LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Wednesday, November 5, 2025
The Speaker: O Eternal and Almighty God, from Whom all power and wisdom come, we are assembled here before Thee to frame such laws as may tend to the welfare and prosperity of our province. Grant, O merciful God, we pray Thee, that we may desire only that which is in accordance with Thy will, that we may seek it with wisdom, know it with certainty and accomplish it perfectly for the glory and honour of Thy name and for the welfare of all our people. Amen.
We acknowledge we are gathered on Treaty 1 territory, that Manitoba's located on the treaty territories and ancestral lands of the Anishinaabeg, Anishininewuk, Dakota Oyate, Denesuline and Nehethowuk nations. We acknowledge Manitoba is located on the Homeland of the Red River Métis. We acknowledge northern Manitoba includes lands that were and are the ancestral lands of the Inuit. We respect the spirit and intent of treaties and treaty making and remain committed to working in partnership with First Nations, Inuit and Métis people in the spirit of truth, reconciliation and collaboration.
Please be seated.
The Speaker: Introduction of bills? Committee reports?
Hon. Nahanni Fontaine (Government House Leader): Honourable Speaker, I'm tabling the revised Estimates sequence for tomorrow, November 6, 2025.
The Speaker: Ministerial statements?
MLA Jelynn
(Radisson): Honourable Speaker, across our province, Men's Sheds Manitoba is building more than woodwork; it's building connection, camaraderie and purpose.
What began as an idea to create safe, welcoming spaces for men to gather, share skills and support one another has grown into an unbreakable network that strengthens men's health and well‑being across Manitoba. And the need is unmistakable. Nationally, fewer than 50 per cent of Canadian men sought help when they were experiencing changes to their life or health. Across Canada, men die by suicide at three times the rate of women.
That's why Men's Sheds matter. Each shed is a place where men build not just projects, but trust; not just furniture, but friendship. They are spaces where men can feel seen, supported and connected, where working with your hands helps rebuild something heavy in your heart, Honourable Speaker.
I'm especially proud that the board chair of Men's Sheds Manitoba, Fred Bobrowski, locally known as Men's Shed Fred, calls Radisson home. Fred's leadership has helped grow this movement, from serving as a founding board member of Men's Sheds Canada to leading outreach right here in our province and establishing Park City Men's Shed in 2017.
As we mark Movember, men's health awareness month, let us remember that supporting men's health is about more than just awareness: It's about action. It's about building spaces where men can connect, open up, look out for one another and find purpose together.
So today I ask all members to join me in recognizing Fred Bobrowski and Men's Sheds Manitoba, who join us virtually, for the work that they do every day to build belonging, well‑being and community across Manitoba and across Canada.
Thank you, Honourable Speaker.
Mrs. Lauren Stone (Midland): I am pleased to rise today in the House today to recognize curling coach power couple Lorne and Chris Hamblin from Morris, who have joined us in the gallery today.
Lorne and Chris have led many successful curling teams, including coaching the Swiss men in their bronze medal win at the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver. They also did a stint as Chinese national coaches, who led those teams at both the 2012 and 2013 world championships.
After 2013, they headed back home to Morris. They went on to coach in the 2015 Deaflympics and the 2019 Canadian winter games. In 2015, Lorne was inducted into the Manitoba Curling Hall of Fame.
Chris and Lorne are managers and instructors for the Cargill Curling Training Centre in Morris. They were instrumental in gathering donations and sponsors from local community members and businesses, making it a world renowned, state‑of‑the‑art training centre.
Locally, they're known for their involvement in the DEKALB SuperSpiel. The event has grown over the years and currently hosts over 40 teams across Manitoba, Canada, China, Sweden, Switzerland, New Zealand, Scotland and the United States, the theme for the event being world-class curling with small town hospitality.
I have gotten to know Chris and Lorne over the years, and one of the things that has stood out to me personally is their passion for encouraging youth to take up the sport and their commitment to developing the junior youth programs.
Lorne and Chris have now passed on the reins of the DEKALB SuperSpiel to Mat Norris, who is also with us today, which will take place November 27 to 30 in Morris. It will be a great weekend and I encourage all to come out to cheer on our local teams.
Lorne and Chris, thank you for your years of service to the sport of curling and your commitment to the Morris community.
Thank you so much.
The Speaker: The honourable member for Midland.
Mrs. Stone: Honourable Speaker, I wish to add the names to Hansard of the guests who have joined us today as well.
Cheryl Demarcke, Macy Friesen, Chris Hamblin, Elizabeth Hamblin, Jane Hamblin, Jenelle Hamblin, Katherine Hamblin, Kevin Hamblin, Lorne Hamblin, Neals Johnson–Bayer and DEKALB representative, Shelley Johnson, Trish Jordan, Alyvia Lutz, Mat Norris, Brian Recksiedler.
The Speaker: The–no other members' statements?
MLA Cindy Lamoureux (Tyndall Park): The phrase lest we forget originates from the poem Recessional, written by British poet Rudyard Kipling in 1897 for Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee. Honourable Speaker, 21 years later it became used to remember those who had given the ultimate sacrifice during World War I.
It is something we practise to this day, particularly to honour all soldiers who served and sacrificed their lives in the name of freedom and democracy.
Honourable Speaker, today we see democracy around the world at risk and it causes one to reflect upon the importance of remembering.
We need to remember the lives lost in battles across the world; the veterans and living history of the war that was supposed to end all wars; soldiers who made the ultimate sacrifice; and the lives of millions who were forever changed.
Honourable Speaker, it is because of our colleague, the MLA for Waverley, that Bill 210, Indigenous veterans day will be commemorated officially for the first time in Manitoba on November 8. This was supported by all MLAs.
Further, it has been so nice to see, over this past week and here today, MLAs on both sides of the House invite and formally recognize veterans during members' statements.
* (13:40)
And as I wrap up, I want to encourage my colleagues, as I'm sure they already are, to attend services for both Indigenous Veterans Day and Remembrance Day.
As we visit veterans, resting soldiers, attend ceremonies and lay wreaths, let us take a moment to remember the values of peace, freedom and democracy, the importance of civic participation, respect for human rights and rule of law.
Thank you, Honourable Speaker.
Mr. Wayne Ewasko (Lac du Bonnet): It gives me great pleasure to stand today in the House and talk about over two years of NDP failings and how it's contributing to the hardships in the Lac du Bonnet constituency.
Honourable Speaker, from Victoria Beach to the Manitoba-Ontario border to south of Falcon Lake, back up to Hadashville, Elma, Whitemouth, Beausejour, Tyndall, Garson, people–constituents–are suffering more today than they were just over two years ago. Crime is up; health care is in shambles; and, of course, affordability is harder and harder each and every day. And we can pick up any newspaper, any media, to see the evidence of that.
We've seen the child‑care spaces, well over 3,200 spaces, be cut by this Education Minister, and in the Lac du Bonnet constituency, there's three specific: one in Pinawa, one in Lac du Bonnet and one just outside, in the catchment area of Anola, that was promised to be built, and it's a shame that this Education Minister has not taken the time to deliver on a lot of those promises, Honourable Speaker.
We talk about the cuts to education. We talk about affordability, of education and property taxes on the rise. Well, it's not necessarily the total issue of school divisions, Honourable Speaker. It's a fact that school divisions have had to raise these more than double‑digit tax increases on Manitobans due to the lack of funding by this Education Minister and the failings of this Kinew government.
So with that, Honourable Speaker, we've seen two thirds of the announcements made by this Education Minister reannouncing PC announcements. Crime is up; health care's in shambles.
Thanks for your time, Honourable Speaker.
Mr. Mark Wasyliw (Fort Garry): As Remembrance Day approaches, I'm proud to rise and recognize the members of Fort Garry branch of the Royal Canadian Legion.
After its founders met for two years in private homes and other locations, a charter was issued in Ottawa in 1931 for the Fort Garry No. 90 branch of the Royal Canadian Legion. Without a permanent home, members continued to meet in any place that would welcome them.
In 1947, a group of veterans decided that it was time that the Legion find a place that they could call their own. Thanks to the perseverance of Alex Fraser and–the municipality of Fort Garry agreed to the sale of a site at the corner of Pembina and Windermere for the sum of $1. Construction took place two years, as much of the work and fundraising was on a voluntary basis. Their first location opened in 1949. The original structure was completed by volunteers whose only pay was the occasional beer that was borrowed or scrounged by the infamous Ben Franks.
The Fort Garry Legion served as a flood relief station in 1950, where members could be found filling sandbags, building dikes, patrolling the river, as well as offering assistance and clothing wherever it was needed. The club was run entirely by a group of volunteers. To keep the beer flowing, the club borrowed money from the membership to pay for it.
In 1971, the Legion was granted a liquor licence, expanded their seating capacity and their amenities. After thriving for many years and–costly maintenance and repairs of their beloved building forced them to relocate to 762 Pembina Highway in 2021.
It saddens me to report that the Legion will be shutting its doors of its Fort Garry location at the end of this year and merging with the South Osborne Legion. In early 2000, the Legion had over 1,200 paid members, but due to factors such as COVID, lack of government support and public's perception of Legions, their membership has now dwindled to less than 300, making it impossible to continue.
I invite all present to join me in acknowledging the hard work and dedication of Garry Reid and Brian Cutts, who are present in the gallery today representing Fort Garry branch 90. We thank them for their service and wish them well in their upcoming merger.
Introduction of Guests
The Speaker: Before we move on, I wanted to make all members aware that as today is Take Our Kids to Work Day, and throughout the day we are going to be joined in the gallery by a number of grade 9 students and their parents, caregivers or sponsors.
I or one of the presiding officers will periodically be drawing the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery, where throughout the afternoon, too, we will welcome different kids to the Legislative Assembly.
And with that in mind, I would now like to draw members' attention to the public gallery, where we have with us 15 grade 9 students and their parents, caregivers or sponsors. We welcome them all here today.
I would also like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery, where we have with us today for Take Your Kids to Work Day Alvyra [phonetic] Lutz, who attends grade 9 at Immanuel Christian School and Macy Friesen, who attends grade 9 at Elm Creek School, who are the guests of the honourable member for Midland (Mrs. Stone).
And on behalf of all honourable members, we welcome you here today.
Mr. Obby Khan (Leader of the Official Opposition): To date, this Premier refuses to listen to Manitobans.
Manitobans came out for over six hours to voice their concerns with Bill 48; some in support and some against, but all with valid concerns.
We on this side of the House took those concerns and brought them forward with reasonable amendments to Bill 48. Manitobans did not want these protective-care units around schools, daycares or care homes. Manitobans wanted transparency. Manitobans wanted community consultation before this went ahead. Manitobans asked for these changes, but this NDP Premier refused them at every single chance they had.
My question to the Premier is can he explain why, to Manitobans, he would reject, he would vote against those three reasonable amendments?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): Honourable Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to welcome all of our guests here today. To the young Manitobans visiting the seat of our democracy, this place belongs to you. I hope and very much look forward to seeing many of you serve in this Chamber in the future.
When it comes to Bill 48, this is about stamping out the meth crisis in our streets. People across the province in Winnipeg, Brandon, Steinbach, Thompson, First Nations, you name it, want to see action on meth, except, of course, for the members opposite, who are here playing games and trying to delay the passage of Bill 48.
Law enforcement supports it. The chief of police testified at that very same committee, saying bass–saying pass Bill 48.
So what do the PCs have to say to that? What do they say to the law enforcement officers, to the firefighters, to the first responders and nurses who are desperately asking for help combatting meth? It's time for the PCs to stop playing games and start doing some work.
The Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a supplementary question.
Location of Protective-Care Centres
Mr. Khan: Manitobans will take note that this Premier didn't answer that question at all. I asked about the three reasonable amendments, and he went on some random talking point.
Why is he–did he deny Manitobans those three reasonable–[interjection]–the Minister of Families (MLA Fontaine) wants to yell at me the entire time I'm speaking–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order.
Mr. Khan: –when all I'm trying to do is ask, why does this Premier think it's okay to open a 72‑hour detention unit within 500 metres of a school? [interjection] The Minister of Families wants to continue heckling me. She's welcome to stand up and answer the question.
Why does the Premier think it's okay to open a detention unit within 500 metres of a school?
* (13:50)
Mr. Kinew: What the member doesn't say is this: the alternative to passing Bill 48 is to let people high on meth continue to harm kids in the community, to continue to threaten seniors who are just trying to go to the store.
And when we take to our first responders–you don't have to listen to me because we know he's a little sensitive about that, but here's what the vice-president of the United Fire Fighters of Winnipeg said, and I quote: Just last night our crews responded to many meth‑related incidents. When crews approach, they often encounter verbal abuse and choose to stage at a distance to avoid physical confrontation. This can be difficult at times when you know or see someone in medical distress and feel threatened if you approach. End quote.
This is exactly why we need to pass Bill 48 so that people on meth can get treatment, so that firefighters can get help doing their jobs and so that patients in the community suffering in medical distress will be able to get the health care that they need. Who would oppose that?
The Speaker: Order, please.
If I could ask the Premier, was that a public document that he was quoting from?
Mr. Kinew: Honourable Speaker, I intend to table this document in the subsequent answer because I need to read from it first.
The Speaker: Thank you.
The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a final supplementary question.
Mr. Obby Khan (Leader of the Official Opposition): The alternative to this Premier's half‑baked plan is actually getting it right. Manitobans came out and they wanted these amendments done and he rejected every one of them. He thinks it's okay to have a protection site within–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order.
Mr. Khan: –500 metres of a school.
Question from the federal budget is that they talk about a Crown corporation that doesn't exist. I'll table that page of the budget for the Premier. Even if the Premier had the legislation ready to drop today for a Manitoba Crown‑Indigenous corp., it wouldn't be ready for at least two years; two years to get a Crown going, two years of consultation, five years of permits, 10 years of construction; 19 years later we might have a plan under this NDP Premier.
Why is the Premier banking so much on a Crown corporation that doesn't exist?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): Oh, different question.
Honourable 'speakuler'–Honourable Speaker, I'll read from the document that I also tabled. Again, vice‑president of the United Fire Fighters of Winnipeg: Of more concern was an individual behaving erratically on the street, banging on parked cars. EMS had staged, and when fire crews arrived they remained in the truck as the person approached and jumped on the truck, trying to gain entry. The individual went around the truck and tried opening the passenger door, but luckily the crew had all the doors locked. The person jumped on the truck again and fell off; luckily no injuries from the fall. End quote.
That's last night. What's going to happen tonight? After that? The weekend? This is what they're playing games with.
The PCs are offside with the moral majority of Manitobans. We are looking to support law enforcement, support firefighters, support health‑care workers and, yes, support people struggling with meth addiction. Most of all, we need to keep you safe. And the most important tool we could do on that front right now is to pass Bill 48. End the games–
The Speaker: Member's time has expired.
Mr. Khan: If the Premier and his members weren't heckling so much, he would have heard that the question–I had moved on to about the economic growth of this province. I wasn't talking about Bill 48. He's not even listening–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order.
Mr. Khan: –that's how little care he takes about this place–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order.
Mr. Khan:
I asked about a Crown corporation that doesn't exist. The Premier doesn't even know about it. He refused to answer the question, so I guess it doesn't exist. The federal government refers to a Crown corporation that doesn't exist.
Will the Premier talk? Will he tell Manitobans what is Manitoba's Crown‑Indigenous Crown corporation? This Premier wants to go to Ottawa and beg for scraps at the table for increasing transfer payments when provinces like Saskatchewan, Alberta are taking the future and prosperity of their people in their hands.
