6th March 2013

SECOND SESSION - TWENTY-SEVENTH LEGISLATURE
of the
Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan

____________
DEBATES
and
PROCEEDINGS
____________
(HANSARD)
Published under the
authority of
The Hon. Dan D’Autremont
Speaker
N.S. VOL. 55 NO. 28A WEDNESDAY, MARCH 6, 2013, 1:30 p.m.

MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF SASKATCHEWAN
Speaker — Hon. Dan D’Autremont

Premier — Hon. Brad Wall
Leader of the Opposition — John Nilson
Name of Member Political Affiliation Constituency
Belanger, Buckley NDP Athabasca

Bjornerud, Bob SP Melville-Saltcoats
Boyd, Hon. Bill SP Kindersley
Bradshaw, Fred SP Carrot River Valley
Brkich, Greg SP Arm River-Watrous
Broten, Cam NDP Saskatoon Massey Place
Campeau, Jennifer SP Saskatoon Fairview
Chartier, Danielle NDP Saskatoon Riversdale
Cheveldayoff, Hon. Ken SP Saskatoon Silver Springs
Cox, Herb SP The Battlefords
D’Autremont, Hon. Dan SP Cannington
Docherty, Mark SP Regina Coronation Park
Doherty, Hon. Kevin SP Regina Northeast
Doke, Larry SP Cut Knife-Turtleford
Draude, Hon. June SP Kelvington-Wadena
Duncan, Hon. Dustin SP Weyburn-Big Muddy
Eagles, Doreen SP Estevan
Elhard, Hon. Wayne SP Cypress Hills
Forbes, David NDP Saskatoon Centre
Harpauer, Hon. Donna SP Humboldt
Harrison, Hon. Jeremy SP Meadow Lake
Hart, Glen SP Last Mountain-Touchwood
Heppner, Hon. Nancy SP Martensville
Hickie, Darryl SP Prince Albert Carlton
Hutchinson, Bill SP Regina South
Huyghebaert, D.F. (Yogi) SP Wood River
Jurgens, Victoria SP Prince Albert Northcote
Kirsch, Delbert SP Batoche
Krawetz, Hon. Ken SP Canora-Pelly
Lawrence, Greg SP Moose Jaw Wakamow
Makowsky, Gene SP Regina Dewdney
Marchuk, Hon. Russ SP Regina Douglas Park
McCall, Warren NDP Regina Elphinstone-Centre
McMillan, Hon. Tim SP Lloydminster
McMorris, Hon. Don SP Indian Head-Milestone
Merriman, Paul SP Saskatoon Sutherland
Michelson, Warren SP Moose Jaw North
Moe, Scott SP Rosthern-Shellbrook
Morgan, Hon. Don SP Saskatoon Southeast
Nilson, John NDP Regina Lakeview
Norris, Rob SP Saskatoon Greystone
Ottenbreit, Greg SP Yorkton
Parent, Roger SP Saskatoon Meewasin
Phillips, Kevin SP Melfort
Reiter, Hon. Jim SP Rosetown-Elrose
Ross, Laura SP Regina Qu’Appelle Valley
Sproule, Cathy NDP Saskatoon Nutana
Steinley, Warren SP Regina Walsh Acres
Stewart, Hon. Lyle SP Thunder Creek
Tell, Hon. Christine SP Regina Wascana Plains
Tochor, Corey SP Saskatoon Eastview
Toth, Don SP Moosomin
Vermette, Doyle NDP Cumberland
Wall, Hon. Brad SP Swift Current
Weekes, Hon. Randy SP Biggar
Wilson, Nadine SP Saskatchewan Rivers
Wotherspoon, Trent NDP Regina Rosemont
Wyant, Hon. Gordon SP Saskatoon Northwest
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF SASKATCHEWAN 2553
March 6, 2013
[The Assembly met at 13:30.] shape our provincial cultural identity. I’d like to encourage all
citizens to join us in celebrating the Francophonie in
[Prayers] Saskatchewan. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS The Speaker: — I recognize the Opposition House Leader.
INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS Mr. McCall: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. On behalf
of the official opposition, I’d like to join with the Provincial
The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Cypress Hills. Secretary in . . .
Hon. Mr. Elhard: — Mr. Speaker, I request leave for an Je voudrais dire un grand bienvenue á l’Assemblée législative á
extended introduction. tous les personnes ici avec le ACF [l’Assemblée
communautaire fransaskoise] et les étudiants avec l’École
The Speaker: — The member has requested leave for an Monseigneur de Laval.
extended introduction. Is leave granted?
[Translation: I would like to say a big welcome to the
Some Hon. Members: — Agreed. Legislative Assembly to all the people here with the ACF
[Assembly of the French Community] and the students with
The Speaker: — Carried. I recognize the member for Cypress l’École Monseigneur de Laval.]
Hills.
I want to say congratulations.
Hon. Mr. Elhard: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To you and
through you, it’s my pleasure to introduce a group of French Félicitations avec les festivités pour le Rendez-vous.
grade 4 and 5 students from École Monseigneur de Laval here [Translation: Congratulations with the festivities for the
in the city of Regina. Rendez-vous.]
And along with the students and their chaperones from Laval, And really, Mr. Speaker, for a province whose motto is “from
we also have some other representatives from the francophone many peoples, strength,” that strength and the pride that comes
community joining us here today. I’d like to identify in from the Fransaskois is something that we know well and we
particular Françoise Sigur-Cloutier, the president of the are very thankful for on this side of the Assembly. And I’m sure
Assemblée communautaire fransaskoise, an organization whose we join with all members in that pride and gratitude.
purpose is to build and strengthen the francophone community
here in Saskatchewan. And with Françoise today are a number But as well to Madame Sigur-Cloutier, félicitations for the
of members of the Fransaskois community. election and as well a word of thanks to your predecessor,
Monsieur Heppelle, and Denis Simard, all the team with the
Would our honoured guests please rise today. I think we have ACF. Good to see you here and keep up that great work in
this gallery full and some may be over in the west gallery as helping us to realize that promise of Saskatchewan in terms of
well. We’d like to welcome each of these guests to their “from many peoples, strength,” but not just strength but a lot of
Legislative Assembly today. Thank you very much. joy and celebration as well.
And, Mr. Speaker, while I’m on my feet, I’d like to take this Welcome to your legislature. Bienvenue tout le monde.
opportunity to officially proclaim March the 8th through to the [Translation: Welcome everyone.]
24th as Rendez-vous de la Francophonie 2013 in the province
of Saskatchewan. Mr. Speaker, during this period, which The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Regina
coincides with the International Day of La Francophonie on Coronation Park.
March 20th, Saskatchewan people will have the opportunity to
join with fellow Canadians to celebrate our country’s Mr. Docherty: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To you and
francophone culture and heritage. Now here in Saskatchewan, through you to the rest of the Assembly, I’d like to introduce a
Mr. Speaker, it provides the perfect opportunity to recognize the group of five students and two teachers from Thom Collegiate.
specific contributions that the Fransaskois make every day to They’re in grades 9 to 12, and they’re part of the zone
support our growth and to enhance our quality of life. classroom.
Mr. Speaker, in my role as Provincial Secretary, I’ve had many And the zone classroom’s an alternative model to the traditional
opportunities to interact with the Fransaskois. And I have to tell approach to education. It’s using an inquiry-based approach.
you that no matter how many times I’m invited to attend a Students curriculum outcomes to their interests and passions
community event or to see a French artist perform or meet with through a wide range of different projects and activities, and
any one of our province’s francophone organizations — on students are provided with a high level of support to work
official government business, by the way — I’m continually towards the goal of attaining the regular credits of graduation.
amazed at their enthusiasm, their dedication, and their love for
French, the language, the culture, and the life. And I’ve had the opportunity to go the classroom a couple of
times and actually did a little bit of tutoring. I’m going to
And we’re proud to have a francophone community that helps apologize in advance if their outcomes aren’t as good as they
2554 Saskatchewan Hansard March 6, 2013
should have been. But teachers Brian Gatin and Blaine Duffield as much of an effort as an Aboriginal group, or as Aboriginal
and the five students from Thom Collegiate, I’d like to welcome people, to recognize that culture that we share. And certainly
you, and all of the members here welcome you to your today I want to do that.
Legislative Assembly.
So I want to welcome Yvan Lebel. Yvan has spent some time in
The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Saskatoon Centre. Ile-a-la-Crosse. He attempted to teach me to play the piano.
That didn’t work out very well. He also attempted to coach me
Mr. Forbes: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to in hockey. That didn’t work out very well. But, Mr. Speaker, he
introduce to you and through you to all members of the House, did tell me to be proud of my French heritage, and I want to
a frequent visitor to this Legislative Assembly. Gunnar stand up today to say that I am and to welcome mon ami. Thank
Passmore in the east gallery is with the building trades and an you very much.
advocate for working men and women in this province, making
sure we have safe and fair laws. And we want to welcome him The Speaker: — I’d like to welcome all our guests here today
to our Legislative Assembly here today. Thank you so much, and to remind them not to participate on events on the floor
Gunnar. Thanks. including applause. Thank you.
The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Advanced PRESENTING PETITIONS

