LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON CROWN CORPORATIONS

Tuesday, September 26, 2017

TIME – 10 a.m.

LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba

CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Len Isleifson (Brandon East)

VICE-CHAIRPERSON – Ms. Janice Morley‑Lecomte (Seine River)

ATTENDANCE – 11    QUORUM – 6

Members of the Committee present:

Hon. Mr. Cullen

Messrs. Allum, Bindle, Curry, Ms. Fontaine, Messrs. Isleifson, Johnston, Ms. Klassen, Mr. Lindsey, Ms. Morley-Lecomte, Mr. Teitsma

APPEARING:

Mr. Dan Guimond, President and Chief Executive Officer, Manitoba Public Insurance

Mr. Brent VanKoughnet, Chairperson of the Board, Manitoba Public Insurance

MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION:

Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2014

Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2015

Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2015

Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 29, 2016

Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 29, 2016

Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2017

Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2017

* * *

Clerk Assistant (Ms. Monique Grenier): Good morning. Will the Standing Committee on Crown Corporations please come to order.

      For the committee's information, I have before me the resignation letter of Mr. Teitsma as Vice‑Chairperson of this standing committee.

      Before the committee can proceed with the business before it, it must elect a new Chairperson.

      Are there any nominations for this position?

Mr. Scott Johnston (St. James): I would nominate Mr. Isleifson.

Clerk Assistant: Are there any other nominations?

      Mr. Isleifson has been nominated.

      Hearing no other nominations, Mr. Isleifson, can you please take the Chair.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, and good morning all.

      Our next item of business is the election of a Vice-Chairperson.

      Are there any nominations?

      Yes, Mr. Bindle.

Mr. Kelly Bindle (Thompson): I nominate Ms. Morley-Lecomte.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you. Ms. Morley-Lecomte has been nominated.

Are there any other nominations?

Hearing no other nominations, Ms. Morley‑Lecomte is elected Vice-Chairperson.

      So this meeting has been called to consider the following reports: the annual reports of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal years ending February 28th, 2014, February 28th, 2015, February 29th, 2016, and February 28th, 2017; Annual financial statements of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal years ending February 28th, 2015, February 29th, 2016, and February 28th, 2017.

      Are there any suggestions from the committee as to how long we should sit this morning?

      Mr. Teitsma–Mr. Lindsey.

Mr. Tom Lindsey (Flin Flon): 'Til noon and then see if we're finished, and if not, then carry on.

Mr. Chairperson: So it's been suggested noon and then re-evaluate.

      Any other suggestions? We're all agreed? [Agreed]

      Okay, are there any suggestions as to the order in which we should consider the reports?

Mr. Lindsey: Global, I guess.

Mr. Chairperson: Global. Global has been suggested in considering the reports. Is that in agreement? [Agreed]

      Excellent. So does the honourable minister wish to make an opening statement, and would you please introduce the officials we have in attendance?

Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Crown Services): Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair, and good morning, members of the committee. As the Minister of Crown Services and Manitoba's public auto insurer, Manitoba Public Insurance falls within that portfolio. I am pleased to present for your approval today the annual reports of Manitoba Public Insurance for the fiscal years ended February 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017.

      Joining me today are the following members of   the corporation's board and executive: first, chair of the board of MPI, Mr. Brent VanKoughnet; and president and chief executive officer, Dan Guimond; Peter Yien, our acting vice-president of finance and chief financial officer; and Ward Keith, vice-president, Business Development and Communications and chief administrative officer.

      Thank you, gentlemen, for joining us today.

      I want to begin by stating that, since 1971, Manitoba Public Insurance has provided Manitobans with access to comprehensive automobile insurance coverage at rates that are among the lowest in all of  Canada. Since 2004, Manitoba Public Insurance has also provided driver and vehicle licensing services and provincial identification card services as administrator of The Drivers and Vehicles Act.

      With a focus on working with Manitobans to reduce risk on the road and making our roadways safer by establishing and enforcing standards for drivers and vehicles, Manitobans have come to expect, and indeed deserve, a high standard of quality of service delivered by Manitoba Public Insurance.

      Our government is committed to reducing red  tape, providing quality service, strengthening accountability and delivering for–value for money, all of which Manitoba Public Insurance is committed to providing as well.

      Our government has also repeatedly stated that we intend to allow the professionals of our Crown corporations to run their business in the best interest of Manitobans. To this end, as Minister of Crown Services, I have charged the corporation's board of   directors with exercising its due diligence in   evaluating the long-term financial strength of the  organization, its ability to continue to deliver best‑in‑class automobile insurance coverage at rates that are predictable, stable and among the lowest in all of Canada, and to continually seek ways to streamline operations, control discretionary costs and operate in a fiscally prudent manner.

      I know that Manitoba Public Insurance management is cognizant of these expectations as well as their responsibility to provide affordable premiums to Manitoba vehicle owners. Manitoba Public Insurance continues to deliver on its commitment to loss prevention and road safety by working with like-minded road safety stakeholders to   promote safe driving behaviours and reduce collisions, fatalities and serious injuries on our public roadways.

      Tackling high-risk driving behaviours that contribute to crashes, fatalities and serious injuries such as impaired driving by alcohol or drugs, speeding, distracted driving and non-use of occupant restraints is not an easy task. It can often take a generation or more to change ingrained behaviours and create a more positive culture of traffic safety in our province.

      That said, Manitoba Public Insurance continues to work proactively with other road safety partners, including our law enforcement agencies, to address these issues head-on. In addition to continuing to raise awareness about the dangers of drinking and driving, Manitoba Public Insurance continues to deliver a positive, proactive strategy related to distracting driving, an extremely high-risk driving behaviour.

* (10:10)

      In addition, earlier this month, the corporation launched a new public education campaign to inform Manitobans about the dangers and consequences of drug‑impaired driving in the lead-up to the federal government's planned legalization of recreational cannabis, some time in 2018.

      Our government commends Manitoba Public Insurance and its road‑safety partners for their proactive efforts to get out ahead of this concerning road‑safety issue so that when cannabis does become more accessible in Canada, drivers will have the information they need to make informed decisions, right and safe decisions, about getting behind a wheel after consuming cannabis or accepting a ride from someone who has.

      Manitoba Public Insurance also continues to take steps to improve the services it provides to customers and evolve its service‑delivery model to meet customer needs and expectations.

      We look forward to a discussion and questions and answers this morning.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank the honourable minister.

      Does the critic for the official opposition have an opening statement?

Mr. Lindsey: I thank the minister for his comments. I'm happy to be the new critic for Crown Services, and I'm looking forward to defending our Crown corporations against this government's agenda of austerity and privatization.

      I'd like to thank everyone for coming today, and I would especially like to congratulate Mr. Dan Guimond for his many years of public service. Mr. Guimond has been working for MPI for almost 30 years, serving the last three as president, and I know that our caucus enjoyed working with him and valued the great work that he did and held him in high esteem. I'd like to extend the–I'd like to acknowledge Mr. Guimond's passion and expertise, which made him an outstanding steward of one of our most valued Crown corporations. Thank you, and good luck in your retirement.

      We need to ensure that MPI stays affordable for all Manitobans. It is our sincerest hope that this new leadership will always keep this in mind as they go forward. It is our hope that this government and the leadership of MPI have no plans to privatize these valuable services, one of the pillars of Manitoba affordability.

      Thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: And we thank the member for his comments.

      Do the representatives from Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation wish to make an opening statement?

Mr. Dan Guimond (President and Chief Executive Officer, Manitoba Public Insurance): No, we have no opening statements, but we will endeavour to try and answer all the questions today. We're looking forward to the discussion.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you very much.           

      So, with that, I thank you, and the floor is now open for questions.

Mr. Lindsey: How, as the CEO, would you describe the overall MPI–the corporation in a global view over the last number of years?

Mr. Guimond: In terms of the most important thing for the corporation is to meet its mandate and so we've stayed true to our mandate, which is to provide affordable insurance with superior coverage to our customers and make sure that nobody is destitute as the result of an automobile accident. So we've stayed true to that, and we've evolved the business models and the service‑delivery models and our commitment to Manitobans, and we call it adding value to Manitobans and so that is the most important thing, is that through time the corporation has stayed true to its mandate.

Mr. Lindsey: In your view, is MPI best understood as a for‑profit venture or a non‑profit corporation meant to provide essential service to Manitobans?

Mr. Guimond: We're viewed as a monopoly for auto insurance in Manitoba. It's not for profit; it's a   break‑even business and that's how the public understands us and perceives us.

Mr. Lindsey: Has there been any change in the mandate dictated by the current government?

Mr. Guimond: No.

Mr. Lindsey: Is–working on my questions–sorry about that.

Mr. Chairperson: Go ahead, Mr. Lindsey.

Mr. Lindsey: What actions has the corporation taken, in light of the passing of The Crown Corporations Governance and Accountability Act?

Mr. Guimond: Well, right now we're working with the government officials to making sure that we've complied to the new legislation. In particular, there's a deliverable in this file which is called a roles and responsibility deliverable, and that's been completed now and signed off by our–recently by our chair.

      And now we're going to be working on the next deliverable according to the law, which is a business plan that needs to be submitted to the minister and be public by March 1 of next year. And so we're taking steps to ensure that Manitoba Public Insurance is in compliance with the new law.

Mr. Lindsey: So you've formulated your roles and responsibilities. Is that available publicly now?

Mr. Guimond: Not at this time. I believe it will be shortly. It's in the process and it's been submitted to the government officially. It's been signed off by our chair and I believe it's in the process of making it through.

