Manitoba Hansard — 25 February 1988 (Sitting 11, 33rd Legislature, 3rd Session)

33-3-11

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Thursday, 25 February, 1988. Time - 1:30 p.m. OPENING PRAYER by Madam Spea ker. MADAM SPEAKER, Hon. M. Phillips: Presenting Petitions . . . Read ing and Receiving Petitions . . . Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees . . . MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS AND TABLING OF REPORTS MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Employment Services and Economic Securi ty. HON. L. EVANS: Madam Speaker, I'd like to table a state ment on "Social Assistance Reforms." MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. The Honourable Mi nister of Labour. HON. M.

SMITH: Madam Speaker, I'd like to table the report on the admini stration of the Rent Regulation Program for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1986. MADAM SPEAKER: Notices of Motion . . . INTRODUCTION OF BILLS MR. M. DOLIN Introduced, by leave, Bill No. 5, The Manitoba Institute of the Purchasing Management Association of Canada Act; Lol sur l'lnstltut manltobaln de I' Association canadlenne de gestlon des achats. MADAM SPEAKER: Before moving to Oral Questions MR. G. MERCIER: A point of order , Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mem ber for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: On a point of order, Madam Speak er.

The Page has just delivered to members of the House a document which reads, "Min isterial Statement, Honourable Len Evans, Social Assistance Reforms." We on this side would take this, Madam Speaker, as a min isterial statement, and I would ask that the critic be allow to resp ond. She does not wish to table a written statement but wishes to respond verbally. MADAM SPEAKER: Order please.

On the honourable mem ber's point of order, when reports are tabled, I am usually not given one but, seeing the statement that the Opposition House Leader has referred to, it Is entitled a ministerial statement. lt is not entitled a report. So, In my opinion, the Honourable Mini ster has tabled it as read and the honourable critic would have an opportunity to res pond. The Honou rable Member for Gladstone. Order please. The Honourable Government House Leader on another point of order. HON. J. COWAN: On a point of order, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: On another point of order? HON. J. COWAN: Yes, Madam Speaker.

Just on the matter of the tabling of statements in the House and the making of statements in the House, it is in fact a gray area where there have been numerous disagreements . . . SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! HON. J. COWAN: I would expect that if the members opposite, Madam Speaker, gave me the courtesy of hearing out what I have to say, they would not only agree that I'm not reflect ing upon any rulings but they might also agree that I'm offering a constructive suggestion on how to deal with this issue in the future. And it is a point of order.

MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. 289 A point of order Is to raise a point of digr ession from the normal proceed ings. it's not a time for helpful suggestions, unless it's on a point of order. I already recognized the Honourable Member for Glad stone. MRS. C. OLESON: Thank ypu, Madam Speaker. I'm glad we can count on you to enforce some of the practices that have taken place normally in the House. I would thank the Minis ter for coming up with this statement that was supposed to be a statemen t. it's been long awaited, of course, In the communiti es.

The task force report of 1983 suggested that this system be brought In place. Last summer , the Min ister announced In Brandon that he was going to come forth with a White Paper, and he told me that, In probably late August or early Septem ber, it would be for thcoming, so we're glad to see it's finally arrived. it's rather Interesting the form in which it's arrived. lt has travelled throughout the news media for two days and finally we get to the House with it where I thought, in my naive way, things were supposed to be announced in the House and then circulate throughout the province.

However, we can set that aside for a few minu tes. it is really unfortunate that we have to have more emphasis placed on social assistance. lt's unfortunate the welfare rolls are rising in the rural areas partly because, and I would say mainly because, of the crisis in the farm commun ity. So it is really unfortuna te that we have to place so much emphasis on this. Now the Min ister says in the news release released this morning, he says he'll be introducing legislation, and I quote: "My department will then take a consultive

Thursday, 25 February, 1988 phased approach to bringing municipal assistance under the provincial social allowances program." Well, Madam Speaker, once again we see an example of the way this government consults. In early February, the Minister of Municipal Affairs met with an advisory committee of the UMM, Union of Manitoba Mu nicipalities, at which time he said that either he or the Minister of Employment and Economic Security would be meeting with that committee to discuss the approach that was to be taken to social assistance. That meeting did not take place.

No consulting has taken place, and yet he's talking away again, as thi s government is wont to do, about consulting. He Is announcing the changes today. He has not discussed it with the UMM. A report In the Winnipeg Sun Indicates that the Minister says that he has full support of the UMM. How does he know? They did not pass the resolution, Mr. Minister. In November of 1987, a Resolution No. 6, If you want to check, came before the UMM meeting, their annual meeting, and was defeated.

He may be thinking of the resolution of 1985 which was passed but the one In '87 was defeated, so I'm wondering where he thinks he has his support. As I said, once again, it's an example of the cooperation that this government gives and how they consult. They decide what to do. They tell people what they're doing, and then they talk about it with no Indication of change. I would suggest that he use this advisory committee of UMM to set up this program.

I'd further advise him that he should usa, as his advisers, the president of the Union of Manitoba Municipali ties, some representative from the Secretary- Treasurers' Association, who are intimately Involved with this problem and have had all kinds of Input to me on the problems, and I have passed those onto the Minister. So the Minister has been aware for a long time that there are problems in this area. I think he should also consult and have on his committee somebody from the rural area who is receiving social assistance, because those people will also know the problems.