Education.
The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Saskatoon Centre.
Hon. Mr. Morgan: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to join
with the member opposite in welcoming Mr. Passmore to the Mr. Forbes: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I rise
House today. He is, as the member opposite indicated, a very today to present a petition calling for the reconsideration of
frequent visitor here and a strong advocate for organized labour passing Bill 85, The Saskatchewan Employment Act.
in our province, but he’s also part of the growing economy that
builds and creates the successes of our province. So we thank And we know since the Act was introduced in December,
him and we thank all working men and women for that, Mr. literally hundreds of hours of studying comparisons have been
Speaker. carried out in the interests of due diligence. And there is no
labour relations crisis to fix and no necessity to rush this
I also know that he lives in Indian Head-Milestone, and I know omnibus bill through that will likely govern workplace relations
the member from Indian Head-Milestone stops every election to for decades to come. And if it does become the new law in the
try and get a sign put up. And to the member from Indian province, working people, particularly young workers,
Head-Milestone: keep trying. immigrant workers, and other vulnerable workers, will suffer
from a hasty watering down of our current labour standards. I’d
The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister for Parks, Culture like to read the prayer:
and Sport.
We, in the prayer that reads as follows, respectfully
Hon. Mr. Doherty: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, request that the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan
to you and through you to all colleagues of the Legislative take the following action: cause the Government of
Assembly, I’d like to introduce a gentleman very important in Saskatchewan to not pass Bill 85, The Saskatchewan
my life sitting in the west gallery, Mr. Ron Naidu. Ron is my Employment Act in this current session before the end of
constituency assistant, and he makes life a lot easier for me, as May and to place it on a much longer legislative track to
do all CAs [constituency assistant] for all members of the ensure greater understanding and support for the new
Legislative Assembly. So welcome to your legislature, Ron, and labour law.
glad to have you here today. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I do so present. Thank you very much.
The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Athabasca.
The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Athabasca.
Mr. Belanger: — Merci, Monsieur le Président. [Translation:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.] Mr. Belanger: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I stand
today to present a petition in reference to cell coverage, and the
I just want to very basically stand today and recognize a friend prayer reads as follows, Mr. Speaker:
that spent many, many years in Ile-a-la-Crosse — shouldn’t say
many — but it’s very nice to see him today with the To undertake, as soon as possible, to ensure SaskTel
Fransaskois group. delivers cell service to the Canoe Lake First Nations,
along with the adjoining communities of Cole Bay and
And, Mr. Speaker, as people will know, being a Métis person, Jans Bay; Buffalo River First Nations, also known as
or a Métis as the French would know, half of our culture Dillon, and the neighbouring communities of Michel
belongs to the French. And in fact in our home community of Village and St. George’s Hill; English River First Nations,
Ile-a-la-Crosse, all the streets are named after our French also known as Patuanak, and the hamlet of Patuanak; and
families. You have Desjarlais, you have Morin, you have Birch Narrows First Nations along with their neighbouring
Belanger, you have Daigneault. You have all these French community of Turnor Lake, including all the neighbouring
names in our community. And it’s a great opportunity for me to communities in each of these areas.
stand today and say I’m very proud and that we ought to make
March 6, 2013 Saskatchewan Hansard 2555
And, Mr. Speaker, the most amazing thing about this petition is with me in congratulating Elder Catherine Charles on receiving
it being signed by the members of these communities but, more the Diamond Jubilee Medal. Thank you very much.
importantly, it’s being signed by the people all throughout the
province. And I so present. The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Estevan.
STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Rural Women’s Month
The Speaker: — I recognize the member from Prince Albert Ms. Eagles: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in
Carlton. recognition of the vital past, present, and future contributions of
rural women in Saskatchewan, I am pleased to rise today to
Impaired Driving Awareness Week recognize Rural Women’s Month.
Mr. Hickie: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. March 4th to 10th is Rural women have been crucial to the development of
Impaired Driving Awareness Week in Saskatchewan. This Saskatchewan communities while playing important roles in
week is spearheaded by Students Against Drinking and Driving, their municipalities and on family farms throughout this
better known as SADD, with the help of SGI [Saskatchewan province’s history. Although the makeup of rural Saskatchewan
Government Insurance]. This week is important, Mr. Speaker, has changed considerably over the past century, the importance
because alcohol use is one of the leading causes of fatal crashes of rural women to the growth and development of this province
in Saskatchewan. and the agriculture industry remains as significant as ever.
SADD and SGI work hard to address this issue, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, rural women in Saskatchewan have and will
First there is the report impaired drivers program or RID, a continue to be major contributors to the success of our
partnership lead by SGI, the Saskatchewan Liquor and Gaming province’s economic and social development. The contributions
authority, and law enforcement. Mr. Speaker, the goal of RID is of rural women are evident in the great work they do at their
to remove impaired drivers from our roads. If you suspect jobs, the education they provide, their contributions to
someone is driving drunk, call 911. SGI also partners with law agriculture, and the care they give to the young and the elderly.
enforcement on operation overdrive. This is a province-wide Additionally rural women are remarkable volunteers throughout
blitz targeting impaired driving. These programs help but there our province, and Saskatchewan has prospered due to the
is more that can be done, Mr. Speaker. And I’m very proud and pivotal role they play in our province’s success.
pleased to lead the newly formed Traffic Safety Committee to
that effect. Mr. Speaker, I would ask all members of this Assembly
recognize the hard work, leadership, and significant
I’d like to remind everyone to always plan a safe ride home. contributions of past and present rural women to the social and
Use a designated driver. Call a designated driving service. Take economic growth of this great province. Thank you.
a cab or the bus. SGI also has a free app that can help people get
home safely. With all the options available, Mr. Speaker, [13:45]
there’s just no excuse to drink and drive. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker. The Speaker: — I recognize the Opposition House Leader.
The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Cumberland. Roughriders and Red Cross Anti-Bullying Campaign
La Ronge Elder Receives Diamond Jubilee Medal Mr. McCall: — Mr. Speaker, today we’d like to recognize the
Saskatchewan Roughriders and the Canadian Red Cross in their
Mr. Vermette: — Mr. Speaker, I had the privilege of attending continued efforts to reduce bullying in Saskatchewan.
the Charles family Christmas dinner in La Ronge this year and
had the honour to present Elder Catherine Charles with the This is an issue that matters. The damage that it causes to young
Queen Elizabeth Diamond Jubilee Medal. people in society is, as a whole, unacceptable. As well, Mr.
Speaker, March is also national Red Cross awareness month.
Catherine Charles is a respected elder of the Lac La Ronge Since 2009 the Canadian Red Cross has been providing
Indian Band. She has a large family with many children, anti-bullying workshops in schools across the province, and
grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. Many in the Roughriders like Luc Mullinder, Weston Dressler, Chris
community are part of her extended family and I am honoured Getzlaf, and Keith Shologan are among those players who have
to be one of them. We treasure her kindness, her wisdom, and participated to use their image to help educate students on
her caring spirit. I was honoured to nominate Catherine for this bullying prevention.
award and to present it to her.
Last month these organizations took another step forward in a
I have personally relied on Elder Catherine for guidance and new agreement which allows for the participation of more
support on many topics and issues that affect our community. players in the Red Cross’s effort to stop the cycle of hurt that
Mr. Speaker, perhaps the greatest honour of all was the results from youth bullying.
presentation of this award and the chance to share the moment
with so many of Catherine’s family. Saskatchewan Roughrider president and CEO [chief executive
officer] Jim Hopson described their desires to become involved:
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members of this Assembly to please join “The Saskatchewan Roughriders share the belief that bullying is
a community problem,” and that the team is “. . . proud to help Mr. Speaker, the community of Loreburn has been eating Mars
the Red Cross address the issue by delivering violence- and bars ever since.
abuse-prevention programs to schools and community groups
across the province.” Vanessa Tastad, who is a Loreburn Recreation Board president
and village councillor, was kept busy entering PIN numbers for
We’d like to ask all colleagues in this Assembly to join us in residents. She credits the whole village in this effort. The rink
thanking the Saskatchewan Roughriders and the Canadian Red sold Mars bars exclusively in their concession. The high school
Cross for their continued efforts towards making bullying a football team . . . and the Mars bars are sold at every school
thing of the past. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. function. They faced off in the final round against rinks in
Mission, BC [British Columbia]; London, Ontario; Warwick,
The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Carrot River Quebec; and Marsh Lake, Yukon.
Valley.
The Loreburn rink is planning to use the $20,000 prize money
Students Learn About Life in Politics to make improvements to their new dressing rooms, which
include painting, adding stick racks, and door closures. They’re
Mr. Bradshaw: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am pleased to planning to install new flooring as well in the 48-year-old
rise in this House today to discuss a recent activity in one of my building.
constituency’s classrooms.
I would ask that all members please join me in congratulating
Mr. Speaker, I was recently contacted by Brian Ofukany who is the community of Loreburn on their much-deserved win.
a grade 8 teacher of social studies in the Tisdale Middle and
Secondary School. Mr. Ofukany’s students have been learning The Speaker: — I recognize the member for
about the impact of a citizen’s willingness and ability to Melville-Saltcoats.
actively engage in the Canadian political process. As an
assignment, Mr. Ofukany had his students select one MLA Agriculture Literacy Week
[Member of the Legislative Assembly] and MP [Member of
Parliament] and contact them with a series of questions relating Mr. Bjornerud: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I
to their life in politics. rise in this House to announce that this week marks Agriculture
Literacy Week in Saskatchewan. Agriculture Literacy Week is a
Mr. Speaker, Brian wishes to thank all those members who took time to show our youth the importance and the value of
time out of their busy schedule to respond to the students’ agriculture and the role our producers play in feeding the world.
questions, saying, “The responses provided great insight into all
the things that politicians deal with on a daily basis.” The Today Canadian agriculture employs over 2 million people in
students were genuinely engaged in the assignment, and they Canada. Mr. Speaker, our government supports a number of
were excited when they received replies. Typically grade 8 initiatives to help educate youth about agriculture in
students are not overly politically minded; however the Saskatchewan, including Ag in the Classroom. The Ministry of
connection that the members provided make the political Agriculture has provided $150,000 in funding over the past year
process more real for them. to fund Ag in the Classroom. Mr. Speaker, Agriculture in the
Classroom marked Ag Literacy Week by organizing a number
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the members involved for of events, including Agriculture Adventure at the Saskatchewan
their participation as well as Brian and his students for all their Science Centre, made-in-Saskatchewan lunch at Albert Scott
great work. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. community school — and there was no Mars bars, to my
colleague from Arm River — and having farmers and ranchers
The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Arm visit classrooms to read to students and talk about agriculture.
River-Watrous.
Mr. Speaker, I would like all members of this Assembly to join
Loreburn Rink Wins Grand Prize me in recognizing the excellent work of Ag in the Classroom
for their advancement of agriculture literacy in our younger
Mr. Brkich: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise generation. Thank you.
today to talk about the residents in the community of Loreburn.
Everyone in this village loves Mars bars. How much do they QUESTION PERIOD
love Mars bars, you ask? Well so much that the Loreburn rink
was recently named one of the five grand-prize winners in the The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Regina Rosemont.
Mars bars Play Your Part Promotion.
Release of Information Regarding IPAC-CO2
This contest was open to all rinks across Canada. With the
chance of being awarded a prize of $20,000, all they had to do Mr. Wotherspoon: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s another
was gather as many PIN [personal identification number] day and another changed story from that government on its
numbers found in the wrappers of Mars bars and enter them IPAC [International Performance Assessment Centre for
online. The Loreburn Recreational Board had applied in March geologic storage of CO2] cover-up. We asked yesterday whether
of 2012 to join the Mars bars promotion. Two months later they contracts existed between IT [information technology] vendors
were informed they had advanced to the second round. In June — set up by this government with public money — and the
they heard they were picked as one of the finalists. Since then, government. The minister claimed there were three, in this
House. But now that story’s changed. When will that minister come clean and be straight with
Saskatchewan people about that government’s IPAC cover-up?
The news today exposes more incorrect answers from that
minister with more contracts with that government, some even The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Crown
going untendered and without proper oversight. One contract, Investments.
Mr. Speaker, that was almost half a million dollars, just a small
oversight of the minister yesterday. Hon. Ms. Harpauer: — This has been, Mr. Speaker, day after
day after day of leadership hopeful spin, is what this has been
Mr. Speaker, let me be clear. A slow leak of incorrect, all about and nothing else, Mr. Speaker. He knows full well that
inconsistent, troubling information from that minister is no the letter that was written to the president of the U of R
substitute for straight answers and real accountability. To the [University of Regina] pointed out that we had discovered that
minister: when will the public get a straight answer to this Dr. Wilson was involved with PTRC and there was a
question and the full story on the IPAC cover-up? sole-source contract. What I requested of the president . . . And
I also gave her a phone call that morning and just said, can you
The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister for Central Services. look across the university to find any other such contracts, as
we will be doing in government?
Hon. Ms. Heppner: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I thank
the member opposite for his question. And before he makes Yesterday the member opposite asked about what I had
further accusations against my colleague who’s been forthright discovered in the Crown corporations, and I gave the answer for
with her answers, he asked yesterday specifically about the three contracts that has been brought forward to me. I have
contracts within the Crowns. The Minister Responsible for CIC answered his questions. He knows the answers. He’s known a
[Crown Investments Corporation of Saskatchewan] responded lot of this without . . . while pretending that there is this big
very specifically to his questions about Crown contracts. So for mystery. And yet when I told him I would give some
him to cast aspersions today, Mr. Speaker, I think is quite information of people off the record, he didn’t even bother to
incorrect. come and ask me what I was talking about. Why? Because he
knew the answer all along, and he is just pretending that there is
As to the other contracts that the member has asked, through the a cover-up.
Public Service Commission our agency of record subcontracted
to ClimbIT. That process was done completely appropriately. The Speaker: — I would like to caution the member on his use
Once that work was done, the PSC [Public Service of words. The word “cover-up” in Beauchesne’s edition no. 6 is
Commission] wanted to continue with the services of ClimbIT, not a permitted term, based on the November 16th, 1977 ruling.
and the personnel involved believed that they could just renew So I would ask the member to not use that verbiage. I recognize
the contract without tendering. Mr. Speaker. That was a the member for Regina Rosemont.
mistake.
Mr. Wotherspoon: — Mr. Speaker, let me be clear. This
I’ve voiced my concern to my deputy minister. The Chair of the government has responsibility for this IPAC debacle from day
Public Service Commission has spoken to the employees one. They chose to start up and operate both CVI [Climate
involved to explain to them once again what our processes and Ventures Inc.] and IPAC with taxpayer dollars. Those public
procedures are, and the deputy minister to the Premier has also dollars started flowing early on in their term in 2008. They
alerted the deputy ministers of all ministries as to what the chose as well to put three of seven board members on IPAC,
procedures are. We want to have an open, transparent process in Mr. Speaker. They chose to put some of their closest confidants
this province, Mr. Speaker, and we are taking steps to correct on that board. And they chose to claim there was value for
the mistakes that we’ve made. money and that there was a contract — statements that have
been proven to be not true once facts were exposed by
The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Regina Rosemont. investigation. And we continue to receive inconsistent, incorrect
answers, including just yesterday about IT contracts with that
Mr. Wotherspoon: — As I said yesterday, getting information government.
on the Sask Party’s IPAC cover-up has been like pulling teeth,
Mr. Speaker. We see that again here today. Mr. Speaker, instead of covering up, when will that minister
and government start owning up and call on the Provincial
Let me be clear that minister has failed to provide consistent, Auditor, call on the Provincial Auditor to fully investigate this
correct answers; failed to provide the full facts upfront; and has IPAC debacle?
deflected responsibility at every turn. In fact last week the
minister sent a letter to the president of the University of Regina The Speaker: — I cautioned the member on the use of that
regarding the contractors in question and the PTRC [Petroleum word and the context of that word. I would ask the member to
Technology Research Centre], Mr. Speaker, which is now withdraw that remark and apologize. I recognize the
independent of the university, and the minister should know member for Regina Rosemont.
that. But all while pointing her finger at the university, the
minister failed to do her own homework in her own backyard, Mr. Wotherspoon: — Withdraw and apologize.
Mr. Speaker. She’s failed to fulfill her responsibility for the tax
dollars she’s responsible for and the contracts with her The Speaker: — I recognize the minister.
government.
Hon. Ms. Harpauer: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There has
been many, many, many times these questions have been The Speaker: — I recognize the Opposition House Leader.
answered, and he knows that. He absolutely knows that. This is
all about the theatre that he wants, to have this big play, stage Mr. McCall: — It says a lot about this government’s priorities
the whole acting and the drama. And it’s for his leadership bid, that they would force l’École Monseigneur de Laval to do
nothing more. That is what this is about. expensive patching repairs over the past three years and beyond
rather than fix the problem. When it comes to putting new
He knows full well that the difficulties that were identified hardwood floors in the Premier’s office, it’s all systems go. But
happened when IPAC was under the management of the for the leaking roof above students and teachers at l’École
University of Regina. He knows that. He knew who was Monseigneur de Laval, the answer is again, not yet. It’s a
involved. He knew how it started. He knew about the contract. question of priorities, Mr. Speaker, and this government is
He knows all of that, and he keeps pretending otherwise. getting the answer wrong.