Mr. Lindsey: I would ask the minister, then, if that will be released publicly sometime soon.

Mr. Cullen: Yes, it will.

Mr. Lindsey: Has MPI taken any steps to develop any new policies for its board of directors as far as conflict of interest or things of that nature?

Mr. Guimond: We have a governance manual at MPI that our board of directors follow, and they've adhered to the same principles that is currently in our government's manual. There's been no changes to that regard.

Mr. Lindsey: Has MPI had discussions with the   department of this minister regarding the implementation of the act and how the corporation sees that whole act as rolling out in relation to MPI?

Mr. Guimond: Just wish to clarify which act, sir?   Just to make sure I–[interjection]–yes, accountability.

Mr. Lindsey: The accountability act.

Mr. Guimond: Well, we–what we do when there's new legislation, we go over the legislation and through our general counsel. We make sure that we have a good understanding and interpretation of the new law. And then I report to the deputy minister, and so we have discussions in terms of making sure that MPI has a proper understanding of the law and then we work collaboratively to ensure that the intent of the law is met.

      In this case, those two deliverables, which is the roles and responsibility and the business plan.

Mr. Lindsey: Thank you for that.

      Just moving on now, 15 per cent reduction in   management staff, was there a reduction in managerial staff at MPI in the last year?

Mr. Guimond: Yes, there was.

Mr. Lindsey: Did you meet the 15 per cent target?

Mr. Guimond: Yes, we did.

Mr. Lindsey: And do you have a list of what all those positions were that were eliminated?

Mr. Guimond: I don't have the list at the specific individual, but I can tell you that the 15 per cent reduction consisted of 33 management positions, three executive directors, seven directors, three project managers, 12 managers and eight assistant managers.

Mr. Lindsey: Could you tell us how many individuals were fired as opposed to vacant positions that were no longer identified as ones to fill?

Mr. Guimond: Our board of directors felt that MPI overall was doing well when they did their due diligence, and the government accepted to provide me until end of December of this year to accomplish the reduction and we did it through attrition.

Mr. Lindsey: What do you anticipate the cost savings to be from that?

Mr. Guimond: It'll be about two and a half to three million dollars.

Mr. Lindsey: Thank you for that.

      So how was the mandate for the reduction of positions communicated to MPI? Was it by letter, phone, meetings with the government ministers or representatives?

Mr. Guimond: Internally I report to the chair of the board and that's the–that's how the ask was done, was by our board of directors.

Mr. Lindsey: So you received word of the need to cut through the CEO?

Mr. Guimond: Through the chair of the board of directors.

* (10:20)

Mr. Lindsey: So I'd like to ask the chair of the board, then, how you received the instructions.

Mr. Brent VanKoughnet (Chairperson of the Board, Manitoba Public Insurance): It was part of this–our strategy already to be looking at cost savings, and there was a number of efforts that were already under way, and we were asked whether we could participate at the same level, and that was within the range of work that was already being done, so we continued.

Mr. Lindsey: So you've reduced a number of positions. What effect do you anticipate this will have on service to Manitobans?

Mr. Chairperson: If I could just–if I may get some clarification on who you're asking the question to because I'm not sure if you're continuing with Mr. VanKoughnet or Mr. Guimond.

Mr. Lindsey: I'd be happy with either/or.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you.

Mr. Lindsey: Or both.

Mr. Chairperson: Or both.

Mr. Guimond: So MPI has constantly worked   towards improving our efficiencies and productivities and to be able to achieve the lowest rates across Canada. It's been important to always streamline of operations, and we have done that throughout the years. We had plans of reducing our head count, and you can see over the years that it has reduced; it's nothing new for MPI. And so we just kept following our business plan, and you will continue to see, even if you look at the PUB record, the continuation of reduction of head count.

      And it's very important to understand that MPI,  in terms of what we do, if you look at the demographics of the baby boomers retiring and how many people are having children and so on, we need to be able to streamline because our business is growing and we just won't be able to have enough people to serve our customers if we don't continue to do this. And so we've had a plan to be able to continue to serve our customers properly, and that   includes streamlining just because of the demographic that's happening, our society is driving.

Mr. Lindsey: So you're suggesting that there's been no reduction in service available to Manitobans as a result of this cut?

Mr. Guimond: Actually, we continue to improve our service. We continue to grow and improve our service, and we've made some changes. You saw this  year we made some changes on our extension products where we added $10-million liability for our customers. We've signed a big agreement with the repair industry, and we've rolled out, for our customers, the Direct Repair Program and the Direct Repair Plus program. So we continue to enhance, actually, the service and options that we provide to our customers, and we're also enhancing self-serve and that kind of strategy.

      So our company is growing. It's providing additional services, and we're offering alternatives to   our customers more like what you call omni channels. And so, no, there are no degradations in service or customer service. In fact, it's the opposite; we're improving it.

Mr. Lindsey: So, if I was a resident of Snow Lake, Manitoba, where there's no longer any claims adjusters, for example, that go to the community, would you say that that service is being adequately maintained in light of the fact that there's also no claims adjuster stationed in Flin Flon anymore? So is there an increased cost to individuals that have to travel to The Pas or try and make arrangements to get to Flin Flon when an adjuster might be there?

Mr. Guimond: Yes, so, when we have our–when we look at our customers in rural Manitoba, and some of them in fairly isolated places–so we provide remote estimating, so we have people that get in their cars and go meet our customers on a regular basis. But even that, you know, we're looking at–see if we can improve our services. So, with the Direct Repair Program, for example, it's possible now for our customers, you know, when they decide where they want to have their cars repaired and so on, to actually drive to where they want to go, drop off their car, have the estimate done. And we're even working towards, in terms of working with the repair industry, to be able to even, instead of the customer waiting for us to go there for an estimate and having to drive and having estimate finalized, we want the concept that a customer can just go to the shop of their choice, drop their car, get their Loss of Use; we'll fix it, come back.

      And so we're trying to really not consume as much of the customer's time. You know, we value our customers' time, and we're trying to streamline how much of their time we ask in that process. And so we're trying to find a way now to have our customers just drop off their car, here's your loss of   use, minimize the inconvenience of a negative experience like an automobile accident and just streamline the whole process. So that's what really we're trying to do.

Mr. Lindsey: I would suggest from concerns I've heard, particularly from Snow Lake, Manitoba, that you need to relook at that because I don't believe it's working the way you think it is, so.

      People, particularly in northern Manitoba, have trouble accessing a lot of services and reducing the number of people that may be available to assist those people. It's not going to maintain the service at a level that people in those communities feel is acceptable.

      So would there be an opportunity for you to reconsider at least scheduling adjusters to attend some of those northern communities so that people can at least get the initial process started without having to drive back and forth which, by the way, nobody really covers their travel costs for that?

Mr. Guimond: We will continue to make an effort to improve the customer experience of our customers wherever they are in Manitoba, and I believe that the changes that we're making right now will improve the service. And there will be exceptions and there will be customers, maybe it won't work perfectly, but we will keep improving on what we do. And we are committed to the remote estimating–to what you're saying–so we will send people up there.

      And we're very vigilant in looking at our statistics when it comes to customer service by region, and so I understand that maybe there's always an exception that one can point to. But at this point in time, the models that we're rolling out has actually improved customer service and our customer service polling that we do in terms of satisfaction, actually, been staying at the levels and been improving. So the data suggests that the improvements we're doing is working.

Mr. Lindsey: Has the government communicated any other mandate to MPI regarding staffing or anything else, operations, including capital plans or assets?

Mr. Guimond: No. I get my direction from the chair, and I can say that, right now, as CEO, there's nothing that we have done that hasn't been according to plans or things we wanted to do as a corporation in general.

Mr. Lindsey: I'd ask the chair the same question, that is, is there any other instructions or suggestions, mandates from the government as to further cuts or changes in operations?

Mr. VanKoughnet: The focus of the board and the   activities of strengthening and ensuring the organization delivers value within mandate has been consistent in any of the conversations I've had back and forth with the minister. So no other direction has been given to us other than continue to deliver on the mandate as defined.

Mr. Lindsey: So I'd ask the minister, then, how did you–and you may not have been the minister at the time–how did your department, then, communicate the 15 per cent mandate to MPI?

Mr. Cullen: Yes, the member is correct; that was before my time. Since I've taken over in the last few weeks I have had–certainly, I had conversations with the chair and the CEO and senior management. And, you know, the conversation was about streamlining delivery of service and making sure that we're delivering service to Manitobans. Certainly, in the day-to-day management we lead with the board of  directors and the senior executives there, too, that  make those decisions. And we look forward to   having further discussions with the senior management and the–or the chair of the board as well in terms of how they see the delivery of these products and services to Manitobans happening in an efficient and effective and cost-efficient basis.

* (10:30)

Mr. Lindsey: So have you or your department communicated any other mandate to MPI regarding staffing, operations, capital plans, assets?

Mr. Cullen: No, we haven't.

      I think, as indicated earlier, we just–under the new legislation, we're going through the process for the first time. So it's certainly an evolution for not just ourselves as government, but the corporation as well. And there has been some discussion back and forth in terms of the roles and responsibilities. I think we've come to an agreement, a consensus there. We're just going through the process to finalize that for getting sign-off, and those documents will become public.

      And that's really the intent of the legislation, is  to provide the public–ratepayers, taxpayers–our  intent and our relationship that we have as   a   government with the Crown corporations, clearly  defining the roles and responsibilities of the Crown corps, as well as our role as both minister and as   government. And it's designed to be an accountability piece so that the public understands our relationship, where we're headed, and what the expectations are of the Crowns, as well, in terms of what they are to deliver.