Will the Premier get up, will he at least mention, will he talk, will he tell Manitobans what is Manitoba's Indigenous‑Crown corporation?
Mr. Kinew: The member opposite said that he's moved on from the damages of meth addiction. Well, I haven't, because you can't move on. You can't move on when you drive down Main Street and you see what's happening out in the community today. You can't move on when you're worrying about your kid taking a bus home from school. You can't move on when you're thinking about mom, dad, grandparents, walking to the store. Meanwhile, somebody's acting out on meth psychosis.
We're not going to let the PCs move on. This is about an urgent matter of public importance. This is about keeping you and your loved ones safe in the streets. What happened to the party of law and order? Certainly, how far the Progressive Conservatives of Manitoba have fallen is a national travesty. Law enforcement calls for it. Firefighters call for it. Health‑care workers call for it. Most importantly, you, the people of Manitoba, for years have been saying do something about meth. We are.
The facility is ready to go. Bill 48 is the only piece that we need in place. They are blocking it right now. He might want to move on. I'm not ready because we–
The Speaker: Member's time has expired.
Loophole Concern for Change of Name
Legislation
Ms. Jodie Byram (Agassiz): Honourable Speaker, on the topic of public safety, I've heard from a mother who learned after the fact that a man she trusted was, in fact, a repeat child sex offender because he changed his name and circumvented safeguards.
The Change of Name Amendment Act received royal assent on June 3 last year after being passed unanimously. This bill should make it impossible for predators to change their name. This minister has had a year and a half to implement this law but has failed to do anything.
Because of this minister's inaction, sexual predators can still change their name.
Why is he not prioritizing protecting children? When will the minister close this loophole?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): Honourable Speaker, the regulations have been passed. This bill has been proclaimed. If you commit a sexual offence against a child, you cannot change your name in Manitoba.
I'm going to table a couple of concerning documents for the member opposite. The province of Saskatchewan did this, and they called on all other provinces to do the same. Alberta did this, and they called on all other provinces to do the same.
Do you know when these other provinces took action and called on their peers? They did so in 2020 when they were in government, when that leader was the hype man for Heather Stefanson.
The member opposite needs to answer to the people of Manitoba: Why did the PCs refuse to take action on this important matter of public importance? While she is doing that, perhaps she'd like to rise in her place and say why they are blocking action on stamping out meth damages in our communities.
We are taking action when it comes to protecting children. We are taking action when it comes to hiring law enforcement. Now we're taking action to stamp–
The Speaker: Member's time has expired.
Mrs. Lauren Stone (Midland): Honourable Speaker, there's a lot of talk these days of fiscal anchors with the recent federal budget, while the Province's gross debt is now $80 billion, which is higher than what the debt–federal deficit was yesterday.
With the current Finance Minister adding $8.6 billion in new spending in just two years, on top of back-to-back deficits, he is now adding generations of debt on future children, grandchildren and future generations.
Since the minister is failing to balance the books, since the minister is failing to control their spending, what will the gross debt explode to by 2027?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): The safety of your hard-earned tax dollars is also a top priority for our administration. That's why yesterday evening, I was very pleased to see that our Finance Minister had our provincial credit rating affirmed by DBRS. It's a sign of the sound stewardship that he is showing when it comes to the Province's books.
And on the topic of fiscal anchors, the only fiscal anchor in Manitoba is the Progressive Conservative Party that dragged our books deep into the red. The deficit was five times greater after their pre-election promises that they tried to earn back your support.
Manitobans lost faith, and it's clear that nothing has changed. When it comes to Bill 48, which will help protect communities from the damages of meth addiction, here they are blocking again. They ballooned the deficit, they blocked Bill 48. They're only in it for themselves.
People of Manitoba, please let them know you expect better from the PCs, you want them to support Bill 48 and get on board–
The Speaker: Member's time has expired.
* (14:00)
Mr. Konrad Narth (La Vérendrye): I've brought up a number of examples in the past, but every day we are watching industry after industry pass by our province: value-added agriculture projects setting up in Saskatchewan, mining investments flowing west and north, all while our province drowns in red tape, unnecessary debt and uncertainty.
The federal budget lays out billions of investment opportunities, but those dollars will land where provinces are ready to compete. Sadly, under this NDP government, Manitoba isn't one of them.
What is this minister doing right now to make sure Manitoba can actually attract new investment, cut red tape and retain the businesses that we are losing to other provinces?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): Honourable Speaker, Manitoba is in the top three of all provinces in Canada when it comes to job creation. But when it comes to doing your job, you know who's falling short? It's the members opposite.
For everybody watching question period today, online and otherwise, typically every single MLA is supposed to ask three questions. How many of them have asked three questions here today? Their leader is supposed to ask six questions. They're not doing the job that they each get paid 100 grand a year for. Why is it? Because they want to give time today for an MLA who was elected under our banner to get up and ask questions.
Well, if they don't want to do their basic job of doing question period questions, they should perhaps do their basic job of legislating.
Bill 48 will help police and firefighters and health-care workers combat meth use in our communities. Who could oppose that? Nobody actually does. Even they don't–
The Speaker: Member's time has expired.
Mr. Josh Guenter (Borderland): In Landmark, Manitoba, we've heard from a mother who works two jobs but still struggles in this NDP economy. She has publicly commented, quote, you find yourself going to the grocery store, grabbing what you need, then doing an audit of your cart to see what you can afford and sometimes having to put things back. It's embarrassing.
I ask this NDP minister: Why are Manitobans having to put groceries back?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): Since we've taken office, our government has cut the gas tax; we've cut income taxes; we've cut corporate taxes, and we've cut the payroll tax here in the province of Manitoba.
Now what has the member opposite done? Well, I think we all know that the biggest threat to our economy here in Manitoba is Donald Trump, and what is their record? Thank Donald Trump? Thank Donald Trump? And I quote from their leader, I would say thank you. Repeats it: I would say thank you to Donald Trump on the tariffs. That is wrong. That is the real risk to the economy.
I'd also like to share with the House that I had my meeting with the Lieutenant Governor yesterday, and I informed her that if the PCs do not pass Bill 48, we intend to sit again next week, and then the week after that, and then the week after that. We will not be proroguing the House; we will not be giving them a week off in November while other Manitobans are hard at work just because they won't do their job.
It's time for them to show up to work and pass–
The Speaker: Member's time has expired.
Disclosure of Child Sex Offender Names by
2026
MLA Cindy Lamoureux (Tyndall Park): Honourable Speaker, I table an article from today's Free Press about a mother who was horrified to learn that a convicted sex offender had access to her home and children. Placing trust in a person with access to your family is a decision that no one can take lightly these days, and to later learn that such a person had frequent and close access to your child for an extended period of time is horrifying.
Honourable Speaker, bill 23, the Province's change of name amendment act, received royal assent over a year ago. In today's paper, the minister shared consultation is not yet complete.
Can the minister confirm for the House if bill 23 will be in full effect and all names will be made public by spring 2026?
Hon. Mintu Sandhu (Minister of Public Service Delivery): I want to thank the member for that question. This situation is every parent's worst nightmare.
I want to extend my deepest sympathy to this family for what they are going through. This horrible situation makes me think of my own children. As a parent, I want to know that we are doing everything possible to keep our kids safe. And our government is taking action.
This is a priority to me as a minister. I have talked to my department, and the regulations are in effect as of now.
Thank you, Honourable Speaker.
The Speaker: The honourable member for Tyndall Park, on a supplementary question.
Proclamation and Implementation Timeline
MLA Lamoureux: Honourable Speaker, despite background checks and Google searches, this person had access to her home and her children for five years because he was legally allowed to change his name. His name change, birth name and long list of violent criminal offences against vulnerable children were all wiped from Google and the KB registry, giving him the appearance of a clean slate.
In this particular case, the offender had near-daily access to a young boy who has since quit his job and become withdrawn. The system that protects this offender's rights to privacy failed this family.
Can the minister explain why bill 23 still has not been proclaimed and why it is taking this long to implement?
MLA Sandhu: I want to assure Manitobans that we are working hard to protect children in this province. Our government passed a bill to ensure that sex offenders cannot legally change their names going forward. And those regulations are in effect.
Honourable Speaker, I'd also like to maybe quote what Alberta premier Jason Kenney said during this time. He said, I quote: Written to counterpart across the country, asking that every province follow the lead of Saskatchewan and Alberta, because, ultimately, this will only fully affect if other provinces follow our example. Otherwise, convicted pedophiles and sex offenders could just jump from one province to another and change their name.
When did they said–say this? This was in 2029, when the opposition was in power, Honourable Speaker.
Disclosure of Child Sex Offender Names by 2026
MLA Lamoureux: Honourable Speaker, the mother is a front-line community service worker with knowledge and experience who feels deeply victimized.
On October 26, the police came to her home to inform her that this same person had now offended again. The offence included rape, drugging of a child and creating child pornography. Police pulled the offender over, finding another child in the vehicle at 2 a.m. who was identified through retrieved video on the offender's computer.
Honourable Speaker, this is outrageous, it is heartbreaking and it highlights how flawed our system is.
Can the minister assure the House here this afternoon that by spring 2026, all names, including past offenders, will be made public?
MLA Sandhu: I want to thank the member for that question. This is very, very important that we protect the kids here in Manitoba and across Canada as well.
Honourable Speaker, PCs had seven and a half years to bring this law into effect, and they never did it. Even in 2020, Alberta and Saskatchewan changed the law and urged Manitoba, then to Justice Minister Cliff Cullen, do the same. But Cliff Cullen and Brian Pallister did nothing.
I'll also–like to quote the press release we–from Alberta. I quote: We urge other provinces to join Saskatchewan and Alberta to enact similar changes that protect children and other vulnerable–
The Speaker: Member's time has expired.
MLA David Pankratz (Waverley): Honourable Speaker, I'm honoured again that they rushed through their questions in opposition to get to mine today. Thank you very much.
But on a very serious note, Manitobans want Bill 48 passed today. They want people in the throes of meth addictions to get the help that they need, and they want safer streets.
It's time to pass Bill 48 today. It's a compassionate medical approach that will get people out of harm's way and make our streets safer at the same time.
Meth addiction has taken too many lives. It has caused too much suffering. It needs to stop.
Can the minister please tell the House why Bill 48 must pass today?
Hon. Bernadette Smith (Minister of Housing, Addictions and Homelessness): Manitobans have spoken. They want safer streets and they want to stamp out meth addiction in this province.
* (14:10)
That's why the PC Party of Manitoba needs to stop playing games. They need to stop playing games with people's lives. Right now, they're standing in the way of medical care and they are standing in the way of public safety. It needs to stop.
Over this past week, the PC Party of Manitoba has tried to drag Manitoba backwards by refusing to pass Bill 48. Instead, they propose shutting down Main Street Project entirely. The PCs need to stop playing political games.
Will they pass Bill 48 today?
Mr. Greg Nesbitt (Riding Mountain): Honourable Speaker, in September of last year, the Minister of Natural Resources promised Manitobans he would sell his business after he was the first member of this House to ever be found guilty by the Ethics Commissioner.
Well, it's been over a year, and nothing. The same minister that took illegal government contracts has refused to make good on his promise. It's hard to keep track of this minister's failures.
Has he failed to sell his business, or has he failed to disclose the sale with the Ethics Commissioner? Which is it, Honourable Speaker?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): I always welcome a question on the Ethics Commissioner from the members opposite because us–it allows us to remind Manitobans that their former leader, the one that they all campaigned for, Heather Stefanson, was the first to ever be fined for breaking the conflict of interest law–$18,000 she was fined.
Their member, that they allow to sit with them in the back row, also fined. Cliff Cullen, their former deputy premier, all fined because after you voted in the last election, they decided to ignore the results of the election and tried to ram through a controversial project.
Now here they are again, ignoring the will of the people. You want action on meth addiction, you've got it, in the form of Bill 48. And yet here they are again, the rulebreakers, the law flouters, the constitution violators themselves holding up Bill 48.
Won't they start to turn things around and show the first steps of goodwill by passing Bill 48–[interjection]
The Speaker: Member's time has expired.
Mrs. Kathleen Cook (Roblin): Cheryl Grewar is waiting in pain for surgery and has gotten nothing but the runaround from this minister and this NDP government.
She's been told her file got lost in a drawer, given three surgery dates that never materialized and had her concerns outright dismissed by this government. The latest tentative surgery date she's been given is later this month.
Is her surgery date going to be changed yet again, or will this minister confirm that Ms. Grewar will get her surgery on November 17?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): You know, for people like Cheryl, my heart goes out to you. You are the reason why we're staffing up health care and we are cutting down the wait-list when it comes to getting priority surgeries.
We are not in a position to be able to provide specific answers about people's private health information here on the floor of the Legislature, but I can assure you, Cheryl, we will work with you. And I know that the Minister of Health will follow up.
It's a far cry from what we see from the members opposite, though. One simple piece of follow-up that they need to do is to pass Bill 48 now. Everybody in every community in Manitoba has a story about the impact that meth is having. We are taking action based on the advice of medical experts, based on the advice of the chiefs of police, based on the advice of firefighters.
They take their advice from the comment section on Facebook. They're not a serious political operation. They need to pass Bill 48 now so that we can work together to keep our streets safe.
Mr. Mark Wasyliw (Fort Garry): Bill 48 isn't about treatment; it's about jail.
A non-violent Manitoban suffering from a–mental health issues who's committed no crime will be arrested by police, stripped down to one layer of clothes, have their shoes, belts and personal property taken from them. They will not be able to call a lawyer. They will be placed in a windowless, solitary confinement cell. They will eat just feet away from a toilet. They will sleep on a thin mattress on a concrete floor. They will have no privacy. The lights will be kept on 24 hours a day. They will not be allowed to shower or to change their clothes.
This experience by those who have lived it describe it as humiliating.
Will the Premier agree to spend 72 hours in the exact same conditions that Bill 48 inmates will experience, and if not, why not?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): Section 1. Section 1 of the Canadian–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Kinew: Section 1 of the Canadian Constitution says that–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Kinew: Okay, the Leader of the Opposition just made a–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order, please.
All members will stop hollering back and forth across the Chamber, the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Khan) and the Minister of Families (MLA Fontaine) in particular.
Mr. Kinew: I'd like some clarity, Honourable Speaker, as to whether I'll have my full time to answer the question.
The Speaker: You will.
Mr. Kinew: Thank you.
When it comes to the Canadian Constitution, Section 1 says that reasonable limits can be put on the elements that the Charter provides to you by way of liberties. The idea there is that when your exercise of freedoms starts to harm other people in the community, the state has a role to act.
Well, ask yourself: people who've been threatened by somebody high on meth addiction, people who've been driving down Main Street and see what is happening at Higgins and Main. Is your freedom, is your liberty being respected right now? No, it is not. The state has a responsibility to act.
People who are suffering from meth addiction do not have the right to determine how the rest of us are going to live in our society. Rather, the rest of our society has a responsibility to take action and get those people help.
What the member opposite is ignoring is the reality of this: if we do not pass Bill 48, we're not going to be living in–
The Speaker: Member's time has expired.
The honourable member for Fort Garry, on a supplementary question.
People with Mental Health Issues–Ethical Concerns
Mr. Wasyliw: This Premier is attempting to repackage coercion as compassion. We know that forcing someone to get treatment doesn't work. We know it's unethical for medical professionals to treat someone without consent. We know this bill is unconstitutional.
We know from Sunshine House that meth users are overwhelmingly non-violent, yet this Premier is demonizing drug users, suggesting they are a threat and must be controlled. He claims that the alternative to Bill 48 is to have somebody high on meth swinging a machete in front of grandmother, and I will table those ignorant comments.
