Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard — Statements by Ministers; Oral Questions — 26 November 1999 (44th General Assembly, 1st Session, Vol. XLIV No. 40)
1999-11-26
Newfoundland and Labrador — Debates (Hansard)
November 26, 1999 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 40
The House met at 9:00 a.m.
MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!
Statements by Ministers
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I
rise to update my hon. colleagues on our government's ongoing commitment to
the youth of our Province. Once again this year the Department of Education has
provided over $500,000 in grants to a wide variety of youth organizations
benefitting 35,000 young people across the Province to assist them with their
programming for the year.
Monies have been allocated to the Scout and Girl Guide movements in the
Province as well as to the provincial Councils of the Boys and Girls Club. Youth
Centres were also provided funding, as were the Duke of Edinburgh's Award
Program, the Community Services Council Volunteer Centre and the Navy and Army
Cadet Leagues of Canada.
These organizations help to foster through fun and learning the qualities
that will help the youth of Newfoundland and Labrador become well-rounded
individuals and leaders in their communities.
In addition, we have just made the last installment of $50,000 of a
three-year $150,000 commitment for the development of a new camp at Northwest
Pond for the Newfoundland and Labrador Council of the Girl Guides of Canada.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MS FOOTE: The completion of this twenty-five acre campsite will provide
an ideal setting for the 13,000 active members, both girls and adults, in
Newfoundland and Labra r for adventure and leadership in surroundings that
stimulate environmental awareness, physical activity and challenge.
Government has also renewed its commitment of $75,000 to the School Lunch
Association. As my hon. colleagues may know, the School Lunch Association helps
children take full advantage of their educational opportunities by operating a
non-stigmatizing program that provides hot, nutritious lunches to children at
school, regardless of their families' ability to pay.
I am pleased that government's financial support of youth programming
complements the important work of the over 6,000 adult volunteers who commit
their time and talent to the youth of this Province and the 200 staff people who
maintain the administration of these organizations.
It is by working together that we can maximize opportunities for the youth of
today with enhancement of their future possibilities in mind.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.
MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to thank the minister for providing me with a copy of this
statement prior to entry. Minister, I say to you that any support for the youth
of this Province in the areas which you have identified is certainly welcome.
There is not enough that we can do for the youth of this Province.
Minister, I draw attention to the School Lunch Association and the
contribution to that. I ask the minister to consider additional support in any
way to make this program a universal program. I would ask the minister also to
look at supporting these types of lunch programs. In particular, as a caution,
it has been brought to my attention that some of the contractors who are going
into the schools to get the contract to take care of cafeteria services are
asking schools to give them exclusive rights. I'm
very much afraid, minister, that it may interfere with the volunteer lunch
program that it is there.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. HEDDERSON: So I would ask the minister, again, to make sure that the
children of this Province are getting the support that they need in the lunch
program.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi
MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I too wish acknowledge the contribution that the Province is making to young
people in the Province, but would like to point out that the Chair of the School
Trustees Association last year, Mr. Merle Vokey, has pointed out, as have
others, that more than 25,000 children per day go to school hungry in our
Province. The School Lunch Program at the present time is only able to supply
school lunch programs in 20 per cent of the schools.
Mr. Speaker, I want to call on the minister to announce this program as a
universal comprehensive program for every school in the Province so that we can
be sure there are no children going to school hungry.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
Oral Questions
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the
Member for St. John's East.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions this morning are directed to the Minister of Mines and Energy.
Yesterday, the minister indicated that Inco has proposed a hydrometallurgical
technology to process Voisey's Bay ore. In fact, in an
article today in The
Globe and Mail , the minister is
quoted as saying, and in fact he referred to this directly in the House
yesterday, that Inco ...is planning a new, leading-edge hydrometallurgical
processing plant...that would the first of its kind in the world...'
It is clear that what Inco has proposed, at least initially, is a pilot plant
or a test plant to test its hydrometallurgical technology on Voisey's Bay
sulfide ore. My question to the minister is: How long will this test period be?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have just a couple of things. If I seem like I am a little bit sensitive
over language then I am, because in the years to come, if people want to find
out what this debate was really about - the people who are interested in history
and so on, how it developed - they will check Hansard in the Legislature to find
out what was actually said rather than what somebody tried to say somebody else
said.
Inco has not made a proposal or anything. Let me make that clear. What we
have said, and what I did say yesterday in a statement, which Inco has verified,
is that if and when they do make a proposal for full processing in Newfoundland
and Labrador, it will be for hydrometallurgic processing. If and when they make
a proposal it will involve the hydrometallurgic process. That is what was said.
The hon. member can suggest that Inco has proposed this. They have proposed
nothing. We are awaiting a proposal to see if we can start negotiations.
Mr. Speaker, I know he is obligated to follow on the same line of questioning
that the Leader of the Opposition was asking yesterday, to say: That must mean
this and this must mean that. We will find out what any of it means if and when
we get a detailed comprehensive proposal that puts forward for the consideration
of the government -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer.
MR. GRIMES: - on behalf of the people of the Province a full project
definition right from taking the first bit of ore out of a mine to shipping the
first bit of nickel metal out of the Province. We are willing to wait and see
what the proposal is rather than try to speculate.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. minister to sit down.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: A
supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's East.
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Minister, you have said that you will accept nothing less than 100 per cent
of the ore being processed in this Province. In view of Inco's concerns about
financing this project and in view of the fact that what we now understand is a
pilot test or a test plant, can you confirm that during this test period no ore
will leave this Province to be processed elsewhere?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Maybe I can reference and get quickly to the question by making a comment,
again, that is thirty years old in my mind. When I was a university student one
supplementary part of the course called Words Are Important.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRIMES: There are people in this Legislature, Mr. Speaker, that can
certainly recall the little booklet that we had to use at Memorial University. I
was very proud to use it. I did not like it much at the time because I thought
it was kind of silly, but I have been in politics now long enough to realize
that people do want to suggest that you said things you did not say.
Last week, when addressing this issue outside the Legislature, and there is
now a copy if he wants to refer to it in The Telegram , I made the point
of saying the words that I have put on the public record inside and outside the
House is that Newfoundland and Labrador will have full processing. The hon.
member gets up this morning and says in starting the question: You said that
there will be 100 per cent and nothing less. There is nobody, not a single soul,
who can ever find any time, at any point in history, where I ever said any such
thing.. What I have always said is that we will have full processing -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer.
MR. GRIMES: - in Newfoundland and Labrador or there will not be any
project to talk about.
What we said yesterday is that Inco has now acknowledged that they hope to
bring a proposal for full processing and it will contain reference to the
hydrometallurgical process, and we hope they actually bring us the proposal.
MR. SPEAKER: A
supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's East.
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Minister, you have indicated that this is a new
technology that is not in existence anywhere else in the world. If this new
technology does not live up to its expectations, what guarantees will you be
receiving or have you received from Inco that will ensure that all the ore will
be processed in this Province? What guarantees, Minister?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I guess there is one thing clear, I would expect, and that is that I would
understand that the greatest hope and wish for the Opposition is that we fail
and that we do not have a deal.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRIMES: I understand that completely. Why else would we be in a
circumstance and a position whereby days or weeks before we even get a proposal,
which we never seen and do not have, that they would suggest that this might be
in it or that might be in it; is this acceptable and is that acceptable; do you
have a guarantee for this and do you have a guarantee for that? We do not have a
proposal. Let me repeat it again, we do not have a proposal.
What Inco has said openly and honesty is that they want to bring a proposal
for full processing, that will have the hydrometallurgical process used, and
that the product that will leave Newfoundland and Labrador will be nickel metal,
which is a significant breakthrough in this discussion from a point two summers
ago where the same company said: We will only build a mine in Labrador, build a
mill which changes the ore into concentrate, and then ship it out of the
Province.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. GRIMES: We are making some process. We should be happy about that. We
are happy about making progress, and we are happy to await a proposal before we
either condemn it or accept it. We will wait to see what is actually in the
proposal.
MR. SPEAKER: A
supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's East.
MR. OTTENHEIMER: Just to
follow up on that comment, Mr. Speaker, I will ask the minister this question.
When he receives a proposal - and the people of this Province know what we have.
In fact, the minister has said publically he is 80 per cent to 90 per cent there
- we are very close - and it is important that the minister relay this
information to the people of the Province; but let's use his thinking for a
second. When he gets a proposal, will he accept a proposal that does not contain
a guarantee from Inco that will ensure that all ore will
be processed in this Province?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.
MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, remind me, if I ever have any legal
difficulties, not to hire the hon. member, for goodness sake.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. GRIMES: I certainly
wouldn't want to think that I would pay valuable money to a lawyer who would
spend any time going through that kind of a convoluted thought process on my
behalf. I am a very simple, basic person and I don't mind saying that. Maybe
my limitations in being simple keep me from the torment of trying to wonder
about what might happen some time in the future. I am quite willing to wait
until we get a proposal so we can analyze it, see if it is in the best interest
of Newfoundland and Labrador, see if it provides full and
fair benefits, make a judgement, and then either present it to the Legislature
and the people of the Province as something that makes full sense and something
that we should support and embrace wholeheartedly or something that should be
rejected because it does not meet the objective of getting full and fair
benefits for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
Maybe I am stunned, Mr. Speaker, but I am stunned enough to wait instead of
trying to guess what might happen next week or the week after.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Member for St. John's South.
MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions are for the Minister of Environment and Labour. The minister
said the reason he could not release information about THM levels in municipal
water supplies was because the municipalities are responsible for the operation
of their water supplies and it is their responsibility to make known that
information.
My question is this: Have all of the municipalities been supplied with all
information on THM levels in their municipalities prior to this month?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Labour.
MR. LANGDON: Mr. Speaker, all of the communities have been given the
information on the THMs, and I mentioned communities here in the House. I
mentioned places like Clarenville, Gander, Pasadena, Point Leamington, Musgrave
Harbour and so on. The answer would be, yes.
MR. SPEAKER: A
supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's South.
MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker,
that is not what we have heard. In fact, we have heard the minister's PR
person was calling municipalities just this week to tell them what their THM
levels were and to fax them information. In fact, we have heard from
municipalities that have said that even though they have received information,
other municipalities, that they had no idea what it meant. They did not receive
advice from government to supply this information to the people in their
municipalities. They did not receive ad vice whether or not
to refrigerate the water or what to do with the water.
Let me ask the minister this. Are there any municipalities in the Province
where the provincial government, through the water services division, own and
operate water supply systems?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Labour.
MR. LANGDON: Mr. Speaker, there are certain communities in the Province
where there were industrial water supplies. I can think of one which was in my
own district in Hermitage. I am not sure where the others are. The hon. the
Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs could probably answer that. As far
as the THM information is concerned, as soon as the reports are prepared they
are given to the municipalities.