Mr. Speaker, when IPAC incorporated and a board was put The school administrators say students and teachers shouldn’t
together for the new incorporation, immediate steps were taken. have to learn or work in this environment, and we in the official
The funding was suspended. A forensic audit was ordered on opposition agree. To the minister: will the roof be fixed on
the agreement with CVI. The relationship with CVI was l’École Monseigneur de Laval, or will those students and
severed. The assets were secured. They hired an independent IT teachers be forced to wait yet another year?
consultant to assess the services performed by CVI. The
funding control was moved from the U of R to IPAC-CO2, and The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Education.
that member knows all of it.
Hon. Mr. Marchuk: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker,
The Speaker: — I would like to remind the Opposition Whip again, over 70 per cent of our schools are at least 40 years old
not to bring the Speaker into the debate on the floor. I recognize so both replacement and new schools are needed. We realize
the Opposition House Leader. that. Even with the $500 million allocated, we’re still making
up for years and years of neglect.
Repairs to School Infrastructure
Mr. Speaker, we inherited a $1.2 billion school deficit
Mr. McCall: — Mr. Speaker, this Sask Party government has a infrastructure. We’ve committed approximately $500 million
lot of time and resources for misadventures like standardized since 2007 — major capital $369.5 million, Mr. Speaker; block
testing. But when it comes to facing the real challenges for funding $127.4 million, Mr. Speaker. There has been a 217 per
students and teachers in the classroom, they’re not making the cent increase in school infrastructure spending since forming
grade. government. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This week there were reports about the problems caused by a The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Saskatoon Centre.
water main break at Gard’Amis child care and educational
centre at l’École Monseigneur de Laval. And as if that wasn’t Progress of Labour Bill
problem enough, the school has been coping with a leaking roof
for years. This roof is long past its 25-year lifespan. L’École Mr. Forbes: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr.
Monseigneur de Laval and the Conseil scolaire fransaskois have Speaker, members of the Minister of Labour’s own advisory
spent $100,000 on patching the roof. Tests for mould and other committee have asked him to slow down on Bill 85. This
problems are ongoing. The roof needs to be replaced. The morning the Regina Leader-Post printed a plea from a member
francophone school board asked for money to replace the roof of the minister’s own hand-picked committee. Hugh Wagner,
three years ago, but the problem with the roof continues. who sits on that committee, writes that the Sask Party is in a
hurry for no reason. And I quote:
To the minister: why are students at l’École Monseigneur de
Laval being told to wait for the budget to get the roof fixed? The new bill repeals nearly 1,000 pages of current
provincial legislation and consolidates it into 184. In total,
[14:00] 33 pieces of legislation are repealed and/or amended — a
substantial undertaking that, logically, should require far
The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Education. more public, labour and business input than what has been
provided for to date.
Hon. Mr. Marchuk: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Our
government knows that investing in school infrastructure is an Mr. Speaker, will the minister at least slow down his plan to
investment in our students. We want to support our students. ram this bill through and listen to the concerns of the very
We want to support our teachers. We want to support our people he appointed to work on this legislation?
schools the best way we can. Our government has made a
record investment in school infrastructure, $500 million since The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Advanced
becoming government. We inherited a $1.2 billion deficit. Education.
We’ve seen first-hand how these new and updated spaces help
to create environments that are so conducive to learning, and Hon. Mr. Morgan: — Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for the
we’ll continue to invest in the infrastructure of our schools as question, and I’d like to take this opportunity to thank the
we go forward, Mr. Speaker. members of the advisory committee. These are people from
business and within the labour movement. They provided a lot
of advice, direction, and guidance. highlight this particular change in December. And while he may
talk about it as a faith issue, many people talk about it as a
The makeup of the committee is such that it is not likely going work-life balance issue. And he’s not had the time to highlight
to produce a consensus on a lot of issues. But I’m surprised, Mr. that kind of change with people who would like to know that
Speaker, that there was a consensus on a number of things. that’s the change we’re kind of talking about. So I’ll say it
Those things have found their way into the bill. Over the course again, Mr. Speaker: this Sask Party government just will not
of the last few months, we’ve received 3,800 submissions. listen.
We’ve had an additional period of time to allow for
submissions once the bill has been introduced. We know that, We know over the last three months experts have pored over
as a result of that, we are going to have to make a series of these changes to spot what’s been left out and what will change
changes and, Mr. Speaker, the process is going along. We have for middle-class workers and small businesses. These experts
a number of other meetings going on and we will make changes say they need more time to track these changes and consider the
as are required and as are appropriate. potential consequences of the Sask Party labour bill. And it
begs the question, as Hugh Wagner asks in the paper today, and
The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Saskatoon Centre. I quote: “What is driving the government’s rushed efforts to
pass Bill 85 in the spring sitting of the legislature?”
Mr. Forbes: — Mr. Speaker, clearly the working people of
Saskatchewan have been kept in the dark on this. And the more To the minister: will he commit today to listen to members of
time people try to shine some light on the Sask Party’s his own advisory committee and delay passage of Bill 85 until
workplace law rewrite, the more they’re uncovering strange the fall sitting?
inconsistencies.
The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Advanced
For example, Mr. Speaker, the old law specified Sunday would Education.
be a day of rest whenever possible while scheduling. Now in
fact, the new law doesn’t, and this was not brought to the Hon. Mr. Morgan: — Mr. Speaker, our province is bound by
public’s attention in December before Christmas. Obviously the courts. It’s not a subject that we can debate, whether we
some are very concerned that this will unfairly upset the have Sundays as a day off or another day off. The issue is we
work-family balance people in Saskatchewan value as core to are providing that employees are entitled to two consecutive
our way of life here in Saskatchewan. days off. We’ve done that. This isn’t something we would want
to delay a bill or a piece of legislation for.
Mr. Speaker, this is clearly a consequence of a rushed piece of
legislation. Will the minister do the right thing, listen to I am however pleased that the member opposite is reading the
members of his own advisory committee, and delay the passage bill and is studying the bill. I went through the various
of this bill so that these kind of problems can be sorted out? submissions that have come in to date, Mr. Speaker. And since
the bill has been introduced, one of the ones that I would have
The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Advanced thought would have introduced or filed a submission would
Education. have been the members opposite. But to date, Mr. Speaker,
there has been no submission since from the New Democratic
Hon. Mr. Morgan: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate Party. I was looking for that with some interest. And I would
the question again. The issue the member raises is whether have thought that if they wished to speak on behalf of their
Sunday should be enshrined as a specified day off. There have members or their supporters . . . Now perhaps, Mr. Speaker,
been court challenges with regard to Sunday being a religious they’re caught up with other things such as the leadership
holiday and the Act has been amended in compliance with the convention or whatever else is taking place this week. But, Mr.
rulings of the courts in our province and elsewhere. We do Speaker, we look forward to seeing if they wish to file a late
require there to be two days a week, two days of rest per week, submission, and from them we would welcome it, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, rather than including Sunday, which is in
compliance with the law of the land now. The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Regina Rosemont.
Mr. Speaker, I can advise that the member from Saskatoon Financial Management and Reporting
Riversdale asked the question on Monday, March 4th, and she
read this section from the Act. She said, “In prescribed Mr. Wotherspoon: — Mr. Speaker, we’re two weeks away
workplaces . . . an employer shall grant to employees in the from budget day and it’s clear to all the people of the province
workplace or to the category of employees two consecutive that this government is struggling with its finances. When given
days off . . .” Then she goes on half a page later and says, “So a chance to report its finances just a couple of weeks ago, that
am I correct in saying that employees will no longer be entitled government put forth a spun set of books with a report that
to two days off in a week?” Mr. Speaker, to the member would be accepted nowhere else in Canada, Mr. Speaker. Now
opposite and the member for Riversdale, if she reads her own that government is unwilling to come clean with alleged wasted
question, there are two consecutive days off per week. money and that government even won the Pinocchio Award for
its financial management and reporting. Mr. Speaker, how does
The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Saskatoon Centre. that cut it for Saskatchewan people who deserve nothing less
than sound financial management and the true full state of our
Mr. Forbes: — Well, Mr. Speaker, it’s an interesting answer books?
that the minister clearly has thought about this but did not
The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Finance. Mr. Wotherspoon: — Mr. Speaker, we’re just two weeks from
budget and that government’s clearly scrambling financially.
Hon. Mr. Krawetz: — Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. They’ve been selling assets, hiding alleged waste. They’ve
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite has raised a number of stripped our Crowns of another $120 million. They’re
issues in his question, and I want to thank the member. increasing our debt by $950 million this year alone. And if you
can fathom, they’re actually running expensive ads to tell us
First of all, the member is making a comment about summary they’ll be cutting, Mr. Speaker. It’s simply more spin. And their
financial statements and the General Revenue Fund. Mr. books, in the words of the auditor, are misleading and wrong.
Speaker, the NDP [New Democratic Party] in 2004, when the Quite simply, Mr. Speaker, why should anyone trust the
member from Athabasca was part of that government, they upcoming budget from this government?
introduced, for the very first time, summary financial
statements — in 2004, Mr. Speaker, after the opposition and the The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Finance.
auditor said, you can’t just do General Revenue Fund. So, Mr.
Speaker, that system has been in place since 2004. We provide Hon. Mr. Krawetz: — Well, Mr. Speaker, what we want to say
the summary financial statements at mid-year, Mr. Speaker, to the people of Saskatchewan, that Saskatchewan . . . to the
which is what the member opposite had an opportunity to read people, that Saskatchewan has a unique position. Saskatchewan
back at mid-year. And, Mr. Speaker, we will provide the was the only province to have a balanced budget last year, Mr.
summary financials at the time of the budget, which will be Speaker. Mr. Speaker, while we understand, we understand that
March 20th. And I ask the member to stay tuned. the times that are facing other provinces . . . We just saw
yesterday and the day before, Mr. Speaker, the actual
The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Regina Rosemont. acceptance of the BC budget that proposes increases; it
proposes cuts, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Wotherspoon: — Mr. Speaker, we’re just two weeks away
from budget with a government that’s clearly scrambling, a We in the province of Saskatchewan are taking a different
government that’s hiding alleged waste and being called out by approach, and we have done that, Mr. Speaker. We have taken
the Provincial Auditor for reporting our finances in a way that an approach that deals with expenditure, Mr. Speaker, unlike
she said is “misleading and wrong.” So what did the Sask Party the opposite members, Mr. Speaker. And the member who is
government do when they were confronted with that, Mr. asking the questions is proposing $5 billion worth of spending,
Speaker? They attacked the messenger, the auditor, leaving our Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, that’s who’s going to drive up the
Provincial Auditor to say: debt.
I just hope the discussion around here — and with all due [14:15]
respect — is not a message to me and to my staff that we
should not be operating independently and performing the The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Saskatoon
work that we think is appropriate in this province. Nutana.
Mr. Speaker, instead of heeding the advice of the auditor, or at Community Pastures
least respecting her role, they attacked the Provincial Auditor at
the first opportunity in the Public Accounts. My question to the Ms. Sproule: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last year the federal
minister: why would he choose this approach? government abandoned rural Canadians and farm families when
they walked away from managing Saskatchewan’s PFRA
The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Finance. [Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration] community
pastures. In January several hundred concerned patrons formed
Hon. Mr. Krawetz: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Community Pasture Patrons Association to represent the
every government, including this government, appreciates the interests of more than 2,600 pasture patrons who have been
work of the Provincial Auditor. Mr. Speaker, in Saskatchewan using the pastures for decades.
we have had many auditors who have commented on, first of
all, up until 2004 the Saskatchewan position, which was only a The association has now met with and signed up almost half of
General Revenue Fund. Mr. Speaker, that was reality until the patron groups, and they’re working hard to meet with the
2004. In 2004, the NDP, and I’ve given them credit for that, rest of the groups and need more time. They’re very concerned
introduced summary financials as well as the General Revenue with the aggressive timeline this government has set out for
Fund and they made the changes to The Financial off-loading the individual pastures. To the minister: will he stop
Administration Act. Mr. Speaker, that is the Act that is in place; rushing the process, listen to the Community Pasture Patrons
that is the Act that directs Treasury Board; and that is what we Association, and give them the time they need to organize?
do. We prepare, with the advice of the Provincial Comptroller, What’s the rush?
we prepare a General Revenue Fund statement and we prepare a
summary financial fund statement. We have at this point a The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Agriculture.
disagreement with the auditor as to whether or not her
comments about the General Revenue Fund are indeed accurate, Hon. Mr. Stewart: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the
Mr. Speaker. member for her question. Ministry of Agriculture staff have
been meeting with patrons throughout this process. Meetings
The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Regina Rosemont. have been held with the first 10 patrons groups around the
province. The regional patron information meetings were held
across the province in the month of February, in which every ORDERS OF THE DAY
patron had an invitation to attend.
GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Mr. Speaker, the patrons are becoming quite well informed of
what’s happening with the previous PFRA community pastures. ADJOURNED DEBATES
The group the member speaks about is led by Ian McCreary, a
former Wheat Board director back in the grim days when the SECOND READINGS
Wheat Board was compulsory and directors were appointed.
Bill No. 85
But he has this to say, he has this to say, Mr. Speaker, and he
says it in The Commonwealth. He says that: [The Assembly resumed the adjourned debate on the proposed
motion by the Hon. Mr. Morgan that Bill No. 85 — The
There are many reasons why progressive people in rural Saskatchewan Employment Act be now read a second time.]
Saskatchewan no longer support the NDP . . . the
Romanow administration made cuts which The Speaker: — I recognize the member for Cumberland.
disproportionately affected rural people. Over fifty rural
hospitals were closed. We withdrew from the national Mr. Vermette: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I join in the debate
farm income support program during the lowest farm . . . on Bill 85, The Saskatchewan Employment Act. I guess opening
up . . . And I know with a conversation a lot of questions are
The Speaker: — Next question, please. I recognize the member being asked, and there are a lot of people, individuals that are
for Saskatoon Nutana. very concerned about the timing of this bill and the way this bill
is being handled and legislation and the way that we’re looking
Ms. Sproule: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The province should at it. And I mean I’m going to go over it point by point, and
be focused on protecting these pastures as important parts of we’re going to have some discussions on some of the concerns
our ecosystem and of our rural economy. Those are the interests in areas that are being faced. So I think we’re going to spend
that the patrons have at heart. some time today discussing this bill because it’s so important.
The president of the Community Pastures Patrons Association There’s so many areas and so many areas in this legislation that
referred to by the minister says that the proposal the Sask Party will impact men and women of our province, our young people
government put forward will drive up costs for patrons and is that are hard-working. There’s protections in legislation that are
simply unworkable. The minister’s proposal will increase the being affected, and I think people are very concerned. So I want
patrons’ costs by between 67 per cent and 117 per cent. The to just kind of start going into the lack of consultation that’s
offer is unaffordable and will drive most of these producer gone on in this bill.
patrons out of the cattle business.
And I know the minister likes to refer to his time frame that
A key factor is that over the past eight decades these producers he’s used. Well 90 days clearly has not been enough time, and I
have paid significant fees to build the wells, fences, and corrals think we see that by the response that we’re having from
in the pastures. As part of the minister’s proposal, producers are individuals. And the minister can say he’s had time to allow
now being forced to buy back their own improvements. That’s people to bring forward their concerns, and clearly that has not
not fair for these farm families. Why can’t the minister do the happened. And he refers to about 38 actual submissions that
math and realize he’s forcing the patrons into defeat by putting he’s received — 3,800 is what he’s saying. I’m not sure of
an unaffordable offer on the table? those numbers, if they’re there or not. We’ll see. He says he’s
going through them.
The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Agriculture.
But unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, it’s very clear that there are a
Hon. Mr. Stewart: — You know, Mr. Speaker, costs will vary lot of issues, and I think it’s about timing. And we’re going to
from pasture to pasture and if the patrons want to run exactly go through this bill slowly. We’re going to make sure. We’re
the same service that the PFRA provided, with a massive going to take the time to discuss it. And I think that’s what
subsidy, it’ll cost more. If they want to use their inherent people are asking.
efficiencies that they’ve learned through a life in agriculture,
it’ll cost less. They want to make it very clear: this bill is going to impact I
guess many families in this province, many workers in this
I don’t know where Mr. McCreary gets his numbers but you’d province, not only the immigration individuals that come to our
think he could draw on some of the lessons he learned as a province — the foreign workers that come in — but clearly
director of the compulsory Wheat Board wherein he said the Saskatchewan residents. Whether they’re young, old, whether
rural road network, taxed by a rapidly centralized elevator they’re students, whether they’re post-secondary, they have to
system, began a rapid process of decline during the Romanow work sometimes to cover off their living expenses, to cover off
years. He said the end result was that rural people felt some of the tuition costs that are being forced on them, so they
abandoned by the NDP government. In subsequent elections, are working.
rural areas were not represented in government and rural people
watched, often in disbelief, as rural policy was generated in So some of these changes in here . . . We don’t know how they
urban areas. will be impacted. And I don’t think they’ve had the opportunity,
and I don’t think, to be fair, that students have had a chance to
look at this legislation. It’s such a large piece of legislation. movement.

