Home › News › Speeches › Response to Speech from Throne

Response to Speech from Throne

By Dwain Lingenfelter

Mr. Lingenfelter: — Mr. Deputy Speaker, I want to say how very, very pleased I am to rise in the Assembly for the first time in almost 10 years, and I beg the indulgence of the House to be patient because I’m rusty. And I would like to apologize if I don’t get everything quite straight today. So be patient with me and a little bit tolerant. I do want to congratulate the new member from Riversdale. I was amazed to watch her campaign, and not only the member campaign but her family. And it’s an interesting family. And if the member doesn’t mind, I just want to say a couple of words of congratulation to them — to her mom and dad and most of all to Blair, her husband, who had the great opportunity to spend a couple of months at home with Ophelia and the children to look after and allow for the member to go out and campaign. And I thought it was a very, very well-run operation. Congratulations to the team, to the executive. And I say this. For the member to achieve virtually the same percentage as Lorne Calvert, who was a brilliant politician and had a great career in politics, absolutely amazing. And I say again, congratulations to you. Absolutely. I want to talk too and thank my executive in Douglas Park who did, I thought, an excellent job with a candidate who was new to the constituency. I had been back in Saskatchewan for about a year, but I was new in Douglas Park. But in order to make that happen, one Harry Van Mulligen, who many of you know as a colleague and a friend, not only made the sacrifice to open the seat up so the Leader of the New Democratic Party could take a seat in the Assembly. Harry was with me every day of the week except Saturday and Sunday to campaign. And he came out and knocked on doors, and he talked to people who had difficulty in the Broders Annex and in other parts of the constituency. And there too I want to say a big thanks to Harry and Judy and his family for the work they did for the people of Saskatchewan and for the residents of the constituency. And I think the House should give Harry a big round of applause for the work that he did.

A thank you to my executive. I mentioned earlier we have a very strong executive. To the member from Moose Jaw, my desk mate, her membership may be a bit higher than mine at the moment, but that’s not going to be for long because we’re working very hard to build the strongest organization in the province. And I just want to thank my very strong executive and the hundreds of members in the riding for all the work that they did.

I think we met new heights in things like sign locations. The member from Elphinstone will know that we had about 650 signs up. It was a great campaign and I think it bodes well for the kind of campaign that we will run in 2011. It will be strong. The campaign will be province-wide. We will run strong candidates in every riding. I’m very curious about my hometown, farming hometown where I grew up in Cypress Hills — and I know the member represents that area very well, but we’re going to build a strong organization there and we will see how that goes. But we’re targeting all the ridings in the province.

And when I came to the province a year ago and I was asked by many people in the NDP caucus and the party to come and run, I believed there were three things the party had to do to renew itself. And I made the commitment that I had three goals. One was to reorganize and restructure the party, especially at the constituent level, to rebuild the membership. Secondly, to mentor and work with new, exciting young candidates and MLAs. And we’re doing that, and people saw it today in question period. Not that those who have experience aren’t important. They are, and they’ll be a big part of it. But I want to make sure that new young women and men learn and understand the structure of politics within the New Democratic Party, formerly the CCF [Co-operative Commonwealth Federation], with great leaders. And I’m humbled to stand in this seat where Allan Blakeney used to be my desk mate when we were in opposition, and even to have an opportunity to talk like this and talk about rebuilding the party and having the opportunity to lead such a great political movement. Because it is an honour, and I respect the values that all of my members have brought. Those who worked for the leadership, the member from Moose Jaw who worked hard and should be congratulated for her effort, but is a proud member of the New Democratic Party and brings strong strength. But we need to develop young, new workers, constituency presidents, MLAs, candidates. And that is our second strategy. So the first, to reorganize; secondly to mentor and train new people; and third, be in a position by 2011, November 7th, to run the most credible campaign we’ve seen in the party in a long time. And if we do the first two right, have the opportunity — if we have the right policy and talk to people in the right tone and the right language — win back government for the people of Saskatchewan.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to thank my family — first, my extended family. Obviously I grew up in a large family, with six sisters and two brothers, and they’ve been with me through thick and thin. I want to thank them. My dad who’s 92 November 10th, in a few days. So those of you who think I’m leaving soon, I’ve got some good genetics and I plan to be around for quite a while, God willing. I plan to work with the New Democratic Party for as long as I am capable and as long as you’ll tolerate me. So I want to thank my father, my family. But I also want to talk for a moment about my wonderful daughter Sacha who is an addiction counsellor here, in Regina with one of the school divisions, doing a great job. She got her masterâ��s degree a couple of years ago, but works hard helping families.