MR. SPEAKER: A final
supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's South.
MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker,
there are communities in this Province where the residential water supply
systems are owned and operated by the provincial government. Why would your
department not release the information to the public on THM levels in
municipalities where water supply systems are owned and operated by government?
Isn't it your responsibility and the responsibility of your department to
release information to the public when government own and operate the water
supply systems for those municipalities?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Labour.
MR. LANGDON: Mr. Speaker, I
want to say again, as I've said in the House every day since the questions
have been asked, that the information on THMs has been given to the
municipalities and will continue to be given to the municipalities. Once the THM
results have been given to them there have been guidelines and so on, and
explanations have been given to the communities, and pamphlets from Health
Canada.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.
MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions today are for the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.
Minister, as we are all aware, your department is responsible for the Fire
Commissioner's Office. In 1998, two men were killed during an explosion at the
Come by Chance oil refinery. This is now some twenty months later and reports
into that explosion still have not been released. I would like to ask you today,
sir, why not?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.
MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The answer is essentially the same as the one I gave in the House during the
last session. As the hon. member is aware, the RCMP investigation was completed
in March. Immediately following that, because they concluded that no criminal
charges were being recommended by them, we immediately, the very next day, had
some charges laid under a couple of our own provincial statues, mainly those
falling under the occupation health and safety area. Those charges are currently
before the courts. Immediately, as they are disposed of by the courts there will
be, as also committed to by government, a judicial inquiry commenced.
We understand the need on behalf of the families involved in this tragic
situation to have as much information available to them as they can in order to
pursue whatever legal options or other types of activity they want to move
forward with. In the context of that, and in partial response to that, while the
full report could not be released because it is a police report, as a result of
a court order on March 2 there was partial disclosure of the information that
was contained in the provincial Fire Com missioner's
report. That information has been made available to the families directly and/or
through their solicitors, and that level of disclosure is appropriate in these
circumstances, and at this point has been fully made available to the families.
When the court proceedings conclude, as I said earlier, the judicial inquiry
under the auspices of the Minister of Justice, by virtue of making an
appointment, will move forward with a judicial inquiry.
We have made available, Mr. Speaker, the maximum level of information that we
can appropriately make available at this point in the current circumstances. We
understand the concerns of the family, we appreciate their concerns, and we will
do everything this is appropriate and within our power to ensure that they have
the information that they need as quickly as we can make it available.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.
MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Minister, I say to you today that it isn't fair to the families of the
deceased who want access to this information. Mrs. Joan Kieley, the widow of the
Jerome Kieley, one of the men who was killed in this explosion, has expressed
grave concern to me about the lack of information surrounding her husband's
tragic death.
Sir, I'm very surprised this morning to hear you say that has been
information released. Up to twenty-four hours ago, Mrs. Kieley has heard
absolutely nothing from any department of government concerning this incident.
Mrs. Kieley says she wants closure to her husband's very tragic death. I say
again today: Why not release information to the immediate families who have been
struggling to deal with the loss of their loved ones since March 1998? I will
repeat again, sir, that Mrs. Kieley has heard abs olutely
nothing from any department of government about any report with anything in it
involving the death of her husband.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.
MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to dispute anything that the
hon. member is saying in terms of what level of information the family of one of
the deceased may have in their possession. I will simply say this, as I have
already said, that we have made available already the maximum level of
information that we can make available in the current circumstances and in the
context of the court actions that are ongoing.
Let me say to him again, that on March 3, the counsel for the Workplace
Health, Safety and Compensation Commission, and a expert witness, both acting on
behalf of some individuals, reviewed the provincial Fire Commissioner's
report, pursuant to the terms of the March 2 court order.
If we had the capacity, Mr. Speaker, today to make additional information
available then we would be only too happy to do it. The fact of the matter is
that we are constrained by the processes of the court and other processes that
have to be followed in the area of dealing with this type of matter. The
information from all accounts and reports when it is appropriate, and to whom it
is appropriate to make it available, will absolutely be done in a expeditious
matter as far as government is responsible to do so.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.
MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions are to the Minister of Finance. They relate to the $250 million
recently guaranteed by government to a variety of corporations, some of them
public, like the St. John's Health Care Corporation, and some of them private,
like Integrated Poultry Limited and S.C.B. Fisheries. Last year the government
publically stated that taxpayers would not be again asked to extend our public
liabilities to either I.P.L. or to S.C.B. Fisheries. What explanation can the
minister have for the Cabinet changi ng its collective mind
and issuing a further guarantee of $1.5 million to Integrated Poultry Limited,
and a further $1.7 million to S.C.B. Fisheries.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods.
MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I will answer the part of the question as it
relates to I.P.L. We have dealt with that in the last two weeks. Again, all
those funds were 100 per cent recovered.
MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.
MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I ask the question again to the Minister of Finance. The government has
recently issued a another guarantee to Marble Mountain Corporation, not for
capital expenditures but for current account expenditures. Marble Mountain, I
say to the minister, gives new meaning to the financial terms sinking funds.
Why would this personal interest of the minister in the Marble Mountain
Corporation permit them to come into his office and kind of dip right into the
public treasury? He has permitted them to do that, I guess, in order to keep
Marble Mountain afloat. Why are the people of Marble Mountain continuing to get
money, not for capital expenditures but for current account?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance.
MR. DICKS: Maybe the hon. member knows more than I do. We have not
guaranteed Marble Mountain. Having said that I would like to know if the
position of the Leader of the Opposition and his party is that they do not
support Marble Mountain. For the public record? Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. DICKS: There is no guarantee for Marble Mountain.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.
MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I say to the minister, Order in Council 278-99, authorized a $300,000 loan
guarantee to Marble Mountain for current account.
I also want to say to the minister in this matter: Why is it that he has had
such a hard-nosed approach to the collective bargaining concerns of nurses, RNC
officers, the prison wardens, and the public service in general, and yet your
buddies over at Marble Mountain can walk into your office and they can have
access to the keys of the public Treasury?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance.
MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Marble Mountain is a prime winter tourism generator in the Province. It is
the showpiece, if you will, for winter tourism inasmuch as you might point to
other matters in the summer. One of the difficulties Marble has had over the
last several years is that there has not been a lot of snow. Marble Mountain has
basically survived on its ticket sales and its other sources of revenue and
government has supported it. From our point of view, on this side of the House,
Marble Mountain is a necessary and important part of winter tourism product in
this Province. It ties in with all the things we are doing, snowmobile trails
and everything else.
If the hon. member and his Party's position is that we should close Marble
Mountain or give it to friends of his Party for a dollar, that is not the
position of this government.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the
Member for St. John's West.
MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions this morning are for the Minister of Human Resources and
Employment. This week, Campaign 2000 released a report showing Newfoundland's
child poverty rate has not improved in the past decade and, in fact, is still
the worst in the country. When asked in the House Wednesday why the government
will not fund the Community Food Sharing Association so hungry children can get
meals, the minister said the government responds to the issue in a different way
through income support programs and chil d benefit.
I ask the minister: Is she satisfied that the government is doing enough
through its programs to address child poverty? If not, how dissatisfied does she
have to be before she decides to do something about it?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.
MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, I believe that I indicated in the House when the
question was asked, that this government will never be satisfied as long as
there are children in this Province, or in fact in this country, who are going
hungry. What I did indicate, however, is that there are responses that this
Province can take and a level of policy influence that we can exercise that can
really impact the cycle of poverty. One of the key issues that has come up over
the debate around this for the last couple of days is the fact that the way to
really break poverty is to encourage employment and to ensure that families have
access to work so that they can support themselves and meet the needs that they
have for themselves and their children.
In addition to what we are doing in the area of providing income support when
families cannot work, of course, one of the things that we have had great
success in is in our initiatives around supporting people towards employment.
In essence, what we are doing is trying to work on any number of fronts to
eliminate poverty not only for children but for families and for everyone in
this Province, and we will continue those efforts.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: A
supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's West.
MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
In spite of the employment initiatives, many thousands of our unemployed
families have left the Province to find work elsewhere. It is surprising, and
isn't the minister surprised, that child poverty figures have not improved in
spite of that.
The fact that the child poverty rate has stayed the same indicates that more
and more children are falling into poverty to replace the ones that we have lost
through out-migration. Won't the minister admit that the programs are not
working?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.
MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker,
this needs to be taken in a bigger context, I believe, when you look at the past
number of years and what has happened across the country and elsewhere. I think,
at this point, to have stayed the same is an achievement in itself. As was
indicated in the child poverty report, there are many other provinces which had
different experiences here, but I don't think it is productive to focus simply
on this issue of rates of child poverty or rates of poverty in general because,
as we know, the numbers do not tell the story here.
What we need to do is look at the increases that we have had in people
working, the successes that we have had with initiatives like the single parent
program, which has to date encouraged and supported dozens, if not hundreds at
this point, of women into employment in this Province. It is a success story. In
addition to this, we have implemented our National Child Benefit which is
putting more money into the hands of families so they can help support their
children, and the list of initiatives can go on and on.
I think we have to look to make progress on many fronts and ensure that we
continue our work.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the
Member for St. John's West, a final supplementary.
MS S. OSBORNE: Yes, the numbers have the stayed the same in spite of the
fact that a lot of unemployed and poor families have left the Province, and that
is a shame.
We know the government's programs to address child poverty are not working
to put food in the stomachs of the children who probably went to school this
morning hungry. Why won't the minister provide funding to the Community Food
Sharing Association so food banks can stock their shelves and the children who
are in poverty can focus on learning in school, rather than focus on being
hungry?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and Employment.
MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Education spoke to this
morning in her statement, and yesterday as well, I believe, in the House, we are
taking initiatives with the School Food Foundation to assist in this very
specific area of children and hunger, and children going to school, and ensuring
that they can have an opportunity to have good meals as well.
This is something again that is based on a community response. It is a
partnership here, because in partnering with the School Food Foundation, we are
also partnering with the private sector but it is based very much on the
community response in these schools as well.
These programs do not work unless there is community support for them, and
community involvement in every facet of it. The food bank system that is in
operation in this Province is a community-driven response and government's
responses is in many of the other areas that I have mentioned.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.
MR. SHELLEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
My questions are for the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation again
today. A couple of days ago I asked about some questions about the consultation
process that is going on with our own provincial ferry service, which continues
to be the best kept secret in this Province. Of course, the minister got on his
feet to say that why the Labrador end of it was not included in the consultation
process in a formal way with the committee was that the minister has been there
on his own.
Mr. Speaker, it is the best kept secret because I had that report back from
Nain, Labrador, who says: No one has heard of the so-called provincial hearings.