Now one of the inequities in the present system, Madam Speaker, Is that rural people cannot tap into the job creation programs that the Minister has in his department. I hope that he addresses that Inequity. I hope, as we ask questions and as the Minister responds to questioning In Estimates and question period, etc., that we are given a clear understanding of what the cost Implications of this are to the province, and what it will do to help the people on social assistance and relieve some of the municipal people of a burden which they themselves will tell you they have been having difficulty with.

I wish this Minister had consulted with them more and found out what the difficulties were first-hand. Thank you, Madam Speaker. INTRODUCnON OF GUESTS MADAM SPEAKER: Before moving to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the gallery, where we have from the Murdock MacKay Collegiate, sixty Grade 9 students under the direction of Mrs. Swetz and Mr. Remple. The school is located In the constituency of the Honourable Minister of Health. We have, from the Red Sucker Lake School, ten Grade 10 students, under the direction of Ms. Pat Graham.

The school is located in the constituency of the Honourable Minister of Northern Affairs. On behalf of all the members, we welcome you to the Legislature this afternoon. 290 ORAL QUESTIONS MPIC - revised projection MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Ste. Rose. MA. G. CUMMINGS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question Is to the Minister responsible for MPIC. There have recently been statements attributed to the Minister and to the new president of MPIC that Manltobans can expect ever-spiralling costs in Autopac repairs. ever-spiralling costs In the premiums that we'll be paying.

Is the Minister now in the possession of a revised projected financial statement for the corporation for the year 1988, and would he care to share that with the House? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honou rable Mi nister responsible for MPIC. HON. B. UAUSKI: Madam Speaker, if the honourable member is asking whether I'm carrying a crystal ball around, I am not. Madam Speake r, there will be discussions, I am certain, In committee as to projections of claims and costs, and what extent the claims experience will be on the performance of M PlC for the fiscal year ending October 31, 1988.

We will have those discussions but those, at best, are projections and guesstimates as to what the claims might be. We will have those discussions in committee. MA. G. CUMMIN GS: Madam Speaker, obviously someone In the corporation had better have a crystal ball, as the Minister refers to. They better be making some projections as to where the corporation is headed. I wonder If he would confirm to the House that two of the reasons that they may be revising the future of Autopac are:

a) the people of Manitoba are reducing their coverage because of the high deductible, because of the expense that they've been faced with in their Autopac and, therefore, the premiums will be reduced to the company this year; and

b) that the last-minute changes that the corporation, as a result of this Minister's Interference, have brought In - they were very quick to tell us there was a $17 million change because of the merit system. The Minister Is now continuing to make changes. If he hasn't got a projection, what satisfaction is there to the people of Manitoba? He must tell us where we're headed with this corporation, and he can't pretend that he doesn't have a crystal ball. HON. B. UAUSKI: Madam Speak er, I think my honourable friend is confused, as usual.

He just wrote me a letter about 30 days ago, alleging that the corporation lost $28 million in the years'84 and'85. In those two years, the corporation made $18 million in'84

Thursday, 25 February, 1988 and $9 million in'85. I just don't want the honourable member to get too confused. The honourable mem ber, as well, ind icates that Man itobans are in fact reducing their coverage. I don't know where he gets those figures. lt may very well be that some Manitobans will in fact change the level of coverage that they have but, Madam Speak er, that will as well have an off-setting effect on the other side of the ledger In terms of reduced claims costs and admini strative costs, because claims have to be adjusted.

So, he can't come to the conclusion that he's come to, just by virtue that there may be some changes in coverage. MR. G. CUMMINGS: Madam Speaker, I was hoping that somebody was in charge of the shop. The Autopac agents of this province just received the information booklet today, I und erstand by couri er, that was supposed to have been available for the customers of MPIC when they were renewing their Autopac this year. Can the Minister please explain this shoddy management position? HON. B. URUSKI: Madam Speaker, I don't know what brochure or booklet the member speaks of.

The new rating books that the agents have used and the guidelines were in agents' hands prior to the renewals being issued in the mail. If there are some other additional instructions that the member is speaking about, I'm not aware of those. Those would be adminis trative matters that the corporation would look at. But the rating manuals in which the new 1988 rates that motorists had to deal with were in agents' hands prior to the renewals being put in the mall. Mentor - sawmill - sale inclusion MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights. MRS. S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

My question is to the Mini ster responsible for Man for. The government has been enga ged in negotiations for the sale of Manfor for some time, and rumours abound that the deal signing is somewhat Imminent. Can the Mini ster assure the House today that the sawmill operation will be part of the sale? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister respo nsible for Manfor. HON. J. STORIE: Madam Speaker, the Member for River Heights, I think, has probably read in reports that we are in negotiations. I have made it a habit not to discuss negotiations in public.

That's at, obvious ly, the request of the parties who are interested in pursuing the possible purchase of Man for. I can assure the member, as I have assured the people in The Pas and the surrou nding area, that the Intention of our discussions is to make sure that there is Increased employment, that there's increased investment and that wood resource in that area of the province Is put to the highest and best use. MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: A supple mentary question to the same Minist er. 291 Will the gover nment obtain guarantees from any purchaser that the sawmill will continue to operate, in that it is the sawm ill that employs most of the Natives emplo yed at the Manfor site? HON. J. STORIE: I certainly don't intend to engage the Member for River Heights, who has an astou nding level of ignorance about what Manfor is about, about what its history is, about what has been succes sful and what isn't successfu l, and I don't intend to negotiate on the floor of the House. Manfor -Native retraining MRS. S.