My son Matthew, who was here for the leadership and for the by-election night. Matthew went to school at Luther College. Matthew has had an interesting life experience because he became involved in what many people, young people, do which is an addiction. And together we went on an interesting journey while we were in Calgary because Matthew came to me one day and told me that he was addicted to cocaine. And it came as a great surprise to me because, as fathers and mothers all over the place, it’s something you dread all your life. And we had talked a lot about it, and I assumed that he was doing very well. His marks were relatively good in school. But there were signs that he was depressed, and one of the tell-tale signs, of course, of this disease — especially with teens — is depression. And we went to a rigorous program. And some of you will know the AARC [Alberta Adolescent Recovery Centre] program in Calgary. Controversial. It’s run by a good friend, Dr. Dean Vause, from Swift Current. His father, Clarence Vause, a very popular lawyer in that area. Dean himself was a junior hockey player, and he knows and understands how to do it. Matthew has been fully recovered for about five or six years. He’s a top student at Mount Royal University in Calgary, and gives back to other teens in the city of Calgary, and works as a senior counselor at the addiction centre in Calgary. And truly I’m very, very proud of Matthew. And the journey we went on was something to be believed, because only families who have been through this understand the disappointment, the shame. If your child gets cancer, everybody rallies around and gives you . . . When you have a family member who is addicted, you don’t tell anybody. You pretend that it isn’t happening for a while. But there’s a great joy that comes with recovery, and it’s one day at a time. But I wanted to say and put on the record that I’m extremely proud of my son Matthew, and he is doing very well.

Travis, our middle son, is at university in Saskatoon and will graduate — touch wood — after the next semester. And Travis is a brilliant political strategist. And the member from Meadow Lake will know that while . . . He’s tested various political parties, but while he was living in northern Saskatchewan, he worked with and for the member from Meadow Lake when he campaigned for the Member of Parliament. And together, with a much larger team of course, they won that election. I think both of them were the youngest people to be elected and Travis was one of the youngest people to work and help a young Member of Parliament get elected. And to that member’s credit, when he was elected, he hired Travis to work on the Hill in Ottawa. And I believe at that moment in time Travis was 17. And he would send notes to me about going to the home of the Leader of the Opposition, who is now Prime Minister Harper. And I couldn’t believe that, first of all, that my son wasn’t NDP. That was difficult to believe, but secondly, that a 17-year-old could achieve that kind of credibility in politics at that young age. But soon he became disillusioned — not with the member, but with the Conservative Party. And I thought, well okay, now is my chance as a father to get him back into the fold. But he came back to Saskatchewan and joined the Liberal Party and worked for David Karwacki, then leader, while he was 18 and 19. Now the end of the story is, to his credibility he tested the other political parties and has now chosen to come and work in the NDP to get his father elected as premier.

I want to say as well our youngest son, Sahid, he’s 14. He’s at Massey School. Very proud of him. He needs to work a little harder at school, but he’s a great guitar player. He imitates Johnny Cash like anybody and someday you’ll all see him. And then my beautiful daughter, Hanna, our youngest one, is a brilliant skater and if you go on YouTube and watch her figure skate, at the age of eight she is one of the star figure skaters. And I don’t say this just as a proud father but she can skate better than any other eight-year-old I’ve ever seen. Now she’s going to turn 13 one of these days and then we don’t know. And finally to my beautiful wife, Rubiela, who is with us here today, thank you very much for coming on this journey with me because it’s true, we were comfortable living in another home in another part of Canada. Many of the members on the opposite side have experienced life in other provinces and worked in other provinces. The Minister of Labour is nodding and I know he worked out of the province. And if you haven’t worked out of the province . . . And I know the member from I believe Rosthern has worked — Martensville — has worked out. It’s a great experience and I would urge my children and I would urge you to urge your children, not that they should leave the province, but they should have experience in other parts of the world. It doesn’t have to be in Toronto or Calgary or Vancouver. Try Shanghai or try Oslo or London, but there’s a true experience that comes with living and working in other parts of the world. And I just want to say that Rubiela has come like a soldier, like a princess to come and live in our hometown here in Regina. And while she was leery when she first moved, she now says that living in our condo in Douglas Park is better than living in Calgary. She tells me that every day. She’s happier, she has many friends, and I thank you for coming with me and being part of our life and our community here in the New Democratic Party.

