Manitoba Hansard — 26 June 1989 (Sitting 27A, 34th Legislature, 2nd Session)

34-2-27a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Monday, June 26, 1989. The House met at 1:30 p.m. PRAYERS ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORT Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the Annual Report for '88-89 of The Discriminatory Business Practices Act. INTRODUCTION OF BILL Mr. Ed Mandrake (Assiniboia) introduced, by leave, Bill No. 4, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant le Code de la route . ANNOUNCEMENT Mr.

Speaker: Prior to oral questions, I am sure Honourable Members would like to join me in congratulating Paul Edwards (St. James) and his wife, Anne, on the birth yesterday of their son, Evan Lawrence Murdoch, who weighed in at 8 pounds, 15 ounces, a brother for Elizabeth . Mother and son are doing fine , I am told. INTRODUCTION OF GUESTS Mr. Speaker: Also, I would like to draw Honourable Members' attention to the public gallery where we have from the Bethel Christian Academy, fourteen Grades 7, 8 and 9 students under the direction of Mr. Peters and Ruth Funk.

This school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans). On behalf of all Honourable Members, I welcome you here this afternoon. ORAL QUESTION PERIOD Douglas Scott and Company Untendered Contract Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I must say that the Liberals are really doing our best to increase the population of Manitoba but are being let down by the other two Parties within this Chamber . Who is he, where does he come from, and what did he do for his $10,000.00? My question is to the Minister responsible for Seniors (Mr. Downey).

Can the Minister tell the House who Douglas Scott and Company Communication Services are, and why the y were given a $10,000 unte nder ed contract by his department? Hon. James Downey (Minister responsible for Seniors): Yes, Mr. Speaker, to carry out a very important activity on behalf of the seniors in Manitoba . 884 *

(1335) Responsibilities Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, with a supplementary question to the same Minister, surely before you need a communications policy you have to have a program of initiatives you wish to enunciate . Since there is not any and there has not been under both the previous administration and this one in terms of previous ministry and this one you did not have a ministry. Mr. Speaker , we all know the previous Minister had no strategy. Therefore , what exactly did this individual do earlier this year when he was given this untendered contract?

Could we have some specificity, please? Hon. James Downey (Minister responsible for Seniors): Mr. Speaker, if the Leader of the New Democratic Party (Mr. Doer) and the Liberals can stop fighting for a minute , I will try to respond to that answer . Mr.

Speaker, the individual has been working on material that has been put together by the Seniors Directorate, preparing it so that it is very easily understood and very workable information that can be used-she may not be interested in the welfare of the seniors and elderly abuse-so that it can be a piece of a Discussion Paper that works very well towards the objectives of reducing and eliminating the elderly abuse in this province . Seniors Directorate Communications Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): Mr.

Speaker , this $10,000 untendered contract is larger than the entire increase in the budget for the Seniors Directorate for 1989-90 . This is a Government who complained about the previous administration's use of hacks and flacks. Can the First Minister tell this House what is the difference between their strategy and the previous Government's strategy with regard to communicators or is it only th at they hire them outside untendered and the others hired them inside? Hon . James Downey (Minister responsible for Seniors): Mr.

Speaker , I do not accept the premise from the Leader of the Opposition that we have not done anything for seniors. It has been identified that those who are most abused in the seniors ' category are women 75 years of age and older. I believe there was something like 800,000 put into the abuse centres, shelters for women, Mr. Speaker. So I do not accept the premise that the Leader of the Opposition has put forward. The individual was hired to perform a job for the people of Manitoba and it was done and well done .

Monday, June 26, 1989 Douglas Scott and Company Responsibilities Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, but we are still somewhat confused. We want to know exactly , specifically what this indiv idual did. Can the Minis ter tell us what he did for his $10 ,000 and where he did it? I mean, did it come out of Ontario or did it come out of Manitoba? Hon. James Downey (Minister responsible for Seniors): Mr. Speaker, the Liberals cannot have it both ways. On one hand they are criticizing for not getting on and doing a job.

We get on and do the job; now they are criticizing the individual who has done some of the work . You cannot have it both ways. They pushed us to get action, we got action. It is going to work towards the resolve and the assistance of elderly abuse or the elimination of elderly abuse . I will get the details for the Leader of the Opposition. It is unfortunate that she cannot look at the positive things in life and look towards assisting the seniors as we are doing. Untendered Contract Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, but this contract was let on February 3.

How long does it take a Minister and this particular Government to find out exactly what is done for the contracts that they give untendered? Hon. James Downey (Minister responsible for Seniors): Again, Mr. Speaker, I point out to the Leader of the Opposition, who does not want to look at the positive side of life but on the negative side all the time, we clearly expressed publicly on Friday with all the seniors that we could get in this place and outside at the Seniors Day, the Discussion Paper on Elderly Abuse which was well done and will lead to some resolutions of it.

I would hope that the Leader of the Opposition would be supportive of that initiative because her critic has been pushing for some weeks now and we have delivered, and I for the life of me cannot understand why she cannot get on the positive side of helping the seniors in this province. *

(1340) Elderly Abuse White Paper Author Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Opposition): Maybe he can answer a very specific question . The paper was about a couple of pages long and most of it came out of the Schell Report . Can the Minister tell us, did Douglas Small Communications actually write this document, and if they did not then what exactly did they do? Hon. James Downey (Minister responsible for Seniors): Mr. Speaker, I have to make a couple of corrections with the greatest of respect . 885 Mr. Speaker , it was far more than a couple of pages long .

I do not know who Douglas Small is that she is referring to. An Honourable Member: Scott. Mr. Downey: Yes, he was involved in the development of the paper, of putting together the information that had been developed . Yes, he developed the paper and , yes, I introduced it to the public on Friday. It is action, action the people of Manitoba wanted this progressive Government to take and we are carrying on with it. Gold Mine-Shoal Lake Tailing Sample Analysis Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): My question is to the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings).

Today, the Winnipeg Water Protection Group confirmed that there are indeed discharges of arsenic and other chemicals into Shoal Lake as a result of the recent emptying of the retention ponds and some other activities associated with Consolidated Professor Gold Mine Company. Does the Minister have the results of the province 's water test, and will he table them in the House today? Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment) : Mr. Speaker, I have indicated it would be this week that those tests would be done. They will be done tomorrow or Wednesday, I believe.

I will certainly be prepared to share that information. Environmental Impact Study Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): The results today tabled with the public by the Winnipeg Water Protection Group contradict the statements made last week in media reports by the Ontario Environment Department .

Will the Minister now ensure that besides the federal environmental impact study, can he confirm today whether the Ontario Government is following their own land development pol icies around Shoal Lake, something that was developed in 1983 with our administration, although there have been many problems through all Government administrations? There is absolutely no question about that, Mr. Speaker.

Will the Government confirm today whether the full environmental assessment process under The Environment Act is going to take place under the 1983 Ontario land development policy that again was referenced by the community group today? Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, the issue of the land use in and around the body of water which Winnipeg draws its supplies from is obviously every bit as much of a concern as the activities on the island.

As a matter of fact , my off icials are in Ontario today , and one of the topics that will be brought forward is plann ing control to try and make sure that the future of this very good supply of water is carefully managed.

Monday, June 26, 1989 Water Protection Plan Legislation-Federal Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, Governments of all political stripes have been fighting this issue for years . Quite frankly, I do not believe we have the legislative teeth in provincial envi ronment Acts and even in the federal environmental Acts necessary to really deal with the drinking water challenges in Canada . I thi nk we can use those Acts but , Mr.

Speaker, I would ask the Minister of Environment-today the NDP is tabling and debating at second reading at five o'clock in Ottawa a Private Member 's Bill to protect and enhance the qualit y of drinking water in Canada. This Bill would do more than what the environment Bills do. It would supersede the environment Acts when it comes to the areas of drinking water, so that we can fight for our drinking water ahead of time rather than always dealing with these rear guard actions province to province and province to federal Government. Would this First Minister (Mr.

Filmon) support this type of legislation, which I am sure he is aware of? Would he and the First Minister communicate to the Conservative Party, and the Liberal Party communicate with their colleagues in Ottawa, to pass this Bill in reading and in the House of Commons today so that we will have protection for our water supply that will supersede The Environment Act and really do the job that we all need as Manitobans? •

(1345) Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, I am aware of the legislation that is the topic of the Bill that was being introduced in Ottawa. I have seen the legislation that was to be introduced as a Private Member's Bill in Ontario. My opinion of the Bill that was being introduced in Ontario was that it was not strong enough to do some of the things that we hoped to do. Frankly, in dealing wit h this specific issue which is Shoal Lake, and obviously that is why the Member has raised the question , we are obviously very concerned.

That is why in my first answer I indicated that we were putting more options on the table to try and bring Ontario into further agreement with us in protection of water quality . Certainly that becomes, as society grows and our population grows, increasingly important that potable water supplies be protected . Mr. Doer: I will table copies of this Bill in the Chamber today so the Minister can have the opportunity to read it before five o'clock eastern time, which is four o'clock our time .

Given the fact that the Ontario Government has said there is no problem with arsenic , and today a community based group said there is arsenic in that water, I would strongly urge the M inister and ask him whether, upon reading, if it is much stronger than the Ontario legislation which only deals within the boundaries of the Province of Ontario, would he not support the concept and the principles of having a Bill that supersedes even our 886 Environment Act on a national level so we can get national protection for our water supply that goes across boundaries, a priority I believe that is consistent with all Members from all political Parties in this Chamber?

Would he not support the principle of that type of Bill, and would he not look at the specifics and confirm his support with that type of Bill today before the debate of the Private Member 's Bill in the House? Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, I think I would be foolish to respond directly to the question not having read the Bill. Let me repeat the principles by which we are operating , and that is to do everything possible to assure and guarantee the quality of potable water in this particular example .

Further national legislation that would enhance the availability and protection of potable water is an excellent objective, but in not having read this Bill or having seen the specifics of it, I will not answer directly the question. Bill C-22 Challenge Manitoba Society of Seniors Mr. James Carr (Fort Rouge): My question is for the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mccrae). Mr. Speaker, we are getting very confusing signals from this Government on the whole issue of drug patent legislation .

Ministers responsible for Seniors, both past and present, have argued that Bill C-22 is going to provide necessary research and development. But just on Friday last the Minister of Justice (Mr. Mccrae) supported the court challenge launched by the Manitoba Society of Seniors and the Minister said, "I cannot understand why it is the Honourable Member would like to have two lawyers standing, one after the other, arguing the same things .

I just do not quite understand how the involvement of the Department of Justice could assist in any way except to be repetitive." The Minister could help by throwing the entire weight of his Government behind the MSOS Court Challenge. Why does he not show some leadership and finally bite the bullet and admit that this is a court challenge worthy of his Government's support? Hon.

James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): The Honourable Member and other Members of his caucus seem to have trouble concentrating on what it is that is federal jurisdiction, and what it is that is in provincial jurisdiction. My response to the Honourable Member was to tell him that the Manitoba Society of Seniors is being represented by Mr. Arne Peltz in the discussion in the courts about Bill C-22. Bill C-22 Provincial Jurisdiction Mr. James Carr (Fort Rouge): With a supplementary question to the Minister, the question of jurisdiction is exactly what the MSOS is arguing .