As for the claims that the minister or anybody else has been up this way
listening intensively to our concerns is living in la-la land. That is Nain,
Labrador. That is Nain - Nain, Labrador.
I would like to ask the minister: Why wasn't Labrador included in the
formal consultation process on these forums?
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.
MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I don't know where the hon. member is getting his information from, but I
have been in Nain, met with the council in Nain, and some other groups there as
well. I have been in Rigolet, in Hopedale, in Postville, in Makkovik, all over
the coast, and met with all the councils, all the development associations in
the area. I don't know what the hon. member is talking about, except for the
(inaudible). There is one thing I do know he is talking about; if he can get a
definition for this la-la land, I woul d like to know it.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has ended.
Notices of Motion
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and Labour.
MR. LANGDON: Mr. Speaker, I
give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, Act
To Amend The Fisheries Industry Collective Bargaining Act. (Bill 44)
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance.
MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, I
give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, An
Act To Amend The Proceedings Against The Crown Act And the Public Officials
Garnishee Act.
I further give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill
entitled,
An Act To Revise The Law Respecting The Law Society Of Newfoundland.
I give further notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill
entitled,
An Act To Amend The Teachers Pensions Act.
I finally give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill
entitled,
An Act To Amend The Public Service Pensions Act, 1999".
Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education.
MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I
give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, An
Act To Amend The Schools Act, 1997".
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
Orders of the Day
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, Order
8,
An Act To Amend The Registered Nurses Act. (Bill 27)
MR. SPEAKER: Order 8.
The hon. the Member for Labrador adjourned the debate.
The hon. the Member for Labrador West.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to begin to talk a bit about the health care in the Province,
and in Labrador in particular. I would like to say, as I reiterate what I said
yesterday when the President of Treasury Board was talking about the new
hospital and construction around the Province, I don't know about all of the
construction that is taking place but I do know that the hospital she mentioned
in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, the new construction of that hospital scheduled to
open next year, will have in excess of 30 per cent less
beds than the present hospital, and a tremendous increase in the administration
offices in the hospital. From what I am told, each one of theses will be
equipped with their own washroom facilities in all of the offices that are going
to be in that new hospital.
While there is construction taking place, and new hospitals opening, one can
question whether or not the health care in this Province is going to improve as
a result of that, when we look at the fact that there are going to be less beds
available for the people who are going to require them.
Mr. Speaker, closer to home at the Captain William Jackman Memorial Hospital,
since the introduction of the hospital boards and the regional board for
Labrador, the hospital in Labrador West has suffered greatly. Right now, in
order to order the most basis types of medical supplies, it has to be cleared
through Goose Bay first. The local hospital in Labrador West does not have the
authority to order anything that is required without getting permission from
Happy Valley- Goose Bay and the board office there.
In addition to that, when the regional board came into being, the hospital in
Labrador West that was run at that time by the Salvation Army had a huge surplus
on hand - a surplus of funds. When the hospital board assumed responsibility for
the delivery of health care in Labrador, and Labrador West and other parts of
Labrador came underneath the jurisdiction of one board, the surplus that we had
was swallowed up at that time by the deficits that were being run in other
hospitals in other regions of Labrador.
Now we have a deficit. Indeed, as was pointed out, there is great difficulty
in attracting nurses and medical professionals to the areas of Labrador,
particularly in coastal Labrador and indeed throughout all regions of Labrador,
when it comes to having staff levels where they should be in the region.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to say there is a long waiting list that applies
for people to get into health care institutions today; long waiting lists for
even, at times, simple procedures to be carried out. The waiting lists are long.
For an MRI, for example, anybody requiring the use of that, who needs to have an
MRI done, who is recommended to have one done, many times the waiting list is
six to eight months. That is unacceptable in this day and age.
There is only one place in the Province where that can be carried out, and
that is at the Health Sciences Complex in St. John's. Of course, people
traveling from other areas incur a great expense to have an MRI done for their
own benefit.
We look at the hospital boards, and I want to concentrate on them a bit
because the minister and government has said that our health care is in great
shape. I don't know which bubble they are living in, but I can assure you that
it is soon going to break; because health care in this Province is anything but
great.
We look at the hospital boards and how they are comprised, how they are
appointed. They are not answerable to anyone. The only requirement, I guess,
will be a political card in your wallet or handbag.
MR. J. BYRNE: And you take the flack.
MR. COLLINS: And you take the flack for the government, for the people
who appointed you.
A few weeks ago, four or five weeks ago, we had a public meeting in Labrador
West with the Labrador Health Care Corporation and the board. There were a lot
of concerns that were relayed to the board. It was very disturbing to see - in
the middle of the concerns being expressed by the residents of Labrador West -
that the majority of board members got out of their seats, walked out of the
meeting, and did not even have the courtesy or decency to stay and hear the
concerns from the residents, from the workers, that were being put forward to
them at that time.
It is not uncommon at all for anyone who has occasion to visit the hospital,
whether as a patient or to go in to see somebody in there, to witness people on
stretchers, on beds, in the corridors of the hospitals.
Not too long ago, a friend of mine had to take her elderly mother in and they
were in excess of twenty-four hours in the corridor of a hospital, on a bed, and
the next day they moved her into a room and she died shortly after. That is a
very undignified death, something that a person should not have to endure,
should not have to be subject to, during the last hours of their life. It has
gotten to the point in this Province where even death cannot be dignified when
you are in a hospital and you have to spend your remaining hours of living in
the corridor, on a stretcher or a bed, waiting for a room to become available.
There are other cases I am aware of where young people doing chemotherapy
have been allowed out for the weekend, come back for treatment on Tuesday, only
to find that there is no bed available for them to have their treatment
continued when it was supposed to.
All of these things are totally unacceptable in today's society. There is
absolutely no reason for things to be that way. Things have to change. People
have to start getting the medical attention that they require.
I would like to talk a bit about the Air Ambulance Program as it pertains to
Labrador. Members are probably aware that the Province has an air ambulance
aircraft that responds to medical emergencies. In Labrador, any part of
Labrador, a medical emergency, the only way to get to a major centre is by air.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) on their own, after they bring you in.
MR. COLLINS: That is right; that is correct.
When people are transported from Labrador, most times to St. John's, they
are admitted to hospital and have very serious medical procedures carried out,
and there comes a point in time when they are released from hospital. When they
are released, they have to find their own way back. That may not be a hindrance,
depending on the situation of where you are living and other things.
Let me give you the examples that have happened in Labrador recently where
people have been flown out, have had surgeries carried out, have been released
from hospitals, but they have been in body casts or for other reasons were
unable to sit for prolonged periods of time.
None of the airlines that service Labrador West will take patients on a
stretcher, so how does a person get back home, whether they be kids, adults, or
very senior people? Everybody has been in this position, from all walks of life,
and they have no way to get back home. They are told that if we have to respond
to another emergency in Labrador, and if the person is ready to get to the
airport immediately, then they will take them back home.
I think it is disgraceful when a patient's return home is completely
dependent upon somebody else in their community having an emergency situation
exist. That is totally deplorable. People should not have to depend on somebody
else becoming critically ill in order for them to get back to their families and
loved ones following very serious medical operations. The stress alone from the
operation, the stress created by being away from your support, is bad enough;
but when you have to sit and wait for a phone to ring,
saying: If you can be at the airport in five minutes, we will get you back home.
If not, you may have to wait another month, three months or six months before
you are able to get back... It is not acceptable.
If this government were listening, and if they were serious about providing
good quality health care, then one of the things that they would do would be to
ensure that people who can only get back home by air, following very difficult
medical operations, would be taken back the same way that they were brought out,
by air, and not waiting for their next door neighbor to have a serious accident
or serious illness so they can get back when they are going in to do another
Medivac.
Also from Labrador, the cost of travel is extraordinarily high. Air fares
going into Labrador today, and coming out from Labrador West, you are looking at
about $1,500 return, if you have to go on the spur of the moment. Now there are
programs in place. There is a non-emergency medical subsidy plan, through the
provincial government, but that only covers 50 per cent of incurred related
expenses after the first $500. That still inflicts a very serious financial
burden upon the people in Labrador who have to travel to the Island portion of
the Province to have medical conditions taken care of, corrected, and other
needs; because when we are talking about particularly children, they are not
able to travel on their own. A parent must fly with them and attend to them
while they are here. Of course, the financial burden that is inflicted then
increases because now we are talking about two people who have to be here,
sometimes in a hotel while they are waiting and, at the best of times, eating in
resta urants. It doesn't take long
to add up. So the 50 per cent deduction, after the first $500, does not really
provide adequate reimbursement or rebate to people who have to be away from home
by necessity in order to have medical things looked at.
The President of Treasury Board also talked yesterday about things related -
like tourism and out-migration being slow. I don't know which area of the
Province she has visited lately, but I can assure her that in Labrador West
out-migration has not slowed. It has increased significantly. It is very
difficult, as you walk around the communities in Labrador West - one thing that
is evident as you walk around is lack of young people that you see. You can
really see the difference. At Christmastime vac ation,
summertime when students are out, then you see the number of young people who
actually live in the area but, through necessity, other than at high points and
vacation time, the area is almost void of young people between the ages of
eighteen and twenty-five or twenty-six because they all have to leave to find
work or to further their education. So out-migration, certainly from my
perspective, is not something that is slowing. It is not something that has
halted. In fact, it is something that has been continued to increase and people
are leaving this Province in numbers unprecedented at any other point in time in
our history.
Again, talking about the tourism opportunities, the President of Treasury
Board talked about the bed and breakfasts and the opportunities for tourism to
be a great industry in this Province. I agree, we do have the potential, but we
do need things in place and better services than we have right now. If we look
at the Province in whole, if you look at Labrador and the Island, and you follow
the routes that connect, then a lot of people would like to make the trip, I
would say, make the round trip. Come in through Labrador, cross over from Goose
Bay to Lewisporte, and continue on back through the mainland or do the reverse.
With all of the talk about ferry service in this Province in recent months, I
can assure you that the ferry service from Goose Bay to Lewisporte on board the Sir
Robert Bond - that is certainly not a boat that is equipped to be able to
handle tourism. It is not a new boat by any stretch of the imagination. The
facilities are very limited. Anyone who has any restrictions whatsoever, or is
confined to a wheelchair, or has difficulty walking, certainly would never be
able to get from the main deck area to the cafeteria. The ship is also not
equipped properly, and it is a long voyage; approximately between thirty-two and
thirty-four hours you are on the boat. The cabin facilities and other facilities
that are there are certainly not conducive to promoting tourism, to encouraging
tourism, or to increase at all the activity that is related to tourism between
Labrador and Newfoundland when people want to take the ferry system.