Now just for a moment, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I want to talk about so people understand because there are . . . In fact today in question period the Premier was saying, well you can be a Conservative, you could . . . The truth of the matter is I grew up in a Liberal family in Shaunavon. My mom was Irish Catholic, so what hope did I have but to be a Liberal? And until I went to university here in Regina, I thought I was a Catholic Liberal until I got involved in the student movement and talked about politics and at some point in time was asked to run as a candidate in the Shaunavon constituency. Now when we were growing up, our title was Liberal, but really we shopped at the co-op and we banked at the credit union and we supported SaskTel and SaskPower and the Crown corporations. And almost like all rural people, we were social democrats, not because we wanted to be, but that’s just how we lived. When the power company was built, it wasn’t philosophical. They didnâ��t say, well we like government-owned Crown corporations better than we like private sector. When Tommy built the power company and rural electrification came in, it was because there was nobody else to do it. And that’s what we decided to do. Same with the co-op movement. After the Great Depression and banks foreclosed on farms, many farmers said, well we’re not going to do it that way any more. We’re going to set up our own lending institutions for banking. And it wasn’t based on, well we don’t like big business; it was just a practical thing to do — the same with SaskTel; the same with many things, including medicare. Tommy, who is now known . . . His birthday was on the 20th of this month. He would have been 105 years old. He set up medicare because it was a practical thing to do. And the member from Swift Current and Cypress will know that that plan for medicare, really the incubator, happened during the 1930s when Health Region No. 1 got together to hire a doctor. Socialized medicine. The RMs [rural municipality] levied a small fee in order to hire a doctor. Why? Because there was no medical service in the area and people couldn’t afford to go to a doctor and pay even $10. So they hired a doctor. They didn’t say, we want socialized medicine. They just hired a doctor. And from that grew the health plan under Tommy Douglas and Woodrow Lloyd, that then became a Canadian program that actually is the key to why Tommy Douglas is the most favoured and most famous Canadian. And our party and province should be very proud of him.

I then went to university in Saskatoon, and luckily we had a community and a province that supported tuition — because with nine children and a half section of land, there wasn’t a lot of money around. I never could’ve afforded to go if I wouldn't have had a public school system and university that had low tuition fees. But because that was in place, I went to university. I got my degree and I’m very thankful for that. Ran for politics in Shaunavon. Was successful twice, defeated. Ran in Allan Blakeney’s riding of Elphinstone, was elected there a number of times. Had proud moments in government and in opposition. Most proud day was when I took that seat right at the back by the door in 1978, and Al Blakeney was sitting in that seat. And he was a great leader. He taught me a lot of things, and later he gave me the opportunity to sit in his cabinet as minister of Social Services. And I was very proud the day that he asked me to implement the home care program.

And what I relish the thought of — and over the years I’ve been proud of the fact that I’ve had my name on that program — but the fact that my dad, who’s 92, lives in his own little house. It’s not a very pretty house. It’s kind of run down. It’s about 700 square feet in Shaunavon, but it’s his home and he can live there because somebody comes every day to change his catheter and look after him. He doesn’t need much help, but can you imagine the difference between having that independence for your father or your mother or family member as opposed to having to go to a nursing home? And if I think about my career in politics, the most outstanding moment was the day that I was given the honour to implement that program and set up the 45 boards and travel the province and amalgamate programs that were in place into a province-wide home care program.

There were other moments. When we stopped the privatization of SaskEnergy, and some of the members who are here will remember that day, when we stopped in the tracks the privatization of SaskEnergy by the Devine government. And after we won the election in 1991, Premier Romanow gave me the responsibility of setting up SaskEnergy as a Crown corporation because it had been stripped out of SaskPower but had no legislation. And writing the Bill to establish that Crown corporation was a great honour for me, and I remember it and I hope someday we can do more of that, and we’ll talk about that later.

In 2000 I decided to leave politics and go work in the private sector, and a number of companies were of interest to me, but Canadian Occidental Petroleum offered me a job that was headquartered in Calgary but was very different than living in Calgary. It was the vice-president of government relations international, and it gave me the opportunity to work with governments and state-owned oil companies around the world.

Many people don’t know this, but 29 of the top 50 oil companies in the world are not privately owned but are owned by government or state — 29 out of 50. They are Saudi Aramco which is the largest oil company in the world. They produce about 10 million barrels of oil a day. They have tens of thousands of employees. You have Petrobras which is one of the leading drillers in the world. They drill offshore in some of the deepest water in the world. Ecopetrol in Colombia. Nexen had a partnership with Petrobras in Columbia with their state-owned entity, and the list goes on and on. And what there is in the world of energy is a blending of independent oil companies and NOCs [national oil companies]. And at the World Petroleum Congress last year, where I got to speak in Spain and Madrid, I gave a speech on the role of . . . I was invited to speak on the role of NOCs and independent oil companies and how they fit together to create an energy structure for the world because, if you look around the world, you will find countries like Norway with StatHydro working with private sector companies. And the companies line up — the independent oil companies — line up to come in and work with them. They don’t run away as some people in this Assembly have said would happen if you had a state-owned or a partially state-owned oil company. I notice the Premier’s making notes. This is no secret. I’ve given speeches about this. And all oil companies nationally know this. Talisman does, deals with state-owned oil companies. That may come as a surprise to the Premier, but it’s a fact.