      So that's really the first step forward, and we're  happy that we're making progress in that regard. There may be other discussions in terms of mandate letters going forward. Those, obviously, will be discussed with the board as well, in due course. But that's really the intent of the process, and  the legislation is to make sure those mandates are available to the public so that we have understanding of the public–what everyone's roles and responsibilities. And then, particularly, the mandates that may be provided to the Crown corps.

Mr. Lindsey: Thank you for that.

      Back to either the CEO or the chair. Let's talk a little bit about the cancellation of the entry-level professional truck driver program. How many years did that program operate?

Mr. Guimond: I don't have the exact number, but I can tell you that we implemented this around 2009 or '10, approximately.

Mr. Lindsey: And how much did the program cost?

Mr. Guimond: We were spending about $1.2 million a year on training.

Mr. Lindsey: And was MPI the sole funder of the program?

Mr. Guimond: No. To–we funded the schooling part of it, and then our customers funded what we call the in-cab training. So, after you graduate, you need to be able to spend some time actually driving a truck, and our customers pay for the in-cab driving. And they paid for the person in the truck training the student, and so that was a joint effort.

Mr. Lindsey: How many individuals participated in the program and how many successfully completed it?

Mr. Guimond: We'll have to take that as an undertaking. We'll find the answer for you before 12. We'll just have to phone. I just don't have the number at the top of my head over seven years on it.

Mr. Lindsey: Does MPI have any information regarding the need for truck drivers in Manitoba?

Mr. Guimond: So this was a partnership done with the 'Maniba' trucking association, and as you know right now the governments are providing more training. And so they're also providing funding for training. And also the needs of the 'Mani' trucking association are changing. And there was actually an article–if you want to, we can get it for you–printed by the association about why it was time for MPI to  discontinue the program and how things were evolving.

      So, again, we work in partnerships with our business partners, and we reached a point now that this thing had reached the end of its life. And because of the other kinds of trainings that are coming and being available to our customers, that it was time to phase it out.

Mr. Lindsey: So you're saying that truck driver training in the province, now, will be solely done by private enterprise? The government–or MPI–doesn't have a hand in it anymore?

Mr. Guimond: What we've done is, there was the training that we were providing–we came to the conclusion was no longer required because of the alternatives out there, in terms of what's available to our customers and the direction that they'd take. And it had reached its lifespan over seven years, which was a pretty good run for a program when you think about it from a training perspective.

Mr. Lindsey: So what did you look at? How did you determine that it was time to cancel the program? What all considerations were reviewed and who were they reviewed with?

Mr. Guimond: Not as much about us as much as our customers, what do they need. It's like in 2007 or '8 when we were talking about this, there was a need at the industry at that point in time. And as time goes by, you know, you evaluate the programs, you talk with your stakeholders, you talk what they need and so on. And when you come to the conclusion, then that that's really not required anymore, then you just say, okay, it's done its thing and it's time to phase it out. So it's not as much as us making a decision but, again, working with your stakeholders, with your business partners, and you run a business and when it's not needed anymore it's not needed anymore.

Mr. Lindsey: So we're depending now on individual companies to do the training for truck drivers. Is that correct? [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Guimond.

Mr. Guimond: I'm sorry. No, my understanding right now is that what we–the need we used to fill is   now being filled by the schools and–that are available now and they're being funded by the government. So there's no–it was no need for us to do this anymore.

Mr. Lindsey: Did MPI advertise to prospective applicants that the program would be ending?

Mr. Guimond: I'm not sure what you mean by advertising, but we–did we communicate that this would be ending? Yes, we communicated to the school. We 'communited' it to the, you know, when people were applying, we always started–we had a process in terms of phasing out the program. So you talk with your–you know, we were talking with our stakeholders and we agreed on how we would talk to the schools. We made sure that the candidates that were in the program were able to finish the program and then we made sure that the people that were applying were told that this was no longer available, but they were also pointed to other places that–where they could get the assistance to get the training they needed.

Mr. Lindsey: So you could supply us with a list of what those other places are that people have–[interjection]–appreciate that.

Mr. Guimond: Absolutely.

Mr. Lindsey: I guess, to the minister: Does the minister believe it's part of MPI's mandate to promote employment opportunities for Manitobans in the trucking industry through programs like the one that was cancelled in June of 2017?

Mr. Cullen: Well, I think as a government we're always interested in making sure Manitobans have the ability to have employment and, certainly, we recognize the important role that the trucking industry plays in Manitoba. And certainly there is companies out there that will provide that service to Manitobans, provide that service to companies that are looking to hire truck drivers, and I think there's also companies out there that will take it upon themselves to train their employees and I think there's certainly opportunity for that, yes. I'm not completely familiar with this particular course, but I   do understand there is some funding from the government to assist in this, in these courses.

Mr. Lindsey: So there's funding available to schools to assist in these courses or funding available to individuals?

Mr. Cullen: Well, I think, I'm–probably defer to MPI on this one to–for the details.

Mr. Guimond: Okay, it's available to schools with government funding. It's available to students, also, through the Canadian government funding and it's also available through unemployment insurance in terms of training.

Mr. Lindsey: So could someone give me a cost comparison for a student under the present system as opposed to what was in place previously?

Mr. Guimond: That'd be hard for us to do that in terms of all the options, but I can tell you that the courses that you need to take are still being paid for by the government. So in terms of bottom line to the person who's trying to get a job there, they're not worse off.

* (10:40)

Mr. Lindsey: I guess to the chair or the CEO, what's the rate-application increase for 2017 and 2018?

Mr. Guimond: Okay, for 2017, we'd had asked–which, just to make sure we clarify, these are for the policies issued from March 1, 2017 to February 2018–we'd had asked for 4.37 last year, and the PUB ordered 3.7 in December of 2016.

      This year, we submitted our rate applications for policies that are issued from March 1, 2018 to February 2019, and the rate that we asked for is 2.7 per cent. That's the increase we asked for. And the–we're going to the–in front of the regulator next week it's starting, and we'll get the order for that in December of this year.

Mr. Lindsey: And could you explain to us how MPI determined the requested increases for 2017?

Mr. Guimond: Yes, we determined the rates based on what has been approved by the regulator, which is the 'actural' indicated rate. And so we've changed the methodology this year based on what the order was from the regulator last year. It's–so it's the actual approved indicated rate.

Mr. Lindsey: When you initially came up with the 4.3 per cent request for a rate increase, could you explain to us how you came up with that number?

Mr. Guimond: So what we do to keep it really high level here is our actuaries, you know, they determine for all the policies that we're going to issue how much money we need to collect for these policies to be able to pay all the claims and all the expenses associated for these policies. And what you do is you come up with an 'actural' indicated rate, and what you do is you have the money to be able to pay for the administration of these policies, but also to put money aside to make sure you can pay your future claims liabilities–high-level overview–

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Lindsey.

Mr. Lindsey: So you requested 4.3 per cent, the Public Utilities Board cut it down to 3.7, and then for the year going forward you're requesting 2.7. So I'm not clear on how you came up with the original 4.3 that wasn't accepted, and now you're requesting 2.7, which is quite a bit less than what your original request was for.

Mr. Guimond: So a lot of it has to do with the financial markets and how volatile they are–in particular, the interest rates. And so it's surprising how much the actual indicated rate can change depending on the interest rates that are in effect at the time of application. And so you can see huge swings like that depending on the interest rates. So that's what really is one of the key things that are affecting our actual indicated rate.

Mr. Lindsey: So could you explain how much of the rate increase is directed specifically to projected claim costs and how much is directed to increase in the rate stabilization fund?

Mr. Guimond: So I'll give you an example for this year, for example. So, in June, we apply to the regulator every June, so the actual rate indicator was 2.7 per cent. Now we're going to the hearings in October, and we rerun all the numbers. Now, based on the interest rate, the actual indicated rate now is at 2.1 per cent–okay, so now you have a drop. And what we do with the regulator is we do another checkpoint, if they agree with us, in December.

      And so, as the interest rate goes up or down, it has a huge impact on the actual indicated rate because you use the interest rates to discount your claims liabilities. And so it makes a big difference and it changes over time, and that's why it's maybe hard for people to understand how these interest rates are so–it's so sensitive to the 'actural' indicated rate.

      And the thing is, because what we do is we apply on a prospective basis, so when we decide the rates are this–let's say, in December, when the PUB orders it–but you're still for policies that are going to be issued from March 1, 2018, to February 2018. And we all know the interest rate's going to change, too, over that time.

      And so you can see that year over year you can have this volatility depending on what happens in the markets.

Mr. Lindsey: It seems to me, and I don't claim to be a financial genius in any stretch of the imagination–but it seems that interest rates have been reasonably stable over the last number of years. So I'm not grasping how you came up with the 4.3, and then it was 3.7 and now it's 2.7; and will the PUB agree to that or is it something less than that?

Mr. Guimond: So the 4.3, the regulator, the only difference between us is–and the regulator or how they got that 3.7 is because they wanted to return the investment income of the rate stability reserve to our customers. So they–so that's how they got from the 4.3 to the two–the 3.7 per cent. We're still in discussion with the regulator in terms of the size of the RSR, what it should be and what should be done with the investment income from the RSR. So that's how they got to that.

      But we have about $2.8 billion in the bank in terms of to pay our future claims liabilities that we invest. And so it doesn't take a lot of changes to your point about how can it vary so much. But on $2.8 billion, you know, a few basis points, it makes a difference. And so it's the size of the portfolio that we have and how we discount our claims that really make it appear–it's big numbers, even though it's very small changes.