The Minister of Justice (Mr. Mccrae) should know that it is a constitutional argument that says this Bill is an encroachment on provincial jurisdiction . My question to the Minister is simple. Does he agree with the MSOS that Bill C-22 encroaches upon provincial jurisdiction?

Monday, June 26, 1989 Hon. James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): The answer I gave to the Honourable Member the other day is the answer that he should accept . Now, I made reference in that answer to correspondence between himself and myself. The Honourable Member looked back at me inquisitively, and I should say that I did indeed receive a letter from the Honourable Member for Churchill (Mr. Cowan) who first raised this matter with me, and I should make that clear for the record . The answer I gave is that the matter is being handled by Mr. Arne Peltz, and he is acting for the MSOS in that court challenge . *

(1350) Bill C-22 Challenge Manitoba Society of Seniors Mr. James Carr (Fort Rouge): Mr. Speaker , with a final supplementary to the Minister responsible for Seniors . Last Friday the Minister of Justice in this Chamber said that he supports the arguments put forward by the MSOS, and there is no question that it would simp ly be repetitive . The Minister responsible for Seniors . Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Government House Leader (Mr. Mccrae), on a point of order . Hon. James Mccrae (Government House Leader): The Honourable Member for Fort Rouge (Mr.

Carr) just read from the record of last week's discussion between himself and myself. The words that he has used in his question today do not appear there . What I said at that time was that if the Honourable Member had his way, he would have a whole courtroom full of lawyers all saying the same thing. Mr. Speaker: Order , please ; order, please . The Honourable Member knows that a dispute over the facts is not a point of order . The Honourable Membe r for Fort Rouge, kindly put his question . Mr. Carr: Hansard speaks for itself. My question for the Minister responsible for Seniors is simple.

Will he adopt the view of the MSOS and go to bat on behalf of senior s in this province rather than the multinationa l drug companies who are the only ones will benefit from this bad piece of legislation? Hon. James Downey (Minister responsible for Seniors): Mr. Speaker , the question that the Member asked directly relates to the Attorney General (Mr. Mccrae) and the constitutional matters within federal provincial jurisdiction . I will leave it to him to respond to the Member directly.

As far as the seniors are concerned, my colleagues, this Government , are very committed to supporting the seniors so that they can fully enhance their opportunities and live their lives to the fullest in this province . 887 INTRODU CTION OF GUESTS Mr. Speaker: Before recognizing t he Honourable Member for Kildonan (Mr. Cheema), I would like to draw all Members' atten tion to the Speaker's gallery where we have with us this afternoon the Honourable Paul Dick , who is the federal Minister responsible for Procurement. On behalf of all Honourable Members, I welcome you here this afte rnoon, sir.

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD (Cont'

d) Health Care Theumatologist Shortage Mr. Guizar Cheema (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, 170,000 Manitobans suffer from rheumatic diseases; 40,000 between the ages of 30 and 45, and 2,000 are under the age of 15. Mr. Speaker, these patients and their families are crying for help . The Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) was notified about this pending disaster in a Health Care Report that was given to him six months back . My question is, will the Min ister of Health (Mr.

Orchard) advise this House what step he has taken since that time to correct the severe shortage of medical services for these patients and their famil ies? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend is correct in that I received correspondence from the Arthritic Self-Help Association, a group that I spoke to at their founding meeting in Winnipeg . As a matter of fact, it was during the election campaign of last spring.

Clearly, a number of Manitobans experience a great deal of physical and med ical discomfort because of arthritic conditions which range from minor aches and pains to very serious conditions such as lupus and rheumatic arthritis. This Government is fully aware of the difficul ties experienced by those indiv iduals .

We are attemp ting, through reference of that information that was presented to me in November of last year, to come up with an appropr iate plan of action whereby we hopefully can, over the next number of years , attempt to remedy a decline in the ability to serve those very serious ly afflicted Manitobans with arthr itic conditions, that very serious decline which has been a part of the Manitoba Healt h Environment over the last number of years . Rheumatic Disease Services Waiting Period Mr. Guizar Cheema (Kildonan): Mr.

Speaker , during these si x months, now we have only three rheumatologists providing services for Manitoba . The waiting pe riod for severe cases, not for a minor complaint , but the severe cases about eight to 12 months , and patients will be compelled to go out of Manitoba and burden our health care system . Mr. Speaker , it is a typical mismanag ement of the tax dollars . Manitoba may lose the rheumatology

Monday, June 26, 1989 program. My question is, what special steps will this Minister now take so that we have a less waiting period for these patients? •

(1355) Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I realize my honourable friend , the Liberal Health Critic is very adept at listening to CBC and reading the Free Press and coming up with his questions for Question Period today . I have been aware of the difficulties with the provision of service to those Manitobans suffering from arthritis . With all due respect to my honourable friend , the Liberal Health Critic, we cannot solve every problem in health care overnight.

My honourable friends in Opposition are starting to howl, and I would like to explain to them some of the initiatives that are working positively for Manitobans . Mr. Speaker: Order, please ; order, please . May I remind the Honourable Minister that answers to questions should be as brief as possible . Rehabilitation Mr. Guizar Cheema (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, we have only 20 medical beds at the Rehabilitation Hospital, and the waiting period for physiotherapy and occupational therapy has increased while he is still a Minister. This is causing patients to become prematurely disabled. Mr.

Speaker: And the question is? Mr. Cheema: Mr. Speaker, what special steps will this Minister take to provide the much needed rehabilitation services for these patients and their families? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, whilst my honourable friend is, as his role requires, raising issues in the House, I would wish my honourable friend would have the decency to indicate that there are increasing levels of services to Mani tob ans in health care in many, many areas .

I do not expect my honourable friend to ever admit that because that means the health care system is in better condition today than it was a year ago . If we have the next 16 years of management in the health care system, it will be restored to a position of excellence that it ought to be. Mr. Speaker, I will admi t that in one year we have not solved all of the problems in health care . Transport Canada Air Services Closure-Dauphin Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): I have a question for the Minister of Transportation (Mr. Albert Driedge r).

The federal Government continues to target transportation for cuts and forcing the transportation to bear the bru nts of deficit reduction, at least that is their excuse . Under the Liberal style and Conservative style of deregulation in this country, we have seen service, safety and jobs cast aside in the interests of the bottom line.

We see it at CN; we see it at VIA; we see it in trucking; we see it at air services. 888 In view of a recent document that I have received from Transport Canada that now shows they intend to close the flight services station in various areas specifically at Dauph in, throwing six people out of work there and providing only remote services from Winnipeg, therefore undermining safety, can the Minister of Transportation (Mr. Albert Driedger) indicate whether he has been advised of this decision and whether he was consulted on it before it was taken? Hon.

Albert Driedger (Minister of Highways and Transportation): The Member makes some very general statements which has happened in the past. I would like to indicate to him that I have expressed concern many times in this House already, some of the proposed or alleged cutbacks from the federal Government, indicating VIA Rail. Many of these things have not really happened at this stage of the game . We have expressed a concern and until we have something definite -I have talked with the federal Minister of Transportation about these issues. He again indicates he has a document that says there is a cutback.

Until I get some information on this, as soon as I do, I will try and raise my concern and deal with it. Mr. Plohman: There we have a Minister who has been by-passed again on serious transportation issues affecting this province .

In view of the fact that the Dauphin flight services has been ranking seventh, eighth or ninth out of 21 in Transp ort Canada's central region, so many centres rank below in terms of the amount of services offered, and in view of the fact that the Dubin Commission following the Cranbrook crash recommended that flight services stations be in place at all airports serviced with scheduled air services, I ask the Minister whether he will raise this issue with the federal Minister and reject this policy that has been put in place by the federal Government to abandon air flight services at various airpor ts in this country? •

(1400) Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr. Speaker , yes, I will raise that issue. However, I want to indicate again that until there is something definite coming forward-we had the alleges of the Via cutbacks-and indications are that until a report comes down , we do not know what the cutbacks are. We do not know exactly what is going to happen until we get the final report. I can indicate to the Member that I will get in touch with the federal Minister and find out exactly what the circumstances are. Mr. Plohman: Mr. Speaker, this is incredible that this Minister is not aware of this issue .

I will table, in this House, a document that I have that shows that the federal Transport Department intends to close the flight services station in Dauphin. I would say, in view of the fact that the Dryden crash occurred -(lnterjection)- Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please . Would the Honourable Member kindly put his question now? Mr. Plohman: I do have my question. In view of the fact that the Dryden air crash occurred -(Interjection)-

Monday, June 26, 1989 Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. I have recogni,:ed the Honourable Member for his final supplementary question. The Honourable Member will kindly put his question now. Mr. Plohman: I ask this Minister to reject this federal policy that has involved accidents that could have been prevented at such places as Dryden where the air crash killed 22 people, and it had remote services, no flight services station. Will this Minister reject that policy and insist on the change- Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please. Mr. Albert Driedger: Mr.

Speaker, I repeat, I will acquaint myself with the circumstances specifically, and I will raise the concern to Manitobans with the federal Minister of Transportation about the issue. Ethnic Newspapers Distribution Assistance Program Mr. Mark Minenko (Seven Oaks): Mr. Speaker, with all the controversy surrounding the federal Government's April Budget, one of its important provisions went largely unnoticed. The Publications Distribution Assistance Program , which assists Canadian newspapers and magazines with the cost of mailing, is to see major cutbacks.

Announcements with respect to changes in this program were to be made by July 1 of this year, and yet, so far none have been made. My question is to the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation (Mrs. Mitchelson). Despite this Tory Government's attack on Manitoba's ethnocultural groups by the removal of the funding provisions from MIC, has this Minister met with her federal counterparts to ensure that any announcements that are to be made by this weekend do not adversely affect the many ethnic newspapers in Manitoba? If she has not met with them yet, will she do so as soon as possible? Hon.

Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Recreation): Mr. Speaker, I will take the specifics of that question as notice and get back to the Member. Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Seven Oaks (Mr. Minenko), with a supplementary question. Order, please; order, please. Mr. Minenko: Mr. Speaker, I just find it incredible that the Minister does not even know what this program is going to affect. Mr. Speaker: Order, please; order, please . As the Honourable Member is quite aware, we do not comment on the specifics of the answer. Community Newspapers Distribution Assistance Program Mr.

Speaker: The Honourable Member for Seven Oaks will kindly put his question now. Mr. Mark Minenko (Seven Oaks): My supplementary question is to the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Penner). Over 30 community newspapers and the people they serve will be adversely affected as a result of these federal Tory cutbacks. What is the effect of the federal Tory cuts on the community newspapers, and what are his plans to assist these newspapers which provide such a valuable bond between rural Manitobans and their communities? Hon. Jack Penner (Minister of Rural Development): Mr.

Speaker, I have met during the last couple of weeks a number of times with representatives of the Community Newspapers Association. They have not raised this specif ic issue with me. I want to indicate to you that, however, I will ask them what their concerns are about this issue, and I will report back to the House when I have that answer. Publishing Industry Distribution Assistance Program Mr. Speaker: The Honourable Member for Seven Oaks, with his final supplementary. Mr. Mark Minenko (Seven Oaks): My final supplementary quest ion is to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr.