The role of energy in the world and how you get your energy strategies straight will be key to the success of any jurisdiction in the world. The United States, that has left it totally up to the private sector up till now, is struggling to find out how to create an energy structure so they don’t have to import 8 million barrels of oil a day. Can you imagine the drain on an economy with oil at $100 a barrel if you’re importing 8 million — not 800,000. But 8 million barrels of oil a day flows into the United States and has to be paid for. Today the price of oil, $81 a barrel. Do the numbers and figure out the drain on the US [United States] economy. Now the reason that that’s happening . . . Because in some jurisdictions like Norway and Brazil, they say there’s got to be a plan, a strategy, an energy strategy that we base our economy on for the next 5, 10, 15, and 20 years. And they combine the strength and effort of independent oil companies and state-owned oil companies to plan that strategy. In the United States they have said, we’ll leave it up to Exxon and Chevron and let them plan our energy future. Well the sad part is the boards of directors of those companies, that’s not their mandate. They’re not bad people. They’re good people, but their responsibility is to their shareholders, not to the energy structure of that community. The role of government is to manage and direct and set policy and regulation that the energy policy of the country is good for the people. That’s the role of government. The role of a board of directors of a corporation is to plan for shareholder interest and do it an environmental way. And so my job was to work with countries and governments all over the world.

And to give you a short list of where I worked, I spent very little time in Calgary because when I flew back to Calgary, I went directly to my farm. Because the other thing that 10 years being out of politics allowed is for me to expand my farm. And many of you have been there. We had a wonderful picnic at my old home on the farm. And it allowed me to build the farm. I know Lorna Standingready was there, a couple of our friends from First Nations did prayers on the ranch where there still are teepee rings. And it’s a wonderful place. And I refer to Cypress View as a state of mind in my life. I have to go there to refresh and get new. And the 10 years out of politics allowed me to do two things — expand my farm and build it here in Saskatchewan, and travel the world and gain experience in many ways.

I did projects in Madagascar, flew to Antananarivo a number of times out of Paris, late at night, getting into the city, having meetings the next morning dealing with the President and his Minister of Energy — opportunities that few people will ever get. And I’ve been very blessed to have a career in politics, to be a farmer, and also to have this wonderful experience in the private sector. We did projects in Equatorial Guinea. We achieved . . . Nexen got Block K. We drilled two wells. We drilled a couple of wells off shore Rio in Brazil. We drilled a number of wells in Colombia and have an office as I mentioned to you earlier. And my wife, Rubiela, worked at Nexen for nine years, was our treasurer. She’s a lawyer. And I’m also blessed for working at Nexen because if I hadn’t worked there, I never would have met my wife, Rubiela. So that’s the third reason that I’m very proud to have had that. And we did many projects. Our main production was in a country called Yemen. We produced at the peak 220,000 barrels of oil a day. And at one time, Canadian Occidental and Nexen, that company, were about 30 per cent of the GDP [gross domestic product] of the country of Yemen. If you can imagine, the influence that a company and the responsibility that you have because you’re dealing directly with the government. There was no partner. Our shareholder was the Government of Yemen. And we had, with the company and the Government of Yemen, meetings on a daily basis. Not that I was at any or even most of them, but I would travel to Yemen three or four times a year. We had a scholarship program. We brought 10 students from Yemen every year to Calgary. I did the selection with a committee, and we paid for all the tuition, the living costs, the flights over. At any one time we had 40 students going to university or going to technical school in Calgary, and part of the mandate of government relations was to look after the students. And Rubiela got along with the students so well. They spent many hours at our home.

And the other thing was, Yemen being a Muslim country, the initial committee didn’t want to send young females. And we had very hard discussions about the fact that we had to choose the students who were in the top 10, whether they were female or male. And believe it or not, I think almost 30 per cent of the students in that program ended up being female because they were the brightest and best from the country. So I just wanted to say that because my experience away, I think, in some ways has — and I hope — helped me to be not only a better human being but also helped me to be a better politician and leader. And if ever given the opportunity to be premier, I think my experience internationally, my experience on my farm — being an active farmer and rancher — I think will add to my ability to help lead the province. And I’m very, very proud to have such a wonderful team supporting me here in the Assembly and going into the next election. Mr. Speaker, I’m sure the members opposite thought I would never get around to talking about the Throne Speech. But I do want to talk for a few moments because as we have, I mentioned in question period, travelled the province and campaigned for leadership, and then as a candidate in Douglas Park and on our summer tour where all the MLAs went out and travelled the province — we have heard from people many different issues that they wanted us to bring to the Assembly.

