Manitoba Hansard — 98 ISSN 542 (Sitting 29A, 36th Legislature, 4th Session)

36-4-29a

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

Fourth Session - Thirty-Sixth Legislature of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba DEBATES and PROCEEDINGS Official Report (Hansard) Published under the authority of The Honourable Louise M. Dacquay Speaker Vol. XLVIII No. 29A- 10 a.m., Thursday, April9, 1998 ISSN 0542-5492

Member ASHTON, Steve BARRETT, Becky CERILLI, Marianne CHOMIAK, Dave CUMMINGS, Glen, Hon. DACQUA Y, Louise, Hon. DERKACH, Leonard, Hon. DEWAR, Gregory DOER, Gary DOWNEY, James, Hon. DRIEDGER, Albert DYCK, Peter ENNS, Harry, Hon. EVANS, Clif EVANS, Leonard S. FAURSCHOU, David FILMON, Gary, Hon. FINDLAY, Glen, Hon. FRIESEN, Jean GAUDRY, Neil GILLESHAMMER, Harold, Hon. HEL WER, Edward HICKES, George JENNISSEN, Gerard KOWALSKI, Gary LAMOUREUX, Kevin LATHLIN, Oscar LAURENDEAU, Marcel MACKINTOSH, Gord MALOWA Y, Jim MARTINDALE, Doug McALPINE, Gerry McCRAE, James, Hon. McGIFFORD, Diane MciNTOSH, Linda, Hon.

MIHYCHUK, MaryAnn MITCHELSON, Bonnie, Hon. NEWMAN, David, Hon. PENNER, Jack PITURA, Frank, Hon. PRAZNIK, Darren, Hon. RADCLIFFE, Mike, Hon. REID, Daryl REIMER, Jack, Hon. RENDER, Shirley ROBINSON, Eric ROC AN, Denis SALE. Tim SANTOS, Conrad STEFANSON, Eric, Hon. STRUTHERS, Stan SVEINSON. Ben TOEWS, Vic, Hon. TWEED, Mervin VODREY. Rosemary, Hon. WOWCHUK, Rosann Vacant MANITOBA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Thirty-Sixth Legislature Constituency Thompson Wellington Radisson Kildonan Ste.

Rose Seine River Roblin-Russell Selkirk Concordia Arthur-Virden Steinbach Pembina Lakeside Interlake Brandon East Portage Ia Prairie Tuxedo Springfield Wolseley St. Boniface Minnedosa Gimli Point Douglas Flin Flon The Maples Inkster The Pas St. Norbert St. Johns Elmwood Burrows Sturgeon Creek Brandon West Osborne Assiniboia St. James River East Riel Emerson Morris Lac du Bonnet River Heights Transcona Niakwa St. Vital Rupertsland Gladstone Crescent wood Broadway Kirkfield Park Dauphin La Verendrye Ross mere Turtle Mountain Fort Garry Swan River Charleswood Political Affiliation N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C.

P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. Lib. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. Lib. Lib. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. P.C. N.D.P. P.C. N.D.P. N.D.P. P.c.· N.D.P. P.C. P.C. P.C. P.C. N.D.P.

1401 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thur sday, April 9, 1998 The House met at 10 a.m. PRAYERS ORDERS OF THE DAY Hon. James McCrae (Govern ment House Leader): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Min ister ofl ndustry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Downey), that Madam Speaker do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a commit tee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Motion agreed to. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY (Concurrent Sections) LABOUR Mr. Chairperson (Gerry McAlpine): Order, please. Will the Comm ittee of Supply please come to order. This

section of the Commit tee of Supply will be considering the Estimates of the Department of Labour. Does the honourable Mi nister of Labour have an opening statement? Hon. Har old Gilleshammer (Minister of Labour): I do. It is my privi lege to present the Expenditur e Estima tes of the Department of Labour for fiscal year 1998-99. I believe we had a succe ssful year last year working with the labour-management community. I want to start by commending my staff, the staff in the department.

They are dedi cated and hard-working professionals who are under the very capable leadership of my deputy min ister, Tom Farrell, and provide valuable services to the citizens of Manit oba. I would like to thank them for their efforts. I particularly would like to acknowledge the appoin tments of two of my senior staff to national comm ittees. My deputy minis ter, Tom Farrell, sits as the president of the Canadian Association of Adminis trators of Labour Legislation.

Tom Farrell also particip ated as a member of the Canadian delegation to the first co-operative activity organized under the Canada-Chili Agreement on labour co-operation. This activity took place January 7-9 of this year in San Diego and focused on labour standards and occupational safety and health. Geoff Bowden, executive director of the Workpla ce Safety and Health Division has been appointed chair of the hazardous materials information review committee. This commit tee deals with issues under the hazardous materials legislation.

For 1998-99, the total budget request for the Department of Labour is $13.13 9 million, representing an increase of 4 percent from the previous year. This increase largely reflects the salary increases for staff of the department under recently negotiated collective agreements, and the net increase in costs associated with the implementation of a government-wide desktop management strategy.

The Department of Labour will be one of the first departments to be transitioned to the new desktop envir onment that will eventually see all government computer users using standard computer work stations and related software. This desktop initiative will when fully implemented provide the Manitoba government with an infrastructure capable of supporting government-wide corporate initiatives in a reliable cost effective, secure and flexible manner. * (1010 ) The Department of Labour recovers a significant proportion of its annual expenditures through its various sources of revenue.

In 1998-99, the department projects to recover about 65 percent of its total budget as revenue. As Minis ter of Labour, last year I had the opportunity to be part of an important international initiative with Manitoba's signing of the Canadian Intergovernmental Agreement on the North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation. This will enable Manit oba to partici pate fully and directly in the implementation,

1402 LEGIS LATI VE AS SEM BLY OF MANIT OBA April 9, 19 98 management and further development of the North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation. Manitoba's Wally Fox-Decent has been appointed chai r of the newly established national advisory committee created under the Canadian Inter governmental Agreement. The advisory committee will provide indep endent advice and recommendations on the implementation and further development of the North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation to the governmental committee of labour min isters which is managing Canada's involvement in the NAALC.

As memb ers are aware, amendments to four acts were enacted in 19 97. The Workplace Safety and Health Act was amended to provide for a tenfold increase in fine levels under this legislation. This change reflects the unanimous recommendations of the Advis ory Council on Workplace Safety and Health. The council is comprised of members representing workers, employers and technical organizations. The Pension Benefits Act was altered to clarify the legal respo nsi bili ties of administrators, trustees and agents as to the administration of pension plans and to enhance enforcement and penalty provisions of the act.

These changes represent a positive step towards creating an environment that promotes the expansion and establishment of employer-sponsored pension plans, as well as ensuring that benefits of plan members are adequately protected. The Retail Busi nesses Holi day Closing Act was changed to enable a more timely and efficient approach for special exemption permits by authorizing ways for establish ments to obtain permits through special exemptions issued by the Minis ter of Labour without requiring the authorization of the Lieu tenant Governor in Council.

The Steam and Pressure Plants Act was amended to elimin ate the regular two-year inspection requirement for pressure vessels under the provincial act when these pressure vessels are subject to inspection under federal transportation of dangerous goods legislation. This has resulted in elim inating duplication of inspections without reducing safety requirements. I also am pleased to inform you that a new Employment Standards Code has been introduced in the Ho use. This code will consoli date, streamline, simplifY and update three existing, separate but related employment standards acts.

These existing acts contain many provisions and procedures that are redundant, outdated or inconsis tent. At times, this has made it diffi cult for employees and employers to understand their rights and oblig ations under the legislation. To address this situation, an undertaking to develop a new consolidated code was initia ted in 19 96, in consultation with Legislative Counsel. The new code restructures and streamlines the legislation to make it easier to understand, and amend or elimin ate outdated prov isio ns. As well, amendments have been made to enable more efficient and effective enforcement of the law.

This new code also incorporates recommendations made by the Manit oba Labour Management Review Committee. I am very grateful to the comm ittee for its hard work, dedi cation and advice which contributed signifi cantly to improving this important legislative init iative. I am also pleased to inform you that the government will be proceeding with the review of the general minimu m wage in Manitoba. In preparation fo r this, I have already asked employer and employee representatives to provide nominees for membership on the Mi nimum Wage Board.

Once I have received the names of persons to serve, I will be reconstituting the board, and asking it to meet to receive submissions from interested parties, and to make recommendations to me on changes to the mi nimu m wage. I would like to recognize the important work undertaken and contributions made by the department's external advisory committees such as the Advis ory Council on Workplace Safety and Health, the Manitoba Pension Commis sion and the Labour Management Review Comm ittee.

The time and efforts of all commit tee members are very much appreciated, and on behalf of the province I would like to thank all the members for their advice and assistance. Si nce 19 89, the Department of Labour has been pursuing a strategy of change, improvement and innovation. One element of the strategy was the devel opment of a performance measurement and reporting framework feedback measures. Measurement and results-based performance have become an integral element of program and service delivery within

April 9, 19 98 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA 14 03 Manitoba Labour. Last year the department built on its performance measurement efforts by addressing future strategic issues through a busi ness planning approach. Manitoba Labour was one of three government departments to pilot Treasury Board's business planning and performance measurement init iative known as Manitoba Measures.

Another element of Manitoba Labour's commitment to change over the past several years has been its continuous improvement approach, which has assisted the department in focusing on both improving and re engineering services and programs.

Other examples of innovations last year include the redesign of workplace safety and health training courses and materials based on client feedback, more time ly resolution of employment standards claims, sectoral targeting of program acti vities such as inspections, audits and public education and improved client and public access to program and service information through the Internet, and other on-line services. Buil ding on the successes of these init iatives, the department is taking further steps to be forward thinking to serve Manitobans better.

Senior department officia ls have been directly involved in the better methods and better systems ini tiatives which are designed to change government-wide business processes and systems. As part of the better systems ini tiative, the Department of Labour has established a team to examine and redesign its inspections processes in order to provide improved, more efficient services to Manitoba workplaces. The Department of Labour is also a pilot department for the government-wide desktop management initiative.

All these init iatives are in keeping with the department's vision, mission and strategic directions for the next three-to five-year period. In

summary, over the next five years the department will continue to pursue change that will result in improved quality, efficiency and relevance in programs and services, emphasized prevention, public education and dispute resolution strategies as a means to support effective administration of our legislative mandates, allocate resources on a risk assessment and value-added basis and increase emphasis on clarifying responsibilit y among stakeholders. * (1 020) I would now like to highlight a few of the achievements and plans of departmental programs.

The Workplace Safety and Health Division embarked on the business inspections project where it is looking at re engineering its systems and data collection processes to make them more accessible and useful to field staff. The divisio n is looking at how to place enhanced information about firms to be inspected on field staff computers to enable inspectors to have better client information available at the worksite. Program activ ities are being operated so as to encourage employers and workers to identif y and solve their own health and safety problems effectively.

Communic ations with clients are emphasizing the internal responsibil ity system and each party's role in ensuring saf e and healthy workplaces. More resources are being allocated to the high-risk, high-cost hazards in industries. Mechani cal & Engineering Branch has catalogued all inspection vio lations for boilers. The branch is also in the process of reassessing its inspection workload by location and size of boiler.