      So I hope that helps to understand. But it's like–you know, if you make, you know, 2 per cent on $100 or 2 per cent on $10 billion, you'll make rate; it'll make a big difference. So the inverse is true when you start to discount your liabilities of the future. It's just very, very sensitive to the interest rates.

Mr. Lindsey: So just talking about the Rate Stabilization Reserve fund, is there a goal for an overall amount of equity that MPI seeks to realize in the rate stabilization fund?

Mr. Guimond: Yes. Our position as a corporation is that the rate stability reserve should be 100 per cent MCT. That's the test that we want to apply in terms of how much capital should we have in the RSR, and our position is 100 per cent MCT.

      I've also put in the record that PUB, because the chair last year at PUB had a little bit of reservation about MCT, but we said, you know, if they prefer, for example, the dynamic capital adequacy test–which is another form of tests for capital–if they want to use that. But it–close to MCT, 100 per cent. I mean, we're okay to options, but we feel that the number to absorb unforeseen events so that our customers can have rates that are predictable and stable. Because the RSR is what absorbs unforeseen events. So if you have more claims in a year than you thought or if the stock market crash or whatever, we use the RSR to absorb these unforeseen events.

      And so it's very important that it be properly funded so that our customers, year over year, can have rates that are predictable and stable. And what I mean by that is our customers want that, if they buy a car and they keep a car, the same year it should be about the same rate. They want to be able to have monthly budgets and they want to have monthly withdrawals and they want stability. They don't want their premiums to go up and down like a yo-yo.

Mr. Lindsey: So you've lost me on some of the technical terms. Could you explain what MCT is?

Mr. Guimond: MCT is a Minimum Capital Test. That's what it's called. It's a test base that was designed by OSFI–office of the 'supender' of financial institution. And we used that test and we went with 100 per cent because we are public auto  insurers. Typically, in the private sector you'll  do it at 150 per cent–at 150 per cent, you know, the regulator, they start closing your doors as  an insurance company. But us, we went with 100 per cent MCT.

* (10:50)

      And the reason we–the test is a test against your balance sheet, so what it does is that it does a mathematical calculation against your balance sheet, and it says based on the number of policies you have, liabilities you have, and the risk that you have, this is how much money you should have in the rate stability reserve, and it's based on your balance sheet. And we believe that that's good because a balance sheet–it gives assurance to our board of directors and to the government of Manitoba, in particular the Minister of Finance (Mr. Friesen), the risk that they are truly facing, and what is their risk tolerance.

Mr. Lindsey: So you've said that you've got $2.8 billion in the Rate Stabilization Reserve, no?

Mr. Guimond: The $2.8 billion that we have aside is to pay our future claims liabilities, so that's a different pot of money, and then you have the rate stability reserve, which is sort of–think of it as an account that you can deal with unforeseen events, right.

      So, for example, when I talk to people–like, as individuals, we all have a budget for the year, right, so when my son went fishing a few years ago when he was small, you know, he'd dropped his iPhone at the bottom of the lake. Well, I didn't know that year I would have to replace his iPhone, so I went into my savings account to replace it. So, from a budget perspective, I'd overrun my budget that year, right, but I didn't have to go ask my boss for a raise to be able to pay for the phone because I'd put some money for unforeseen events.

      So, at MPI, we face three unforeseen events that we really pay attention to. One is the financial markets. We invest that $2.8 billion so, for example, in equities for a year like I said, we would lose $50 million in stocks, for example, just because there's a market correction. Not much anybody can do about that.

      Hail: If there's a couple of storms extra than the average, we could be paying 40 to 60 million dollars more in hail in a particular year.

      Winter: If you have a bad winter and you get a bumper crop of claims, you're going to pay more, so–and then you can have a combination of these things.

      So, when these things happen, you want to be able to go to the RSR and absorb the additional costs that you had that year without going to the customers and say I need an extra 50 or 60 million dollars.

      The inverse is also true. Any given year you can have a good year. Like, we could have less hail or the stock market can go crazy, so now you–it comes, like you make a little bit more money that year and you put it back in the RSR, but the idea–that's why we say we need about $411 million in the RSR. The idea is that over time, based on the size of our business, all of these unforeseen events, when you lose money, they take it out.

      The next year I make a little bit more than I thought, I put it back in–out, in; out, in. This is what  allows our customers to have rates that are predictable and stable because they don't have to absorb the volatility of the unforeseen events.

      So I can say with reassurance if I have enough money in my RSR, your rates are going to be about the same as next year, and it's important to our customers. It really is. And they understand we're all Manitobans; we all want a deal, and we understand, too, that if we keep our cars, we wanted the same rate. Now they all understand that if they go buy themselves a Maserati next year they'll have to pay a little bit more but not a lot more, and that's what we have to do, and that's how you keep the rates the lowest across Canada.

Mr. Lindsey: So you've said that you'd like the rate stabilization fund to be at $411 million. What's it at presently?

Mr. Guimond: One hundred and sixty-six million.

Mr. Lindsey: Page 39 of the 2016 Annual Report, the board of directors does not support the use of the $159 million that the Public Utilities Board has said, so you're already over what the Public Utilities Board believed was the proper number.

      How do you justify going dramatically over that for the rate stabilization fund?

Mr. Guimond: It's important to know that the number changes every year because, as our company grows and you have more liabilities, but that really is the last remaining difference between the regulator and MPI in terms of how much money should be   in  the RSR, and there was a–over the last several  years we've worked collaboratively with the   regulator. We understand our differences. We understand the difference of opinions. Luckily for us, the chair of the PUB called a technical conference on how much money should be in the RSR earlier in the year, and this will be a key subject of discussion at the hearings in October.

      And so the regulator is of the understanding of the risk that we have. They verbally, sort of, in discussions through the technical conference, they understand how serious the issue is, and we'll see what happens this year. It's really a decision of how much risk one wants to take, because at $166 million in the RSR, MPI, we can swing in a year 150 to 200  million dollars either way on a break-even budget just because of how big we are and the realities of the volatility of the financial markets. So it depends on the risk tolerance that we're wishing to take.

Mr. Lindsey: So could you tell me, kind of, running average of the last number of years what the rate stabilization fund has been at?

Mr. Guimond: And we–what we've done is in discussions with the regulator, we've been–we've kept transferring money from our competitive lines into the RSRs so that basic can be what we called in good financial standing. And so we've been keeping the RSR at–hovering around a hundred and ninety, two hundred and twenty million dollars with the contributions that we've done. We've transferred $176 million in the last couple of years. But now the regulator is seeing that, right? They're seeing the stats, but they're seeing that it's happening. So we avoided a rebuilding fee for our customers of 19 per cent with the money that we've transferred, and we believe our customers need to be isolated against these massive increases. And through dialogue and now through experience, I think the regulator is really understanding the risk that the corporation is facing, and I really–I'm keeping my fingers crossed, but I really believe that this fall we'll be able to resolve this particular issue with the regulator.

Mr. Lindsey: Seems to me that if you've managed to function successfully with a number–159, 160, up to 200–that trying to get that number now up to $400 million is a pretty dramatic increase that will see an increase in rates that consumers pay for insurance that, clearly, in the past the Public Utilities Board hasn't agreed with that, and I'm not sure that the public is going to agree with it either.

Mr. Guimond: Well, the issue is that it hasn't worked, the RSR, because now the regulator can see that if we hadn't transferred the money, they'd be nothing in the RSR, and now you'd have to ask, you know, like, if they agree to 159 or 100 million dollars, you have to go and get $170 million out of the economy, which you shouldn't do.

      To your second point–so they're seeing that, and  they're seeing that the money has just actually literally disappeared because of the unforeseen events. So they understand that.

      The second thing to your point about the regulator not seeing eye to eye maybe with MPI, it's important to understand that the chair of the PUB had approved 100 per cent MCT on a notional basis; that was the previous chair of the PUB. So they did understand it. Then there was a change, and I believe that this chair decided to sort of, being a new chair–and it happened when we were in front of the regulator–but I think this chair of the PUB is assessing the situation. He's doing his due diligence, and I think he's really had a year now to think about, like, what–how do we solve this? What's the best approach, what's the interest of Manitobans, and I'm feeling pretty positive about the fall because now he's had a chance to really put his head around it.

      But it's important to understand that the regulator does understand the situation we're in, and even from an order perspective, they had notionally approved 100 per cent MCT. They understand something needs to be done. You know, how it gets resolved we'll see. But they definitely understand this issue needs to be resolved because Manitobans are at risk of significant, large increases.

* (11:00)

Mr. Lindsey: To the minister: Does the minister agree that it's part of MPI's mandate to keep insurance rates low for Manitoba drivers?

Mr. Cullen: I think that's what Manitobans want to see, are certainly low rates. As the CE pointed out, Manitobans like a deal. And clearly the corporation understands that, and they want to see rates low as well.

      So the corporation has some tools to manage that. And, certainly, the Rate Stabilization Reserve fund is one of those tools. That's one of the tools they have in their toolbox. I think we as governments, too, we have set aside, in the past, money in a rainy day account. And I view this rate stabilization fund as similar to a rainy day account, so that when the rainy days come, there's some money in the kitty to soften the blow.

      And clearly there's formulas that are out there, and all insurance companies looks–look at these formulas, and whatever that figure is going to be, to cushion those blows when we do have those situations that occur. So, clearly, to me, this is one of those mechanisms that the corporation has to reduce the risk to the ratepayers, because if there's not money set aside in the rainy day account, then the ratepayers will have to pay the additional cost.