And when you talk about whether it’s 33, we’re hearing, pieces
of legislation that will be impacted by the changes that the Sask And I want to talk about, and I guess, the union movement. And
Party government’s proposing . . . And you know, you look at I’ve had an opportunity to meet with some of the individuals
all those challenges. over the times that I’ve been elected, some of the unions.
They’re very strong. And I say they work hard for the
And I want to put out a little bit of a thank you to the critic for membership, for the people they represent. And when you look
his role of Labour from the official opposition. And to watch as at that, and they have a different type of I guess an organization,
he went around and he consulted with individuals . . . And he and I look at it, and it’s respected. And they have very strong
held meetings all over the province, trying to find out and trying ties to one another that hold up together, and it’s a brother and
to do his best to talk about some of the issues facing our sister. And you look at the way they support one another
workforce in this province. through some rough times, and you look at how they work
together and how they communicate together. And I mean it’s
And we have a very proud and we have a long history of impressive to watch how they come together and they organize.
legislation, years and years. And a lot of time and effort went
into pieces of legislation that we use, whether that legislation And when it’s, I guess, not only . . . You look at the unions and
has developed into regulations and allowed those regulations to you look at the movement, and I want to be clear about the role
happen. Within those, I guess, legislation that’s been passed and that they have and what unions have done. And I look at some
the bills that have passed, organizations, whether they’re the of the strength that they have had, and over time, when times
employer, they set the tone on how people will work together, weren’t good for individuals. And when individuals first come
how companies will hire individuals, how companies will work. out and there wasn’t a lot of legislation in here to protect
individuals, something happened, and clearly individuals came
So the area where we’re talking about consultation is . . . And I forward with concerns. And from there legislation was passed
mean we’re going to go on some time here discussing that to protect workers, to make sure that those workers’ rights were
because that has been raised time and time again, not only by protected. And it didn’t happen in 90 days. It took years to get
the official opposition, by many individuals, organizations, the and develop and to actually find the legislation and regulations
unions. And I mean we’ve looked at a lot of it. that would protect workers. It took many years, many hours,
many days, many months.
And I know in the record my colleagues have expressed
concern that have spoke before me, about that process, about So when we look at that, Mr. Speaker, it’s very clear. There was
the time. And they’re very concerned about the manner and the time involved over years and years of hard work by not only
timeline that this government is pushing ahead on these bills. government, by industry, by the unions, by working families to
There is obviously concern that this government is pushing clearly bring legislation that would protect our workers of this
ahead without respecting the workers, the unions, and their province. And we needed those protections over time.
issues. And whether you’re talking about individuals who are, I
guess, truly going through the bills, they’re identifying that But now we see this government coming forward with such a
there has to be more time. And we talked about, I guess in move. And it isn’t that people are saying it’s not time to review
question period, some of the questions that were asked. legislation. It’s good. There’s no problem. People are saying it’s
fine. Let’s look at some of them if you have to change. We want
And it’s interesting. There was an individual, Hugh Wagner, to improve things. If there’s legislation that needs to be
who’s raised concerns about the handling of this. And a part of removed, repealed, that’s fine. People are saying, we understand
a committee or an individual, he’s raising concerns. And that the work of government has to happen. And sometimes
looking at an article in the Leader-Post from that individual and there might be house cleaning items that have to be . . . But the
the concerns that he’s raised, and it’s about the time. And he point they’re making, it’s the time frame that they’re trying to
raises one area about the time and pushing ahead with this and do this in. It’s such a large bill. There’s so many, I guess, areas
asking and I think clearly suggesting to the government, it’s of Saskatchewan, working people in this province that will be
okay to take a break, take a pause, and slow down and not to impacted.
ram this bill through.
And I don’t think truly the government has thought this
But unfortunately we see that that’s not going to happen. The through. They have an agenda, and that’s what we’re hearing
government’s going to go ahead. They’re going to push this some people are concerned about. They have their own agenda,
bill. And we’re hoping that they will slow it down. The minister and they’re going to ram it through. It doesn’t matter who it
will see his error. The government will say, okay, we made a impacts and what it takes away from the working students, from
mistake. We don’t have this right. We need to slow down. We our seniors, from working families. It doesn’t seem to matter
need to make sure that individuals understand the process. It’s a what’s going to affect them. Somehow somebody’s got a hold
clear message. of their ear and said, this is what we want; this is what’s good.
And they’re pushing ahead, and that’s the concern.
We heard the minister today sharing some light that he’s looked
at it. Well, I think that’s exactly what . . . Our critic for Labour [14:30]
has made it very clear. That’s what the public wants, that duty
to consult and accommodate, the duty to make sure people are Why not slow this down? Why not make sure we are consulting
informed, that there’s ongoing discussions and that those with individuals, with the working men and women of this
discussions that are happening are happening with the labour province, the working families who are struggling in areas, who
can shed light and who have had an opportunity over the years renters? And those renters are either on fixed income or they’re
to deal with some of those challenges. And I know a lot of my working. And some of them are working three jobs to make
colleagues have expressed their concern when it came down to ends meet. Why should that be happening in a province that
the timeline of this bill. And if you look at that, and I think brags?
people are saying very clearly slow down, you know.
But we can spend our time in rushing certain bills through this
And the Sask Party government doesn’t have to be so House — for what reason? — when we have a crisis going on
bullheaded about this. They could slow down, take a breather, with rents, 77 per cent increase on rents. And we’re not rushing
take a break and say, maybe we are pushing this. Maybe we to help those individuals. Why is that? Why is the Sask Party
need to slow down and have a good look at this, make sure the not rushing off to help individuals with rent controls?
changes we are going to make are going to improve the
economy, going to improve opportunities for working men and But here they have legislation where they want to push. And
women of this province, to make sure that it’s going to improve they have individuals and lots of individuals — lots of
better working conditions, safer working conditions, to make organizations, lots of groups, and lots of I guess working men
sure how it will impact men and women who go to work, many and women — asking them to slow down and think this thing
of them just about every day, to provide for their families. through. Well no, they want to push ahead with it. So it’s
amazing to watch the difference: their priorities, and they’re
Now we talk about safety. And we have to look at and go picking them. And that’s a sad day because it’s individuals, it’s
through the bill to see how will that impact safety. We look at individuals that suffer. It’s our students. It’s our seniors. It’s our
worker safety, and we’ve seen some of the challenges that middle-class families out there trying to make ends meet, and
families have to face. They lose their loved ones because of a they’re being impacted in so many different ways, whether it’s
work-related incident. So we want to make sure safety in there rents, whether it’s the working conditions. And all they’re
is crucial, that’s it’s looked . . . and the time and the discussions asking for is, clearly, take the time. Do this right.
have gone on with probably individuals who have experienced
that. I guess as far as the employers who have had to deal with But again we go back to a Sask Party government that doesn’t
that as well, it can’t be easy for them. care once they’re there. They don’t listen to the people. Oh,
they might say that. And we talk about dollars. And you know, I
So there’s a lot of challenge, and I think one of the biggest ones want to get into that in a little bit about the dollars that they’re
is the process on consulting, talking with, you know, spending. And the minister said there would be no money spent
stakeholders, talking with the individuals that will be impacted. on this, but we see already . . . And I think my colleague has
And I don’t think this government has done it and has not got it made it very clear, the critic for Labour has made it very clear
right by the way they’ve handled this. They’re pushing ahead that the cost, the money that’s being spent, I think there’s over
with it. They’re not listening, and they don’t want to listen. And $700,000 being spent and it could be more.
that’s unfortunate.
Now if you’re going to put this kind of money into it, then why
This government doesn’t have I think, clearly, the interests of not do it right? Why not make sure at the end of the day, if
the working women if they’re not willing to slow down when you’re going to spend this money on this bill, why don’t you
they’re asked, when individuals come forward and they’re make sure that individuals feel like they’ve had the input,
being asked, slow this down. And the government says, no, they’ve been consulted, that they’ve had their chance to be
we’re not slowing down. We’re going to push ahead with it. heard, and that they’ve had their ideas and their suggestions
And they can spin it how they want. And that’s sad, in that area. adopted by the government. Sometimes you can’t just say, oh
we’ve heard you and walk away. Individuals want the changes
Now I’m going to come back to that area a little bit, but I want too, when they come with ideas and improvements to
to . . . You know, it’s very clear, people are wondering why. legislation, when they come in improvement to the quality of
Why the rush? Why the rush job? Why the rush job? And they life for working families in this province.
will sit there and say, when you have years . . . And that’s what
I said in my earlier comments, and I know my colleagues have So when I look at Bill 85, I want to make it very clear. We have
talked about this. And I know individuals are bringing this a lot of concerns, but we have a lot of individuals saying,
information forward to our caucus, to the critic for Labour, and maybe it’s time to look at this legislation. But they are
clearly have said, why the rush to get this done, to put this concerned about the dollars. And when you look at dollars right
legislation through? And that’s really a concern. now and you see the ads being run, I think about $92,000,
they’re running some ads telling people to be prepared — you
But we see the different challenges that are going on in this know, the budget may not be as good, you know. But yet you
province right now when it comes to working families. They’re see some of my colleagues and the questions we’ve been asking
having struggles out there. They’re having a tough time to make about the mismanagement of dollars, about the accountability,
ends meet. And I guess at the end of the day, how will this the people want to hold the government to account. These are
legislation impact, and how will it make their life any better? the dollars that belong to individuals. They’re taxpayers. They
Will it make it affordable? work hard and they want to make sure at the end of the day the
government of the day looks after — and the ministers — and is
And we’ve seen some of the challenges. I want to show some accountable for their dollars.
examples of that and some of the comments that come out. We
talk about rent controls to protect families who are working. And we see where the government is spending 700,000 here to
You know what? Why don’t we have legislation that protects look at this legislation and Bill 85. And I think some of those
individuals are not . . . And I mean, some will be boisterous. huge, this bill. It could impact so many rights of working people
Some will talk about it in the coffee shops and you hear some of of this province. I think the government doesn’t just . . . should
the discussion. They’re listening. They’re paying attention. do it. I think they have an obligation, and they owe the citizens
More and more, I think, individuals are paying attention to of this province the due diligence to go through this legislation
what’s going on and they are concerned about stuff coming out properly to take the time, have a well thought-out plan, make
and the questions and about the accountability of the Sask Party sure you’re going out and you’re talking with the individuals.
government. And I’ve said this yesterday and I’m going to say Take the time. To rush this like we’re hearing, that is where
it again, the people will one day hold this government to alarm bells are ringing off about the push and the push and the
account for the actions you’ve done. rush and the rush. And I think that’s where we’re hearing
individuals say — concern.
And you know, you have individuals within the government
and you have the backbenchers and you have individuals out So it’s about the middle class. They will be impacted, and
there, they’ve got to go home and deal with this. They’ve got to they’re not sure exactly how they will. But when you start
sell what’s going on, and they’ve got to face the music. It’s talking about some of the changes, I’m saying this to all
your government. You’re on that side of it; you have to. You individuals who work in this province: be paying attention.
can’t just always be about the photo ops and all the great times. Send letters. Send emails. Phone your MLAs. Tell them, what
When times get tough, people look at the government and they are you guys doing with all these changes to legislation?
want to hold the government to account for the challenges that
they’re being faced. But when they find out that money’s being We have taken years and years to develop, I guess, legislation
wasted and not taken care of when they’ve asked and they’ve — rules, regulations to protect workers, men and women. So
given you that trust to look after their hard-earned dollars and I’m going to say to those individuals, make sure you get a hold
you don’t respect that trust that they’ve given you, they will of Sask Party MLAs. Make sure you send them emails on
send you a message. Mark my words, they will send a message. Facebook, any way you can message. Phone, letters, any way
you can send the message to them to ask them to truly either
So we look at the cost and we look at the spending. And you explain it and how you’re going to be impacted, or to slow
know, we’re not sure yet, too — with the piece of legislation down and let that process happen to make sure that stakeholders
that’s going on and the proposed changes — we’re not sure how are at the table explaining this. So I think that’s clear. I ask that,
northern Saskatchewan will be impacted. We have a mining and I know there’s people listening. And I’m going to say that.
industry. We have forestry — for what there is out there, there’s And I know they’re trying to do what they can to get the
forestry. We have, you know, a lot of different areas where, you attention of the Minister of Labour on this. But having said that,
know, we have mining. And truly we have, probably the largest we will encourage that, to continue bringing that forward.
employer would be Cameco in northern Saskatchewan. And
then we have gold mines. We have a lot of opportunity in Now I’ve talked about the lack of consultation, the lack of
northern Saskatchewan when it comes to the mines. reaching out and getting information. We’ve talked about the
rush. We’ve talked, you know, about how will the legislation
So how will that impact and what changes will impact those impact northern Saskatchewan. And there’s many areas of
workers? And what changes are coming ahead that the northern Saskatchewan could be impacted, whether it’s
government’s going to ram without consulting those workers individuals working in our hospitals, working at our . . .
and those companies? The individuals who live in northern whether it’s on our highways, whether it’s individuals working
Saskatchewan, those individuals who live in the rest of this with the fire services protection, whether it’s individuals
beautiful province who work in northern Saskatchewan in the working in any capacity with government, with any
mining industry and work at the gold mines, uranium mines, organization in northern Saskatchewan, whether it’s small
how are they? And you know, there’s so many of them — business, whether it’s large business, whether it’s a
whether they work in the janitorial or the housekeeping, the mom-and-pop business, whether mom and dad own a business.
kitchen, the catering area, whether it’s working in the actual And you know, you look at all those challenges. How will this
mine working underground, working for one of the different impact companies? Is this going to make it better for them and
companies — that are working in the area that have contracts their employees? Are some of the changes that the
with the mining industry with Cameco, Areva. government’s going to introduce, are they going to affect the
little, you know, the little jobs and the little companies? And
When we see those individuals . . . And I don’t think . . . And you know, how will it impact the big companies?
that’s what we’re asking. They’re asking and they’ve made —
very clearly from my side — employees, they want to know. So there’s a lot of questions people have. And they’re asking
For those individuals that work for those companies, they want clearly for the government to slow down. Let’s think this thing
to make sure that their rights are going to be protected by this through. Like I mean, when I talk about it and you hear some of
legislation. And yes, we have unions and then there are certain my colleagues talk about the time and the length that it has
agreements, but not all of them are covered by union taken us to develop this legislation to protect our workers in our
agreements. So there are challenges. What they have to go by is province, we have to be clear that that part of it has to happen
labour standards. They have to go by what legislation is passed and isn’t happening under this government.
