LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Wednesday, November 26, 2025


The House met at 1:30 p.m.

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 and 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 and that Manitoba is 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.

Hon. Nahanni Fontaine (Government House Leader): On a point of order. I–

Point of Order

The Speaker: The Gov­ern­ment House Leader, on a point of order.

MLA Fontaine: I've just learned that it is our Clerk's 60th birthday today, so on behalf of our gov­ern­ment caucus and I'm sure everyone in the Chamber, we'd like to wish you a happy birthday.

The Speaker: I would just point out, the hon­our­able Gov­ern­ment House Leader did not have a point of order, but it was a nice point and happy birthday, Mr. The Clerk.

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

The Speaker: Intro­duction of bills? Com­mit­tee reports? Tabling of reports?

Ministerial Statements

Recog­nizing Colleen Lussier

Hon. Tracy Schmidt (Minister of Education and Early Childhood Learning): I rise today to recognize Colleen Lussier, an exceptional Manitoban and early childhood educator who has been awarded a Certificate of Achievement through the Prime Minister's Awards for Excellence in Early Childhood Education.

      This prestigious honour celebrates educators who demonstrate leadership, exemplary practices and a deep commitment to helping build the foundation children need to make the best possible start in their life.

      Colleen has been an early childhood educator for 19 years. She began her career in Winnipeg in 2006. She then moved and worked in northern communities where she became a director. In 2012, she returned to Winnipeg and has been at the YMCA‑YWCA ever since, working with children of all ages.

      Colleen's national recognition highlights her excep­tional work in outdoor education for young children, fostering exploration, resilience and a lifelong connec­tion to nature. At the YMCA‑YWCA Winnipeg's Building Blocks on Balmoral child-care centre, she brings creativity, compassion and expertise to create meaningful learning experiences that reflect the core values of early childhood pedagogy.

      Exceptional ECEs like Colleen are the reason why our government has worked hard to make sig­ni­fi­cant investments in early childhood education. That's why, earlier this year, our government announced the largest ever wage grid increase for ECEs in Manitoba's history. This invest­ment will help recognize the essen­tial service that ECEs provide, as well as help recruit and retain workers in the child-care sector, which is essential for Manitoba's growing economy.

      Honourable Speaker, I'm also proud to share with this House that this Friday evening, our government will be presenting the inaugural annual early child­hood education awards to deserving and dedicated ECEs just like Colleen so that ECEs across Manitoba have the op­por­tun­ity finally to be celebrated, honoured and thanked for their exceptional work.

      I want to extend my heartfelt congratulations to Colleen Lussier on behalf of the gov­ern­ment of Manitoba. Her contributions to the field of early childhood education are deeply ap­pre­ciated; her national recogni­tion is very well deserved.

      Thank you, merci, miigwech, Colleen. Colleen–it breaks my heart that she wasn't able to make it here today but I know that she's watching at home online, so I would like to invite all members of this House to join me in celebrating Colleen, her achievements and the impact she continues to make in the lives of children and families across our great province and, indeed, across our country.

      Thank you, Honourable Speaker.

Mrs. Carrie Hiebert (Morden-Winkler): It is my honour to rise today to recognize the extra­ordin­ary contributions of Manitoba's early childhood educators. These are professionals who–whose dedication, skill and heart shape the very foundation of our province's future: our children. These educators nurture curio­sity, build con­fi­dence and set children on a path toward lifelong learning and success. Their work strengthens families, supports com­mu­nities and helps ensure Manitobans–Manitoba remains a place where every child has the opportunity to thrive.

      Today, I am especially pleased to congratulate an individual whose leadership and vision exemplify the very best of this profession: Colleen Lussier, of the YMCA of Winnipeg Building Blocks on Balmoral centre program.

      Colleen's expertise has earned national recognition. She helped pilot Canada's Outdoor Play Strategy 2.0, and her centre was chosen as one of the eight–just eight land-based teaching hubs in the entire country. This is an achievement that speaks to her vision and credibility as a leader in early child­hood edu­ca­tion and learning. She is a trusted voice in land-based edu­ca­tion, and her work continues to shape the direction of early childhood programs across Manitoba and beyond.

      At the core of Colleen's philosophy is a profound respect for every child's unique strengths and needs. She believes in creating warm, home-like spaces where play is central and where learning emerges naturally through joy, curiosity and meaningful connection. Whether exploring the banks of the Assiniboine River, engaging with local history or participating in the outdoor learning program she leads, children in her care ex­per­ience rich, developmently grounded opportunities to learn and grow.

      Colleen had–also builds strong relationships with families through open communication, cultural learn­ing and community events. She launched the Gran-Friends program to build–to bridge gen­era­tions, pairing preschoolers with seniors for gardening, walks and shared activities that build empathy and community bonds. She speaks publicly on child-care policy, always championing stronger early childhood learning prac­tices for Manitoba families.

      Honourable Speaker, I am proud to acknowledge the outstanding work of early childhood educators across our province, and today we extend our heartfelt congratulations to Colleen Lussier. Her leadership, her compassion and her unwavering dedication are helping build stronger families–

* (13:40)

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

An Honourable Member: Leave.

The Speaker: Does the member have leave to finish her reply? [Agreed]

Mrs. Hiebert: –stronger communities and a brighter future for Manitoba's children.

      Thank you, Colleen.

Introduction of Guests

The Speaker: Prior to members' statements, there are some guests in the gallery I'd like to intro­duce.

      We have seated in the public gallery, from Université de Saint-Boniface, 40 students under the direction of Alexandre Brassard, and they are located in the con­stit­uency of the hon­our­able member for St. Boniface (MLA Loiselle). And we welcome you here today.

      Also seated in the public gallery, we have Jean‑Paul Molgat, from Whitehorse in the Yukon, and  he is the guest of the hon­our­able member for St. Boniface (MLA Loiselle). We welcome you here today.

Members' Statements

Audra's Sweet Delights

Hon. Mike Moyes (Minister of Environment and Climate Change): Today I'm proud to rise to shine a spotlight on an incredible small business in Riel: Audra's Sweet Delights, founded by the talented Audra Martin. This bakery, nestled in the Greendell Park Community Centre, is a local gem, offering cupcakes, cookies, custom cakes and more, each crafted with care and creativity.

      Audra's story is nothing short of inspiring. She discovered her love for baking at just 13 years old and turned that passion into a thriving business. Along the way, she faced challenges–living with type 1 diabetes and managing anxiety–but never let those obstacles stand in her way. Instead, she transformed them into fuel for her success.

      As one of her former teachers at Glenlawn Collegiate, I've watched Audra's journey first-hand. Her creativity was always evident, and today, it's the foundation of her business. She is also a proud graduate of the bakery and pastry arts program at the Louis Riel Arts and Tech Centre, a shining example of how vocational education empowers students and opens doors to real careers.

      Honourable Speaker, when we support local busi­ness such as Audra's Sweet Delights, we're doing more than buying baked goods; we're investing in a young entrepreneur who embodies resilience, passion and community spirit. I encourage everyone to visit her bakery, follow her online and help celebrate local talent.

      I'm thrilled Audra is here with us today, joined by her mother, Sandra, and brother, Deklen. Please join me in congratulating Audra and wishing her continued success as her business grows, because when we lift up local talent, we don't just build busi­nesses; we build stronger communities. Let's keep making life sweeter in Manitoba by supporting local.

      Thank you, Honourable Speaker.

Bredin Family Farm

Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield-Ritchot): As fall winds down and winter approaches, the community of Oakbank prepares for another Christmas season. This time of year often invites reflection and, this year, our community marks the end of a significant chapter in Oakbank's agricultural history.

      One particular farm's legacy stretches back to 1891, when Michael Ruttig, a newcomer from Germany, settled in the Oakbank area and began cultivating the land. Just a few years later, in 19–in 1895, he became one of the founding members of the Oakbank Baptist Church, a congregation his family is still deeply con­nected to today. The original farm spanned a sig­nificant portion of land between Vernon Road and Main Street, an area now home to residential neigh­bor­hoods, schools and commercial developments.

      As Michael aged, he passed the farm to his daughter, who married into the Wilde family of Souris, Manitoba. The Wildes carried on the farming tradition and also operated a blacksmith shop in Oakbank. Eventually, the next generation bought in–brought a new name to the farm when a Wilde daughter married into the Bredin family. In 1963, the Bredin's officially took over the farm, continuing its agricultural legacy.

      Over the years, the farmland evolved with the com­munity, transitioning gradually into residential and commercial use. The farm focused on growing staple prairie crops, including wheat, soybeans, flax and oats, and in 1996, it earned provincial century farm status, recognizing over 100 years of continuous farm family ownership.

      In 2018, Howard and Daryl Bredin closed the family operation. From its roots in 1891 to its upcoming sale, the Bredin family farm represents more than a piece of land; it symbolizes the spirit of community, resilience and tradition.

      As we finished another harvest season, we cele­brate the legacy of those who worked this land and gave so much to Oakbank and the greater Springfield com­mu­nity.

Tyndall Park Com­mu­nity 55+ Fitness Group

MLA Cindy Lamoureux (Tyndall Park): Honourable Speaker, I rise this afternoon to recognize the Tyndall Park community fitness club 55-plus group: a group of mainly seniors that get together throughout the week to exercise through Zumba, strength, stretching, yoga and line dancing.

      The group was founded by Joe and Remy Reynante in their desire to enhance their lifestyle. After frequent outings to The Forks, Kildonan Place and Garden City to find a fitness program, they realized the amount of time commuting was outweighing the fitness session.

      So on September 18, 2017, they envisioned a fit­ness program that would serve local community mem­bers right in the heart of Tyndall Park.

      Their goals included enhancing physical function, healthy lifestyles, boosting mental health and social wellness.

      Through resources and connections–former coun­cillor Mike Pagtakhan and David DeSousa, operations manager for Tyndall Park Community Centre–and the City administration office, they successfully secured the rec hall at the community centre.

      Now, unfortunately, due to the pandemic and fund­­ing from March 2018 until 2024, the program was discontinued. However, I am happy to report that earlier this year Tito [uncle] Joe announced that the club will be resuming. He explained how active aging is the best way to grow old, and that through reaching out to former members and contacting others to spread the word, the club reopened this past March and cur­rently has over 45 active members that participate every week. I even had the opportunity to join them in some Zumba the other week, Hon­our­able Speaker.

      Now, as I wrap up, I want to thank Tito [uncle] Joe and all of those involved in making the club a success, and ask my colleagues to join me today in recognizing and celebrating all of those who have joined us in the gallery.

      Thank you.

Southeast Com­mu­nity Food Bank Volunteers

Mr. Konrad Narth (La Vérendrye): It's been a beautiful fall here in Manitoba, and soon our thoughts will turn to Christmas.

      For many Manitobans, especially for our young people, Christmas is a favourite time of year: a time of family, generosity and celebration as we mark the birth of Jesus Christ.

      But, Honourable Speaker, we also know that for many families, the Christmas season brings financial strain rather than the peace and joy that it should. That's where our local food banks and soup kitchens step up with compassion and care.

      Across Manitoba, and especially in the southeast, generous people work tirelessly to ease the burden of hunger. Supported by churches, community groups, businesses and volunteers, food banks in Grunthal, Piney, Vita, La Broquerie, St. Pierre, Sprague and others prepare and distribute hampers so no family goes without the essentials.

      Honourable Speaker, the southeast has long under­stood the power of community. Neighbours help neigh­bours, volunteers step up without being asked and generosity is simply part of who we are. Every year, we see people who once relied on Christmas hampers now becoming donors and volunteers. That is the spirit of the southeast: a community that lifts one another up.

      None of this work would be possible without the continuous generosity, every day. Manitobans, I want to sincerely thank volunteers, co-ordinators, donors, churches and community partners who make this sup­port possible.

      As we enter the Christmas season, I encourage Manitobans: if you are able, please give, whether it's groceries, a financial contribution or your time. Your kindness ensures every family can experience Christmas with dignity.

      This season reminds us that hope grows strongest when we share–

The Speaker: Hon­our­able member's time is expired.

Fort Garry Legion Closure

Mr. Mark Wasyliw (Fort Garry): I had the great honour this past weekend to be invited to attend the very last meeting of the Fort Garry Legion. First established in 1931, it will cease operations this Saturday night; a Legion which has been part of the Fort Garry community for 94 years.

* (13:50)

      At its height it had over 1,500 members, now less than 300. The Legion was no longer financially viable, and the membership made the very difficult decision to cease operations, shut down the Fort Garry branch and to merge with South Osborne.

      Sadly, what's occurred at the Fort Garry Legion is not unique or, nowadays, even unusual. The South Osborne legion is made up of the former Fort Rouge, St. Vital and two former Imperial Veterans branches. Recently, Winnipeg lost Brooklands branch, which was the oldest Legion operating in Canada. At one time the Royal Canadian Legion was the largest voluntary service organization in Canada; 240 branches have closed in recent years, and many Legions are struggling and many more will be closing in the future.

      The Legion is a fundamental part of our heritage and our culture. It's often one of the key public institu­tions in many small towns. Legion branches are central places for people to gather and feel connected to their neighbours. In many places, they serve as a primary community centre, hosting weddings, town meetings and even prov­incial court.

      At the final meeting at Fort Garry Legion, I wit­nessed the love these members had for each other, their community. I watched as members gave, often tearful, final reports and were speaking to friends for the last time, some having been members for 40 or 50 years, saying goodbye to people who'd become a second family to them. It became very clear to me that as a province, we are losing a piece of ourselves and we are lesser for it. This is part of Manitoba heritage that's disappearing.

      Ken Izzard, the last president of Fort Garry Legion, asked me to bring a message to this Manitoba Legislature. He said it's too late for them, but he urges governments to act before we lose more Legions. There is a role for the Province in preserving this piece of our cultural heritage.

      I urge my fellow MLAs–

The Speaker: Hon­our­able member's time has expired.

Some Honourable Members: Leave.

The Speaker: Does the hon­our­able member have leave to complete his statement? [Agreed]

Mr. Wasyliw: I urge my fellow M-L-Es to drop by the Fort Garry Legion this Saturday and say goodbye to an old friend, one that's always been there for Fort Garry.

      Thank you.

Speaker's Statement

The Speaker: Prior to oral questions, I have a state­ment for the House. I have a statement regarding the rotation of speakers in debate.

      Since 2016, the House leaders of all recognized parties have agreed upon a rotation of speakers for debates in this House, including members of their parties and independent members.

      In the past, if an independent member missed their spot in debate, they would be able to speak later in the same debate whenever they wished. In some instances–excuse me–in some instances, this practice has caused disorder in House proceedings.