CARSTAIRS: Madam Speaker, I won't stoop to the same depths as the Mini ster, but will the Minister respond to the following question? In meetings with northern chiefs earlier this week, the Min ister promised equity for Natives. Will the Minis ter guarantee that, if there is any displa cement of workers as a result of the Ma nfor sale, this government will provide retraining programs? HON. J. STORIE: Madam Speaker, I don't know where the Member for River Heights is getting her information.

I've given the Member for River Heights and the House the assurances that I have given everyone to whom I have spoken about the potential sale of Manfor, Madam Speaker , and I will reiterate those. There's increased employment, incr eased in vestment, incr eased and better use of the wood resource. UMM - exclusion re social assistance changes MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Gladstone. MRS. C. OLESON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Mini ster of Employment Services and Economic Security.

The Mini ster of Municipal Affairs told the Advisory Commit tee of the Union of Manitoba Municipalities, when he met with them in early February, that he or the Mini ster of Employment Services and Economic Security would consult with the union before making an annou ncement on changes to the del ivery of social assistance to rural communities, and that did not take place. Why did he not consult with the Union of Muni cipalities? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Employment Services. HON. L.

EVANS: Ma dam Speak er, the Union of Manitoba Municipalities and indeed the Urban Municipal Association have advised us in writing some time ago their concern that the Province of Manitoba should take over this social service area, and indeed this was recommended by the Task Force on Social Allowances that was set up a few years ago, and we've Ind icated this in this House. As a matter of fact, in Hansard last year, there was some considerable debate on this. So there's been a

Thuraday, 25 February, 1988 lot of discussion with many organizations, Including mun icipal governments. We still wish to dis cuss but, in principle, we believe in a one-tier sy stem. it's high time, Madam Speak er, that we enh ance social justic e in this province, and it's simply not good enough to have the Inequitable situation that we have, particularly in the small municip alities of this province. The point is, Madam Speaker, that there are many things to be discus sed with regard to the mechanisms and so on, and these discussions will go on.

Having said that, Madam Speaker, I'd like to remind the honourable member that seven out of ten provinces have indeed a provincial system of social welfare. There are no municipal governments involved . But I'm satisfied that, along with my colleague, the Mini ster of Municipal Affairs, there will be ample consultation. As a matter of fact, he had a meeting not long ago. -(lnte rjection) Yes , yes , this is a good question. I'd like to find out from the member eventually whether she Is in favour or against what we are trying to do to impr ove social assistance.

SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, ohl MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please. Social aniatance change• - coat MRS. C. OLESON: Madam Speaker, we're not here to consult about what the seven other provinces in Canada are doing. I asked you why you did not consult with the UMM, and I'll ask a further question. After the November meeting of the Union of Muni cipalities, did the Mini ster ascertain why that motion was defeated? Did he find out what the reasons were behind the defeat of that motion? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mini ster of Municipal Affairs. HON. B.

URUSKI: Madam Speak er, I'd like to point out to the House that I did meet with the president and the executive of the union just recently. Madam Speaker, the Honourable Min ister was out of town that day and could not join me at that meeting. We did dis cuss the very issue that the member raises that there was no consultation on, and the president of the Union of the Manitoba Municip alities recognized that something should be done. In fact his words were that, general ly, we have chased people out of rural areas Into the towns with our welfare policies, and that we would move.

We did discuss the matter of Imple mentation and their desire for further consultations, and that assurance, Madam Speak er, was given. In fact, the Mini ster's staff will be meeting with the union during the spring meetings to talk about the implementation process, Madam Speaker. Social Maietance change• - coet MRS. C. OLESON: Could the Min ister tell the House today, and the people of Manitoba, what would be the total cost of Implementing these changes?

What will be assessed to municipal taxpayers and how much to provincial taxpayers? 292 MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mini ster of Employment Services and Economic Securi ty. HON. L. EVANS: Madam Speaker, after discussing this matter with the honourable member over the years, Including last year at some length, I'm still at a loss to know where the honourable member stands on this or where the Opposition is. Are they in favour or agains t Impr oving this system In the Province of Manitoba? Are they in favour of enhancing social justice in Manitoba or not?

The estimated net cost Is just a ballpark figure at this time and , recal ling that we do cost-share with the Federal Government, our estimated net cost, once we get it on a full year's operation, is approximately $2.5 million. We will be discussing, as the Minister of Municipal Affairs stated, various details with regard to the lmplemention of this and the contributions and so on, but I can assure the honourable member that the munici palities in Manitoba will not be paying out any more, and likely a lot less, than they have in the past.

Northern Tax Allowance - exclusion MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Thompson. MR. S. ASHTON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Mini ster of Finance. Last year, I raised my concern in the Legislature about the exclusion of Thompson and Wabowden from the proposed Northern Tax Allowance. At the time, it appeared that Thompson and Wabowden were two out of 48 communities that have been excluded.

According to the new guide lines for Northern Tax Al lowance, it now appears that there are 200 communit ies in Ma nitoba that are eligible , and Thompson and Wabowden are still excluded, and communities as far south as Swan River, Winnip egosis are eligible for the Northern Tax Allowance.

In view of the fact, Madam Speaker, this is outrageous in regard to the residents of Thompson and Wabowden, I'd like to ask the Mini ster whether he will once again, as he did last year, raise this issue with the Federal Government and demand a review of the criteria that will give justice to the residents of those two communities. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Mi nister of Finance. HON. E. KOSTYRA: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I thank the member for his question.

