend some time talking about where the department wants to go with e-commerce. I did want to ask, just in case there is a need to develop more information before tomorrow, I would like to ask the minister then what problems he foresees with the TD bug? [interjection] It is the TD bug. TD.

Mr. Pitura: I was wondering if my honourable friend would tell me what that stands for.

Mr. Maloway: It is the time-and-date instabilities bug. I think it is also called the Crouch-Echlin effect, but it evidently results in the computer having difficulty calculating or retaining the correct time and date. The TD: time-and-date bug. It is something that is not going to be a problem before year 2000, but it can become a problem immediately after. So not only are you going to go through all the wars and battles and worries, then I am sure you are staying up nights every night worrying about all this stuff, about whether this system is going to function January 1, but when January 1 gets here, you have to worry about your time-and-date instabilities potentials.

I just wanted to have some assurances that you have that question dealt with by the people who are running your system here. I guess it would certainly be a vital issue in the banking business because of the instabilities of the computer system. If it cannot do the time and the date properly, then you are in big, big trouble. How it will affect government, I am sure it will have serious effects there too. If you can check for tomorrow, find out what you guys know about that or what the status is of that. If you do not think you are going to have a problem with the TD bug, then you are not, but it is a possibility that you will.

Mr. Pitura: Mr. Chairman, I will take that question as notice and try to bring back the information for the member tomorrow.

I think as an aside to that, the comments made with e-commerce, I am probably safe in saying that across provincial government, the desktop initiative that we put into place and some of the results of that initiative in being able to utilize that system in an efficient manner, of course e-commerce is a vital role of that and certainly the provincial government is going to be looking at various opportunities to be able to establish e-commerce within various departments right across the provincial government. Just to share some information with the member, as well, that within the Desktop Management Unit, because we have the whole process laid out right across the provincial government, we also have a higher level of sophistication of security within this whole system because it is all laid out and it is in a managed environment.

So when we take a look at a virus that can affect a computer, as an example, and the member might be very interested in this. In the province of British Columbia, when they had the Melissa virus, they spent 10,000 man hours cleaning up that virus from the computers. I am advised from our chief information officer that within the provincial government, when the Melissa virus hit here, it took three hours to get the virus under control. So having it under the managed environment that we have here in Manitoba is I think very positive. It is very sustainable, and it will provide us with many opportunities in the future to be able to provide good service to Manitobans that is cost-effective and efficient.

Mr. Chairperson: The time being six o'clock, committee rise.