This will enable the branch to maximize its inspection activities with respect to higher hazard boil ers and steam plants by isolating any high-risk trends that may be occurring and ini tiating corrective actions before problems occur. The Workplace Safety and Health Branch has identified foundries as one of the sectors in manufacturing where a high incidence of accidents are occurring. Proactive programs which target the prevention of illness and injuries will be deli vered in 19 98-99 to improve the general awareness of safety and health issues.

The program deli very will include meeting with safety and health committees, conducting audits and establishing a partnership with the American foundry society, Manitoba chapter. The Min es Inspection Branch developed for all chief mine inspectors a national registry of mi ne rescue capabilities for Canada. This is being placed on the Internet and the information ci rculated to all mines in Canada. The Occupation al Health Branch is involved with hospitals and doctors in Manitoba as part of the

14 04 LEGlSL A TIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA April 9, 19 98 development of a national database on farm injury statistics. Mani toba's pilot was the model for the national system. The Employment Standards Division continues to integrate a risk management approach into all of its functional areas. The division also continues to increase its efforts to resolve claims and issues quickly and in a nonconfrontational manner.

The Employment Standards Branch's efforts to resolve claims timely and efficie ntly has been showing positive results: 35 percent of all claims are resolved in less than 30 days and 80 percent of claims are settled without the need for formal action. This has been achieved by providing alternative methods for claim resolution where appropriate. A quick resolution process is offered at the inquiry intake stage of a complaint, with 12 percent of all claims successfully resolved at this level.

Another method used to resolve disputes is the Alternative Dis pute Resolution process, which has resulted in a 50 percent decrease in the number of di sputes which otherwise would have gone to the Manitoba Labour Board for adjudic ation. Labour Board referrals are now down to less than 2 percent of all filed employment standards claims. Feedback from clients suggests that both employees and employers who use the Alternative Dispu te Resolution service are highly satisfied with this service.

These services have allowed the branch to reallocate more resources to high-risk areas and various preventative initia tives. As part of its Community Adjustment services the Employment Standards Branch has continued with labour adjustment services to Pinawa and expanded services to Bi ssett, Manigotagan and Seymourville areas. In supporting activities such as needs assessment interviews, regional labour markets sector analysis, investigation of retraining options and partnering in community health initia tives, the branch assists these communities in mitigating the effects of downsizing.

The Employment Standards Branch recognizes that youth are a higher-risk employee group. The branch is working with other jurisdictions of the Canadian Association of Adminis trators of Labour Legislation to develop baseline information in this area. This project will assist the branch in targeting preventative programs to young workers. The Worker Advisor office ensures that workers and their dependents receive the benefits to which they are entitled under The Workers Com pensation Act.

The office continues to focus on prov id ing more ti mely resolution of claims by concentrating efforts at the primary adjudic ation level of the WCB rather than the more lengthy levels of appeal. This effort has resulted in 76 percent of appealable issues being resolved at this level. The office has also been successful with their appeals where 58 percent of appeals to the review office were successful and 42 percent were successful at the appeal commis sion.

A Worker Advis or office-client survey revealed that 70 percent of clients responding to the survey were satisfied or very satisfied with how the worker advisors handled their issues. The Pension Commission continued its development of a risk management model for pension plans, which includes on-site inspections of admini strative and financial systems used by the employer, third party adminis trator and actuary. Staff received training in risk management examination procedures from the office of the Superintendent of Financia l Institutions.

The Manitoba Pension Commission has struck a strategic partnership with Revenue Canada to save clients time and money and to allow for one contact for the clients for the purpose of processing annual information returns. Prior to the partnership, clients had to file sim ilar information annually with both offices. Now clients only file one annual information return using the Manitoba Pension Commission as the entry point. Revenue Canada's information is processed by the commis sion staff and electronica lly transferred to Ottawa.

The Office of the Fire Comm issioner has completed its second year as a special operating agency, and I am pleased to announce that the Office of the Fir e Commis sioner has achieved a balanced budget. The Office of the Fir e Comm issioner completed the construction of a new state-of-the-art practical training site located next to the Brandon Ai rport. The training site is buil t primarily for the Manitoba fire service. This will allow for the training of firefighters under real fire scene conditions. Live bum experience training is a requirement for the National Fir e Protection Associa tion standards.

The private sector assis ted in the financing of this training site contributing in excess of $200,000. Several corporations donated products or

April 9, 19 98 LEGI SLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANIT OBA 14 05 services to this project. With this private sector assistance, construction of the practical training centre was completed within budget. Numerous partnerships have been developed over the years with opportunities for marketing both domestically and abroad. The Office of the Fir e Commis sion has established marketing contacts in Chile, Brazil and Argentina. The Office of the Fi re Commis sioner signed a memorandum of understanding with the University of Santiago, Chil e, on behalf of a consortium of educational institutions in Manitoba.

The goal of the consortium is to provide the Chilean market with custom training offerings using the University of Santiago as the medium. Conc iliation and Mediation Branch has a long tradition of facilit ating dis pute resolution. The branch seeks to enhance harmonious industrial relations in the province. Its services are seen as vital by labour and management. During 19 97-98, the Concilia tion and Med iation Branch was active in 23 1 grievance mediation and 13 3 conciliation assignments. Over 95 percent of the conciliation assignments were settled without a work stoppage.

The Manitoba Labour Board, as an independent and quasi-judic ial body, serves as a forum for the resolutio n of labour relations issues in a fair and reasonable manner and in a way that will be accepted by labour and management. The Manitoba Labo ur Board recently completed a review of bargaining structures in Mani toba's rural health care sector. The success of this process, due in no small part to the co-operative eff orts of both labour and management, will create uniformity and bargaining units within rural facilities.

The board is presently undertaking a sim ilar init iative with the urban health care authorities. The board has also successfully managed the transition dealing with the voti ng procedures in the certification process. Mr. Chairman, this completes my opening statement. I welcome a meani ngful and productive discussion of the Department of Labour Estima tes in the ensuing hours. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairperson: We thank the honourable minis ter for those comments. Does the critic for the offici al opposition, the honourable member for Transcona, have an opening statement? Mr.

Daryl Reid (Transcona): Thank you, Mr. Chair person, for the opportunity to add some comments. I have listened very closely to what the min ister said in his opening statement comments here today. To maximize the amount of time that we have towards the asking of questions of the subsections of the minister's department, I am going to be very brief in my comments. I have a number of questions with specific areas. As the minis ter might expect, those comments will be relating to activities of the Employment Standards Branch, Workplace Safety and Health, Fire Commis sioner.

I have some questions with respect to the minimum wage and actions in that regard and also dealing with mine safety. That is not to limi t my comments, because I have a number of questions. * (1 030) I do note though in opening that the minis ter has indic ated that his department is responsible, I believ e he said, for the desktop computer initiative for the government. I believe, if I understand him correctly, that is what he said. We will be having some questions in the opening in that area as well, looking at the cost factor that is associated or tied to that for his department itself .

So my two colleagues who are here with me today also have a few questions that will likely be taking place in the opening sections of the minister's Estimates here this morning, so I would be giving them the opportunity to ask their questions as well. With those few comments, Mr. Chai rperson, I am, with your will and pleasure, prepared to have the staff come to the table and begin the process. Mr. Cha irperson : I thank the critic for the official opposition for those comments.

Under Manitoba practice, debate of the Minis ter's Salary is traditiona lly the last item conside red for the Estima tes of a department. Accordi ngly we shall defer consi deratio n of this item and now proceed with the consi deration of the next line.

14 06 LEGI SLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANIT OBA April 9, 19 98 Before we do that, we would invite the minister's staff to join us at the table, and we ask the mini ster to introduce his staff present. Mr. Gilleshammer: Joining me at the table are Tom Farrell, who is the Deputy Min ister of Labour; Jim Nykoluk, the Assistant Deputy Minister of Labour; and Jim Wood, Director of Fi nancial Services. I have other staff from the various branches. If the questions are going to range into those areas, we would invite them to the table at the appropriate time. Mr. Cha irperson: I thank the min ister for those introductions. We will now proceed to line l l.l .(

b) of the Executive Support, Salaries and Employee Benefits, on page 10 2 of the Main Estimates book. Shall this item pass? Mr. Reid: I want to start in dealing with the issue of the computer desktop system initia tive that the government is now involved with. I have taken a look at the overall Estima tes document for the Department of Labour, and there is a substantial cost associated with the . involvement in this area. I would like to know-my questions will be regarding the savings, if any, that the department is going to realize as a result of this particular initia tive.

I would like to know of some of the capital costs that you have currently within your department dealing with computers, if you have an overall or a global budget figure for your department, that you would be involved both in the hardware and I would imagine the software side. Mr. Gillesham mer: Depending on how much detail you want to get into, this initiative is housed in Government Services in the Desktop Unit. We are one of three departments that are involved in some pi lot work.

So there is a unit within Government Services that probably can give you in more finite detail what you might be looking for, but the Departments of Government Services and Labour and Culture are the three departments that are piloting the project. Again, there is a Desktop Unit housed within the Department of Government Services, but there are some staffing changes that are reflected within our department. We have a net reduction of two full-time equiv alents which results in a salary cost reduction of almost $73 ,000.

Then, a total of$250,000 in additional funding has been included within what is called Other Expenditures, and this allocation crosses various branches within the department to cover the net additional costs of implementing the desktop manage ment init iative across the Department of Labour. The total costs of the desktop management are estima ted to be $475,000 for '98-99, while offsetting cost reductions are estimated at $225,000, leaving a net increase in expenditures of almost $250,000.

So I do not know if that is the general sort of information you are looking for or whether you want to get into some detail with the Desktop Management Unit within Government Services. Mr. Reid: I have done a calculation for the expenditures for the Department of Labour alone, of course, because I had the document avai lable to me. The mi nister's total, at least what he is showing in his budget document here, is a little over $472,000. So your budget, 475, obviously you are within that particular budget.

You are saying you are having an ongoing cost of $225, 000, or cost, I should say, above and beyond-Qr $25 0,000, pardon me, beyond what your antici pated savings are. Are there ongoing costs associated with this on an annual basis? What is going to be your annual figure that you have to expend for this particular service? Mr. Gillesha mm er: I am told that there will be changes ongoing with the development of the Desktop Unit, but the estima te of ongoing costs will be around $250,000. * (1 040) Mr. Reid: So, then, on an ongoing, in perpetuity basis, the cost accrued to the Department of Labour is $250 ,000.

Is that just purely for systems? Is that dealing with staffing, or what is the breakdown for those particular costs, and how long will that particular cost be ongoing? Mr. Gillesham mer: That includes updating of equipment, and it also is a portion of the cost of what is called the help desk that we would be responsible for within the Department of Labour.

April 9, 19 98 LEGIS LATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MA NIT OBA 14 07 Mr. Reid: So we have full-time equiv alents, 203 staff people, and we are going to spend $250 ,000 a year on ongoing computer costs for the Department of Labour. That is a heck of a cost. Would you have spent $250,000 a year on your ongoing capital and software equi pment costs for your department? Do you spend that kind of money in a year, and what is your historical expenditures? Mr. Gillesham mer: I am informed that historically we have been spending in that neighbo urhood on capital costs and salaries. Mr. Reid: Well, the minister says salaries.

Could you give me a breakdown, please? With the greatest of respect to the minis ter and his departmental staff, I have to raise this right at the beginning because last year I had asked for a number of pie ces of information to be forwarded to me and the minis ter undertook to provide that information. To this point in time, I have not received that information on a number of areas within your department.