And questions like, are the finances okay? Are you sure the Premier and the members of the Sask Party know how to handle the affairs? Questions about, are they following in the steps of their predecessor where many of them worked historically. Some of them were members of the Devine administration. There’s a worry. I can guarantee you there’s a worry in Saskatchewan that things are not all well in the Government of Saskatchewan. It’s true, we had a booming economy. And if I look at the main statistics in the province in â��07, and I look at the statistics now, there’s a story to be told. Housing starts between â��07 and today are down by 50 per cent. Potash production is down by 69 per cent. Auto sales are down by 10 per cent. The beef herd . . . Well the members laugh when I mention the beef herd, but they will laugh at their own . . . [inaudible interjection] . . . yes. Yes. It’s 69 per cent . . . [inaudible interjection] . . . Yes well you would know. The member from Swift Current would know about potash; he would know. He’s the brilliant man who came up with the numbers for the last budget. So yes, you did a good job. Thank you very much. Do you know what, Mr. Deputy Speaker? I didn’t hear one Saskatchewan person tell me that the Premier was doing a good job in potash — that didn’t happen — as I toured around. But all these indicators — hog production is down by more than 30 per cent — all the indicators that I as a farmer or a business person would say, there’s trouble on the horizon, are there. There’s trouble on the horizon. And the member from Regina South says I’m grumpy. No. The public’s grumpy with you. And you can go do a jig at the next event you go to and jig around, but that doesn’t impress people. It doesn’t. It doesn’t impress people, not a bit. Well the member continues to holler from his seat, but, Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that you need more than cheerleading and jigging. You’re going to have to do more than that. You’re going to have to get the numbers right.

And the press are telling me, Mr. Speaker, that the Premier says that I had Conservative signs up on my lawn. Why would he say that when it’s not true? Why would you say that? Why would you say that? Why would you say that? Now why would you do that if you’re the Premier of the province, Premier of the province? Well he turns red and turns his seat. Well I don’t wonder why. But I’ll tell you this, that when you get your numbers wrong in all these categories, in all these categories, believe me, you’re in big trouble, big trouble with the people of this province. Big trouble. Mr. Speaker, on the issue of health care, I said yesterday the Premier now has a new plan, brand new plan. Mr. Speaker, he says, my old plan, the one with the children’s hospital, and we were going to have surgical clinics, and we were going to do many things on waiting lists — in two years, nothing. That plan is crashed on the ground, smoldering. And the Premier says, I’ve got another plan. I can only cheerlead for two years on any one topic, and then they quit listening to me and I need a new plan. And now he’s going to cheerlead this one. But you know what? This plan isn’t for two years. He said I want the report card to come in after the next election, after the next election. Well they’re not going to buy it. They’re not going to buy it. We’re going to make a report card on you in 2011, November 7th. I’m talking to you. I’m talking to you. I’m talking to you. You’re going to get a report card. The member from Swift Current will get a report card before he wants it. And he will have to deliver the goods in health care earlier than 2013 which is what he would like.

Now I want to say as well that, on health care, there are many people who are saying that the following of Ed Stelmach for your policy, which is written up in the latest report that he’s now peddling around the province, now he’s going to follow Ed Stelmach and only have one board, one board . . . [inaudible interjection] . . . No, Ed wasn’t my guy. Believe me, he wasn’t my guy. You got that right. He’s your guy. He’s your guy. He’s your guy. He’s your guy. That’s right. The member from Meadow Lake said Ed Stelmach wasn’t my guy. He’s right. He’s your guy. You got that one. You got that one. Now do you know what’s going to happen though, Mr. Speaker? Do you know what’s going to happen, Mr. Speaker? They’re going to find fault with Ed Stelmach pretty soon and they’re going to run over to the alliance. You watch. Mark my word. Mark my word. This guy is a cheerleader and runs to whatever he thinks is the most popular flavour of the day. That’s why, that’s why the member from Souris-Cannington isn’t there any more. He’s not the flavour of the month. And the member from Cypress is not the flavour of the month. He’s going to run somewhere else. And believe me, pretty soon they’re going to dump old Ed Stelmach. That’s what he’s going to do. He’s not going to be their best friend any more. He’s going to say, I’m not going to be like Ed Stelmach. And he’ll be saying, I never knew him; I didn’t know who he was; I never went to his meetings and I never met . . . And do you know what? The Premier of BC [British Columbia] pretty soon isn’t going to be his friend as he drops in the polls and he tries to harmonize the tax.

The member from Swift Current saying, I never knew the guy, never knew him, never knew him, didn’t know who the heck he was. I don’t know Ed Stelmach. I don’t know . . . I’m going to go and meet Mr. Selinger in Manitoba here pretty soon. That’s what he’ll do because that’s the kind of guy he is. That’s the kind of guy he is . . . [inaudible interjection] . . . Yes, but you wouldn’t meet with him before. Before, you wanted to meet with Ed Stelmach. And yes, that’s right. You wouldn’t meet with Mr. Doer, yes. So, Mr. Speaker, this member, we’ve got to watch him because as we go through this — health plan, privatizing, watching Ed Stelmach, get rid of the boards.
I had an email from one of the board members in one part of the province this morning. He said, look we’re working hard on our boards. We’re getting our things together. We’re doing the best we can. And for the Premier to come out and say that he’s going to get rid of all these local boards and go to one board like Ed Stelmach is a disgrace to the province. So I just wanted to pass that along to you, that that’s what I’m getting from the people of the province.