I too share the concern that the Memb er for Thom pson has, and I kn ow other members who represent communities in the North and indeed all or many people In northern Manitoba feel over the discrimi natory practices of the Federal Government when it comes to Northern Manitoba. I will, as the member suggests, take up this issue again with the federal Min ister of Finance and urge him to reconsider and use some common sense in terms of the approach to the treatment of various northern communities. MR. S. ASHTON: As part of my supplem entar y, I'd like to table a copy of the list of the communities and a

Thursday, 25 February, 1988 map outlining those communit ies that are included, and the two that are excluded. I'd also like to ask the Mini ster whether he will also raise the concerns of some of the border communities, such as Benito, which is 20 miles from Swan River, which now finds that it is excluded from the Northern Tax Allowance and faces the possibility of its communi ty being faced with an exodus of population because of, once again, the arbitrary and unfair guidelines that the Federal Government has introduced for this allowance. HON. E.

KOSTYRA: I look forward to receiving the material that the member tabled. The issue of the community of Benito has been raised with me by the member representing that area, the Minister of Agriculture, because he expressed some degree of shock and amazement over the arbitrary treatment of that commun ity In his area. I intend to also review that matter and raise those concerns also with the Federal Minister and hope that common sense also will be dealt with In terms of how Benito is being treated by the Federal Government. MR. S. ASHTON: One fina l supplementary, Madam Speaker.

I was wondering if the Finance Mi nister could also ask that the Federal Government consult directly with the com muni ties affe cted, In cluding specifically Thompson and Wabowden and other communities, such as Benito, since they obviously have no concept of what the North is all about when they have to turn around and say that those communities are not northern and are not eligible for the Northern Tax Allowance. Will the Min ister ask for consultation? HON. E. KOSTYRA: Yes, I will.

In fact , I will Invite the federal Finance Mi nister to take the opportunity when he next comes to Manitoba to visit the North to get a better understanding of the needs of northern residents and the fiscal layout of those communities so he can better understand tha t a common-sense approach should be dealt with in terms of the treatment of those communities. Trial date - delays MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for St. Norbert. MR. G. MERCIER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question follows upon the comments of the Member for Brandon East and the Member for Thompson about justice.

Madam Speaker, when the NDP assumed office in 1981, it took just three months to set a crimina l case down for trial in the Provincia l Judges' Court, Madam Speaker. That delay is now 10 months or lon ger. I would ask the Attorney-General whether the Deputy Attorney General, Tanner Elton, was articulating the policy of the Attorney- General's Department when he said that a 10-month delay was no reason for alarm, or was the Deputy Attorney -General wrong? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Attorney-General. HON. V. SCHROEDER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. 293 We're always working on that problem and it goes up and down.

The member refers to it being th ree months at a specific time. lt was longer than that during other times and has been shorter than what it is right now as recently as six months ago. In fact, I was involved with one particular case yesterday where we were looking back at a file where a trial date was set for about six months down the road from July in 1987. Those things are concerns. We would like to get speedier justice. I've had, in fact , a meeting with the chief judge, at which we had a fairly lengthy discussion of some of his ideas as to how to go about reducing the backlog.

He feels that there are things that can be done within current resource of allocations without spending more provincial funds to bring down that backlog some. We are working toward doing precisely that. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker, the Attorney General is correct when he says tha t the delay was longer than three months prior to 1981. lt was a six month delay when the now Premier was Attorney General in 1987. We reduced it to three months, Madam Speaker, when we were in gov ernment.

Madam Speaker, in view of the concerns of the Association of Crown Attorneys and the concern about the admin istration of justice and how this has been adversely affecte d, for example, with difficultie s in witnesses giving evidence at trial. Since the delay has been increasing significantly ever since the NDP took office in 1981 and has now reached this deplorable state of taking 10 months to set a matter down for trial, Madam Speaker, I ask the Attorney-General: What specific steps is he taking to reduce the delay in setting matters down for trial? HON. V.

SCHROEDER: One specific item we're looking at Is to do what we can within the system to ensure - (Interjection) - Do you want an answer or do you want to yap? If the Member for Emerson could possibly contain him self and listen, it's a serious question and I'm trying to provide a serious answer, an answer with respect to which we've been attem pting to deal.

Madam Speaker, what we're attempting to do in those instances where it's clear from fairly close to the outset after particulars are exchanged with the lawyer for an accused and where it is intended that later on there will be a guilty plea, we are wor king on ways to reduce any temptation of setting those kinds of dates down as though they will be contested, thereby blocking off court time now for six months or two months or thr ee months from now, whatever, when we know now that in all likeli hood we won't use that court time.

We're also looking at possibly overbook ing in the way we're doing right now in other courts and is occurring in other provinces on the assumption that a fairly significant proport ion of cases may not go ahead because of changes in pleas or because of other circu mstances at any given time. Having said that, Madam Speaker, I point out that fairly recently we've been able to set down cases for as early as several months from now. There are always openings. Those who say I want justice tomorrow can be accommodated . There are holes generally because cases fall apart because people change pleas, because

Thursday, 25 February, 1988 witnesses are unavailable and so on. So If people want speedy trials, there is that availabili ty. MR. G. MERCIER: Madam Speaker, the president of the Crown Attorneys Assoc iation has said there are Insufficient number of prosecutors and tha t the admini stration of justice is being threatened by these undue delays which are not In the public interest but are in the accused's interest. Would the Attorney General consider hiring more Crown prosecuters to deal with the delay and perhaps eliminating some of the 11 6 commu nicators that the government employs? HON. V.