      And it's quite similar to–in my view, to–insurance companies will purchase reinsurance. So   they will purchase reinsurance from other companies, pay a premium for that to mitigate some of the risk that may come as a result of a hail situation or other weather occurrence. So it's–to me, it's one of those tools in the toolbox to make sure that the ratepayers don't get adversely impacted by these situations.

Mr. Lindsey: So does the minister believe that the increases that MPI's got over the last couple of years is sustainable?

Mr. Cullen: Well, it's an insurance company, and risks vary from year to year. And clearly the executive there have to take those issues into account and figure out what the premiums are going to be for Manitobans. And clearly, I think the direction is, you   know, to try to keep our premiums low to Manitobans.

      But what are the mechanisms to put in place to make sure that we are protecting Manitobans from those high increases? Clearly, the reinsurance, the rate stabilization, or the rainy day fund, is–those are a couple of the components that executive want to put in place to mitigate those increases to Manitobans.

      In the past, like, there's clearly been a difference between what the corporation recommends as a   reserve and what the Public Utilities Board recommended as a reserve. And certainly those differences, too, are interesting. And then you also look at what other provinces are doing, whether they be publicly owned insurance companies, what kind of levels they're having, or what kind of levels that private insurance companies have, as well, in their reserve accounts.

      So that's why there's always a difference of opinion, because there's different models out there.

Mr. Lindsey: Does the minister agree that part of the mandate–or, the main part of the mandate for MPI is to ensure that rates remain among the lowest, if not the lowest, in Canada?

Mr. Cullen: Well, I would agree with that statement. At the same time, we want to make sure we're providing a quality service and a quality product to Manitobans.

      And, obviously, there's a combination of things that have to occur, but I think as Manitobans, and certainly, we as a government, would like to see our rates remain certainly competitive with other jurisdictions.

Mr. Lindsey: Does the minister agree with MPI's claim that the PUB is incorrect in what it sees as the size of the rate stabilization fund?

Mr. Cullen: I don't know if I need to weigh into the disagreement there between what the–and this has been a disagreement in the past that, you know, there may be a change in opinion coming from the PUB, so we'll let the PUB and the corporation have that dialogue. It sounds like they're having a dialogue. Get all the information on the table and then assess what's best for the corporation and, at the end of the day, what's best for ratepayers.

Mr. Lindsey: Back to CEO or the chair: How many claims adjusters does MPI employ?

Mr. Guimond: We'll find out for you. I know we've got about 80 estimators in the corporation; the adjusters, I don't have that. We'll find out for you.

Mr. Lindsey: How are they classified? For example, by the type of claim, commercial claims verse individual claims, or is there some other manner that they're classified?

Mr. Guimond: So our adjusters handle all of our lines of business, whether it be basic, extension or SRE, and they have access also to our underwriting department if they need some help in terms of interpretation of coverage when they approve a claim or approve the coverage, and so they–there's no distinction in terms of doing one or the other.

Mr. Lindsey: So, while you're finding how many claims adjusters you employ, could you also find out or let us know how many claims adjusters are in  Winnipeg, in Brandon, verse rural and northern Manitoba?

Mr. Guimond: Yes, we'll take that as an undertaking.

Mr. Lindsey: What type of training is required to become an adjuster? Is there a certification process, or?

Mr. Guimond: Yes, we have a formal training program for adjusters and you also have to take some formal training through the insurance–there is insurance institutes.

Mr. Lindsey: Has the number of adjusters increased in the past number of years? Is it correlated with the number of claims made?

Mr. Guimond: Yes, we have some statistics in terms of how many claims an adjuster can handle and we make sure that we have the staff required to be able to process those claims, and it varies year over year.

Mr. Lindsey: So has the number gone up, gone down?

Mr. Guimond: We'll find out.

Mr. Lindsey: Particularly, look at have the number of adjusters gone up and down in rural Manitoba, northern Manitoba, as opposed to in the cities. See what that difference is.

Mr. Guimond: I mean, we'll get the exact numbers, but I know it has been fairly stable in the last several years. So, I mean, in terms of drastic changes in head counts, that hasn't occurred, if that's your concern, but we'll get you the exact numbers.

Mr. Lindsey: My concern is the total number may stay similar, but the numbers in rural and northern may decrease by one or two which has a huge impact on some of those outside‑the‑city areas.

Mr. Guimond: Well, the biggest challenge we have in some of our locations where we have service centres is finding people, you know, to be able to work in our centres.

      It's difficult to find people at this point in time,   but I can assure you when it comes to customer  service–like, for example, we had actually an adjuster leaving one of our service centres, but we  did not postpone any of our appointments or decisions and so on. What we do is we have the customer go to our service centres and now we have technology that they can sit in front of the computer and do video conferencing with one of our adjusters in Winnipeg, and we process the claim real time online because of the technology that we have. And so I can assure that when it comes to customer service our customers are not negatively affected.

Mr. Lindsey: So do you see a move towards greater automation resulting in more job losses?

Mr. Guimond: It's not as much as a job loss. I mean, you need the people you need to run the company. It's more availability of people which is really our challenge. So we're constantly trying to find ways to   attract people in some of these communities and  particular locations. So it's not as much as us eliminating jobs or a reduction of jobs, but it's more the challenge of finding people, attracting people. And right now we're even looking internally in our corporation, you know, in terms of career path, can we find ways to 'incent' people maybe to do like a five‑year tour of duty to Thompson to–from a career perspective, and then we start to move them to another location and so on.

* (11:10)

      So we're looking at all kinds of options to make sure we have access to the resources that we need. And then, when we have some turnover and people leave, then we try and use our technology–we do use our technology to make sure that our customers are not negatively affected.

Mr. Lindsey: Just curious why you have such a hard time attracting people to these occupations.

Mr. Guimond: I'm not going to speculate on that. I think everybody has–every company, you know, you recruit and you try and find people, but I won't speculate in terms of why that's happening. I just run a business. I try and get people; I find people. I try and find them to go to work where I need them to go to work. Why that's happening, it's not something I feel I should answer.

Mr. Lindsey: I guess if I was running a business and was having a hard time finding people to work for me, I'd kind of want to figure out why that was so that I could correct it. It seems an odd decision, that. Can't attract people, but don't want to comment on why that is. There has to be reasons why people don’t want to work for this corporation.

Mr. Guimond: Well, you're right. Like, I do care. We do things about it. But I believe in terms of my role, it's not appropriate for me to comment on that.

Mr. Lindsey: Could you suggest who might be the appropriate person to ask that question of? Is it the minister? Is it the chair?

Mr. Guimond: Typically universities are good at that. Like I mean, there's a lot of professors that do economic studies or they find out, you know, what's going on from the economic standpoint, and they do analysis for governments to take into consideration. So, typically, universities would–might be a good spot to start.

Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): I'm just curious in respect to–again, the–kind of the discussion in respect of the tracking people to do the jobs that you're currently looking at. Has–have you explored or do you have, currently, a strategy in respect of  retention–recruitment of indigenous peoples in Manitoba?

      Clearly there are indigenous peoples that live in the North, and I guess–or certainly in respect of some of our really high and egregious unemployment rates, it seems to be a really good opportunity to provide that training, to provide–with the people that are in those locations and geographical areas–to be able to fill these jobs that you're looking at.

Mr. Guimond: Yes, you're quite right. That's a great opportunity for us to look into that.

      We are looking into it and we have had some discussions with the indigenous population and also with what Hydro's doing in terms of opening the route where many Manitobans now–First Nations will have access to public transportation. And so there'll be a big demand for those particular locations to–for people to have driver licences because they drive on their community, but they don't have access to public roads. And now with that road opening, there's–be a big demand on driver licensing, and new drivers, and so on.

      So we're working with the government of Manitoba and we're working with the First Nation people to develop a whole strategy of how we're going to do that, how we're going to get the labour in, how we're going to serve all these people. So yes, we do have a game plan.

Ms. Fontaine: So would you be able to clarify or provide a little bit more information in respect of–I  know that you just said that you were working with  the government and First Nation, but can you provide a little bit more clarification?

      And then I guess–so that's one question, and I know I'm kind of giving you a couple here, but also I think my first question was whether or not there was actually a strategy in respect of, you know, attracting indigenous employees overall. So I'm not sure if you answered that, but–so those two pieces.

Mr. Guimond: Yes, we do have a strategy to attract indigenous people. And one of the first things that you have to do from a corporation is, do you have any biases inherent into your company that would preclude, you know, the hiring of indigenous people, or how you do business, or how you do things, because as a corporation, our employees have to be a reflection of who we serve. And we need to make sure that we have representation in terms of our employees.

      So, yes, we do work with the community and, yes, we do have strategies to do recruitment and retain people. There's things like the co-op programs, there's things like opportunities that we create for people to come and work for us for seven, eight months, for example. And then if they like it, you know, they can stay, and so on. So we do all kinds of things.

      In terms of the, you know, the First Nations and the roads opening and so on, what we want to do is that–is there an opportunity for these communities to open an office? Is there an opportunity for them to be able to–for us to be able to train people, hire people, maybe even for them to have a business or own a business, like a broker–brokerage, for example. And is there a way that we can find a way for–to be able to train these people, to certify these people, to be able to do the work that we need done? So, like, for example, they only have people that can do road tests, do we have people can do the brokerage side of it, the issuance of policies. How do we serve these customers?