But that's not what Bill 48 does. It arrests and holds in solitary confinement not machete-wielding criminals but non-violent drug users who have committed no crime.
Why is the Premier trying to demonize Manitobans with mental health issues and criminalize mental health?
Mr. Kinew: The PCs gave up their time in question period for that, so I'm not sure why they're not applauding, or what exactly the strategy is on that side of the House.
But I will say this to the member opposite: every person in Manitoba can check for themselves. Go outside. Drive up and down Main Street. Go see our communities across Manitoba. The ravages of meth addiction are very, very clear. We need to take action to keep you safe. We need to take action to keep people on meth safe as well from harming themselves.
This is an issue that has been studied. This is an issue that has been advocated on. The path forward is clear. Action is needed to get people help when they need it, but to keep you safe. That's what Bill 48 is all about. We are here to work for you, the people of Manitoba. The member opposite is looking forward to just billing by the hour, challenging this in court.
Mr. Doyle Piwniuk (Turtle Mountain): Can the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure (MLA Naylor) tell us what her department and her government will be doing to ensure that Arctic Gateway Group railroad to Churchill meets the Class 1 transportation Canada's railroad standards for–that's necessary for shipping commodities through the Port of Churchill; and can she–the minister tell us what timelines are these–for these major upgrades–will be completed?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): I appreciate the friendly question, because it allows us to shout out the federal government for including 10 references to Churchill in the federal budget yesterday.
This is, of course, the result of the effort of the Minister of Infrastructure, the business–the Minister of Business Development, and really the whole team, who have been pushing for this once-in-a-generation opportunity to build up northern Manitoba and build up our economy.
Now I recognize that the member opposite has been busy starting a new business with one of the people named in the Ethics Commissioner's most recent report, so he may not be up to date on what is going on with Bill 48. But the reality is this: for people in Virden, for people in southwestern Manitoba, they know meth is having an impact.
* (14:20)
Go ask your MLA why he's blocking Bill 48. Better yet, elect an NDP MLA next time, and we'll make sure that we make our community safer, we make our economy stronger and we fix your health care as we've done in Virden, as we've done across the Westman region.
MLA Jeff Bereza (Portage la Prairie): Honourable Speaker, under this NDP government, food bank usage is absolutely through the roof, farmers are struggling, small businesses are struggling, workers are struggling.
Honourable Speaker, why are the only people who don't see what's going on in Manitoba are those sitting on the NDP benches?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): People on this side of the House came from the struggle; they had it given to them. That's the difference. That's why, when we came into office, the first thing that we did was we cut the provincial gas tax to put–
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
The Speaker: Order.
Mr. Kinew: –money in your pocket each and every single day.
When it comes to feeding hungry people in our community, the PCs did nothing for two terms in office. What is the first thing that we did? A universal school food program so no child in Manitoba has to go to school hungry. These are the types of common sense ideas–to help you with your pocketbook, to help children be able to learn and build our society for the future–that also leads us to Bill 48.
Everyone knows that, when we're talking about crime in Manitoba, we're talking about drugs. And what are we talking about when we're talking about drugs? We're talking about meth and opioids. These are the long-acting toxic substances where we're bringing the hammer down on the people trafficking, but we also need to get the–
The Speaker: Member's time has expired.
Mr. Trevor King (Lakeside): Honourable Speaker, the mayor of Winnipeg has commented that the $50 billion announced by the federal government for local infrastructure is welcome news.
Can the minister tell us if the provincial government will be supporting the mayor's request to use Manitoba's share to fund the third phase of the North End water treatment plant construction, the extension of the Chief Peguis and the widening of Kenaston Boulevard for Route 90?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): Honourable Speaker, we're going to get all the projects that they never built during their time in office built while we're serving you, the people of Manitoba. And unlike the member opposite, we know that the province extends beyond the Perimeter. So we'll be there in the Pembina Valley, we'll be there in the South, we'll be there in the West, we'll be there in Eastman, we'll be there in the North.
But I really do appreciate a question about the mayor of the city of Winnipeg. Because who made a submission to the committee on Bill 48, saying that this needed to be passed right away; to saying that this would help the streets in Winnipeg; to saying this would help law enforcement and firefighters and first responders and health care and the average person out there who wants safer streets? Well, you guessed it. The person who made that submission, the person that the member opposite is such a big fan of is the mayor of the city of Winnipeg.
Pass Bill 48 now.
Mr. Wayne Ewasko (Lac du Bonnet): Honourable Speaker, this Premier promised to lower grocery prices. Whilst his Cabinet ministers collect their bonuses and top-ups that are more than the average Manitoban brings in on a yearly basis, we know that food bank usage right here in Manitoba is up 20 per cent–up 20 per cent. That's this Families Minister's legacy.
Honourable Speaker, since the Premier's not allowing his Cabinet ministers to stand up–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order.
Mr. Ewasko: –will the Premier stand up and–again and apologize to the 50-thousand-plus Manitobans that need to use the food bank just to survive in the last two years, Honourable Speaker?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): When it comes to affordability, we passed legislation to break up real estate monopolies in the grocery sector. More competition, lower prices. Only the modern PC Party of Manitoba would oppose market mechanisms like more competition in the grocery food aisle.
But that tells you everything that you need to know about them. This member's got it tough, I know, because we're building a personal-care home in his constituency. We're fixing the roads in that constituency. We're working with municipalities in that constituency. And all he has left to do is collect that government cheque in the six figures for the hard work that our ministers are doing.
So what I would ask him to do to earn that pay this year: listen to the people in Beausejour, listen to the people in VB, listen to the people throughout your community and pass Bill 48 so that we can take real action to stamp out drug use and get people who are high on meth help while keeping our communities safe.
Mrs. Colleen Robbins (Spruce Woods): Retirees are being squeezed by the cost-of-living increases under this failed NDP government. One retiree told the media recently, if this keeps up, he's going to have to return to the workforce.
How many of these retirees are the NDP forcing back to work?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): When it comes to seniors, we've been there to restore the rental tax credit that was cut when she was a PC staffer. We've been there for seniors, to ensure that you have the supports in the community to live independently, with dignity, for as long as you want–those same health-care supports that were cut when she was a staffer to the former PC government.
The one thing that she could do to turn around that shameful legacy is, of course, to pass Bill 48. You saw that coming from a mile away, because guess who the people are in Souris and in Glenboro and in the north hill of Brandon who want to see action on meth use? It's the seniors–seniors who deserve to feel safe when they're walking to the store; seniors who deserve to feel safe when they're living independently in the community; seniors who want to be able to go for a walk with their grandparents.
Why on earth would a brand new MLA want to oppose all that? Simply, she must be following the leadership of a misbegotten–
The Speaker: Member's time has expired.
Mrs. Lauren Stone (Midland): Honourable Speaker, Manitoba is one of the last provinces in Canada that continues to have a carbon tax. The industrial-based carbon tax is added on to fertilizer, food processing and our manufacturing sectors, all sectors that are dealing with the threat of US and China tariffs. In addition, this carbon tax is driving up grocery food prices and our cost of living and inflation.
With cost of living skyrocketing and half of Manitobans within $200 from bankruptcy, will this Premier stand up and call Prime Minister Mark Carney today to immediately end the industrial-based carbon tax within Manitoba?
Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): I called Mark Carney and told him to lift the carbon tax months and months and months ago. There is no carbon tax in Manitoba.
And you know what else we did? We cut the gas tax, the same gas tax that the PCs charged you every single day that they were in office. They have no credibility when it comes to saving you money. We're the team that's on your side.
When it comes to Bill 48, the member needs to stand up to her misguided leader and say: We got to pass this thing right now. Help people in Morden and Winkler see the bright light at the end of the tunnel when it comes to drug impacts in our communities. She ought to do it right now.
But when it comes to raising revenues, I really, really wish we could tax the hot air coming out of the Leader of the Opposition because that would be a never-ending gold mine to build our public coffers.
The Speaker: The time for oral questions has expired.
Introduction of Guests
The Speaker: And I would like to draw–[interjection]
Order, please.
I'd like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us today, representing DEKALB SuperSpeil, Lorne Hamblin, Chris Hamblin, Kevin Hamblin, Jenelle Hamblin, Elizabeth Hamblin, Katherine Hamblin, Jane Hamblin, Neals Johnson, Shelley Johnson, Nat Morris [phonetic], Trish Jordan, Cheryl Demarcke, Brian Reckslinger [phonetic], who are guests of the honourable member for Midland (Mrs. Stone).
Further, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us today Dale and Chase Edmunds, who are guests of the honourable Minister of Sport, Culture, Heritage and Tourism (MLA Kennedy), and we welcome you here today.
* (14:30)
And I would also like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have with us today Sartaj Singh who is the guest of the honourable member for Burrows (Mr. Brar).
And on behalf of all honourable members, we welcome you here today.
Mr. Obby Khan (Leader of the Official Opposition): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Ensuring that teachers have a robust background in the subjects they teach is essential for maintaining high‑quality education and fostering well‑rounded learning experiences for all Manitoba students.
(2) The recent amendments by the Province of Manitoba to the Teaching Certificates and Qualifications Regulation under The Education Administration Act have significantly lowered the standards for subject-area expertise required for teacher certification.
(3) These amendments eliminated all subject‑area requirements for teacher certification, including major and minor teachable subjects and subject‑specific requirements for early/middle-years streams.
Specifically, the amendments removed: senior year credit requirements in an approved teachable major and minor; early/middle‑years credit requirements in an approved teachable major and minor; and early/middle‑years credits requirements for specific subjects, including: math; physical or biological science; English or French; and history and/or geography.
(5) Key stakeholders, such as parents, post‑secondary educators outside the faculties of education and business partners were not consulted about the changes.
(6) The removal of subject‑specific requirements undermines the educational quality in Manitoba schools by permitting teachers to enter the classroom without sufficient training in core academic areas, thereby compromising the education that Manitoba students receive.
We petition the Legislative Assembly–sorry–We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
(1) To urge the Minister of Education and Early Childhood Learning to reverse recent amendments to the Teaching Certificates and Qualifications Regulation that weaken subject‑area requirements for teacher certification and to reinstate teachable majors and minors and early/middle-years requirements which are essential for ensuring teachers have strong knowledge in core subject areas.
(2) To urge the provincial government to address teacher shortages through alternative measures that uphold rigorous subject-area standards, which are critical–which are to address teacher shortages through advance–through alternative measures and uphold rigorous subject-area standards, which are critical for providing quality education to all Manitobans.
Honourable Speaker, this petition was signed by Esther Nikkel, Lorrie Brubacher, Sandra Zopata and many, many, many other Manitobans.
Introduction of Guests
The Speaker: Order, please.
We have, seated in the public gallery 15 grade 9 students and their parents, caregivers or sponsors on a tour for take your kids to work day.
And we welcome you here today.
Mr. Derek Johnson (Interlake-Gimli): I wish to present the following petition.
To the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, the background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Reliable access to emergency services, including 911, is a fundamental public safety, necessary can mean the difference between life and death.
(2) On March 23, 2025, a resident in the rural municipality of Fisher tragically passed away after family and friends were unable to reach 911 despite making numerous attempts, due to an internal 911 routing malfunction at a major cell provider.
(3) During the emergency, loved ones attempted to provide CPR while frantically trying to connect with emergency medical services, ultimately only reaching help by contacting a local RCMP officer directly.
(4) The March 2025 tragedy is not an isolated incident, as there have been other reports of failed 911 cellular calls in neighbouring rural municipalities.
(5) In April 2024, the provincial government indicated that it was undertaking a review of 911 services, with a final report expected in the following months. In August of 2024, following another 911 service failure, a provincial representative repeated the same assurances previously made, but as of March 2025, no report has been released.
(7) Rural Manitobans continue to face challenges accessing emergency services due to unreliable cell service and gaps in the ability of some providers to connect to emergency telecommunications infrastructure, particularly in regions like the Interlake.
(8) The 911 'dispash'–dispatch centre serving rural and northern Manitoba, located in Brandon, was not made aware of the March 2025 service interruption, raising concerns about the lack of real‑time monitoring and co‑ordination between telecommunications providers and emergency response systems.
(9) Local officials, including representatives from the RM of Fisher, have previously raised concerns with the Province and the RCMP regarding the reliability of 911 services in rural areas, calling for immediate action.
(10) The public has a right to expect that 911 service will be accessible during an emergency regardless of location or mobile service provider.
(11) The provincial government must ensure that emergency communication systems are adequately staffed and resourced, particularly for rural and northern regions.
(12) Access to 911 must not be compromised by infrastructure failures of private service providers.
(13) Timely and transparent communication between telecommunications companies and emergency service providers is essential to protect public safety.
(14) Effective government oversight and accountability are necessary to ensure public confidence in emergency response systems.
(15) Failure to invest in resilient province‑wide emergency response systems and telecommunications infrastructure puts rural lives at risk and undermines public trust in essential services.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
(1) To urge the provincial government to investigate the 911 network failures that contributed to the March 2025 tragedy in the Interlake region and to publicize those findings.
(2) To urge the provincial government to work with municipalities, telecommunications providers and first responders to strengthen 911 reliability and ensure uninterrupted access to emergency services for all Manitobans, especially those living in rural and northern communities.
* (14:40)
This petition was signed by Dwayne Smith, Sharleen Miller, L. Bear and many, many other fine Manitobans.
Mrs. Kathleen Cook (Roblin): I wish to present the following petition.
And the background to this petition is as follows:
Phoenix School, a kindergarten to grade 5 school located in Headingley, has experienced consistent enrolment growth over the last several years. Enrolment is expected to reach 275 students in the next two years.
Because the school is now over capacity, the school division has had to install portable classrooms on site as of fall 2024.
For several consecutive years, the top capital priority of the St. James‑Assiniboia School Division has been the renovation and expansion of Phoenix School.
In 2022, the Phoenix School expansion and renovation project was approved to proceed to the design phase. The project included, among other amenities, a new gymnasium, two new classrooms, a multi-purpose room and room for 74 child‑care spaces.
In June 2024, the school division received notice from the provincial government that the project has been deferred. There is no guarantee if, or when, the project will move forward.
There are currently hundreds of children on a wait‑list for child care in Headingley. The daycare operator in Phoenix School has been told that they will continue to have space within the school for the 2024‑2025 school year only, that further expansion of child‑care space within the school is not possible and that space may be reduced moving forward due to the shortage of classrooms. If new space is not constructed as planned, many families may be left without child care.
It is critical that the expansion and renovation of Phoenix School proceed as planned in order to support the needs of students, teachers and families in the growing community of Headingley.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to proceed with the planned renovation and expansion of Phoenix School without further delay.
And this petition is signed by Lisa Barun, Rachel DeCorby, Trista McFadyen and many, many other Manitobans.
Mr. Trevor King (Lakeside): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
And the background to this petition is as follows:
(1) As part of ongoing strategic infrastructure investments to the provincial highway network, it was announced in August 2022 that almost $70 million would be spent on upgrades to provincial road PR 227.
(2) Over 72 kilometres of PR 227 were to be paved along with the repair or replacement of three bridges and multiple drainage works.
(3) Reeves, mayors, councillors and residents of the surrounding municipalities, cities, towns and villages were ecstatic and overwhelmingly supportive of this plan.
(4) The planned PR 227 was to connect Highway 16 with Highway No. 6, thus creating an alternative route to Highway No. 1.
(5) PR 227 was to be part of the Manitoba's trade and commerce grid initiative, an expanded grid of highways that can accommodate heavy commercial loading that will attract new industrial activity, reduce transportation costs and optimize supply chain efficiency, which will benefit all Manitobans.