So that ferry as well, although we have not heard much about it, is important
to the tourism industry. It is important to the people who live in Newfoundland
or Labrador and use that as their transportation to get back and forth between
one place to another. Although we have not heard much about it, it is a boat
that certainly needs to be looked at as being replaced with a higher quality
boat that will provide better services to the people who use it.
When we look at people in this Province who are traveling to hospitals, and
the length of time that patients spend in hospitals today with the demands on
the health care system and the beds, people are being released from hospitals at
earlier points in time than they should be in many cases, certainly earlier than
they would have been a dozen years ago. Right now, when somebody is released
from the hospital there are times when you almost need a pickup truck to go pick
them up, they have that many things to take home to be able to look after
themselves when they get there.
We talked in the House not too long ago about the need for expanded services
in the rural areas of the Province, such as on the Northern Peninsula, Grand
Falls, Labrador, Gander, and other areas of the Province that need equipment to
provide service to the residents there. Because one of the fundamental things in
a speedy recovery from any type of illness or sickness is having familiar
surroundings, where your are surrounded by family and friends and have the type
of support that is, again, conducive to your well-being and to your state of
mind, reducing stress levels and allowing you to recuperate in a speedier period
of time.
I do not believe for a minute, and I do not think the people of this Province
believe, that our health care is in great shape. The minister may think so, the
government of the day may think so, but the people of the Province certainly do
not. There are many examples. There is not one person, and I would suggest not
even on the other side of the House, who can't tell you story after story
about things that have happened in hospitals, the waiting lists, that even their
own family members may have exper ienced, to get medical
procedures carried out. So I cannot say, and I do not see how anyone can say,
that our health care is in great shape.
It is not. It is not going to be in great shape for a while, in my opinion. I
think that this government had an opportunity last April to take some positive
steps forward in making sure our health care system would be better, but I think
they missed the boat. Because they had an opportunity to settle with the nurses
of this Province to ensure that the nurses who are graduating would stay in the
Province and perform a service to the people in the areas they are from. They
failed miserably in their attempt to do that and the people of this Province are
paying a price today for it, and they will pay a price for many months and
probably years to come.
We talk about attracting people to rural areas of the Province to provide
health care. I don't know. Maybe this may not sound reasonable to some people
but I thought it sounded pretty reasonable. When I watched a newscast one
afternoon, or one evening, there was a young medical student who was saying:
Listen, I would like to stay in this Province when I graduate but I am going to
have to leave and go places where I can get the money required to pay down the
debt I'm going to incur. That is through necessity. He did have an idea. He
said: Why won't the government today give me a break on my education and I
will agree to go anywhere in this Province that I am needed as a physician and
practice?
I do not think that is far-fetched. I do think it is probably something that
is worthwhile pursuing and to be looked at, because the young people today who
are graduating medical school, the people who are from this Province, do not
want to leave by choice. They have to leave by necessity. I can assure you that
many of them, if not for the debt that they incurred while obtaining their
education, would much rather stay in this Province and practice than go to
Ontario or to the States, in spite of the fact that they can make more money.
Because they have to go to the places where they can make the most money to pay
off their debts and get on with their lives as most of us have done.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER (Oldford): Order, please!
MR. COLLINS: I would suggest, Mr. Speaker -
AN HON. MEMBER: Less stressful working conditions (inaudible).
MR. COLLINS: Less stressful working conditions too. Mr. Speaker, I do not
think that our health care is in great shape. I do not think that it is
impossible to put it there. I think there are new ideas that are generated that
can be followed through on and I think there are new initiatives that can be
taken that will greatly improve the health care we presently provide.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I do not know if it is the Friday morning syndrome, the Friday morning blues,
or whatever it is, but all members on the other side have been somewhat
different and unusual this morning than they have been all week. I think the
Member for Baie Verte summed it all up when he said he was in la-la land. I
suspect that is what it was, that is what he was feeling. In particular, the odd
couple sitting right there in the corner. Any member to do what the Leader of
the NDP Party did this morning, well, there is a word to describe it. The Member
for Labrador West just spent twenty minutes condemning the health care system in
Newfoundland and Labrador.
I know the role of an opposition. I've been there, I was there for four
years. I tell you, and I will speak for all my colleagues who were on the
opposite side at that particular time, when we stood we based it on facts.
Before we ever asked a question we knew the answer. For someone to stand on
their feet in this hon. House of Assembly and talk about the health care system
for twenty minutes, condemn it, and put forward a message that the health care
system is a total failure in the Province of New foundland
and Labrador, is absolutely untrue.
I say to the hon. member he has not traveled very far. If he has come to the
conclusion that the health care system is in that state he has not traveled very
far. If you ever get the occasion to talk about health care systems and costs,
go to the United States. If you ever get the occasion to talk about health care
systems and cost, go to the United States, or if you ever get the occasion to go
to another province. There was a man from Nova Scotia in the Health Sciences
hospital last year as a patie nt and
boasted about the service and the care he got from the Health Sciences here in
St. John's compared to what was in his own province. Time after time you can
hear people talking about the people who work in those hospitals, the nurses,
the attendants, the doctors, the assistant nurses, all of those people getting
bragged about, boasted about, and thanked for the good job they do. To totally
condemn the health care system in Newfoundland and Labrador is absolutely wrong.
Now am I saying -
MR. COLLINS: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: I don't know
if the member opposite was listening very well but I certainly did not condemn
the entire health care in this Province, and I certainly did not condemn the
people who work in the health care profession in this Province. I guess what the
member is attempting to do is deflect attention from the realities and compare
us to other places. I can tell the member that other people from Nova Scotia
came to this Province and had to be airlifted and received a bill for many
thousands of dollars for the service. I can tell him that
case.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) that happens in every province. (Inaudible).
MR. COLLINS: Exactly, but if you are going to tell it, tell it all. Tell
it like it is.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
There is no point of order.
The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
MR. EFFORD: The hon. member
had twenty minutes. I believe twenty minutes is the time limit. You had a full
opportunity to explain and I am going to take my twenty minutes. Thirty minutes!
He had thirty minutes. So don't waste my time and make frivolous points of
order.
You cannot condemn the health care system without condemning the people who
work in it unless there is something different than I know. The health care
system is made up of buildings, equipment and people. Now it is either right or
it is not right. Now, am I saying that the health care system in Newfoundland
and Labrador is perfect? Absolutely not. There is no system that is perfect.
There is no such thing as a perfect system. The hon. member should know that.
MR. FUREY: Yes there is (inaudible). The Communist crowd had it right.
MR. EFFORD: Sorry?
MR. FUREY: The Communists had it right.
MR. EFFORD: Oh yes. Mr.
Speaker, what we are saying here in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador is
simply this. We are a province of 560,000 people, approximately. It could be
565,000, but let's say approximately 560,000 people. Look at the geography of
Newfoundland and Labrador. Look at where we have to provide health care systems.
We have a population the size of one city, Winnipeg for example. We are
scattered over a land mass which is four times larger than the country of Japan
which has a populat ion of 120 million people. In that
health care system you have to provide the services to people no matter where
they live in the Province. What is the cost of doing it compared to if the
population was concentrated in one area? What do we spend here in the Province
of Newfoundland and Labrador on a health care system? Approximately $1.3 billion
annually on health care alone.
Why is it? Why does it cost that much? One of the reasons, as I just
explained, is the geography of Newfoundland. You have to have so many health
care centres around the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador to provide the
services where people are living. Even though they are in remote areas with
small populations they still need the services. So for everybody on the
Opposition to condemn the health care system in Newfoundland, that it is
absolutely not working, not providing the services, the que stion
I would ask everybody, and I've asked this many times on this side of the
House, is: When is enough enough? Is it $1.5 billion? Is it $2 billion? Is it
the total budget of Newfoundland and Labrador, $3.5 billion? Will that be
enough? Will that satisfy the member opposite? Will that solve all the problems
in the health care system?
I think not. I think it is a responsibility on everybody in the institutions
around this Province, the health care boards and everybody else, to reevaluate
what we are doing in the health care system. This government, the Minister of
Health, cannot be in every corridor of every hospital every hour of the day to
ensure that there are no problems. I don't care if you had somebody in every
corridor, in every room, in every hospital; you are still going to have
incidents where people will not be happy. That is a fact
of life, but it is the responsibility of the health care boards, the
administrators and the medical services to do the best job they possibly can.
I can say very clearly it is not all about money. It is very easy over there
to criticize the people who work in those hospitals and to condemn the staff in
the hospitals. That is what the Member for Labrador West said. If you condemn
the health care system you condemn the people who work in the hospitals. They
are the providers of care. They are part of the health care system, Mr. Speaker.
MR. COLLINS: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Labrador West.
MR. COLLINS: I would just
like, again, to clarify for the record that at no time did I criticize the
people who work in the hospitals in this Province. Just for the minister's
purpose.
MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.
The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.
MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I
know the hon. Member for Labrador West is a little thick on Friday mornings. He
has to be. He is scurrying backward like a lobster. He said simply this: the
health care system is simply not working in the Province of Newfoundland and
Labrador. What makes up the health care system? The hospital buildings, clinics,
bricks and mortar, equipment? Isn't that part of it? Isn't it also the
staff, the nurses, the doctors, the attendants, are they not part of the health
care system? If it is not working, then they must be a
part of not making it work? Do you want to argue with that point?
AN HON. MEMBER: Who decides the numbers?
MR. EFFORD: My goodness, you never mentioned numbers once in the thirty
minutes. Get Hansard.
I will go back to what I said five minutes ago. Let's go back to money:
$1.3 billion, $400 million over four years, an extra $400 million.
MR. TULK: No, $300 million.
MR. EFFORD: Sorry, $300 million. So we are talking about $100 million.
What is $100 million here and there, hey, I say to the Member for Labrador West?
Give it another $100 million.
Like I just said, the total budget of Newfoundland and Labrador is
approximately $3.5 billion, and $1.3 billion goes into health care, so let's
take the whole budget. Will that be enough? There will not be one member on that
side of the House who will say that is enough. Not a member on that side of the
House will say: Government, that is the right thing to do. Now we have an
excellent health care system because you have thrown the total budget at it.
That is how ludicrous it is over there.
Mr. Speaker, I have respect for the health care system in Newfoundland and
Labrador. I have traveled. I remember one time I made a trip to Florida and my
wife became sick on the way down. She was in hospital from - I am not sure if it
was Tuesday afternoon or Wednesday morning. Friday we had to transfer her to St.
John's. The bill for three days in Florida was $9,000. That is the health care
system that we would like to have for Newfoundland and Labrador.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) insurance (inaudible)?
MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, it has nothing to do with insurance. What about
people living in places like the United States who have to mortgage their homes
in order to get into hospital? If they are in hospital and they do not have the
money to pay, they will not let them out and they have to mortgage their homes
or draw every last nickel out of the savings account. It is people who cannot
afford to get into a hospital in a place like the United States, who do not have
the money, will die.
I tell you, there is not too much of that happening in Newfoundland and
Labrador. There is not too much of that happening in Canada, because for the
most part everybody who needs health service will get it. Will they get exactly,
every time, a perfect situation? Absolutely not. You go over to the Health
Sciences on any given day at 8:00 a.m. and look at the lineups. I have never
seen anybody turned away over there. Do people have to wait? Yes, they have to
wait, but it is better to have to wait than not to get in hospital at all and
have to die at home because of the lack of services.
I have been in hospital myself. I tell you, the service I have received in
hospital has been excellent. The nursing care, the attendant care, the attention
from the doctors has been excellent service. I do not condemn those people for
the hard work which they do in the hospitals -
MR. TULK: Here is some
information. (Inaudible). Tell them what is happening in the (inaudible). These
aren't our figures either.
MR. EFFORD: Yes, there we
go. One hundred per cent of our health facilities are accredited by the Canadian
Council on Health Services Accreditation. Listen to this one. Health and
Community Services in St. John's is the first community health board in Canada
to receive accreditation from the Canadian Council on Health Service
Accreditation. The remaining health community service boards are in the process
of undergoing the accreditation process. The first one in all of Canada to
receive accreditation.
The hon. member stood for thirty minutes and condemned the heath care system
in Newfoundland. Here we have this right here, and this happened in 1998, is it?
AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.
MR. EFFORD: The Newfoundland Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation
will undergo its first accreditation in November - as we are talking now - in
1999. That is bad. They are now undergoing accreditation. The first place to get
it in Canada was Newfoundland and Labrador.
Now, on to budget items. We have increased our health and community services
budget every year for the past four years despite decreased transfer of payments
from the federal government. In other words, we have less money from the federal
government, but year over year for the last four years we have increased the
health care budget in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Let me list it off. Government allotted: $40 million to pay down the
accumulated deficit of institutional boards in March 1998; $21 million in
additional funding for hospital equipment, Year 2000 issues, and enabled these
three boards to implement integrated management information systems. The top in
Canada, Mr. Speaker. Not third, fourth or fifth, but top in Canada.
There was $15 million in additional funding for board budgets and $4.1
million to recruit salaried physicians. The hon. member took five minutes
condemning, saying there is not enough money for salaried physicians to go
around, to move in rural areas or to attract them to rural Newfoundland and
Labrador. There was $4.1 million just to attract salaried physicians. There was
$1.8 million for new drug therapies approved last year. There is $1.3 million
included to implement the new Child, Youth and Family Services Act. The Leader
of the NDP should listen to that one. There was $900,000 over three years for
the tobacco reduction strategy, announced by the Minister of Health.
AN HON. MEMBER: Are you reading that?
MR. EFFORD: Yes, I am
reading that, and I can read some more. Close to $90 million - now, this is the
one you all should listen to - will be spent for hospital facilities in St. John's,
Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Gander, Harbour Breton, Stephenville, Old Pelican, Fogo,
Bonne Bay, Grand Bank and Grand Falls-Windsor.
AN HON. MEMBER: What about the Health Sciences?
MR. EFFORD: What about the
facilities, the Janeway, the Health Science Centre, the re-organization of
institutions here in St. John's? That is over $100 million.
Now, on to financial capital expenditures. Government spends $1.2 billion on
health and community service: the highest expenditures in government, one-third
of all government expenditures.
This is an interesting one, Mr. Speaker. CIHI's July (inaudible) stats show
that Newfoundland and Labrador spent $1,780 per person in 1998, up from $1,519
in 1992. The Province spent almost $90 per person above -
MR. TULK: Above what?
MR. EFFORD: I will repeat it again to the odd couple. Just listen to
facts and figures. The Province spent almost $90 per person above the Canadian
average on health care in 1998. In other words, little old Newfoundland and
Labrador spent $90 more per Canadian average than any other province in the
whole of Canada.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Newfoundland. You have to spend more money.
MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, the bottom line is they are grasping for straws,
trying to find something to complain about, trying to -
AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!
MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member took up five minutes of his
thirty-minutes talking about the problems with the nurses, that government is
not paying attention to the lack of the numbers of nurses in the Province. I
will conclude by just making these couple of remarks. First, $7.5 million was
allotted to create 125 new permanent nursing positions.
MR. TULK: When? This year.
MR. EFFORD: This year, and
$2.3 million was allotted to convert up to 540 casual nursing positions to
permanent positions. As well, $4 million is allotted for additional support
staff? What do we get? A cry from the Opposition that Newfoundland's economy
is going down. We cannot create jobs in the Province. Here is an example here.
This year, $7.5 million, $2.3 million, and $4 million, totaling $13.8 million,
is there for extra staffing, nursing care and additional support staff in
Newfoundland and Labrador.
I will ask the hon. member one more question. When is enough enough? When is
he going to start boasting about the health care system in Newfoundland and
Labrador instead of condemning all of the people and the health care system?
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER (Smith): The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.
MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to speak on Bill 27, too. I am not going to stand here today and
condemn totally the health care system in Newfoundland and Labrador. I have to
commend and thank the health care workers in Newfoundland and Labrador for the
great job these people are doing under the circumstances they are doing them
under. If the hon. member wants examples of things that are wrong, I can
certainly give them. I have seen in the past two years in my own family, when I
went to the hospital when my father was in the hospital before he died, crying
because he could not get help from anybody on that floor to take him to the
washroom. I had to go all over that floor, with almost forty patients on that
floor, and found one worker. I tell you, that was not very nice, and I take
exception to anybody -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. HUNTER: I am not condemning the health care work workers, but I think
that -
AN HON. MEMBER: Who is?
MR. HUNTER: The hon. member said that the hon. member over there was
condemning them.
Mr. Speaker, I can tell a lot of stories like that. I have a friend -
MR. TULK: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker..
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
On a point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader.
MR. TULK: I do not want to interrupt the hon. gentleman, but I would like
for him to clarify who he says in this House is condemning the health care
workers in the Province. It is not this side, I can assure the hon. gentleman.
It is not this side.
MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.
The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.
MR. HUNTER: Mr. Speaker, I
had a friend not too long ago who was in the hospital and she fell out of bed
because she tried ringing a bell for a full hour. She tried to get someone to
come to her assistance and take her to a washroom. She fell out of bed and broke
her hip. I don't think that is what you call good health care in our country
today. I think she should have had someone there to help her out of that bed to
get to the washroom. I can think of dozens of incidents where people needed
services that they did not get. I'm not reflecting on the people working
there, because I sympathize with them, I sympathize with the stressful working
hours that they have, but when you go there it can only make you mad to see what
is going on. Another person that is in there is in a bed, his condition so
serious that he cannot he even listen to a radio. He is sitting in a bed waiting
to get to St. John's to see a heart specialist and get surgery done.
There are all kinds of stories I can tell like that, even one of my own. A
little while ago I was in a car accident on the other side of Stephenville at
2:00 a.m. and struck a patch of black ice. I demolished a vehicle there and got
a ride to Western Memorial Hospital with a tractor trailer driver. They took me
and stitched me up and I was in a lot of pain, and the nurse said to me: You are
going to have to sit in the lobby. I said: I'm in too much pain to sit in the
lobby. She said: We have orders not to call in anybody
this hour in the morning. I said I needed an x-ray on my back because I felt my
back, if it was not broken, was damaged, and no way would they call in someone
to do an x-ray on my back. Not only that, they asked me to leave the hospital,
stitched up, face swollen out like that. They required me to leave that
hospital. I said: This is not good enough.
In my years I haven't used the health care system that much for my own use,
and I've paid taxes for many years and worked hard. At that particular time I
needed that service. No, they would not do it. The doctor came in and he said:
No, I cannot do it. I have strict orders not to call in somebody to do x-rays at
this hour in the morning. You will have to wait until 8:00 a.m. and then you
will have to come back. They would not even admit me. I thought that was very
unfair, and I was pretty sick th at day.
There are lots of cases. I have another one of a gentleman who called me a
month ago, dying with cancer. This gentleman was very desperate for personal
care and personal things for his own use, particularly, I would say, like
pampers, and stuff like that. I went to try to get help for him and they said:
No, you do not fall within the policy. This man worked most of his life in the
woods, worked very hard, paid taxes all his life, and at this time he needed the
system to help him. He was a man who w as
very generous. He worked hard and helped a lot of people in his day, and didn't
mind paying his taxes. At this point in time in his life when he needed some
help from the health care, he could not get it. Last week he died. I tell you, I
felt very sorry for that man who cried out for someone to listen and nobody
would listen to him.
We all know the health care system and our social programs are not the best,
but sometimes we have to stop and listen. Sometimes we have to stop and look at
the people who are really crying out for help, and recognize these people.
Sometimes we have to look at our policies and say: Well, maybe it does not fall
within the policy but this person deserves the help that he is asking for.
It is never going to be enough, no matter what we say. Because of our
geographical position in this world, in this Province, where people are spread
out so much, they are all over, in long areas, long ways from health care
facilities. Some people might have to drive for four or five hours to get to a
hospital. It is important that we do provide the service when they get there.
Even though they may spend hours on the road trying to get to those facilities,
when they get there they are told: Sorry we cannot take you in today, you will
have to come back tomorrow or next week.
I know several like that. I know of one man who drove in a snowstorm for an
hour-and-a-half. He went to the hospital and they said: Sorry, we cannot admit
you tonight, you are going to have to come back tomorrow. Because he had nowhere
to stay, no friends, no relatives and no money to get a hotel room, he had to
drive an hour-and-a-half back to his home again and then turn around the next
morning - there was still a snow storm coming on - to drive right back to that
facility again and still not get in. Those are the kinds of things we have to
look at when people are looking for services. It is important that if someone
needs the service then something has to be done to help that person. At least if
he could not be admitted, there should be something done where he would not have
to jeopardize his life to drive for three hours that day just to be said no to.
I have had dozens and dozens of calls from people calling me about the health
care system. If there is no problem in the health care system, then why are
people calling? I don't understand it. People call me and say: Look, I drove
to St. John's to see a specialist, and I was supposed to be admitted, but when
I got there they said: Sorry, we cannot admit you. There are no beds available.
We can have all kinds of infrastructures. We have them now on the Island
today. We have the infrastructures that have been developing for ten years. The
beds are there but there is no support for these services that we need. If we
are going to have the facilities, if we are going to have the infrastructures,
then we need the money to put in for the support to allow people to use the
services that they need.