to protect workers. So when we look at this type of a situation,
people are very concerned, and what will impact them? How So when we look at their rush . . . Now I want to go back to
will this impact them? some examples to this Bill 85. We’ve seen some of the
legislation here before. Sometimes legislation comes before the
And I think the government has an obligation because it’s so legislature and this House, and we actually go through it and we
have the debates. We have the discussions. But at the end of the we’re not going to admit it. We’re not going to see it. We’re
day, we have sometimes co-operated and worked together to going to look away. And that’s pretty sad when you have an
pass legislation on certain bills since I’ve been here, the short industry and all the people that we’ve lost and have left. And I
period of time I’ve been here. mean they did such a fine job in the film industry. You know,
we heard of all the success and how much money was brought
[14:45] into this province. And now we see what’s happened.
We have worked together on, I guess, finding common ground And here’s another situation where we have that: the
and co-operating and finding answers and solutions to some of government just will not listen. They will not listen to the
the problems of individuals in our province, and to some of the people. I hope in 2015 when the next election comes on, the
challenges people face. And sometimes it’s not easy; we have people of this province send a message to the government, you
our differences as opposition and government. We understand know. And it’s not a young government any more. They’ve
that and I understand that. Individuals. been here for just about six years running things. I think people
are going to start having a look at that. They’re not new any
Here’s a piece of legislation where I’m saying could we not more. And some of the mistakes they’re making constantly,
slow down, work together, and find some answers? We’re not they are going to pay a price. And humble or not, I think the
saying that, no we don’t have to review this legislation. We people will finally get the message, and they will speak. And
have to. We know that and I understand that. And sometimes once they’re frustrated . . .
I’ve said there are housekeeping items that need to be taken
care of. But unfortunately some of these we don’t know how And I’ve said this before: it’s about trust. We are trusted, and
they will impact. we are asked to serve. And the people say, take care. We give
you our trust. Take care. And as we’re all elected in here, the
And I don’t believe the government has truly thought this people put their trust and they put the trust in the government
through. And I don’t think they realize how they will be and in the 58 MLAs that you will take care of business.
impacted. Men and women that are working in this province are
going to be impacted. Students, how they will be impacted. I The official opposition has a role to do, and it has to be
don’t think they’ve thought this through. For some reason, effective to bring the challenges that Saskatchewan people are
they’re ramming it, ramming it. facing. It shouldn’t have to always be that way, but
unfortunately with this Sask Party government the opposition
And when you get so many people saying, let’s slow down. has to speak for the people because that government will not
Let’s talk about it; let’s make sure we understand how it will listen to the people. And that’s why you have to have an
impact individuals. I don’t believe this government truly is official, an effective opposition to raise the concerns, the
taking that to heart. And I don’t think they’re hearing. And I challenges that people are facing out there.
don’t know why they’re ramming it down. And again, we’ve
said this — why? Why the push, push, push? And you talk about a province that has so-called . . . Well they
talk about all the different things that they want to sell, but
And those are the concerns. And my colleagues have talked when they take the assets out of our Crowns to balance off their
about this bill, some of them for quite a length on some of the so-called books and you see the way they attack anyone who
challenges that they’re facing and some of the concerns that the puts up a fight forwards them, whether it’s our Provincial
unions have raised — men and women out there, working hard Auditor who is independent . . . So we see that. So I want to use
trying to make ends meet. They’re worried about what’s going that example to show this bill being rushed through, pushed
on. And when you tell them, well no, they’re reviewing that, through, Bill 85 being pushed through the way it is.
some people are shocked because they don’t understand it.
They say, well what are they doing? Why are they doing this? We look at other examples of the way they conduct the business
Well we don’t know. They’re pushing ahead on it for whatever of the day and the way they’ve dealt with other legislation and
reason. So people are starting to wake up, and they’re the way they’ve pushed ahead. And when somebody does raise
wondering what’s going on. concerns to them and stands up to them, well they bully them.
And there is many ways that they can bully. And we’ve seen
So I’m hoping the government will slow down, put the brakes that here in this House. We’ve seen that in the province.
on. The minister will say, okay, maybe we’ve rushed this. But I
know this government doesn’t like to admit it’s made a mistake. Bullies are bullies, and yet we pass legislation that protects
It doesn’t like to admit it has errors. It just wants to push ahead. from being bullied in schools. We talk about it. We say how
It’s bullheaded. It wants to push ahead on it. We’re going to important it is. But some people out there feel like that. They
bulldoze this through, and we’re going to make sure that we feel like they can’t raise their concerns to a government because
push this legislation through. And that’s pretty sad when it they’re worried about what will come back onto them, whether
impacts so many people in our province. they’re in business . . .
And we know, we can talk about the film tax credit. You look So why is it that way? It’s wrong. The government needs to
what they did there. You look at the chamber and you look at hear what the people have to say, and it shouldn’t be just
all the different areas that came out and said it was wrong what insiders within the government that get to tell them whatever
this government was doing — wrong. Wrong, you’ve got it they want or special considerations. Here, this is what I want as
wrong. And there’s no way they would admit it. They did an insider or a friend. Here’s what I would like. It shouldn’t be
everything they could to put their head in the sand and say, that way. It should make sure that everyone has a right to bring
concerns to government. And this government has truly lost developed over years to protect rights. And they may not have
touch, has lost touch, has lost touch with a lot of working men all come out in certain time frames and period of time. It took
and women of this province, clearly, the taxpayers. years to develop the legislation to protect workers’ rights,
whether it’s holidays, whether it’s working hours. There are a
So having said that, Mr. Speaker, referring to Bill 85 and some lot of pieces that will need to be discussed and have to be
of the challenges that we see coming forward, clearly there are a discussed, and it should be working men and women of this
lot of concerns. And my colleagues have raised it, and I know province that are the biggest individuals giving advice to
there are other organizations, groups who have raised concerns government. They’re the ones that are being impacted, truly are
about the rush job and about some of the money being spent on going to be impacted at the end of the day. So we see the
this project. And if they’re willing to spend this type of dollars protection.
on this project and on this legislation, then why don’t they do it
right? Let’s get it right. Let’s not say later . . . There’s a lot of work to be done. There’s more work to be done,
but again, I’m going to say this clearly — I’m asking the
And then, you know, I want to go back into this because I think minister and the government, on behalf of the individuals that
it’s important. We talk about the challenges that will go before have raised concern and asked the official opposition the
the courts because we know that for sure, for sure, some of this concerns we’ve had and our concerns about this, to slow down
legislation, I think there has been rulings on it. And I think and take the time to do it right. Slow down and take the time to
some of the legislation that the courts have ruled . . . And the do it right. Consult stakeholders. Make sure you’ve got it right.
government may have appealed that court ruling, and that’s And if you’ll do that, again, that’s all the people are asking a
fine. We’ll see where it goes at the end of the day and how the government to do. Take the time. Do it right. Don’t waste our
courts rule on it. dollars. We entrust you with that, and that is an honour to be
entrusted with that.
I hope the courts will look at cases, and I think individuals will,
whether it’s individuals, organizations, the unions, working And I say this clearly to the members opposite. I said this
men and women of this province that will challenge legislation. earlier and I’ll say it again. They will, election time, they’ll do
And maybe it goes before the courts. And if the courts already their review. And your record will come out and if you’ve done
have ruled on the essential services legislation . . . The courts a good job, good for you. On behalf of the people, we’re
ruled on that. And how did the minister handle that? That’s supposed to work together in co-operation. I say that to you. We
going to be his file to deal with. So he knows this. need to work together. But we have to do a better job of
consulting, the way this government has not done with many
So let’s get it right. Why waste money, hard-earned money? different groups. And I think about the First Nations, the Métis.
And when you want to spend 92,000 on ads to tell the people of I think about citizens that are being impacted, individuals that
the province to tighten up their belts and that, you know, they are being impacted by legislation, and the way the government
spend money on flooring — 22,000 on flooring. Why don’t we handles it. It doesn’t consult, it doesn’t talk with individuals. It
get it right? Let’s not waste hard-earned money that the doesn’t take input the way it should be. At one time it might
government has in its coffer that’s been entrusted by going to have said we’re willing to do certain things but they haven’t
court and having individuals challenge legislation. Let’s make done that.
sure we get it right.
So at this time, Mr. Speaker, I know my colleagues have a lot to
And I think people are saying that for a reason. Slow down. say, and on this bill there’ll be more comments said. And at this
Take the time. Let’s get it right. Let’s make sure people agree time I’d be prepared to adjourn debate on Bill 85.
with it so that we don’t have more money spent on fighting and
back and forth on a decision that if government would have just The Speaker: — The member has moved adjournment of
slowed down, would have taken the time to consult with debate on Bill No. 85, The Saskatchewan Employment Act. Is it
working men and women, with the middle class, with our the pleasure of the Assembly to adopt the motion?
unions, with business whether they’re small or big, with the
industry, they could have had an opportunity. With the Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.
opposition, they could have worked through this thing very
effectively. But unfortunately, who knows where this is going The Speaker: — Carried.
to go? Because we don’t know all the details, and I think my
colleagues have made it very clear and you know, you know, Bill No. 69
the devil’s in the details.
[The Assembly resumed the adjourned debate on the proposed
And I think some people are wondering. There’s so much being motion by the Hon. Mr. McMorris that Bill No. 69 — The
rammed down them and at one time and at such a short period Information Services Corporation Act be now read a second
of time. They’re asking one simple thing — slow down. Why time.]
do we have to push this bill so fast? Slow down. Let’s work
through it. Let’s make sure that it’s right for the men and The Speaker: — I recognize the Leader of the Opposition.
women of this province who are proud to work in this province
and who do an excellent job. Mr. Nilson: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my pleasure to
rise and speak about An Act respecting Information Services
So when I talk about the issues that are facing our working men Corporation. This particular legislation relates to the Sask Party
and women . . . and those protection. This legislation has been government’s desire to privatize what they see as one of the
insignificant Crown corporations, to see what the public’s of the Environment — he wrote in his ISC’s annual report that
appetite is for sale of Crown corporations. his priority was “to ensure that Saskatchewan’s Crown
corporations remain publicly owned.” Then he goes on: “This is
And, Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House have many, a promise our government made to the people of Saskatchewan,
many questions about this particular action. And they go right and it is a promise we will keep.” And we note that that was in
across the board from the historical important function of a land 2008, just after the provincial election of November 2007.
titles system within the Province of Saskatchewan, both in our
history but also in our future, to all the questions that relate to We also go back into 2003 and we have our former member for
corporate registry and the personal information that may be Weyburn-Big Muddy, Brenda Bakken . . . Brenda Lackey, who
there in this particular corporation that’s being created or this is told the Radville Star, September 10th, 2003, “The other
the way the legislation’s being dealt with. So effectively, let’s 80-some Crowns will be sold.”
talk about what the legislation is first and then we’ll go into
some of the questions that are here. Now I raised this and I mentioned the comment made by the
present Minister of Environment back in 2008 in the
The legislation itself is a bit curious because it has a preamble. Information Services Corporation’s annual report, because the
And quite often legislation in Saskatchewan will not have a issue of the sale of the Crowns was clearly a point of contention
preamble because it’s clear in the Act itself what the legislation in the upcoming election in the fall of 2007. And so the
is all about. But the minister in charge of this particular Premier, our present Premier at that time was the leader of the
legislation, and perhaps the Minister of Justice if he’s had a opposition, was asked by Mr. Mandryk and he said, would you
hand in this, have realized that the actual legislation itself is be willing to support the sell-off of some aspects of Crown
problematic. So let’s take a look at this preamble. It says, ownership? And the premier said then, no. And then he
“Whereas it is desirable and in the public interest that voting subsequently said, “We have said they’re not for sale, that they
shares of Information Services Corporation be offered for sale won’t be privatized, and that’s exactly what we mean.”
to members of the public.”
So, Mr. Speaker, they ran an election in 2007 on this particular
[15:00] issue. In 2011 they also made sure that they downplayed any
discussion of this particular issue. And now in, you know, a
So they’re trying to say, well this is so obvious we’ll state it in couple years, well a year and a half later, they are starting this
the preamble. We have not heard any reason for this to be activity to see what the public tolerance is around selling off the
desirable and in the public interest, and so the initial premise in Crowns, and they’re doing it in kind of a strange way.
their very first paragraph in their preamble is one that most
people in Saskatchewan would have a great deal of difficulty And so they put in their preamble that, according to them, “it is
with. And so I want to remind the public that when the Sask desirable and in the public interest that . . . shares . . . be offered
Party states in the preamble, the first paragraph, that it’s for sale to members of the public.” So that’s that first paragraph
desirable, it appears to be desirable to an agenda of the Premier in this preamble, and it’s directly a breach of the promise of the
and the Sask Party government on a bigger issue of leader of the opposition — who’s now the Premier — prior to
privatization of Crown corporations. the 2007 election, and a breach of a promise as it relates to the
2011 election.
And I want to provide a few quotes from some of our illustrious
members of this House. And I will go back a few years but I Now the next paragraph in this preamble says:
think it’s important that we take a look at this. We know that in
The Outlook news, the member for Arm River-Watrous on And whereas it is desirable and in the public interest that
February 17th, 2003 said that the Treasury Board Crowns the Government of Saskatchewan and Information
would be sold off when the selling price would reap the best Services Corporation enter into an agreement to allow
back for the buck. The member for Cypress Hills told The Information Services Corporation to continue to act as the
StarPhoenix on November 9, 2004 — this is about service provider for registry activities and functions of the
Saskatchewan transportation corporation — “If we could find a Government of Saskatchewan in accordance with the
private sector bus operation that would undertake the passenger following principles:
and freight service that is provided by STC, we would
recommend that would happen.” And the first principle:
The former member for Melfort, Mr. Rod Gantefoer, told the (a) that the integrity of the registries and the rights and
Leader-Post on April 4th, 1998, “They would privatize some protections currently afforded the public, including the
Crown corporations.” He personally said that they would existing government assurance of land titles, will not be
privatize STC [Saskatchewan Transportation Company] and adversely affected by the sale of voting shares.
SaskTel. The former member for Rosetown, Elwin Hermanson,
he said on April 4th, 1999, “I definitely support the sale of So that’s the first paragraph, and I’d like to talk a little bit about
STC,” and “I think there would be support to sell some more of that.
the Crowns.”
While the integrity of the registries and the rights and
Mr. Speaker, in 2008 the former minister responsible for protections that the public have come to expect are an
Crowns wrote in ISC’s [Information Services Corporation of absolutely crucial part of this province, we know from the
Saskatchewan] annual report — this is now the present Minister information provided in lots of difference places — it’s the kind
of thing you learn in some of your law classes in high school was that that security of title was provided by the government.
and in more detail when you go to law school — but ISC, what
we’re talking about here as it relates to land titles, is an Now we all know that the government in Saskatchewan at the