I do not know the reasons why that information did not come to me, whether it was an oversight on the part of your department or on the part of your office or on your part, yourself, as the minis ter, but that information did not come to me here. So I am hoping at the beginning here to get an undertaking that you or your department will follow through with providing us with answers to the questions that we raise for last year as well as the questions that we raise this year, where you make a commitment to provide so�e detailed information. Mr.

Gillesham mer: We are always delighted to make our information available from the Department of Labour. We are very proud of the work that we do. If there is information you do not understand or that you feel you are not receivin g we would be pleased to supply that for you. I am not sure in your question what detail you are looking for, going back to the desktop management. Mr.

Reid: I just want to get an understanding here at the begi nning, because the minister did make comm itment on a number of fronts last year, and we can go get copies of the Hansard for you if you would like and provide you with some detai l, but I am sure your staff is aware of it as well, where you provided or ind icated that you would be providing some information which has not been forthcoming to this point, a year later.

So that is why I am asking for some kind of an understanding here that when we ask questions throughout the process here where, in essence, I am trying to educate myself about the functionings of the Department of Labour that we would receive some information from the minis ter and that that would be forthcoming in what we would consider to be a relatively short period of time. One year seems to be quite excessive. That is why I am trying to get an understanding here up front. Mr. Gilleshammer: We ll, we would be pleased to have a positive influence in your education about the Department of Labour. Mr.

Reid: Will the minis ter define what this positive influence is and what kind of a time frame we are talking about here? Does he consider one year to be a reasonable period of time for me to be waiting for that information to come forward? It is in Hansard. I mean, I have asked a number of questions. You have undertaken to provide the information, and I do not recall receiving it. I have talked to staff. They have not received it either. Mr.

Gillesham mer: Well, if there is information that you feel you are lacking from previous years Estimates, we will try and identif y that and provide that to you in a timely manner. Mr. Reid: I will take the minis ter at his word. I did last year and, to be frank, I am dis appointed that that information did not come forward, because each of us has our own credibil ity when we say that we are going to do or perform some certain service.

If it is not followed through or carried through then it becomes more difficult for the opposition critics to undertake to understand the department, to ask hopefully intelligent questions about the workings of the department. That is why I was looking for specific pieces of information. So when I ask about the desktop computer init iative, I would like to have a breakdown of the ongoing costs that you have. You said that you expend approximately $250 ,000 a year in ongoing costs, and that is both for

14 08 LEGI SLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANIT OBA April 9, 19 98 equip ment and labour costs. Could you give me a breakdown of that? If you do not have that information here, would you undertake to provide that, please? Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, we will certainly get a breakdown for you. It is a number of individuals who spend a portion of their time doing technical work, and there are also capital costs. My deputy indi cates that we can provide you some written detail that will go a long way to I think enlightening you in this very important area. Ms. Maryann Mihychuk (St.

James): I would like to go back to the desktop management program. Can the min ister clarify, is this the deal with System House? Mr. Gilleshammer: Yes. Ms. Mihychuk: If I understand the program correctly, it includes an initial capital replacement. The computers will be upgraded to a certain standard, and then there is an ongoing annual basically maintenance cost where they replace certain capital components on a regular basis as well as provide service. Would that be correct? Mr. Gillesham mer: Yes. Ms.

Mihychuk: Are the two individuals who were released from the department your computer staff people who provided that computer servicin g? Mr. Gilleshammer: I am informed that both of them are employed at SHL. Ms. Mihychuk: For clarification, they did work for the Department of Labour and now are working for SHL. Mr. Gilleshammer: I am told one is employed by SHL and one by the Department of Hig hways. Ms. Mihychuk: I am not sure that I really understood whether these two individu als were the computer people for the Department of Labour. Mr. Gilleshammer: I am told they were two of our group. Ms.

Mihychuk : The ongoing costs, which amount to approximately $250,000, will be this service provision that SystemHouse can provide on-line, I understand. Now, that is signific antly more than the expenditure of those two staff people. Did the two staff people the Department of Labour had provide sufficient service to the department to service the needs of all 203 staff memb ers? Mr. Gilleshamm er: They were certainly two people that were part of a team that provided technical service. Ms.

Mihychuk: Did the department have to contract out or bring in additional expertise to provide computer maintenance or technical advice? Mr. Gilleshammer: I am informed that in the past we had two term people who were contracted to do some of that work. Ms. Mihychuk: Has the department been offered the ability to service their own system? For example, if the department was provided with half-a-million dollars for this year and an ongoing grant or allocation of $25 0,000, would the department be able to self-serve their computer needs? Mr. Gilleshamm er: It is a hypothetical question.

There are costs as we get into a new system that are one-time costs. The servicing was not entirely based on two people. They were part of a team. Ms. Mihychuk: Perhaps I could ask again. Was the department offered that option of provid ing the service on their own? Mr. Gillesham mer: That was not part of the plan. Ms. Mihychuk: Did the department feel or identify a serious problem in their hardware component that required a signi ficant upgrading? Mr.

Gilleshammer: I am informed it is the view of the department that we did not have sufficient equipment or current equipment to work in a number of the initia tives that we are in the process of doing or headed towards at the present time. Ms. Mihychuk: Perhaps the min ister could articulate in some detail what those would be. The minister in his open ing statement talked about this new desktop

April 9, 19 98 LEGISL ATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 14 09 management allowing the department to act in a corporate manner. What exactly are we investing in? What is this corporate manner that now the Department of Labour will be able to comply with? * ( 10 50) Mr. Gillesham mer: I am not sure how much detai l the member is looking for, but basical ly so many systems in government were independent of other departments, and the technology is changing so rapidly. We are part of a corporate view of government where we can interact with other departments with the new technology.

There are a number of initia tives that I talked about within my opening statements, and I would be pleased to go back and articulate some of them, if that is what the member wants. I think there was a feeling that we needed to upgrade the technology that we had within the Department of Labour and be part of a corporate view of information systems. Ms. Mihychuk: We ll, I am not an expert, but I do have a PC and I am hooked to the Internet and am part of a network with other colleagues. Would it not be then feasible to pay $40, like I do, to get onto the Internet and link with another department? Mr.

Gillesham mer: I do not know where my honourable friend wants to go with this. This is part of a government-wide initiative. I sense what the member is saying is that perhaps the Department of Labour does not need to be part of that, that we should continue to act and exist independent of other government depart ments. I do not share that view. I think the work we do is extremely important. I do not think that we need to take a back seat to other departments. When you have a government-wide initiative, I think it is im portant that we be part of that, that we should not exist in isolation.

I kriow my honourable friend, the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid), who is the critic of this department, shares the view that we do important work, that we need to have updated equipment, that we need the most modem technology just as other departments do. So we are part of a corporate government, and it is a government-wide initiative, and we are part of it. Ms. Mihychuk: Well, the minister is suggesting that I am somehow suggesting the Department of Labour is not useful. Hardly. What I am asking are serious questions about the commitment that this government has made with SystemHouse.

You have gone into a program that is a massive undertaking of all government, that has signi ficant expenditures, and I think that it is valid for the opposition to ask questions of the government's actions, and since the Department of Labour is one of the pilot projects, I would indeed like to continue on this. The System House program, as far as I understand our analysis of it, has indic ated that perhaps it could be done in-house at considerable savings. If that is the case, then the taxpayers of Manitoba need to know that.

Is the government undertaking a program that is going to end up costing Manitobans a great deal more than had it been done in-house? Do we have to fire and lay off more civil servants just to hire and contract private corporations who are going to then gouge public citiz ens and taxpayers? What is the ultimate purpose of the System House deal, and if it is to interact with other departments, as the min ister suggests, then I think the public needs to know that. Is that the purpose of the SystemHouse deal? Mr.

Gilleshammer: The member has put a lot on the record, and I did not get a chance to write it all down, but I will certainly review it in Hansard. It almost seems like we have a philosophical difference of opinio n here. The member comes to the table bad mouthing private sector corporations and uses words like "gouge." I cannot believe that the member wants to enhance the province of Manitoba and be proud of the work that is being done.

I mean, all of us noted with some delig ht that the unemp loyment stats are down to 5.2 percent in the province, and a lot of that is because of private sector development that is going on, an economy that is very hot at this time, and if comments like the one the member for St. James is making is that private sector corporations are out there to gouge everybody-you cannot trust them, that everything has to be done in government-that is simply not true. I am sad to hear those comments from the member for St. James. I thought she would have a more realistic view of the world than that.

If you want to get into the detail of the whole desktop issue, I would suggest you go to the Estima tes of the

1410 LEGISL ATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANIT OBA April 9, 19 98 Department of Government Services where the desktop unit is housed. This is a government-wide init iative. The memb er is suggesting that the Department of Labour does not need modem technology, does not need new equip ment, that we should put band-aids on the equipment we have and patch things together, and that is good enough for the Department of Labour. That simply is not the case. We do very signi ficant and important work. When there is a government-wide initiative, it is incumb ent upon us to be part of that.

You know, we have given you the detai ls of staffing and costs within the Department of Labour. I sense that what the member wants to talk about is that this is a wrong-headed ini tiative, that she is opposed to the whole initia tive, and I say she is wrong. We are part of corporate government and it is up to us to upgrade our systems and be part of a corporate-wide system to try and give the best possible service we can to the clients that we serve. I am sorry that the member does not share that view. Mr. Reid: Mr.

Chairperson, I want to ask the minister, you have mentioned that you have ongoing costs of $25 0,000' a year for the new system of which you are one of the test departments. You have about 203 employees for your departmental operations. Is each one of these employees going to have a computer system available to them or assigned to them as indivi duals? Are you going to have 203 systems within your department? If that is not the case, can you tell me how many you are going to have? Mr.

Gillesham mer: I am informed that we will have in the neighbo urhood of 17 6 pieces of equipme nt within the department. *( 1 10 0) Mr. Reid: Can you tell me, with this new initiative that you are part of and looking at computer life spans-1 mean, for the purposes of my job as an MLA, we buy pieces of equipment from time to time-a computer life span of the technology itself is about six months, one year at best, before it is superseded by something that is superior by way of equipment.

In the contract that your government has signed, can you tell me, are there going to be upgrades to the hardware equipment of the 17 6 pieces your department is going to be using? What type of upgrade process do you have within the contract itself that you have signed to keep these pieces of equipment current since you have ongoing costs of $250,000 a year? Mr.

Gillesham mer: I have indicated before and I will indi cate it again that the desktop unit is not housed in the Department of Labour, and if you want to get into that level of detail, that would be the appropriate place to put those questions when the Estima tes for the Department of Government Services come forward. That information is not housed in this department. I certainly agree with the member that technology is out there, and it is ever-changing. It is going to be a challenge not only in government but in the education system, in the private sector, if I can say that word in this room.

They are all going to be challenged to make appropriate expenditures on technology and make those decisio ns at the appropriate time so that they can mai ntain the service that they need, whatever their functions are. So, if the member is asking do I think there may be further costs in the future as techno logy changes, I think, yes, there will be. Mr. Reid: Mr. Chair person, I am trying to get an understanding here.