      A lot of our rules and practices have evolved since 2016 in response to changes in various situations. As the Speaker of this House, I have determined that this debate rotation must also evolve.

      As a reminder to members, our rule 9(1) states that the Speaker shall preserve order and decorum and enforce rules and shall decide all questions of order without appeal.

      Further, on page 318 of the third edition of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Bosc and Gagnon note that the Speaker's duty is to decide any matters of procedure that may arise regarding the con­duct of proceedings and the rules of debate.

      Accordingly, I am ruling that starting today, an independent member is entitled to speak in debate at their spot in the rotation only. If an independent member does not speak when their turn in the rotation comes up, then they would lose their opportunity to speak.

      The exception to this would be if there are no other members standing to speak before or after an independent member's spot in rotation, and the debate has not concluded, then an independent member may speak at that time.

      This will also apply to all debates for which the House leaders have assigned a rotation list. For the reference of all members, I'm tabling the most recent version of the debate, rotation list as agreed to by the House leaders on October 2, 2024. This list shows when members may speak in debates where the rotation isn't set out in the rules. As with any practice or rule of the House, this practice could be varied with unanimous consent of all members.

      I will note that in any debate in this House, there is no guarantee that every member–or any parti­cular member–will get to speak, as many debates end before every member has had the op­por­tun­ity to speak, and I see this arrangement as no different than that.

      Thank you for your attention to this.

Oral Questions

Grace Hospital Emergency Room


Con­stit­uent Wait-Time Ex­per­ience with Family

Mr. Obby Khan (Leader of the Official Opposition): Hon­our­able Speaker, the health-care system is worse off than it was two years ago. Ask any Manitoban. Ask Manitoba Nurses Union, who gave this Health Minister a D-. Every day, there's a heartbreaking story under this NDP and how they have failed Manitobans.

      Sadly, today is no different. A Manitoban came forward with a social media post with details of her mother's passing after waiting 30 hours in the ER of Grace Hospital.

      Waiting 30 hours, the woman witnessed her mother go from, and I quote: She went from walking and talking and being able to give medical history and details to weak and confused in less than 24 hours. End quote. From there, it took another 12 hours to get treatment and see a doctor. Sadly, her mother passed away shortly afterwards.

      Quote again from that letter: Our system is broken. End quote.

      What does the Premier have to say to this daughter whose mother passed away after waiting 30 hours–

The Speaker: Time has expired. 

Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): I want to say to this daughter that on behalf of the Province of Manitoba, we are very sorry for your loss.

      Just received an update from our Minister of Health that they have spoken to the woman and addressed the situation with her mother. The details that we see in this post are very, very disturbing and are calling many, many things into question.

      As a matter of course, a critical incident has been launched. There seems to have been some errors made in the care for this person who we lost far too soon, but beyond that, it would seem that there are other issues at play, potentially systemic ones. And on account of that, our Minister of Health has committed to doing an additional in­vesti­gation, beyond the CI report, to get to the bottom of just went–what went wrong here.

      As for the larger factors, what is causing the chaos in health care? It's the cuts that they made when they were in office. They closed three of our biggest emer­gency–

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

      The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a supplementary question.

Mr. Khan: To the family and all Manitobans watch­ing, I'm sorry. I'm sorry that this Premier and Health Minister didn't do better by you and by all Manitobans.

      I'm sorry that this failed Health Minister, last year, also launched a critical incident in­vesti­gation when a Manitoban died after waiting eight hours in the Health Sciences Centre. Now, a year later, some­one else has died waiting 30 hours.

      All talk, no action by this NDP gov­ern­ment, Premier and failed Health Minister.

      I'll quote again from that same article, same letter–post: I don't blame the nurses. In fact, I feel for them. Not having the capacity to provide the care as we, as nurses, want to provide is heartbreaking. We need better. This system is broken. End quote.

      So I'll ask the Premier and his failing Health Minister, what are they doing today to make health care in Manitoba better so this never happens again?

Mr. Kinew: To the woman who wrote the post, our heart certainly goes out to you. I understand that you are a nurse, and I very much want to thank you for the wonderful job that you do on the front lines helping the people of Manitoba.

      Since we've taken office, the Minister of Health and myself have sent a clear message: help is coming. To date, 3,500 new front-line health-care staff have been added at the bedside. The members opposite cut nursing positions. They closed emergency rooms.

      Repairing the damage that we saw in our health-care system will not be accomplished over­night. Along the way, when incidents such as this take place, we will leave no stone unturned to get to the bottom of what went wrong. Repairing health care so that you, the people of Manitoba, get the care that you need when you need it is some­thing that will take many years to accomplish, but it only moves forward if we have the courage to look at the person in the mirror.

      That's some­thing that the members opposite have never done. They've never accepted accountability for the chaos and the dysfunction that they caused.

      We're going to continue to fix health care. The biggest risk to getting the job done–

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

      The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question?

Edu­ca­tion Property Taxes
Increase Concerns for Manitobans

Mr. Obby Khan (Leader of the Official Opposition): A new question, Hon­our­able Speaker.

The Speaker: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition, on a new question.

* (14:00)

Mr. Khan: Less talk, more action is needed by this Premier. Now we shift to tax, tax, tax. That's all this NDP know how to do: take money out of your back pocket while smiling to you with an arrogant smile on camera. The NDP did it with Greg Selinger's PST increase and now they're doing it again.

      In 2014, the NDP increased the PST, costing you $250 million. Now, in 2025, they've done it again, but they just changed the name to edu­ca­tion and property tax, costing you $400 million out of your back pocket. The Premier and Finance Minister falsely claim that Manitobans are not paying more under the NDP, but $400 million says they are.

      Will the Premier stand up and apologize to Manitobans for taking a page out of his mentor Greg Selinger's playbook and increasing your taxes?

Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): No, no, no, no, no. I cut taxes. I got here, I cut the gas tax. I cut your income taxes. I cut cor­por­ate taxes. I even went out and I cut the payroll tax. This is Mr. Tax Cut.

      On the other side, let's talk political mentors. Heather Stefanson? Who–Heather Stefanson? Who would look up to Heather Stefanson, the worst premier that Manitoba's ever had? He would look up to her. Still stands by her, even as she became the first premier in Manitoba history to break the law, disgracing herself, tripping on the way out the door after Manitobans had voted her out of office.

      You want accountability for taxpayers? Ask this: you pay his salary; he can't even carry a whole ques­tion period. He's supposed to do three sets of questions each time. He won't do it because he wants somebody elected under our banner to ask questions in question period.

The Speaker: The hon­our­able Leader of the Official Op­posi­tion, on a sup­ple­mentary question.

Mr. Khan: The Premier can smile and joke and attack and act like a clown or whatever the heck he's acting like on that side. Manitobans can see through him. They can see through his arrogant smile, his condescending attitude and his dismissiveness of $400 million he has–stole out of your back pocket.

      Residents in Tuxedo, Waverley–

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

The Speaker: Order.

Mr. Khan: –Bridgwater, Lagimodière, Radisson, Transcona, McPhillips, Assiniboia, are all paying more in edu­ca­tion property taxes under this NDP govern­ment.

      So he can stand up, he can act like a clown, he can joke, he can attack, but he can't dismiss the facts, and the facts are, he is taking more money out of your back pocket.

      So will the Premier apologize for taxing you $400 million when he promised he wouldn't?

Mr. Kinew: And the member knows some­thing about apologies. Every week he's calling up CBC, CJOB: Could I come down and apologize for what I stepped in this week? Whether it's attacking trans kids or the general LGBTQ com­mu­nity, he's saying sorry every single day.

      What's up with that? Trans kids don't even know who he is. Why is he always talking about them? It's bizarre. It's weird. It's inappropriate.

      But let's get back to the matter at hand: taxpayer accountability. They pay him more than 150 grand each year. And what do they get for it? Four questions? Four questions? That's it? I asked six questions minimum every single day in op­posi­tion. You want to ask questions about accountability? How about this, Hon­our­able Speaker: show up and do your job first.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

The Speaker: Order.

Rural Crime in Manitoba
Request for Plan to Address

Ms. Jodie Byram (Agassiz): Months ago, I raised the concerns of con­stit­uents of mine, a single mother who lived with her two daughters on their farm. With the rise in violence and the string of organized armed break-ins, she was terrified of every car driving down their mile road. She still lives in fear because this gov­ern­ment has done nothing to address these problems in rural Manitoba. Families in Manitoba are not safe under this Premier.

      How has the Minister of Justice (Mr. Wiebe) failed to bring any measures forward in seven months? Why are Manitoba families not his concern?

Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): People who live in the member for Agassiz's riding, ask yourself, do you like more police, or less? Because we added 55 police officers inside the Perimeter and we've added millions of dollars more in funding for RCMP outside of the Perimeter.

      What did they do during their time in office? We lost 55 police officers. They cut police.

      The PCs defunded police when they were in office. They should defund their leader. Listen to this banger that he dropped at the AMM this morning, and I quote: Got the MLAs for Lakeside and La Vérendrye. Yeah, I heard one whoo; we got one whoo for Lakeside. We got nothing for La Vérendrye. Come on, La Vérendrye. I know many of you have served with him. End quote.

      No wonder they look dejected and demoralized. Step it up.

The Speaker: Order, please.

      Could I ask the hon­our­able First Minister what he was quoting from?

Mr. Kinew: It's the comments from the AMM conven­tion. Would you like me to table it?

The Speaker: Please.

Mr. Kinew: Okay, I'll ask staff to send in four copies of this, as well as four copies of the cringe comments about Inwood that were made a few minutes after that, and four copies of the Jerry Maguire cringe moment towards the end–because we'll table those very soon as well, too.

The Speaker: Thank you.

      The hon­our­able member for Agassiz. [interjection]

      Order.

Ms. Byram: Clearly no concern for families there, but more concerned about quotes from Jerry Maguire.

      Rural or urban, east, west or Winnipeg, I'm hearing it all. Families are scared. They're reaching out to share their stories. Everyday acts of violence under­mine Manitobans' faith in our justice system. A security camera offers no peace of mind.

      I've heard from so many families concerned about violent crime. Why, two years into the mandate, has the minister only made things worse?

Mr. Kinew: There are dozens more police officers working in Manitoba under us in office. The PCs cut the number of police working in Manitoba. People want to talk about bail? They closed the Dauphin jail. They closed the Agassiz Youth Centre.

      Good news for people in the Parkland region and all of rural Manitoba: In 2026, we're breaking ground on a new centre for justice in the com­mu­nity of Dauphin to bring back economic op­por­tun­ity, to defend public safety.

      And, yes, we'll pay for your security camera along the way because we understand that what's needed to make com­mu­nities safer is a com­pre­hen­sive approach, not the drive-by-at-election-time approach you get from the PCs, but real part­ner­ship from a real gov­ern­ment every single day of the year.

Health Sciences Centre
Safety and Security Issues

Mrs. Carrie Hiebert (Morden-Winkler): Hon­our­able Speaker, Manitobans aren't feeling safe under this NDP gov­ern­ment, and never has that ever been clearer than with the increase of violence in health care. Four out of five nurses graduating today are women and sadly it is not a question of if they will ex­per­ience violence but when. This is unacceptable and more must be done.

      Why, after months, has this gov­ern­ment done nothing to address the concerns that are happening at HSC?

Hon. Uzoma Asagwara (Minister of Health, Seniors and Long-Term Care): Hon­our­able Speaker, we've been addressing safety and security concerns at Health Sciences Centre, at sites across the province, since day one.

      I was stunned when I became the Minister of Health and opened what I thought would be a file full of plans to address safety and security under the previous gov­ern­ment and learned that there was not a single piece of paper in it. There was no work done by the previous PC gov­ern­ment for seven and a half years to make health care safer and more secure.

      For two years, we had in­sti­tutional safety officer legis­lation under the PCs that never saw a single person hired or trained in this province. Today, 130 in­sti­tutional safety officers working at sites across this province.

      We know there's more to do. We're going to keep doing that work with experts and our De­part­ment of Justice for all Manitobans.

Assault at St. Boniface Hospital Parkade
Pre­ven­tion of the Release of Assailant

Mrs. Carrie Hiebert (Morden-Winkler): Hon­our­able Speaker, one week in–in one week, there were five sexual assaults at the HSC this summer alone. Earlier this month, a nurse was sexually assaulted in the parkade at St. Boniface Hospital. Now, a judge is putting it out there that the assailant might not be held criminally respon­si­ble.

      What assurances can this minister give Manitobans that this repeat offender is not going to go back and terrorize nurses next week?

Hon. Uzoma Asagwara (Minister of Health, Seniors and Long-Term Care): Health-care workers deserve to be safe at their jobs. Manitobans deserve to be safe in their com­mu­nities. And that is why our gov­ern­ment has been working across de­part­ments to take real steps to make our com­mu­nities and our health-care settings and campuses much safer.

* (14:10)

      We have done some­thing that has not been done before: we are working with the De­part­ment of Justice, Winnipeg Police Service, RCMP, First Nation Safety Officer Program, regional health author­ities and sites across the province, in col­lab­o­ration to take steps to make sure that health-care workers are safer in this province.

      Seven and a half years of less than no action taken has had con­se­quences here in Manitoba. We are moving things in the right direction. We're going to keep doing this work so that health-care workers are safer. And that member opposite would do better to stand up and apologize for her lack of action when the PCs–

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

Child-Care Facilities
Security Services

MLA Jeff Bereza (Portage la Prairie): Hon­our­able Speaker, I've heard from a Winnipeg mother who is worried for her kids' safety. Her child-care facility has had to start posting a security guard for pickup and drop-off safety. This is absolutely absurd.

      Under this failed NDP, child-care facilities are needing to take their limited funds for security guards. That isn't sus­tain­able or acceptable.

      How has this gov­ern­ment failed so miserably for daycares in Manitoba?

Hon. Tracy Schmidt (Minister of Education and Early Childhood Learning): Like the Deputy Premier (MLA Asagwara) just shared with this House, just like health-care workers, early child­hood educators, child-care assistants, families and children absolutely deserve to be safe in their child-care spaces.

      Unfor­tunately, Hon­our­able Speaker, for seven and a half years, child-care centres saw their operating funding frozen–absolutely frozen–under this gov­ern­ment–under the previous gov­ern­ment.

      Under our gov­ern­ment, we have come in; we have increased–we have finally increased operating funding to child-care centres so that they can meet the needs of their families, so that they can finally pay their early child­hood educators a fair living wage, some­thing the previous gov­ern­ment cared nothing about.