      And so there's a lot of opportunities and we need to figure that out, and we want to run a pilot next year and then we'll see how that pilot goes and we'll go from there. But I think we definitely need to be  able to show that we are very progressive in providing people with opportunities and the chance to have really rewarding careers and jobs that are, in my opinion, more well-paying jobs.

Ms. Fontaine: Can you advise–and I'm not sure if you have those numbers on you–but can you tell me how many indigenous employees you do have overall? [interjection]

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Guimond.

Mr. Guimond: Sorry, I can find that out for you in terms of–

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Lindsey.

Mr. Lindsey: I guess we'll leave that for a bit.

      Has MPI studied the experience of other jurisdictions or companies as far as automated claims processing or adjustment goes?

Mr. Guimond: Yes, we have. We've looked throughout North America. We've looked at different models of different large carriers in the United States, and so on. And based on the analysis that we've done and so on, that's how we got to working with the repair industry and launching our Direct Repair Program and Direct Repair Plus program.

      And next year we're also going to be releasing a   mobile app where people, for physical damage claims they can report their claims directly online and can choose a place where they want their cars fixed and go straight to the place of their choice and have the vehicle repaired. So we're streamlining our operations and we're using best practice.

Mr. Lindsey: You're aware, of course, that great parts of northern Manitoba don't have mobile accessibility, right?

Mr. Guimond: We have brokers throughout the province who have access to mobility. And as far as I know, in terms of–that there might be limited areas where you don't have. I'm not too sure where exactly you're referring to, but in terms of right now, I'm not aware of anywhere particularly where maybe our customers wouldn't be having access to Wi-Fi or Internet or–unless there's the remote areas that you want to refer to. And then we're going to be looking at that.

Mr. Lindsey: Certainly, any number of communities where individuals don't have access to that. They would have to go to a band office, a school which–separate conversation for a different minister–is already costing them too much money because of data caps and the rest of it.

      So just as long as you're aware that not all of the province is serviced equally by that kind of service.

Mr. Guimond: You're right, and we're going to  make sure that whatever service delivery model we  do–example, when those–for example, when we open up the road–Hydro opens up the roads and we have all these communities now that'll be looking for services, we're going to have to make sure that they have the ability to do business with us and that includes access to Internet. They will have access to Internet.

* (11:20)

Mr. Lindsey: Does MPI anticipate the introduction of driverless vehicles will lessen the number of claims?

Mr. Guimond: The driverless vehicles, I hope they're there by the time I'm 90 or 85 so I can go get my prescriptions and go visit my sons. But you're quite right that it's more like–the autonomous car, by the time you actually–by the time they actually drive by themselves, where you get in the car and there's no steering wheel and no accelerators and so on, that's long time. It's more of a journey, how we look at it.

      And the rate of technology coming in for the new automobiles is fascinating in terms of what it's  doing to an insurance company. So, right now, because they're rolling out the technology as fast as they can, what we're seeing as an insurance company is the costs of repair going up, right? So we've been doing a whole set of activities to reduce our costs to be able to absorb how much more it costs to repair these vehicles without having to ask our customers for more money in terms of pricing. So we've been very successful at that because the severity is going up quite a bit.

      As the technology rolls out, we can already see that customers are having less accidents. For example, there's not as much scrapes–underground parking, you know, beside the pillar, the cement pillar because of the cameras and so on, so we're seeing worldwide, and we're seeing that there's less of these claims. So as the technology comes in,  right, the frequency of claims, the number of claims we process per year will drop because of that technology.

      And we, based on the latest studies done by KPMG and so on, that we believe that the models we ran at the corporation, that by 2025 will be the intersection point where, even though it costs a lot more to repair a vehicle, there'll be so many less claims, right, that now your revenue, from a revenue perspective, it's about the same, right? And then after that, what will happen is there'll be a reduction of income for basic, because if you don't pay the claims, you don't need the premium.

      So right now, based on the rate of change in the  industry and how our customers turn over their cars,  we believe by 2025 is where potentially that intersection point is where there'll be less claims. And so we're preparing for that as a corporation.

Mr. Lindsey: So we've looked at–or you've looked at more automation for claims processing. Do you have a date in mind when you plan to roll out more of that automation, or is it more of a thing that's ongoing all the time?

Mr. Guimond: Yes, so it's a journey, so we're looking to have more self-serve starting in February, March next year. For example, people will be able to do their appointments online. And then the mobile app that I talked about in terms of physical damage, filling out your own claim online, that will happen in late 2018, early 2019, that will happen in our next fiscal year.

      And then, after that, I'll respectfully ask that maybe I'll leave it to the next CEO in terms of commitments, because the new CEO will be working with the board of directors in establishing a road map on a go-forward basis, so I'm going to leave it at that for now.

Mr. Lindsey: I appreciate that. We'll let you off the hook on things that take place after you're retired.

      What steps do you see MPI taking to retrain adjusters and be able to keep them gainfully employed within the corporation as opposed to technology merely replacing them and them not having jobs?

Mr. Guimond: The adjusters will always be required. You know, the issue with automation is you need as many adjusters or as many estimators as you go forward, as you streamline. But then again, there's this huge pressure of labour, access to labour. I mean, baby boomers are retiring left and right. My sons are 29 and 27. If I'm a grandfather by the time they're 40, I'll consider myself lucky. We have to prepare for the reality of access to labour and we have to streamline of–our operation. So adjusters will always be there; estimators will all be there. They're very important in terms of how we serve our customers. The number of people will be totally–we have to prepare for this reality that our business is growing, but access to labour is shrinking; we have to, otherwise we won't be able to serve our customers.

Mr. Lindsey: Do you see the number of claims that an adjuster or estimator can look at realistically going up with automation or staying the same?

Mr. Guimond: So the number of claims that they going to be looking at, I'm hoping it reduces over time. And the number we're trying to reduce, just like estimation or front-line transactions, is we're trying to shrink how much work everybody has to do so to make sure that we have enough people to serve our customers because the amount of people that are available to work is shrinking, right, because of the retirements of the baby boomers and the reality of how many children we're having.

      So we have to make sure that how we automate–at the rate of automation, right, and at the rate of what's happening, then you have to make sure that the people are not overwhelmed with work. So we have to make work go away so they can serve our   customers with what's available; that's very important.

Mr. Lindsey: I would think that with the number of unemployed people that are available in this country that there should be no shortage of workers. It's a matter of figuring out how to train them to do the work. That be a accurate reflection?

Mr. Guimond: Well, it's–in Manitoba, right now, I can only talk about the reality of Manitoba. But that's–as a business that's what we're facing and we have to deal with that.

      In terms of training, MPI does provide training. We even pay for people to go to school. You know, we hire people; we send them to school; we teach them our business and so on. So there's a lot of opportunities even–but at the same time, the reality is the reality. That's our experience and I don't think we're unique. I mean, even when I go to things like Microsoft. A few years ago I went to their think tank in terms of the future, and they said, well, by 2025 you better improve your productivity by 25 per cent; 12 per cent is because of price point in the market, but the other 14 per cent, people won't be there. So, I mean, there's a lot of literature on that and it's important that MPI is prepared for that. So those are things out there, warnings to businesses to make sure you prepare for that.

Mr. Lindsey: To the minister, do you believe it's a part of the mandate of the MPI to make sure that they're retraining workers that may be displaced by automation so that those workers can stay gainfully employed?

Mr. Cullen: Well, not necessarily sure it's MPI's role   there. If, you know, in terms of–if that particular job description is no longer required by the  corporation, I don't think it's necessarily up to MPI or us as ratepayers to train somebody to move on to another position. We, as a government, have different mechanisms in place to train people for   various jobs.  So there's other opportunities whether it's the provincial government or the federal government, there's all kinds of training options out there. So just because the job situation will change within a corporation, I don't think it's necessarily the mandate of that corporation to train someone to get into another field.

Mr. Lindsey: Interesting concept. [interjection] Certainly, if he like to.

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Guimond.

Mr. Guimond: Very important that how the corporation goes about this that we never let people go because of technology changes; we've never done that and we don't–we've never laid off people. We never got rid of people. We do everything through–we do our models through attrition. Like, right now  I've got approximately 155 employees that are 55 years or more and qualify for retirement. I can't replace 155 people overnight, you know. Like, I have to prepare, and I'm not going to replace them all, because I know I can't even if I wanted to.

* (11:30)

      So what we do is we run our models. We set up–we stay in tune how to stay relevant to our customers and we automate. And as our workforce reduces, we streamline, but we never do it sort of on the back of people where you just throw people on the street. We've never done that. We don't believe in that.

Mr. Lindsey: Thank you, Mr. Guimond. I like that answer much better than the minister's.

      Moving on to ride-sharing. What steps has MPI taken to prepare for the introduction of ride services in Manitoba?

Mr. Guimond: If you're okay, I have a couple of answers that were asked previously–just to put on the record.

Mr. Chairperson: Absolutely.

Mr. Guimond: So, regarding the training program with MTA, it started in 2008 and we've processed 567 students over that time period. Okay?

      Regarding how many indigenous employees we have in MPI, it's 178 or 9.6 per cent. There might be more because we don't know if everybody's sort of declared, but right now that's the stats that we have.

      Regarding ride-sharing, I want you to know that we've been working very collaboratively with the City of Winnipeg, so we're aware that provincial legislation is pending and it will eliminate the taxicab board and the power of municipalities to   create bylaws to address the operation of vehicles‑for-hire.