Mr. Tyler Blashko, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair
(6) The 2023 multi-year infrastructure investment strategy is a five‑year, $4.1‑billion investment in Manitoba's roads, highways, bridges, airports and flood protection. The paving of PR 227 was part of this strategy.
(7) The Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure has cut PR 227 project, notwithstanding that the project appears in the multi-year infrastructure investment strategy and listed on the Manitoba Transportation and Infrastructure website as an active project.
(8) Additional keystone projects in the 2023 multi‑year infrastructure investment strategy were the Winnipeg One Million Perimeter Freeway Initiative, the Lake St. Martin and Lake Manitoba outlet channels and the twinning of the Trans‑Canada Highway to the Ontario border. The actions of the NDP government now bring into question whether any of these projects will be completed as planned.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
(1) To urge the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure to immediately restore funding to the PR 227 paving project.
(2) To urge the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure to commitment to Manitobans to carry out all of the projects as outlined in the 2023 multi-year infrastructure investment strategy in their totality, to the same scope and in accordance with already stated timelines.
Honourable Speaker, this petition has been signed by Sandra Keen, Martin Keen and George Hamilton and many, many, many other Manitobans.
Thank you.
Mr. Wayne Balcaen (Brandon West): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Kellie Verwey, a beloved young woman from Portage la Prairie, Manitoba, was tragically killed in a car crash caused by a repeat violent offender with a long criminal history.
(2) Despite repeated violations of his bail conditions, the offender was free to roam the streets and to ultimately claim Kellie's life. This tragedy was entirely preventable.
(3) While the Criminal Code falls under federal jurisdiction, provinces have been given the responsibility for the administration of justice, allowing for meaningful provincial action on bail reform to ensure public safety.
(4) Other provinces have taken proactive steps to strengthen bail enforcement, but Manitoba has not used all available tools to address this issue effectively.
(5) The provincial government has the ability and the responsibility to advocate for and implement measures that protect its citizens by ensuring that repeat violent offenders are not released into our communities without proper safeguards.
(6) Immediate action is required to close gaps in the justice system to allow–that allow dangerous criminals to remain free, which puts innocent Manitobans at risk.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
(1) To urge the provincial government to take immediate and decisive action on bail reform to address serious deficits in enforcement by utilizing all available provincial mechanisms to strengthen warrant enforcement, increasing bail supervision and opposing release of offenders, thus ensuring that repeat violent offenders are held accountable and that public safety is prioritized over leniency; and
* (14:50)
(2) To urge the provincial government to lobby the federal government to immediately repeal provisions of the Criminal Code that allow for continued victimization of law‑abiding Manitobans while granting repeat offenders additional rights.
And honourable Deputy Speaker, this petition was signed by Kevin Nelson, Larson Nelson, Kim Skoc and many, many other fine Manitobans.
MLA Jeff Bereza (Portage la Prairie): I wish to present the following petition.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Thanks to the investment made under the previous PC provincial government as part of the clinical and preventative services plan, construction for the new Portage regional health facility is well under way. The facility and surrounding community would greatly benefit from added diagnostic machinery and equipment, but specifically the addition of an MRI machine.
(2) An MRI machine is a non‑invasive medical imaging technique that uses a magnetic field and a computer‑generated radio waves to create detailed images of organs and tissues in the human body. It is used for disease detection, diagnosis and treatment monitoring.
(3) Portage la Prairie is centrally located in Manitoba and is on the No. 1 Highway in the Southern Health/Santé Sud Health Authority. Currently there is only one MRI machine in that RHA.
(4) An MRI machine located in Portage regional health facility will reduce transportation costs for patients as well as reduce the burden on stretcher service and ambulance use. It will bring care closer to home and reduce wait times for MRI scans across the province.
(5) Located around Portage la Prairie are the Dakota Tipi, Dakota Plains, Sandy Bay and Long Plain First Nations reserves. Indigenous peoples in Canada disproportionately face barriers in access to services and medical care. An MRI machine located in the Portage regional health facility will bring care closer to their home communities and provide greater access to diagnostic testing.
(6) Located in close proximity to the new Portage regional health facility is the Southport airport. This aerodrome has a runway length that is more than adequate to support medical air ambulance services. This would provide the opportunity to transport patients by air from remote communities to access MRI imaging services.
(7) The average wait time for Manitobans to receive an MRI scan is currently six to eight months. Having an MRI machine in the Portage regional health facility will help reduce these wait times for patients and provide better care sooner.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to support the investment and placement of an MRI machine in Portage la–Portage regional health facility in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba.
This is signed by Richard Jones, Shirley Bodie, Cheryl Nickels and many, many more Manitobans.
Thank you, honourable Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Wayne Ewasko (Lac du Bonnet): It gives me a great pleasure to bring forward this petition today.
And the background to this petition to the Manitoba Assembly is as follows:
(1) The federal government has mandated a consumption‑based carbon tax, with the stated goal of financially pressuring Canadians to make decisions to reduce their carbon emissions.
(2) Manitoba Hydro estimates that even with a high‑efficiency furnace, the carbon tax is costing the average family over $200 annually, even more for those with older furnaces.
(3) Home heating in Manitoba is not a choice or a decision for Manitobans to make; it is a necessity of life, with an average of almost 200 days below 0°C annually.
(4) The federal government has selectively removed the carbon tax off of home heating oil in the Atlantic provinces of Canada, but has indicated they have no intention to provide the same relief to Manitobans heating their homes.
(5) Manitoba Hydro indicates that natural gas heating is one of the most affordable options available to Manitobans, and it can be cost prohibitive for households to replace their heating source.
(6) Premiers across Canada, including in the Atlantic provinces that benefit from this decision, have collectively sent a letter to the federal government, calling on it to extend the carbon tax exemption to all forms of home heating, with the exception of Manitoba.
(7) Manitoba is one of the only provincial jurisdictions to have not agreed with the stance that all Canadians' home heating bills should be exempt from the carbon tax.
(8) Provincial leadership in other jurisdictions have already committed to removing the federal carbon tax from home heating bills.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to remove the federal carbon tax on home heating bills for all Manitobans to provide them much‑needed relief.
Honourable Deputy Speaker, this petition is signed by Allen Hunnie, Ron Jennings, West Wiebe and many, many more fine Manitobans.
Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, and the background to the petition is as follows:
(1) Thanks to the investment made under the previous PC provincial government as part of the clinical preventative services plan, construction for the new Portage regional health facility is well under way. The facility and the surrounding community would greatly benefit from added diagnostic machinery and equipment, but specifically the addition of an MRI machine.
(2) An MRI machine is a non‑invasive medical imaging technique that uses a magnetic field and computer‑generated radio waves to create detailed images of organs and tissues in the human body. It is used for disease detection, diagnosis and treatment monitoring.
(3) Portage la Prairie is centrally located in Manitoba and is on the No. 1 Highway in Southern Health/Santé Sud Health Authority. Currently there is only one MRI machine in the RHA.
(4) An MRI machine located in the Portage regional health facility will reduce transportation costs for patients as well as reduce the burden on stretcher service and ambulance use. It will bring care closer to home and reduce wait times for MRI scans across the province.
* (15:00)
(5) Located around Portage la Prairie are the Dakota Tipi, Dakota Plains, Sandy Bay and Long Plain First Nations reserves. Indigenous peoples in Canada are disproportionately–or they disproportionately face barriers in access to services and medical care. An MRI machine located in the Portage regional health facility will bring care closer to their home communities and provide greater access to diagnostic testing.
(6) Located in close proximity to the new regional–the new Portage regional health facility is the Southport airport. This aerodrome has a runway length that is more than adequate to support medical air ambulance services. This would provide the opportunity to transport patients by air from more remote communities to access MRI imaging services.
The average wait times for Manitobans to receive an MRI scan is currently six to eight months. Having an MRI machine in the Portage regional health facility will reduce these wait times for patients and provide better care sooner.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to support the investment and the placement of an MRI machine in the Portage regional health facility in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba.
And, honourable Deputy Speaker, this petition is signed by Lydia Daniels, Tom Henry, Ron Smore [phonetic] and many other fine Manitobans.
Thank you.
Mr. Josh Guenter (Borderland): Honourable Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
These are the reasons for this petition:
(1) Persons struggling with mental health as their sole condition may access medical assistance in dying unless Parliament intervenes.
(2) Suicidality is often a symptom of mental illness, and suicide is the second leading cause of death for Canadians between the age of 10 and 19.
(3) There have been reports of the unsolicited introduction of medical assistance in dying to non‑seeking persons, including Canadian veterans, as a solution for their medical and mental health issues.
(4) Legal and medical experts are deeply concerned that permitting Canadians suffering from depression and other mental illnesses to access euthanasia would undermine suicide prevention efforts and risk normalizing suicide as a solution for those suffering from mental illness.
(5) The federal government is bound by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to advance and protect the life, liberty and security of its citizens.
(6) Manitobans consider it a priority to ensure that adequate supports are in place for the mental health of all Canadians; and
(7) Vulnerable Manitobans must be given suicide prevention counselling instead of suicide assistance.
(8) The federal government should focus on increasing mental health supports to provinces and improve access to these supports, instead of offering medical assistance in dying for those with mental illness.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
(1) To urge the provincial government to lobby the federal government to stop the expansion of medical assistance in dying to those for whom mental illness is the sole condition; and
(2) To urge the provincial government to lobby the federal government to protect Canadians struggling with mental illness by facilitating treatment, recovery and medical assistance in living, not death.
This petition has been signed by Barb Adair, Mary Reimer, Judy Peters and many, many Manitobans.
Mrs. Carrie Hiebert (Morden-Winkler): Honourable Speaker, I wish to present the following petition.
To the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, the background to this petition is as follows:
(1) The Province of Manitoba has filed paperwork with the federal government proposing the establishment of a drug injection site for illegal drugs at 200 Disraeli Fwy. without sufficient public consultation.
(2) The decision to locate the facility at 200 Disraeli was made despite the site is located in the immediate vicinity of a daycare centre, a high school, a multiple community gathering sites, including churches and cultural institutions.
(3) Residents, business owners and community organizations have raised concerns that the location is incompatible with nearby institutions serving thousands of youths and families, and believe it will erode public safety and confidence in the area.
(4) Existing community consultations specifically ignored concerns about public safety and were criticized by community members for being artificial and scripted.
(5) Provincial government has failed to introduce legislation and regulations to control where drug injection sites can be located.
(6) Other provinces are closing drug injection sites and adopting a recovery model, following the expertise of groups such as Canadian centre for recovery excellence.
(7) This decision to ignore the experts will leave people suspended in addiction and will not give Manitobans their lives or their loved ones back.
(8) The provincial government has failed to fund and operate any treatment or additional rapid access to addictions medication clinics to break the cycle.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
(1) To urge the provincial government to cancel drug injection sites in the Point Douglas community, including the proposed location at 200 Disraeli Fwy.
(2) To urge the provincial government to legislate that no further sites will be proposed without community support.
This petition has been signed by Paul Regrias [phonetic], Archdalie Souris [phonetic] and Pisa Maria Soren [phonetic] and many, many other Manitobans.
Mr. Konrad Narth (La Vérendrye): I wish to present the following petition.
To the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, the background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Provincial Road 210, PR 210, is a 117.3 kilometre–72.8 mile–highway in the Eastman region of Manitoba that connects the towns and communities of Woodridge, Marchand, La Broquerie, Ste. Anne, Landmark, Linden, Île des Chênes and St. Adolphe.
(2) A significant portion of PR 210 also runs through the constituency of La Vérendrye.
(3) PR 210 is a significant commuting route for Eastman families and is also notably used for those in the agriculture, tourism, trade and commerce industries.
(4) The condition of PR 210 from Woodridge to Highway 12 is in an unacceptable state of disrepair.
(5) The planned pavement upgrade was promised more than 20 years ago when it was constructed with a flat surface suitable for pavement but has yet to be completed.
(6) The condition of PR 210 from Woodridge to Highway 12 is in such bad shape that firefighters, police and paramedic services are severely delayed when responding to emergencies.
(7) The Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure as well as the Premier have a duty to respond to infrastructure needs identified by rural communities.
* (15:10)
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
(1) To urge the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure to prioritize the reconstruction of Provincial Road 210.
(2) To urge the provincial government to include the stretch of Provincial Road 210 from Woodridge to Highway 12 in its reconstruction plans.
This petition has been signed by Rachelle Edmunds, Melanie Sawatzky, Curtis Funk and many, many other Manitobans.
The Deputy Speaker: No further–the honourable member for Spruce Woods.
Mrs. Colleen Robbins (Spruce Woods): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.
The background to this petition is as follows:
(1) Provincial Trunk Highway 34 is a two‑lane provincial primary highway that runs from the US border where it meets from the ND 20 to the PTH 16 at the town of Gladstone.
(2) PTH 34 runs north‑south in the south-central region of the province. It is the main highway for the towns of Crystal City, Pilot Mound and Holland, serving as a main corridor for semi‑trailers, farm equipment, daily drivers and local school bus routes.
(3) A new bridge is currently be constructed over the Assiniboine River at PTH 34 north of Holland, in the RM of Victoria. The bridge serves as an important north‑south link over the Assiniboine River between Trans‑Canada Highway and PTH 2.
(4) The deterioration of PTH 34 has raised major concerns due to its narrow shoulders and numerous deep potholes that pose serious safety risks considering farmers often need to use this highway to transport heavy equipment.
(5) Construction of a new bridge in accordance current design codes and the RTAC standard, located on the PTH 34 crossing the Assiniboine River, will support trade and commerce and improve public safety in the area, and also accommodate flood events on the Assiniboine River.
We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:
To urge the provincial government to address the conditions of Provincial Trunk Highway 34, making the necessary upgrades to RTAC standard and to reassure the road once the new bridge has been completed.
This has been signed by Christine Froese, Bill Voris, Stephen Harbichuk [phonetic] and many, many more Manitobans.
The Deputy Speaker: No further petitions? Grievances?
Hon. Nahanni Fontaine (Government House Leader): Can you please call for third reading and concurrence Bill 48, The Protective Detention and Care of Intoxicated Persons Act.
The Deputy Speaker: We will now move on to concurrence and third reading of Bill 48, The Protective Detention and Care of Intoxicated Persons Act.
Hon. Nahanni Fontaine (Acting Minister of Housing, Addictions and Homelessness): I move, seconded by the Minister for Advanced Education and Training, that Bill 48, The Protective Detention and Care of Intoxicated Persons Act–sorry, where's my glasses? Apologize. Sorry, Deputy Speaker–reported from the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development, be concurred in and be now read for a third time and passed.
Motion presented.
Hon. Nahanni Fontaine (Minister of Families): Manitoba, like other provinces and territories, is facing a substance use and addictions crisis.
The existing Intoxicated Persons Detention Act was drafted decades ago, and its intent was to provide an alternative to detention in the justice system for people intoxicated by alcohol. While alcohol is still a significant addiction for many people, the landscape of substance use has dramatically changed and the current legislation is not sufficient to serve people intoxicated by substances other than alcohol, who are in–a danger to themselves or others.
The Speaker in the Chair
Repealing The Intoxicated Persons Detention Act and replacing it with The Protective Detention and Care of Intoxicated Persons Act would enable individuals who are under the influence of substances other than alcohol to be held in protective-care centres under medical supervision.
The member–the Minister for Housing, Addictions and Homelessness has heard from so many community members regarding meth use and other substances, and the need to provide a secure and safe place for Manitobans.