      We're going to continue working with that child-care centre and–

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

Winnipeg Transit
Safety Concerns

Mrs. Colleen Robbins (Spruce Woods): Hon­our­able Speaker, Manitobans just aren't safe under this Premier (Mr. Kinew).

      Alarming new stats show how violent crime on Winnipeg Transit has spiked under the NDP gov­ern­ment. Winnipeg has the worst record on transit crime in Canada, with violent incidents spiking this past two years under the NDP. Women and children taking the bus to school and work don't feel safe. Uni­ver­sity stu­dents don't feel safe because they're not safe under this Premier and his failed Minister of Justice.

      So here's my question: Since they don't seem to be concerned, will the Premier and his minister commit to taking the Winnipeg Transit to and from work unescorted for one month, or do they–

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

Hon. Matt Wiebe (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Well, this member is just wrong, Hon­our­able Speaker. In fact, the numbers that she's quoting are an indictment of the record of the previous gov­ern­ment. We saw year over year over year that transit was getting less safe under their watch, and they did nothing; they did absolutely nothing.

      We've started to see the stats show we're making a difference. We're seeing safety on our buses, and that's because we proclaimed the legis­lation that allowed transit safety officers to operate in our city. That's the kind of action that we're willing to take in part­ner­ship with law en­force­ment, in part­ner­ship with munici­palities.

      We are making com­mu­nities safer because that's what Manitobans are asking for.

Home-Based Child-Care Centres
Request for Gov­ern­ment to Support

MLA Cindy Lamoureux (Tyndall Park): Hon­our­able Speaker, this gov­ern­ment committed to building 23,000 child-care spaces; however, more than half­way through their mandate, they have only achieved 14 per cent of their goal. There have been millions of federal dollars available over the last five years, yet we are not seeing enough tangible spaces being created.

      One approach to child-care spaces is licensed, fully operational home-based centres. Manitoba could easily afford to imme­diately create 1,000 spaces and have them funded at $10 a day for 16 years.

      Because we are in such need of these spaces, is the gov­ern­ment con­sid­ering supporting licensed, fully operational home-based centres?

Hon. Tracy Schmidt (Minister of Education and Early Childhood Learning): I thank the member for Tyndall Park for this im­por­tant question on such an im­por­tant issue that's on top of mind for Manitobans across our province.

      Just this morning, Hon­our­able Speaker, we were at the Association of Manitoba Munici­palities and we heard a lot of questions, including questions on public safety, including questions on health care. And what I would like to share with the House is that the best health-care plan, the best public safety plan starts with edu­ca­tion, and edu­ca­tion, Hon­our­able Speaker, starts in our child-care sector.

      So our gov­ern­ment is so proud to have been investing in child-care infra­structure. We have tens of millions of dollars of projects on the way right now. Those include licensed centres, those also–

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

MLA Lamoureux: Hon­our­able Speaker, when the gov­ern­ment was in op­posi­tion, they often emphasized the importance of public engagement, yet today, families and child-care providers are seeing a troubling lack of meaningful public input.

      To truly reflect the needs of Manitobans, the gov­ern­ment needs to listen to everyone. This includes parents, existing home-based child-care providers, child-care centres and experts for insights that could significantly strengthen policy and unlock practical solutions.

      Will this gov­ern­ment provide an op­por­tun­ity to meet with stake­holders who have infor­ma­tion to con­tribute towards speeding up the creation of child-care spaces?

MLA Schmidt: Again, I thank the member opposite for the im­por­tant question. And, absolutely, not only are we open to having further con­sul­ta­tions with some of the groups that the member from Tyndall Park just mentioned, but that's some­thing that we've been doing actively and ongoing.

      I'm so lucky to have the insight of the minister's con­sul­ta­tion table, which is made up of repre­sen­tatives from all across the sector, including from the for-profit sector, the not-for-profit sector, the home-based sector. We're going to continue working with our friends at the AMM and munici­palities across the province.

      We're working with First Nations, we're working with the health-care sector and we're working with our school divisions to make sure that this is really an all-hands-on-deck approach of taking advantage of this excellent op­por­tun­ity we have with our partners at the federal gov­ern­ment, a part­ner­ship that the previous gov­ern­ment failed to act upon.

      We are so grateful for this exciting time in Canada where we are going to see child-care span–child-care spaces finally expand across our province–

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

      The hon­our­able member for Tyndall Park, on a final sup­ple­mentary question.

MLA Lamoureux: Hon­our­able Speaker, the child-care spaces that this gov­ern­ment promised has a pro­found impact on families, especially women. Afford­able and accessible child care is a crucial issue for work­ing families. Parents are often being forced to leave the workforce and families are often struggling to find and access affordable care.

      The lack of child-care spaces is an urgent issue. Across the province, many home-based providers could be licensed and imme­diately offered $10-a-day care, yet this op­por­tun­ity continues to be overlooked.

      How does the government intend to meet its child-care-space targets when centre-based construc­tion alone cannot keep up with the demand?

MLA Schmidt: We know that working with our centres–our existing centres are really one of the best ways to rapidly scale up child-care centre–child-care-space expansion here in Manitoba. But there absolutely are licensed home child-care providers here in the province; we are so grateful for them and we're going to continue working with them.

      As I said earlier, Hon­our­able Speaker, child care is not just an issue that will promote greater public safety, greater health-care out­comes down the road, but it also is a huge measure on our economy and on affordability. And $10-a-day–true $10-a-day child care is something that this gov­ern­ment finally imple­mented.

      And you know what, Hon­our­able Speaker? Do you know what Manitoba families saw this summer? Over $1,000 of savings that went straight into their pockets thanks to true $10-a-day daycare, brought to you by the Manitoba NDP.

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

Early Child­hood Learning
Wage Increase for Educators

French spoken

MLA Robert Loiselle (St. Boniface): L'Honorable Président, depuis notre arrivée au pouvoir, l'une des principales priorités de notre gouvernement est d'assurer que les familles aient accès de bons services de garde. Lorsque les familles – lorsque les services de garde prospèrent, nos familles prospèrent aussi, et notre économie prospère également.

      Après des années de négligence de la part du Parti conservateur, la Ministre de l'Éducation et l'Apprentissage de la petite enfance peut-elle nous en dire davantage sur les façons dont notre gouvernement offre enfin aux éducatrices et aux éducateurs de la petite enfance le respect et la 'rénumération' qu'ils méritent?

Translation

Honourable Speaker, since coming to power, one of our government's top priorities has been to ensure that families have access to good child-care services. When families–when child-care services thrive, our families thrive, and our economy thrives as well.

After years of neglect by the Conservative Party, can the Minister of Education and Early Learning tell us more about the ways in which our government is finally giving early childhood educators the respect and compensation they deserve?

* (14:20)

Hon. Tracy Schmidt (Minister of Education and Early Childhood Learning): Au ce côté de la Chambre [On this side of the House]–on this side of the House, we value the im­por­tant role that early child­hood educators play in children's lives and supporting working families' ability to pursue either their career or their edu­ca­tion op­por­tun­ities. These educators are the foundation of our economy. Because of their work, parents can go to school or build careers that help power our province.

      As minister, I am proud to support early child­hood educators and child-care assistants in seeing the single largest wage increase in this sector's history. If  you are an early child­hood educator, it is a fact that you are better paid and better respected when an NDP gov­ern­ment is in power, and we are proud of this. We are proud of you. After seven and a half years of neglect, it's never been a better time.

      Le moment est venu. [The time has come.] The time is now. Folks working in early child­hood learning can know that they have a prov­incial gov­ern­ment com­mitted to supporting–

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

Violent Crime in Winnipeg Neighbourhoods
Concern for Incidents Near Schools

Mrs. Lauren Stone (Midland): Hon­our­able Speaker, children are not safe under this NDP gov­ern­ment. Violent crime in Winnipeg and surrounding com­mu­nities is getting worse and climbing month after month. Families are scared to walk to school, to work or to take the bus. They do not feel safe in their own neighbourhoods.

      Schools are having to lock down because of violent offenders on our streets, as recently as last week in River Heights when a man with a machete approached a parent waiting to pick their kids up from school. Front-line officers are saying the situation is getting worse.

      Will this minister admit that his soft-on-crime, catch-and-release policies are failing Manitoba children?

Hon. Matt Wiebe (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Of course, we're making our streets safer. We're doing that in part­ner­ship with law en­force­ment. We've added 55–sorry, 36 new officers here in the city of Winnipeg. Province-wide, we've added more officers in com­mu­nity.

      And, really, what this is about is ensuring that our streets are safe both through the part­ner­ship with law en­force­ment and that funding agreement, but also ensuring that we're making the changes here at the legis­lative level to ensure that our streets are safe, specific­ally around machetes. Of course, we brought in an im­por­tant bill, an im­por­tant change, that limits the access of youth to those weapons. But we're going further with that legis­lation.

      I encourage members opposite: Don't stand in the way this time. Get on board. Let's make our streets safer. I hope they support that legis­lation when it comes–

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

Munici­pal Policing
Request for Gov­ern­ment Support

Mr. Wayne Balcaen (Brandon West): I'm not so sure about this minister's claim about extra policing in the province, if you listen to AMM today. It was also clear munici­palities expect much more from this gov­ern­ment when it comes to supporting policing. Families are terrified under this NDP gov­ern­ment.

      The NDP have made it clear that supporting police is not a priority for them. Let's not forget, these are the same members that voted against standing with AMM and calling on Ottawa to pay its fair share for RCMP costs.

      So why does this minister of munici­pal relations refuse to actually engage with munici­pal partners and protect Manitobans?

Hon. Matt Wiebe (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Hon­our­able Speaker, what is this guy talk­ing about? AMM has worked with us. In fact, President Valentino and myself wrote a letter to Minister Anandasangaree, asking–[interjection]

The Speaker: Order.

Mr. Wiebe: –him about clarity around the future of contract policing, about the high vacancy rate.

      What did they get from members opposite? Year over year, we saw them voting against and standing in the way of increased funding: $13.7 million across Manitoba to police, to law en­force­ment, to RCMP. Members opposite only stood in the way while we work with munici­palities like the mayor of Portage, Mayor Knox.

       I'm encouraged by the direction the Province seems to be taking, especially on public safety and com­mu­nity well-being, which are top priorities for our com­mu­nity and our region. We stand with Mayor Knox. We stand against members opposite.

Carbon Emission Targets
Gov­ern­ment Action on Climate

Mr. Mark Wasyliw (Fort Garry): This Premier (Mr. Kinew) pledged that he would commit to reducing carbon emissions in Manitoba by 45 per cent in 2023; that's four years away. He first claimed he would do it with a carbon tax. Then he claimed that Manitoba was on track to meet the 2030 targets with what Manitoba was already doing. In Estimates, I asked the Premier if we were on track to meet those targets, and I'll table the exchange.

      Not only did he say yes, he claimed that he had an expert report proving it, and he said he shared that analysis with Prime Minister Carney. Turns out none of that is accurate, and I'll table the FIPPA. There is no report. There is no analysis. The Premier didn't share anything with Prime Minister Carney. Time for the Premier to come clean.

      Why is he misleading Manitobans on his lack of action on climate change?

Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): Yes, we've got a great Environ­ment Minister, and he as well as the team are the reason that we are going to hit our emissions targets.

      Now, I'll resist from pointing out that this MLA will never be in Cabinet, he'll never be the premier, he'll never be the Prime Minister, and instead just draw the PC members' attention to the folly of their strategy. They all sat down today to give this guy time. He was elected under our banner, so think about that if you're a backbencher not getting time in question period.

      On top of that, now you folks are defenceless, okay. PC Party president, again, in his campaign to win, says that his own party has been breaking the rules for years. I'll table a transcript of his website for them to review.

      So I'll ask the member for Fort Garry: Doesn't he think it's a darn shame that the PC president himself says that their party is all about breaking the rules?

The Speaker: The honourable member for Fort Garry, on a supplementary question.

Mr. Wasyliw: What's a darn shame is that Manitobans don't have a Premier that takes climate change seriously. Manitoba and Alberta share a couple things in common: we both have premiers that think we need to become more reliant on oil and old oil pipelines, and both Alberta and Manitoba are the only two provinces in the country that carbon emissions have actually gone up. Premier claims he can reduce them in four years, but by doing nothing.

      Now our Premier is saying, well, maybe I will do some­thing. He's planning to build a gas-burning power plant which will radically increase our carbon emis­sions. Even without the gas plant, Manitoba was never going to meet the 2030 target.

      Will the Premier now come clean and admit to Manitobans that he has no in­ten­tion of reducing carbon emissions by the deadline?

Mr. Kinew: No, we're going to hit all the targets and we're going to grow the economy.

      But the PC members, check this out. This is what your new party president says about your party: We've not been following our own rules for a while now. Directors do not ensure the con­stit­uency associations meet. Nomination rules are unclear and not followed. I guess he was paying attention to the Spruce Woods nomination contest when he said that. He says it all makes members feel insignificant and not valued and provides no forum for their voices to be heard.

      Yes, no kidding; we know. The whole province knows. That's why they're sitting in the op­posi­tion benches.

      So while they sit over there on timeout and reconsider this Wednesday strategy of theirs that lets them toss and turn in the wind, defenceless that they are, we will table another docu­ment showing not only do they ignore their own party members, this one says that they ignore youth in Manitoba. It's a whole demo­gra­phic group. But then again, from the PCs, we shouldn't be surprised about them ignoring an entire–

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

      The honourable member for Fort Garry, on a final sup­ple­mentary question.

Mr. Wasyliw: This Premier deserves Manitobans an explanation about why there was no report to Prime Minister Carney, but Manitoba spent hundreds of mil­lions of dollars this year alone on climate change.

      Over 35,000 Manitobans became climate refugees in our province due to wildfires. Drought means that Hydro doesn't have enough water to profitably generate energy, and that means your rates are going up.

      We know northern winter road season is smaller, forcing com­mu­nities to­–[interjection]

The Speaker: Order.

Mr. Wasyliw: –spend huge money on bringing goods by air.

      The Premier has made things worse; he's bor­rowed over $400 million for a gas tax holiday that went to cor­por­ations and the very rich. The biggest threat to Manitoba's economic future is climate change, yet this Premier does nothing.

      Given this record, why should Manitobans trust the Premier–

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

Mr. Kinew: Again, the gas tax saved you money. And when it comes to environ­ment, we're going to make the environ­ment clean, safe and healthy for the next gen­era­tion.

      The data the minister is asking about, I shared it with Prime Minister Carney in a letter imme­diately after he was chosen as our prime minister.

      But again, the PCs–great strategy, boys. Great strategy, ladies. Great strategy, people of all genders on that side. Oh, I better not go there–we know how they feel about that one.