SCHROEDER: Obviously, today is spending day for the Opposi tion. If you want to have determination made on the basis of employees, as to how many should be employed, we would have a massive Increase in employment In this province. You go and talk to nurses, they will tell you they're overw orked. I believe they are. They would say we should have far more nurses working. If you talk to court reporters they would say we need far more court reporters. If you talk to hig hways workers, police officers, fire fighters, what have you, all of them will tell you that they need more, and they're probably all right.

Optimal ly, we could use more help In each one of the areas that all of us are resp onsible for. We also hear from these people about taxes. We shouldn't increase taxes in this province. Taxes are too high. The deficit is too high and yet every single day, other than Budget day, when they complain about taxes and the deficit, they're telling us to spend more: more on roads, more on the justice system, more on the health system, more on social assistance, more on every single area that they get inv olved with, more on agriculture, and so on.

Well, Madam Speaker , we are attempting res ponsibly to deal with the justice sys tem, which we believe is a fine justice sys tem, which is working and will continue to work. We will do our best to fine tune it, but we will not simply throw more money at the problem. Rideau Park Centre - delay in opening MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Brandon We st. MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speaker , my question is dir ected to the Minister of Health.

The Rldeau Park Centre is a brand new $5 million, 100-bed, psycho-geriatric facility In Brandon. lt was completed on January 1, and it's expected to be vacant until April 1 and perhaps beyond. Why? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minis ter of Health. HON. W. PARAS IUK: Madam Sp eak er, I had the opportunity of visiting that facility when I visited Brand on to open the CAT scan that the Government of Manitoba provided for Brandon.

I would like to say to the Deputy Leader of the Conservative Party that facility for tod ay, that facility in fact was completed, that furniture had been ordered, the staff are being put in place. Furniture was late in 294 arrival, but that is being pursued, and we would hope that facility will be open and opera tional in the very near future, Madam Speaker. MR. J. McCRAE: Madam Speaker, just to correct the Min ister, the people of Manitoba, through their tax dollars, provided the CAT scan to the Brandon General Hospital, not honourable members opposite.

The Minister failed to answer the question, Madam Speaker, about why it is this government, and what is the matter with this government's planning that a facility like this has to sit vacant for three months. HON. W. PARASIUK: Madam Speaker, the Government of Manitoba has the mandate of the peo ple of Manitoba, and it's the New Democratic Government that made that decision to put a CAT scan in Brandon. I never heard of any Conservative Government in Manitoba from '77 to'8 1 making any commitment of that nature, Madam Speaker.

So I would like to ind icate to today's Deputy Leader of the Conservative Party that program of establishing a psy cho-geriat ric centre makes eminent sense, reflects good planning. There was a hold up with respect to del ivery of furniture. There is the matter of transferring staff. But, Madam Speaker, that facility will be there for tens of years. lt will be servi ng Brandon and Southwestern Manitoba in a very good way, despite what appears to be the ill will of the Deputy Leader of the Conservative Party with respect to this project. MR. J.

McCRAE: The commitment made by this government to introduce the CA T scan to the Brandon General Hospital was made after it was dragged, kicking and scre aming, into that commitment by this party, Madam Speaker. The plan was that the staffing for the Ri deau Park Centre was to be emp loyees made available by the demolition of the Valleyview Pavilion at Brandon Mental Health Centre. Is the plan still that the staff for the Rideau Park Centre should be BMHC staff, and which bargaining agent will speak for those staff? HON. W.

PARA SIUK: Madam Speaker , my understanding Is that is a matter of negotiation. lt's also a matter of certification with respect to the local group, and we will see what happens following normal democratic procedures. MR. J. McCRAE: Is it the problem, Madam Speaker, that the Min ister has to wait to find out what the certification proceed ings decide before they know what they can do about staffi ng? Is staffing the problem that keeps that place vacant for three or more months? HON. W. PARASIUK: Madam Speaker, this side of the House believes in the rule of law.

That side, Madam Speaker, occas ionally sinks into anarchy. We will follow the rule of law with respect to procedures, as has been done in the past and as I hope will be done in the future, because that's the way a civilization operates in a democratic and effective way.

Thursday, 25 February, 1988 Crown Corp'n - financial stmt release MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Rhineland. MR. A. BROWN: Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Mini ster of Crown Investments. Last week a news media person came to me with a list of Crown corporat ions' profits and losses, which had been given to him by the Premier's media aide. Would the Min ister please tell this house just what he was up to when he had the Premier's media aide, Mr. Michael Balagus, inform members of the media that overa ll net profits of Crowns was approximately $95 million?

This, Madam Speaker , included a figure of $14 2 million profit by the Manitoba Liquor Commission, an agency whose figures have never been incorporated among the Crown corporations because it's not a Crown corpora tion. Madam Speaker , information was provided that was not available in the House; it was provided to the news media and that was not available in this House. Now that's an absolute breach of privilege. Can the Min ister explain his actions? MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister for Crown Investments. HON. G.

DOER : Ma dam Speak er, most of the inf ormation that was requested, quite frank ly, was available to this House. The member mentioned the Liquor Commission. That report was tabled and copied to all members of this House, I believe, some months ago. The figure used in the Te lephone Sys tem, for example, had been released in a press release. Projections for '87 had been put in a press release and released publicly and given to the Opposition and the Opposition critic. Many of those num bers had been released to members of the public.