The minister says that his department is one of three departments to be involved in the government's new ini tiative, that I believe is going to spend some 35-million taxpayer dollars for this particular type of system. Government Services is one of those other departments as is Family Services. I belie ve Culture, Her itage-and you do not know. You do not have an idea what is in that contract and whether or not your people in three years from now are going to be working with antiquated pieces of junk that should be in the garbage. Is that what you are telling me? Mr.

Gillesham mer: We ll, I am trying to understand what the member is asking. He is saying that equipment bought today is going to be, in a certain time span, junk. I guess, if that is his view of the world, it would be so whether it was bought by the private sector or by a government unless he feels there is specific technology that is independent and used only by government. I have indi cated to him that I agree with him that technology is changing very rapidly. That change is going to take place not because of thi ngs

April 9, 19 98 LEGI SLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MANIT OBA 1411 happening in Manitoba but things happening right across the world. I have indicated that governments will face an enormous challenge, as will educational institutions, corporations, private sector companies, indivi duals, in trying to strike that proper balance of how much do you spend on technology, when does technology become obsolete, when do you reinvest. Wel l, my honourable friend says that all becomes obsolete in six months.

So, in his view of the world, every six months there is going to be a turnover in all institutions using techno logy and that there is going to obviously be a tremendous cost. I do not think he is totally right. I believe that-[interjection] Well, I certainly bow to his superior wisdom on this, but I am told that probably-at least people, what they are telling me-a lot of the equipment will be used perhaps for three or four years.

So, if his view of the world is that all technology becomes obsolete in six months, maybe he is suggesting we should not get into it at all because the technology becomes obsolete too soon. I do not think that is the way the world is going, that we are going to have technological systems and we need across government to have some consis tency. We need to be, I think, aware of what is happening in technology and be part of it, but at the same time, I suppose, we will be constrained by the number of dollars that we can dedic ate to technology. Mr.

Chairman, he is absolutely right that these systems are going to change rapidly, and the challenge will be to make the appropriate changes at the appropriate times and spend the appropriate resources on that. I suppose I used the word "pilo t" before. We are one of the pi lot departments, and part of that is to ease our way into the systems to be able to test and pi lot technology and hopefully provide good information for the decision makers within the desktop unit so that we can continue to update ourselves and update our department and make good decisions on technology. Mr.

Reid: One of the thi ngs I have learned since coming to this place is that technology does change very rapidly. I have indicated that six-month life span in the current technology that is on the marketplace now, and I know this from personal experience. I also know it from the cost side because technology that you are using today, that you are paying a fee to operate and use the Internet for an example.

If you have staff that are working on the Internet, or an e-mail system that uti lizes the Internet services, your costs of operation are going to be at one level today because the equipment operates at a slower speed. But if technology passes you by and comes out with a new piece in six months or a year and you do not keep current with that equi pment, your costs could be reduced if you went to the new equipment. There is going to be a cost saving that is involved with that if you are able to purchase your equipment on a planned basis to keep current.

You even yourselft alked about not having current or sufficient equipment within the department. I suspect and I hope that you want to keep your costs under some kind of control there and to, wherever you can, effect cost savings. But if you do not utilize the technology that is available to allow you to do that, the software and the hardware that would be available on the market to allow you to do that, you are not going to be able to effect those savings.

If you do not know, if you are linking yourself in with this SHL SystemHouse system that is going to have you a $250, 000-a-year ongoing cost, and you do not know whether or not you are going to have equipment upgrades at all or over what period of time, and the software changes that are coming on the market now that average about two to two to three years on upgrades for those particular software packages, it may be more applicable to the staff people that you have in this room and the people that work for them.

You are not going to be able to take advantages of the im provements that are available in the technological side. So I would like to ask you: since SHL System House is involved in this process and they are going to be setting it up, have they not told you, has Government Services not told anybody in your department whether or not you are going to see hardware upgrades over what period of time, if any?

Who has licensed ownership of the software equipment, and what type of confidentiality of the records and the operations of your department do you have in place to protect thir d-party confidentiality that your department so often tells me is essential to the operations of your department?

1412 LEGI SLATI VE AS SEMBLY OF MANIT OBA April 9, 19 98 *( 11 10 ) Mr. Gilleshamme r: It is the view of the senior staff in my department who work with this that we have ironclad confidentiality agreements, that they feel very comfortable with. You are right; we do have information, whether it is in the Labour Board or whether it is in Employment Standards. I am sure all departments of government have confidential information, certainly on the staffing side. I am assured by my senior staff that they do not have any feeling that confidenti ality will be breached.

Part of the government-wide initiative to move in this direction is to be able to access and use contemporary software. One of the diffi culties in government is the ability to employ technical staff and experts in the whole area of technology. I know that we have lost a lot of senior middle-management staff to private corporations simply because of the incentives and the pay scale that the private sector is offering. As a result, we have lost a lot of key people across government simply because we cannot compete with the wages that are being paid in the private sector.

Part of the rationale for moving to this system is to be able to access that expertise in technology that we need. It is not only within government that this is happening. I meet young people that were former students of mine or young people that have grown up in my communities who are very mobile, that are able to access jobs, high-paying jobs in the U.S., across Canada and here in Win nipeg, simply because of the demand for the expertise that they have. Government does not want to find itself vulnerable that we no longer have enough expertise.

One of the ways of mitigating that is to outsource some of this from companies like SystemHouse. There will be software upgrades on a regular basis. As I indicated earlier, the hardware upgrades will be on a three- or four-year renewal cycle. What I hear my honourable friend saying is in the work that he has done in this technological field, that everything becomes obsolete in six months and that systems will have to be replaced every six months.

I do not think he is right there, although he perhaps has more knowledge in this area than I do, but I do agree that the changing technology will be a challenge, not only to government but to the private sector and others as well. We will do our best to stay as current as we can with both the software and the hardware. You know, I do read a bit about it in the paper and about the challenges of the year 2000, and in journals and so forth. Sure, there is a nervousness across the world. Are we going to meet that challenge that is coming at us in the next short time?

A lot of money is being spent by corporations and governments all over the place to try and meet the year 2000 challenge, and we will continue to have those challenges after that to try and keep current, to manage our resources so that we can make the appropriate decisions and appropriate expenditures when necessary. Mr. Reid: I am still worried about the confidential ity, because the department does do work that is quite sensitive.

I know I have personal friends that are in the computer business for one of the employers right across the street from this building here, works out of his home, works on a PC, but he is an employee of the company, and he does troubleshooting within the systems that that particular company has.

I take it that with the contract that the government has signed with SHL System House that you are going to have the same type of activities, people working external to this buildin g, because government offices are spread around, they are not just here in the Legis lature, that the System House people are going to be working external to your operations and tapping into your operations if necessary to do any kind of trouble shooting that they have. So there is the poss ibil ity of security breaches. You say you have an ironclad agreement that is in place.

You are not going to stop a hacker from coming into your system and accessing your personal data files. You could, if it was internal to your own operations in your own office itself, have that security system bui lt in, but you cannot give an ironclad guarantee that you will not have somebody external com ing into your systems, because I do not think there is a system 'Yet that has been developed. Even the mil itary of North America has not been able to stop people from accessing their computer systems.

So you cannot say that it is an ironclad agreement that you have of confidentiality, because I do not think there is a system

April 9, 19 98 LEGI SLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MANIT OBA 1413 yet that has not been broken. So I am quite worried about the files and the information that you have that is confidential being put on that and being put into the hands of a third party to access that equi pment, perhaps from a remote location. You still have not answered the question with respect to the software. You say a regular update. What is regular? Five years, I 0 years? Do you have any idea what is in the contract here that your department is now one of the pi lot departments for? Mr.

Gillesham mer: We ll, I guess the member says that he is concerned about confidentiality, as we all are. Yes, there are hackers from around the world that I understand access the information from the FBI and the CIA and CSIS, the mili tary. What the member is saying is maybe no system is safe, that all of us would be subject to having somebody access information no matter what our system is and, to some degree, that is true. My senior staff who sit with me at the table say that they are comfortable with the systems that have been put in place to ensure confidentiality.

I do not know whether the member would ever be satisfied that you would have absolute, total control of all information. Heavens, I understand sometimes even briefing notes end up in the NDP caucus room, and I do not know how that happens. But- An Honour able Member: Thanks, Harold. Thanks for sending them. Mr. Gillesha mmer: We ll, he says somebody sends them to him. Well, that is unfortunate. If these are confidential documents that are handled by professional staff we have to have a lot of trust and faith in them.

So I guess no matter who is in charge of the system, people are going to be concerned about confidentiality. I have indicated that my staff who are working with the changes within the system are satisfied that the system will provide confidentiality but, having said that, someday maybe some of this information will fall into the wrong hands. *( 1 12 0) I can remember back in the mid-'80s when there were health records found in a back alley somewhere in the city of Winni peg, hard copies of information on indivi duals who were accessing medical attention at hospitals and clin ics.

I guess there were people in charge of that and something went wrong. So perhaps I should not have used the word "ironclad." All I am saying is, my staff who have been working on this are very comfortable that the safeguards have been put in place. If somebody working with that information chooses to release it to you, contrary to what they should be doing, that would be unfortunate but, whatever system you have, and you have referenced some of the major spy agencies of the world who occasionally have some information get out on them from what he termed hackers.

I recognize that is true, but that does not sort of freeze us into suspended animation that we do not go ahead with this. We are part of a government-wide initiative; we are one of the pilots; work is progressing nic ely. I have indicated that we will not be renewing our total equipment and our software every six months, as the members suggests, but that the generally accepted thinking within government is that hardware will be on a three-or four-year renewal cycle and that there will be regular software upgrades. I think my honourable friend is wondering what "regular" means. Mr.

David Faurschou, Acting Chair person, in the Chair We ll, as new software comes onto the market and becomes available, it will be incumbent upon staff to look at it, evaluate it, and determine whether it is appropriate to make those changes. We have said that there are going to be ongoing costs, both for staffing and for hardware, for technology, and, within our department, we would be setting aside a certain number of dollars to be sur e that our systems are compatible and modern in doing the job we feel we need to do. Mr. Reid: Well, do I understand the minister correctly, Mr.

Chai rperson, when he says that the staff is going to evaluate new hardware, then I take it that the SHL people are not going to be responsible-for the software, I should say-if the staff are going to evaluate the new software in the department. Can you talk, as part of your contract, to the supplier of this software and hardware equi pment and say that this is the type of equipment or software we would like to have in place

1414 LEGI SLATIVE ASSE MBLY OF MAN ITOBA April 9, 19 98 for our particula r operations because it would better meet our needs? Do you have that flexibility under this contract? Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, I really hate being redundant because your time is so valuable and this commit tee's time is so valuable, and the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen), of course, is here, too, and we know how valuable her time is, but I have indi cated that the Desktop Management Unit will be co ordinating the needs of departments and the direction this is going.

I have suggested to him twice or maybe three times that if he wants to get into the detail of this whole initia tive, the more appropriate place would be to sit in on the Esti mates of Government Services and the Desktop Management Unit and pose those questions. But if the member is asking are staff from our department going to occasionally or often interrelate to staff within the Desktop Management Unit, the answer is yes. Mr.

Reid: Can the min ister tell me-and I may have mi sspoke ' myself really when I said $35 milli on, I believe it is much higher than that, around the $85- million range for this overall contract. This particular contract I take it is not in perpetuity, it is not going to be there forever, and governments obviously bui lds option clauses into the contracts that they sign so that they can re-evaluate based on needs.