This act will broaden the care that can be provided to people who are under the influence, while individuals can still be taken to a detention sceptre for up to 24 hours, there is an option to take individuals into protective-care facilities for as long as they need to a maximum 72 hours.
I encourage members opposite to pass Bill 48 today.
MLA Jeff Bereza (Portage la Prairie): Here we are at third reading of Bill 48. Manitobans expect us to keep vulnerable people safe, to support the officers and health-care workers who serve on the front line and to ensure that compassion is expressed through competence.
We share that purpose. Where we differ from this government is in how it has handled the process, the haste and the unwillingness to listen when listening mattered most. But good intent alone cannot rescue bad process.
The NDP's attempt to present this bill as swift, decisive action has backfired because Manitobans see what has happened. Committee was cut short; amendments were ignored; regulations promised later and decisions made before the law even existed. The government is trying to sell haste as a substance.
We are in favour of protecting all Manitobans, especially those struggling with addictions, mental health crisis and homelessness. We want to see dignity, medical supervision and a bridge to recovery, but that can only happen when the government respects the careful, step-by-step legislative process that gives laws their legitimacy. Debate amendment and consultation are not irritations to be managed. They are the architecture of responsible government.
* (15:20)
Honourable Speaker, I want to read words from Hansard yesterday–
Introduction of Guests
The Speaker: Order, please.
If I could get the clock stopped for a minute. There's more guests in the gallery that we should recognize because they can't stay that long.
We have seated in the public gallery 15 grade 9 students and their parents, caregivers or sponsors on a tour for take your kids to work day, and we welcome you all here today.
* * *
MLA Bereza: Honourable Speaker, I want to read the words that we heard in Hansard yesterday from the minister from St. Johns: The minister responsible for addictions has lost several family members to overdose. And I know that members opposite think that that's funny, and so it's completely disingenuous and disrespectful for any single member to get up to question the commitment and dedication of the minister responsible who has lost members of her family to addiction.
And also: To imagine these members getting up in the Chamber and feigning, pretending like they actually care for Manitobans that are struggling with addictions and pretending that actually they care where they go. They don't care about these Manitobans. They just don't want them in their area. They don't care about these Manitobans, and that's what happens to them because if they did, they would finish all the amendment business.
Honourable Speaker, I want to apologize to all Manitobans that had to listen to that yesterday, and I want to say these words: You don't know me. You don't know other people out there. There is no reason for me or anyone else on this side to be put into a situation like that. There's addictions in probably a lot of the people that are dealing here with us today, and to be called out that I wasn't talking about this properly is inconsiderate.
To all of you Manitobans that are watching today: I am sorry that you had to listen to this. We just want you to be healthy, safe and happy. Addiction is nothing to be talked lightly about.
The irony, Honourable Speaker, is that the same government that claims to champion transparency did not even wait for this House to debate the bill before it started implementing it. The site for the first protective-care centre–or now as the Premier (Mr. Kinew) calls it, a sobriety centre–again, some of the questions we asked: What is a protective-care centre? Now the name is being changed, so I'm not sure who knows what it is.
This site for this first protective-care centre was purchased and renovations began before the legislation was even introduced, let alone passed. Public funds were being spent. Walls were being built and staff were being positioned before the law authorized the program even existed.
That's not leadership; that is contempt for the process. It sends a message that the decision was made long before Manitobans or their elected representatives could weigh in.
Three modest, practical amendments that came from testimony heard at committed–from people that were committed and stayed long into the night could have corrected the course. The first proposed a 500‑metre buffer between protective-care centres or sobriety centres or whatever this NDP government is now calling it. It should be away from a sensitive site such as schools, child-care centres, community halls, parks and personal-care homes.
The second amendment created an annual reporting requirement detailing admissions, repeat detentions, demographic data, injuries or death in the–and the kinds of care provided. Manitobans deserve to see whether this policy actually works. Data does not lie, and governments that fear data usually have a reason to fear the data.
The third amendment required a 45-day consultation period before any regulation is made or amended, plus a public meeting with the minister and a published community impact plan. That is the bare, bare minimum of transparency. It forces government to explain its decisions before they are finalized, not after the shovels have gone into the ground.
Rushing a bill of this magnitude carries consequences that cannot be undone with a press conference. Protective care is only protected if there is capacity. What happens when the centre is full? Does an officer keep an intoxicated person in a holding cell until the clock runs out? Does this sound like progress?
And what about rural Manitoba? We have heard nothing about how this will be rolled out in rural Manitoba. The–to think that we don't have issues with addiction in rural Manitoba is just wrong.
The bill also fails to address what happens after detention. This is what's missing. We're going to hold somebody in a meth-fuelled psychosis for 72 hours. The experts that we heard from are saying three to 10 days to come out of this psychosis. We're going to let them out the back door, let them buy drugs and let them back in the front door. This is going to be nothing more than a revolving door.
This bill also fails to address what happens after the detention. We should also learn from other provinces that have attempted similar reforms, where funding, staffing and treatment connections were strong. The results were positive. Where they were not is facilities became holding cells by a number–another name, which it looks like what these sobriety cells are going to be.
Manitoba has the opportunity to design a better system, but only, only if it listens. Legislation of this magnitude should not be driven by a political calendar. Every sentence we pass here affects real lives. That is why the process matters: consultation, debate and amendments are not niceties; they're differences between a law that works and one that fails.
A healthy government listens to differing opinions; they don't try and shut them down and tell them that we don't know about addictions. A healthy government listens to differing options; a fragile one suppresses them. The refusal to hear even–out even friendly voices shows insecurity, not confidence.
Behind every clause in this bill stands a person in crisis. Addiction and public intoxication are not abstractions; they are stories of pain, of poverty, trauma and illness.
* (15:30)
To the members on the other side: I have seen and felt that in my own families. They are faces we see in emergency rooms, on downtown streets and in small‑town detachment cells. Every Manitoban who ends up in a protective care is someone's family member. That reality deserves more than a political timeline. It deserves a law built on consultation, compassion, not on convenience.
Honourable Speaker, I want to thank you and thank this Chamber for giving me the opportunity to stand up over the last few days because this is very near and dear to my heart. We need to get this right. We need to help these people that are on these drugs and that are suffering and have nowhere else to go. We need to help these people that are suffering from mental health issues. We need to give them somewhere to go. Somewhere to go is not locking them up in a high‑security building that has four walls, a hose to hose down after they've been in there and only a little window that somebody watches them through.
Where are the mental health workers? Where are the psychiatrists? Where are the doctors? None of those questions were answered, Honourable Speaker.
Thank you so much for your time today.
Hon. Bernadette Smith (Minister of Housing, Addictions and Homelessness): The member from Portage la Prairie talks about–you know, he wants people to get safety, that he wants them to get healthy. Well, that's exactly what this bill does. It helps members of our society here in Manitoba get the supports that they need.
I don't know why members opposite are against that. Member–we've been working with health professionals who have said that this is the right model. And, in fact, in 2019, the illicit drug force–the drug task force that was under their government, their failed PC government–recommended this very model. They failed to do that. We're not failing to do that.
We're taking action. We're going to support Manitobans. We're going to make our communities safer. Something that they didn't do, we're going to get done.
This Bill 48 helps to get people the supports that they need. Medically trained staff will be at this protective‑care centre. This will help front‑line workers be freed up to do the work that they need to do. Our Premier (Mr. Kinew) has said this many times: our kids need to be able to go to school and feel safe. Our grandmas, our grandpas, our elders, even us as adults, we need to be able to walk the streets and be able to feel safe at night, to feel safe during the day when we leave our places of work.
But what's standing in the way? Members across the way are standing in the way of the safety of Manitobans. And I want to remind the members they have the opportunity today to support this bill, to help Manitobans get the supports that they need, to create a safer community in Manitoba by passing Bill 48.
This act will help broaden the care that can be provided to people who are under the influence of meth. And it's up to a max of 72 hours. This member, you know, somehow thinks that we're going to detain people for 72 hours. Right now under the act–this act has been in existence for decades.
We're modernizing it to what we're seeing today. It's only under alcohol. We're expanding it to include what we're seeing: meth, substances other than alcohol. This has been asked for for years under the former government, who put their fingers in their ears, you know, put their hands over their eyes, failed to listen. We're not taking that approach. We're listening to Manitobans. We want to create a safe community where people get the supports that they need in a compassionate way.
So it's up to 72 hours. Right now people go to Main Street Project; they're not always held for 24 hours. If after, you know, 12 hours they are deemed safe to be released, then they're released. This is the same model. No different. We're just expanding it to include other substances.
So I want to just, you know, mention the mayor. The City of Winnipeg is supporting this because he sees the value of keeping his city safe. Members opposite, again, are standing in the way of safety and security in our city, but, more importantly, getting people the supports that they need.
We've been continually putting more supports into the system to ensure that people are getting the supports–the addiction supports that they need, unlike members opposite, who, you know, turned a blind eye. The leader, yesterday, of opposition called members who were struggling with meth, meth heads.
How uncompassionate to look at folks that are struggling with substance use that way. These are somebody's loved ones. These are somebody's mothers, somebody's daughters, somebody's fathers, somebody's sons. They are struggling because of some root cause, and they need help and support. And we want to make sure that they're getting the compassionate care that they need.
The president of the firefighters, those that are on the front lines that represent over 1,600 members are supporting this. Members opposite, again, are standing in the way of helping them to do the job that they need to do.
So I implore members opposite to get on board, to help, you know, get these folks the supports that they need. This is life-saving work. We can't afford to lose any more lives in this province. We're losing up to 10 members a day that are overdosing in our province–570 people last year. We have an opportunity to do the right thing.
So I'm asking the members opposite to support this. Help members–help Manitobans get the supports they need; help, you know, front-line organizations do the work that they're meant to do; free up our hospitals; allow our police officers to get to the work that they're doing; help our communities to be safer.
And, you know, put your egos aside. This is a non-partisan issue. This is about community safety and helping to support those who are struggling and getting them the supports that they need.
Miigwech.
The Speaker: Order, please.
Introduction of Guests
The Speaker: Before recognizing any other speakers, we have some more guests in the gallery that are here: 15 grade 9 students, again as part of the take your kids to work day, and they're here with their parents and caregivers.
So, please, welcome them to the Chamber today.
* * *
Mr. Mark Wasyliw (Fort Garry): You know, I think this is actually going to go down in Manitoba political history as a rather dark day. Bill 48 is a huge step backwards for human rights in this province. The toxic drug crisis has gotten worse under this Premier (Mr. Kinew). Homelessness has gotten worse under this Premier.
But what Bill 48 does is it blames the victims. It puts the problem on Manitobans themselves who are struggling with addictions and mental health issues, as opposed to what's actually happening which is the failure of this government to act and to support Manitobans who are struggling.
We know that mental health and drug addiction go hand in hand with poverty, with unemployment, with a lack of opportunity, with lack of education; that these are health issues of despair, and people turn to drugs either to cope or to escape. That's on the government. But they've turned this around today, that they're trying to rebrand coercion into compassion.
This is not about treatment. And we know it's not about treatment because we just have to look into the act. And there's not one legal clause in the act that mandates medical treatment to detainees; that is not a legal requirement of this act. And whatever prison guard who's administering their act will be well within the legal rights to ignore their prisoners for 72 hours, and there's absolutely no check on government power and there's no redress–nobody.
If you are arrested for a crime, you have the right in this country to appear before a judge and plead your case why you should get released. You actually have less rights in this law. Even though you've committed no crime, you do not get to plead your case and go before a judge within 24 hours and say you have been wrongfully detained. You don't get to do that after 48 hours. In fact, you get no say at all.
* (15:40)
And if the police get it wrong, if you're acting funny because they don't understand somebody on the autism spectrum order and they're confusing some behaviour they're not familiar with and call it drug use, too bad for you. This bill prevents you from taking the government to account and suing the actual government.
So this isn't about treatment; this is about jail. We are not providing help for vulnerable people; we are locking them up without charge. It's humiliating, it's demeaning and it targets the most vulnerable Manitobans. It will overwhelmingly be used, as it currently is, against Indigenous Manitobans and vulnerable women. The poor, marginalized Manitobans will absolutely be abused by this law–because they currently are today–using the power and the violence of the state to hide away social problems that this government has no response for.
So members may not understand just how bad this is, but here's what happens. Somebody is in our community, they are struggling. And it may be a combination of mental health issues and they may be using drugs as self-medication to cope or to escape, and they're doing something weird. They haven't committed a crime. There's nothing that you can arrest them for, but they're in the community and somebody is scared of them, is uncomfortable with them and wants something to be done. So they call the police.
The police show up and they realize very quickly that there has been no crime committed, but the person, in fact, in their opinion is kind of strange and doing strange things. Well, they have now just been pulled off the street. They've been pulled off the street from investigating crime and doing their job for what essentially is a health issue. They have to do something, but the police don't have 'mony' tools. They're not mental health specialists. They don't have any training. They have absolutely no way to know if the person's intoxicated or not, and they certainly have no way to know whether the person is high on any sort of drugs, specifically meth or anything else.
So they have one tool. They can arrest that individual, again, somebody who has not committed any crime. And arresting somebody is a violent act because if you haven't committed crime, you may have a strong opinion about going with the police. You may protest that. You may resist it because you don't think it's valid or just. These are tense situations that escalate quickly and can lead to violence.
So once this person is now taken into police custody, they are handcuffed. They are handcuffed behind their back, which is excruciatingly uncomfortable and painful. They then get put into the back of a cramped police car, very little room, and they may be held in that position for 45 minutes to an hour until they get processed with their hands handcuffed behind their back. And, again, they've committed no crime.
They then get searched not only at the car and have their property taken away; they're going to have a second search when they get to the Bill 48 jail. And they're going to get stripped down to one layer of clothes. They're going to have their personal property, their cellphone, everything, removed from them, their shoes, their belt; they're down to one layer. They have lost agency. Unlike if you actually committed a crime, you could call a lawyer; you have that right. In this law, you don't have that right. You can't call anybody. Your family do not know what happened to you. There's no obligation for this jailer to call your family and tell them where you are.
You're then put into a solitary confinement cell. This is four concrete walls, a tiny metal, you know, window in a metal door, no–there's no windows or lights going into that cell. There'll be a camera in that cell and a toilet. There'll be a small, thin mattress on the ground, which you will be forced to live on and sleep on for the next 72 hours. You will not be given a blanket because when you put somebody in solitary confinement there is a high risk that they will harm themselves, including killing themselves. You can't give any extra fabric in those circumstances.
So for 72 hours, no matter what the temperature is or how cold it is outside, you're going to be sleeping on a thin little mattress on the floor without even a blanket. You will eat all your meals in that cell, feet away from a toilet. The lights are kept on for 24 hours a day in that cell because they're worried you're going to hurt yourself, so they have to watch you the whole time.
You have no privacy, including going to the bathroom, where all of that is recorded and kept on a police database. You are not let out of that cell for that 72 hours. There is no treatment that's occurring. You may not even be high on meth. Some police officer gets it wrong, but you don't get a say.
That's what this government wants to do to Manitobans. That's what this government and this Premier (Mr. Kinew) call treatment. That's not treatment; that's torture. Solitary confinement has been overused in Manitoba.
There is a lawsuit. The Province is getting sued currently. It is going to court in November because we have used solitary confinement way too much in Manitoba. In fact, we've had the children's advocate come out, say that there shouldn't be any solitary confinement for children and the practice should be banned.
Yet, in the Winnipeg Free Press last week, we have the minister of addictions and homeless saying she'd be perfectly fine having children stay at 190 Disraeli in solitary confinement for 72 hours under these conditions. That is blood lust. That is so ghoulish and concerning, that a member of the government would treat children like that and think it's okay to treat children in Manitoba like that.