Mr. Speaker, I don't know if there is a dollar value that we can put on how
much we should spend, a dollar value on how much each life is worth. I don't
know that answer, but I know that people expect services. People work hard all
their lives, paying taxes, and expect that when the time comes for them to get
that service then they want it; and so they should get it.
I know it is hard for members to get up and say: Well, we spend this much
money, we spend that much money and we cannot supply that service. But, because
of our unique situation in this Province, where people are spread out so much
and there are so few facilities - I can sympathize with our hon. Member for
Labrador West, with the situation in Labrador. I talk to people even from
Labrador, friends of mine, who say it is a nightmare trying to get out of
Labrador to get services. I sympathize with them. I say to the member, he has
done a good job presenting some of the concerns that he has on it.
It is not always easy for a politician to get up and criticize. I don't
like criticizing for the sake of criticizing, but sometimes when you see the
circumstances that are involved in your daily work - like, each one of us get so
many calls and we look at so many situations, so many cases - sometimes you just
get a bit frustrated with trying to deal with them. When you are making calls on
their behalf, you get frustrated with the system, frustrated with the employees,
the government employees in the s ystem, even though it is
not their fault. I sympathize with them, but I have for two weeks been calling
the social services department, home, to get some things clarified. They are
under so much stress that most of them are off most of the time. It is hard to
get answers. It is hard to get to talk to the people you need to talk to,
because there are not enough there working to handle the workloads.
It is difficult for us to do our job when the system and the government, I
would say, are not supporting in areas where they should be supporting,
particularly when it comes to rural Newfoundland. It is so easy for anybody here
in this area, on the Avalon, to jump aboard their car and go wherever they want
to go, to look into a problem or get services, but when you are in rural
Newfoundland it is hard to do that. You have to rely on somebody else to get
things done for you, particularly when it comes to elected people. You have
council members and politicians who - people rely on us to look into their
problems and help them out with their problems.
Our hon. member, when he presented yesterday on the Ombudsman -
AN HON. MEMBER: The private
member's resolution.
MR. HUNTER: The private
member's resolution on the Ombudsman.
Sometimes there are a lot of things that we cannot do, and that third party
certainly could be an important party and an important avenue for people to get
important problems looked into and taken care of. I have to give our hon. member
congratulations on taking that initiative to present that. I think it is very
important that, even though the cost may seem high in the interim, in the long
run, for the number of things that could be done - and some of the important
things. Maybe there -
AN HON. MEMBER: If there were an Ombudsman in place, (inaudible).
MR. HUNTER: The hon. member just reminded me, if there were an Ombudsman
in place, the millions of dollars we could have saved in the Murray Premises
dispute. There are a lot of other things like that, where an Ombudsman could
have saved taxpayers of this Province thousands or millions of dollars, more
than justifying the cost of having it.
I listened to the hon. Member for Grand Falls-Buchans yesterday -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
I will ask the hon. member to take his seat.
The hon. member has the right to speak in this House, and I would ask other
members to respect his right to speak.
MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I was listening to the hon. Member for Grand Falls-Buchans yesterday. I would
like to tell the rest of the people on her side that they should watch her very
carefully because they could learn an awful lot from that member. I have to
congratulate her. She is a good member for her area, and the money that she gets
for her district - the thousands and hundreds of thousands and millions of
dollars that she gets for her district - I think there is probably a lesson that
the other members should get from that member. Even though she might be a little
bit jealous that, if I attend too many functions, I might get more recognition
than she does; but I assure the hon. minister that I am not interested in
running in Grand Falls-Buchans at this time.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. HUNTER: I remind the hon. minister that I did win Buchans, Badger and
Millertown, or Buchans Junction in 1989. I did win those three areas, and I took
Windsor also in 1989. So probably if I did want to run in that district I would
have a good shot at winning it, if I could convince the people of Buchans
returning their vote.
AN HON. MEMBER: Why don't
you give it a go?
MR. HUNTER: I am quite happy where I am.
We talk about the millions of dollars that was put in support for the health
care records. I think there is still a lot of pay inequity in our health care
system, in our workers. I think sometime we must look at that problem so that if
we had -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. HUNTER: I thought it very funny when they turned the sod on the new
Carmelite House in Grand Falls-Windsor and I never even got an invitation. I
would say that the territory by the hon. member is very protected.
AN HON. MEMBER: Because you had nothing to do with it.
MR. HUNTER: I would like to remind the hon. member that maybe I had
nothing to do with it but there are a lot of people in my district who want to
use that facility. I think I should have been invited to that function, not only
because people in my district need the services of that facility too, but it was
just another Liberal love-in to make themselves look good. Certainly, they did
not want me or any other PC there to make it look like we did have something to
do with it.
It still seems awfully funny, when they do have functions in Grand
Falls-Windsor, that the hon. Member for Exploits seems to show up sometimes and
he doesn't have anything to do with it; but he shows up there, his picture in
the paper, smiling, as if he financed the whole project himself. I remind the
hon. minister that -
AN HON. MEMBER: You wouldn't
know but he found it.
MR. HUNTER: If he could find that kind of money, I would like to have a
talk to him later. I know the hon. Member for Grand Falls-Buchans knows how to
find money when she wants it. The hon. the Member for Grand Falls-Buchans
certainly knows how to find a penney when she needs it.
Yesterday, the hon. member mentioned about the scenery in the Gaff Topsail. I
have to agree with her. Central Newfoundland is certainly a beautiful place. It
is a place that I do a lot of traveling in, in the wilderness and in the
interior in Central Newfoundland. I have to agree with her that the Gaff Topsail
is a beautiful place. In that whole area up there, the people and the area, it
is certainly a joy to go in there and I would recommend to anybody, if they want
to see some nice scenery, meet some good people, certainly the Buchans and the
Millertown area is the place to go. I do recommend that.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) in you district.
MR. HUNTER: My district is certainly a beautiful place too, I say to the
minister.
The hon. member - how many times do you take credit for doing something? How
many times do you get your picture in the paper for doing something that
everybody knows is good, but every time you open the paper they are announcing -
the picture is on the same project that had been done months ago and they still
try to take credit for stuff - I guess they do take credit for stuff that is
done - but they like bragging about it. For some reason - I don't know why -
the advertiser seems like they are obliga ted to take
pictures of the hon. minister and have them in the paper. Every time you open
the paper, the picture is there two and three times, and the next day the same
picture is there again. I do not know if money has anything to do with it or if
there are any goodies given out to certain people in the community, but I think
sometimes you look at this stuff and you wonder what is going on. Is there
favoritism being done by the minister or not?
Mr. Speaker, when I get into social programs and health care, it brings me
back to Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation and the problems that I
see in that. It is an area where certainly more attention should be put,
particularly when it comes to seniors and people who require urgent home repair.
I am so frustrated with the system, I don't know how to deal with this.
When I go to someone's house to look at their problems and I see five gallon
buckets all over the place catching water, and I go to the Newfoundland and
Labrador Housing Corporation and present the case to them, and a man looks up at
me and says: That is not an urgent repair. Does this man have to move out of his
house? I said: No, the man cannot afford to move out. He has to live in that
house. Well, sorry, we can't help him .
Mr. Speaker, that presents health care problems.
One particular man was on social services and had so many problems with his
House that he took a heart attack. I went back to the department again and
asked: What can you do for this man? He was under so much stress that he took a
heart attack and now he is in the hospital. They said: Sorry, we still cannot
help this man. I said: If he is coming back to live in that house, then we need
something done for him. Sorry, we have no money. Our budget ran out.
This is one of the incidents I alluded to earlier, where a person should be
looked at on the merits and a person should be -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MHA.
MR. HUNTER: They have a good MHA. Probably we need something done in the
department.
I say that if we do not look at these people individually, and look at their
circumstances, then there is going to be more of a burden on our health care;
because if the department had to spend probably $3,000 or $4,000 to help this
man with his problems, to alleviate the stress that he had, he probably would
not been in the hospital costing thousands and thousands of dollars per day.
If an ounce of prevention could stop this kind of stuff, I think it is
important that we go back to the housing issue, go back to the minister - I have
talked to him on this issue before - and see where we can put more money into
that system so that we can help these people with their problems, to alleviate
other problems that come after this. I do not know about the rest of the areas
or regions in Newfoundland, but I know that the central region is pretty
desperate right now. The hon. minister knows that herself, and the hon. minister
from Exploits knows that himself.
AN HON. MEMBER: What did you say?
MR. HUNTER: With the desperate situation of urgent repair -
AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, no.
MR. HUNTER: Oh, no? I meet with housing on a regular basis on behalf of
my constituents, and the manager there tells me -
MS THISTLE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
On a point of order, the hon. the President of Treasury Board.
MS THISTLE: I would like to respond to the statement just made by the
Member for Windsor-Springdale. He is quite inaccurate in his comments in saying
how there is a desperate situation in Central Newfoundland regarding
Newfoundland and Labrador Housing RRAP program. Central Newfoundland is well
served by Newfoundland and Labrador Housing.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order.
The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.
MR. HUNTER: (Inaudible) is
what I was talking to. The minister knows, herself, and the hon. minister from
Exploits knows, himself, the problems we have in that regional office. If he
doesn't know, then he is not in his district; he doesn't know what is going
on in this district about the Urgent Repair Program in the central regional
office of Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation. If you don't know
that, you are out of touch with your district.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. HUNTER: I am talking about the Urgent Repair Program in the regional
district, in Central Newfoundland. If I am getting dozens of calls every week,
and sometimes every day, then you are getting them and every minister is getting
them. There is no point in phoning the minister -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. HUNTER: Mr. Speaker, they know I am telling the truth. I do not have
to try to defend what I am saying because they know the truth. They are just
trying to throw me off track. Maybe I am not that good at presenting the case
right now but, I tell you, I am going to be around here for a long time.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HUNTER: And I am going to get better at it. If I can shut anybody up
who is trying to present something that is not true, I will do it.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. HUNTER: I am going to be a long-term member, I am sorry to tell you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. HUNTER: I have to say to the hon. Member for Exploits, if he is
looking for my support for the leadership, I think he had better be very careful
of what he is saying. I could remind the hon. minister that he never had that
great of a victory in the last election.
AN HON. MEMBER: What bill are you speaking on?
MR. HUNTER: Bill 27.
AN HON. MEMBER: What is the name of it?
MR. HUNTER: Don't you have
it there? Have you got it there? I know what it is; do you know what it is?
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. HUNTER: I will get back to speaking again.
I can still come up with a lot of circumstances, incidences where people
require better health care services. It is not everybody who can afford to come
into St. John's and get the services that they require. I get many calls from
people who need to come out here for services and surgeries and they find it
very difficult paying the money to get here. When they get here, there is
nowhere to stay. They have to come up with extra money, trying to get places in
hotels, hostels, and everything.