Ernst). 889 The printing and publishing industry in Manitoba is an important industry, not just for the economic, but also for cultural reasons . Given this Minister's stated commitment to Manitoban industries, can this Minister tell us what is the impact of the federal cuts which will impact, not only on ethnic community papers, but also on papers like the Manitoba Society of Seniors Journal, and what concrete steps will this Minister take to ensure that this important Manitoba industry is not adversely affected? Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr.

Speaker, throughout the months of January through April, I had extensive meetings right across the province with a wide variety of industry groups. At no time did they raise this issue with me at all. However, during other meetings that I will be having over the course of the next few months, I will certainly raise the issue with them . If they have concerns, we will bring them back to the House. Province of Manitoba Ottawa Office Study Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker , too have a question for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Ernst).

I note that on February 7, 1989, this Government signed an untendered $25 ,000 contract to study the development of a Manitoba-Ottawa office. I tr ied to get the information out of The Freedom of Informa tion Act. It was denied to us, so I am wondering now whether the Minister can tell the House whether the study is complete and whether he is prepared to table that study in this Legislature.

Monday, June 26, 1989 Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Mr. Speaker, on at least two occasions this Government has announced its intentions to establish an office in Ottawa , an office in Ottawa to deal with our visitors department on a regular basis, to make sure that Manitoba companies get the kind of response they deserv e in terms of procurement on a regular basis . In addition, Mr. Speaker, we also want to deal with the question of tourism th rough tha t office.

The fact of the matter is there are any number of head office organizations withi n Ottawa's environs that deal on a regular basis with having conven tio ns. We see that office also dealing with the situation. I might add to the Member for Brandon East that, yes, the study is comp leted . Mr. Leonard Evans: Mr. Speaker, I also ask the Minister if he would table it in view of the fact that we were denied this information under The Freedom on Information Act. Government Policy Consultants Ottawa Office Study Mr.

Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Can the Min ister tell the House why he hired the firm of Government Policy Consultants Incorporated of Ontario to do this work? Why this particular firm, Mr. Speaker? Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Indus try, Trade and Tourism): In terms of dealing with - Mr. Speaker: Order , please . The Honourable Member will have tim e to get his remarks on the record . The Honou rab le Minister of Industry , Trade and Tourism has the floor . Mr.

Ernst: When the Government looks for expertise and advice on specific matters , it goes to consultants , particularly out- of-province consultants for those who have certain expertise and advice that they could give the Government. That is the criteria upon which it was based . For that reas on , we hired thi s particular consulting firm. Government Policy Consultants Ottawa Office Study Mr.

Leonard Evans {Brandon East): Although we could not get anything under The Freedom of Information Act, thanks to the Ontario Consumer and Corpora te Affairs Department we have been advised that the director of the company, Mr. John Johnston , former chairman of Mulro ney's Manitoba leadership campaign runs this company. I would ask the Min ister, would the fact that this person who is the former chair of Mr. Mulroney's leadership campaign in Manitoba and obviously an individual wit h close ties to the Prime Minister have anything to do with the awarding of this contract?

Does ti1e Minister believe that only by having someone tied direct ly to the Prime Min ist er will Manitoba be fairly treated by the federal Government? Hon. Gary Filmon {Premier): Mr. Speaker, the Member for Brandon East may be able to tell us about 890 untendered contracts under his administration. It is only because our administration is open and publishes these that he can find out information. He may like to tell us, Mr. Speaker , why his Government, on May 12, 1987, gave an untendered contract to Viewpoin ts Research for $18,000.00.

He may, in fact, want to tell us why Culture , Heritage and Recreation on May 26, 1987, gave an untendered contract for $30,000 to Viewpoints Research or why they gave an untende red contract through the Department of Health on April 21, 1987, to Robert . . .. Some Honourable Memb ers: Oh, oh! *

(1410) Mr. Speaker: Order , please ; order please . The Honourable Membe r for Thompson, on a point of order. Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Spea ker, before the Premier (Mr. Filmon) has leave of his senses, I would ask that you would call the Premier to order. It is surely not in order as indicated in Beauchesne. For those Members opposite who have not read Beauchesne, it is a very serious matter . They should deal with it. It is not in order for the First Minister to give this type of answer , Mr. Speaker .

We realize they are somewhat sensitive about the very legitimate questions raised by the Member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans), but the First Minister should not abuse the rules of the House and should deal with the question raised, the very legitimate question by the Member for Brandon East. Mr. Speaker: I would like to thank the Honourable Member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) . The Honourable Government House Leader (Mr. Mcc rae), on the same point of order. Hon.

James Mccrae (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): After listening to the lengthy pre- and post am bles put a little earlier by the Honourable Member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman), I should think the Honourable Member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) should blush even to refer to Beauchesne in response to my Leader's answer . Mr. Speaker : Order, please . The Honourable Member does not have a point of order . Workers Compensation Board Claim Delays Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Speaker, I have a quest ion for the Minister responsible for Workers Compensat ion (Mr.

Connery) , and it is regarding the appeal backlog . I have a co nstituent who was forced to go back to work wit h back problems because he refuses to beg for oth er typ es of social assistance. I have another constituent who has had to sell her cottage and vehicle and now is having to look at selling her home because of the Workers Compensation backlog . I have yet another constituent in my riding who will be putting his truck up for sale if a decision is not made quickly on his appeal process .

Monday, June 26, 1989 Given the three cases I have just cited, and I have more in my riding, -(lnterjection)- Mr. Speaker: Order, please . The Honourable Member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) is attempting to ask his question . Order , please . Mr. Lamoureux: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would like the Minister responsible for Workers Compensation (Mr. Connery) to tell me what he would suggest I tell the injured workers in my riding about the backlog and the lack of commitment by this Government to address this very serious problem? Hon.

Edward Connery (Minister responsible for The Workers Compensation Act): There is no question that we have worked hard to improve the Workers Compensation, but I have never denied in this House, and I will not until it is cleared up, that we do have a problem with the final appeals. They are excessive. I have had many meetings with the Workers Compensation Board.

In fact, I had an hour-and-a-hal f meeting with the three members of the Workers Compensation Board where there is representatio n from the employers and the employees side to go over the length or the delay in the appeals, and I have asked them to give me a very short , soon resolve, so that we can shorten that length of appeal. It is about eight months duration right now and that is not acceptable that injured workers should have to wait that long . If the Member would give us those specifics , outside the House, I would be pleased to follow up and get an explanation for him. Mr. Lamoureux: Yes, Mr.

Speaker , I will be more than happy to give him the specifics. This Government is showing a lack of respect for the injured workers of Manitoba . At present there is a backlog of appeals at every stage of the appeal process . Given that we have injured workers going back to work, injured and others forced to sell their property because of this serious backlog, will the Minister apply additional resources into clearing up this very serious problem? Mr. Connery: I wish the Member would not put misinformation on the record that this Government is not concerned about injured workers.

We are deeply concerned about injured workers. I just told the Member that I have met , again , with the Board of Commis sioners and we are working on a resolve to bring this into a proper perspective . They are looking at a three-month's duration as being an appropriate time and we hope within a reasonable period of time to achieve this. Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, I will give the Minister the numbers and he can give them a call and he can tell them what the problem is.

My supplementary question is-injured workers in the appeal process have regular monthly bills that they have to maintain-how does this Minister propose these people maintain their financial commitments while they have no income because they are unable to go to work? Mr. Connery: Mr. Speaker, where there is need or there is a clear indic ation that there has been an accident , 891 an injury that occurred at the workplace, injured workers are given up-front money. That will continue to happen . In the interim we are trying to determine the best method to make sure that people are processed very quickly .

I can tell you that the Workers Compensation is going through a major review . The Member for Radisson (Mr. Patterson) took the opportunity to make that tour and had the explanations given and the process that is in place to sho rten those periods . Mr. Speaker, it is coming . It is not there yet. Whiteshell School Division Privatization Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Education (Mr. Derkach).

I think most Manitobans were shocked to learn on the weekend that a school district in Manitoba is contemplating or had contemplated becoming a private institution, partly because of the windfall that has been prov ided to private institutions by this Minister of Education . Can the Minister of Education (Mr. Derkach) provide assurances to the people of Manitoba, the 13,000 teachers , the 200,000 public school students, that under no circumstances will school distr icts or individual public schools be privatized in the Province of Manitoba? Hon.

Leonard Derkach (Minister of Education and Training): I am happy today to rise on that particular question because, Mr. Speaker, under the former administration this same situation persisted . There was no kind of assistance given to the Whiteshell School District for the kind of inequ ity that school district was facing. Mr.

Speaker , when we took over Governmen t last year to assist in a bridge financing, if you like , to try and resolve the situation in the interim, this Government provided $100,000 specifically to Whiteshell so that they would not suffer the kind of inequities that they suffered under the former administration. We are working to resolve that situa tion at the present time wit h the assistance of my colleague, the Member for Lac du Bonne t (Mr. Praznik). We have met with that school district, and before fall we hope to have this resolved. Mr.

Speaker: The Honourable Member for Flin Flon, with time for a very short question . Mr. Storie: Mr. Speaker, there was no answer to the question of "will he give assurances to the Provinc e of Manitoba?" Public Schools Privatization Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): My final questi on to the Minister of Education (Mr. Derkach) is, has the Min ister con sulted with other public school officials about the seeming inequities that now exist, and the attractiveness that exists in the system for moving to a private system , that in fact they are additionally well funded under this

Monday, June 26, 1989 administration? Can the Minister provide assurances to the public school system, the hundreds and hundreds of trustees , that privatization is not on this Minister 's agenda? Mr. Speaker: Order, please . There is a ques tion there. The Honourable Minister of Education. Hon. Leonard Derk ach (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, privatization is not on this Minister's agenda.

I have met with the Manitoba Teachers ' Society, the Manitoba Associa tion of School Trustees and all other organizations that have some interest in education with regard to funding of public schools and independent schools as well. This Governmen t has done far more for funding public school s in this province and making sure that opportunit ies for students right through this province are there far more than was ever done by the former administration in the six years that they were in Government. •

(1420) Mr. Speaker: The time for oral questions has expired. I have a rulin g for the House . SPEAKER'S RULING Mr. Speaker: On June 13, the Deputy Speaker (Mr. Chornopyski) took under advisement a point of order raised by the Honourable Member for Dauphin (Mr. Plohman) respecting words spoken by the Honourable Minister of Northern Affairs (Mr. Downey) .

The words spoken by the Honourable Minister, " . . . the Member for Dauphin, who is skulking around in the back alleys, trying to cause problems for our Melis community and disrupting the lives of many people ," were alleged by the Honourable Member for Dauphin to have imputed motives to him. Language which impu tes unworthy motives is unparliamentary . I have reviewed carefully the specific remarks quoted earlier in this rulin g, and I have also read with care the Minister's complete comments respecting the activities of the Honourable Member for Dauphin in relation to Metis communities in that constituency.

I note that the Honourable Min iste r made sever al earlier remarks which might have prompted the Honourable Member for Dauphin to claim that unworth y motives were being attribu ted or imputed to him, which remarks the Honourab le Mem ber for Dauphin chose to disregard . Words which are alleged to have imputed unworthy motives are quite often part of the norm al exchanges which occur in thi s House, some of which may be unkind or discourteous, but whic h seldom are unparliamentary.