Well, you know, BC thought that way too, and they just paid out a $60‑million settlement for abusing solitary confinement, and Manitoba is going to do the same with Bill 48.
These are not treatment facilities. We know from the medical experts that if somebody is suffering from mental health psychosis, putting them in solitary confinement is the absolute worst thing you can do. The federal government has banned the practice. They have put in new rules saying that at minimum federal prisoners have to be out of their cell for four hours a day and for two of those hours, they have to have meaningful contact with people outside their cells.
Well, this bill does the opposite. It's going to keep people who are struggling isolated and alone for 72 hours.
And, you know, I was talking–I was contacted by Dr. Simm. He's the former head of psychiatry from the Health Sciences Centre, who is absolutely appalled by this bill, absolutely against it. Nobody talked to the actual experts in mental health psychiatry. [interjection] Yes. And, yes, the transcript; I read that but my friend fairly pointed out that the government actually cut him off when he was trying to give evidence during committee.
And what he said was very interesting. He said that, you know, this is not how you treat people with psychosis and mental health issues, that it's actually quite dangerous to do this.
If you imagine the 20 cells that this government has already built, before this law even became a law, how loud and chaotic. There's going to be crying, screaming, banging on metal doors, people melting down and in crisis. Imagine how your mental health would be, sitting in the cell next to you a person who's crying out for help and pleading for somebody to please let them out.
How on earth is that helping their mental health? All of this is being done against people's will and consent. This is all about coercion and force. None of that is, you know, helpful when you're dealing with trauma and you're dealing with mental health issues.
In fact, Bill 48 is going to be a trauma-generating centre. People are going to be worse having experienced this than they were coming in.
* (15:50)
And, you know, people in the current system, the 24-hour system that we have right now, say, through lived experience, the whole thing from start to finish is humiliating. Not my words; it's their words. They describe this whole situation as humiliating.
If something is humiliating, it's not therapeutic and it's certainly not treatment. But, of course, this government refuses to listen.
This government heard from committee. They heard very clearly from committee that even people who were open to this idea felt that it was rushed, that there hadn't been the thought, the time and the consultation by this government. And I think that's pretty obvious; I think that's actually without dispute at this point.
But what they also were concerned about is that they didn't go to the community where they want to put this jail, and that was Point Douglas. And we heard loudly about that, that they never announced that this was coming, they spent millions of dollars, and they've been doing this for months, and then they just sprung this on Manitobans without giving them an opportunity to actually talk about it.
Why would you do that? If you were proud of this, if this was a good bill, if you think that this was in the best interests of your community, why wouldn't you be speaking and telling everybody about it? If this is so fantastic for Point Douglas, why wouldn't you go to the Point Douglas community and get their consent and get them to be part of this?
But they didn't do that because they knew that this would be the reaction. They knew that the public wouldn't want a jail in their neighbourhood, and Point Douglas has spoken very clearly about this.
You know, back to the cells. So you don't get four hours out of the cell. You don't even get two hours of meaningful human contact. The only way the Province is going to be able to afford this is there will–there'll be a paramedic on duty, and there'll be a prison guards–or, guards, and they'll be watching the 20 cells on monitors, and they'll be locked in there for that period of time. That's the only way, financially, that they can afford to keep an institution like this, and we know this because that's how 75 Martha is run.
Imagine not being allowed to bathe or shower for 72 hours. Imagine not being allowed to change your clothes for 72 hours. Imagine having no test to assess if you've sobered up. How are they going to determine this? They don't know what's in your system; they don't know what's wrong with you. So you're going to have a paramedic look at you and go, oh, well, you look good to me; you can go home.
What happens when you've detained somebody? What happens when you're detained when you haven't committed any crime? You've been forced into a police car, you've been forced into a cell, and you don't think you should be there. Are you going to be in a pleasant, happy, co‑operative mood, or are you going to protest?
And when you protest and claim for your freedom and say, hey, guys, you've made a mistake; I'm not on meth, can I go home now, and they say no, what's your reaction? Are you going to protest? Are you going to be angry? Are you going to be impolite to your prison guard? Well, the chances are–is yes.
And if you protest, if you stand up for yourself and you actually don't back down, does that make you high? Does that keep you longer in detention than you otherwise would be?
We know this is happening because it happens already. The Law Enforcement Review Agency of Manitoba has a whole category of complaints dedicated to The Intoxicated Persons Detention Act. They get their own filing cabinet, there's so many of these.
Many Manitobans have been claiming for years that they have been wrongfully held in the current 24‑hour holding cells of an Intoxicated Persons Detention Act facility. Imagine what that will be like at 72 hours, how many more complaints, how many more issues are going to be raised about that? But this government hasn't seemed concerned about that.
The Kinew government's obviously proven that it doesn't listen. It heard from witnesses in committee and has not changed the bill one iota. They haven't taken any of these neutral, independent recommendations and absorbed it. This is such terrible political theatre; it is such an arbitrary deadline, and this, sort of, you know, Dirty Harry–we've got to do this or the civilization we know as Manitoba is going to fall apart.
And, you know, and the issue is, is you know–[interjection]
The Speaker: Order.
Members don't need to be hollering back and forth across.
Mr. Wasyliw: So it's clear that they never spoke to any medical experts, like the former chief psychiatrist for Health Sciences Centre, because if they had, he would have told a very different story.
The expert at committee said, you know, peak meth use lasts about 12 hours. If somebody is in psychosis after that, you're dealing with a mental health issue, and the wrong place to put them is a jail cell. They need to be at the Health Sciences Centre psychiatric ward where they can do blood tests and actually find out what's in your body. They can do EKGs to see if your heart rate is elevated, because people can go into distress and go into cardiac arrest. There's a real risk to life and danger.
And these jails, facilities, will not be set up for it. These paramedics do not have that training. They will not have that speciality equipment. They won't be able to do the testing. They–all they have is, you know, their perception of what they think's going on, but they don't know scientifically.
And if somebody is forced against their will to withdraw, that puts them in an incredibly dangerous, precarious position. And you need a medical practitioner to monitor that person on their way down, and you may have to give them opiates or other drugs during that process in order to maintain their life.
This is an incredibly risky, dangerous medical situation, and this government is absolutely flippant about it. And the Health Sciences Centre says that's where you need to go. And, in fact, Dr. Simm says very clearly we don't need this law, and that we have a law under The Mental Health Act where if the scenario that the Premier's (Mr. Kinew) concerned about actually occurs, people–police officers–can take somebody who is having a psychotic break with drugs to the Health Sciences mental health unit and they can be involuntarily held there and get proper professional medical care because it is a medical crisis. That is not what Bill 48 does.
So Dr. Simm says we don't need Bill 48: it's actually the wrong approach, it's the wrong treatment at the wrong time with the wrong people; that we have a system in place; it's underfunded. This government has not put money into it. It hasn't built capacity, but they've given us Bill 48.
We know from the people of Point Douglas that they don't want this, and it's concerning that this government will not listen, will not take those concerns at all and have not modified their position at all. It's this condescending, belittling attitude that the Premier knows best and he knows what's best for the people of Point Douglas.
That is shameful. That is absolutely, absolutely shameful. In fact, we heard from the people of Point Douglas because they came to meet with me in the Legislature, and they complained about meeting with the Premier and voicing their concerns about it, and that meeting did not go well. It did not. Surprise.
But the Premier was described as condescending and belittling and that he didn't take their concerns seriously. And, in fact, at one point in that meeting, told the people of Point Douglas–some of them had lived there for more than several decades–that they didn't represent the community. Can you imagine? But, apparently, the Premier did, and that's the hypocrisy of this law.
* (16:00)
You do not see the Premier volunteering the lot next to his Crescentwood mansion to put this centre. But it's okay to put it in somebody else's neighbourhood without their consent, without their input. That is wrong.
The people of Point Douglas deserve a safe neighbourhood. They deserve to feel like they can go to a park and not have to deal with all of Manitoba's social problems. And we've seen this government have treated Point Douglas as a dumping ground. For every single problem that we have in Manitoba: well, whatever, just put it in Point Douglas, whatever social service, you know, who cares what they think.
Well, they've said, we had enough; we've done our share; we've done more than our share in Manitoba. And it's time to spread the burden of our social problems on other communities. In fact, the Deputy House Leader, in his response during the amendments, said that this government specifically picked Point Douglas because of the social needs there. So this neighbourhood was targeted by this government to be used as a dumping zone, as a sacrifice zone where they don't care about this community and the people in it who want to have a safe community.
And what is so delusional about this bill is that it doesn't accept that what we know from, you know, these centres being elsewhere in Canada, that there are collateral consequences to having them in your neighbourhood. They become hubs. You've now just take some of the worst addicts in your community and you've centralized them. Well, who follows the addicts? The drug dealers, because that's where their business is. So they've now come into your community.
So you've now taken a–somebody who's struggling with both mental health issues and drugs and you've forced them to sober up as best as they could within 72 hours. They didn't want to do it. They didn't consent to it. And when they get out, they are drug sick. They are feeling the effects of toxic drug withdrawal. And to them, it's medicine. To them, they're desperate; they need to maintain their addictions.
And they may not have any resources, having spent 72 hours in custody. So when they get out, they are desperate, and they need money to give money to the drug dealers to give–get drugs so that they can feed the withdrawal and stop the pain.
And the people of Point Douglas know this very well because they're living with it right now. And what happens when you don't have the money? You go into somebody's backyard and steal something or into their house and steal something, or worse. And I heard many horrible stories about robberies and strong‑arm muggings in Point Douglas affecting young people and children because you have a whole group of very, very desperate Manitobans who this government has completely ignored and left behind who will do whatever they have to do to survive and worry about the consequences later.
Imagine inviting that type of desperation into your community. Imagine having to live with that type of chaos in your community. Imagine coming to the Legislature and speaking to a government you voted for, that you put in office, and saying, we need help. And the Premier (Mr. Kinew) turns around and says, you don't represent the community and I know better. And no help comes.
This is a community that has done more than its fair share. It has been struggling. And there is no safety plan. There's no extra resources that have been put in place to support these people. They were telling me that they can't even go to the local park anymore because when they take their children to the local park, there is always somebody there shooting up on the picnic bench.
Nobody in this Chamber–nobody–would subject their family to that. So why is this government asking the people of Point Douglas to do it? And when they come to this government and ask them for action, why are they talking down to them? Why are they belittling them? Why won't they listen to them? I don't think it's much to ask.
And we're talking about people who are on the front lines of this crisis who will routinely allow people who are homeless into their homes to use showers, to feed them, to help them. These are some of the most compassionate people I have ever, ever met, and they are struggling with this burden, and they do it alone without any help from this government.
You know, this government says that the police somehow are going to save resources; we're going to save hospital beds. Well there's a law right now for 24 hours. So if they're not using it with the 24‑hour law, why would we assume that they would use it for 72 hours? So that argument makes absolutely no sense.
This has not been guided by health‑care professionals, as we've seen from Dr. Simm. And the last most troubling aspect about this whole bill, which I really think that the government has to look deeply about this, it is absolutely the last reserve of scandals–or of scoundrels, sorry, to use fear. And we've heard that all week long from this government and specifically this Premier: fear, fear, fear. If you don't do this, the world's going to fall apart; grandmother's not safe; the little toddler isn't safe; the machete‑wielding bad guys are out there.
That's a premier talking, trying to build up fear in our community, to pass a very cynical law that doesn't do what he wants it to do. If this law was good, you wouldn't have to scare people into it. And, of course, if somebody is waving a machete in front of grandmother, that's a crime. We have laws for that. We have police that actually do know what they're doing when it comes to that scenario. That's not what this law is going to be used for. That's not how it's going to be effected.
We know from the women's centre that this is disproportionately going to affect women; that they are scared to go to Manitoba shelters because they may get interfered there, so they live homeless and they take meth to quash the pain of hunger and also to stay up to stay safe.
So we know that vulnerable women are going to be disproportionately housed in this facility. We know Indigenous and BIPOC Manitobans will be disproportionately housed in this facility. When we talk about systemic racism, this is going to be exhibit No. 1.
I urge my former colleagues, that if you were in opposition, you would be 'vehently' opposed to this bill and your values shouldn't have changed that much.
Thank you, Honourable Speaker.
Mr. Obby Khan (Leader of the Official Opposition): It gives me great pleasure and honour to stand in this House today and debate such an important bill before this province.
Really, when we look at what Bill 48–it speaks to the future of our communities, of our families, of our children, of our schools, of our daycares, care homes and the very fabric of what we deem society should be.
On this side of the House–your PC MLAs and the member from Fort Garry, who's not a PC MLA, the member from Tyndall Park–all believe that Manitobans should have a say in the future of their province. We all believe that consultation is important when it comes to legislation. When it comes to making big decisions that shape the future of our province, we have to have consultation.
I think everyone listening at home, and even members opposite would agree; you have to have consultation. You can't argue with that, right? And I see nods of agreement. Everyone agrees that we should have consultation. Okay, we agree that when something's important, that you have to have consultation.
Now, what about accountability and transparency? Honourable Speaker, we have seen over and over again that this NDP government and this Premier refuse to answer any questions. They don't want to be accountable to anyone; this Premier especially.
Now when it comes to Bill 48, questions were brought forward and no answers. They are scared of what the answer will be because they know their truth, and the truth is that there are major problems in Bill 48: accountability, transparency, consultation. I'll come back to those points on the importance of what it means within Bill 48.
* (16:10)
And Bill 48 is about protecting our communities, it's about helping Manitoba thrive. It's about helping people that are going through the drug addictions, mental health crisis, meth crisis–it's about helping them get out of this vicious cycle.
I think we all agree that that's what we want as a society. Whether you are a Progressive Conservative, a Liberal, a freed soul who has left the NDP party or if you're the NDP, we would all fundamentally agree: this is what we want as a society. And yet, Bill 48 fails to deal with every one of these principles.
Now, on this side of the House, we will also agree that Bill 48 is important. The intent of what Bill 48 was, I believe, originally designed to do is important; that supporting and protecting communities, helping people in crisis–that is what the intent was portrayed as, but the very reality is something completely different.
It is a bill that has been forced through. It is a bill where this failed Government House Leader, the Minister of Families (MLA Fontaine), missed the deadline. Once again, a failure by the NDP. If this was such a crisis that the NDP deem, why did they not bring this bill forward by the specified bill deadline? Another miss. Just like this Minister of Families missed the bill on interprovincial trade barriers, they also missed this one. Another failure–repeated failures–but they missed it.
Then they introduced Bill 48 and said: We have to get it done by November 1 and we don't want consultation, which they all agreed we should have consultation. I'll ask them about accountability and transparency and they're all nodding their heads, so they all agree that they should have accountability and transparency. And yet, they didn't want it. They want to force it through. It doesn't make any sense.
It literally blows your mind to think that a government, that a failed Government House Leader, the Minister of Families who's responsible for protecting families doesn't want to do the very job that she is–well, the Premier (Mr. Kinew) believes it's her right. On this side of the House, we believe it's a privilege to serve in here. It's an honour. It's a duty. And yet, this minister believes it's her right to be here. It's also your duty to protect children and families and communities. This bill fails at every one of those responsibilities.
So because this failed Government House Leader missed the deadline, because they missed the specified bill deadline, once again, they are saying: We have to get this through. We don't want consultation, say the NDP. We don't want accountability and transparency, again by the NDP. We want to block Manitobans from coming to speak on the very legislation that's about to shape the future of this province. This NDP wants to block it all. It literally blows my mind when they talk about wanting to protect our communities and they don't want to get to those basics.