Can you tell me, the equipment you have in place now-and I take it you must have some equipment in your overall operations that is fairly current-what happens with the equipment that you have, both current equipment and perhaps some pieces that are not so current? Do you sti ll retain responsibil ity for that, or where does the responsibilit y lie for that equi pment, or what is going to be the disposition for that equipment? Mr. Gillesham mer: The final decisions on the future of that equipment have not yet been made. Mr. Reid: So, you have built money into this year's budget.

You have got an ongoing cost of $250,000. You have got two staff people who have been pulled away from your operations as a result of the decision to get involved in the desktop initiative. You do not know what is going to happen with your equipm ent in your operation or when you are going to get the new equipment to come into your department. Is that what you are telling me? Mr. Gillesham mer: No. We have the new equipment now. Wha t you asked, or one of the parts of your question, is what is the future for the old equipment, and I indicated that the final decision on that had not yet been made. Mr.

Reid: So then the 17 6 pieces that you have talked about, or the 17 6 systems that you have talked about for your staff, are new pieces of equipment that have come in. You are not using existing or current pieces of equipment that were currently or had been used by the department prior to the decision. Mr. Gilleshammer: Yes, I am informed that we have 17 6 pieces that have been transitioned into our department, and this is new equi pment. I think the member earlier referred to old equipment as garbage; I do not see it that way.

There is going to be value in that old equi pment, and there are some issues around its di sposition that have not been totally resolved at this time. Again, that will be done on a government-wide basis, and the Department of Labour will not be working in isolation. Mr. Reid: I understand you will not be working in isolation, because you are part of a pilot project for the overall government involvement in this area. Can you tell me if this con tract was to end, who has ownership of the equipment, the hardware equipment? Mr.

Gillesham mer: The member is getting into the world of "if' and asking hypothetical questions, and I do not know whether he wants to go there or not. We will own the equip ment. Mr. Reid: It is buil t into the contract then that all government operations that are going to be supplied with computer systems, including the 17 6 units or pieces that Labour has, will be owned by the department when this contract ends. Can you also tell me what happens to the software licensing agreements that go with the hardware equipment? Who has ownership of those?

�Axp�ri i�9�·�19�9�8�--------= L=EG�IS�L�A�T�I V�E�A�S�S�E�M�B�L�Y_O�F�M�A�N�I_T_O_B_A ____ ____ __ ____ ___ 1415 Mr. Gillesham mer: Again, the contract is housed with the Desktop Management Unit within the Department of Government Services. They will have the ownership of that software that the member asks about. Mr. Reid: Okay, so that the desktop ini tiative unit people, which is an arm of government, will be responsible for all of the computer systems and software systems that the government will be using, and they will be responsible for the ownership of that equipment and the maintenance of that equipment.

Mr. Gilleshamme r: Yes, we are unanimously agreed that you are right on that. *( 1 13 0) Mr. Reid: I thank the mi nister for the information. I am trying to get an understanding here of what happens, because I do not want to see the Department of Labour or any other government department caught short, if somewhere down the road there is a change of heart, because a particular contract does not meet the needs of the department or their overall government operations.

That is why I am asking questions here to get an understanding on wha t flexibil ity you built into the process that you are now setting up and of which you are one of the pi lot departments, and, also, what the future holds for the department itself with respect to hardware and software flexibility in the future. Having bought equipment in 19 90 for the operation of my own office-and the government knows, anybody that works with computers knows, what the value of a 386 computer is today. I have seen them used as doorstops when you go into some of the computer shops.

So it tells you how quickly that technology can pass you by. Even more cur rent equipment is used as doorstops today. I am not sa ying it cannot be used somewhere, because the older equipment which is still functional can be used in some cases for educational purposes to allow school systems in the province of Manitoba to uti lize that equipment to train our young people.

Perhaps I should ask the question on whether or not your government, your department, is involved or has provided advice to this desktop init iative group and whether or not that equi pment should be allocated to the various school divisions in the province if it is functional sti ll to allow the school chil dren the opportunity to make use of this equipment. Mr. Gilleshammer: I agree with the member, what he referenced as garbage to government might be usef ul somewhere else. I would-[interjection] We ll, sure, that is right.

I remember when we moved from manual typewriters to electric and electronic ones and it was- Mr. Reid: That is way before my time. Mr. Gillesham mer: We ll, some of us will remember that. I remember officials from the Department of Education having to tell school divis ions that probably they would make good boat anchors, because there was no longer any use for them. Mr. Reid: Do you still have them? Mr. Gilleshammer: Well, the member knows that this becomes obsolete, but the school system certainly could benefit.

I know many corporations take some of their obsol ete equipment and donate it to schools, school divisi ons, and if it is, to use his word again, garbage to them or garbage to government, maybe it has some use for other people. Mr. Reid: It is not my word though. Check Hansard; I did not use that word. Mr. Gilleshammer: I believe the member did use the word "garbage" and we will check Hansard, sure. It will, I am sure, find good use somewhere, that if there is value in it, certainly somebody else should be able to benefit from it. Mr. Reid: I will leave that with the department then.

I just do not want to see this equipment, if it is sti ll functioning, not put to some good use. It is in the sense of the minister's word of garbage to him and his department. If he wants to call it garbage, I mean, that is up to him. He can do that, but it may be useful and serviceable to other areas of the people of the province, whether it be school systems or other nonprofit agencies that may want to make use of that equipme nt. So I will leave it with the department, if you are talking with the desktop initia tive unit people, to make sure

1416 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANIT OBA April 9, 19 98 that the serviceable equipment that is now surplus to your operations would perhaps be turned over to some worthy operations to give it the opportunity to make use of that equipment. I want to ask questions with respect now to some of the things that have also been happening in this area. I know the min ister has struck the mini mum wage review board to take place. Can the min ister tell me, because when I had asked him in Estima tes this time last year, he said there was not a need to have the minimum wage review board struck.

In fact, I think he said that no stakeholder had asked him to convene the board to look at the minimum wage in the province. At that time-just before that time, in fact, I think currently Manitoba is third last or tied for third or tied for thir d last in minimum wages in the country. Can you tell me why you have had a change of heart to now strike the Minimum Wage Board to review that when, last year at this time, you chose that it was not a priority for you, your department, or the government? Why have you had a change of heart with respect to the Min imum Wage Board? Mr.

Gilleshammer: Just going back to the previous topic, I think we are on the same wavelength as the honourable member, that the technology that is obsolete to government I am sure still has tremendous value, and the Desktop Unit I am sure will bring forward recommendations. I would be very much assured that it will be put into the hands of people who can use it and the appropriate thing will be done. Now, my honourable friend wants to talk about the minimum wage and characterized our dis cussions last year, I think, in a kind of negative light.

I would say to him that the history of the Mi nimum Wage Board is that it is called from time to time and not on a regular schedule. I do recall saying, and my honourable friend would remember that I had just been in the department for a couple of months at that particular time, and quite correctly the issue had not been brought forward by any group at that time, as I was getting to meet some of the labour and management people within the province of Manitoba.

Sin ce then, I have had the time to review the issue with my staff and take a look at it, and I am of the opinion that it is appropriate to strike that board at this time. I have sent letters to the Manitoba Federation of Labour and, I believe it is, to the Winnip eg Chamber of Commerce, to provide me with some names of people who would serve on that board and do a community consultation. I have just rece ived some response to that in recent weeks, and I antici pate additional response in the near future.

As soon as I have received that information and have been able to desig nate a chair, we would be reconstituting that. I antici pate what we would do is probably do a press release indic ating as much information on how the board is constituted and where they are going to be and try and make interested parties aware of the process. I am anxious to proceed with that. Mr. Reid: Mr. Chair person, can the mi nister tell me-because last year he said that none of the stakeholders had requested, and he has referenced the Man itoba Federation of Labour and the Chamber of Comm erce representatives.

Has either one of those asked you as stakeholders to review the mi nimum wage, and, if so, will you identif y which one? Mr. Gilleshammer: Numerous people including the mem ber for Transcona has brought it to my attention. I know that I indica ted in the House one day in a question that he asked me about this issue. I told him at that time that we had recently had a very positive meeting with the MF L, it was one of the issues that they raised, and I responded in a positive way to that.

Sin ce that time other indivi duals who are part of organizations have also asked me about it, and it is generally understood that the Minimu m Wage Board is going to be called. I would hope that we have them functioning in the near future. Mr. Reid: Can the minister tell me: have representatives from the Canadian Federation of Independent Busi ness or the Chambers of Commerce for the province of Manitoba asked the min ister to review the mi nimu m wage in the province of Manit oba? Mr. Gilleshamme r: I am sorry, you said the Manitoba Chamber or the Winnip eg Chamber?

April 9, 19 98 LEG I SLATI VE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 1417 Mr. Reid: Manitoba Chambers of Commerce. All of them. Just for clarific ation, Mr. Chai rperson, the province of Manitoba has many Chambers of Commerce in it. I know they are represented by one body, the Manitoba Chamber of Commerce, but not to exclude others in the province of Man itoba, to find out which, if any, of those may have requested as stakeholders in this process, whether or not they have requested the min ister to review the mi nimum wage level in this province. *( 1 14 0) Mr.

Gilleshamme r: I will indicate that my honourable friend from Transcona was the very first person to raise it and it was last year in Estimates. Secondly, it was raised by the Manitoba Federation- An Honou rable Member: In the year before. Mr. Gilleshamme r: Well, my honourable friend says the year before. I was not the minister the year before. We have only been through this process once, and this is our second time. But I do give the member total credit.

He was the very first Manitoban, the very first member of the Legislature to raise it, and I took it very seriously, and we have indi cated that we are going to proceed with that. It was secondly raised with me by the Manitoba Federation of Labour, and in my response to a question that you asked me in December, I beli eve, I indicated that we were going to start the process. Sin ce then, because other people knew about it, they have certainly inquired and they have certainly talked to me about it, so it has not been a secret. I think it has been covered in the press in December.

I think I heard it in the electronic media , and I am prepared to give my honourable friend full credit. He was the first one to ask, and I am pleased that we have been able to respond positively to him. Mr. Reid: Just for the minister's information, I did ask him to strike the minimu m wage review board, but I did so at this time last year, a year ago. I did not ask in December, although my concerns would sti ll be relevant in December. I have asked the previous Minis ter of Labour, as well, to have that situation under review.

Instead of having ad hoc minimum wage adjustments, has the min ister and his government given any conside ration to attaching the minimum wage of the province to the average wage composite index for the province of Manito ba, so that we do not have to have these ad hoc adjustments, so that there would be an orderly process that would be in place so that people who are working at minimum wage jobs in the business com munity would be aware of changes that would be coming and that it could be done in an orderly fashion. Has any consi deration been undertaken in that? Are you looking at many changes in that area? Mr.

Gillesham mer: We ll, first and foremost, we are going to follow the process that is in our current legislation, and I am sensing that what the member is asking is for us to bring forward legislation to make amendment to the minimum wage act. We are not planning that this session. If I have not indica ted to my honourable friend before, we are bringing forward only one piece of legislation this session, and it was tabled the other day. I think the member has a copy of it, and we have offered to spend some time with him.