In this case, I am of the opinion that the words used by the Ministe r and quoted earlier did impute unworthy motives to the Honourable Member for Dauphin and are therefore unp arl iamentary. Theref ore, I am calling upon the Honourable Minister of Northern Affairs to withdraw the unpa rliamentary words. 892 Hon. James Downey (Minister of Northern Affairs): Mr. Speaker , I have no reason not to have those words withdrawn . Mr. Speaker: We would like to thank the Honourable Minister of North ern Affairs . ORDERS OF THE DAY Hon. James Mccrae (Government House Leader): Mr.

Speaker, would you be so kind as to call Bill 11, after which the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) will proceed into Interim Supply , followed by Bill 27, by leave , and Bill 30. THIRD READING BILL NO. 11-THE ELECTORAL DIVISIONS AMENDMENT ACT Bill No 11 was read a third time and passed. Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I move that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair for the House to go into Committee of Supply . MOTION presented and carried and the House resolved itself into a Committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty, with the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks (Mr.

Minenko) in the Chair for Interim Supply. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY SUPPLY-INTERIM SUPPLY The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mark Minenko): I call the committee to order . The Committee of Supply will consider a resolution respecting the Interim Supply . RESOLVED that a sum not exceeding $3,241,346,100 , being 75 percent of the total amount to be voted as set out in the Main Estimates, be granted to Her Majesty for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March , 1990. Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr.

Acting Chairman , what we are beginning on in the next few minutes is the process of providing the Government with authority to expend some significant portion of the total appropriation that hopefully will be voted to it through the cou rse of the Estimates . I thank Members opposite for their indulgence in the manne r in which they have entered into discuss ions and negotiations with respect to the bringing in of the Interim Supply Bill. I would like to indicate , particularly to the House Leader and the critic of Finance (Mr.

Alcock) from the Liberal Party , that when I had approached him previously and given to him a proposed date to which time the Interim Supply would carry, that being the end of November , unknown to me at that time officials within my department had written in a December 31 deadline. I want to state for the record, Mr. Acting Chairman, that I apologize to the Member for that change. Certainly

Monday, June 26, 1989 H was an honest error, and no doubt it would be ohe that he probably would like to discuss somewhat more fully. Nevertheless, Mr. Acting Chairman, it is a Government responsibility that they ultimately decide what is best to put forward in the legislation from the viewpoint of the people of the Province of Manitoba. We have done so and of course will be held totally accountab le and responsible for it. Thank you. The Acting Chairman (Mr. Minenko): Do the Opposition Finance Critics wish to address this resolution? Is the committee ready for the question? Shall the resolution be passed?

Resolved that a sum not exceeding $3,241,346 , 100, being 75 percent of the total amount to be voted as set out in the Main Estimates, be granted to Her Majesty for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March , 1990- pass. The resolution is accordingly passed . Committee rise. Call in the Speaker . IN SESSION COMMITTEE REPORT Mr. Mark Minenko (Acting Chairman of Committees): Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted a certain resolution, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for La Verendrye (Mr.

Pankratz), that the report of the committee be received. MOTION presented and carried. Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Neufeld), that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair, and the House resolve itself into a Committee to consider Ways and Means for raising of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. MOTION presented and carried and th e House resolved itself into a Committee to consider Ways and Means for raisin g of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty with the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks (Mr. Minenko) in the Chair.

COMMITTEE OF WAYS AND MEANS SUPPLY-INTERIM SUPPLY The Acting Chairman (Mr. Mark Minenko): The Committee of Ways and Means wili come to order , please. We have before us for our consideration a resolution respecting the Interim Supply Bill.

The resolution reads as follows : RESOLVED that towards making good the Supply granted to Her Majesty on account of certain expenditures of the Public Service, for me fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1990, the sum of $3,241,346 ,100, being 75 percent of the total amount to be voted as set out in the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1990, laid before the House at the present Session of the Legislature, be granted out of the Consolidated Fund. 893 Does the Minister of Finance have any comments? Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): No comments, Mr. Chairman.

The Acting Chairman (Mr. Minenko): The Oppos iti on Critics wish to address the resolution? Is the committee ready for the question? Shall the resolution be passed? The resolution is accordingly passed . The committee rise. Call in the Speaker . IN SESSION COMMITTEE REPORT Mr. Mark Minenko (Acting Chairman of Committees): Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Ways and Means has adopted a certain resolution, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again. I move , seconded by the Hono urab le Member for La Verendrye (Mr. Pankratz), that t he report of the committee be received . MOTION presented and carried.

INTRODUCTION OF BILL BILL NO. 29-THE INTERIM APPROPRIATION ACT, 1989 Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance) introduced, by leave, Bill No. 29 , The Inte r im Appropriation Act, 1989; Loi de 1989 Portant Affectation Anticipee De Credits , and be ordered for second reading immediately . MOTION presented and carried . *

(1430) SECOND READING BILL NO. 29-THE INTERIM APPROPRIATION ACT, 1989 Hon. Clayton Manness (M iniste r of Finance) pre sente d , by leave, Bi ll No. 29 , The Interim Appropriation Act, 1989; Loi de 1989 Portant Affectation Antic ipee De Credits, for seco nd reading and be refe rred to a committee of th is House. MOTION presented . Mr. Manness: Bill No. 29, The Inter im Appro priation Act , 1989, is required to provide interim spen ding , commitment and borrowing authority for the 1989-90

Monday, June 26, 1989 fiscal year, retroactive to April 1, pending approval of The Appropriation Act, 1989. The amount of spending authority requested is $3,241,346,100, being 75 percent of the total sums to be voted (exc luding statutory items) as set forth in the Main Estimates of Expenditure. Mr.

Speaker, this is broken down , as follows: Total general statutory appropriations . . . $494,265 ,700 Total sums to be voted .... . .... $4,321,794,800 Total Main Estimates of Expenditure ... . ....... . ... ... $4,816,060,500 The interim supply calculation is 75 percent of the $4.3 billion sums to be voted, which equals specifically $3,241,346 ,100.00. This amount is estimated to last until approximate ly the end of December, 1989. Mr.

Speaker, the amount of future commitment authority included in this Interim Supply Bill is $300 million, being 75 percent of the total amount of $400 million which is to be included in The Appropriation Act, 1989. This represents an increase of $100 million from last year's level and relates primarily to the commitment authority required for the financial long term lease obligations for Manitoba Properties Inc. Expenditures for future years commitment cannot be made in the 1989-90 fiscal year unless additional spending authority is provided . Mr.

Speaker, a clause has been included to provide Government with the authority to make payments against accrued liabilities totalling $2,272,000 as recorded in the accounts of the province as at March 31, 1989. As in previous years, a borrowing authority clause has been included in the Interim Supply Bill for 1989- 90. Bill 29 will provide the Government with borr owing authority of $400 million. Mr. Speaker, Bill 29 is required to provide interim spending, commitment and borrowing authority effective April 1, 1989, to ensure the continued operation of Government .

This Bill replaces spending autho rity previously provided by way of a special warrant, which included sufficient authority to facilitate Government operations until the end of June. I would like to request co-operation of the Opposition in passing Bill 29 through all stages of consideration, debate and approval without undue delay. When Bill 29 reaches the committee stage, I can provide Members with a section-by-section explanation. Thank you. Mr. Guiza r Cheema (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, I would like to put some comments on this Bill 29.

The present administra tion is spending about $1,500 per person in Manitoba for our health care system and that amounts to about $1.5 billion , approximately one-t hird our provincial Bud get. I have serious reservations about this spending. For the last few months, we have seen in Manitoba that our health care system is deteriorating in spite of the amount of money we spend on the health care system. 894 We are the th ird major spenders in Canada and still our population is not as healthy as in other plac es. We have not reduced the rate of ischaemic heart disease . We have not reduced the rate for cancer .

We are not as healthy as compared to the other parts of Canada , but we still keep on spending $1,500 per person in Manitoba. Mr. Speaker, let us start from the earlier stages of life. We continue to have problems at our maternity wards throughout the city. In 1987, when the previous administration tried to reorganize the obstetrical services in Manitoba they had no planning, and that is continued throughout the new administration, also.

What they did, they have cut down Concordia Hospital and they have cut down Seven Oaks Hospital but without proper planning for the whole city and the other areas, the teaching hospital, such as St. Boniface Hospital and Health Sciences and the community hospitals such as Misericordia Hospital, Victoria and Grace Hospital. What this Government got from the previous Government was a mess in terms of the maternity services. For the last one year we have not seen any planning from this administration either. We did not expect them to do it overnight, as the Minister is right, we do not have the answers.

Nobody has the answers for health care to fix overnight, but the planning has to be started. Mr. Speaker , what is happening, we have the Misericordia Hosp ital where there are plenty of beds available for the delivery services . We have the St. Boniface Hospital where we do not have adequate services for the maternity ward as well as for the post partum ward. So what is happening , the patients are constantly being transferred and to be exact, for 28 to 29 times during this administration .

If a unit has to be closed that is not management, that is mismanagement, that is a waste of the taxpayers' dollar and that is a major concern. Above all, you are exposing a variety of individuals, not only mother and the unborn child but also the families, other professionals who are related to that person, also go through a lot of stress. We have not solved anything, we still keep on spending the same amount of money, but we have not seen any answers from this administration.

There are two concepts everyone agrees with in the health care profession, that you cannot provide all the services at all the hospitals , but there has to be a plan that if you want to provide a maternity ward in the community hospital, which we would like to do and we would favour that, but at the same time have these two hospitals , such as the St. Boniface and the Health Sciences Centre upgraded to make sure that the tertiary care and the critical care is provided for all the patients not only in Winnipeg but throughout Manitoba .

These units do have services for an intensive care nursery, they have other services such as ultrasound and other professionals who are very valuable to provide any critical maternity services, but that is missing. We have not seen any action. We were hoping that the Minister of Health would come up with some plans, but so far it is nil and that is disappointing. *

(1440) Monday, June 26, 1989 Mr. Speaker, let us go to the second area which is distressing to the patients . I will address that area to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) . I will give him a very simple example, a very mathematical example . No one has to be a genius to do that, anyone could just use a calculator and add those numbers. There are 90 patients waiting, as the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) agreed, they are waiting at the Health Sciences Centre for cardiac surgery, it is by-pass surgery. These 90 patients are costing taxpayers a lot of money.

Why I am saying, it is costing a lot of money because these individuals are not getting the proper health care. They are going to see their doctors, they are getting all the tests done, they are filling the acute care beds, so ultimately, it is costing us more money than it otherwise would cost if you had operated on these patients . That is why I am saying this is a gross mismanagement . It is not being done. This Government is not doing a proper job addressing this issue. They had the opportunity last year, they were given one year but with no action and now there is a so-called another committee.

How many committees would this Minister need to make a decision? The decision has to be made by this administration. They are the decision makers. They should not be depending on each and every action and just pass the buck to the different committees and wait for it. That is not acceptable. The results are very clear. Everyone in Manitoba knows that this administration in health care is lurching from one area to another without any majo r improvement. We never said to the Minister of Health (Mr.

Orchard), and to be fair to him, we did not say that he has to do it overnight, as he said very rightly that he cannot do it overnight, but one year and two months is not overnight. It is how many days? -(Interjection)- That is a long time. I think the responsibility on this Minister of Health is more than anyone right now. Why I say that, because the way this administration would handle the health care, it will help Manitobans for years to come, for decades to come .