There were some projections for '87 that have not yet had the final bottom line, and one of them obviously is the Public Insurance Corpora tion which the Mini ster will table. Madam Speaker, the num bers that were requested were only dealing with the Crown holding company. The Liquor Commission, as the member knows, is part of the holding company. lt is part of the holding compan y, Madam Speaker , so that we can have public hearings on the Liquor Commission.

For the first time in the history of this Cham ber, the Liquor Commission will be heard in committee with the senior officials of the Liquor Commission present before the Legislature, consistent with the Spivak Task Force, consistent with the reforms we made last year for more accountable Crown corpora tions in Manitoba, Madam Speaker. MR. A. BROWN: Thank you. My question is to the same Min ister. Did the Min ister instruct the Premier's aide to release these figures, or was Mr. Balagus acting on his own volition without instruction? HON. G.

DOER: We ll, Madam Speaker, one day the govern ment (sic) wants open government. The next day, when the media asks for some information, they condemn us. 295 MADAM SPEAKER: Order please. Could the honour able member wait till he's recog nized? HON. G. DOER: Okay. I'm anxious, Madam Speaker. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Crown Investments. HON. G. DOER: Thank you, Madam Speaker. One day we get asked for information, and the next day we get accused of withholding information.

Madam Speaker, I think it's very important that the holding company information of the actual losses - and there were some - the actual surplus es - and there were some - are made public. Madam Speaker , most of our Crown corporat ions are intended to break even because we want to keep the rates the lowest in Canada. For example, if the Manitoba Te lephone System was to charge the same as Bell Canada, Madam Speaker, we would make $50 million or $60 million a year for the last 10 years.

But the purpose of public corporations is to provide low rates, to provide employment in Man itoba, to provide an economic base in this province, and to provide services to Manitobans. We believe, Madam Speaker, there have been some problems with the Crown corpora tions, and we took action with Flyer Ind ustries. We 're looking at action in turning around Manfor, Madam Speak er, but the majority of our Crown corporat ions are having good jobs with low rates in this province. MPIC - net loss MR. A. BROWN: My question is to the same Min ister. What is the net loss of the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporat ion?

Is it the $69 million as reported by Mr. Balagus? Why was this information not forwarded to the Mini ster resp onsible, so that he could have answered the question when it was asked of him last week? HON. G. DOER: Madam Speaker, the final numb ers for a numb er of Crown corpora tions for the '87 year are project ions. The figure for the Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation is not completed. The figure for the Manitoba Te lephone System is at the auditors, and we expect to have a signed financial state ment, I believe, early next week.

The figures again for Manitoba Data Services, the organization that produced an annual report at $3.9 million in the '86-87 year, Ma dam Speak er, the project ions are for $1.1 million surplus this year, and that even includes a rebate of some $2 million or $3 million to the organizations, including Health, that are using the Manitoba Data Services. Madam Speaker, there are some Crown corporations that need some work, and that's fairly obvious to all members in this House. We have said publicly that we have a great deal of work to do with our Manitoba Public Insurance Corpora tion.

Madam Speaker, we have also taken action where Crown corporations were a drain on this economy. Flyer Indus tries is one of them, Madam Speaker, and the

Thur.cley, 25 February, 1988 second action is, of course, the issue of Manfor which, since the days of CFI, has been a tremendous drag on the Manitoba econo my. The Min ister has turned that corporation around, and we're on the right side of the cycle to have an intelligent deal for Manitobans. Crown corp'n loaHa - write-off MA. A. BROWN: I have a new que stion for the Min ister , Madam Speak er.

Order-in-Council 1363 - and I have it right here - dated December 2, 1987, which was an Order-in Council which Executive Council refused to release until the middle of January 1988, and this effect ively writes off $1 85 million in Crown agency losses; 172 million of that amount in Crown corporations. Now, it's small wonder that Manitobans have lost complete confidence in this government's management capabilities. Would the Minister ind icate whether these losses will ever be reflected in Crown corpor ation financial statements? HON. G.

DOER: Madam Speaker, the member full knows that the losses that he's ref erring to in the Order in-Council were discussed at commi ttee, were discussed by the Provincial Auditor with the Min ister of Finance.

Madam Speaker, the Auditor has recommended for a number of years that the losses that started, some of them, back with the CFI days with the members opposite, the losses that are shown on the books of the province and will be indeed anticipated for recovery be accurately reflected on the books of this province, Madam Speaker. lt was the Auditor's recommendation, and I quote, Madam Speaker: "What we are doing is giving full recognition here for the movement towards a fuller accrual basis of accounting, which doesn't necessitate the actual expenditure of cash to be incu rred before there is a recog nit ion that expenses have been incur red ." So, Madam Speaker, those are not my words, those are the Auditor's words.

Madam Speaker, for the first time ever in this House, when the Min ister of Finance tables his Budget, there will be a provision for Crown corporation losses , as he has promised yesterday to the Finance critic. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MA. C. MANNESS: Madam Speaker, I direct my question to the same Min ister. Given the comments that he has just made, maybe he can answer one question that the Minis ter of Finance has never been able to answer, Madam Speaker.

Using the arguments that he did previous, Madam Speaker , that all the Crowns, including the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission, be considered as one, can this Min ister explain why the revenues coming forth from the Liquor Control Commission are shown within the Estimates and why the losses, $185 million written off, are not reflected in the Estimates of expenditur e? HON. G.