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about energy for a moment because the member is now again on to another topic. For the last couple years, he’s been talking about Bruce Power. When’s the last time you heard him talk about that? When’s the last time? Anybody remember? It’s so long ago now, can’t remember, but he was going to build two nuclear reactors and he had members of his caucus, former members, out doing site locations for them. Where are they now? Where did they go?

And, Mr. Speaker, what the irony is in this Throne Speech, what is he talking about? Now he’s talking about wind. What happened to your other strategy? Where’s it at? It too is on the ground crashed, smoldering. Mr. Speaker, this is a government that every plan they had . . . When’s the last time you heard about the domed stadium from the Premier? When’s the last time . . . [inaudible interjection] . . . What did you say? And you said what?

An Hon. Member: — I said you were opposed to it.

Mr. Lingenfelter: — Oh, yes. No, I’m not opposed to it. I’m not opposed to it. When’s the last time you heard the Premier mention a domed stadium? Oh he’s on to another plan. This one too is crashed and burning on the ground but they have new plans, brand new plans. This Premier, other than spending the $2.3 billion that he was left, has nothing to talk about — nothing. He’s like the guy that finds a wallet on the road. It’s full of money, and he can’t wait to spend it all. And he believes he made the money. He believes he made the money. They never did anything. He didn’t change the oil royalty policy. They’re the same. I was in Calgary last week meeting with oil companies and I said, well what’s it like to do business in Saskatchewan under the new Sask Party? They said it’s exactly the same because they haven’t changed anything that Lorne Calvert and Roy Romanow had in place — not one thing. And so I say to the member that that’s what they said. That’s what they said.

And on the wells drilled in the province, does anyone know how they’ve managed the number of wells drilled in the province between â��07 and today? Well you took credit when it was good. It must be your fault now that it’s bad. Wasn’t that logic? How does that work? Must be. What’s the deal? What’s the deal? Is the deal that a government takes credit for everything that’s going good and when it goes bad, you say it’s somebody else’s fault? That’s not grown-up. That’s childlike and that’s a cheerleader. A real leader will stand up and explain why you make mistakes, and take the credit, Mr. Speaker. That’s what would happen. This Premier will not do that, will not do it.

Do you know how many wells are drilled this year compared to â��07? Does anyone know? Half, half as many as under Lorne Calvert. Now the speeches that the member from Swift Current gave going into the â��07 election was the reason that the wells drilled weren’t higher, because they didn’t like the NDP and they would love the Sask Party. Well I guess the corollary is that they now don’t like the member from Swift Current. They don’t like him any more. Or maybe it’s the member from Kindersley. But for sure, if they didn’t like Lorne Calvert, they sure as heck don’t like these guys. They don’t like them.

And I say to the member opposite, people are measuring the statistics. They’re measuring all of these statistics: auto sales, housing starts, wells drilled, potash production. And every one of these indicators is down significantly.

Now any economist knows that the job numbers will stay and stay. And in the last two months, permanent jobs have dropped by 4,500 per month, replaced by part-time jobs. And the chickens are coming home to roost. Because if you don’t have housing starts and you don’t have potash production and you don’t have oil wells drilled and you don’t have cattle production and you don’t have pork production, what’s going to happen with jobs? Like this is not by magic. It’s not smoke and mirrors. It’s not how many pompoms you can wave in the air at any one time. It’s not if you’ve got rose-coloured glasses.

Mr. Speaker, one guy told me the other day . . . This was a press person from one of the constituencies they hold. I said, but the member from Swift Current said he checked the numbers on potash three and four times. The reporter said, lucky he didn’t check them six times or we would have been out $2 billion. That’s what they said. That’s what they said. That’s what they said. Mr. Speaker, this Premier does not know how to run business. That’s the problem. Now he can laugh at me for getting business experience in Calgary and learning how to run corporations, but I would urge him to get some training in how to run the economy of the province. His expiry date in cheerleading is about two years on any projects he’s ever done, about two years. And we’re at the two-year anniversary just about now. And when he hires people to get him good press about going to Ottawa to be leader of the Conservative Party, hires people to do that, that’s because his two years is up and he’d like to change the channel. He’d like to go somewhere else because it’s getting tough here. He’s got to start running the show. Yes, we’ll talk about the press that, Mr. Speaker, we’ll talk about the press and how he arranges it later, but it’s not the right way to do it. Yes, arranges press, with press secretaries and high-paid help. But, Mr. Premier, pretty soon you’re going to have to, Mr. Speaker, pretty soon the Premier is going to have to get his own line and do his own work because he’s run out of money. It’s like the guy who takes over a farm — beautiful farm, money in the bank, grain in the bin. And two years later the father comes back to see how this young guy is making out. And it’s in shambles. Every plan he had is burning and smoldering on the ground. The bins are empty, the savings gone, and he’s selling off land to keep the farm going.