That is why I am saying somebody who, he or she, is going to occupy that chair in a few years time, will be in greater trouble than he if we do not fix this system now. Why I am saying that, for the last 10 years the health care cost in Manitoba has tripled. The health care continues to rise, but still the long-term planning has to come from the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) . He is nodding his head, he is saying no. I think he will do it if he wants to, but he does not take the responsibility seriously in terms of having a long-term planning, and that is missing .

We have not heard anything for medical centres like Health Sciences or St. Boniface, except there was a nice line in the Throne Speech saying we want to upgrade the Health Sciences Centre to make it a world class teaching and surgical centre. How can he even justify making a statement when you do not have these services available? The problem is getting worse and worse. Any teaching hospital, when they are losing all the specialists who are a part of the teaching hospital, how can they justify it? Pediatricians are leaving, seven of them already left. There is no hope that more will come.

There is no more 895 hope that others will stay, because of the different reasons. In this Budget, we have not seen any planning to include more physicians where there is a lack of physicians in a specialized service such as pediatrics, such as nephrology , such as rheumatology, interesting . The Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) said, well, we are doing research from the CBC and the Free Press. It is really amazing the number of questions, the number of items we have brought to the attention of this House so that we can make the best health care possible for Manitobans.

The Minis ter is saying that we are just going with the research of the Free Press and CBC. I think it is an immature statement. It is not acceptable . The question we raised today was a very serious one, and he accepted that. He was given the report six months back, and six months is enough time to make a decision. What he did, according to the media reports, he passed the information to the Health Services Commission, but he did not say that today. What kind of approach is that?-six months for a single report. The question here is who is the boss? Who is running the health care system?

Is the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) running the health care system, or is someone else doing it? It is very clear from the number of issues we have raised , he does not know where the health care system is going. There are 170,000 patients suffering from rheumatic diseases . These diseases range from minor arthritic pain to severe diseases such as SLE, rheumatic heart diseases and other areas. These patients who are 170,000 in number, they are suffering. They have to wait for eight to 12 months for a simple appointment to see someone to look at them.

How can we justify spending $1,500 per person and not give that kind of service? This is a mismanagement because these individuals will, and they are becoming prematurely disabled because they do not get the physiotherapy, they do not get occupational therapy, and we have only 20 medical beds . (The Acting Speaker , Mr. Mark Minenko, in the Chair.) Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): They do not like ... Mr. Cheema: Mr. Acting Speaker, the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) is saying from his chair some unparliamentary words.

I would ask him to stand up and repeat those words on the record because I think it will be extremely unparliamentary, if he would repeat those words what he said. He should be ashamed of himself . Mr. Orchard: Are you going to sit down? Are you going to sit down? Sit down . Sit down, boy. Some Honourable Members: Oh! Oh! Mr. Cheema: Mr. Acting Speaker, this Minister does not run this House. I am elected by my constituents and they have the right to ask me to sit down, he has no right to do that.

Monday, June 26, 1989 The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): Order, please. The Honourable Member for- Mr. Cheema: This kind of prejudice exists, that is why every time- Mr. Orchard: You want this, you got to sit down. Mr. Cheema: Mr. Acting Speaker, that is why . . . I ask questions. it bothers him. That is the reason for not . . . for a long time, you understand that. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): Order, please. The Honourable Member for Inkster, on a point of order. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Yes, Mr. Acting Speaker . I would ask for the Health Minister (Mr.

Orchard) to explain what he meant when he made the comment, "Sit down, boy," and retract them unequivocally. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): The Honourable Minister of Health, on a point of order. Mr. Orchard: Mr. Acting Speaker, my honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic, asked me to put on the record remarks I made across the floor to do that. When he is the recognized speaker he has to sit down in order for me to do that . I asked him to sit down on several occasions, but he refused. Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): The same point of order. The Acting Speaker (Mr.

Minenko): The Honourable Member for Concordia, on the point of order. Mr. Doer: Yes, I think it is inappropriate to use that term, "boy," when all of us are Honourable Members. Mr. Acting Speaker, I think we will have a lot of debate on policy in Health, we all look forward to it. I think we should keep the acrimony, as much as possible, out of it. I think it would be a good move to retract that statement and get on to the Health policy issues. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): Order, please. I would like to thank all Honourable Members for their advice on this matter .

Although the exact word is not necessarily unparliamenta ry, I would like to cite for Members, Beauchesne 491, which sets out that the Speake r has consistently ruled that language used in the House should be temperate and worthy of the place in which it is spoken. I would ask all Honourable Members to consider that particular rule in any language they may use in the House. The Honourable Minister of Health. Mr. Orchard: Mr. Acting Speaker , we have a tempest in a teapot. My honourable friend was asking me to put comments I m ade on the record. I indicated that he had to sit down for me to do that .

In referring to him in the male gender I meant no offence, as he took it, I meant no offence to any Member of the House, to the Member for Kildonan, to any other Member of 896 this House, I simply wanted, as he challenged me to do, to stand up and put on the record that he had to sit down, that is what the rules require . There is only one recognized Speaker by yourself. To take that as any personal offence is entirely incorrect. *

(1450) The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): I would like to thank the Honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) for his explanation, but again would caution all Honourable Members that they should consider the terms they use in the House that may indeed inflame dialogue in this House. Mr. Cheema: Thank you. I will consult, this matter that the Minister of Health just put on the record , with my caucus, and I will raise this very issue tomorrow, first thing when I get a chance, if that is approved by my caucus . This Minister has said something which I will not accept.

He has no right to say to me, "Sit down, boy." Mr. Acting Speaker, I was elected by the Kildonan constituents, and as long as they want me I will come to this House. He has no right, by any power. I will not sit down when he says to me. An Honourable Member: It is here in the rules. Mr. Cheema: I am reading the rules. An Honourable Member: No, but he just ruled. He has ruled, so the issue is finished. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): Order, please. I have ruled on the matter and I would ask the - Mr. Orchard: What more can I say? The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): Order, please.

I have ruled that the matter does not necessarily fall within the- Mr. Orchard: I said that. What more do you want? The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): Order, please. I have ruled earlier that the word used does not necessarily fall within the terms as set out as unparliamentary in Beauchesne, but I did caution all Honourable Members in accordance to Rule 491. I would ask the Honourable Member for Kildonan (Mr. Cheema) to continue with debate on this matter. The Honourable Member for Concordia, on a point of order. Mr. Doer: I believe that it is a term that was used by the Minister of Health (Mr.

Orchard) that should be withdrawn , and I believe that it is important for us to get on with the debate on the health care system . The term he used can be perceived by an individual to be an insult, a very personal insult. I believe he should withdraw it so we can get on- -(Interjection)- Well, as a Manitoban, I find offensive, the comment, and the statement has not been withdrawn.

Monday, June 26, 1989 The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): Order, please. As I mentioned earlier, I have ruled on the matter, and I would ask the Honourable Member for Kildonan (Mr. Cheema) to continue with his remarks today on this matter, this Bill. Mr. Cheema: I will continue with my speech further, but as I said earlier, I still resent what the Minister of Health said, and I will make sure tomorrow, first thing when I get the opportunity, I will raise this question in this House. Mr. Manness: It has to break, Mr. Acting Speaker. The Acting Speaker (Mr.

Minenko): The Honourable Minister of Finance, on a point of order. Mr. Manness: On a point of order, this is going from the sublime to the ridiculous very quickly. As is required by the Rules of the House, the Member has to rise at the point in time that he feels his privileges as a Member, as an Honourable Member, have been in some way challenged. The Member has done that, the MLA for Pembina, the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) in my view has withdrawn. You, Sir, have acknowledged that withdrawal; you have ruled on the matter. The matter is officially closed. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): Order, please.

I would like to thank the Honourable Member for his advice, but would like to again add that I have ruled on the matter. I would ask the Honourable Member for Kildonan (Mr. Cheema) to continue in debate on this Bill. Mr. Cheema: As I was discussing the long-term planning which is missing from health administration and with the interruptions from the other side of the House, it is becoming impossible even to be a human in this House and be equally acceptable for all Members of this House. I am not changing my position, that unless the Minister of Health (Mr.

Orchard) withdraws his remarks, I will not speak on this issue. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): Order, please . I have recognized the Honourable Member for Kildonan to speak on the Bill. I would ask him to cont inue his remarks on that Bill. Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I wish to reply and comment to some of the allegations my honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic has made . The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): Order , please. On what basis does the Honourable Minister of Health- Mr. Orchard: I am speaking to the Bill. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): You are speaking to the Bill. Mr.

Orchard: I am speaking to the Bill, Mr. Acting Speaker. 897 We have had a number of opportunities to debate Estimates of health care in the Province of Manitoba. One of the things that we do in this House is we attempt, as reasonably as possible, to seek out ideas, to seek out positions , to offer solutions to problems that face the health care system . That is a process that has gone on for some time. In addition to that, each political Party in Opposition attempts to paint the worst picture of health care as possible because that is politically opportune .

I want to remind my honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic (Mr. Cheema) , that last year a grand total of 25 minutes was spent by the Liberal Party discuss ing the entire Manitoba Health Services Commission spending for the last fiscal year. I certainly hope that both Opposition Parties live up to what they say, that there will be a lot more debate on it this year because I look forward to that debate in the Manitoba Health Services Commission.

The Opposition Parties have been identifying what they consider to be difficulties in the health care system, the Liberal Party much more so than the New Democra ts, and that is understandably so. Mr. Doer: Point of order . The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): The Honourable Member for Concordia , on a point of order. Mr. Doer: The statements from the Minister of Health (Mr. Orcha rd) are totally inaccurate if you look at the number of questions allowed in each Question Period. The Minister knows that. It is terribly inappropriate for him to comment , based on the proportion of questions in the Chamber .

We will allow the public to judge his performance ultimately . The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko) : Order, please. The Honourable Member does not have a poin t of order as disputes over the facts are not a point of order. Mr. Orchard: Mr. Acting Speaker, the Liberal Party has asked a number of questions this Session on health care . That was the point I was making to my honourable friend the Leader of the New Democrats (Mr. Doer). Why and how I never questioned, or why I never questioned, but obviously the Leader of the New Democrats has some difficulty.

I have cautioned my honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic, on a one-to-one basis, that when you bring up problems in the health care system as you perceive them to be, there is an obligatio n to be able to offer a resolution of those problems . Now, that has not been forthcoming. With all due respect to my honourable friend , that has not been forthcoming from the Liberal Party. That is why I look forwa rd to the Estimates process .

I look forw ard to it because maybe the impression my honourable friend is making on behalf of the Liberal Party is the wrong impression, that being that the solution to every problem is to put more money into the system. If that is the only answer the Liberal Party has to resolving to what they perceive to be health care problems, then they are going to have to answer a number questions beyond that, i.e., where will the

Monday, June 26, 1989 resource, the money come from? How do they intend to offer those monied solutions to the people of Manitoba? That will only happen during the Estimates process because in Question Period you cannot get those kinds of answers from the political Parties. I suspect they will not be forthcoming.

Now in a number of issues, my honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic, has offered or appeared to have offered-and he can defend this if he thinks I am interpreting him incorrectly-that in terms of the specific discipline of medical doctors in the Province of Manitoba that more money in salaries or fee for service is an answer. That, we want to establish. Clearly, we want to establish how much more money the Liberal Party believes woul d be appropriate to put into that discipline of health care delivery, and we will only find that out during the Estimates process .