I know that it will not be next week, but I think that what our discussion yesterday was, that when you have time you will let me know, and we will set up a meeting within days to brief you on the legislation. So we do not have any plans at this time to make any amendment to that legislation. Mr. Reid: So then the plan of your government is then to just continue to do ad hoc adjustments to the Mini mum Wage Board, and as we have seen historical ly through the performance of your government, that it was done just prior to or around the 19 90 election time.

It was done just prior to the 19 95 general election, and we are now approaching the 19 99 provincial general election if you follow his torical voting patterns for the province. So it seems like just before every election, you strike the mini mum wage review board for the province, and you are starting to develop quite a history here of tim ing with respect to the provincial general election. Is there not some way that we could have a more

1418 LEGISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANIT OBA April 9, 19 98 orderly process in place so that this could be tied to the performance of the economy of the province of Manit oba that would take this away from ad hoc adjustments done purely for political purposes? Mr. Gillesha mme r: We ll, I was not here during the 19 80s when the member's party was governing this province and where rates such as Autopac were set at the cabinet table. Maybe that is where the member gets this idea that these thi ngs have some connection to political exercises in the province. I have never seen it that way.

In fact, because of the way that his party managed issues such as the government auto insurance, where the entire province was in an uproar because of the way those rates were fiddled with at the cabinet table, one of the first thi ngs we did was tum that over to an external third party to review them. So, I mean, our history is very clear that a third objective party should review rates like that. The his tory of setting Autopac rates was not a very good one. I think in this case we have legislation that we live by, that the previous government lived by.

They did not see fit to change it, but I would make a commitment to have my staff bring forward for discussion internally the current legislation and to look very closely at it. I am told that there is not a jurisdic tion in Canada that has indexed rates. Now, that is the advice I am given from my staff, so I do not believe the province of Saskatchewan or British Columbia or wherever socialist governments are in power follow that practice. I do not think Liberal governments follow that practice. I guess what my honourable friend is asking us to do is to pioneer a new way.

An Honour able Member: Hmm, that would be an interesting concept. Mr. Gilleshammer: We ll, we followed your good advice last year, so, you know, I have given him the commitment that I will review the legislation with my staff, but I can tell him very clearly we are not bringing it forward in this session. We have tried to table the majo rity of our legislation early in the session, and other legislation we have indi cated to critics, at least I have, what we are doing. bringing forward a particula r bill.

That is the only bill that we will have this session, but my comm itment is to spend some time with staff to look at the existing legislation and I think look at existing legislation in other jurisdictions. I am told that nobody else indexes it. Maybe the member has information from his fellow travellers in Saskatchewan or B.C. that they are going to do this. I am not sure. Mr. Reid: I take it you mean life's travellers; we are all life's travellers down the road. I have talked with other jurisdictions about their minimum wage. It is interesting you note the social democrat provinces in your comments, Mr.

Mi nister. Saskatchewan is still consi derably ahead of the Province of Manitoba in minimum wage. In fact, I suspect that when you have your Minimu m Wage Board, you will just barely meet or slightly exceed the minimum wage of Saskatchewan, but purely for political reasons. The province of B.C., the mi nimum wage is $7. 15 an hour. An Honour able Member: Their economy is ramming through the floor, is it not? *( 11 50) Mr. Reid: Yes, and you have got an out-migration of a signific ant number of people in the province here in Manit oba. They cannot find jobs here, so they are going elsewhere in western Canada.

While they were the best performing economy in Canada during the recess ion, Manitoba was in the toilet, but the Mi nister of I, T and T did not see fit to make comment at that time. You can tell that he was not too worried about the B. C. economy when they were steamrollering along, as your Min ister of Fi nance (Mr. Stefanson) likes to talk about. So your minimu m wage in your social democrat provinces of this country is doing quite well, and no doubt they will be making some adjustments to their mi nimum wage in the not too dis tant future.

If it is a good idea to have the mi nimum wage tied to the average composite wage for the province ofMa nitoba-1 always thought that your government, or at least you like to tell us that you want to be leaders in initiatives in the country, so I do not know why you would not give some consi deration to this. An Honour able Member: And, indeed, we are.

April 9, 19 98 LEG IS LATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANIT OBA 1419 Mr. Reid: Well, that is not what the Minis ter of Labour (Mr. Gil leshammer) has just said here a few moments ago. I know you want to inject yourself, Mr. Mi nister of I, T and T, want to inject yourself into the conversation here today, and you are more than willing to pull up a chair at the head of the table here and inject your comments and ask about the labouring people of your province, but I am sure you are not too worried about that.

You have other interests that you are taking care of to make sure that you have feathered the nests of your own friends. Mr. Chairman, I digress, and I want to get back and ask the minis ter with respect to the minimum wage. What is his implementation time line with respect to the changes and the recommendations that would come back from the review body that he has now struck, since it is an ad hoc body only at his call? Mr.

Gilleshamme r: Well, what I heard the honourable memb er say-and I am sure he wants to listen because he does ask from time to time thought-provoking and intelligent questi ons-he stated that he thinks that we should be compared with Saskatchewan, and I do not think he is wrong there. I know that when we look at many comparisons, it is unf air to look at, say, the cost of living in Toronto com pared to what it is in western Mani toba. We do have many comparisons with Saskatchewan, and I know that we have in some ways simi lar economies. We have simila r sized populations.

We both tend to lead the country in terms of the unemployment statistics. I did not see the figures that came out today, but I did hear on the radio early this morning that our unemployment rate is now 5.2 percent, and I know Saskatchewan has always been very low too-[interjection] I can tell the member that the stats that came out today had Manitoba with the lowest unemployment rate in the country, and I know that he would share my pride in that, being a fellow Manitoban. Mr.

Chairperson in the Chair Any comparison that we have with the province of Saskatchewan tends to be relatively valid because we do share the same part of North America. I heard very clearly the memb er suggest that the Mi nimu m Wage Bo ard should perhaps look at what Saskatchewan is doing, and I will say very clearly I do not intend to interfere with them. I think that they should have public hearings and that they should hear any and all people who want to have some input and give advice to government on the minimu m wage.

I would think that a natural part of their deliberations, besides hearing from Manitobans from all corners of our province, from the city of Winn ipeg to the North, to the rural areas, to our growing cities like Steinbach and com munities like Morden, Wi nkler, I think it is inc umbent upon them to hear from Manitobans in all areas to have some input on what they think the current minimu m wage should be. I would say that I expect them to be totally unfettered in the process that they follow, and I would direct them and encourage them to consult as widely as possible.

It would be quite natural to look at interprovincial comparisons, as well, that reflect what other jurisdictions are doing. So I would hope that in the near future we can get the process started and give them the appropriate time to listen to Manit obans, to have their deli berations, and to bring back a recommendation to government. I am informed by my dep uty that historically the Mi nimu m Wage Board would take about four months to hold those hearings and present that information to government.

I know that just the time frame we are in that this may encompass the summer holiday period in Manitoba which might affect them one way or the other, but historically it has been about a four-month process, and historically governments have taken about two months after that to address the issue. Mr. Reid: So it is going to be some time down the road later this year when you will make your announcement, likely early in the fall, with respect to the mini mum wage, and the timin g will be there for January I.

It just happens you have another budget com ing out in Apri l, and it will be the four-year mark for the government which has historically been the time for the provincia l general election. I guess it is just coincident again, for the third time, third consecutive time, that you have adjusted the minimum wage dealing with the-coincidentally in timin g with the provincial general election. So I guess it is just a pattern that is developing for your government, and it is nothing unusual, I guess, that we should not expect for you now, as we have seen develop in the past.

14 20 LEGI SLATI VE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA April 9, 19 98 Just to let the min ister know with respect to the unemployment stats for the country here-and we want to do comparisons between Manitoba and the province of Saskatchewan-Winni peg's unemployment rate just came out today. Winn ipeg is at 5.8 percent; Regina is at 4.9 percent. If you want to do comparisons, Mr. Min ister, on the unemployment rates for the provinces overall, Manitoba for the first time tied Saskatchewan. We were both at 6.2 percent.

So you have not beat Saskatchewan this time, and do not let the Mi nister of I, T and To r yourself put unfactual information on the record about the pe rformance of the province in comparison with the province of Saskatchewan. Yes, we are happy to see that your unemployment rate has for the first time matched Saskatchewan. An Honou rable Member: "Our" unemployment rate. Mr. Reid: Yes, I stand corrected.

Our unemployment rate in the province of Manitoba has matched the province of Saskatchewan who has been a leader in the country with respect to employment of the people, and we are happy to see for the first time that I can recall in my mem ory that you have actually matched Saskatchewan, si nce I have been in this bui lding. An Honour able Member: Why is that? Mr. Reid: Why is that? Because you also have an out migration in the province here, which probably says that you have less people available for the workforce. Mr. Chairperson: Order, please.

I would remind all honourable members that any comments that they are going to make that they do make their comments through the Chair. That will elim inate any discussions back and forth and keep thi ngs in control. The honourable member for Transcona, to finish your comments. Mr. Reid: Thank you, Mr. Chair person. You are absolutely right, and I apologize to you for not directing my comments through the Chair, as has been my practice in the past.

I want to ask the mtmster with respect to his department-last time, I believe, in this area I had made some requests from him about the cost recovery for his department, and I think you had indica ted last year at 63 percent-any changes contemp lated within the fee structure? Are you contemplating any changes with respect to cost recovery for your department's operations overall? Mr. Gilleshamm er: We ll, you know we have really had a pleasant dis cussion this morning, and I am pleased that my honourable friend shares the pride I have in Manitoba and the fact that the unemployment rate is so low.

I think it bodes well for the future and the future of our province. We have worked very diligently to attract industry to Manitoba to provide jobs for Manitobans, and I know that there have been many init iatives in the city of Winn ipeg here that are employing thousands and thousands more Manitobans. I would-[interjection] Well, the member interjects. On the one hand he says congratulations for having great numbers and tying Saskatchewan, and then in a breath shortly after that, he says why are your numbers so bad. You cannot have it both ways, you know.

I distinctly heard the member for Transcona say that he was pleased that the unemployment rate had gone down, and I would hope that is true, because surely he would not represent a fine constituency like Transcona and have some glee if there is unemployment in the province. So, again, I share that pride with him, and I think we can all brag about our province. I would even encourage him to come out to rural Manitoba. I know the memb er for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) was out there recently in Brandon, and there are tremendous thi ngs going on out there.

It is unbelievable the energy and enthusiasm in the city of Brandon these day. It is not just the Maple Leaf development but many other factors out there and developments which contribute to this unemployment rate. I would urge the member for Transcona to take some time on a weekend or intersessionally to get out to rural Manitoba. I would even invite him to the fine constituency ofM innedosa to see the developments that are going on there. [interjection] He has been there. We have a railroad there, too, and I am sure he would have some interest in that.

But it is a boom ing com munity, and we honour, of course, the history of the railroad in Minnedosa. I know that my honourab le friend would feel quite at home there. You know, you

April 9, 19 98 LEG ISL ATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 1421 do not even have to go that far. You could just slip out to Elie and see the lsobord plant which is developing the product that they have ready to go, and other developments happening there. One of the trends that the member should take note of is that the population in many areas of rural Manitoba is growing. We had been through decades where the city of Winni peg-and a very unique part of Canada, where the city of Winnip eg continues to grow and is the only metropolis of that size within the province.