I think, if we are going to supply a service, we have to look the other
aspect of that service. It is not only to get the bed and get the person in the
bed; it is to get them there from the outlying areas of Newfoundland and
Labrador where it is very difficult to get from their home to a facility where
they need the services.
That brings back to mind the dialysis for areas of Newfoundland and Labrador
where people have to really put themselves out on a limb and financially strap
themselves to get to where they need these services. I must admit, we don't
have that problem in Grand Falls-Windsor, but there are certainly a lot of other
areas in Newfoundland and Labrador today where we should be looking at supplying
that service - thanks to a person who died, because they never had the service.
I could give you lots of news clippings, hon. minister, to prove that if it
was not for this gentleman, who put his life on the line, who gave up his life
for the fight for dialysis, that probably would have never happened. It was only
because of public pressure and this one particular person whom we all know of,
and I certainly have to respect what he did when he was alive.
It is very important, but we do not want that to happen any more. These
things cannot continue to go on. When someone has to get in their vehicle and
drive for four, five or six hours to get to a facility for dialysis, that is
ridiculous in this day and age. I realize and understand the situation where we
are all spread out so much and we cannot have big, major hospitals everywhere,
but there have to be some things like that which we can have at a reasonably
close distance.
There are a lot of other things in our social programs that really concern
people in the rural areas of Newfoundland and Labrador, particularly other
services when it comes to paying bills and paying for licence fees and stuff
like that, when people have the same problems they have in the health care
system. They still have to drive long distances and they still have to rely on
us, as politicians, sometimes to help them with their problems, when they find
little problems in their particular situations where
they need us to go on their behalf to find out the problem and help them with
the problem. I don't mind doing that. I realize that is part of my job, and I
enjoy doing that part of the job. I certainly wouldn't turn anybody away
because I felt that their problem wasn't important enough for me; because I
take every problem, every phone call, no matter how big or how small it is. I
regard that problem as the biggest one that person could have. It is my job to
work on their behalf, and I do that .
I don't mind getting up here and saying to the hon. people on the other
side that it is all of our jobs to service our constituents the best way we can.
In order to do that, we have to have facilities, we have to have programs, and
we have to have some compassion on the part of government to sit down and look
at these problems and say: Yes, maybe this is not in our policy but we have to
look at this case on an individual basis and do something for that person. That
person has worked all of their life , paid into our system,
paying taxes, and expects some day that when I need, and when they need our
system, when they need our government to do something for them, they expect it
done. Dollars do not make any difference to people who need the service. I think
it is important that we recognize that fact. Even though we do not have a money
tree here, there are a lot of things that we could be doing and there are a lot
of things that we should be doing to help people in their time of need. The time
of need to them is most important to them. It may not seem much to us, as
politicians, but to them it is a very big need. It is very important that they
have someone to talk to and someone to go to.
Mr. Speaker, that is why I am not against the Ombudsman. I think there are
times when I cannot do stuff, when other people cannot do things, and the
problems are so great that I think an Ombudsman - it would be great to have him.
Half-a-million dollars or less, whatever it is, I think could be a better
benefit to us and save millions and millions if the Ombudsman was there in
place; a third person for that person to go to. We cannot always go to a
minister because we do not get the right answers and we do not get the right
reaction to the problems that we present to them. There is somewhere else that
we should go. We need somewhere else to go. People need somewhere to go and
someone to talk to so that, when they do not get satisfaction from government,
they could have someone to go and present their case to the government, to make
sure that their needs, their services and their requirements - that are just as
important to the person they are talking to as they are to themselves.
I think that hon. ministers sometimes overlook the fact that these problems
are very important. No matter what district you are in, no matter what
situation, no matter what area or what department you are dealing with, every
problem is an important problem. I think the Ombudsman would certainly be a good
way to deal with some of these things.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. member's time is up.
MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It was certainly a pleasure to speak to the House today.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.
MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I could speak to the health care with a great
degree of emotion, with a great degree of passion, but I hope that I do not
revert to emotion. I want to use rationality and talk about it from the
knowledge that I have gained over the last two years. I expect there is not a
member in this House who has been more associated with the health care than I,
not on a provincial basis but more on a national basis, in the last two years.
I want to say this: The greatest lesson that I learned in politics in 1975,
from a leader, an opposition leader, - a great lesson I learned, and one that I
practiced right throughout the twenty-three years that I have been in politics -
I had come upon, by fluke and by accident, that the Public Utilities Board was
going to increase, or had given approval to Newfoundland Light and Power to
increase the rates by 10 per cent and the Cabinet was about to approve it. I
thought this was a great story, that the PUB had approved the application - it
was not as wide open as they are today - that the PUB had approved the
application for a 10 per cent increase and the Cabinet was about to approve it.
I wanted to get going on this, and it became a big issue at the time. My
leader said: Tom, you know, we are going to be in government one day and we are
going to have to grant increases to Newfoundland Light and Power, so be very
careful. When you are going to say something to condemn the government, do not
say anything that is irresponsible. Do not say anything that is going to come
back and fly in your face; because, when we sit in government as sure as you are
sitting in front of me, we are going to give increases to Newfoundland Light and
Power, and by condemning it you are raising the expectations of the people of
this Province unnecessarily by saying: When we get in government we are not
going to do that, and that is not about to happen.
I called my press conference. I gave the essence of what was going on, but
the point of the matter was it was a great lesson. Every time I was to do
something publicly, I always operated on that basis. You are going to be in
government one day. Make sure what you say now is not going to affect what you
do then, and that what you say now is not going to have the affect of
unnecessarily giving the wrong impression to the public, of unnecessarily
raising the expectations of the public.
MR. TULK: Playing on their emotions.
MR. LUSH: I would say,
playing on people's emotions, and to a large degree, their lack of
information.
Mr. Speaker, in health, where can we go? What is a good health system? What
is it that we are looking for? Are we looking for the whole range of health
services that we can offer the people of this Province? I suggest it is like
education. We go out and we give misinformation about education. There is only a
certain level that we can reach in this Province. We talk about quality
education in our small communities, and how we must do this, and how it must
apply to what we doing; and what we offer in the urban areas must be the same as
what we offer in the rural areas. By talking about this sometimes we give
misinformation. We could be talking about quality education; we confuse that
with quantity.
We have to honest in those things. There are things that we cannot do in
education on a provincial basis. In some specialities we have to go to other
provinces. Why have we not done law in this university? Why have we not granted
law degrees? Because we felt it is a luxury we cannot afford. So people have to
go to other universities in other places in Canada and in other parts of the
world to do that. We had to do it in medicine until a Liberal government brought
in a School of Medicine. We thought that was an absolute necessity. So this is
what we do. We do it on a basis of priority, and there are certain things we
cannot do in this Province. There are certain things that we cannot afford. In
education, in health, and right throughout the whole field of human endeavor,
there are things we cannot do. We have to evaluate what it is that we can do,
what are the absolute necessities, and do them well.
Some of the issues that I have heard raised in terms of condemning health, I
could have done it when I was over there twenty years ago. The same things: a
waiting list, trying to get in to the hospital. I'm not suggesting that
everything is perfect. There are some areas when our waiting lists are too long.
Again, I'm talking about exercising the obligation of people in public office,
elected office, exercising responsibility. Yes, there are some areas where the
waiting list is too long. There are other areas where we
rank right up there in terms of efficiency with other provinces in Canada.
I have heard people talking about patients in a room in a hospital not being
able to get this and not being able to get that immediately, or having to wait
an hour. I can tell hon. members, I have waited many hours. Many I have spent,
many wrenching hours, and the only thing that could have solved that was a
private nurse. Had I been able to afford a private nurse, I would have had a
private nurse for the last two years. The only place in Canada, the only place
in our hospitals where we get twenty-four hour surveillance, is in intensive
care. That is the only place in the whole - I do not but if it is the only place
in the whole of the world. Once you come out of intensive care you are
downgraded. You get downgraded to where you are not required to have service
every hour, and you can make it, and you can call. Everybody expects that there
is going to have to be a little wait. That is the way it is right throughout the
country. I suggest that is the way it is right throughout the world.
AN HON. MEMBER: North America.
MR. LUSH: North America, certainly. We will never get into a situation
where there is going to be somebody there all the time once we are out of
intensive care and gradually downgraded. To give that impression, that we have a
nurse on call the minute you press your button, is giving the wrong message, Mr.
Speaker.. It is absolutely irresponsible.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. LUSH: I have gone to
waiting rooms, hospitals in Manitoba, in the Isle of Man, in Bombay, India, in
Churchill Falls and in St. John's, and I have never seen one yet that I never
had to sit down in a waiting room and wait my turn. I never ever saw it, Mr.
Speaker. People expect that. It may have been, it may stem from, a certain
arrogance that doctors themselves have established by making you and I wait for
appointments. All hon. members here can walk in and see the doctor when they
like? I have gone in, and the system is they call you in.
Come in tomorrow at 9:00 a.m., and you go in at 11:00 a.m. That is a certain
arrogance established by the medical profession that has to be stopped.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, that flows into the hospital. They think sometimes
they are the only people who work. I have a job, and I told my doctor. If he
wants to see me at 9:00 a.m., he sees me at 9:00 a.m. I have a job. There is no
necessity to keep me in that office until 11:00 a.m. I think that kind of
arrogance is a structural thing and that they do not probably do it as quickly
as they should.
For what we do in this Province, my observance has been this. As I have said,
I have waited in Winnipeg when to me it was an utmost emergency, but I could not
see the doctor or the nurse. That is the way it is. If we get to the position
where nobody has to wait anymore, hon. members will use not the total provincial
treasury, but they will use the total federal treasury, if we have to get to
that position in health care where we are going to get admitted when we want,
when we are going to get people to attend to people when we want. It is an
irresponsible position to take, and hon. member have an obligation to be
responsible.
Having said that, let me tell you, having waited in hospitals all my life,
outside of this Province and inside, let me tell you this: I would rather wait
inside this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. LUSH: I spent three agonizing months in Winnipeg. I do not want to
get on to that to much. Let me tell you, it was a welcome day when I got back
here in Newfoundland. I tell you this, after the three months in the Health
Sciences - I did not have to wait three months - my wife and I concluded that
what we do in the Health Sciences we do as well and better than anywhere else in
Canada.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. LUSH: What we have in this Province, Mr. Speaker, more than anywhere
else that I have been, among our nurses and our doctors, is compassion. It is
compassion, and we found that along with knowledge in the areas in which they
work.