I hope that is forthcoming because it is an obligation upon all Members of the Liberal Party not simply to, in a shotgun manner, bring out what they perceive to be problems, but also to offer solutions. *

(1500) As a background to that, Mr. Acting Speaker, I will share with the House some conversations I have had with Liberal Health Critic (Mr. Cheema). I have indicated to him that I brought up a number of issues when I was the Health Care Critic, and in a great number of those issues we have moved to resolve the problem . The problem has not completely disappeared , but anybody who stands for election to this Legislature saying they can create the perfect health care system is not telling the truth to the people of Manitoba. I guess, Mr.

Acting Speaker, what I have to indicate to you is that when those solutions are started, for instance an ambulance with a significant increase in ground ambulance funding, $1.9 million last year, when the budget was just a little over $2 million-$950,000 in this fiscal year-and another $950,000 in the next fiscal year, we identified a problem and we moved to resolve it. Have we ever heard any of my honourable friends in either political Party say, well, that was a reasonable thing to do and the Government is on track? - (Interjection)- My honourable friend , the Leader of the New Democrats (Mr.

Doer) says, yes, we have. I guess I missed it. I guess I missed it, but I accept. I accept my honourable friend's, the Leader of the New Democrats, congratulations on that ambulance funding. Just last week we had a question come from one of the Members of the Second Opposition Party regarding air ambula nce service to northern Manitoba alleging a change in the criteria and policy and that resources were being somehow hoarded on the service. Neither statement is correct.

I simply point out that in October of 1988, five months into our administrat ion, we added $180 ,000 of addition al moni es to the air ambulance service to prov ide 24-hour emergency backup service from the Health Sciences Centre to provide an enhanced level of service to northern Manitobans again moving to address a problem perceived to be in the air ambulance service. 898 Do my honourable friends acknowledge that? Of course not. That is what you did for me yesterday. What are you going to do for me today? If you are going to criticize the system every step of the way, be prepared this Estimates session.

I simply ask my honourable friend , the Liberal Health Critic (Mr. Cheema), to be prepared this session to offer some of the Liberal Party solutions. When my honourable friend criticizes the length of waiting lists at the Health Sciences Centre and says we are doing absolutely nothing to help to resolve that issue, No.

I, he is wrong in that accusation ; and secondly, my honourable friend, who is a medical doctor and knows this to be fact, must also tell the people of Manitoba that more open-heart surgeries have been funded in the last 12 months that we have been Government than ever before in the history of Manitoba; that more angioplasties have been done in the last 12 months of this Government than any time before in the history of this province. Admittedly, the waiting list has increased , but have the decency not to alarm the people of Manitoba unduly and admit that more procedures have been done.

More people have been helped . *

(1510) In terms of the accusation that nothing is being done, that is wrong, Mr. Acting Speaker, for the Liberal Health Critic to say that-absolutely wrong. I have indicated to him that we have established a Cardiac Care Committee, basis the allegations that were made in early January to try and determine how we make the program of open-heart surgery work better between the two hospitals currently offering open-heart surgery procedures, St. Boniface and Health Sciences Centre.

That party, that care committee, is already analyzing what constitutes the waiting list, how waiting lists are determined at each facility, and what each facility does in terms of the Cardiac Care Committee, cardiac care and services provided . To say that nothing is going on is absolutely wrong, Mr. Acting Speaker, and I wish my honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic (Mr. Cheema) would have the decency to admit that. He often says that if I have had my facts wrong in an answer in the House, he stands up and righteously demands an apology.

I wish reciprocal action when he is wrong to do the same, but I have not had one single apology from my honourable friend when he says nothing is going on, when we are getting to the root of the problem in many areas of health care. He sits there and he shakes his head right now. Right now he shakes his head but he is not correct , because many of the issues that he has identified have been worked on over the past year and solutions are being worked on.

For instance, in the obstetric question my honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic, brought up constantly the number of times that admissions were denied at the St. Boniface obstetric unit because it was at capacity. It was 28 times in the past year and that is correct . I kept telling my honourable friend that we are taking a look at St. Boniface in the context of the

Monday, June 26, 1989 system, because you cannot simply make decisions in isolation at one hospital. That was done by the previus Government when they closed Seven Oaks and Concordia obstetrical units. They made that decision in isolation of the system, because they did not follow through with certain commitments that were made . My honourable friend wants an instant solution, and I kept telling him that in Misericordia there is capacity to deliver expecting mothers' babies . The same thing applies in Victoria Hospital. The same thing applies in Grace Hospital.

I said that makes it difficult for any Minister of Health to make a rational decision on one facility which is at capacity when there is surplus capacity at other facilities. My honourable friend took the liberty of going to Misericordia and seeing whether I was correct in what I was saying because he alleged that there was no 24-hour anesthesiology, which in fact exists at Misericordia, which in fact exists in Misericordia Hospital. My honourable friend was not correct when he made that accusation, and he did not apologize for that.

If you want to play the game of who withdraws and who apologizes, you have to be prepared to be big enough to apologize and withdraw when you are wrong, I offer to my honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic because he has not been right in all of the things that he has brought to this House. I understand that, if he has not had his research fully done. I can understand that, but when you are wrong, have the decency to admit it, because that is expected of me and I have done that. Mr. Acting Speaker, in the obstet ric question, that is very actively under discussion between the hospitals right now, St.

Boniface, Misericordia, Victoria, Grace and Health Sciences Centre, because we have to come to a resolution on that problem . To help out , I have to tell you that the system is co-operating between facilities. There is a good working relationship between Health Sciences Centre and St. Bonifac e, in terms of the high-risk deliveries. There is a good working relationship between St. Boniface and Misericordia Hospitals to accommodate expectant mothers who, for reasons of capacity at St. Boniface, have to be referred elsewhere. The same arrangement is in place with Victoria Hospital. Mr.

Acting Speaker , I realize that is not satisfactor y to an expectant mother who all along has believed that St. Boniface will be the hospital in which she gives birth to her child, but safety is assured every step of the way where another facility is necessary to be used . Victoria Hospital has offered two obstetricians and family practitioners the delivery services of their hospital and admitting privileges so that expectan t mothers can deliver there . That is the ultimate of co-operation. In the meantime, Mr.

Acting Speaker, the system is being appropriately discussed by experts to come up and offer the Governme nt a reasoned solution . Maybe my honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic (Mr. Cheema) has all the answers today on how to solve the problem . I have not heard them . I have not heard them at all, but maybe he does . If he does, then he could save a lot of planning time if he simply told me today what should we do with the obs tetr ics situation 899 at St. Boniface . I would be pleased to hear his answer, but I have not.

Maybe that is an indication that the Liberal Party is adept at bringing issues forward and not very adept at offering solutions . I can accept that because that is Opposition. What I am telling my honourable friends is do not raise too many expecta tions and you are going to solve all the problems because, heaven forbid, if you ever get to be Government you will have a lot of focus on you from the expectations you have raised without any opportuni ty or ability to resolve those expectations . My honourable friend has on a number of occasions talked about other programs. As I say, I look forward, Mr.

Acting Speaker, to the Estima tes process because not only will my honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic, have an opport unity to identify the problems which we can explore with him and the Liberal Caucus, their variation of answer to the problem and if it is a reasoned answer that does not involve a great deal of extra spending, I am certainly willing to listen. Even where there is a request for additional spending, that is an appropriate solution in some cases and we have done that. We have started to foc us on more resources, speech therapy and audiology .

There has been some success at the Health Sciences Centre on the audiology side. The waiting list was 12 months when we came into Government one year ago. Today, because of additiona l resources put in place in October-November of last year, audiology is down to two months. I did not hear my honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic, bring that out in his questions. My honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic in the Liberal Party said , well, what about the increasing waiting list for children, pre-school children, wanting speech therapy services?

That has grown because the announcem ent of additional resources last fall by myself, by this Government, was very favourably received and raised the expectations of people who had maybe given up that they were going to have a chance to have their pre-schoolers receive services. They have applied to the Health Sciences Centre, and the waiting list has grown. That is a problem that is being addressed actively by this Government.

But the one thing that my honourable friends in the Liberal Party again have failed to tell the people of Manitoba is that more pre-school children are receiving service today than were receiving services one year ago . That is a posit ive accomp lishment, not for this Government, but for those children. I consider that issue to be an ext remely important one, a very impo rtant one because if a child cannot communicate adequa tely when they get to school , their ability to learn is impeded . That goes without saying.

In the school system we have a significant resource of speech therapy, but it is after the fact, Mr. Acting Speaker . It is after the child reaches school. I would hope that we can turn the system over the years around so we intervene earlier, so that a child does not have a problem upon entering school. I think that would receive no disagreement in this House , no disagreement at all. No, I have not heard from my honourable friends , but I would assume that

Monday, June 26, 1989 common-sense approach would be favourably viewed by even the Liberal Party and its Health Critic. We will find out when we get to Estimates, but in the meantime, Dr. William MacDiarmid is taking and giving us what he believes is an appropriate course of action for audiology, speech therapy, physiotherapy and occupational therap y in terms of meeting the needs for those disciplines in the health care system . No doubt the solution that he is going to propose will cost Government additional resources, so it would be better not to have that report as Government.

We consider the issue serious, one that has been growing over the years, has not been addressed, needs to be addr essed, and we are add ressing it. Yet my honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic, stands up and says nothing is being done. Again my honourable friend is wrong, absolutely wrong. That troubles me to some degree, because when the Liberal Party came in here in April of 1988 with renewed membership, the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mrs. Carsta irs) said we are going to be different.

We are going to be a responsible Opposition and offer constructive critici sm, and we are going to offer positive solutions . That soon failed and fell away, because constructive criticism means that you do give credit where credit is due. That has not been forthcoming. All we hear is the negative side from the Liberal Health Critic of how a waiting list is grow ing. That is correct. Speech therapy, that is correct. Open-heart surgery, that is correct , but at the same time more people are being served in both programs, because of what this Government has done in terms of resources.

It is fair to criticize, but provide the other side of the coin, i.e., that additional people are receiving service . That can carry on throughout the entire health care system, Mr. Acting Speaker, and that is why I say I look forward to the debate in the Manitoba Health Services Commission Estimates, because they will allow an opportunity, not simply for the Liberal Health Critic to identify what he perceives to be difficulties, but will give the Liberal Party full opportunity to indicate what the solutions are.

Our solutions will be offered at Estimates time, as I was prepared to offer them last year, and I will be prepared to offer them this year in Estimates. I believe, and I believe sincerely, that there is more co-ordination, more focu s, more planning, more direction in health care today than there has been for a number of years. That is because we have taken and we have said that Government no longer has all the answers . We are actively seeking, from reasoned individuals in and out of the health care community , their advice on how we approach the many challenges to health care in the Province of Manitoba. Mr.

Acting Speaker , I can simply say to you I believe that approach will build a stronger , a better , a more efficient and a higher quality health care system in the Province of Manitoba. I would like every single day to be offering another solution to another problem that is identified or to offer a new direction every single 900 day. That is not the reality of health care today. You have to have your answers achieved at through a reasoned discussion that involves not simply the narrow issue at hand, but the health care system as a whole. That is why you cannot make your decision at St.