      But, again, I'll read out that their new party president, Peter Smith, again, when it comes to the issue that rocked this province–a premier under the PC banner breaking the law, their current do-nothing MLA from Red River North breaking the law, being fined–what does their new president think about this?

* (14:30)

      I'll table his post. He doesn't think Heather Stefanson did anything wrong. That's the person leading their party, that's the person designing their campaign and that's the leader that they all follow when they come to QP–

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

Daycare Centre for Warren, Manitoba
Inquiry into Project Delays

Mr. Trevor King (Lakeside): Hon­our­able Speaker, the Warren daycare project was announced by the PCs. The NDP gov­ern­ment doubled down and affirmed that commit­ment.

      Yet today, parents are still waiting for answers while the project sits in limbo.

      Can this minister explain why this critical child-care project has been delayed and why the com­mu­nity has not been kept informed about shifting timelines?

Hon. Tracy Schmidt (Minister of Education and Early Childhood Learning): As I said, Hon­our­able Speaker, it is the case that we are building thousands of child-care spaces across Manitoba. We have tens of millions of dollars of projects in construction right now.

      We do have a new procurement strategy, Hon­our­able Speaker, that we needed to do to make sure that Manitobans are earning value for dollar, unlike the deal that they had under the previous PCs, who–you know what their child-care plan was? Was to find a creative way to give $2.8 million of taxpayer dollars that was meant to go to families for child care, and they gave it to the leader of their last election.

      It is a disgrace. It is shameful. And we will absolutely clean up the mess that the PCs left us with.

The Speaker: The honourable member for Lakeside, on a supplementary question.

Mr. King: There you have it; no answers once again.

      Warren and the surrounding com­mu­nities are facing a shortage of accessible, affordable child care, and the delay of this project is putting real strain on working families. Parents are being forced to turn jobs down, delay returning to work or seek care hours away.

      How can you justify this delay when families are des­per­ate for daycare spaces in Lakeside and across the province?

MLA Schmidt: We justify the delay because we are here to work on behalf of Manitobans and to make sure that Manitobans have a gov­ern­ment that is sincere, that is stepping up to the plate with real dollars and that does not siphon off dollars from the child-care fund to their party campaign manager. [interjection]

      Let's update the House about some spaces. They can heckle me all I want because I misspeak, Hon­our­able Speaker. That's fine. They can continue attacking me all day. I'll keep building child-care centres right across this province.

The Speaker: The honourable member for Lakeside, on a final sup­ple­mentary question.

Mr. King: Hon­our­able Speaker, last fall, this minister stated in com­mit­tee that this project was fully funded, approved and will proceed. A year has passed and no apparent progress has been made. The com­mu­nity deserves trans­par­ency.

      Will you commit today to a clear public update and timeline for completion of this project?

The Speaker: Order, please.

      I would just caution the member to make sure he's addressing his questions through the Chair and not directly to a member opposite.

MLA Schmidt: The com­mu­nity was advised of the delay in the project back in July. I can update the House that this project is proceeding, that procurement is on track and that shovels will be in the ground right away, just like the projects that we've opened in Morden, in the member for Morden-Winkler's (Mrs. Hiebert) con­stit­uency–104 spaces; just like the 62 spaces we opened in Baldur, in the riding of Turtle Mountain; just like the 74 spaces we opened in Tyndall, in the member for Lac du Bonnet's (Mr. Ewasko) riding; just like the 104 spaces we opened in Kleefeld, in the member for La Vérendrye's (Mr. Narth) riding; also like the 74 spaces we opened in La Salle, in the member for Midland's (Mrs. Stone) riding.

      I can go on and on and on, Hon­our­able Speaker.

      We are delivering results for Manitobans. We thank every single early child­-care educator in this province. And we are going to continue delivering for Manitoba–

The Speaker: Member's time has expired.

911 Emergency Services
Call for Review of System

Mr. Derek Johnson (Interlake-Gimli): Hon­our­able Speaker, the Switzer family is still waiting for answers. They have asked for accountability, not blame, and for assurance that no one else will have to go through what they did.

      After eight months of reflection, has the minister changed his mind and will he now commit to a full, in­de­pen­dent inquiry into the technical aspects of Manitoba's 911 system, including phones, cell providers, dispatch and first respon­ders?

Hon. Mike Moroz (Minister of Innovation and New Technology): Hon­our­able Speaker, I want to again extend our gov­ern­ment's con­dol­ences to the Switzer family. No Manitoban should have to endure what the Switzer family has gone through.

      As I've said in the past, we are working with our federal partners. As evidence to that, I want to table a letter today from the Premier (Mr. Kinew) to Minister of Industry Mélanie Joly, and I want to identify for the member opposite the would–what would have been really helpful is we try and edge our way towards solving this problem, is if only we had our own, I don't know, prov­incial telco that we could work with that look at heading out and solving some of these problems, right?

      But unfor­tunately, a previous–

The Speaker: Member's time has expired. [interjection] The member's time has expired. [interjection]

      Order.

      The time for oral questions has also expired.

Introduction of Guests

The Speaker: And I have some intro­ductions.

      We have seated in the public gallery, from the Steinbach Christian School, 24 grade 9 students under the direction of Curt Plett, and this group is located in the con­stit­uency of the hon­our­able member for Steinbach (Mr. Goertzen).

Petitions

MRI Machine for Portage Regional Health Facility

Mr. Obby Khan (Leader of the Official Opposition): Hon­our­able Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

      The background to this–

An Honourable Member: Point of order.

Point of Order

The Speaker: The hon­our­able First Minister, on a point of order.

Hon. Wab Kinew (Premier): Yes, Hon­our­able Speaker. I was remiss in not following your direction to table some of the infor­ma­tion that you had requested, and so I'm just going to quickly do so before I leave this afternoon.

 I think that these are the comments that the member opposite made about his colleagues, and–well, we'll save the rest for later.

The Speaker: I thank the hon­our­able First Minister for that. It's not a point of order, but I do ap­pre­ciate that you tabled the docu­ments you said you would.

* * *

The Speaker: The hon­our­able Leader of the Official Op­posi­tion, on his petition.

Mr. Khan: I wish to present the following petition to the Legis­lative Assembly of Manitoba.

      The back­ground to this petition–sorry, Hon­our­able Speaker–the back­ground to this petition is as follows:

      (1) Thanks to investments 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–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 computer-generated radio waves to create digital images of organs and tissues in the human body. It is used for disease detection, diagnoses 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.

* (14:40)

       (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 services 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 more remote communities to access MRI imaging services.

      (7) The wait times for Manitobans to receive an MRI scan is currently six to eight months. Having an MRI machine in Portage regional health facility will help reduce these wait times for patients and provide care sooner.

      We petition the Legislative Assembly as follows:

      To urge the provincial government to support investment and placement of an MRI machine in the Portage regional health facility in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba.

      Hon­our­able Speaker, this petition was signed by Selene Marsh, Shawna Patton, Darlene [phonetic] Brasher. This petition has been signed by many, many, many more Manitobans.

The Speaker: The hon­our­able member for Roblin.

      Hon­our­able member for Roblin, we can't hear you.

Headingley–Highway 1 Pedestrian Upgrades

The Speaker: The hon­our­able member for Roblin, we can't hear you.

Mrs. Kathleen Cook (Roblin): Can you hear me now?

The Speaker: Apparently, we can hear you, or at least some people can. So I would ask that you really need to speak up.

Mrs. Cook: I'm not sure what's going on with my headphones.

      I wish to present the following petition to the Legis­lative Assembly of Manitoba.

      The back­ground to this petition is as follows:

      (1) Highway 1 through the RM of Headingley is in­creasingly busy with vehicular traffic. As a major truck and trans­por­tation route that runs through both com­mercial and resi­den­tial areas, safety is of para­mount importance.

      (2) There are many local busi­nesses and homes in this area, meaning that motorists must safely share the roadway with cyclists and pedestrians.

      (3) The stretch of Highway 1 westbound from Dodds Road to Bobiche Street does not have a service road, nor does it have a shoulder. Instead, Manitoba Trans­por­tation and Infra­structure has recently installed a curb on this stretch, which is unique compared to the rest of Highway 1 through Headingley.

      (4) The de­part­ment's decision to forgo a shoulder or turning lane forces cyclists and pedestrians onto the actual lane of traffic, presenting a serious safety hazard.

      (5) Residents have reported challenges safely navigating this stretch of highway while cycling or walking to nearby homes and busi­nesses. Some residents fear that it is only a matter of time until a pedestrian or cyclist is seriously injured or killed.

      We petition the Legis­lative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:

      To urge the prov­incial gov­ern­ment to install a sidewalk or shoulder with a turning lane to facilitate safe pedestrian and cyclist traffic along Highway 1 westbound from Dodds Road to Bobiche Street.

      And this petition is signed by Michael Gowrie, Rodrigo [phonetic] Gagnon, Branden Robson and many, many other Manitobans.

Breast Screening

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) Due to evolving scientific evidence, the Canadian Cancer Society, CCS, is now urging all provinces and territories to lower the starting age for breast screening to 40.

      (2) Based off 2023 treatment standards, it is esti­mated that screening women annually for breast cancer starting at age 40 will save the Canadian health-care system $460 million annually.

      (3) After non-melanoma skin cancers, breast cancer is the most common form of cancer among Canadian women. One in eight Canadian women will be diagnosed with breast cancer during their lifetime, and one in 36 will die from it. This is 30,500 diagnoses and 5,500 deaths every year, and 84 diagnoses and 15 deaths every day.

      (4) Early detection of breast cancer will lead to better out­comes in patients, with better odds of survival and less severe cases. Women in their 40s who have access to mammograms have a 44 per cent lower mortality rate from breast cancer than those who don't receive screening.

      (5) Every other province and territory in Canada has already lowered the breast cancer screening age, or announced their in­ten­tion to do so. Other provinces in Canada have already commenced the work of expanding screening programs and hiring additional technologists into their public health-care system.

      (6) Manitoba is currently behind the rest of the country and has no formal plan to increase its screening capacity or lower the breast cancer screening age.

* (14:50)

      (7) Lowering the breast cancer screening age to 40 in Manitoba will reduce long-term costs to the health-care system because cancers that are caught earlier are typically less complicated to treat.

      We petition the Legis­lative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:

      To urge the prov­incial gov­ern­ment to imme­diately put forward a plan to increase breast cancer screening capacity and lower the breast cancer screening age to 40.

      And, Hon­our­able Speaker, this petition was signed by Ian Brew [phonetic], Norrie [phonetic] Mitchell, Jeff Harwood and many, many other fine Manitobans.

MRI Machine for Portage Regional Health Facility

MLA Jeff Bereza (Portage la Prairie): Hon­our­able Speaker, 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 wave 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 it's on the No. 1 Highway in the 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 services 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 people 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 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 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 the Portage regional health facility in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba.

      This is signed by Libi Thomas, Shibi Philip and Doug Glathew, plus many, many more Manitobans.

      Thank you, Hon­our­able Speaker.

Programs for Adolescents with Disabilities

Ms. Jodie Byram (Agassiz): I wish to present the following petition to the Legis­lative Assembly of Manitoba.

      The back­ground to this petition is as follows:

      (1) Children with dis­abil­ities often require child care beyond the age of 12. Children with dis­abil­ities aged 12 to 17 face a gap in publicly available care programs.

      (2) The current adolescent-care service model creates undue hardship on caregivers.

      (3) While developing children may be entering into extracurricular activities, school clubs or spending time with friends in­de­pen­dently, children with dis­abil­ities have reduced op­por­tun­ities for such social and recreational op­por­tun­ities due to the lack of spaces.

      (4) The current self-managed adolescent-care models place additional workloads onto already stressed families, requiring parents to seek all alter­na­tive options and prove their need for care.

      (5) The current adolescent-care system, as part of overall respite and support available to families, is failing families of children with dis­abil­ities, as identified in the Manitoba Advocate for Children and Youth's Bridging the Gaps report.

      (6) To date, none of the nine recom­men­dations it contains have been completed beyond 50 per cent.

      (7) The recom­men­dations in this report touch on many issues facing families, with adolescent care being but a small component of their overall needs.

      We petition the Legis­lative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:

      (1) To urge the prov­incial gov­ern­ment to fully implement recom­men­dations in the Bridging the Gaps report.

      (2) To urge the prov­incial gov­ern­ment to imme­diately implement official policies and procedures that are more respectful and col­lab­o­rative, which also minimize harm faced by families seeking help from Children's dis­ABILITY Services.

      (3) To urge the Minister of Families to arrange for a full review of em­ploy­ment supports provided by Children's dis­ABILITY Services for children with dis­abil­ities aged 12 to 17, including direct con­sul­ta­tion with impacted families and to explore a full spectrum of options to support families, em­power­ing them to choose solutions that best fit their needs.

      This petition is signed by William Hunter [phonetic], Reid Boyer and Sam Warden and many, many more Manitobans.

      Thank you.

MRI Machine for Portage Regional Health Facility

Mr. Kelvin Goertzen (Steinbach): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

      And these are the reasons for the petition:

      (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 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.

* (15:00)

      (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.

      (5) Located around Portage la Prairie are the Dakota Tipi, the Dakota Plains, Sandy Bay and Long Plain First Nations reserves. Indigenous people 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 in diagnose–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 more remote communities to access MRI imaging services.

      (7) 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 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 the Portage regional health facility in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba.

      And, Hon­our­able Speaker, this petition is signed by Angie Addison, Jolene Gollabrudu [phonetic] and Marie Rosalie Gellamandu [phonetic] and many other fine Manitobans.

Op­posi­tion to Releasing Repeat Offenders

Mr. Wayne Ewasko (Lac du Bonnet): I wish to present the following petition, and 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 the 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 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

      (2) To urge the provincial government to lobby the federal government to immediately repeal pro­visions of the Criminal Code that allow for the continued victimization of law-abiding Manitobans while granting repeat offenders additional rights.

      Hon­our­able Speaker, this petition is signed by G. Fotheringham, Cari-Ann Nickels, Bob Kriski and many more fine Manitobans.

Medical Assist­ance in Dying

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.

      (7) Vul­ner­able Manitobans must be given suicide pre­ven­tion counselling instead of suicide assist­ance; and

      (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 Lisa Sawatzky, Susan Peters, Ann Wolfe and many, many Manitobans.

Location of Safe Injection Sites

Mrs. Carrie Hiebert (Morden-Winkler): I wish to present the following petition.

      The Province of Manitoba has filled–filed–sorry.

      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. with sufficient–without sufficient public consultation.