It is heartening and encouraging to see rural communities, the growth they are having and the econom ic activity that is happe ning. That is part of the good news of these statistics that the Minis ter of I, T and T was communic ating to you earlier. So again we share a common cause I think and take pride in the fact that Manitoba is growing, jobs are being created out there, the unemployment rate is going down and the circumstances of Manit obans are improving. Mr. Cha irperson: Order, please.

The time being 12 noon, I am interrupting proceedings, and the Commit tee of Supply will resume sitting this afternoon following the conclusion of Routine Proceedi ngs. HEALTH Mr. Cha irperson (Ben Sveinson): Order, please. Will the Commit tee of Supply please come to order. The commi ttee will resume consider ation of the Estima tes of the Department of Health. When the committee last sat it had been considering item 2l.l. (b )(

I) on page 71. Shall the item pass? The honourable member for Kild onan was posing some questions. Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): I wonder if the mini ster might outline for me-we talked about planning to have some indivi duals here today. Maybe perhaps he could outline what the arrangement is thus far. Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Yes, Mr. Chair , we have Mr. Potter and Mr. McCormack, who have been dealing with the Be taseron issue. They are here and available today. We also have Heather McLa ren from the legislative unit if we wanted to discuss legislative proposals. Mr.

O'Neill is here with respect to health information. So those were the areas you had requested for today and our staff are here as requested. Mr. Chomiak: We are going to have a morning session and an afternoon session, so perhaps si nce staff are here we should deal with the individu als who are here and then this afternoon we could deal with a sort of pot pourri of issues that were remaining from the last session and talk about a couple of other issues that have arisen. Perhaps we should start with the Betaseron issue? Mr. Praznik: Yes, I have Mr.

Potter, who is my Associa te Deputy Mi nister for Internal Operations, which includes the Pharmacare program, and Mr. Tom McCormack, who has actually been the staff person who has been working directly on this since Ms. Deborah Vivi an de parted from the provincial government to take on other responsibi lities elsewhere. She had been initially the indivi dual who had taken on this particular project. Mr.

Chomi ak: As has been reported and is fairly obvious with respect to the Betaseron and, I might add, Copaxone issue, which I would also like to query on today, the question of delay and the question of the up and-running nature of the program is, of course, paramount to everyone in the system, particularly those who are suffering. So maybe we could commence by the min ister outlining specifically from the provincial perspective exactly where the program is at and also as much indi cation as po ssible when we might see the actual flowing through of benefits to the individu als. Mr. Praznik: Mr.

Chair, I will deal with the first part of the question which is the general perspective. Then I will let Mr. Potter or Mr. McCormack update you on the specific details as they can of the program, because they have been involved with the committee and the MS centre clinic which will be hosting the pilot project. When this matter was first brought to my attention, by way of background, it was brought to my attention

14 22 LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA April 9, 19 98 because our pharmacal economic comm ittee which advises on whether or not drugs are included in the formulary and I believe, as well, interchangeability of drugs within the formulary. When Betaseron had first come to their attention, they had recommended it not be included. That had been the general recommendation of simi lar comm ittees across the country.

Several provinces then did overturn that, either their comm ittee did-or I am not familiar with the specific details -but several provinces did develop programs, some on a lim ited basis, to start using the particular drug. At that time because of the public interest in this and, certai nly, I know the member for Kild onan had spoken to me about it, both formally and informally. I think we both shared some concern about was this a fair treatment for the drug. In fairness to all involved, this is one of those drugs that is in the early stages of its formation.

Yes, it is approved for public use, but its effectiveness or the amount of effectiveness, I guess, or what it does contribute to improvement of the relevant patient's life has been, particularly during that period, a matter of great debate over its effectiveness. * (1010 ) If numbers serve me correctly, the initial information had was that it prevented one relapse period in a three-year period, with a cost during that period of about $1 7,000 a year, so putting it close to $50,000 per patient for the prevention of one relapse without making an impact on the longevity.

It was felt it did not prevent the further development of MS, et cetera. I think on that basis and on the basis of that information, the committee had recommended that its cost versus its very lim ited medical value did not make it a worthy candidate for inclusion on the formulary. Needless to say, as drugs develop, often the first generation of a drug product has more limi ted value. As drugs are used and utiliz ed and refined further, the value of that drug in terms of the outcome, the medical outcome, improves, and I think that is the his tory of many, many products in the pharmaceutical industry.

So the conc ern was where is this? It is a developing product. I did make some effort as a minister because, as a new min ister wanting to understand how my Pharmacare approval process worked, were there shortcomings in the process. I want to say very firmly-and I have never had the member for Ki ldonan occasion to challenge this particular point. In fact, I believe, sincerely, if he were in my shoes, he would be supportive of it. Governments and ministers should not be making decisions on individu al drugs and be the ones who decide whether there is a value or no medical value in that drug.

We are not equi pped for it technically, and there should be some commit tee of experts who provide that advice and we rely on that advice. The question always, of course, is what is the process for that comm ittee to operate; what is the process and options for that comm ittee to decide? That is what I was interested in very much, as a min ister, is the process involved in those approvals. I know I had meetings with representatives of the MS Society in Winnip eg, the MS Society of Manit oba, MS Cli nic.

I met with our pharmacal econom ic comm ittee that makes these recommendations, and we recognized a number of improvements I think we could have made to our process. One is our process traditionally has only involved paper reviews. Often a drug, because the evolution of a product is one that is going on, it is not static, sometimes a drug may be used on an experimental basis in the province or in some program where there are much dif ferent results or improved results or better information that may not have made it into the literature yet at the time of the decision making, and there is a lag period there.

So we felt it was important that the commit tee who had the power, on occasion where it deemed appropriate, take technical representation or information from people involved in using the drug as opposed to just a paper review. Of course, one did not want to open that up that any particular lobby group or interest group would be able to come in and make a case based on anecdote.

It has to be scientific information, but certainly allowing those who are qualified to provide that information to be part of that process and make an oral presentation seemed reasonable as long as it was done in a scientif ic-based manner. So we talked to the committee about doing that. The other thing is the committee had traditionally done what I called the red light, green light approach. It was a yes or a no for inclusion in the formulary. I felt, and -

April 9, 19 98 LEGI SLATIVE AS SEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 1423 particula rly as we see more drugs developed and go through this process of their value and improvements in their value, that it was important not to give such a stark or have such a stark set of choices that there would be occasions when a drug was in that gray area, that it was not really clear, that it had limited value or it had great value but it was in a developing sense, a gray sense, and have just a standard that it had to be proven of certain amount of value, or it did not get approved to have what I call a yellow light process, a yellow light option where the comm ittee could recommend on a limited basis, a time set basis, a trial program or a test program with that product to determine exactly if the medical benefits were sufficie nt to warrant the value of the product.

So this is the first time with Betaseron that that new yellow light process is taking place. We asked the committee to reconsider the drug in light of the process changes that we thought would be good . I should tell members that in the meetings I had with the MS Soci ety, they were fully supportive of this approach when they met with me, because they recognized that there would be other products coming down the tube, including copaxine which we will discuss.

That would be in that same category, and rather than having stark choices and a more limited process, having this option would mean at the end of the day that it would allow, I think, for better decision making and improving products. One of the ironies of this I share with the member and we might want to pursue is when I met with the physicians from the MS Clinic. They said in the two or three years that will be needed to do a fair assessment on Betaseron, other potential products that are now in the development stage or coming onto the market may overtake Betaseron and its value.

That is something too we have to be cognizant of that some of the drugs that go into this product may not ever end up on the formulary, because other products may overtake them in medical value. So it is an interesting and dynamic process, but we did not want a process that saw Manitobans in need of the benefits of new pharmaceuticals disa dvantaged by the generally slow pace that takes place in the development and approvals and acceptance and understanding of pharmaceuticals products. So that is what we have done by way of process. Betaseron went back to the comm ittee.

I think the comm ittee was not able to meet until the early part of January. They considered and stuck by their position that based on the evidence that they had received, they viewed it was of more limited medical value for the cost involved, but they did recommend that we test this in the yellow light process. We agreed to do that with a pilot-actually, I would not say a pilot, a yellow light test process. It is a pilot for us in doing the first one, so we want to make sure we learn as much as we can from those who have been before us and do it in a manner that we can repeat on other products.

When we did discuss doing this, we agreed that the product would be avai lable to all Mani tobans who met the medical criteria for using Betaseron. So, I want to make this clear, no Manitoban who would meet the medical criteria for trying the drug will be ref used access to the first pilot or test program. So this is not a test in saying we are taking I 0 percent of the sample community and we are only giving it to 1 0 or 15 percent and the rest have to wait for the results of the program. I did have opportunity to visit the group in British Columbia who brought in their pilot.

I think it took them three-four months to set up their particular program. Saskatchewan I think was five-seven months, something in that range, to get their program. So we have learned, contact has been made, we have learned what others have done. With the MS Cli nic as hosts, and I want to indic ate that the Manitoba government's role really is to be the funder of the drug under the pilot and to make sure that the evaluation process is acceptable to us so that we can have that information for our comm ittee. The financial parts are in place; they have been approved by Treasury Board some time ago, in fact.

That was the easiest and fastest component to have in place, the dollar support. The evaluation tool is being developed with the MS Clinic and, if l may, Mr. Chair, allow Mr. Potter and Mr. McCormack to update commi ttee exactly on the technical information, I understand that they met yesterday with the MS Cli nic, and they certainly would want to update this comm ittee.

14 24 LEGI SLATI VE ASSEMBL Y OF MANIT OBA April 9, 19 98 *

(1020) Mr. Don Potter (Associate Deputy Minister, Internal Programs & Operations): Basic ally, the project, the pilo t pro ject is being managed through a steering committee process, a steering committee that is chaired by the Department of Health, but it includes representation from the MS Socie ty of Manitoba. It includes representation from the MS Cli nic; it includes representation from our Drug Standards Comm ittee. This group is developing the pilot program. There is a great deal of work that is being done to put the pilo t program in place.

The MS Clinic itself has agreed to be the host for this project, but, of course, we have to put staffing in place, and right now the MS Clin ic is in the process of putting that staffing in place to operate it. We have been working on the criteria, and the steering committee has agreed on the criteria for the program. We have also been working in terms of the evaluation process, and the comm ittee has just recently approved a proposal for an evaluation coming from a Dr. Colleen Metge at the University of Manitoba, who is a doctor in pharmacy.

The proposal, we belie ve, is very solid and will provide the type of information that is required as we proceed through the program. So the project is underway. Obviously, we are not in a position yet to provide the drugs until the MS Clinic is up and functioni ng, but we are working towards that end. Mr. Chomiak: So just to sum up so that I understand, the steering comm ittee has been set up, criteria have been estab lished, evaluation process is established, funding is in place, MS Clinic is to be the host.

Essentially the two major issues remaining, I presume, are for MS Clinic to staff itself up and secondly to begin the appli cation or screening procedures. Is that correct? Mr. Potter: Mr. Chair man, that is correct. The protocols have been developed for the program as well, so now we are in a case of getting everything operational, and that is what we are working on at this point. Mr. Chomiak: This might be difficult to answer, and I will not hold anyone to this. but if I were an MS patient who met the criteria, when would there be a likelihood that I would be in a position to be able to obtain Betaseron? Mr.

