Skip to main content

Cindy Lamoureux, MLA for Tyndall Park, speaks against Bill 2

 On Friday November 6, after 3 am in the morning, Cindy Lamoureux spoke forcefully and effectively against the passage of Bill 2.  Her comments are below. 

Ms. Cindy Lamoureux (Tyndall Park): I just wanted to have the opportunity to put a few short words on the record. Our party will not be supporting Bill 2 because it does continue to create a larger wedge in our economic recovery.

      We can talk about 800 Adele and how this government continues to put false information on the record. The facts are: the Province chose to evict vulnerable children from a safe space while causing destruction and trauma. The Premier (Mr. Pallister) and some ministers are, in fact, now facing court challenges because of the comments that they have made in response to their mishandling the contract with the owners of the building.

      We can also talk about the obstacles for children in care that this government continues to put in place, talk about CFS special allowance and how this government followed the NDP's lead in clawing back funds for children in care.

      In essence, Madam Speaker, this negatively affects children and youth for when they age out of care. They are left with nothing. The Province should be responsible for ensuring that children and youth are prepared to reach their full potential when they age out of care, not continue to put up more barriers for them.

      Madam Speaker, we also know that this bill and the 2.9 per cent hydro rate increase completely undermines our Crown corporations. This is why we have the Public Utilities Board, to ensure fair rates.

      Madam Speaker, just very quick recap: this bill negatively affects children who are in care and it completely undermines our Crown corporations, and that's why we are not going to be supporting this legislation.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Comparison between Manitoba and South Dakota shows dramatic impact of Physical Distancing

Manitoba implemented physical distancing measures in mid-March.  South Dakota has still not made physical distancing mandatory.   The result is a dramatic difference in the incidence of covid-19 viral infections between the two jurisdictions.   This graph shows the number of people with Covid-19 infections from March 27 to April 14.  Manitoba ( red line )  started leveling off about April 4 and has seen only a small increase in Covid-19 infections since then.   South Dakota ( blue line )   has seen a dramatic increase in Covid-19 infections since April 4.  Those who are skeptical of the impact of physical distancing in Manitoba should look at this graph! Data are from the Johns Hopkins daily tabulations

Why was Skinner's restaurant removed from the Forks Market when there so much empty space there?

Wednesday, December 4 I asked in Question Period about the large amount of vacant space at the Forks Market, some of which had been vacant for two or more years.  I also asked specifically as to why the renowned Skinner's Restaurant was removed from the Forks Market when there is so much empty space now.  My question and the Minister's response are below.    A video of the exchange can be seen at this link -  https://youtu.be/rD0h3cAkT3o The Forks Market -  Vacancy Management Hon. Jon  Gerrard   (River Heights): Madam Speaker, today The Forks Market has a lot of empty space, much of it empty for two or more years. The list of vacant space includes what was formerly Muddy Waters smokehouse, Beachcombers, Skinners, Dragon House, Aida Crystal, significant parts of Sydney's, Sushi Train, and several balcony businesses a lot–along with a lot of unused former administrative space.       The minister overseeing municipal affairs is responsible for oversight of The Forks,

An awful and uncaring Pallister government goes after the most vulnerable children in our province

Like a sleuth in the night, the Pallister government is cunningly using a bill, bill 34, [updated this is now (Oct 2020) Bill 2] called the Budget Implementation and Tax Statutes Amendment Act 2020, to prevent the return of millions of dollars which was taken away from children in the care of the government.  The monies in question are called the "Children's Special Allowances" or the "federal special allowances for children".  In brief, under Jean Chretien and Paul Martin,  a Canada Child Benefit was established to help support children.  For children in the care of child and family services, where the parents are not directly looking after the children the money is paid to the agencies to help support the children.  There was a time when these monies were being used effectively by child welfare agencies to support children.   Some agencies used these funds in part to provide services to help the children they were looking after and in part into a trust fund