organization that has been built on a long heritage of protecting time that our land title system was put into place, around some
the rights of the people of Saskatchewan. of the initial surveys, was run out of the little stone building
over on Dewdney Avenue. And that place basically controlled
And we know that virtually everything that we have developed the North-West Territories, which included northern Quebec,
as newcomers to this land and basically as the immigrants northern Ontario, all the way up to the Arctic Ocean and to
coming onto First Nations land as treaty people, as people who Alaska. And those people had the foresight to look around the
are welcomed because we respect the treaties, much of that is world and find the best system possible to make sure that
protected and preserved in the land registry system that we security of title could be dealt with in a straightforward fashion.
have.
Not a lot of people in Saskatchewan or Western Canada know
And so what we know is that in the late 1800s the Dominion that the old methods of transferring title or dealing with title
Land Survey was put into place as the railways came across and were built on rituals around how you exchanged money for title.
opened up land on the prairies. And we ended up having a long And I mean some of them are quite interesting, things like if
heritage . . . [inaudible interjection] . . . The member from you wanted to buy a particular piece of land, you would go to
Indian Head, the minister who I think has got some the person who said they own it. They’d look at all of the
responsibility for carriage of this legislation, is yelling from his information that they had in their possession because it was
seat about how this kind of long-term history and concern of the their deeds and titles. You’d walk around the boundary of the
province is going to be protected. Mr. Speaker, I would like to land and one of the . . . Sometimes they would pick up a sack of
hear him say that in very detailed explanations of what the dirt from the land and hand it to you as a symbol that this is
government is going to do, what the government is going to do what we were doing. Often then you would get a deed signed by
to make sure that the rights of the Saskatchewan people are them saying, yes, I assure you that I have title to this land. I’m
protected. transferring it to you and I am giving it to you.
And, Mr. Speaker, we get flim-flam. We get sales kinds of What happened in Saskatchewan is we adopted a system that
things. We get all kinds of things. But the whole purpose of had been developed in South Australia by Mr. Torrens which
Crowns is to protect the people of Saskatchewan. And, Mr. said the registry is the guarantee of your title, not that your title
Speaker, our job as the opposition is to make sure that the is registered. And it’s important to note that distinction, because
yellers and the bullies that we see across the way are put to what it meant then was you could be given a number or a
account to make sure that all of the things that they are doing description which we all . . . People who’ve lived in
are done in a fashion which protects the people of Saskatchewan a long time know, you know, the northeast
Saskatchewan. quarter of section 3 township and range. All of those kinds of
numbers are crucial. But what it meant was, it referred back to
And unfortunately, as a long-time member of this legislature, I the land registry which is the subject of our legislation now.
have grave concerns about the interests of the Premier in this And that land registry was guaranteed to all of the people as
legislation, in the interests of that minister, and that’s what I being run by the province of Saskatchewan.
have the right to talk about in here. Now what I don’t appreciate
is when a member tries to quell my arguments by yelling at me. Now the preamble of this particular bill sets out, in a clear
And, Mr. Speaker, I think that’s totally inappropriate and I want fashion, that that’s the goal — to maintain that integrity. But it’s
to continue to talk about this. one where all of a sudden we don’t know where that registry
might be or who’s going to own that registry. There’s some,
The Deputy Speaker: — Order. Currently the Leader of the some . . . And so there’s questions. And that’s why I’m
Opposition is on his feet debating this bill. Other members will discussing or raising these issues about the history of how our
have an opportunity to enter into the debate if they so wish. But land has been developed.
this House is a House for debate, and I recognize the Leader of
the Opposition. [15:15]
Mr. Nilson: — So, Mr. Speaker, what we have is legislation Now what we know is that the federal government, who was
that builds on the long tradition of the opening up of the West, responsible for the North-West Territories, hired great teams of
is one term that’s used. You look at the historians about how surveyors to come out and survey the land. And they started just
land was developed. And so what we have here in west of Winnipeg because they figured everything west of that
Saskatchewan is a place where our ancestors came from all over first or prime meridian just west of Winnipeg was unoccupied
the world to join the First Nations people who were already land. Now that’s not accurate, because clearly it was treaty land
here, to basically start farming or start businesses and do and there were First Nations people who were living in various
various things. parts of it.
Now one of the precursors or the prerequisites of going and But there were vast tracts of land that were . . . where it would
investing money and time and years and decades of our be possible to use that for agriculture. And so then these survey
family’s history was that you would have security of title, that teams went out, and using the Torrens method, which had also
you would have the security of title in that property. And one of been used south of the border in the States, set out our present
the great characteristics of the opening of the West in Canada system that we have, which basically provides four things.
Conclusive evidence of ownership, so in other words, the a huge paper-based system that was very accurate because of
government’s going to guarantee your title based on the the diligence of the employees within the system in the offices
description. It also guarantees that there’ll be a simple way to spread across the province. And it was complemented with the
transfer ownership if you want to sell this asset that you’ve legal survey, the surveyor’s office. So you had the land titles
acquired. For many of the new people who moved to the West, and the surveyor’s offices that checked everything that every
this was an adventure. They weren’t certain whether this was lawyer did, or if individuals might have dealt with their own
the kind of place or the kind of opportunity that they wanted, so land that they did, so that there were very few errors following
they wanted to know that if they invested time and effort in that old system. But it was very cumbersome, and it took lots of
homesteading — which took a lot of effort — that they could, time and there was delay.
once they got title, transfer that to somebody else. And then
basically be repaid for the years of work that they’d spent trying And so in 1995, we started a land project which the goal was to
to prove up the homestead. So the facility transfer, the spend some time effectively automating the whole land titles
guarantee or the ability to transfer was absolutely important. system. The acronym was LAND, L-A-N-D, and it was Land
Titles Automated Network Development. And it was exciting in
There was also part of this system which said every title, every some ways, but also we knew that there was a challenge
piece of land needed to be registered. And that also then meant because there were so many hundreds of thousands of
that there weren’t all the side deals or you couldn’t . . . You documents that needed to be put into a format that could be part
knew that if somebody was coming to you under the old method of a digital system, and over the years, the work was done to get
of showing you the deeds and doing all that kind of system like that process in place. It wasn’t totally completed in 2000 when
they still had in Ontario or other parts of Canada, you knew that the Information Services Corporation was created to
something was wrong because they weren’t following the rules specifically deal with land titles issues, but the goal at that point
that were under this new land titles system. was that the conversion, as we called it, the transfer of the paper
documents into electronic form would continue and that there
And then the final important part of this was that there was an would also be a whole effort to look at the old processes, which
assurance fund. And effectively I don’t think it had any money we just automated, and see whether there could be some other
in it, but it was a guarantee that the province, or before that the ways to do things.
Territory, the federal government would compensate you if in
some way there was an error in the system. Now we know for In that time, there were lots of difficulties. I don’t think there’s
130 years of history around the assurance fund that there any question about that. But there was some very good advice
weren’t that many errors that occurred that required given from the legal profession, from the surveyors, from
compensation, and that’s, I think, still the case because people people who use the system. The realtors were very much
were careful in how they did this. watching this. And after, you know, a few years, this system
became better at doing what it did, which was to provide the
So you had a system that would encourage settlers to come to security for title, and the speed of doing it was increased
the West and settle on this land. You assured them that there dramatically.
was a system, and this was a new, modern system brought in
from Australia and then spread around the world, and it gave And now I don’t think there are complaints about how long it
you the ability to work hard, buy land, or prove up your takes in the transfer of title. I don’t think there are complaints
homestead or your land. And then if something happened and about the fact that you can look and review Saskatchewan
you had to get out, you could have a way to transfer it on to transactions from anywhere in the world where you have access
somebody else. And so we had this system of providing that. to a computer. And that’s made a big difference for businesses
And so what this particular legislation then has done is built on that are located in the province but also ones from outside of the
that long history and that long part of the trust as it relates to the province.
land titles system.
So there’s a whole legacy of important activity that relates to
Now when the surveys were completed on the prairies, we the security of title for Saskatchewan people, and I would say
know that they used the best technology that they had available maybe in even a grander way for security of title for those
at the time. And a lot of the first surveys were done, people on people who are involved with resource extraction whether it’s
horses, and they carried the chains around and they measured. oil and gas or mining or whatever.
And anybody who’s had farm land in Saskatchewan knows that
when they started doing the digital maps from the satellites and Now I know when I started practising law in Saskatchewan in
looked at the fencelines and looked at other boundaries and 1978, that one of the more interesting but also more challenging
property that there were some discrepancies that those old jobs was to provide opinions on title. And the number one
systems had, but there’s an agreement or there’s a method of group that wanted opinions on titles were the banks that were
dealing with those discrepancies within the system that we lending monies to pipeline companies because they said it quite
have. And nowadays, as I say, the satellite imaging and others, simply, if we lend money to build a pipeline that’s 300 or 500
GPS [global positioning system] systems, have just changed the miles — it goes right across Saskatchewan — we don’t want to
whole world. find out that that money that we’ve lent to that company, that
they haven’t done their proper work and in fact don’t have the
So what happened . . . And the reason I think that I could right to put the pipeline through one lot or one quarter on the
probably speak on this one for a few days if necessary is that 300 miles because a pipeline’s useless if it’s stopped
when I became the minister of Justice and Attorney General in somewhere in the middle.
1995, this was a challenge that was there for us because we had
And so we would spend a lot of time going through the records information that is of concern to Saskatchewan people is to
right back to the original field notes sometimes to make sure withdraw this bill and keep ISC as a corporation owned by the
that the titles were all appropriate. Now you would keep doing citizens of Saskatchewan through the provincial government.
that, and you develop methods. But a lot of younger lawyers And these particular items that they put in their preamble are
would end up in places in land titles offices across the province the ones that they know are the places where people have
as they were at that point. I know in the ’40s and ’50s, with the concern. And so what’s happened is that in the preamble, which
initial oil boom, that many young lawyers spent months in the I say is an unusual kind of a tactic to use in legislation, they are
Arcola Court House. attempting to I guess use their normal sort of public relations
kind of spin to start it off and say, well, oh don’t worry. This is
And so what we have, Mr. Speaker, in this legislation is this all going to be okay because this is our understanding of how
accumulation of information and historical tradition but also this is going to work. And so, Mr. Speaker, it raises the
trust. It’s trust around how this system works. And, Mr. question, well what’s actually in the legislation?
Speaker, when in the preamble to this legislation — which, as I
said before, is a bit unusual — they have to try to go and talk Now what happens in initial public offerings in companies,
about these things as it relates to these protections that we which is what we have here, is quite a number of different
already know that we have, they know, they know that people things. But one of the important parts about going to the public
are concerned that they are selling off a part of something and asking them to invest money in your company is to assure
which is important to Saskatchewan people, that we want them that they’re actually buying something or a share in
control of it here in Saskatchewan. And so what we know is that something that will mean that you get the full value of what
they have this concern that we will continue to ask about. you’re buying. So when this proposal came out, it had this 40
per cent or whatever, I think it’s 40 per cent overhang or share
And that’s why I’m spending some time talking about this. by the government on this initial round of selling this.
Because I don’t know if all of the members opposite totally
understand what the minister and the Premier are up to with this Now this is very similar to the way that the Devine government
particular legislation. privatized companies in the late ’80s. And I think if you go and
look at how they went ahead with some of those sales, they
Because then when you go to . . . They want to set out all of ended up selling lots of shares to the Saskatchewan people who
these things. Now it says in the preamble “that the Government had the money to buy the shares, and they did it by keeping a
of Saskatchewan will continue to own all information, records share in the provincial government. Now I don’t know if it was
and other data now or hereafter stored in the registries.” quite 40 per cent. It would depend on which sale it was. But
eventually the advice would come to the provincial government
Now where will these registries be located? Now I’m not sure that that share, whether it’s 10 per cent or 25 per cent or 40 per
that . . . Like what if this information for commercial purposes cent, is an overhang on the market. It’s a cloud on the value of
is stored in North Dakota or in India or some other part of the these shares. Well, Mr. Speaker, if it’s a cloud on the value of
world? What effect is this law or this preamble going to have on those shares after they’ve been issued, it’s a cloud on the value
the concern that we have about where this information is? This of the shares when they’re sold in the first place.
is a question that needs some better answers than what we have
here. And so, Mr. Speaker, that goes right to the heart of the question
of, if you’re going to sell a public asset, why would you sell it
And what they also knew . . . Because what happened when the in a way that you’d get less than what it’s worth when you sell
Information Services Corporation got the electronic information it?
from land titles mostly done in the sense of the conversion, it
also then went around and looked at other things that the An Hon. Member: — Why don’t you sell 100 per cent. Is that
governments were responsible for. That included lots of what you want, John?
documents that were, some of them, quite old. And so the
conversions took place in some other areas, which are things Mr. Nilson: — And, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, the member
like corporate registries, things like personal property security opposite, the member from Indian Head who has a lot of
registries, other registries like that. And those now, since 2001 interest in this situation said, you should sell 100 per cent. Well
when the ISC was created, have become more and more a part that’s exactly the point. If you’re going to sell off something
of this information company. then what you do is you sell the full thing because then you’re
going to get full value for it. But you don’t sell it off in a way
But the planned rollover of information from vital statistics has that is conditional.
gone over now from the Department of Health to this Crown
corporation. In the preamble they say is, well we know that Now, Mr. Speaker, I am fundamentally opposed to this sale for
you’re worried about that private information, so we’re going to all of the reasons I’ve been talking about because of the fact that
roll it back again, even though when we rolled it forward, rolled this information in this corporation and the services that it
it the other way, we did it because we thought it made most provides are one of the key parts of the province of
sense for the public of Saskatchewan and that it was an efficient Saskatchewan’s responsibility to the people of this province. It
way to manage that information. goes right to the heart of how the economy is supported. It goes
right to the heart of how the people are willing to invest their
[15:30] time and their years and their effort into acquiring property in
this province. And it goes right to the heart of who we are as
Now I think the most efficient way to manage all of the Saskatchewan people.
And, Mr. Speaker, for what appear to be crass, political, and I don’t think what they’re doing here is in the long-term