* (15:10)

      The–(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 and 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 is–it will erode public safety and confidence in the area.

      (4) The existing community consultations specifically ignored concerns about public safety and were criticized by community members for being artificial and scripted.

      (5)  The 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 the Canadian Centre of Recovery and Excellence.

      (7)  This decision is–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 Medicine clinics to break this 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 site will be proposed without commu­nity support.

      This petition was signed by Jalopo Caligio [phonetic], Jose Reis and Sonia Gomez [phonetic], and many other Manitobans.

      Thank you.

Hecla Village Road and Highway 8 Repairs

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:

Mr. Tyler Blashko, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair

      (1) Highway 8 traverses Hecla Island for approxi­mately 30 kilometres from the south where it crosses the causeway to the northern tip at Lindsay tower.

      (2) Hecla Village Road should be a 10‑kilometre lakeside journey that connects people to the history of the island, including its Icelandic heritage.

      (3) Drivers are instead faced with a patchwork of broken pavement, collapsing shoulders, dust clouds that impede motorcycle traffic and gravel potholes that damage vehicles, all of which impact the quality of life of residents, busi­nesses, visitors and tourists alike.

      (4) Highway 8 and Hecla Village Road are vital to the economic and social well-being of Hecla Island. With the 150th anniversary of New Iceland that occurred this year, the Province should be showcasing its heritage and history, not its infra­structure failings.

      (5) Hecla Village Road is unique in that its location makes its repair and maintenance the respon­si­bility of the Minister of Environ­ment and Climate Change, while Highway 8 is the respon­si­bility of the Minister of Trans­por­tation and Infra­structure.

      (6) On May 18, 2023, the prov­incial gov­ern­ment minister of natural resources and resource dev­elop­ment, along with the then-minister of Trans­por­tation and Infra­structure, announced historic funding for infra­­structure repairs and upgrades to prov­incial parks.

      (7) Prov­incial park infra­structure spending was significantly cut, with a reduction of 47 per cent in the 2024‑2025 budget, and the 2025‑2026 budget under the current prov­incial gov­ern­ment also failed to return infra­structure to the previously announced 2023 spend­ing levels.

      (8) Highway 8 and Hecla Village Road have become extremely dangerous, unsafe and have deteriorated to a state that disrespects residents, busi­nesses, visitors and tourists, and truly embarrasses the province as a whole.

      We petition the Legis­lative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:

      To urge the Minister of Environ­ment and Climate Change and the Minister of Trans­por­tation and Infra­structure to imme­diately allocate funding to rebuild Highway 8 and Hecla Village Road to ensure that they are safe, dependable, well maintained and restored to a con­di­tion that will not detour tourists.

      This petition was signed by Tammy Axelsson, Sasha Helgason and Lila Carter and many, many other fine Manitobans.

Op­posi­tion to Releasing Repeat Offenders

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) 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 the 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 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

      (2) To urge the provincial government to lobby the federal government to immediately repeal pro­visions of the Criminal Code that allow for the continued victimization of law-abiding Manitobans while granting repeat offenders additional rights.

* (15:20)

      This petition has been signed by Jodi Hughes, Nona Ferris, Eleanor Braden and many, many Manitobans.

      Thank you, hon­our­able Deputy Speaker.

Provincial Road 210

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 by 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 announced 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.

      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 Janet Letkeman, Elizabeth Culdewski [phonetic], Joyce Peters and many, many other Manitobans.

MRI Machine for Portage Regional Health Facility

Mr. Greg Nesbitt (Riding Mountain): Hon­our­able Speaker, I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

      The background to this petition is as follows:

      (1) Thanks to the investment made under the previous PC gov­ern­ment–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 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 in is–and is on the No. 1 Highway in the 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.

      (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 more remote communities to access MRI imaging services.

      (7) 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 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 the Portage regional health facility in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba.

* (15:30)

      Hon­our­able Deputy Speaker, this petition has been signed by Jamie Bernard, Mary Braun, Raymond Braun and many, many, many other fine Manitobans.

      Thank you, hon­our­able Deputy Speaker.

Funding Crime Cost Mitigation for Small Business

Mr. Richard Perchotte (Selkirk): I did not hear you acknowledge me.

      I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

      The background to this petition is as follows:

      (1) Small businesses are vital in supporting their local economy, and the provincial government has a responsibility to act and support them.

      (2) The recent increase in 'vigilantelism'–I didn't say that right, 'vigilantelism'–shows that Manitoba do not trust this provincial government to fulfill its responsibility.

      (3) More than half–54 per cent–of small businesses in Manitoba are impacted by crime. Property damage, theft, littering and public intoxication are some of the crimes that affect most businesses across the Canadian federation–according to the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. There has been a 44 per cent increase in shoplifting incidents over the last year.

      (4) In order to combat this rise of crime, small businesses try, unaided, to implement various out-of-pocket security measures and safety training for their staff, and they face increasing costs when they incur property damage or theft.

      (5) Vandalism, break-ins and other senseless acts cannot be accepted as a cost of doing business for businesses throughout Manitoba, and the provincial government must do more to ease the burdens small businesses are carrying with its catch-and-release justice system.

      (6) Failing to support small businesses is failing the Manitoba economy, failing Manitoba families and failing Manitobans' dreams.

      (7) The security rebate program in place for home­owners and small businesses does not cover the real costs impacting businesses, such as vandalism, property damage and repairs.

      We urge the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:

      To urge the provincial government to support small businesses through specific funding to reimburse the expenses and insurance deductibles that they incur as a result of crime.

      This petition has been signed by Reed Sutherland, Gerald Sawatsky, Luke Lovenjak and many more fine Manitobans.

Mr. Balcaen: I'm wondering if you could canvass the House to seek leave for me to read a very im­por­tant petition on behalf of the member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Piwniuk).

The Deputy Speaker: Is there leave for the member from Brandon West to read a petition on behalf of the member for Turtle Mountain?

Some Honourable Members: Agreed.

Some Honourable Members: No.

The Deputy Speaker: I hear a no.

      Seeing no further petitions, orders–[interjection]–orders of the–the hon­our­able member for Spruce Woods.

Prov­incial Trunk Highway 34

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, PTH 34, is a two-lane provincial primary highway that runs from the US border where it meets with ND 20 to 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 being 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 the Trans-Canada Highway and PTH 2.

      The–(4) The 'deteriation' 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 the highway to transport heavy equipment.

      (5) Construction of a new bridge in accordance current design codes and the RTAC standard, located on 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 resurface the road once the new bridge has been completed.

      This has been signed by–this petition has been signed by Alicia Buydens, Rick Falk, Barry McLeod and many, many other Manitobans.

Op­posi­tion to Releasing Repeat Offenders

Mr. Ron Schuler (Springfield-Ritchot): I wish to present the following petition.

      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 the available tools to address this issue effectively.

* (15:40)

      (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 that allow dangerous criminals to remain free, which puts innocent Manitobans at risk.

      We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:

      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

      (2) To urge the provincial government to lobby the federal government to immediately repeal pro­visions of the Criminal Code that allow for the continued victimization of law-abiding Manitobans while granting repeat offenders additional rights.

      This has been signed by Darcy McKean, Chad S. Hoyer [phonetic], Wade Preston and many, many other Manitobans.

Location of Safe Injection Sites

Mrs. Lauren Stone (Midland): Hon­our­able Speaker, I wish to present the following petition:

      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 that the site is located in the immediate vicinity of a daycare centre, a high school and 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) The 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 the Canadian Centre of 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 Medicine clinics to break this 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 'freelay'–freeway.

      (2) To urge provincial government to legislate that no future site will be proposed without community support.

      This has been signed by Vidaladia Costa, Acbina Venezuela [phonetic], Jessica Lawrence and many, many more Manitobans.

Mr. Wayne Balcaen (Brandon West): Hon­our­able Deputy Speaker, could you canvass the House to ask if there is leave to allow me to read the petition for the hon­our­able member for Dawson Trail (MLA Lagassé) to represent his con­stit­uents.

The Deputy Speaker: Is there leave for the member from Brandon West to read the petition on behalf of the member for Dawson Trail?

Some Honourable Members: Yes.

Some Honourable Members: No.

The Deputy Speaker: I hear a no.

MRI Machine for Portage Regional Health Facility

Mr. Jeff Wharton (Red River North): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

      The background of 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 of 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 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 Highway No. 1 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 services 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 regional–Portage regional health facility will bring care closer to their home communities and provide greater access to diagnostics and 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, period. This would provide the op­por­tun­ity to transport patients by air from more remote communities to access MRI imaging services.

* (15:50)

      (7) 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 help reduce these wait times for patients and provide better care sooner.

      Hon­our­able Deputy Speaker, 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 the Portage regional health facility in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba.

      This petition is signed by Marian Switzer, Lynn Switzer, Lynda Wood and many, many, many more Manitobans.

      Thank you.

 Provincial Trunk Highway 45

Mr. Rick Wowchuk (Swan River): I wish to present the following petition to the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba.

      These are the reasons for this petition:

      (1) Upgrading Provincial Trunk Highway 45 will accelerate economic development as it will enhance connectivity, facilitate efficient transportation and pro­mote economic growth in the region.

      (2) Economic development will be further enhanced as improved road infrastructure attracts businesses, encourages investment and creates job opportunities.

      (3) Roads meeting the Roads and Transportation Association of Canada, RTAC, standards improve both safety and efficiency, as they can handle heavier loads, reducing the number of trips required for goods transportation.

      (4) Safer roads further benefit both communities and commercial vehicles, minimizing accidents and damage.

      (5) Upgrading to RTAC standards ensures resilience to challenges caused by climate change, such as thawing and flooding, which negatively impact road conditions.

      (6) Efficient transportation networks contribute to Manitoba's economic competitiveness, as upgraded roads support interprovincial and international goods movement, benefiting both trade and commerce.

      We petition the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba as follows:

      To urge the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure to take the necessary steps to upgrade Provincial Trunk Highway 45 from Russell to Provincial Trunk Highway 10 to meet RTAC standards.

      This petition is signed by Cam McDonald, Will Boudrey, Renata Stewart and many, many, many, many, many other Manitobans.

The Deputy Speaker: We were playing it fast and loose with those manys.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

GOVERNMENT BUSINESS

Hon. Nahanni Fontaine (Government House Leader): I'm interrupting debate on the address in reply to the Throne Speech today so the House may consider the gov­ern­ment motion on a Sessional Order, followed by second reading of Bill 2, the non-consentional dis­tri­bu­tion of intimate images amend­ment act and fol­lowed by Bill 3, The Manitoba Public Insurance Corpor­ation Amend­ment Act.

The Deputy Speaker: It has been announced that the debate on the address in reply to the Throne Speech will be interrupted so that the House may consider the gov­ern­ment motion on a sessional order, followed by second reading of Bill 2 and Bill 3.

Government Motion

Hon. Nahanni Fontaine (Government House Leader): I move, seconded by the Minister for Justice,

THAT the following Sessional Order applies for the duration of the Forty‑Third Legislature, despite any other rule or practice of this House.

Ethics Report Motions

1. Ethics Commissioner Reports dealing with a request for an opinion from the Ethics Commissioner (hereafter referred to as a request) regarding another member (or former member) under section 44(1) of The Conflict of Interest (Members and Ministers) Act, shall be considered by the Assembly through debate on an Ethics Report Motion.

2. In accordance with section 51(1) of The Conflict of Interest (Members and Ministers) Act, Ethics Report Motions must be considered by the Assembly within 10 sitting days after the report is tabled.

3. The tabling of a report from the Ethics Commissioner by the Speaker shall serve as notice of the Ethics Report Motion, which shall then appear on the Order Paper the next sitting day under the heading Ethics Report Motions and shall be listed without referencing a sponsoring member.

4. On the 10th sitting day after an Ethics Commissioner Report has been tabled (hereafter referred to as deadline day):

(a) The Speaker shall call for debate any Ethics Report Motion that must be considered that day in accordance with The Conflict of Interest (Members and Ministers) Act (hereafter referred to as an outstanding Ethics Report Motion), with multiple outstanding Ethics Report Motions called in the order those motions are listed on the Order Paper; and

(b) If routine proceedings has not concluded 60 minutes prior to the usual adjournment hour, the Speaker must terminate routine proceedings and proceed to orders of the day; and

(c) The House shall not adjourn until the questions have been put on all outstanding Ethics Report Motions.

5. If an Ethics Commissioner Report contains recommendations regarding two or more members (or former members):

(a) A separate Ethics Report Motion will be required to consider the recommendation for each member (or former member), and all motions must be considered by the deadline day.

(b) Ethics Report Motions originating from the same report may be considered on separate sitting days.

C.An Ethics Report Motion shall be considered as the first item of business under orders of the day, government business, with the following exceptions:

(a) Consideration of an Opposition Day motion shall take precedent and be considered as the first item of business under orders of the day.

(b) If the consideration of an Opposition Day motion is scheduled for a deadline day, consideration of any outstanding Ethics Report Motions or–shall commence as soon as the question has been put on the Opposition Day motion–sorry, where was I–and the House shall not adjourn until the questions have been put on the outstanding Ethics Report Motions.

* (16:00)

(c) If a deadline day falls on a sitting day scheduled for the consideration of:

                           i.   the motion for an address in reply to the Speech from the Throne;

                         ii.   the motion to approve in general the budgetary policy of the government; or

                       iii.   a constitutional amendment motion;

those matters shall be considered until the usual hour of adjournment, at which point the House will consider the outstanding Ethics Report Motions and not adjourn until the questions have been put on all of those motions.

In accordance with rules 35(6) and 47(2), the Government House Leader may also interrupt debate on the budget motion or the address in reply to the Speech from the Throne for the consideration of an outstanding Ethics Report Motion, if both interruption days have not been used.

7. If a deadline day coincides with any of the completion days in rule 2 related to specified bills, designated bills, or business of Supply set out in subrule 76(1) including The Appropriation Act and The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, consideration of the outstanding Ethics Report Motion will take precedent and must be concluded before the House proceeds with other business. The House shall not adjourn until the questions have been put on the outstanding Ethics Report Motions or any relevant completion day items referenced in rule 2.

8. Debate on an Ethics Report Motion shall proceed as follows:

(a) Debate shall be limited to one sitting day. The House shall not adjourn until all members have had an opportunity to speak to the motion. When there are no further speakers in the debate, the Speaker shall put the question.

(b) The Speaker shall read the motion to the House to open the floor for debate.

(c) The motion cannot be amended.

(d) No member shall speak longer than 10 minutes.