Hon. members do a discredit. I tell you from my own experience, I did not
want to come back to Newfoundland, though there was a great hurry by the doctors
in Winnipeg to push us out of the hospital. They did not want us there when they
knew we were from Newfoundland. That is a fact. I did not want to come to
Newfoundland because I said: According to what I hear about our health system,
we do not want to go back there. We want to give our son the very best. Because
of the public pronouncements I had heard, I thought our health service was not
worth a plugged nickel. I pled with them not to come back. Talking to officials
here, they guaranteed me. They said: Mr. Lush, we can look after your son at the
level that he is at as well as anywhere in Canada. I came and found out that
they were absolutely true. I said: Where is all of this information coming from
about our health care not being worth a plugged nickel? If I thought that, a
person who is supposedly intelligent, what are the rest of our people thinking?
Where is it coming from?
I tell hon. members they do the Province a disservice. We have one of the
best health care systems in the whole of the country
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. LUSH: What we do in this Province we do as well and better than
anywhere else in Canada. It is time that we acknowledged that.
AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!
MR. LUSH: Yes, of course we need some refinement, of course there is room
for improvement, of course we can have more speciality areas, of course we need
to keep paying our doctors a good salary so that we can attract them into this
Province. We need to pay our nurses a good salary, but the notion being used in
Newfoundland today that nurses and doctors are leaving because of the salary and
going to the U.S. - they are leaving every other province in Canada and going to
the U.S.! They are leaving Ontario, they are leaving New Brunswick, they are
leaving P.E.I. and they are leaving Nova Scotia, all for the same reason: being
underpaid. It is a national problem and should be addressed in a national
manner.
Hon. members forget - they use it politically - that the federal government,
for a number of years, participated in a big way in giving to this Province
money for social services, health and education. In 1990, we came to the
realization that we had to wrestle the deficit and the debt to the ground,
otherwise Canada was headed for a bankruptcy position if we did not do this.
Countries in the Western world, all of them, acknowledged that we had been on
one large spending spree and we had to stop. The federal government reduced its
spending to this Province dramatically. Hundreds of millions of dollars were
taken from health, education and social services. The wonder was that we were
able to keep it going as well as we did. The wonder was that we were able to
maintain the kind and quality of level of services that we provided our people.
It was great pain, it was a great struggle. Of course, what happened? Those in
the position of not having to exercise that responsibility, those in the
position of not having to care about the deficit and the debt, started jumping
on the government. They wanted it done but they criticized those who were doing
it.
That is what I talk about being responsible. I know the role of the
Opposition. I spent enough time there, more than most members over there. I was
there for thirteen years. As I said, there comes a point when we have to realize
what is responsible. I think yesterday was the first time since we got into what
we call the surplus position. We are not in a surplus position, believe you me.
We are only in a surplus position in terms of the deficit, not in terms of the
debt. I don't know if hon. memb ers understand that
jargon. We are only in a surplus in the sense of the deficit, and not in sense
of the debt.
If hon. members want a delineation, a distinction between them, I will tell
them what it is. Let's take your monthly salary, for example. If you get
$2,000 a month and you are spending $2,200 you have yourself in a deficit. That
is $200 a month in the deficit.
MR. FITZGERALD: Go back to the bill! Relevance, Mr. Speaker! We do not
need lectures from that hon. member about what the debt of this Province is all
about!
MR. SPEAKER (Oldford): Order, please!
MR. FITZGERALD: Get back to the bill (inaudible).
MR. LUSH: I tell the hon. member -
MR. FITZGERALD: (Inaudible)
a kickoff to the member's campaign for Bonavista-Trinity-Conception, this is
not the day to do it, I say to hon. members here in the House.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. LUSH: If the hon. gentleman has made a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I
will speak to the point of order.
MR. SPEAKER: No, he did not.
MR. TULK: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Government House Leader, on a point of order.
MR. TULK: This bill is about changing the name of the nurses union and so
on in the Province, and the people over there are speaking to the principle of
the bill. I want to inform them that this side has sat and listened to them
criticize the government, criticize the health care system, and we have listened
to them quietly -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. TULK: Here we go again. There we go again. When the hon. gentleman -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. TULK: When the hon. gentleman from Terra Nova stands up and makes a
very impassioned speech, makes a very logic speech and a very sensible speech,
and when the truth starts to come out then we get the member from Bonavista
being called in to try and interrupt the hon. gentleman from speaking. So, on
behalf -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. TULK: On behalf of my colleague from Tera Nova, who is too much of a
gentleman to ask anybody for protection, I would ask the Chair to protect him
from the hon. gentleman on the other side.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
There is no point of order.
Are you rising on a new point of order?
MR. FITZGERALD: On a new point of order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.
MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, we have listened to the Member for Terra
Nova. He made a lot of sense and he was relevant to the bill when he talked
about hospital care and his experiences in dealing with it. It was a lesson
probably we all learned, but I say to the Member for Terra Nova that this side
over here does not need to take any lecture from him on what the deficit and the
debt of this Province is all about.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. FITZGERALD: If the member is going to speak to the bill, then let him
speak to the relevance of the bill and not lecture the House of Assembly.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
There is no point of order.
MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, a new point of order.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader, on a new point of
order.
MR. TULK: I was not going to interrupt, but the hon. gentleman is clearly
out (inaudible) how this bill is relevant to what we can spend in the Province.
MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Terra Nova.
MR. LUSH: In a recent poll conducted, it was discovered that 80 per cent
of Canadians did not know the difference between the deficit and the debt.
Unless the hon. member is in the higher IQ of society, he is among those.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. LUSH: Eighty percent did not know the difference in the debt and the
deficit. I would suggest that there may be some among the 80 per cent in this
House, on both sides. There may be some.
The deficit, because this is relevant to this bill, I want to tell how health
fits into this. The deficit is - using the argument that if a person makes
$2,000 a month and spends $2,200, that is $200 of a deficit. Out of that money,
of course, they bought cars and fridges; so that continues next month, the same
thing. They spend $2,100 and now there is another $100 deficit. If you went on
like that for twelve months, when you total all of those deficits, that is your
debt. When you total those deficits, that is your debt.
All we have done with the budget is balance our books for the year. We have
not addressed that debt that we have. All of those deficits that we have built
up over the years, accumulated into the large debt, we have not addressed that
at all. All we have done is balance our books. Our income and our expenditures
are equal for that year, but we have not addressed the debt. Canada's debt at
this moment is $583 billion, and ours is -
AN HON. MEMBER: Six point five.
MR. LUSH: Six point five.
We are talking about a surplus now, and what we should do is spend that money
in one of three ways: debt reduction, tax reduction, or spending on the services
that governments spend their money on.
In the last little while, I have taken that as an objective of mine, asking
the federal government to start now spending money in services, spending money
on education, spending money on health, and I would hope that hon. members would
help me in my fight. I would hope that hon. members will join me, understanding
that we really have not gotten to a position of a surplus that we would like to
be in. So what is the reasonable approach? What is the reasonable approach?
Being a political centrist, my suggestion is that we have to take a
three-pronged approach. We have to do a little tax reduction, we have to do a
little debt reduction, and we have to spend a little more on services - social
services, education and health. The only way we are going to reach a reasonable
proximity of the level of services that hon. members opposite are advocating for
health is that the federal government has to get back into funding. They have to
get back into helping the Province. They have to get back into giving the
funding that they were giving in the 1980s and the 1970s.
We have to get back to that level of funding. Then we may be able to reach
some degree of the kind of expectations that hon. members have been creating for
health. That is where we have to go. I have never heard them call upon the
federal government to increase their spending in those areas. I have never heard
hon. members say, now this is what we have to do, that we are in a surplus
position. The Province has made great effort. The Province has made tremendous
effort. It spent $1.2 billion this year out of a budget of $3.5 billion.
Mr. Speaker, what kind of an effort is that? Are hon. members saying they are
going to spend $2 billion on health? Because that is where they are going to
have to go. Yes, and more than that. That is where they are going to have to go
to be able to live up to the expectations that they have created in the public.
The waiting list I can accept, the general waiting list to get into hospital,
but when they start talking about bedside attendance, almost twenty-four hours,
no lineups in an emergency room, all this kind of thing. If they were ever to
rid the Province of all of that stuff, as I said earlier, I think they would
need the federal Treasury to be able to give us that kind of a service.
Mr. Speaker, I again say that we have to have a degree of responsibility, and
what they have done is created the attitude in Newfoundland that our health care
is the worst in Canada, that our health care is not worth talking about. That is
the kind of attitude they have spread, and that is not correct. We have a high
level of health care, as I have said, the best in the country in what we do.
There are some things we do not do, there are some things we will not do, and
there are some things we will never be able to do, but what we have to look at
is taking care of the most prominent, the most occurring, health care needs in
the Province, and do that well.
When you look at the kind of money that this government has spent over the
last several years, in the Tobin Administration in particular, I think we have
come from something like $980 million to now $1.2 billion. If you subtract that,
you will find out that was a tremendous increase, a tremendous effort by this
government.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
MR. LUSH: They need to be commended, and the people of Newfoundland need
to know that we have tremendous health care in this Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!
MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, a point of order.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
The hon. the Opposition House Leader, on a point of order.
MR. SULLIVAN: A point of order on information that was portrayed that was
not accurate.
We have come there because the Department of Health and Community Services
had taken over divisions from Human Resources and Employment. They had taken
over Family Rehabilitative Services, Youth Corrections, Child Protection. These
areas that have been taken over have been responsible for a significant portion
of the increase, and some things are not accurate. It is the money inefficiently
spent in the system. Forty per cent, Maclean's
Magazine says, is inappropriately spent. It is not
that it is necessarily more money; it is that you have to start spending right.
I will get the examples in the House next week in Question Period on how it is
inappropriately spent, I say.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
There is no point of order.
MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman -
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!
Is the Government House Leader rising on a new point of order?
MR. TULK: Yes, Mr. Speaker, on a new point of order.
MR. SPEAKER: Okay, the hon. the Government House Leader, on a point of
order.
MR. TULK: It is customary in this House to go back and forth, but I will
raise a new one.
Mr. Speaker, let me say to the hon. gentleman that he cannot have it both
ways. He has made his speech. The hon. gentleman from Terra Nova is making his.
He has listed -
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!
MR. TULK: They are interrupting again. They are at it again. They are
over there - I was going to use a word that I cannot use.
The truth is that this government has increased spending, I say to the hon.
gentleman, and if he cannot swallow it quietly, and if he cannot take his
medicine quietly, he should walk out through that door. Be a gentleman. Take
your medicine quietly. If you are going to dish it out, take it quietly, I say
to the hon. gentleman. Be a man. This is not a hockey game. He is not in the
bleachers.
Let me list off for him - I will give the list back to the hon. gentleman -
MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible).
MR. TULK: The hockey game is on again. He believes he is in the Southern
Shore arena, playing hockey. Look, there he goes. The hon. gentlem