maybe sneaky policies by that minister and by that Premier, interests of our province. I think it’s short-sighted thinking. I
they are trying to test the waters around privatizing something think it’s so clouded up in their political sense of the last three
that people don’t totally understand. But, Mr. Speaker, on this elections. I think it’s the 2003 election that really clouds their
side of the House we understand what they’re doing. We judgment on this particular one because they were so convinced
understand the importance of this for the province of — and especially that member from Indian Head — that they
Saskatchewan, and we’re going to continue to ask questions. were going to win that election and it didn’t happen. And so
We’re going to continue to raise the concerns of the public there were another four years where he developed his yelling
about this particular legislation. skills which he’s used here this afternoon.
Now there’s a point made by the minister and by the Premier, But, Mr. Speaker, what we need to do here in this particular
well this company can’t really go and sell its services at other case is to make sure that the interests of Saskatchewan people
places because it’s a Saskatchewan Crown corporation. Well we are protected, and it’s the interests of all of the residents of
do it with SGI. SGI provides services. SGI Canada provides Saskatchewan. It’s not just homeowners. It’s not just farmers.
services across the country. SaskPower has partnerships It’s the interests of everybody who has a job in Saskatchewan
working in other provinces on some of its projects. And we because you don’t want to have something where further
know from looking around the world that Crown corporations control of our space, our province, has been transferred off to
or state-owned corporations from all over the world like to some other part of Canada or the world. And, Mr. Speaker, the
come to Saskatchewan, like to come to Western Canada and arguments made by the government, by the Premier, and by the
participate in our economy because we have rules. We have minister as it relates to this particular legislation are suspect.
local control of things like land titles and the things that make They’re more on the line of trying to sell something. And they
sure that it’s a secure, good place to make investments. started right off with the slick brochure preamble on the front of
it, and we’re going to be asking questions about how this
And so, Mr. Speaker, some of the arguments that the members legislation works.
opposite have used, as it relates to the necessity of doing this for
trying to sell this product other places, really beg the question: Now, Mr. Speaker, I’m concerned that there doesn’t appear to
do they have some kind of a sale somewhere? I know, as a be the right reason for passing this legislation. It appears to me,
minister when we initially set this up, we weren’t certain what as I said when I started, that this is an attempt to sell something
other provinces were going ahead with something similar to off that’s crucial for Saskatchewan people but do it in a way
this. But we thought, well there may be some places that would that they’re lulled into thinking that it doesn’t matter to them.
be interested in this kind of information and using that. But And nothing could be further from the truth. So at this point,
when we looked over the years, we knew that every jurisdiction Mr. Speaker, I’m going to adjourn debate on this bill.
had some of its own issues that had to be dealt with locally. But
we also knew that most smart jurisdictions, smart governments The Deputy Speaker: — The Leader of the Opposition has
didn’t want to lose the control of this type of information and moved to adjourn debate on Bill No. 69, The Information
this type of service provided to their people. Services Corporation Act. Is it the pleasure of the Assembly to
adopt the motion?
And so, Mr. Speaker, we know right now, for example, that the
federal government is working in the Ukraine, taking Canadian Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.
information and helping them set up a secure land titles system
in their country to allow for appropriate local investment and The Deputy Speaker: — That’s carried.
also international investment. That’s something that our federal
government is doing together with people who are involved in Bill No. 48
this type of business. I don’t think our ISC is involved in that
project, but I know other provinces’ land title systems and the [The Assembly resumed the adjourned debate on the proposed
systems of geographical information are working on that kind motion by the Hon. Mr. Cheveldayoff that Bill No. 48 — The
of thing. Management and Reduction of Greenhouse Gases
Amendment Act, 2012 be now read a second time.]
And so, Mr. Speaker, there are quite a number of gaps in the
information, and that’s why we have this preamble which tries The Deputy Speaker: — I recognize the member from Regina
to gloss over all that stuff and say, oh don’t you worry. Don’t Elphinstone-Centre.
you worry about these things because you can trust us. We
know what we’re doing. Well unfortunately we don’t know Mr. McCall: — Thank you very much, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
what they’re doing. We don’t trust their PR [public relations]. I’m glad to rise this afternoon to join in debate on Bill No. 48,
We don’t trust their press releases, and we’re having difficulty An Act to amend The Management and Reduction of
with their legislation. And, Mr. Speaker, I think that our job in Greenhouse Gases Act.
this legislature, both on the government side, in the government
caucus and on the opposition side, is to ask questions of the Now this one’s pretty interesting, Mr. Speaker, because of
executive — and in this case it’s the Premier and the minister in course there’s a bit of recycling in here, which I guess is
charge of this — about what they’re doing, why they’re doing thematically appropriate. You know, cue the recycling joke in
it. And they need to be transparent; they need to tell the public the environmental file bill. But it’s also interesting for what is
what they’re doing. not contained here or what has happened in the file generally,
Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Now in terms of what the Act itself is calling for, bringing which applicants might engage in this legislation, and again
Saskatchewan legislation in line with what is put out by the feds we’ll see how this works out around regulations. We’ll see how
and making sure that, for example, in the new provision this works out in terms of actual uptake. We’ll see how this
62.1(1): works out in the regime that’s currently in place. Again working
through what is put forward by the ministry around the
In order to enter into an equivalency agreement, the legislation, further sort of technical details around the citizen
Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA) investigation aspect — and again, you know, all seemingly
requires a citizen’s investigation power to exist in reasonable propositions that it remains to be seen how they’ll be
provincial legislation as a legal requirement. The taken up and utilized, Mr. Deputy Speaker. And the proof of
Management and Reduction of Greenhouse Gases Act course is in the pudding.
does not currently include such provisions. This
amendment allows any Saskatchewan resident over the But again on some of these things, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it’s
age of 18 to apply for an investigation into a matter they about as well taking it from the source and not just the current
believe to have been a contravention against The legislation in front of us, which I would submit is not exactly
Management and Reduction of Greenhouse Gases Act, its earth-shattering or going to shake Mother Earth too
related regulations, or the Environmental Code. significantly. You know, it seems to be reasonable in terms of
greater opportunity for citizens to hold government to account.
And you know, lest it be said that I’m always critical and But taking these things from the source, when it comes to the
negative, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I actually think this is a good environment — and I say this full well aware and, Mr. Deputy
proposal in the midst of a broader piece of legislation. But Speaker, you as a former Environment critic for the then official
again, it’s been demanded by the federal government to come opposition would be well aware of the imperfection on the
into compliance in this particular sector of the regulatory records of the government of the day which I was part of and
regime when it comes to the environment. But again, having proud to be part of, imperfections and all, Mr. Deputy Speaker
that ability for citizens to initiate investigations for matters — there were some things I think that we as government got
where there’s a believed or perceived to have been a right, and I think there’s some things that we needed to do a
contravention of the Act itself, I think it is actually an better job of.
enrichment.
And one of the challenges I know that preoccupied much of the
And again, Mr. Deputy Speaker, while I think on the face of it, last decade and continues to in a certain vein to this day, Mr.
it’s a good thing to see, so much depends on not just the Deputy Speaker, is the whole file of climate change and what
legislation, but the regulation as well that is brought into place. Saskatchewan is doing to manage greenhouse gas emissions
So is this in fact just a light in the window or is it, will it be and what is our role both on a national and international basis
accessible and meaningful, and will citizens be able to avail and how that all comes together. Certainly this is, we’re told,
themselves of these opportunities? It of course remains to be some of the Premier’s, some of his talking points down in
seen. Washington as he goes to make the ethical oil case for
Saskatchewan. And we’ll see how that works out. And there are
And again one of the frustrations we have, Mr. Speaker, is some things that are not bad to make the case for, Mr. Deputy
oftentimes what is brought forward as legislation is pretty much Speaker. And certainly the Premier’s a fairly forceful, eloquent
the tip of the iceberg. And whether or not that iceberg is a communicator, and I’m sure he’s doing his best there to make
slender icicle underneath the water’s surface or a more the case.
substantial thing depends on the regulations.
But there are some other things in terms of our record and in
[15:45] terms of what’s happened in the province of Saskatchewan that
are less than conducive to a great sell job when it comes to
So how people are able to avail themselves with this power Saskatchewan as a green champion. And certainly, Mr. Deputy
remains to be seen. But if it’s . . . You know, it sounds pretty Speaker, I remember well the 2007 election. I certainly
good in the legislation, Mr. Deputy Speaker. And again, I think remember sharing a platform with the Sask Party
this is actually a positive thing in terms of federal-provincial representatives at the University of Regina, and the Sask Party
co-operation, and glad to see it in the package. But again, does platform at the time, Mr. Deputy Speaker, was, you know, the
the overall package fit the bill? emission reduction targets set by the NDP, you know, we’re on
board for those. The climate change fund that has been secured
I guess the next amendments, in terms of what’s being put to the tune of $300 million, we’re in favour of that as well. And,
forward in the legislation itself, the new provision 62.1(2), the you know, it’s interesting to see how things are campaigned on,
explanation states: Mr. Deputy Speaker, and then how they translate after the
campaign is over and after a government takes charge.
This amendment is necessary because it contains what
information should be contained in the application for an So the emission targets that had been signed on to by the
investigation. The Management and Reduction of members opposite and by the then new government of course
Greenhouse Gases Act requires this provision so that were not met and were revised downward, downward, and
information can be gathered about the alleged offence for downward. And there were games played with, you know,
investigation purposes. problem solving through redefinition, trying to juke the stats as
they might say in The Wire, Mr. Deputy Speaker. But in terms
Again, Mr. Deputy Speaker, bringing forward the terms under of real action, in terms of climate change reduction, not so
much. And when it came to the climate change fund and with So that’s one part of the record of the members opposite when it
$300 million that were in the climate change fund . . . And I comes to bringing forward the measures such as the one we’re
hear my colleague from Saskatoon Silver Springs, the current debating today. Again this is largely in response to the federal
Minister for the Environment across the way. And it’s difficult regulatory regime to get in compliance. And the specific
not to hear him, Mr. Deputy Speaker, because he’s usually got measure in this legislation, again I would submit, is not bad.
one, one level on the volume there, but I’m hearing him nice But it’s, you know, you’ve got a not bad measure alongside a
and clear. But you know, he’s an honourable person in his record of inaction and confusion, and it’s a lot of bafflegab and
place, and I’m sure he would own up to the fact that the double-talk, Mr. Deputy Speaker, so what’s a voting legislator
campaign in 2007 by the Sask Party said one thing and then to do?
after they got elected did another.
One thing that is interesting, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and we will
And in terms of signing on to the climate change fund and see how this plays out down the line, is the work that has been
saying that that was something they’d carry forward with, you done on carbon capture and sequestration. And again I agree
know, it’s . . . I know they said a lot of things on the campaign with the proposition that if this technology can be seized and
trail, Mr. Speaker, but I was there at the University of Regina harnessed for particularly a place like Saskatchewan with, you
debating one of that member’s colleagues when that person said know, hundreds of years of lignite on hand in terms of supply,
that, yes, this is something we’re in favour of, because of course if you can take the emissions out of the equation when it comes
it was a university audience. And maybe that member was to burning coal for producing energy, it certainly, you know,
reflecting a tendency on the part of the Sask Party to try and tell there’s certainly a benefit to be had there. And again if you can
people what they wanted to hear or what they thought they use the CO2 that is gathered from the process in terms of
wanted to hear. enhanced oil recovery, that’s again I think a benefit that bears
study.
And in that regard, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it reminds me as well
of a talk I heard from a then Conservative strategist, a fellow by And we watch with great interest what happens with SaskPower
the name Tom Flanagan, for the Johnson-Shoyama School of and the project down at Boundary, Mr. Speaker. And we’re also
Public Policy, talking about the 2006 campaign on the part of quite aware that, you know, this hasn’t been a straight line, but
the Harper Conservatives. And he said, you know, is there any there certainly was an NDP government in power when . . . and
press in the room, when it came to a question about the worked as a helpful partner, I think, at the time in terms of the
environment. And of course there wasn’t. And the member work that was done in the Apache field around Midale and the
from Cypress Hills was there at the same time as well listening sort of pioneering work that was done around carbon capture
to this lecture. And what the member, what Mr. Flanagan had to and sequestration and again, as I’ve said, with the enhanced oil
say at the time was, you know, when it came to the environment recovery.
we knew that we just really needed a light in the window. We
needed to have something to say but, you know, did we really These are some of the things that we look to, Mr. Deputy
mean it? Well not so much. And I guess we see that being Speaker, but we also register with concern the inaction when it
played out on the federal stage in terms of the different comes to emissions reduction. We come to it with concern
gyrations that have gone on federally in terms of, you know, do when we see what should be really interesting projects,
they even think climate change is a real problem? And you particularly on the power generation side of things. What’s
know, there are days where it would be an interesting question happening with First Nations and the First Nations power
to ask every member of this place, whether or not they think generation authority? Again that could be a really positive
that’s a real concern or if it’s something that’s just a myth or project. And we welcome announcements like the one that was
what the climate change deniers would like us to believe. made with the folks up at Fond-du-Lac — again a neck of the
woods that I know you’re familiar with, Mr. Deputy Speaker,
But Flanagan said in that seminar at the Johnson-Shoyama around Elizabeth Falls — and using smaller scale hydro to
School of Public Policy that the Conservatives needed to have generate power.
something, a light in the window. They needed to have
something to say. They didn’t necessarily need to mean it all But you know, again, you see something like that be announced
that much. And you know, there was lots of snickering and and the kind of hopefulness that that entails, not just for a
tittering about that. But when he was saying that, Mr. Speaker, cleaner, greener way of producing energy but for engaging First
it was after the 2007 election. And for me that certainly Nations people in the economy. You see something like the
resonated with the experience I had had debating one of the Elizabeth Falls project, and you weigh that up alongside what’s
members opposite in terms of the Sask Party plan when it came happening on James Smith. And of course the James Smith
to the environment. project was signed with much fanfare and ballyhoo here in this
legislature. And what has become of the project with James
And they said, when they talked about climate change Smith, Mr. Deputy Speaker?
reduction, they’re like yes, us. When it came to the climate
change fund, they’re like, you know, sign us up. And it didn’t And again the same sort of promise and hope of engaging First
take very long after the election for that to go by the wayside, Nations in the economy and in power generation for a cleaner,
Mr. Speaker, for the $300 million fund to be chopped down to greener form of hydro energy. Again you know, notionally, on
30 million, and then for that $30 million fund to — you know, the ideas of these things, on the principles of these things, these,
in the branding of Go Green and all this — to eventually be they’re very exciting and very interesting and very hopeful. But
gone and to be eliminated from the government program it’s on the follow-through, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that we have
offerings altogether. our questions. And again for every announcement that is made,
it’s a debt unpaid, to crib Robert Service, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