Boniface in obstetrics in isolation of the system, nor are we. That is why you do not make the decision in terms of extended treatment beds at municipal hospitals in isolation of the system. You must consider Deer Lodge and the impact of that new facility. You must consider the proposal at Concordia and Grace in that whole equation, and that is being done, Mr. Acting Speaker . *

(1520) When we reach conclusions and have answers developed, we are willing to stand by the decisions we have made, and we have made a great number of them over the past 12 months in Government. Not all of them have been favourably received by my honourable friends in the Opposition. I expect that , but I believe that they have left us with a better health care system than we had one year ago, not a health care system without problems, because that does not exist anywhere in Canada.

I simply want to point out to my honourable friends that problems in the health care system of Canada did not get to be a topic of discussion in Maclean's, The Globe and Mail, and any other major publication across Canada until there was perceived to be a crisis in Ontario, Ontario under a Liberal Government. It does not matter to me what the political stripe is of the Government in Ontario. It does not bother me at all, because I know the pressures they are facing in the system.

The same sort of pressures are hitting the system right across this nation, and every sing le province is attempting through the best way possible to focus community intelligence, systems intelligence, and personnel intelligence, i.e., those health care providers, the intelligence and the wisdom they have, to give their respective Governments some hopefu l solutions to health care. A very positive direction on the national scene, Mr.

Acting Speaker, among the provincial Ministers, is a desire that we share the workable solutions in our health care systems provincially with our counterparts across Canada, so that we do not, if you will, reinvent the wheel. I think that is a signal that across Canada the problems have become non-partisan, that these problems are large enough in the health care system that we have to come to reasoned solutions, not flailed suggestions of Opposition , but reasoned solutions .

Every Government, whether they be Progressive Conservative, Liberal or Social Credit is wrestling with the development of those solutions, each in their own fashion , each in their own province. It is a goal of the provincial Health Ministers to share the successes and a cautio n on the failures, because we all have our share of those when we have tried to do things different in the health care system. Mr. Acting Speaker, I simply close by saying to my honourable friends in Opposition, I look forward to the

Monday, June 26, 1989 Health Estimate debate this year for the sharing of ideas that they may have to solutions to the system, to the problems they perceive . I very much look forward to that , because the problem we have in Manitoba is probably an easier problem to resolve than in many other jurisdictions across Canada, and I can say that with confidence, having met with my counterparts . We are further advanced in some solutions than other provinces, and that is positive for the people of Manitoba. As I did last year when I opened the Estimates of the Health Department, I look forward to the debate .

I like the thrust and the parry of the debate . That has never troubled me at all, but I also look forward to the constructive suggestions from my honourable friends, not simply the easy identification of what they perceive to be the problems, but some semblance of where they believe the solution lies.

If it is in additional funding and additional funding only, then simply ask yourself before you make that argument why has not additional funding worked over the last 20 years in the Province of Manitoba, because the Department of Health has been the most generously funded department consistently in the provincial jurisdiction in the last 20 years. Before you come with simply the answer, you need more money, be able to identify how that is going to solve the problem when it has not in the past, and be prepared, Mr. Acting Speaker, to defend where the money comes from.

That is a request I make of my honourable friend, and I know that he will attempt, as critic for the Liberal Party, to accede to that request because health care is too serious a matter to simply only have alarming questions and no reasoned solutions to offer. Thank you, Mr. Acting Speaker. Mr. Doer: I would like to speak on the Interim Supply Bill and matters before the House. I believe that this is a very important item . I know we are spending a lot of time on the Department of Health.

Given that it is one-third of the Government's Estimates and therefore one-third of the requirement of the Crown for 75 percent of the total expenditures , it is appropriate that we spend time in this Chamber talking about health care and time we spend on other issues of priority under the Interim Supply Bill. I would say that, yes, the Minister of Health is good at the thrust and parry of issues. Nobody has ever disputed that fact . We all enjoy that from time to time . The issue here is the administrative leadership of the department and where the health care system is goin g.

I believe we will spend a lot of time in the Department of Health in the Estimates this year. We look forward to that process because there are some very important issues to raise. Why did it take so long to establish the Health Advisory Task Force? Why, after establishing the Health Advisory Task Force, was there so little representation from some of the key groups? Why, after one year of the Government being in office, May of '89, do we have the first newsletter coming out from the department, issue No. 1, in terms of the health care challenges facing this province?

That to me is 901 symptomatic I believe of a department that has got a committee that is stuck in cement in terms of moving forward the agenda of the health care system and the priorities of Manitobans . Yes, we should talk about where the money is coming from but we should also talk about how smart we are spending the money.

That is why we have raised questions in this Chamber and will continue to raise questions in the Chamber about the extended care beds in Concordia Hosp ital and how we can use our money smarter at Concord ia; how we have raised questions on home care and how we should not be underfund ing through underspend ing our Home Care Program and cutting people off those needed program s and services throughout our com munit ies; why we have not funded the Health Action Centre and the other community -based groups and Klinic , for example ; why we do not have a thrust in prevention in health care ; why we have not spoken out even today in terms of the changes and the warnings on the tobacco prod ucts that can result in dramatic changes in our health care system.

Those are the issues that we will be raising in the Health Care Estimates and the priorities of this Government. We also think there is a crisis in the health care system at the federal Government's nature . When we look at the numbers and figures that are being produced , and we produced the EPF number s for the next five years under the present Budget , it carrie s on a trend of Government spending that I think is very inapprop riate , Government spending that will provide for radic al shares from the federal Governme nt.

It will kill us softly, 1 percent per year, I think those are the issues we want to discuss also with the Minister of Health. In terms of Interim Supply , Mr. Acting Speaker, . *

(1530) POINT OF ORDER Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Point of order. The Ac ting Spe ak er (Mr. Mark Min enko): The Honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), on a point of orde r. Mr. Orchard: Yes, Mr. Acting Speaker, on a point of order. Twenty minutes ago, whatever, half an hour ago, my honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic (Mr. Cheema), and I got into an across-the-floor discussion. I understand my honourable friend, from discussions with the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness), has taken offence, personally , of comments that I have made to him across the floor .

As I indicated , in indicating on a point of order before , I intended no personal reflection , no insult to my honourable friend, the Liberal Health Critic . I did not use that phraseology in any meaning meant in an offensive way. I want my honourable friend to be assured of that. To make that assurance doubly clea r, Mr. Acting Speaker, I am fully prepared to apolo gize to my honourable friend for any discomfort that unintended remark might have left with him,

Monday, June 26, 1989 because I meant no insult, no connotation, or any other issue. To my honourable friend, the Health Critic, I will offer my apology. Some Honourable Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Acting Speaker, speaking again on the Interim Supply Bill- The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): Order, please. I would like to thank the Honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) for the matter that he raised, and I believe this brings this matter to a conclusion. BILL NO. 29-THE INTERIM APPROPRIATION ACT, 1989 (Cont'

d) Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Acting Speaker, continuing on the Interim Supply Bill. We have raised some issues that the Health Minister (Mr. Orchard) will, I am sure, read in Hansard in terms of the one-third of the Budget for the Department of Health and the priorities that we believe are important to move on.

I would note, for the Minister of Health's attention , that we do not think it is appropriate that Newsletter No. 1, dealing with the Health Advisory Task Force and the many health priorities, comes out in May of 1989, fully a year after the swearing in of this Minister and this Government.

We believe that is a symptom, that is not the issue in the health care system, but we believe it is symptom of a department that is, quite frankly, not moving forward in community-based health and other preventative-based health which we believe is the solution for some of our health care problems although we recognize that health will always be insatiable, but we should be able to deal with many of the problems and challenges we believe in a much more appropriate way. Talking about Interim Supply, I want to go on to a couple of other departments in Government.

I want to talk about the whole area of the economic strategy of thi s Government. Last week we raised the whole effect of the Free Trade Agreement on the Government and asked whether there was any impact study going on with the inc reased activity in the manufacturing sector with the Mexican-based Canadian companies. I was disappointed that the Ministers did not have an answer on that question. They have ads now in the media dealing with the Free Trade Ag reement and how Manitoba employers or employees can fully benefit from that agreement, but I think they are whistling past a few graveyards.

I really believe they should look at what has happened in Ontario when there has been movement of jobs in the manufacturing sector to the manufacturing valleys in Mexico with promises to reduce labour costs by over $20,000 per employee per year. I do not believe that the Minister of Finance's predictions this year, which are below last year 's predictions in manufacturing increases, can withstand over the next 10 years a massive shift in manufacturing based on production 902 costs through loopholes that have been identified before and now during the first stages of the Free Trade Agreement.

I am raising it today because this is not the same kind of form perhaps of Question Period where we are raising things in a public way as part of our job . Perhaps the Government Ministers would take very close attention. I referred them to some articles previously in the Globe and Mail dealing with manufacturing jobs that have been lost from Ontario to go down to Mexico, and that is a company now that has moved in now to Manitoba and is circulating information to Manitobans .

In fact, it is circu lating inf orma t ion of opportunity in Mexico before the Government circulated opportunities in ads that were in the weekend's newspapers. So I ask you, in the full non-light outside of Question Period, to please look at that. It is a serious issue. There are manufacturing companies now looking, as they did already in Ontario, and moving jobs that will affect families in this province. We cannot just take a philosophical position. I respect Conservatives for having a consistent position on free trade. I do not respect their position on it.

I really believe that now that we are partially in the Free Trade Agreement, you have got to look at the change in the dollar, the fact that they are propping the dollar up. Part of that is raising interest rates. Is that dollar propping at 84 cents or 83 cents and the raise of interest rates that are affecting many of your constituents, is that any part of a silent part of the Free Trade Agreement?

When the McDonald Commission first reported on the economic conditions of the Free Trade Agreement, it studied the relationship of the Canadian to the U.S. dollar and they could not come up with any conclusions about what would happen. It was predicted thoug h, at that time when MacDonald said we should make the leap of faith; it was predicted by Clarence Barbour for Manitoba that the dollar would stay around 79 cents, 78 cents , and that would help our export, there would be no reason to believe that it would go up. Well, it has gone up, Mr.

Acting Speaker, and you look at the balance of payment problems with Canada and the United States, it has decreased from $26 billion down to below $10 billion to our advantage . That is a massive change under the Free Trade Agreement in the last year and a half, but it is not all because of the Free Trade Agreement alone , it is partially because of it.

If you look at the fact that the dollars has been propped up at 83 cents and 84 cents, and look at the fact that every political Party at the national level, includi ng the federal Conservatives under Blenkarn, had said that these interest rates are having a devastating effect on the Canadian economy, and it is really doing nothing to deal with the alleged goal of the Canadian Government to deal with the inflation rate in this province. Well, I believe, Mr.

Acting Speaker, that the dollar is being artificially propped up to 83 cents and 84 cents; it is not in our best interests in terms of exports; it is not in our best interests in terms of the inflat ion rate and the interest rates in this cou ntry. I would much rather have the dollar go down to 79 cents or 80 cents and have greater exports and have lower interest rates.