(e) Members may speak to the motion in the following sequence:

                           i.   the subject of the request, or a member from their party;

                         ii.   the member who made the request, or a member from their party;

                       iii.   a member from another recognized party;

                       iv.   a member from the subject of the request's party;

                         v.   a member from the party of the member who made the request;

                       vi.   an independent member;

                      vii.   a rotation of members from recognized parties, followed by an independent member.

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Amendments

9. After adoption by the House, this Sessional Order may be amended only by:

(a) unanimous consent of the House;

(b) passage of a subsequent Sessional Order by the House or;

(c) written agreement of all House leaders if the House is not sitting.

The Deputy Speaker: Is there leave to consider the motion as printed? [Agreed]

THAT the following Sessional Order applies for the duration of the Forty-Third Legislature, despite any other Rule or practice of this House.

Ethics Report Motions

1. Ethics Commissioner Reports dealing with a request for an opinion from the Ethics Commis­sioner (hereafter referred to as a "request") regarding another Member (or former Member) under Section 44(1) of The Conflict of Interest (Members and Ministers) Act, shall be considered by the Assembly through debate on an Ethics Report Motion.

2. In accordance with Section 51(1) of The Conflict of Interest (Members and Ministers) Act, Ethics Report Motions must be considered by the Assembly within 10 sitting days after the report is tabled.

3. The tabling of a report from the Ethics Commissioner by the Speaker shall serve as notice of the Ethics Report Motion, which shall then appear on the Order Paper the next sitting day under the heading "Ethics Report Motions" and shall be listed without referencing a sponsoring Member.

4. On the tenth sitting day after an Ethics Commissioner Report has been tabled (hereafter referred to as a "Deadline Day"):

a) The Speaker shall call for debate any Ethics Report Motion that must be considered that day in accordance with The Conflict of Interest (Members and Ministers) Act (hereafter referred to as an "outstanding Ethics Report Motion"), with multiple outstanding Ethics Report Motions called in the order those motions are listed on the Order Paper; and

b) If Routine Proceedings has not concluded 60 minutes prior to the usual adjournment hour, the Speaker must terminate Routine Proceedings and proceed to Orders of the Day; and

c) The House shall not adjourn until the questions have been put on all outstanding Ethics Report Motions.

5. If an Ethics Commissioner Report contains recommendations regarding two or more Members (or former Members):

a) A separate Ethics Report Motion will be required to consider the recommendation for each Member (or former Member), and all motions must be considered by the Deadline Day.

b) Ethics Report Motions originating from the same report may be considered on separate sitting days.

6. An Ethics Report Motion shall be considered as the first item of business under Orders of the Day – Government Business, with the following exceptions:

a) Consideration of an Opposition Day Motion shall take precedence and be considered as the first item of business under Orders of the Day.

b) If the consideration of an Opposition Day Motion is scheduled for a Deadline Day, consideration of any outstanding Ethics Report Motion(s) shall commence as soon as the question has been put on the Opposition Day Motion, and the House shall not adjourn until the question(s) have been put on the outstanding Ethics Report Motion(s).

c) If a Deadline Day falls on a sitting day scheduled for the consideration of:

         i.      the motion for an Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne;

       ii.      the motion to approve in general the budgetary policy of the Government; or

     iii.      a Constitutional Amendment Motion;

those matters shall be considered until the usual hour of adjournment, at which point the House will consider the outstanding Ethics Report Motion(s) and not adjourn until the questions have been put on all of those motions.

In accordance with Rules 35(6) and 47(2), the Government House Leader may also interrupt debate on the Budget motion or the Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne for the consideration of an outstanding Ethics Motion, if both interruption days have not been used.

7. If a Deadline Day coincides with any of the completion days in Rule 2 related to Specified Bills, Designated Bills, or the Business of Supply set out in sub-rule 76(1) including The Appropriation Act and The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, consideration of the outstanding Ethics Report Motion will take precedence and must be concluded before the House proceeds with other business. The House shall not adjourn until the questions have been put on the outstanding Ethics Report Motion(s) and any relevant completion day items referenced in Rule 2.

8. Debate on an Ethics Report Motion shall proceed as follows:

a) Debate shall be limited to one sitting day. The House shall not adjourn until all Members have had an opportunity to speak to the motion. When there are no further speakers in the debate, the Speaker shall put the question.

b) The Speaker shall read the motion to the House to open the floor for debate.

c) The motion cannot be amended.

d) No Member shall speak longer than 10 minutes.

e) Members may speak to the motion in the following sequence:

         i.      the subject of the request, or a Member from their Party;

       ii.      the Member who made the request, or a Member from their Party;

     iii.      a Member from another Recognized Party;

     iv.      a Member from the subject of the request's Party;

       v.      a Member from the party of the Member who made the request;

     vi.      an Independent Member;

    vii.      a rotation of Members from Recognized Parties, followed by an Independent Member.

General Provisions

Amendments

9. After adoption by the House, this Sessional Order may be amended only by:

a) unanimous consent of the House;

b) passage of a subsequent Sessional Order by the House or;

c) written agreement of all House Leaders if the House is not sitting.

The Deputy Speaker: The motion has been moved by the hon­our­able Gov­ern­ment House Leader (MLA Fontaine), seconded by the Minister of Justice (Mr. Wiebe),

THAT the following Sessional Order applies–dispense?

Some Honourable Members: No.

The Deputy Speaker: THAT the following Sessional Order applies for the duration of the Forty‑Third Legislature, despite any other rule or practice of this House.

Ethics Report Motions

1. Ethics Commissioner Reports dealing with a request for an opinion from the Ethics Commissioner (hereafter referred to as a request) regarding another member (or former member) under section 44(1) of The Conflict of Interest (Members and Ministers) Act, shall be considered by the Assembly through debate on an Ethics Report Motion.

2. In accordance with section 51(1) of The Conflict of Interest (Members and Ministers) Act, Ethics Report Motions must be considered by–

      It has been moved by the hon­our­able Gov­ern­ment House Leader, seconded by the hon­our­able Minister of Justice,

THAT the following Sessional Order applies for the duration of the Forty‑Third Legislature, despite any other rule or practice of this House.

Ethics Report Motions

1. Ethics Commissioner Reports dealing with a request for an opinion from the Ethics Commissioner (hereafter referred to as a request) regarding another minister (or former member) under section 44(1) of The Conflict of Interest (Members and Ministers) Act, shall be considered by the Assembly through debate on an Ethics Report Motion.

2. In accordance with section 51(1) of The Conflict of Interest (Members and Ministers) Act, Ethics Report Motions must be considered by the Assembly within 10 sitting days after the report is tabled.

3. The tabling of a report from the Ethics Commissioner by the Speaker shall serve as notice of the Ethics Report Motion, which shall then appear on the Order Paper the next sitting day under the heading Ethics Report Motions and shall be listed without referencing a sponsoring member.

4. On the 10th  sitting day after an Ethics Commissioner Report has been tabled (hereafter referred to as a deadline day):

(a) The Speaker shall call for debate any Ethics Report Motion that must be considered that day in accordance with The Conflict of Interest (Members and Ministers) Act (hereafter referred to as an outstanding Ethics Report Motion), with multiple outstanding Ethics Report Motions called in the order those motions are listed on the Order Paper; and

(b) If routine proceedings has not concluded 60 minutes prior to the usual adjournment hour, the Speaker must terminate routine proceedings and proceed to the orders of the day; and

(c) The House shall not adjourn until the questions have been put on all outstanding Ethics Report Motions.

5. If an Ethics Commissioner Report contains recommendations regarding two or more members (or former members):

(a) A separate Ethics Report Motion will be required to consider the recommendation for each member (or former member), and all motions must be considered by the deadline day.

(b) Ethics Report Motions originating from the same report may be considered on separate sitting days.

6. An Ethics Report Motion shall be considered as the first item of business under orders of the day, government business, with the following exceptions:

(a) Consideration of an Opposition Day motion shall take precedence and be considered as the first item of business under orders of the day.

(b) If the consideration of an Opposition Day motion is scheduled for a deadline day, consideration of an outstanding Ethics Report Motions shall commence as soon as the question has been put on the Opposition Day motion, and the House shall not adjourn until the questions have been put on the outstanding Ethics Report Motions.

(c) If a deadline day falls on a sitting day scheduled for the consideration of:

                           i.   the motion for an address in reply to the Speech from the Throne;

                         ii.   the motion to approve in general the budgetary policy of the government; or

                       iii.   a constitutional amendment motion;

those matters shall be considered until the usual hour of adjustment–of adjournment, at which point the House will consider the outstanding Ethics Report Motions and not adjourn until the questions have been put on all of those motions.

In accordance with rules 35(6) and 47(2), the Government House Leader may also interrupt debate on the budget motion or the address in reply to the Speech from the Throne for the consideration of an outstanding Ethics Report Motion, if both interruption days have not been used.

7. If a deadline day coincides with any of the completion days in rule 2 related to specified bills, designated bills, or the business of Supply set out in subrule 76(1) including The Appro­priation Act and The Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act, consideration of the outstanding Ethics Report Motion will take precedence and must be concluded before the   House proceeds with other business. The House shall not adjourn until the questions have been put on the outstanding Ethics Report Motions and any relevant completion day items referenced in rule 2.

8. Debate on an Ethics Report Motion shall proceed as follows:

(a) Debate shall be limited to one sitting day. The House shall not adjourn until all members have had an opportunity to speak to the motion. When there are no further speakers in the debate, the Speaker shall put the question.

* (16:10)

(b) The Speaker shall read the motion to the House to open the floor for debate.

(c) The motion cannot be amended.

(d) No member shall speak longer than 10 minutes.

(e) Members may speak to the motion in the following sequence:

                           i.   the subject of the request, or a member from their party;

                         ii.   the member who made the request, or a member from their party;

                       iii.   a member from another recognized party;

                       iv.   a member from the subject of the request's party;

                         v.   a member from the party of the member who made the request;

                       vi.   an independent member;

                      vii.   a rotation of members from recognized parties, followed by an independent member.

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Amendments

9. After adoption of the House, this Sessional Order may be amended only by:

(a) unanimous consent of the House;

(b) passage of a subsequent Sessional Order by the House or;

(c) written agreement of all House leaders if the House is not sitting.

      The motion is in order. Are there any speakers?

      Seeing no speakers, is the House ready for the question?

Some Honourable Members: Question.

The Deputy Speaker: All those in favour of–[interjection]

      Shall the motion pass? [Agreed]

      The motion is accordingly passed.

Second Readings

Bill 2–The Non-Consensual Dis­tri­bu­tion of Intimate Images Amendment Act

The Deputy Speaker: We will now move on to second reading of Bill 2, The Non-Consensual Dis­tri­bu­tion of Intimate Images Amend­ment Act.

Hon. Matt Wiebe (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I move, seconded by the Minister for Educa­tion and Early Child­hood Learning, that Bill 2, The Non-Consensual Dis­tri­bu­tion of Intimate Images Amend­ment Act, be now read a second time and referred to a com­mit­tee of this House.

Motion presented.

Mr. Wiebe: I'm pleased to rise in the House today to intro­duce for second reading Bill 2, The Non-Consensual Dis­tri­bu­tion of Intimate Images Amend­ment Act.

      The bill will address the legis­lative changes recom­­mended in the report following the com­pre­hen­sive five-year review of the act, which was formerly known as The Intimate Image Pro­tec­tion Act.

      The amend­ments will expand and clarify the rights of persons who have had their intimate images distributed without their consent, or who fear that their intimate images are about to be distributed.

      To better protect Manitobans, several amend­ments in the act are required, which include: the definition of intimate image is now expanded to include images in which a person is nearly nude, or images in which a person is not identifiable.

      New definitions are also included for visual recording and–of Internet intermediary, broadening the provision to allow an authorized agency to refuse to act when a person has provided false infor­ma­tion.

      We are intro­ducing a new tort for threatening to distribute an intimate image, including new provisions for the ex­pect­a­tion of privacy where a person is not identifiable and to ensure that a person is entitled to a reasonable ex­pect­a­tion of privacy after their death.

      Clarifying the meaning of public interest by provi­ding examples when the image is distributed in good faith, for instance, amongst law en­force­ment or within court proceedings.

      Expanding the civil remedies to allow the courts to order the defendant and Internet intermediary or others to make every reasonable effort to make the image unavailable to others.

      New provisions for civil remedies for threatening to distribute an intimate image. New provisions which are added for the courts to consider the views of a person depicted in an intimate image that must be taken into account when deciding whether or not to order or revoke a publication ban. The publication ban now includes the threatening of dis­tri­bu­tion of an intimate image.

      And, finally, a new provision to address the limited liability of Internet intermediaries and the author­ities of the court.

      Manitoba has proudly led the way in advancing the non-consensual dis­tri­bu­tion of intimate images act, and the bill will better protect persons who have had their intimate images distributed without their con­sent, or who fear that their intimate images are about to be distributed.

      The amend­ments were crafted in conjunction with C3P, the Canadian Centre for Child Pro­tec­tion, and it fits well within the safer com­mu­nities, safer downtowns public safety strategy and Mino'Ayaawag Ikwewag: All Women Doing Well strategy, as well as fitting with Canada's framework to address gender-based violence.

      I look forward to unanimous, you know–unanimous support of this bill and for it to pass along to second reading.

      Thank you, hon­our­able Speaker.

Questions

The Deputy Speaker: A question period of up to 15 minutes will be held. Questions may be addressed to the minister by any op­posi­tion or in­de­pen­dent member in the following sequence: first question by the official op­posi­tion critic or designate; subsequent questions asked by critics or designates from other recog­nized op­posi­tion parties; subsequent questions asked by each in­de­pen­dent member; remaining questions asked by any op­posi­tion members. And no question or answer shall exceed 45 seconds.

Ms. Jodie Byram (Agassiz): We all know, here in our world that's ever-changing with the tech­no­lo­gy and the advancement that goes along with that, it also gives us more challenges that we need to deal with here.

      And in doing so, can the minister explain for the public how the new tort is being esta­blished in this bill and how it helps to protect potential victims and those that have been victimized?

Hon. Matt Wiebe (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): A very good question. I ap­pre­ciate the work that the member opposite, the member for Agassiz, has been doing in this space as well. I know that she's working hard to protect children in this province as well and I look forward to having her support as well as others' to move this bill forward as quickly as possible.

      As the member opposite mentioned, the mere threat of distributing an intimate image can create a serious detriment to the victim. We want to stop images from even getting out into the public and the new tort will allow us to do that.

Mrs. Carrie Hiebert (Morden-Winkler): Yes, this is a very im­por­tant topic that we're talking about today.