When you look at the core of what we're dealing with, is in this society, lots of issues: unemployment–and I won't go too far off because I know I must stay focused on Bill 48. We can talk about our economy, we can talk about immigration, we can talk about small businesses–and the NDP is failing on every single one of those fronts. But when it comes to our societal fabric, about helping Manitobans, about making our community better, this NDP government has failed and they're failing miserably.
Manitobans wanted to come forward and speak to Bill 48 at committee. They came for over six hours. They came for over six hours to speak about this legislation. Valid concerns.
And what did this NDP government do shamefully, Honourable Speaker? They cut them off. People were cut off at committee. The member from Kildonan-River East said, no; no, you can't talk anymore, I'm going to silence you. This is your NDP government. This is what Manitobans have to look forward for, next two years.
People were silenced under this–so Manitobans came, they wanted to speak for six hours and longer about issues within this bill. And there is people that supported the bill, Honourable Speaker, and there are people that didn't support the bill. But both of them had very valid concerns about the bill itself. Even people that supported it said: Hey, we support this, we support the idea, the concept of it, the intent–like we have said on this side of the House–but we have some concerns. And there are people that came forward that says we don't support this at all.
Whatever their reasoning was, it's valid. And for this government to silence them, to say, no, you can't speak anymore, to try to ram this through without proper debate, with the tools of fear mongering, with the tools of spreading misinformation to the public, with the tools of saying so‑and‑so are blocking it, they're delaying it. They don't want to vote on this.
We are prepared to vote on this. But the truth has to be said for the record, and the record is this failed Government House Leader (MLA Fontaine) missed the deadline and tried to jam it through without consultation. That is the reality of where we're at.
So when Manitobans came, they had lots of concerns. We were able to boil it down to three major amendments for this bill. Now, anybody at home that has a family, lives in a community, will say, we want to do what's best for our community. We want to protect our community. We want to protect our kids, we want to protect our families, seniors, daycares, all of the above. Okay. We agree, again, NDP, that we want to–okay, they're nodding again; they agree.
And we agree that there should be a–probably a safe distance that we have to maintain to keep some safety. I think that would be fair. Someone's a repeat violent offender, probably not going to go, you know, watch a movie with them right away, get them into rehab treatment, et cetera. But when it comes to this specific issue of people who are in meth psychosis, people who are overdosing on drugs, this NDP government believes it's okay to have it right in front of a school.
Actually, the legislation goes as far to say–actually doesn't say that they cannot put it within a school; legislation doesn't say that. They could open a–what they're calling a protective‑care unit, a detention centre, a cell block, a solitary confinement, a torture chamber with no windows, one door, they'll be locked up inside there for an additional 48 hours. They believe that could open right across the street from a school. The legislation does not say it can't.
So when we said–and members–people in Manitoba came out and said we need to put in a distance, something, what did the NDP say? No, no, we don't believe in distance. If somebody wants to–if we want to open a detention unit right across the street from your house, we can do it–across from a school, in a school. Manitobans said there has to be a distance. We agreed on this side of the House. Do members opposite agree? No. They're nodding their head no.
Shameful. They don't believe there should be any distance. Manitobans suggested 500 metres. We looked at that: 100 metres, 200, 500, 1,000 metres, kilometres. Five hundred metres was what we deemed to be reasonable, Manitobans thought was reasonable. What did the NDP–and, again, the intent of the bill, we support the intent of the bill. We want to discuss the legitimacy of this bill.
Honourable Speaker, 500 metres was brought forward and what did the NDP do? They voted it down. They said no. No, we don't believe in having a safe distance. The NDP said, with their vote against the amendment, that they are okay with opening a protective-care unit, a 72‑hour detention centre, a sobering site right across the street from your kids' school. That's the reality. We said, just change it. They said, we'll never do it.
Okay. I mean, we don't believe you: No. 1, you've broken every single promise you campaigned on. Worst economy, worst health care, more crime, more drugs, failing Premier (Mr. Kinew), then go on and on. I want to stay focused on Bill 48. They said no. I–like I just–it blows my mind.
I understand there's politics, I understand there's different sides in here in the Chamber, but we're all for Manitoba, are we not? We all want a–it blows my mind that the member across the way, that the member from Transcona can sit there and say, I don't believe we should have a safe distance.
In Transcona, by the member not voting, is saying, I support a protective‑care unit going across the street from a school, from a community centre. We'll see how that plays out on the campaign door for the member for Transcona (MLA Corbett), the member for Lagimodière (Mr. Blashko)–community centres, families, parks–the member for Lagimodière for their silence. Actually, sorry, not their silence, apologize. They voted no. They said no.
* (16:20)
No, there is no safe distance. We believe they should open up across the street if they want to. There are serious problems when it comes to the common sense, the integrity, the intelligence of members opposite. To think that you could open that up across the street from a school and then vote publicly blows my mind.
Honourable Speaker, if you look at Manitobans, we suggested 500 metres. If you look within the landscape of the province of Manitoba right now, and you look at schools and you go from one edge of the property of a school to the other edge of the property of a school, any idea how far that is? Is it greater or less than 500 metres? Is there the possibility that that could be 500 metres or larger? The answer is yes.
So, from one edge of the school to the other edge of the school could be 500 metres. Even with our proposal, you still could open one across the street. And they still voted against it. We had suggested from the property line of the school to 500 metres out has to be the distance; members said no.
Manitobans wanted this. The sites that this NDP government is going forward with want this. The Point Douglas residents want this distance–well, actually, they don't want it at all. Where it's going, they don't want it at all. And yet they're proceeding forward with it.
I'm not struggling for words to say, but it's just–it absolutely floors me on this side of the House that they believe that that is okay. Point Douglas residents do not want this. This Premier (Mr. Kinew), this NDP government, this member from Fort Richmond, from Waverley, from McPhillips, from Tuxedo, from Kirkfield Park, from St. Boniface, from Radisson, from Kildonan-River East, from Burrows, from Thompson, from Seine River and from Flin Flon–no, I take that last one out. Apologize, Honourable Speaker. Retract Flin Flon from that statement–Transcona, all believe it's okay to go in your neighbourhood.
Every one of those members thinks it's okay for you to have a protective‑care unit in their neighbourhood across from a school, in a school, across from a care home, a senior home, community centre, by them voting against the first amendment we brought in.
Amendments are brought forward; this is the process. Somebody has an idea. You're sitting around the dinner table. Someone has an idea. You say, oh, that's a great idea. But what if we changed it to this, this. You know what, that's great input. Let's change it; let's make this better. Let's do this on the weekend. That's a change to the plan. Now you have a better plan going forward.
That's what an amendment is. It's not a delay tactic. It is common sense suggestions that people bring forward, that Manitobans brought forward, for us to discuss in this House, and what does the NDP do? Fear monger; mislead Manitobans, saying it's delaying. It's not delaying; it's common sense to say you don't want a protective‑care unit across the street from your child's school.
But yet every one of these members across the way thinks it's okay. Every one of these members voted against that common sense amendment. Amendments are part of the legislative process, just like introducing bills by a certain deadline is part of the legislative process. Just like the failed Government House Leader, the Minister of Families (MLA Fontaine), missed that deadline, and because of their inability to do their job, we are now forced into this situation.
The residents from Point Douglas don't want this. They came to the Legislature. Numerous times I met with them here, and they say, member from Fort Whyte, we do not want this. We are trying to meet with the Premier. We met with him; he was dismissive. He was rude. He was condescending. He was arrogant. He was not listening to us. We are begging and pleading the Premier. We do not want this in Point Douglas and the Premier will not listen.
They claim to be a listening government. Maybe it's in one ear, out the other ear. The residents from Point Douglas have come forward repeated times, said we don't want it. Yet this Premier is shoving it down their throat.
Does the Premier want it in his neighbourhood? I don't want this in Fort Whyte. I tell the members–I tell all the residents in Fort Whyte, I will do everything in my power to make sure it doesn't come there, just like everyone on this side of the House will.
On that side of the House, let's recap it again. Member from Transcona, member from Lagimodière, member from Fort Richmond, Waverley, McPhillips, Tuxedo, Kirkfield Park, St. Boniface, Radisson, Kildonan‑River East, Burrows, Thompson, Seine River: every one of those members said you can put the protective-care unit, the detention centre, the rehab centre, their sobering centre, the place where you going to lock up meth heads who are going through meth psychosis, you can put in our neighbourhood.
That's what every one of those members said across that way. They want it there, inside a school, right in front of a school, inside a–if you don't believe me, you could read the legislation. If you don't believe what I'm saying, you can look it up, reach out to any one of us. We–don't take my word for it; I will send you the data; you make your–you make the decision for yourself. They're on the record, every one of them, voting for this in their neighbourhood.
Now, when you go to Point Douglas, the residents don't want it. They all want it in their neighbourhoods; maybe they should put it in theirs; we don't want it in ours. There has to be a better way forward. There has to be a way through. Compassion or empathy through helping, wanting to help the person going through meth psychosis and a drug overdose and a mental health crisis, not give them more drugs, not lock them up for 72 hours and then kick them out to the streets.
Honourable Speaker, going to back up again a little bit here. I have friends who've gone through this, so I can speak about this personally. Alcohol addiction: anyone at home, anyone that has someone who has alcohol addiction, they know that the only way to help that person is what? What is it? Get them off alcohol.
Organizations exist for this. Programs exist. They stop drinking. You don't give your loved one more alcohol. You don't say, hey, let's go to the liquor store and buy some more booze and get you liquored up and that'll get you off of it. You treat them with love, compassion, understanding. You meet them where they're at. You get them off of alcohol. That's the right thing to do. That's the compassionate thing to do.
I've had friends who have gone through that and I've helped them through that journey. That's the right process. Now, when you look at drugs and addictions and mental health, why is that any different? You have–you say, okay, we're going to give you more drugs or we're going to do everything in our power to get you off of drugs. The NDP's answer is give them more drugs. Give them more drugs: that's what the NDP say. You don't believe me? Well, what did they try before Bill 48? They tried to open a drug consumption site at 200 Disraeli highway, right beside 190 Disraeli highway. This was their plan.
The Premier (Mr. Kinew)–again, it goes back. And I started off with this on purpose; I talked about consultation, accountability, transparency and doing the right thing. So accountability and transparency was nowhere to be find on that side of the House. They wanted this to open at 200 Disraeli highway. They denied it. The minister denied it. The Premier denied it, and oops, what happened? It's filed in federal. The federal paperwork came through with an application to open a–not a treatment facility, not a recovery centre, a drug consumption site.
That was their first plan, was to do a drug consumption site at 200 Disraeli highway. Still in their plans to do a drug consumption site. Now they've sugared it up with Bill 48 and trying to rush it through because this failed Government House Leader (MLA Fontaine), who has repeatedly failed, repeatedly missed deadlines, repeatedly attacked Manitobans and then blocked Manitobans, refuses to take accountability for all of her failures with a Premier who has just as long a list of failures, refuses to take responsibility for missing the deadline.
* (16:30)
And now 200 Disraeli Hwy., because the residents from Point Douglas, because Manitobans spoke up and said, we do not want to give people drugs. The NDP said, oh, well, that's not what we were trying to do. We were actually trying to do Bill 48–[interjection]
An Honourable Member: It was the plumber's fault.
Mr. Khan: It was the plumber's fault; that's right. They blamed it on the plumber. They said the application was put in wrong. Got to watch out for those plumbers.
They then came up with Bill 48. Magically, the minister says we're going to pass this by November 1. When they missed the deadline, when it was rushed through–no consultation, no accountability, no transparency, no input from Manitobans, no consideration for families, for your kids–they put it through–they're trying to put it through.
So Manitobans are–spoke up again and said, we want to come speak to this; we want to have a say, so much so, that they're hiding from accountability and transparency that members don't even want to pay attention to what we're saying on this side of the House right now.
Manitobans came here for over six hours to speak about concerns about this bill, and they've ignored them.
You know what would be another way, Honourable Speaker, in the 21st century, is you would say, we have technology; we have computers. Why don't we let Manitobans have their say online? Make sense? That's how the process was done until this NDP government came into power.
EngageMB: used by the previous government; removed by the NDP. You can go online; you can have your say, 45 day–you can have your say on what's happening; you can voice your concerns. Yes, and the members say, what? They don't even know what's going on, on that side of the House. And they probably don't even know what EngageMB is.
They have no idea what's actually happening. It's concerning. EngageMB: come on, guys. Everyone in the province knows what this is. You have your say; you have your voice heard. They removed that process. Not only did they remove that process from online, they then tried to jam Bill 48 through, but Manitobans came and spoke. They said, we don't want this within 500 metres of our houses. NDP forced it through.
Another common sense amendment you would say is, okay, we have a bill that's going forward. I want to have a say in it, just like I think everybody in Manitoba would want a say in the future of this province. You would want to have 45‑day consultation: 45‑day consultation period so neighbourhoods where they're going to be located would have a say. Sounds very reasonable.
Hey, Samantha. Hey, Smoking Bob–making up Manitobans' names–we're going to put a 72‑hour drug detention unit across the street from your child's school, across from where you live, but you have no say. Ludicrous.
Smoking Bob, Samantha, Melissa, says: Hey, I should have a say in this; it's going in my neighbourhood. The member from Waverley believes that you should not have a say if this goes across the street from your house, if a drug consumption site–sorry–a protective‑care unit, they're calling it–a sobering site, as the Premier (Mr. Kinew) calls it–a detention unit is what it is, across the street from you in Waverley.
The member from Fort Whyte believes it's okay to go on Waverley. He voted against an amendment that said–[interjection]–the member from Waverley and Wolseley.
An Honourable Member: You said Fort Whyte.
Mr. Khan: Nope. Fort Whyte. Sorry, I retract. Not Fort Whyte. [inaudible] Member for Waverley (MLA Pankratz).
The member for Waverley believes it is okay, it is actually the right thing to do in legislation to open up a drug consumption site, a sobering site, a protective unit, where they will be housing meth psychosis individuals in Waverley, across the street from your house, maybe in your child's school or daycare. That's the reality of what it is.
Now, they say they're not going to do it. Change the legislation. They refuse to. Have consultation. They refuse to have consultation. These are regular things that Manitobans would have concerns with, and yet this NDP refuses to do it.
So they want to open this up. The member from Fort Richmond, from McPhillips, from Tuxedo, from Kirkfield Park, from St. Boniface, they want to open this up in your neighbourhood, in your neighbourhood where your MLA represents you.
And then, the Manitobans who are in there for 48 hours, when they get out–now, let's not forget that when you're also going through a meth psychosis, it lasts longer than three days. It can't–it most commonly lasts up to a week or two weeks. So you have someone who's getting out after three days; they're still going through meth psychosis–in your neighbourhood.
What do you think's going to happen to that neighbourhood? Who's going to come hang out there? Probably a drug dealer, someone who can benefit from your misery and the misery of your family and your children, to profit off of that, to sell them more drugs that now your child might be exposed to in the playground because they say it's okay to open it in a playground.
There are so many flaws in common sense when it comes to this legislation that the NDP just cannot get out of their own way and do what's best. We are not opposed to the intent of Bill 48. We want to make Bill 48 better. Having a distance of 500 metres away from your child's school is the right thing to do. Having consultations for 45 days is the right thing to do. And yet, they don't want it. Why? I'll get to the why after the third amendment.
The third amendment that we brought forward after listening to Manitobans, Honourable Speaker, was that you should have an annual report created. It makes sense. It might not make sense for members opposite; they've never had another job in their life so they don't know how this works.