And I just say to the Speaker, through the Speaker, to the Premier, his record — the Premier’s record — on fiscal responsibility is not that good. Not that good. The one other thing that I want to mention about fiscal responsibility is when he came to government, the similarity to what he said and his former boss, Grant Devine. Now he’ll leave when I start talking about that, I’m sure. I think he’ll leave now. Doesn’t want to talk about that. Doesn’t want to talk about that.

The Speaker: — Order. Just to remind members that they are not to refer to the absence or presence of individuals on either side of the House. I recognize the Opposition Leader.

Mr. Lingenfelter: — The member from Swift Current doesn’t want to listen to this speech, doesn’t want to hear it. If you don’t want to, you don’t need to. That’s the prerogative of a democracy. You don’t have to listen to me speak. So if you don’t want to, you don’t need to. But the fact of the matter is that the member from Swift Current, Mr. Speaker, when he was working for the Devine government . . . And if you look back, you’ll find that the order in council to hire the member from Swift Current to work in the government is signed by Grant Devine because that’s who he worked for. But why doesn’t he mention that in his resumé? Why doesn’t he talk about that? Why wouldn’t he be proud of the fact that he worked in this building? Mr. Speaker, you were there, as well. We were all here. But why do we pretend we weren’t? Why do we pretend that we didn’t work for the Mulroney government? Why is he not proud and standing up and saying yes, I left the province too for a while? No, only after he got caught. He’s like the kid. He’s like the kid. Guess what? I did it too. Yes, right. Right. Yes, that’ll work, all right. That’s a good one. After he gets caught, yes I did too. Sure he did. He went to Ottawa to work for the Conservative Mulroney government. Now there’s nothing wrong with that. But how can you be critical about other people who go and work somewhere else? How does that work? What kind of hypocrisy is that? It’s terrible. And, Mr. Speaker, I want to say to you that whatever you do in life, mistakes or otherwise, be proud of them; talk about them. Some of your members have done that, and they should be proud of it. There’s nothing wrong with having a bankrupt company. There’s nothing . . . [inaudible interjection] . . . Yes, that’s right. It was a mistake, and we paid for it. And we paid for it . . . [inaudible interjection] . . . Yes. No. And we did too. And we did too. And we did too.

The Speaker: — Order. Order. I would just ask members to allow the member who’s speaking . . . and not get into direct debate with individuals who happen to be on their feet at the time. I recognize the Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Lingenfelter: — Mr. Speaker, as I say about the issue of who you work for and being proud of it, when you make a mistake, there should be consequences. And you should be proud of it, and you should learn from it. So there’s nothing wrong with an individual on this side of the House or that side of the House who runs a business and goes broke. There’s nothing wrong with it at all. But talk about it. Don’t pretend it didn’t happen.
But it should be thought about when you hire that person to do the most important job in the province. Because if you didn’t get the numbers right in your business and you haven’t taken any training and you were learning from your scholar who was the premier who had the worse deficit in the history of Canada, maybe you will have learned the wrong habits. Maybe. And the key is the worst thing that could happen is what’s happening here where this Premier, Mr. Speaker, on a Saturday afternoon, phones up his poor Finance minister and asks him and tells him to move $600 million. That’s not the role of the Premier or of a CEO [chief executive officer], I might add. It’s not their role. They shouldn’t do it.

And why they shouldn’t do it is because you have professional people to do it in your departments. And they should do the numbers and they should report to the Minister of Finance. Then there should be a debate and agreement. But let me say this. It’s true that the Premier said in the press that he did it that one time. The question is, how many other times did he make calls? And the more I watch the Minister of Finance, the more I’m now believing this isn’t his fault. I look at him; he’s tired. He is stressed big time. And you know what? I now know why. He dreads waiting for those phone calls from the Premier telling him to move money because there’s no more money to move. That’s the problem. There’s no more money to move. It’s all been moved. It’s all been moved. So now what are we doing? So now what are we doing? Let’s change the budgetary process. Let’s change the process because the process is wrong. Not my fault that we got the numbers wrong and spent all the money and the till is empty. It’s not my fault. It’s the process’s fault. Even though he talks about the process being him phoning on a Saturday afternoon — I don’t know if he’s mowing his lawn or what he’s doing when he thinks of this — and then runs in the house and phones his Minister of Finance and says, move another 600 million. Boy oh boy, if anybody, a CEO came to me and said look, this is how I’m running my operation, I just phone up and move billions of dollars, I think the board of directors would fire him. And I think that’s what’s going to happen in the next election.