      And I just meant to ask the minister if he could tell us about some of the organi­zations that were con­sulted by the gov­ern­ment and what organi­zations have been–have called for these kinds of pro­tec­tions to be imple­mented.

Mr. Wiebe: Likewise, the member for Morden-Winkler, I know, is–has a keen interest in protecting children, as well, and so I ap­pre­ciate her questions.

      I mentioned in my opening statement the work of the Canadian Centre for Child Pro­tec­tion; we call that–them C3P. And the work that they do is second to none within the province and really leading the country. And so, we have worked lockstep with them in ensuring that we're getting this legis­lation right.

      I do want to just point out that they work very closely and we have numer­ous partners within law enforcement. This is incredibly difficult work but we're partnering with law en­force­ment, as well, to ensure that this bill will be as strong as possible.

Ms. Byram: There is a measure to protect Internet intermediaries if they have taken reasonable steps to address unlawful dis­tri­bu­tion of intimate images in the use of its services, and a power of the court to make an order against an Internet intermediary.

      Can the minister tell us how we can ensure these Internet service providers are complying with the laws and doing every­thing they can to remove harmful intimate images from the Internet when directed by a court or requested by a victim?

Mr. Wiebe: This is a great question, and the member opposite certainly identifies a challenge that we're having, I think, across gov­ern­ment when it comes to steps that we're taking within our juris­dic­tion–within the Canadian juris­dic­tion–but ultimately dealing with what are essentially inter­national companies, often ser­vice providers who do not exist within this country or have their services housed in other places.

      This gives the courts sig­ni­fi­cant powers to go after those Internet intermediaries. That being said, there are some that are willing to work with us in good faith and others that are bad actors. The challenge con­tinues, and we look to the federal gov­ern­ment to take a stronger stance within the Criminal Code, as well, to address this issue.

* (16:20)

Mrs. Hiebert: Are some of these changes as a result of changes in tech­no­lo­gy or oversights in previous legislation passed by the Legislature?

Mr. Wiebe: Yes, I wouldn't characterize it as over­sights by members here in the Chamber. All members stood and supported the work that we did around deepfakes.

      But, you know, the reality is, and this is what the Canadian Centre for Child Pro­tec­tion is stressing is, is that the tech­no­lo­gy is moving quickly. And so we, as legis­lators, need to move quickly.

      Again, that bill was brought last session. Here we are, this session, and already bringing forward new legis­lation. This addresses some of the longer term recom­men­dations, but it does take additional steps around Internet and intermediaries, and it also takes additional steps about the kinds of tech­no­lo­gy, how it's being shared or how the data is being shared.

      So we're trying to keep up, and we're doing every­thing that we can. This bill will bring us to the fore­front in Canada.

Ms. Byram: Can the minister tell us, what if the victim is not fully identified in the image, do they still have pro­tec­tion with these changes?

Mr. Wiebe: Again, very im­por­tant point. I ap­pre­ciate the member for raising this because this is one of the challenges that we know, under the current legis­lation, there is a limitation. If the individual is not identifiable, currently there is no recourse or it's limited, I guess; it's a challenge within the court.

      What this really allows us to do is if, you know, the individual knows this is them, this is their image and it's now being shared, as a victim, they give–they have more agency in this and they can actually, even without that identifiable specifics, able to remove these images.

      It's a great point, and it's some­thing that I think will give, again, victims more control over these images.

Mrs. Hiebert: With things changing so quickly and things–tech­no­lo­gy just–with AI and things keep going so quickly, we are seeing the world change quickly, very quickly, around us.

      With the onslaught of artificial intelligence and other tech­no­lo­gies that become very–have become very commonplace and accessible to the public, can the minister tell us about what the de­part­ment has learned about this and what is going on with the tech­no­lo­gy and the harms that have resulted from bad actors using tech­no­lo­gy in harmful ways and how else we can protect people from these harms?

Mr. Wiebe: Yes, you know, I mean, it's fascinating. I bet if you went back and looked at the debate on this bill–on the bill around deepfakes from a year ago, a lot of the terminology or a lot of the ways that we, even as legis­lators, talked about it, was–is probably out of date now. And at the very least, what we're seeing and what we're hearing from C3P and from law en­force­ment is is that the ease at which the tech­no­lo­gy can be used.

      So the member opposite mentioned AI and those tools that assist in the creation of this. We're seeing that it's being created at a faster pace and it's being used more frequently and more easily by the public. Again, we're keeping up with tech­no­lo­gy, but we're going to continue to make changes that protect chil­dren and protect vul­ner­able people.

Ms. Byram: Can the minister describe some of the specific examples of when the dis­tri­bu­tion of an intimate image is considered to be in the public interest and how they are set out in this bill?

Mr. Wiebe: Again, a great question, and the member opposite will remember in the bill briefing that we had, I identified this was one of the instances where I was very concerned. You know, what–in what cases could we see that it makes sense to distribute or to share an intimate image.

      What this is really spe­cific­ally targeted towards is those good-faith actors who are trying to assist a victim, trying to help. That can be law en­force­ment; that can be com­mu­nity; that can be really anyone who's doing this simply for the sake of supporting that victim and helping to get these images from being more widely distributed.

The Deputy Speaker: The minister's time has expired.

Mrs. Hiebert: Because we know that there's always evolving and new tech­no­lo­gy coming constantly, is there any additional or new edu­ca­tion that's being proposed for–spe­cific­ally for this bill or with the intimate–the–like, because we have so many youth and young adults that are targeted helping to protect our loved ones that could be victims of these images being distributed?

Mr. Wiebe: Yes, I mean this is such an im­por­tant point that, you know, we–I have young kids and I just think about, you know, the world that they're growing up in and the kinds of pressures they're feeling. Really, we have leaned into the relationship with C3P.

      Members of this Chamber, the public will have seen their public advocacy campaigns. They are phenomenal and they really reach that audience.

      Again, the member opposite mentions young people, so they're targeted towards those young people and it gives them con­fi­dence that they have somebody out there looking out for them.

      If somebody doesn't feel–if a young person doesn't feel comfortable going to a parent or guardian, they should always feel comfortable going to C3P and to law en­force­ment.

Ms. Byram: Can the minister tell us a bit about how the specific measures in this bill have come about? Have the courts or the Crown attorneys made these recom­men­dations based on recent ex­per­ience in enforcing the current laws and how this has evolved and brought to light since the initial legis­lation was brought forward?

Mr. Wiebe: Well, again, the impetus for this is the five-year review and there were a number of recom­men­dations that flowed from that. But, again, I think the member opposite has hit the nail on the head that this is really those who work in the space who work on this–these issues every single day, that support victims every single day who have come forward and said these are the changes that'll have the biggest impact.

      And so we trust their guidance because we know that, you know, they are experts in this field and they have the best interests of victims at heart and that's why it was so im­por­tant to bring this bill as our first piece of legis­lation this session.

Mrs. Hiebert: What powers are given to the courts to help protect victims and ensure ap­pro­priate measures and orders can be taken to rectify the harm and ensure the defendant complies with court orders?

Mr. Wiebe: Yes, this bill specifically gives additional powers to the courts in making–obviously making rulings, making judgments, but also enforcing.

      And so, for instance, we talked about the Internet intermediaries. These are oftentimes companies that are–you know, exist transnationally. We've seen that there's been some success in having those court orders; sometimes just banning those images from even being within the country as a starting point. And, of course, contempt of court and the ability the court has, has added some teeth to this parti­cular change in the legis­lation.

Ms. Byram: I know we've touched briefly on the newly esta­blished tort, but can the minister expand on and tell us what the remedies are in the bill for this newly esta­blished tort and for the threatened dis­tri­bu­tion of an intimate image?

Mr. Wiebe: Yes. Well, so as I said, this gives an additional ability for a new tort which spe­cific­ally talks about threatening and other issues that have been identified through the review. But this also gives us more prov­ision for civil remedies, and of course we know this is the key to this legis­lation.

      We need an all-hands-on-deck approach and we need it through the Criminal Code. As I said we need those changes to come, but we certainly want to take every step we can within those civil remedies to ensure that we're getting the results, and that is to protect victims.

Mrs. Hiebert: I just have a question: like, we know that there's so many devastating situations that are happening with young people. I mean, we–I lost–we lost somebody in my–one of my–in my con­stit­uency because they were devastated because–so they took their own life, and it was–they–anyway they–it was devastating for our com­mu­nity because of intimate–like a photo of that was shared.

      And so my question would be, like, what is the parameters, or how will this bill affect the platforms that are being used to share these intimate photos? And–yes.

* (16:30)

Mr. Wiebe: Yes, my heart goes out to the com­mu­nity. And we've heard some horrific stories about young people who feel helpless or feel cornered, who feel like they have no one to turn to.

      As I said, you know, you hope as a parent that your child would come to you and that they'd feel comfortable doing that. That's not always the case.

      And that's why C3P has that public en­gage­ment philosophy, where they go out to young people and they tell them: We're here for you, we can stand up with you, and we can help navigate the changes, again, that we're making in this legis­lation–the existing legis­lation. They'll assist victims, and we need more young people to know about the work that they do.

Ms. Byram: I want to ask the minister, does this bill go far enough to protect the victims?

Mr. Wiebe: Yes, a good question, and a good way to end, I think, our discussion here today. What I think I'm sensing and I'm hearing from the op­posi­tion is that we are all in lockstep on this legis­lation.

      You know, I–we believe that this is as robust as we can bring forward at this time. But I think the message here is that we want to continue to work on this–these issues, and as we continue to see the evolu­tion of tech­no­lo­gy, the challenges amongst victims and young people, let's work together; let's continue to make legis­lation stronger in the future.

The Deputy Speaker: The time for questions has expired.

Debate

The Deputy Speaker: The floor is now open for debate.

Ms. Jodie Byram (Agassiz): I am honoured to stand here in this Chamber today. It gives me the op­por­tun­ity to put words on the record regarding Bill 2, The Non-Consensual Dis­tri­bu­tion of Intimate Images Amend­ment Act.

      It also gives me a chance to acknowledge the efforts of the previous PC gov­ern­ment that brought forward bill 27 in 2022, which then received royal assent in May of 2023. That bill also made some im­prove­ments to ensure the pro­tec­tion of those whose intimate images has been distributed without consent.

      I also want to high­light the work of my colleague from Midland. I know she had been working on amend­­ments to the act and had a bill listed on the Order Paper in early 2024. But the gov­ern­ment, of course, brought forward their own version with bill 24 just last year.

      I did have the op­por­tun­ity to meet with the Minister of Justice (Mr. Wiebe) for a bill briefing, and I would like to thank the minister for that op­por­tun­ity. It was–gave me time to gain further insight to the legis­lation, and I really respected the dialogue that we had.

      I also want to extend my thanks to those who work tirelessly behind the scenes to support some of our most vul­ner­able popu­la­tions, parti­cularly young children and youth. These pro­fes­sionals, whether law en­force­ment or counsellors, have heard heart-wrenching stories. They have had to view in­cred­ible, unbelievable images that can be hard to erase from one's mind, all of which is related to the wrongful dis­tri­bu­tion and theft of intimate images. That type of work must weigh heavy on one's heart and one's mind. And I just want to say a shout-out to those individuals who work in the field of law en­force­ment and child pro­tec­tion.

      I also want to thank the de­part­ment's Victim Services branch. They are doing great work behind the scenes, as well, to help all those that've been impacted. The Canadian Centre for Child Pro­tec­tion has been keeping elected officials informed on these issues for many years now and has put forward many of the measures in this act to strengthen Manitoba laws and address the various circum­stances that may arise.

      And as we've mentioned earlier, tech­no­lo­gy evolves and we as a society must adapt and implement neces­sary changes as well and–just to keep up with the times. And I think this bill addresses some of those situations that we are faced with here today.

      It's clear that Bill 2, the non-consensual dis­tri­bu­tion of intimate images, will address the critical issues, and it's timely and will affect the lives of individuals across our province and indeed our nation.

      The issue is not just a legal matter. It is a deeply personal one that impacts the dignity, the privacy and the mental health of countless individuals, and in parti­cularly, our youth and our vul­ner­able popu­la­tions.

      It's also im­por­tant to discuss the proposed amend­ments to The Non-Consensual Dis­tri­bu­tion of Intimate Images Act. These amend­ments are designed to expand and clarify the rights of persons who have had their intimate images distributed without their consent, or who fear that such images may soon be distributed.

      Changes are im­por­tant, as they represent a 'fun­da­mentable' shift in how we protect the rights and dignity of individuals in our in­creasingly digital society.

      An im­por­tant key amend­ment included in this bill is the definition of intimate image. It is expanded to encompass images in which a person is nearly nude or not identifiable. This is a crucial and critical change that acknowledges that even images that may not seem overtly sexual, they can have sig­ni­fi­cant emotional and psychological impacts on many individuals.

      I want to also mention that the term in its true definition may not reflect that of some–in some cultures, so there may be some sensitivity around the term of what some cultures may consider to be nearly nude.

      Another im­por­tant element to the bill is a new tort of threatening to distribute an intimate image. This is a vital step forward, provi­ding a legal avenue for victims to seek justice and recourse against those who would use threats of distribution as a means of manipulation or coercion.

      Furthermore, we–there's specified examples of when the dis­tri­bu­tion of an intimate image may be con­sidered to be the public interest. This clarity is essential, as it helps describe the boundaries of acceptable conduct and ensures that individuals are not unjustly victimized under the guise of public interest.

      Another con­sid­era­tion in the bill is the views of a person depicted in an intimate image must be taken into account regarding publication bans in court cases. This provision is im­por­tant and is designed to protect victims of being revictimized by further publication of their images and to provide courts with the guidance they need to use publication bans that consider the unique circum­stances of each case.

      This is im­por­tant for the victims in this case to have a voice and to take control of their situation, and an op­por­tun­ity to speak.

      The powers of the court are expanded to include the ability to require Internet service providers, or ISP, and intermediaries to remove intimate images from their platforms. This also is a crucial step to ensure that once an image is deemed harmful or non-consensual, it can be swiftly removed, thereby minimizing the emotional and psychological harm inflicted on the victim.

      However, there still remains work to be done in how this will–bill will be seen internationally with companies to–and ensuring that they abide by prov­incial legis­lation here in Manitoba.

      I understand the amend­ments in this bill are designed to strengthen the current act and expand the pro­tec­tions available to individuals who have been victim­ized by the non-consensual dis­tri­bu­tion of one's intimate images. These are common sense pro­tec­tions that will help protect the lives and well being of many Manitobans.