In the real sector–real life–you have to have reports. They don't even want to be accountable here. You have to generate reports to be accountable so that we can know. Manitobans have a right to know how many people are being detained, what services are they being provided to get off of drugs and so on and so forth.
And this NDP government says no. Full stop. This NDP government doesn't want any accountability. No report for you.
Let's back that up again. Manitobans came forward and said we have lots of concerns. Here are the three major ones: protective distance from schools; 45 days' consulting; 60-day–or annual reporting. They said no, we don't want any of that. The arrogance. Said, why? The arrogance of this side, of this NDP government, all flows down from their toxic leader, as the member from Fort Garry and many others have commented on, have spewed to the roots of what this NDP party is.
Where you have normal, what I would think, rational members from that side of the House–the member from Waverley, I thought he was a rational guy. Now he says it's okay to open up a protective-care unit, a drug detention centre, a sobering site, across the street from your child's school. Can't deny it. He can make whatever TikTok videos he wants. He can't deny that. He can't deny that he voted–the member from Waverley, the member from Transcona, the member from Lagimodière, from Fort Richmond, from Waverley, from Tuxedo, Kirkfield Park, St. Boniface, Radisson, Kildonan-River East, Burrows, Thompson, Seine River, all voted in favour of having a protective-care unit or a sobering site or a drug detention unit in those communities.
Those are your MLAs. They voted for that in their community. They also said, we're okay having it within 500 metres of our child's school, or your child's school or across the street from a playground. We're actually also okay with not having to report anything to you as a Manitoban. We're not going to give you any annual reporting, and furthermore, you're going to have no say.
Those are the three amendments we brought forward. Three days we debated it. They refused. They said no. That's the legislative process, but what do these members do on the opposite side, Honourable Speaker? They say, you're delaying. You're letting more people out with machetes. No, the failed Minister of Justice (Mr. Wiebe) is letting people out with machetes. This failed Minister of Justice is letting pedophiles out. He's letting out people who are breaking–the ankle monitor program has 11 per cent success rate, and this failed Minister of Justice says that's a success.
They're the failures that are failing, and this bill is exactly what is reaped from their boss.
* (16:40)
On this side of the House, we're saying, let's bring reasonable amendments forward to make Manitoba better. Those members say it's okay for drug dealers to come to your community now, because that's what's going to happen, Honourable Speaker. There's no denying it. It's a sad reality of what we live in that people will benefit off of other people's misery.
Honourable Speaker, 72 hours is not enough time to get somebody off of drugs. Why not go longer? Why not look at a program? Why not look at a treatment plan? Why not look at getting them off of it instead of locking them in a cell and throwing away the key?
It was asked earlier today if the Premier (Mr. Kinew) would want this in his lovely neighbourhood on Wellington Crescent. Said no. Do you want–well, what if you were to be locked up for 72 hours? No. Sounds like a hypocrite to me. He doesn't want it in his neighbourhood, but he's okay putting it in your neighbourhood.
Why not, Premier? What are you hiding from Manitobans on this consultation period, on the reporting? What are you afraid of? What don't you want them to–Honourable Speaker–
An Honourable Member: Through the Chair.
Mr. Khan: –Honourable Speaker, through the Chair, I would ask the Premier: What is he afraid of?
So now we have to look at what's the plan. The plan under this half-baked NDP government is we're going to arrest people who have been intoxicated, high on meth for 24 hours. This is a–really, an appeal to the common sense of the other side, because I–no, maybe it's too much credit.
We're going to arrest someone for 40–24 hours and then we're going to move them into these sobering sites, these jail cells, these torture chambers, these solitary confinements for an additional 48 hours. We're going to strip them down, we're going to give them one layer of clothing, they're going to probably sleep on the floor or a one-inch mattress. We're going to lock them up, lights are on 24 hours a day, no showers, no communication with anyone else. We're going to lock you in a call.
And then we're just going to let you out after another 48 hours. What kind of plan is that? Not: we're to get your treatments, we're to help you with a program, we're going to get you off of drugs, we're going to do the right thing and help you, meet you where you're at to make you–help you become a contributing part of society.
This is what we should want for Manitobans, not keep them in this cycle of drug abuse. Come on, members opposite. You've got to see that there's holes in your plan. And we're just trying to make the plan better. But their arrogance, their hubris is so large that they believe in their soul that it's okay to have this across the street from a school, that it's okay to put this in the inner city where people are already going through homelessness and mental crisis and drug addictions.
They're already in this cycle and now they're going to continue to repeat this cycle because 72 hours is not enough time to get them off of this cycle. So they'll get out, they'll get back on more drugs, they'll get arrested, they'll go back for 24 hours, then they will go into protective-care unit, sobering site, detention centre for an additional 48 hours.
No plan. Just: this is what we're going to do. Member from Portage la Prairie asked serious, valid questions on–and this should come to anyone listening to this–okay, if that's their plan, how much is it going to cost? No answer.
Who's going to staff it? No answer. Who's going to transport from the 24-hour centre to the 48 hours afterwards? No answer. What service is going to provide that transportation? No answer. How much is that going to cost? No answer. What are they going to be fed? How are they going to be treated? What's the situation? No answer. What's going to happen afterwards, they get out? No answer. Who's going to provide the two medical assessments that are required, one within 24 hours, one from the 24 to 72 hours? No answer.
In the province of Manitoba, we are in a health crisis. We have the longest wait times in the history–longest median wait times in the history of this province under this NDP government. Let's not forget that they misled you by saying their No. 1 commitment is, we're going to fix their health-care system. Two years later, it's worse. Can't argue that; those are the facts.
HSC is greylisted now for three months. It's unsafe working condition because people are coming in off the streets with–that are high on drugs. So people are coming in off the street high on drugs, it's an unsafe working condition, they're in their meth psychosis, NDP answer? Let's give them more drugs. So they can do it again.
The sheer lack of common sense by members opposite is flooring. HSC three months is greylisted. Hospitals, ERs in rural Manitoba have been closed for days, weeks on end. People requiring emergency medical services cannot get it in their own communities. Let's think about that, Manitoba, let's boil it down to rural Manitoba. You have an emergency in your house, a family member, god forbid, heart attack, stroke, gets hurt. And they have to go to the ER. It's closed.
What does this Health Minister say, Honourable Speaker? Come to Winnipeg. Come to Winnipeg, really? That's your answer? And hold on, we're going to get you to come to Winnipeg, but no, no, you can't just see a doctor because our doctors and nurses are going to be treating people who are locked up in detention centres twice before they see you. This is the direction this NDP government wants to take.
Then they have the audacity to say that we are fear mongering on this side, it's–we're delaying. We don't want this to pass. We want a bill to pass that is going to do right for Manitobans. That is heading in the right direction, and they refuse to engage in that conversation. Oh, we'll change it later–no, you won't. We know you won't do it.
This failed Finance Minister who has driven this economy in this province to dead last in Canada at a 1.1 per cent GDP growth, dead last. When he brought forward their gas tax stunt, he didn't even understand the different types of fuel that Manitobans use. Dyed fuel, regular fuel, diesel, he had no idea–propane. He said people want to fill up their combine, they'll just pull up to the gas station and fill it up, is what the Minister of Finance (MLA Sala) said.
And the MLA from Portage la Prairie until midnight was here and they–at least he amended it to say what dyed fuel was. But this failing Premier (Mr. Kinew), this failing minister, member from Point Douglas–and let's not also forget Point Douglas residents: this is your MLA. This is your MLA, forcing this down your throat, saying I don't care what you have to say, we're going to do this.
This is your NDP government. This is the failing Minister of Housing, Addictions and Homelessness (Ms. Smith) that is forcing this down your throat. At least the failing Minister of Finance said, okay, you're right, we're going to change this, let's amend the bill. But this housing, addictions minister won't do it. The member from fort Point Douglas refuses to do it. And now they're forcing it into your community.
And not only is this Minister of Housing, Addictions and Homelessness forcing these detention centres, where people are going through meth psychosis, to be held in your neighbourhood, you don't have a say, you don't get a report.
The member for Transcona (MLA Corbett), the member for Lagimodière (Mr. Blashko), the member for Waverley (MLA Pankratz), the members for Fort Richmond (MLA Chen), McPhillips (MLA Devgan), Tuxedo (MLA Compton), Kirkfield Park (Mr. Oxenham), St. Boniface (MLA Loiselle), Radisson (MLA Dela Cruz), Kildonan-River East (Mrs. Schott), Burrows (Mr. Brar), Thompson (MLA Redhead) and Seine River (MLA Cross) all believe you have no say if they release people that are going through meth psychosis in your neighbourhood.
They all believe that there should be no boundary or distance from where they can open up a detention centre to your child's school. Honourable Speaker, it's concerning that this NDP government has forged so far ahead with this plan, and yet they refuse to listen to the experts. They refuse to listen to the people who are directly affected by this bill. They refuse to listen to common sense amendments that have been brought forward by this side of the House.
* (16:50)
Again, we on this side of the House support the intent of what Bill 48 is designed to do, but the execution as we have seen by this NDP government is a failure. The forward thought, the planning, the implementation, is a complete and utter disaster under this NDP government.
When you look at the state of our downtown core right now, when I go to watch a Sea Bears game or a Jets game with my son and he's hiding behind me, and I'm saying, what's wrong, son; why are you hiding behind; why are you hugging my leg; why are you hugging my arm? He goes, Dad, I'm afraid. What are you afraid of? He goes, well, I hear about–he's a good–he's a young kid–I'm afraid someone's going to steal my shoes, someone's going to attack us. I don't want to go–this is what Manitobans are saying–I don't want to go downtown.
Businesses are failing. Crime is running rampant. And this NDP government is proposing to open up a drug detention unit, sobering site, in downtown Winnipeg, in Point Douglas, when the members don't want it.
We recognize that work has to be done to make Manitoba and Winnipeg a better province, but it has to be done the right way. You cannot force through legislation without consultation, without being accountable. Under no circumstance is it okay to open up one of these centres across the street from a school. That's just the reality of where we're at. And yet they're going to force Bill 48 through because they have more votes.
Well, Manitoba, this is your time to realize what you've really elected: a government that will not listen to you, that will force legislation through, that doesn't care what you have to say, that thinks all of the things I mentioned is okay.
You have a choice going forward. You have a choice under a new PC Party, myself as the leader, who is committed to working for a better Manitoba, who is committed to listening to you, leading with empathy and kindness and respect, and understanding that helping somebody who is going through this mental health crisis, this drug addiction, this meth psychosis, the answer isn't to give you more drugs. The answer is to get you off of drugs, is to help you where you're at, to provide those services, to increase funding in a real way that's going to have real results; not a vicious cycle of arrest, drugs, reconsume, arrest.
It is shameful that the minister of housing and addictions, the MLA for Point Douglas, would think this is okay. The MLA for Point Douglas is telling you, residents of Point Douglas, I don't care what you have to say; you have no voice with me; I'm not going to listen to you. I'm going to force this through. I'm going to put this right in your community, right across the street from your kids' school, in the playground, by a care home. And you have no say.
The government, this Premier (Mr. Kinew), has treated this entire process as a nuance, as a delay. It's not a delay when you're getting it right. The devil's in the detail. You have to be willing to put the time and effort in, which is clearly shown over and over again that this government isn't willing to do that. Whether it's on economy or health care or agriculture or infrastructure, none of these things this government has talked about, none of the things they've promised, are coming through.
And now what they're promising you in Bill 48 is not the reality because they don't want to do the hard work. They want a big splashy announcement, which they did. They wanted to force it through, which they're doing now, without any of the hard work, without thinking of any of the questions that I've brought up, that members on this side of the House have brought up over and over and over again.
Honourable Speaker, the amendments brought forward are common sense. The violation of the trust that this NDP government has–now in their final stages–forcing–forcing–into Manitobans is wrong. There has to be accountability. There has to be checks and balances for everyone in this Chamber, for myself as a Leader of the Official Opposition, for the Premier, for Manitobans. And this government refuses. It's wrong. What they're doing is wrong by cutting Manitobans out from the process.
But at the end of the day, it's you, Manitobans, that have the say. At the end of the day, you can tell this Premier with your vote that him and his NDP government were wrong. You can tell him and every one of his members that the member from Transcona, Lagimodière, Fort Richmond, Waverley, McPhillips, Tuxedo, Kirkfield Park, St. Boniface, Radisson, Kildonan-River East, Burrows, Thompson, Seine River and Flin Flon are wrong. They are wrong for forcing this through–sorry, take Flin Flon out. Should I read the whole list again?
Honourable Speaker, plead for Manitobans. Like someone says, over and over again, when they show you who they are, believe them. They have showed you, Manitoba, that they don't care about you. They've showed you they don't want to listen to you, they don't respect you, they don't want consultation, they don't want accountability, they don't want transparency, and they showed you it's okay to open this up in front of your child's school, a daycare, a care home.
On this side of the House, we think that's wrong. On this side of the House, we will work and fight and defend your rights and protect your communities. You'll have your say with your voice in the upcoming next election.
Thank you, Honourable Speaker.
The Speaker: There are no other members wishing to speak?
Is the House ready for the question?
Some Honourable Members: Question.
The Speaker: The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 48, The Protective Detention and Care of Intoxicated Persons Act.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
An Honourable Member: No.
The Speaker: Did I hear a no?
I heard a no.
All those in the House–is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
An Honourable Member: No.
The Speaker: Okay, there was a no.
Voice Vote
The Speaker: All those in favour, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
The Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay.
An Honourable Member: Nay.
The Speaker: In my opinion, the Ayes have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. Derek Johnson (Official Opposition House Leader): I request a recorded vote, please, here, Honourable Speaker.
The Speaker: A recorded vote has been requested. Call in the members.
* (17:00)
Order, please.
The question before the House is concurrence and third reading of Bill 48, The Protective Detention and Care of Intoxicated Persons Act.
Division
A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Ayes
Asagwara, Balcaen, Bereza, Blashko, Brar, Bushie, Byram, Cable, Chen, Compton, Cook, Corbett, Cross, Dela Cruz, Devgan, Ewasko, Fontaine, Goertzen, Guenter, Hiebert, Johnson, Kennedy, Khan, Kinew, King, Kostyshyn, Lamoureux, Loiselle, Maloway, Marcelino, Moroz, Moses, Moyes, Narth, Naylor, Nesbitt, Oxenham, Pankratz, Piwniuk, Redhead, Robbins, Sala, Sandhu, Schmidt, Schott, Simard, Smith, Stone, Wharton, Wiebe, Wowchuk.
Nays
Wasyliw.
Clerk (Mr. Rick Yarish): Ayes 51, Nays 1.
The Speaker: The motion is accordingly passed.
* * *
The Speaker: And the hour being past 5 o'clock, we–House is adjourned and stands adjourned until 10 a.m. tomorrow.
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
Wednesday, November 5, 2025
CONTENTS
Remembrance Day and Indigenous Veterans Day
Royal Canadian Legion Fort Garry Branch
Temporary Detention of Intoxicated Individuals
Manitoba Crown-Indigenous Corporation
Change of Name for Child Sex Offenders
Economic Investment Opportunities in Federal Budget
Change of Name Amendment Act (2)
Temporary Detention of Intoxicated Individuals
Temporary Detention of Intoxicated Individuals
Arctic Gateway's Rail Line to Churchill
Local Infrastructure Investment in Federal Budget
911 Services in Rural Manitoba
Opposition to Releasing Repeat Offenders
MRI Machine for Portage Regional Health Facility
MRI Machine for Portage Regional Health Facility
Location of Safe Injection Sites
Concurrence and Third Readings
Bill 48–The Protective Detention and Care of Intoxicated Persons Act