      In anticipation of that law being proclaimed shortly, we have initiated discussions with the City  of Winnipeg–being the largest municipality in Manitoba–and we'll be working together to ensure a solution that is fair and equitable for all parties. The solution will be based to the greatest extent possible with available data on aligning the premiums charged to the risk presented so that vehicle-for-hire activities are not inappropriately subsidized by other insurance ratepayers.

Mr. Lindsey: So how will you ensure that insurance products that MPI offers guarantee a level playing field for all car-for-hire businesses?

Mr. Guimond: We have done a lot of work on this and I believe that we have a solution that will ensure it's fair, it's equitable, and that people pay the risk that they represent. And that's really what's important here, is that the premium they pay represents the risk that they represent for that particular insurance pool–which is vehicles-for-hire.

      And so, at this point in time, I still have to go through my board of directors to have the concepts approved and we're working with the city–closely–and we want the mayor to have a chance to be able to think about this. Because it's our understanding right now that the city, by December, would like to pass the bylaws because they will start being effective March 1 assuming the law comes into effect.

      And so we're working with the Government of  Manitoba, the City of Winnipeg, and ourselves–together, to make sure that we have a solution that will not be at the expense of anybody, but the people who pay–they're going to say yes, that's okay, because that's the risk I represent.

      And so maybe one thing that–I can't go into details because until it goes through the approval process, but I believe that, you know, if we use the term vehicle-for-hire–you know, let's forget about taxis; let's forget about Uber; let's forget about all these things. Let's just think about vehicle-for-hire, okay? There's a pile of people that do that.

      That's the risk that they represent, and then depending what they do, how they do it, or how many hours a week they do it and so on, let's just make sure that the premium they pay represents the risk that they represent and I think that would work out really good.

Mr. Lindsey: Has MPI studied the experience of   other jurisdictions–like Alberta, for example–regarding the types of insurance products that they sell for ride-for-hire services?

Mr. Guimond: Yes, we have. In fact, we've done a study for–across Canada, what's been happening and we've been looking at that. You know, getting some ideas of how do they get–what do they get charged, and then how do they enforce it; and how do they make sure when somebody puts in a claim, is it a valid claim, and did they really pay for the risk that they represent.

      So, yes, we have done an analysis across Canada and, yes, we have looked at the different models.

Mr. Lindsey: So you believe that you'll have plans in place by the time legislation is passed to meet those requirements?

Mr. Guimond: Well, the legislation will finalize for us the requirements. Like, once you understand the legislation in place, then you have to comply to it. And then once the provincial legislation is passed, then we have to work with the municipalities for the bylaws that they're going to pass. And then we also have to work with a regulator because we're going to have to have a rate because it's compulsory. We have to go through the regulator to ensure the regulator approves the rate that we're going to charge to these customers. So we're aligning the whole schedule that  by March 1 we're able to provide that to the customers.

Mr. Lindsey: Do you see that same type of system being rolled out to other municipalities other than just the city of Winnipeg, particularly smaller communities where they may not have the same capability to develop their own rules and regulations?

Mr. Guimond: Well, yes, and that's a very good point because we want to make sure, too, that, you know, if we can find a solution that's fair and equitable and that people pay for the risk they represent, that maybe Winnipeg becomes the model for the other jurisdictions, and we will be working with the other municipalities.

Mr. Lindsey: Thank you for that.

      So just back to self‑driving cars again. On page  19 of your 2016 annual report it states that it anticipates driverless vehicles on Manitoba roads by as early as 2021. So have you made preparations for your insurance industry to be prepared for that date as opposed to one somewhere further down the road that potentially you'd talked about earlier?

Mr. Guimond: Yes, we have, and we already do have some that are somewhat quasi self‑driving. Like the–there's some Teslas in Manitoba, right, and so they're already pushing the–it was same thing with the Volvos. Now, the degree of automation–it's just a degree of it, right? I mean, we're not at the point where there's no steering wheel or no pedals and you just sit and watch TV when you go somewhere, but we already have, to a certain extent, quasi‑driverless cars on Manitoba and we are prepared for what exists today and we're continuing to be prepared for what's coming. And, you know, there's already the flying car, if you want to go that far, in the States, and we're getting ready for that as well. There's some that are going to be delivered in Ontario. So, yes, we have to get ready for that. We are; we got a game plan for it.

Mr. Lindsey: Good. I'm glad to hear that. So, looking at vehicle‑rating system, right now MPI divides province into geographic region based on assessed risk. Will you be reviewing this system as self‑driving cars come into being to see if it still makes sense or does it need to be changed or–

Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Guimond.

Mr. Guimond: We constantly assess how we underwrite the risk of a policy in Manitoba and we've found a way right now that our customers feel is–resonates with them. It's fair, it's equitable.

      When it comes to with the autonomous car, like, the real autonomous car, it really boils down to who's the driver. And so there's already a legislation in the States now that's being–the equivalent of our transportation department in the States have already said that the driver is the computer inside the car   that's actually driving the car, because the autonomous cars are a reality in the States already. Like, Google's been running them for many years. And so the whole concept of who's the driver, who accepts liability, who is your customer–is it the manufacturer? Is it an individual? How does it break down? Where does the chips fall? So we're starting  that right now and we need to really think about how that's going to change the way we provide insurance to Manitobans. And it's interesting that manufacturers have already accepted liability because their computers are the driver, and there's also a lot of ethical issues that they're dealing with. They're working with universities, people that specialize in ethics in terms of how they program the   cars, in terms of how they react in certain incidents, right? So–because computers can make instant decisions. And now, you know, all of us might make different decisions depending on the situation we're in, so how do you program the car to make decisions in difficult situations?

* (11:40)

      So that's happening and we're studying that and we're getting ready for it. We're getting ready for it not only from the insurance perspective, but also from our registration perspective, which is also very important.

Mr. Lindsey: You present some interesting concepts going forward. Things like distracted driving. How do you see owners or users of self-driving cars–will they still be prohibited from using cellphones while they're driving?

Mr. Guimond: A real self-driving car, you know–the way, right now, how it's defined in the United States, based on the equivalent of Canada transport–there will be–they've already agreed there won't be any steering wheel, there won't be gas accelerator or brake. That is all–it's the computer that's driving the car.

      So, yes, people will be working in their cars; they'll be phoning in their cars. They'll be doing all–like, the true autonomous car, because that is a complete different paradigm than today.

Mr. Lindsey: That's some interesting changes in thought process as far as impaired driving laws and things like that that, hopefully, the corporation is   contemplating and getting prepared for. And, hopefully, law enforcement as well.

      So how–or have you talked a little bit about the US experience in manufacturers. How will you be able to determine who's liable for a claim if it's self‑driving and computer-controlled?

Mr. Guimond: So that's a very good question, because, again, it's a journey, right? And so right now we can see with Teslas, when you put into automatic mode and it's driving by itself, the driver is still liable. You still need to be overseeing what's happening in the vehicle, and you still have what you call care and control of the vehicle.

      Now, at what point as we go forward where, from a–as we work with the Legislature and we create the new rules for registration and enforcement and the definition of a driver, right, in terms of liability assessment, what happens? And so I kind of like the idea right now that, by law, you know, a driver's a driver. So, in the United States, for example, what they've said is that any car that is automated to the point where the control of the vehicle is by the computer, then the manufacturers have accepted liability, because it's the computer that's driving the car. And the computer has been designed–the software, the hardware, everything has  been done by the manufacturer, so they accept liability.

      So I think that, as time goes by, the definition of  a driver, by law, will change. And then, as the public–you know, the rate of acceptance of these cars, too, over time, eventually we will not be able to hold a person liable because they're really not driving the car. So then it's going to switch over to the manufacturer. So that's just a function of time.

      But, as a transition, driver's a driver. That's how I see it.

Mr. Lindsey: How do you see that working as far as driver licensing going forward? At what point don't you need a licence? Or will you always need a licence to do something?

Mr. Guimond: Well, you know what? We're talking here like way into the future, right? I mean, we're–that's going to take a long, long time. But, you know, I love driving, so I dread the day that–when I have to go to a track to drive a car.

      You know, that's really what's going to happen as time goes by. It's just like a racing car. You know, if you want to race a car, you go on a track and you pay for it and so on. Eventually, you might have to  pay to drive a car on a racetrack somewhere, so   you're not a menace to people. It's kind of fascinating, right? Where it's going.

Mr. Lindsey: It is, and I suspect it may take place sooner than most of us think it will too. Technology seems to be progressing in leaps and bounds. So, hopefully, the corporation is thinking that far down the road that they'll have things in place.

      A couple of other areas I just want to briefly cover off, cannabis being one of them. In real broad strokes, can the–can you explain what steps the corporation has taken to prepare for the anticipated legalization of cannabis in 2018?

Mr. Guimond: Okay, I'll put this in the record because it's a very serious issue and I think it merits proper–we need to do this. So, yes, we are concerned about any form of impaired driving, and we have vested interests in working proactively with other road-safety stakeholders to address the issue of   drug‑impaired driving and the legalization of cannabis.

      Earlier this month, we launched a broad omni‑channel public-awareness campaign intended to educate Manitobans and raise awareness about the dangers and consequences of drug-impaired driving. The intent is to raise awareness about how drugs generally, and cannabis in particular, can impair driving, so that when cannabis becomes legal in 2018 drivers will be in a position to make informed, safe decisions about whether to drive after consuming cannabis.

      This campaign includes a four-prong approach with messaging focused on four distinct audiences: new teen drivers, youth in general, the medical community and their patients, the general public. Starting this fall, significant enhancements to the High School Driver Education program have been introduced to specifically address the dangers and consequences of cannabis-impaired driving. These messages will be targeted to both the students in the  program, and their parents who we rely on to reinforce safe driving habits and model good driving behaviour.