      Again, this legis­lation is closely related to the previous bills brought forward by the gov­ern­ment, parti­cularly bill 24 in 2024, and builds upon the foundational work initiated by the previous PC gov­ern­ment in 2022. It's essential that we recog­nize the continuity in our approach to this pressing issue as we seek to refine and enhance the legal framework that governs the dis­tri­bu­tion of intimate images.

* (16:40)

      As we discuss the bill, it is im­por­tant to reiterate the support for victims. We unequivocally support the victims who have had their intimate images or deep­fakes distributed or placed on the Internet. These individuals deserve our compassion, under­standing and commit­ment to justice. It takes courage for people of all ages to come forward and speak out, but especially the youth that are and have been affected by these issues. There must be strong penalties for the offenders, and imposing strong penal­ties and con­se­quences for those who threaten publication, victimize others or profit from the non-consensual publication and exploit­ation of intimate images.

      It is im­por­tant to provide law en­force­ment and the courts the necessary tools to enforce publication bans and ensure that Internet providers co‑operate in removing harmful images, which can cause sig­ni­fi­cant emotional distress and mental health crisis for victims and their families. Esta­blish­ing a tort for threatening to distribute an image is a crucial step, and it serves as a deterrent against harmful actions and behaviours, also provi­ding victims with additional legal tools.

      There is growing risks from the rise in artificial intelligence and deepfakes. It is imperative that there be new regula­tions and laws that protect our youth and vul­ner­able individuals from ex­ploit­ation and harmful actions by malicious actors and child predators. We see this in our younger people where AI-generated fakes are being created. It is in­creasingly horrific acts that come from this. We've seen it here in Winnipeg and in other schools where such fakes were posted online, and it impacts the lives of not just the children but the families as a whole.

      In April 2023, a Quebec man was sentenced to more than three years in prison for using AI to produce child pornography. We hear of young people taking their own lives due to fake images being distributed or intimate images they have shared being used to threaten them. The stories are unimaginable, and there are many we don't hear or read about and are too scary to think about.

      How many people are scared and ashamed to come forward and they are left living in silence and carrying that burden? It's im­por­tant that we all learn the devastating harm caused by this non-consensual dis­tri­bu­tion. We must listen to and respect the views of victims. Their ex­per­ience must inform our legis­lative efforts, and it is im­por­tant to learn how this impacts young people and the con­se­quences they cope with as they enter adulthood.

      Let's address and talk about the issue of ex­ploit­ation, hon­our­able Deputy Speaker. Bill 2 addresses an issue that can affect many Manitobans but has had a parti­cular negative impact on our youth. And we heard just moments ago from a colleague and member here from Morden-Winkler who had somebody in their–in her home com­mu­nity take their life due to the sharing and the ex­ploit­ation of such an act.

      We know that there's many young people that have been subjected to coercion through threats and manipulative relationships. Bad actors exploit intimate images to manipulate young individuals, causing immense harm to their mental health; in some tragic cases, leading to suicide. We've heard the reports of these, and I'm sure there are many more youth that have been harmed, and like I said, just aren't speaking about it.

      I want to take a moment to express our gratitude again to the Canadian Centre for Child Pro­tec­tion, for their tireless work bringing forward ideas that strengthen the legis­lation that's been brought forward here in Manitoba, and their commit­ment to safeguarding our children and the vul­ner­able popu­la­tions. I can't imagine the stories they've heard and the images that they have seen.

      Navigating the complexities of our digital age, we must all recog­nize that the world our children and young adults inhabit changes rapidly. It is our respon­si­bility as legis­lators to provide the public, the courts and our Crown attorneys with the tools necessary to combat these terrible actions against our citizens, parti­cularly the young and the vul­ner­able.

      We've witnessed both young women and young men victimized online, predators who threaten to release intimate images publicly. These threats are not mere inconveniences; they are weapons used to manipulate individuals into doing things against their will, exploiting their fears and their vul­ner­abilities.

      We all have to take action that we can take to prevent these predators and bad actors from con­tinuing their abuse. It is vital that we work together to deter this behaviour and halt the ongoing abuse and prevent further ex­ploit­ation. Children are at risk, youth are at risk, adults are at risk. We're all at risk.

      And there is a role for the federal gov­ern­ment in this as well, and we must also call upon the feds to step up, take action through the Criminal Code and  implement stronger laws to protect vul­ner­able Manitobans and all Canadians from coercion, black­mail and manipulation.

      Gov­ern­ments have been playing catch-up on regula­tions and laws in this rapidly evolving world of AI, deepfakes, online com­mu­nities and the dark web. There needs to be change, and we need to tailor new laws to govern these new situations and ensure that we protect those who are vul­ner­able from predators and criminals seeking to exploit others.

      We understand that relationships can sometimes be abusive, both physic­ally and mentally. One person may use intimate images obtained from another to manipulate, coerce or extort them for personal gain. With new tech­no­lo­gy comes the new terms and definitions, and this bill expands on those that were brought forward by our gov­ern­ment in 2022.

      Bill 2 is a continuation of what will be evolving legis­lation, intro­ducing measures supported and put forward by stake­holders dedi­cated to protecting chil­dren, young adults in Canada from the kind of abuse that can occur during online interactions. And in adults, we can see this on sometime dating websites and other interactions that adults are exploring as we explore the new digital age as well, and adults get caught in this as well.

      The bill also acknowledges cultural differences, recog­nizing that an intimate image may not always be a full nude, but can still have profound cultural and psychological effects. It expands on the definition of the intimate image, which is im­por­tant, and it takes these situations into account, ensuring that we are sensitive to the diverse back­grounds of individuals and our society.

      Most im­por­tantly, the bill seeks to empower the courts to hold Internet service providers and inter­mediaries accountable for removing intimate images from their platforms. The courts will have the author­ity to issue orders to these entities, ensuring that harmful material is promptly taken down. The act places an ex­pect­a­tion that intermediaries and Internet service providers will take all reasonable steps to remove these images from their websites and indexes.

      Additionally, the bill establishes the new tort–and we've mentioned that a number of times–new tort of threatening to distribute an intimate image. It provides the legal pathway for victims to take further action against individuals who are threatening them, giving the courts–or, allowing the courts to award damages, including punitive damages to punish those who've wronged the victim.

* (16:50)

      The bill also protects the rights of the victim by requiring the courts to consider the views of those who've been affected. This ensures that the plaintiff understands and consents to any further dis­tri­bu­tion of their image as part of evidence in court proceedings for other legal situations.

      Hon­our­able Speaker, the legis­lation brought–hon­our­able Deputy Speaker, the legis­lation brought forward by both our former PC gov­ern­ment and the current Legislature represents a sig­ni­fi­cant step towards addressing the victimization of young people and vul­ner­able individuals. However, I must em­pha­size that more work remains to be done, both at the prov­incial and federal levels. As tech­no­lo­gy and culture continue to evolve at a rapid pace, we must remain vigilant to protect our children and young adults from predators, abusers and online bullies.

      We're aware that sometimes the very individuals who are supposed to be friends, classmates or romantic partners can turn into threats, leading to extortion, abuse or blackmail. As legis­lators, we must con­tinually seek ways to strengthen our laws to better protect Manitobans and ensure that we are doing every­thing possible to safeguard our children and young adults from such victimization.

      In conclusion, The Non-Consensual Dis­tri­bu­tion of Intimate Images Act is a critical piece of legis­lation that reflects our commit­ment to protecting the rights and dignity of individuals in our society. We must all work together and take the essential steps towards creating a safer environ­ment for all Manitobans.

      As we move forward, I hope we can all listen to the voices and learn from those who have been affected by these issues. With our ever-changing world, we must all ensure that our laws evolve alongside tech­no­lo­gy, provi­ding the pro­tec­tions that our citizens need and deserve.

      As legis­lators, we can make a difference in the lives of those who have been victimized and ensure that our province remains a safe and sup­port­ive place for all. This appears to be a logical step forward in strengthening pro­tec­tions for vul­ner­able Manitobans and youth. I know that as Manitobans, we can all work together for the same common goal to protect our youth.

      And I just want to put on the record, to those families that have had to go through the loss of a loved one due to the sharing of an intimate image; and to those young people out there who are maybe going through some­thing like this, maybe they're not finding a safe place to share their story with somebody or they're maybe scared: reach out to someone. Reach out to a parent, a guardian, somebody that can protect you. Share your story. Don't be ashamed. There is help out there for you.

      And the same goes for adults. I know sometimes we feel vul­ner­able in the world that we live in, especially in the digital world; it's a new exploration for many out there, and a different place to explore. Don't be ashamed. You know, I know there's some seniors that can be vul­ner­able to tech­no­lo­gy as well, and they have a hard time sharing their stories.

      But to the loved ones who have gone through loss, I know we've got families like my colleague from Morden-Winkler who expressed a loss in their com­mu­nity due to a situation like this. My heart goes out to those who are going through that loss. It can affect not just children, families, but like my friend–colleague from Morden-Winkler, a com­mu­nity as a whole.

      And having legis­lation in place that can work and further protect our vul­ner­able people as it evolves–or it will evolve as tech­no­lo­gy evolves. It's a challenge to keep up with it.

      Quite often, those online predators are always a step ahead, so the challenge lies to keep on top of it and hopefully we here, as legis­lators, can work together to make Manitoba a better place, to offer safety for those going through this challenge.

      Thank you, hon­our­able Deputy Speaker.

Mrs. Kathleen Cook (Roblin): I'm very pleased to rise today to speak to Bill 2, which I think is a very im­por­tant bill as it aims to expand the ability to respond to the non-consensual dis­tri­bu­tion of intimate images, including deepfakes and digitally altered content. This is an area where, as we all know, tech­no­lo­gy has moved quickly and laws must keep pace.

      I think the bill before us is an op­por­tun­ity to close some of these gaps, strengthen pro­tec­tions and ensure the justice system has the tools it needs to respond effectively, and I think this debate deserves time and clarity. So I want to walk through some of the aspects of this bill and why it's so im­por­tant.

      And first, I think it's im­por­tant to state clearly, and I think all members of this House would agree, that we support and stand with victims who've had their intimate images, or deepfakes of them, shared, distributed or posted online without their consent. And if this issue's personal for many Manitobans, for victims the ex­per­ience is not a one-time incident; it is a prolonged violation.

      When an image becomes public or even when some­­one threatens to publish it, the victim loses a measure of control over their privacy, their dignity and their safety. Some suffer from anxiety, depression and panic attacks. Others withdraw from school or work and young people, in parti­cular, often feel overwhelmed by shame and social fallout. Adults may see pro­fes­sional reputations damaged, and families ex­per­ience fear and stress as they try to support their loved ones through what can be a very traumatic exper­ience.

      This harm isn't just theoretical. It's been well documented in research in other juris­dic­tions and in countless personal stories. And victims of these crimes tell us the same thing: that the worst part is the sense that they cannot undo what has been done, that once an image is circulated online, it becomes almost impossible to contain, and our laws need to recog­nize that reality. And if we're going to strengthen our response, we need to start by listening to those victims, not just as an act of empathy but as a foundation for policy.

      We need to listen to and respect the views and respond to the views of those whose intimate images have been broadcast, distributed or published on the Internet. And those who've had their images misappropriated, including through AI manipulation, need to know that the courts and the gov­ern­ment will hear them.

      Historically and very unfor­tunately, many victims have not come forward at all. They fear embar­rass­ment, disbelief or retaliation. They worry that the justice system cannot help them. Some simply don't know their rights in this situation. Others believe that even if they report the harm, the image will still circulate.

      And if we want to reduce victimization, we have to make reporting worthwhile. That means provi­ding accessible remedies, meaningful en­force­ment and courts that can act quickly. It means–

The Deputy Speaker: Order.

      The next time this issue is before the House, the hon­our­able member will have 26 minutes.

      The time being 5 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow.


 

 


LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Wednesday, November 26, 2025

CONTENTS


Vol. 7

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

Ministerial Statements

Recognizing Colleen Lussier

Schmidt 171

Hiebert 172

Members' Statements

Audra's Sweet Delights

Moyes 172

Bredin Family Farm

Schuler 173

Tyndall Park Community 55+ Fitness Group

Lamoureux  173

Southeast Community Food Bank Volunteers

Narth  174

Fort Garry Legion Closure

Wasyliw   174

Speaker's Statement

Lindsey  175

Oral Questions

Grace Hospital Emergency Room

Khan  175

Kinew   175

Education Property Taxes

Khan  176

Kinew   176

Rural Crime in Manitoba

Byram   177

Kinew   177

Health Sciences Centre

Hiebert 178

Asagwara  178

Assault at St. Boniface Hospital Parkade

Hiebert 178

Asagwara  178

Child-Care Facilities

Bereza  179

Schmidt 179

Winnipeg Transit

Robbins 179

Wiebe  179

Home-Based Child-Care Centres

Lamoureux  179

Schmidt 179

Early Childhood Learning

Loiselle  180

Schmidt 181

Violent Crime in Winnipeg Neighbourhoods

Stone  181

Wiebe  181

Municipal Policing

Balcaen  181

Wiebe  181

Carbon Emission Targets

Wasyliw   182

Kinew   182

Daycare Centre for Warren, Manitoba

King  183

Schmidt 183

911 Emergency Services

Johnson  184

Moroz  184

Petitions

MRI Machine for Portage Regional Health Facility

Khan  184

Headingley–Highway 1 Pedestrian Upgrades

Cook  185

Breast Screening

Balcaen  186

MRI Machine for Portage Regional Health Facility

Bereza  186

Programs for Adolescents with Disabilities

Byram   187

MRI Machine for Portage Regional Health Facility

Goertzen  187

Opposition to Releasing Repeat Offenders

Ewasko  188

Medical Assistance in Dying

Guenter 189

Location of Safe Injection Sites

Hiebert 189

Hecla Village Road and Highway 8 Repairs

Johnson  190

Opposition to Releasing Repeat Offenders

King  190

Provincial Road 210

Narth  191

MRI Machine for Portage Regional Health Facility

Nesbitt 191

Funding Crime Cost Mitigation for Small Business

Perchotte  192

Provincial Trunk Highway 34

Robbins 192

Opposition to Releasing Repeat Offenders

Schuler 193

Location of Safe Injection Sites

Stone  193

MRI Machine for Portage Regional Health Facility

Wharton  194

Provincial Trunk Highway 45

Wowchuk  195

ORDERS OF THE DAY

GOVERNMENT BUSINESS

Government Motion

Fontaine  195

Second Readings

Bill 2–The Non-Consensual Distribution of Intimate Images Amendment Act

Wiebe  200

Questions

Byram   201

Wiebe  201

Hiebert 201

Debate

Byram   204

Cook  208