Mr. Speaker, I want to touch on a couple of other points in the Throne Speech before I take my place. I want to talk about agriculture because there is a section in agriculture . . . And the minister, I know, is pushing as hard as he can for some of these programs to take place for beef and pork. But in the Throne Speech, there’s one thing they’ve proposed for the future of agriculture in the province, one thing. They talk about what they did in the past. Then there’s one brand new exciting thing. They’re going to move some bureaucrats from one city to another. That’s it, full stop, period. That’s the plan. That’s the plan. Well I can guarantee you I have not heard one farmer, not one farmer has suggested to me that that is an important issue for them, not one. But that’s their plan. The other thing I want to mention is, when I look at the pillars of the economy . . . My belief is you need three pillars to make a modern, 21st-century economy. One is you need strong business, public and private and, in this province, co-operatives. You need strong unions and labour organizations to look after the families who work in the strong businesses, and you need strong government to oversee the environment, the policy that labour and business work by. That’s a modern economy. Those who believe that you can get rid of government . . . It’s just an impediment. If we just had no government, everything would be good and . . . 19th century, that’s what you think. The Minister of Labour says to his neighbour, that’s 19th-century thinking. That’s the 19th . . .

An Hon. Member: — Where’s the innovation agenda?

Mr. Lingenfelter: — Oh my God. Oh my God, you got to clip that one. Clip that one. Mr. Speaker . . . Brilliant. Brilliant. The idea that labour doesn’t play an important role in any economy, any economy . . . Let me tell you a little story about the company I worked for, Mr. Speaker, in Calgary. We worked in many countries in the world. But you know where we chose most to work were two countries, Norway and the United Kingdom. Do you know why we chose to work there? Because they had the balance of government. They had strong government in Norway and in the UK [United Kingdom]. They had strong unions and they have strong companies. And these, of all the countries we worked in — Nigeria, Columbia, Yemen — the two that were the most pleasant to work in and you could make a profit and go to sleep at night believing all of the citizens were taken care of were the countries of Norway and the United Kingdom, that have strong labour laws, strong companies, mixed private and public oil companies, and strong labour unions. That’s a modern economy. It’s not 19th century. It’s not. It is not 19th century to believe labour is a big part of a successful province or economy. Now I did the statistics on the economy in 2007. That was with good labour law, good involvement of the public and private sector, and good oversight from the government. We hit the peak. And since then, as we weaken labour law and don’t pay attention and weaken the role of oversight by government, our economy is into free fall. Now the worst thing of all is the insult that this government gives to working people, to working people. Working people are hurt by this government. Bill 5, Bill 6, now Bill 80. Not even just what’s in the Bills . . . What’s in the Bills is important; don’t get me wrong. But the signal that it sends is that working people are unimportant to this government. There’s not one word, not one word in the Throne Speech about that pillar of the economy. And that’s sad. And it will come back to haunt us because, when you ignore your workers — whether it’s on your farm, whether it’s in this building, whether it’s in government, whether it’s the steelworker, whether it’s CUPE [Canadian Union of Public Employees] — they’re important.

They’re as important as the business people. They’re as important as government employees. And as leader, I would take a very different approach, and I would treat them equally and with respect. That’s my commitment.

Mr. Speaker, I travelled the province. I heard many requests. In Canora, they talked to me about spot loss hail. In Douglas Park they talked about high rents. In Broders Annex they were talking about utility rates, and in Shaunavon they talked about some assistance for livestock. In Kindersley they talked about support for their airport, and in Outlook they were talking about government funding for dental assistance. And in Estevan and Weyburn, they want their highway four-laned, and in Moose Jaw there were questions about the government commitment to the Union Hospital. In Prince Albert and the North, they want to know what the forestry strategy is for the province. And they wanted to know, working people, wanted to know what is the strategy for working people.

And when we went through the Throne Speech, we waited for the Throne Speech to see if these issues were dealt with because if they’re talking to the same people we are, these are what people are talking about.

Is there any mention of spot loss hail in this document? No. Is there any mention of an airport support for Kindersley? Not a thing, and I can go through the list. But I want to say to you, Mr. Speaker, and through you to the members of government, we cannot support this Throne Speech, and I want to move the following amendment, seconded by the member from Moose Jaw Wakamow that the following words be added to the motion:

This government no longer enjoys the support of the Assembly and the people of Saskatchewan because of this government’s lack of vision for the future and because of this government’s woeful mismanagement of the province’s fiscal and finances and because the government has failed policies on health care, the Crowns, energy, housing, the environment, and the economy and because of this government’s refusal to listen to the people’s priorities.

I so move.

The Speaker: — Order. Order. The amendment presented by the Leader of the Opposition, seconded by the member from Moose Jaw Wakamow reads as follows that the following words be added to the motion:

This government no longer enjoys the support of the Assembly and the people of Saskatchewan because of this government’s lack of vision for the future and because of this government’s woeful mismanagement of the province’s finances and because of this government’s failed policies on health care, the Crowns, energy, housing, the environment, and the economy and because of this government’s refusal to listen to the people’s priorities.