Potter: The steering committee has established an im plementation date of May 4 as the date that the facility will be open for business, if you like. As you say, it is very di fficult to guarantee, but that is a target date that has been set by the steering commit tee with all of the groups partici pating in the discussion. That is recognizing the timely need to get the staff on and to put the other supports in place for the program. Mr.

Chomiak: I appreciate that answer and appreciate also that the May 4 date is, of course, conditio nal and subject, but I appreciate the fact that there is some time line that can be sort of looked forward to. Can the min ister advise me whether or not he can table the protocols and the criteria for the program? Mr. Praznik: Mr. Chair, I understand that there the process or the final touches are being put on them, and I have no problem sharing this with the memb er as we go along.

I think he apprec iates it and, by the way, I appreciate his comments about the time frame, because there are so many factors beyond anyone's control, but I thin k he gathers that there is a great deal of work involved in setting this up for the MS Clin ic, that they have been moving I think at fair speed to get this done and that it is a new process that we are developing on the evaluation.

So, I think it is in everyone's interest to be able to follow this very closely and to fine tune it as we go along, because what we do here, what we learn from this yellow-light process is one I hope that we can use in the case of many other products. So when we have that in place, when we are in a position to prov ide you with a complete copy of what we are applying, I will be prepared to do so. Mr. Chomi ak: Mr. Chair person, can the minister indicate, in terms of the staffing in MS Clinic, what are we looking, is it new staff years, is it additional phys icia ns or additional clerical?

Wha t is the issue with respect to staffing?

April 9, 19 98 LEGI SLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MAN ITOBA 1425 Mr. Praznik: It is, as I understand it, clerical support and also nurse support. The nurse support, if I may just comment on this, when we were in British Columbia, one · of the points that they made to Ms.

Viv ian and myself very, very strongly was that it was important to have, I think they used a nurse in British Columbia , if I am not mistaken, who actually works with the people on a regular basis, because many of the side effects of using Betaseron can be very di fficult, and having a person involved with the clinic to be able to work with people through this process and be supportive of them ensures, I thin k, a greater success on the program .

A comment they made to us, that by having good prescreening, and that is not just the medical side of are you eligible for this drug, could this drug be helpful to you, the understanding of the side effects that can take place as well are important because in British Columb ia, if I remember correctly, and it has been some time since we spoke to them, but by having a good prescreening where people are aware of the side effects, they make their decision at the beg inning so they tend to have a higher retention rate of people who will remain on the product over a period of time.

Those who are not prepared to deal with the side effects tend to make that decision at the outset. That was one ofthe things we learned, and it was important. So the staffing goes along with the clerical part of keeping track of everything, and also providin g that kind of hands-on, day-to-day support for the people who are on the program. Mr. Chomiak: Can the minister indi cate what the cost of the program will be? Mr. Praznik: Yes, Mr. Chair, somewhere between $1. 5 million and a little over $1. 7 milli on on an annual basis. Mr.

Chomiak: So has this funding now been appropria ted to the pharmacare line in the budget and will be appropriated on an annual basis, based on that figure? Mr. Praznik: Yes, that is my understanding of it, and I know when I was part of a meeting with the doctors from the MS Clin ic, they made the point that this program would probably need two to three years, if I remember correctly, three years to do a proper assessment, something in that range. So we know we will have to budget for this period .

One of the comments they did make to us, which was interesting, was within that same period some of the other drugs that are coming on the scene may, in fact, overtake Betaseron, but you never know on these thin gs. Certainly, we want to proceed with this study on Betaseron. Mr. Chomia k: And the funding to the MS Clinic for the additional clerical help, where and how will that be funded? Mr. Praznik: That is part of the Pharmacare side, and it is included in that particular total.

As I have indicated, this is somewhat new for us, a new process, so we are learning a lot about how we are going to be doing these kind of allocations and these kind of issues, because we may have again other products that require a pilot project. For a pilot to work well, in many cases, it is important-not all-but in many cases it is im portant to have a host facility, clinic, et cetera, to be able to manage it on a consistent basis, so that we remain consis tency in measurement. I think the membe rs recognize that. Mr. Chomiak: Mr.

Chairperson, which does bring us to the issue of Copaxone and which I think probably we could use as an example. Cer tainly in the early stages of Copaxone, and in some cases, appears to be overtaking the effectiveness of the Be taseron. I do not think any of us want to go through with Betaseron what we went through with Copaxone. I wonder if the min ister might outline for me what the process is in place, and I appreciate there will be other drugs, but let us use Copaxone or other drugs as an example as to what is going to happen from here on in. Mr. Praznik: Mr.

Chair, Copaxone was also raised with us at the time I had a meeting with the MS Cli nic with Ms. Vivian and Mr. Potter, and we wanted to ensure that-the committee I think initially had rejected it. One of the benefits that I have learned in this process is allowing the comm ittee to receive evidence from experts in the field gives us a chance to check our own internal administrative process of the committee as to what information is provided to the committee. I am not pointing fingers and saying someone is at fault, but

14 26 LEG ISLATI VE ASSEMBLY OF MANIT OBA April 9, 19 98 it is a very dynamic, pharmaceutical development is a very dynamic area of science and of industry, and there is lots happening all the time. So we want to make sure as many avenues as possible are there to ensure the most up-to-date information comes forward for considera tion . I was advised that with the case of Copaxone there had either been new information or a piece of information that had not original ly come to the committee.

That has now been provided adminis tratively, and the drug is going back to the comm ittee, I take it, at their next session, and we will await their recommendation with that new information. *( 10 30) Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Chairperson, I appreciate this is hypothetical, but let us take it one step further. Assuming that Copaxone, if this red light, green light, yellow light process is in place, let us assume that the same thing happens with Copaxone as happened with the Betaseron, that there is a rejection or there is a tentative �pproval, a yellow light.

Is it the department's intention then, therefore, to go into a simi lar process whereby Copaxone would be made available through the MS Clini c funded, et cetera, and how would that work? Mr. Praznik: Mr. Chair, I know it is always di fficult when you get into hypotheticals, but I gather the member is asking if we had another yellow light recommendation.

Because this drug obviously, it is my understanding, covers the same group of people and there is quite a bit of overlap, a huge amount of overlap, I do not know how such a process would work, but we would obviously, if we had that recommendation, would want to be sitting down and dealing with those in the medical communit y about how we would handle such a project, because they do obviously overlap. So I do not want to speculate on that today, but obviously if that is the recommendation, we would have to then deal with the appropriate medical people to see how we would handle it. Mr. Chomiak: Mr.

Chair person, I will come back to that, but I want to go back to the therapeutic drug committee at this point. Do we have a list of who is on that comm ittee? Mr. Praznik: Mr. Chair, we are going to see if we have that list today. Just a caveat I put to that, and I have no problem sharing the list with the member, but I met with members of the committee and-1 believe the memb ers get an honorari um, but this is becom ing a very more involved process.

One of the things they did flag with us when I met with them-and, again, I am sure the member can appreciate the diff iculty in attracting experts in this field to be on the committee. Mr. Chomiak: Can we have a list? Mr. Praznik: We do not have one here, but we will get it this afternoon for the member. One of the difficulties they flagged with us is that they do not want to be in a position where every particular group-and I have seen this and I know the member has seen it-that people who are suffering from an illness hear of a drug.

If one is in very desperate medical circums tances, the hope that drug brings can-and I would be in the same position if I were in their shoes, so I do not off er this as a criticism. I think it is a reality of human nature and of life. We all want to live and if we feel we are dying, we want to go after whatever possible cure could be out there.

One of the things they flagged with us is they do not want to be in a position where they are indivi dually lobbied at their homes or their offices with respect to their decisions, that what makes the comm ittee work is that their decisions are based on scientific evidence. I think it is in the public interest that that happen.

So the only reason I flag that with the member, I have no problem providing that list, but I ask for some di scretion in how he shares that list, because I would not want to be in a position some day where indiv iduals with their own cir cumstances lobby members and I cannot get memb ers for the com mittee. Mr. Chomiak: I certainly appreciate that di fficulty. Can the min ister, because this actually is the fundamental question, outline the guidelines and criteria that are utilized by the committee in reaching its decisions? · Mr. Praznik: Mr.

Chair, one of the things I have learned as we have developed this process on the Be taseron issue-and I am very thankful for it-is in a plate that is more of a platter than a dinner plate of

�A�pr�i1�9�, �19�9�8�--------� LE�G�IS�L�A�T�I V�E�A�S�S=E�M�B�L�Y_O�F�M=A=N�I�T�O�B�A __________________ 1 427 issues. As a Min ister of Health, you only have so many hours in the day, and this issue allowed me to get into the Pharmacare process. I know in meetings I have had with them, we do have guidelines for their approval, and we will bring those for you this afternoon. Mr. Potter thought we would only be discussing specifically Be taseron and does not have that information. So we will make sure we get it for you for this afternoon's sitting, but we do have guidelines.

One of the things that we are working on developing is to refine those further. I shared this issue informally with some of my provincial colleagues from across the country, and they have the same problem. On a national basis, there is a need to be developing some criteria, more in-depth criteria for the assessment and approval of pharmaceutical products. It is somewhat a hodgepodge. Now we have the general guidelines; they are relatively simila r.

Some of the principles are simi lar, but many of the criteria for establishing whether or not those principles are met, pardon me, are not very well defined, and it is the case in Manitoba, too, and so somewhat the committee sometimes feels that they need more sense of direction. I am a great bel iever that within the nation, there is a need to be doing this on somewhat of a consistent basis across the country.

So there is a lot of work still to do in this area, and when we provide you with those guidelines, I indica te very clearly, they are not as complete or in-depth in terms of criteria as, in fact, the comm ittee would like. One of the ch arges I have given them, and we will be working with it nationally is to refine those further, because this will become a growing area with in health adminis tration. As the pharmaceutical industry continues to grow, more research is being done.

The value of products, often high-cost products, is going to become a big question in health care, and I share with the member this very brief story. I vis ited a pharmacist who lives in my constituency who works in a rural hospital and regularly is inundated with drug companies dropping by him products. He made the observation with me that often a new product on the market will have minimal medical value but have a considerably higher cost, but it will be the next generation of the product that you can say is a little bit better.

I think the member agrees, if we are going to have public health care and it is going to survive into the next century, we as the adminis trators and funders of that system have to ensure that we are getting value out of the products that are developed for the dollars we are paying for them. How we do that is still a matter of a great deal of work and refinement, but that general principle certainly is one that we must be looking at. Mr.

Chom iak: Some of the issues that I wish to pursue are conti ngent on some of the docume ntation that is going to come back this afternoon, so the minister has indicated they will be here. The other tie in with this, of course, is, we probably are going to have a more in-depth dis cussion on Pharmacare in general when we get to that line or when we

schedule it. Maybe I will cease this line of questioning at this point. Perhaps we should move on to the legislative portion. We can come back to this when the documents come this afternoon, something along those lines. Does that make sense? Mr. Praznik: Yes, it certainly does. I know the member appreciates this as a very important area, I think, the future of the Pharmacare program and some of these principles. Mr. Cha irperson : The honourable minis ter might want to introduce another staff member. Mr. Praznik: Yes, Mr. Chair, I would like to introduce Ms. He ather McLaren, who is a barrister and solicitor by trade, an

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	36-4-29a
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	36th 4th hansardpdf 29a.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	bdbc25cdaeb9485e03ccb796bb01cafdc4e5842e

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