      Our myth-buster campaign will also debunk some of the misconception that exists with respect to how cannabis and other drugs affect concentration and motor skills, both of which can 'significly' impair driving ability. Messaging will also be directed to the general public using both traditional and social media platforms.

      We're also going to be addressing the use of prescription medication including medical marijuana and how these sorts of drugs can also affect driving.  We're doing this in partnership with the medical community who are best positioned to have  conversations with their patients about how prescription medications can affect concentration, reaction time and driving focus.

      What will this campaign cost? To date, approximately $75,000 has been spent, mostly on media buys; however, we are partnering with MADD Canada on this campaign and they have allowed us to use some of their creative, which is valued at least at double that investment. As a result, the overall value to Manitobans will far exceed the investment of ratepayers' dollars.

      Why is the issue of cannabis and driving such a   concern to us? We know from our research of  drug‑impaired driving in US jurisdictions that have   already legalized cannabis that the states of   Washington and Colorado experienced very significant increase in impaired driving charges and   impair-related collisions and fatalities after legalization. In Washington, the incidence of active THC in tested drivers increased by 74 per cent in the first four years after legalization. Drug-related motor vehicles fatalities also nearly doubled. Similarly, in   Colorado, there was increase of 70 per cent–74 per cent in drivers testing positive for cannabis.

      We also know from roadside surveys conducted in the fall of 2016 that drug use amongst drivers in Manitoba is a significant concern. In those surveys, one in 10 drivers tested positive for drugs with 53   per cent of these drivers testing positive for cannabis; 31 per cent of those testing positive tested for cocaine; and 22 per cent of cases, drivers tested positive for more than one drug. In our view, these are collisions waiting to happen.

* (11:50)

      Of further concern is that the survey data reveals significant misconceptions about–among Manitoba drivers about how cannabis impairs driving. This was particularly the case with young drivers and cannabis. Taken together, these things give us very   significant concern that when cannabis is legalized, drug-impaired driving collisions, fatalities and serious injuries could increase significantly. This   is why we are working so hard with other stakeholders to get ahead of the issue and educate   drivers about the real consequences of cannabis‑impaired driving, so that when cannabis becomes more accessible in Canada, drivers will have the information they need to make informed decisions about driving after consuming cannabis.

      Thank you.

Mr. Chairperson: Thank you.

Ms. Judy Klassen (Kewatinook): You mentioned that there was a pilot project for a community when my colleague Nahanni asked a question. Where is that community?

Mr. Guimond: Yes, I'm working with my board of directors on that right now, and I would like to wait until, you know, we have, like, approval and things are in order before we even make that public.

Ms. Klassen: And with the ride-sharing commuters, they're providing an eco-benefit as well as an environmental benefit by decreasing their carbon footprint. Will that be factored into the premiums that you are negotiating?

Mr. Guimond: No. No, we–our underwriting in terms of how we charge a customer for a premium represents the risk that they represent in terms of how many accidents have they had or how many highway traffic infractions they have. It's not linked to the type of car that you drive.

Ms. Klassen: And then for the–when cannabis becomes legalized, are you then looking at increasing that RSR?

Mr. Guimond: No, the–it won't be just because of a particular event; it's a mathematical test in terms of how we determine how much money we need, and we'll continue to use these tests to do that.

Mr. Lindsey: Does MPI require any further legislative changes in order to be ready for the anticipated decriminalization of cannabis?

Mr. Guimond: I don't know the answer to that because, as you know, with Bill C-45 right now at the federal level, I mean, it's not law yet, and they're also looking at regulations under that law at the federal level. And so depending what happens at the federal level, it's possible, hypothetically, that the Province may need to do something. So we're just going to have to wait and see until the federal legislation is completely done. Then we can assess, you know, what we're up against, and then the provincial government will need to make a decision if we need to do something there or not, depending on what happens.

Mr. Lindsey: Does MPI intend to continue to offer low-cost loans for the snow tire program?

Mr. Guimond: Yes. At this point, yes, we are.

Mr. James Allum (Fort Garry-Riverview): I want to say, also, and in addition to my colleague from Flin Flon, to thank Mr. Guimond for his service to the people of Manitoba as CEO for MPI over the last number of years. He and I had the opportunity to work together at one point, and I know that he did excellent work and that MPI continues to serve the people of Manitoba under his leadership, and so I wanted to just put that on the record, if that's all right.

      Mr. VanKoughnet, welcome to the chair of the board. In that vein, I'd also like to just publicly thank Jake Janzen as the previous board chair and other members of the board who served over many years. I think they all made a valuable contribution to the province and certainly to the–to MPI, and so I wanted to put that on the record as well.

      Mr. Chair, I just have a–I think are just snappers to try to get us done before 12 and they're primarily for the CEO, but I do want to ask the minister just very quickly, does he or his government have any plans to privatize MPI in whole or in part?

Mr. Cullen: No.

Mr. Allum: Thank you for that, just wanted to make sure that was on the record as well.

      The CEO identified that a number of positions had been eliminated through attrition with a savings, I think you said, of about two and a half million per year. What was the up-front cost to retire and/or buy out all of those folks?

Mr. Guimond: We–it was about $500,000 altogether.

Mr. Allum: Thank you for that.

      We had, during my time as minister responsible for MPI, worked on a couple of initiatives that I think were ultimately announced after I returned to Education.

      Could the CEO just give us a status update on the Centre of Excellence and where that stands today?

Mr. Guimond: So the Centre of Excellence will open officially in October. So that's going live, and the status is that we know we have been able to work with their repair industry collaboratively and with the manufacturers–auto manufacturers. So we'll be using it for, as anticipated, for training in the trade making sure that they keep up with what's required to fix the new cars. We're doing a lot of research there, and that's why we're also a member of RCAR to be able to work with our colleagues throughout the world similar–like organizations where we work with manufacturers to try and reduce the costs of repairs in terms of how the vehicles are designed, and also to minimize the injury when people are involved in accidents we work with manufacturers on that.

      And so we're very pleased that, you know, the vision of the Centre of Excellence is happening. Now we're able to roll out, because of that, what we call the proper repair. And through the Centre of Excellence now we know that all the accredited shops in Manitoba–because we keep track of them and we help with the training and so on–we know that the people who work on the cars are qualified to work on those cars. We know that these shops have the right tools, the right equipment, the right facilities, because now cars are not built all alike. You need aluminum rooms to fix some of them; you need regular rooms to fix some of them to prevent contamination.

      We also know that people have access to technology for the proper policies and procedures that they need to fix those cars. Because today a person who repairs their cars they need to follow the instruction of the manual to say, how do I go about fixing this car, and you have to follow those steps.

      And we also have what we call a proper record of the repair. What I mean by that with proper record is that these cars are so complicated now, but when you buttoned it up–if you open the hood or you go underneath you don't know if the car was really repaired or not. So now we're able to keep track of the proper repair, which is very important because we also have the responsibility to make sure that the vehicles that are on the road are road worthy.

Mr. Allum: I'm very pleased to hear that that Centre of Excellence originally contemplated a partnership with Red River College not only to address the very important changes in the construction of vehicles these days, but also as an opportunity for training young people. Does that partnership still exist?

Mr. Guimond: Yes.

Mr. Allum: Thank you very much for that.

      And then another initiative that we've worked on, I think we called it the Manitoba Enhanced Identification Card. Has that–is that–could you give us a status update on the progress of that initiative?

Mr. Guimond: Yes, the program has been put on hold at this point in time, and–by the government of Manitoba, and I think it's–depending on priorities, you know, it will be re-evaluated at a future date. That's my understanding.

Mr. Allum: I thank you for that.

      Can you tell me how much money was invested in that program until the new government ditched it?

Mr. Guimond: We invested $3 million.

Mr. Allum:       It's a bit of an irony to us that at the same time the government has legislation before the House to require everyone to have a proper ID before they can cast a ballot and participate in democracy here, that programs like that are discontinued which take away opportunities for people who don't have ID to get some. But I just say that as an observation, Mr. Chair.

      Thank you so much.

Mr. Chairperson: Any further questions? Facing no further questions, then, I will proceed to putting the questions on each report.

      Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance   Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28th, 2014–pass.

      Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance   Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28th, 2015–pass.

      Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28th, 2015–pass.

      Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance  Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 29th, 2016–pass.

      Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 29th, 2016–pass.

      Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28th, 2017–pass.

      Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28th, 2017–pass.

      So this concludes the business before us, and the time being 12 o'clock, the committee will now rise.

COMMITTEE ROSE AT: 12:00 p.m.

TIME – 10 a.m.

LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba

CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Len Isleifson (Brandon East)

VICE-CHAIRPERSON – Ms. Janice Morley‑Lecomte (Seine River)

ATTENDANCE – 11    QUORUM – 6

Members of the Committee present:

Hon. Mr. Cullen

Messrs. Allum, Bindle, Curry,
Ms. Fontaine,
Messrs. Isleifson, Johnston,
Ms. Klassen,
Mr. Lindsey,
Ms. Morley-Lecomte,
Mr. Teitsma

APPEARING:

Mr. Dan Guimond, President and Chief Executive Officer, Manitoba Public Insurance

Mr. Brent VanKoughnet, Chairperson of the Board, Manitoba Public Insurance

MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION:

Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2014

Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2015

Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2015

Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 29, 2016

Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 29, 2016

Annual Report of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2017

Annual Financial Statement of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2017

* * *