Monday, June 26, 1989 I ask the question, how much of our economy is strangled for this 83 cent to 84 cent dollar? I believe it is part of the Free Trade Agreement. I have to tell you, Mr. Acting Speaker, I happen to believe that it defies any economic logic for Canadians, particularly in the regions. I believe there is something there that I cannot kick or touch in that Free Trade Agreement dealing with the 83 cent, 84 cent dollars .- (lnterjection) Yes, on a point of order, sure. I believe that is a very important factor. I believe the Member for Kildonan (Mr. Cheema) wants to rise on a point of order.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): The Honourable Member for Kildonan, on a point of order. Mr. Guizar Cheema (Kildonan): Mr. Acting Speaker, on a point of order, what happened about 20 minutes ago, the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) has apologized and I accept his apology. It leaves a doubt in my mind that when we are all Honourable Members in this House, what that special term "sit down, boy" means to anyone, not only to me, but all other Members . I am greatly disturbed and I think it really disheartened me today, for the last one-and-a-half years, why am I here if I am not going to be respected equally .

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Minenko): I would just like to thank the Honourable Member for his comments ; however, there is no point of order. The Honourable Member for Concordia, with respect to the Bill. Mr. Doer: Thank you. Just carrying on, on the discussion. I mentioned the Free Trade Agreement , and I really believe that we can make ideological positions in this Chamber, but I really believe it is important to take positions also on the basis of what pragmatically will happen in this Chamber for Manitobans. Now we had our ideological fight in 1988, November 21, 1988, and our side of the debate did not prevail.

We prevailed in popular vote, but we did not prevail in terms of seats. I believe, Mr. Acting Speaker, that there are very major impacts. There are winners and losers in free trade. We disagreed about whether there would be more winners than losers, but I think it is incumbent upon this Government to take a look at the losers as well as the winners.

I think it is important beyond just defending the November 21st positions for all of us to take a look at who is winning and who is losing in terms of Manitoba families, becau se everyone of these families it does lose, it is anoth er li velihood lost, and it is a major decision in our communities whether it is Ogilvie or Marr's Marina or others . I believe that we have to keep our eyes wide open on the effect of this trade agreement. *

(1540) We have seen the changes in the unemploym ent insurance which will impact on this pro vincial Government, negatively, in ter ms of the welfar e rates in this province . We have done an analysis of Winnipeg in terms of the changes based on the unempl oyment 903 rate. That will-I am sure the Minister has done that have a very negative effect on our welfare rates and the contributions of the provincial Government.

More than that, a family who is on unemp loyment insurance is in a lot different dignity position , based on pay ing for an insurance program , than a family who is in a situation of going on welfare, especially a worker that has been working for 30, 40 years. The thought of somebody that has contributed so much to society through no fault of their own, through a rationalization, a merger or some other New York Stock Exchange term, they never get laid off, they always get downsized. You never say what you mean any more . All of us, I guess, can be accused of the same thing.

Nobody ever says what they mean any more. They get downsized and you lose your job . It is atrocious for those families and their communities.

I really believe that this Government has got to have an economic strategy and part of that economic strategy, we cannot deal with all of it today, is the winners and losers in a free trade environment, both in terms of social services, which we are seeing now with UIC, health care , whether we are seeing a mass of erosion over the next 5 years in this Budget in terms of the federal contributions or the regional development grants , which were predicted beforehand and are unfortunately coming true, or in the economic activity of the private sector and its ability to move capital and change labour, north and south .

I am also worried , on a personal nature, that we will adopt some of the U.S. labour standards, the right-to work legislation and other issues that I think is antithetical to the Canadi an quality of life and our traditions. So that is health care and the economy a bit. I think in Interim Supply we should comm ent about the lack of rural economic development. We commented on the period of time when the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) proposed a rural development department, we said it should be Rural Economic Developme nt.

We believ e that the positions that are in Busines s Development and Tourism and the ministries that are in Business Development and Tourism should be moved to the Rural Economic Development. We believe that business development , small business development and tourism should be moved from Industry Trade and Technology, and that Minister to Rural Development and call it Rural Economic Development. The other area we would like to address is the environment. We believe that the Minister has inherited a huge problem. The former Minister had a philosophy of running the dep art ment that said it runs itself.

Well, it ran him right out of the department , and that is too bad, because it is a very important priority area of the province. The First Minister made an error in combining Labour , Workplace Safety and Health, Labour and the Environment. We also believe that the First Minister made a mistake by separating Workplace Safety and Health and the Env ironment into two separate dep artments. We made the statement at the time of the First Minister's announcement, that you should keep them together, because what is unsafe inside a workplace, what is a cancer-causing good inside a

Monday, June 26, 1989 workplace is a cancer-causing good outside of a workplace. I did not know at the time that we were making those announcements, at the beginning of May when the Cabinet was shuffled, that we would be so correct some five, six weeks later, in terms of the exact regulations that have been changed by Cabinet and unannounced by the Government, announced by the Opposition. We expect that the changes will be announced shortly.

I do not know why we are waiting past any Cabinet Wednesday to make those changes to those regulations and go back to where they were before , but you cannot have credibility on the sustainable development based on a speech from the Throne. You have to have credibility on sustainable development based on real Government policy. You really look at the laws and you really look at the regulations and you really look at what the Government is doing. It is going backwards on the environment and going backwards under the Workplace Safety and Health.

I recognize it was the former Minister who was quarterbacking these changes with a couple of selected members in the Chamber of Commerce, but I even know that a couple of selected members of the Chamber of Commerce have distanced themselves from the forme r Minister of Environment. They have said we did not even do that, even we in business do not want to take blame for all those changes, that is not our fault, that was the former Minister's fault . We do not know what he was doing on some of these proposals .

Even some of my business contacts are saying, oh, god, we did not go ahead with that proposal, please do not blame us for that. *

(1550) So I think one Wednesday of Cabinet has been too many for the Government not to change those things back. I would hope that this Wednesday it will be changed back again and we will have it finished before the Government stands. I see the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) shaking his head. I look forward to a pretty good fight on this one because this is the kind of fight we like. We have been raising it since April 10. I know which side of people we stand on . We stand with the workers and the public on cancer-causing goods. If you want to stand with David Newman-the Member is finally going for it.

The Member for the Chamber of Commerce, the Minister of the whatever it is now, is finally talking about this issue. I would be very embarrassed to face the new Minister of Labour (Mrs. Hammond) and the new Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings) having hung those changes and regulations on their shoulders and their necks. It must have made the former Min ister-I do not know whether you could sleep at night after doing that, to watch two new Ministers have to defend those terrible changes.

I could not have slept at night if I would have left changes and cancer-causing goods to two new Ministers and their portfolios. Mr. Acting Speaker , you must hang your head in shame, I am sure the Member for Portage (Mr. Connery), in terms of those changes. We thought when the Cabinet shuffle was made we had gotten rid of all those changes 904 but they keep popping up. We await the real date, the July date, the permit being approved in St. Boniface. I wonder what the former Minister was doing with that one, the thing that blew sky-high in the air. It seems everything the former Minister touched blew sky-high .

There are still things popping out the closet on a daily basis. Hon. Edward Connery (Minister of Co-operative, Consumer and Corporate Affairs): The only difference is I have paid my way as I went through life . Mr. Doer: Mr. Acting Speaker, especially that $200,000 that was written-off from that bankrupt company in Portage la Prairie, real man of action all right. My taxes are in that money. I do not quite enjoy that bankruptcy any more, it was not bankruptcy- I have to admit there is improvement.

It used to take us about five minutes to get him off his feet, it took us at least six and a half minutes now when we went on to his areas. I know the damage control team in the central Premier's office has things pretty controlled now. They have the sock in his mouth. They have the hook around his neck when he stands up. We appreciate that believe me. We will continue to-these are by way of general questions, Mr.

Acting Speaker, but we believe in terms of the health care system, in terms of rural economic development, the environment, the economy and other key areas that there is a day of reckoning for the Members opposite, in terms of the cracks in their public relations walls. We will continue to widen those cracks not because we want to, but because this Government is not very good for Manitobans over the long run. Thank you, very much. Mr. Laurie Evans (Fort Garry): I welcome this opportunity to speak briefly on the Interim Supply Bill, even though we are in the midst of Agriculture estimates.

I get the distinct impression that we probably will not get very much further in the Estimates process between now and when we hopefully recess in three or four days, but I will not give up as the Minister of Finance indicates. One of the difficulties you have even when you are in the debate on the Estimates is that the errors of omission are the ones that are difficult to deal with because, of course, they do not appear as a line on the Budget. I think what we are faced with within the Agriculture budget is what I would regard as some serious errors of omission.

I think the first thing that I have to repeat, and I have brought this to the Minister's attention before, is my disappointment in the overall size of the Agriculture budget. Last year, we were dealing with a budget of $107.3 million approximately , this year it has been reduced to 88. Now it was feasible to anticipate a significant reduction because of the drought aid that was provided last year. The drought aid last year was only $18.3 million, so the reduction is actually more extensive than just the removal of the Drought Aid Program from last year.

The other thing that one has to appreciate is that there are at least two items in the budget this year

Monday, June 26, 1989 which I regard as shot -in-the-arm type of things, both of which are over three-quarters of a million dollars. They are the Exces s Summerfallow Program which is somet hing that should have been looked at a long time ago . It is included in the budget at $880,000,000, of which one-half of that goes to the federal Government An Honourable Member: Thousand. Mr. Laurie Evans: Eight hundred and eighty thousand dollars , of which half of it will be picked up by the federal Government. The other one that is one shot in the arm is the support to the honey produc ers of $759,000.00.

You add those two together and you are looking at a budget that is very subst antially below what it was last year. Even if you take the figure that is budgeted of $88 .3 million, you are looking at a budget which is 1.83 percent of the total budget for the Department of Agriculture. The Minister says spend more . I am not advocating spending more , I am advocating looking at the repriorization .

I am satisfied that agriculture has to be identified as-if not the top priority , it certainly has to be identified as one of the high priori ties, because the Minister has gone on record as saying this is the backbone of Manitoba's economy. Whi le you are spending 1.83 percent of your Budget on that backbone , all I can say is that we need to have a better health system , because that backbone is going to get weaker and weaker and it is going to need some assistance; 1.83 percent of the Budget in this province is not sufficient to address the problems that are related to agricu lture at the present time.

The other thing that is of major concern to me, Mr. Acting Speaker , is not only the size of the budget , but the fact that the four areas within thi s budget which address what I would refer to as the basic programs area, namely, the Agricultural Developmen t and Marketing Division, the area there, there has been an addition that is far below the rate of inflation. In other words, there has not been a cut in that area of progra m.

The regional services , the area where you are looking at the extension, once again that increase is below the cost of inflation, and finally the area of Policy and Economics Division, once again below the cost of inflation, so t he three major component s in the Depar tm ent of Agriculture that relate to ongoing programs are all in the range of 1 percent to 2 percent in other words , approximately or even less than 50 percent of the cost of inflat ion. There has been in my opinion, Mr. Acting Speaker, a failure to address the areas where there is a need for some innova tive thinking in agriculture.

In other words, there is nothing that I would call new within the Department of Agriculture as far as initiatives are concerned that would assist in the rev italization of our rural communities . One can always argue, why do you bring in the federal issues here , but we are faced with a federa l Budget which has just

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	34-2-27a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	34th 2nd hansardpdf 27a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	146bd17f82bbab1b2068de3d06e3a41c25264dbe

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (pdf).