DOER: Madam Speak er, this question was answered by the Provincial Auditor at committee, and the Minister of Finance was at commit tee, in terms of 296 the accounting procedures that he recom mended, and the advice that the Mini ster of Finance followed in terms of having the methodology that was implemented this year on the recommendation of the Provincial Auditor. MA. C.

MANNESS: Madam Speaker, given that I am fully aware as what's on the record, I again ask the Minis ter to explain his action as to how he could then possibly lump together, in the whole area of Crown financial activity, the results from the Liquor Control Commission with the losses with the other Crowns, using the same argument that he has. HON. G. DOER: Madam Speaker, the que stion was asked in terms of the year-over-year operations of Mani toba Crown corporat ions unde r the holding compan y.

The figures were given in terms of the many Crown corporations that are under the holding company that was passed in this House last year, in terms of those Crowns that had a surplus or profit situation. Second ly, Madam Speaker, the Crown corporations that were at a net deficit situation, were also released . In fact, many of these reports have been released in this House and will be released, Madam Speaker, in the future. Madam Speaker, the Member for Morris questioned the Provincial Auditor and the Minis ter of Finance at committee, and asked why this was taking place.

The Provincial Auditor replied that this is the more modern way of showing losses that have developed year-over-year for a numb er of years, primarily by the way, Madam Speaker , in Flyer Industries which we have sold, and the CFI-Manfor which is making a surplus this year. MADAM SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has expired. ORDERS OF THE DAY MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Government House Leader. HON. J.

COWAN: Madam Speaker, would you please call for Second Reading of Bill No. 2 and, following the debate on Bill No. 2, however long it takes, would you then, if there is time re maining, please call the government resolution standing in the name of the Prem ier. SECOND READING BILL NO. 2 - THE HEALTH SERVICES DEVELOPMENT TRUST FUND ACT HON. W. PARASIUK presented Bill No. 2, The Health Services Development Trust Fund Act; La

Loi sur le Fonds fiduciaire en vue de l'amel ioration des services de sante, for Second Read ing. (Recommended by His Honour, the Lieut enant -Governor .) MOTION preaented. MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Min ister of Health. HON. W. PARASIUK: Madam Speaker, the introduction of this bill to establish the Health Services Development

Thursday, 25 February, 1988 Trust Fund is another milestone for Manitoba with respect to health care, and I am very proud to introduce it on behalf of the government for Second Reading in this Legislature. Manitobans are justifiably proud of their health care system. lt is one of the best and most comprehensive in the world. The establ ishment of the Health Services Development Trust Fund Is another first for Manitoba because, by establishing this fund through legislation, we are demonstrating an unequivocal commitment to meet the challenges of the health care needs in Manitoba well into the future.

Improving Manitoba's health care system is a major priority for this government, and we will be building upon a social democratic tradition of progressive leadership and inn ovation in health care here in Manitoba and in the rest of Canada. No one could debate the fact that we would not have a Medicare system here in Canada as good as it is, as inn ovative as it is, the sacred treasure that we have in this country, without the pioneering efforts, vision, compassion and political will of Tommy Douglas and the New Democratic Party of Saskatchewan and of Canada.

The New Democratic Party in the Province of Manitoba has carried on in that fine tradition. The Pawley Government and the previous Schr eyer Government have led the way in developing the most comprehensive health services In Canada. We have developed a high-quality hospital and medical service system.

We have established in a pioneering way the best Home Care Program in Canada, a program which supports thousands of Manitobans in their communities, Madam Speaker, and it's a model for North America. 1t was Manitoba's Social Democratic Governments that introduced such programs as the Children's Dental Health program, Pharmacare, Insured Personal Care Homes, programs to meet the needs of the people regardless of their ability to pay. lt was a New Democratic Party Government in Manitoba, Madam Speake r, that abolished the regressive Medicare premiums.

Madam Speaker, I find it really tragic that In this country we have a Lib eral Government in Ontario that still has massive Medicare premiums levied on people. I find it tragic that in this country we have a Conservative Government in Alberta that still levies Med icare premiums on people, Madam Speaker. These are two of the wealthiest provinces in Canada, and yet they levy a tax on the poor and a tax on the rich In order for them to have medical services. - (I nterjection) - I find that the Member for Morris is saying: doesn't that say something, as if somehow that is a mark of accomplishment.

Madam Speaker, we on this side of the House reject that approach entirely. We do not believe that one taxes the poor and drives them in the poor house in order for them to have health. The whole philosophical basis of Medicare says that you should have accessibility regardless of your ability to pay. We on this side believe that 100 percent, even if those people on the other side don't, Madam Speaker.

I think that's interesting room for debate that'll develop over the course of the next few months with respect to this whole issue and what directions people should be going into with respect to health care. 297 Our government's commitment to health care is also shown by a quick look at the statistics. Manitobar.s spent $1, 616 per capita in 19 85 on health care compared to wealthy Ontario at $1 ,602; Saskatchewan at $1 ,523; and an overall Canadian average of $1 ,568.00.

To put it in another way, we spend more than 9.5 percent of our gross domestic product, as a province, on health care, a full percentage point above the Canadian average. Madam Speaker, this government puts its money where its mouth is with respect to health care. it is our intention to maintain Manitoba's health care system as the best and most comprehensive in the country. No Conservative Government would maintain this commitment.