And we see the debts racking up over on the other side of the
legislature, in terms of again the things that sound great coming
out of the gates. But it doesn’t take too long to think, you know,
well whatever the heck happened to that?
So again the particulars of this piece of legislation, you know,

good, bad, or indifferent — we could debate the merits of them
— but there’s always a context to these things, Mr. Deputy
Speaker, and the context doesn’t say a lot of great things about
the record of this government when it comes to the
environment.
And I know that other of my colleagues have participated in this

debate. I think I’ve got a few to go on this, but I’m sure they
will have more to say on these matters. But with that, Mr.
Deputy Speaker, I would move to adjourn debate on Bill No.
48, An Act to amend The Management and Reduction of
Greenhouse Gases Act.
The Deputy Speaker: — The member from Regina

Elphinstone-Centre has moved to adjourn debate on Bill No. 48,
The Management and Reduction of Greenhouse Gases
Amendment Act, 2012. Is it the pleasure of the Assembly to
adopt the motion?
Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.
The Deputy Speaker: — Carried. I recognize the Government

House Leader.
Hon. Mr. Harrison: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In order to

facilitate the attendance by members of the farewell celebration
for the Leader of the Opposition who will be vacating that
position after this weekend, I move that this House do now
adjourn.
The Deputy Speaker: — The Government House Leader has

moved that this House adjourns. Is it the pleasure of the
Assembly to adopt the motion?
Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.
The Deputy Speaker: — This House stands adjourned until

tomorrow morning at 10 a.m.
[The Assembly adjourned at 16:00.]

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS
Elhard ......................................................................................................................................................................................2553
McCall .....................................................................................................................................................................................2553
Docherty ..................................................................................................................................................................................2553
Forbes ......................................................................................................................................................................................2554
Morgan ....................................................................................................................................................................................2554
Doherty ....................................................................................................................................................................................2554
Belanger ...................................................................................................................................................................................2554
PRESENTING PETITIONS
Forbes ......................................................................................................................................................................................2554
Belanger ...................................................................................................................................................................................2554
STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS
Impaired Driving Awareness Week
Hickie .......................................................................................................................................................................................2555
La Ronge Elder Receives Diamond Jubilee Medal
Vermette ..................................................................................................................................................................................2555
Rural Women’s Month
Eagles .......................................................................................................................................................................................2555
Roughriders and Red Cross Anti-Bullying Campaign
McCall .....................................................................................................................................................................................2555
Students Learn About Life in Politics
Bradshaw .................................................................................................................................................................................2556
Loreburn Rink Wins Grand Prize
Brkich ......................................................................................................................................................................................2556
Agriculture Literacy Week
Bjornerud ................................................................................................................................................................................2556
QUESTION PERIOD
Release of Information Regarding IPAC-CO2
Wotherspoon ...........................................................................................................................................................................2556
Heppner ...................................................................................................................................................................................2557
Harpauer .................................................................................................................................................................................2557
Repairs to School Infrastructure
McCall .....................................................................................................................................................................................2558
Marchuk ..................................................................................................................................................................................2558
Progress of Labour Bill
Forbes ......................................................................................................................................................................................2558
Morgan ....................................................................................................................................................................................2558
Financial Management and Reporting
Wotherspoon ...........................................................................................................................................................................2559
Krawetz....................................................................................................................................................................................2560
Community Pastures
Sproule .....................................................................................................................................................................................2560
Stewart .....................................................................................................................................................................................2560
ORDERS OF THE DAY
GOVERNMENT ORDERS
ADJOURNED DEBATES
SECOND READINGS
Bill No. 85 — The Saskatchewan Employment Act
Vermette ..................................................................................................................................................................................2561
Bill No. 69 — The Information Services Corporation Act
Nilson .......................................................................................................................................................................................2566
Bill No. 48 — The Management and Reduction of Greenhouse Gases Amendment Act, 2012
McCall .....................................................................................................................................................................................2571
GOVERNMENT OF SASKATCHEWAN
CABINET MINISTERS
_____________________________________________________
Hon. Brad Wall

Premier
President of the Executive Council
Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs
Hon. Bill Boyd Hon. Tim McMillan

Minister of the Economy Minister Responsible for Energy and Resources
Minister Responsible for The Global Minister Responsible for Tourism Saskatchewan
Transportation Hub Authority Minister Responsible for Trade
Minister Responsible for Saskatchewan Minister Responsible for SaskEnergy Incorporated
Power Corporation
Hon. Don McMorris
Hon. Ken Cheveldayoff Minister of Highways and Infrastructure
Minister of Environment Minister Responsible for Saskatchewan
Minister Responsible for Saskatchewan Telecommunications
Water Security Agency Minister Responsible for Saskatchewan
Minister Responsible for Saskatchewan Transportation Company
Water Corporation Minister Responsible for Information
Services Corporation
Hon. Kevin Doherty Minister Responsible for Saskatchewan
Minister of Parks, Culture and Sport Gaming Corporation
Minister Responsible for the Provincial Minister Responsible for SaskBuilds
Capital Commission
Hon. Don Morgan
Hon. June Draude Minister of Advanced Education
Minister of Social Services Minister of Labour Relations and Workplace Safety
Minister Responsible for the Status of Women Minister Responsible for the Saskatchewan
Workers’ Compensation Board
Hon. Dustin Duncan
Minister of Health Hon. Jim Reiter
Minister of Government Relations
Minister Responsible for First Nations,
Hon. Donna Harpauer Métis and Northern Affairs
Minister of Crown Investments
Minister Responsible for Saskatchewan
Government Insurance Hon. Lyle Stewart
Minister Responsible for Saskatchewan Minister of Agriculture
Liquor and Gaming Authority Minister Responsible for Saskatchewan Crop
Insurance Corporation
Hon. Nancy Heppner
Minister of Central Services Hon. Christine Tell
Minister Responsible for the Public Service Commission Minister Responsible for Corrections and Policing
Minister Responsible for the Lean Initiative
Hon. Randy Weekes
Hon. Ken Krawetz Minister Responsible for Rural and Remote Health
Deputy Premier
Minister of Finance Hon. Gordon Wyant
Minister of Justice and Attorney General
Hon. Russ Marchuk
Minister of Education

6th March 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

6th March 2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

6th March 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SECOND SESSION - TWENTY-SEVENTH LEGISLATURE

Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan

N.S. VOL. 55 NO. 28A WEDNESDAY, MARCH 6, 2013, 1:30 p.m.

Speaker — Hon. Dan D’Autremont

Name of Member Political Affiliation Constituency

Belanger, Buckley NDP Athabasca

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS The Speaker: — I recognize the Opposition House Leader.

The Speaker: — I recognize the Minister of Advanced PRESENTING PETITIONS

STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Rural Women’s Month

look at this legislation. It’s such a large piece of legislation. movement.

it’s a debt unpaid, to crib Robert Service, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

So again the particulars of this piece of legislation, you know,

And I know that other of my colleagues have participated in this

The Deputy Speaker: — The member from Regina

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

The Deputy Speaker: — Carried. I recognize the Government

Hon. Mr. Harrison: — Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In order to

The Deputy Speaker: — The Government House Leader has

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

The Deputy Speaker: — This House stands adjourned until

[The Assembly adjourned at 16:00.]

Hon. Brad Wall

Hon. Bill Boyd Hon. Tim McMillan

You might also like