During the last election, the Mulroney Conservatives spoke a great deal about health care and what they called "that sacred trust." The reality is that the Mulroney Government has cut back on health care funding to the point where Ottawa shares only 40 percent of the cost of providing health care in Manitoba. What a tragic regression there's been by the Federal Government in this respect.

When Medic are was brought in by a federal Liberal Government in 1967, ultimately imple mented in 1969, it did so following the courageous NDP example in Saskatchewan, and the Federal Government told all the provinces that they would cost-share Medicare basically on a 50-50 basis, and that was the basis on which they sold a universal, accessible, portable program of Medicare right across the country of Canada. Madam Speaker, within a few short years alter that, the Trudeau Li beral Government welched on that deal, and they started moving that proportion of funding down.

We objected to that, because we said that this provides an opportunity for the Federal Government to move that share down and offload the costs on provinces and create problems with respect to universality, accessibility and portability for Medicare right across this country. That rule was accentuated by the Trudeau Government in the 1980's, despite our objections and despite the fact that the Mi nister of Finance for Manitoba at the time provided very detailed information showing how they were cutting back on health care funding.

Unfortuna tely, that was the situation that existed when Mulroney made a commitment in Nova Scotia that, if a Conservative Government was elected nationally, they would have a 50-50 cost-sharing on health care in this country. I believe it was the Crocodile Room of the Peter Pan Hotel in Nova Scotia, in New Glasgow, all documented, Madam Speaker. The future Prime Minister of this country went on television, lowered his voice and said: "M edicare is a sacred trust with me.

Medicare is a scared trust for the Government of Canada." Madam Speaker, today we find ourselves In a situation where the Federal Government has said they will reduce expenditure increases on health care to two points below increases in the cost of living. So that accentuates and worsens the examples set by the Li beral Government that didn't have that same commitment as the New Democrats with respect to health care. And we know where the Tories stand. They stand generally to the right of the liberals.

So If the li berals were going to hurt Medicare, the Conservatives, who are Liberals in a hurry with respect to slashing the

Thursdey, 25 February, 1988 social infrastructure of this country, put that program into high gear. You know, these "Libe rals In a hurry" who call themselves Mulroney Conservatives when it means slashing programs have indeed left the situation in Canada where we have only 40 percent of the funding coming from the Federal Government. Every province is feeling that type of pressure brought about by unilateral, disgraceful action on the part of a Federal Government that has turned Its back on what we all believe is Indeed a sacred trust.

But only a few people, namely the New Democrats In this country, believe it sincerely and totally and keep that trust. To the west of us, Conservative Governments in Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia, partly in response to the federal cutbacks In health care sharing and also because of their own philosophical disposition to also be "Liberals in a hurry" with respect to cutbacks In health care, have cut back services dramatically and dismantled entire programs.

I find that they have gone almost out of their way patting themselves on the back, saying that somehow we will deal with health care pressures by slashing programs. We know what that approach is, Madam Speaker, because we In Manitoba have vivid memories of the 4'on Government's assault, the Conservative assault from '77 to'81 on the provincial health care system and on the entire social infrastructure of this province. So the mess age Is clear . The Conservatives cannot be trusted to preserve a health care system that is so highly valued by Canadians.

The record of Conservative Governments, both federally and provincially , speaks for Itself. We have asked for transitional funding from the Federal Government with respect to new approaches In health care development. This Is not something that we just raised recently. My predecessor, the Honourable Larry Desja rdlns, called for this type of a health resources fund back In November of 1986. He reiterated that call In the autumn of 1986 as well.

I won't take this opportunity, Madam Speaker, I'll do that during the Budget Debate, but I will speak about the past contributions of my predecessor, the Honourable larry Desjardins as Health Minister, and the fact that I believe that he is taking a very constructive and cooperative approach in his new position In a way that I think is visionary, despite the attempts to malign him by Conservatives opposite. I'll use another vehicle, Madam Speaker, to go into that In more depth.

But when I became Minister In the fall of '87, Madam Speaker, I looked at that proposal with respect to the Health Resources Development Fund, and I thought it made eminent sense, as Desjardlns calls, for a health Initiatives fund. So when I attended the Health Ministers' Conference In the fall of 1987, I made that proposal again. The provincial Health Minis ters agreed that we needed transitional funding to move us into the new directions In health care to both Improve our system and also to meet the new challenges that we are facing.

I am happy to report that not only do the Health Min isters right across the country believe that is important, but also the Anance Min isters from provinces right across this country believe that more federal funding is required to bring us back to 50-50.

Also, they believe we need that transitional fund to help us build for a better future, so we are taking that step. 298 Tomorrow's Budget, Madam Speaker, I'm sure you will agree, will again illustrate our commitment to build upon the achievements of the past to make an even stronger health care system in Manitoba, one which is responsive to changing circumstances and to new needs and Ideas.

So it'll deal with the existing system, I think, in a very progressive, constructive way, and also make that commitment with respect to this transitional funding apparatus that we are establishing, one which I think will serve the people of Manitoba very well into the future. As I said, all jurisdictions in Canada are facing very real challenges in the provision of high quality and accessible health care. I have spoken of these challenges numerous times, and a numb er of them were highlig hted In the Throne Speech.

The Manitoba Government's response to these challenges of new technologies and new diseases and the fact that we do have an aging population which provides challenges - challenges which we welcome, because we believe that one mark of a society is how well it treats its elderly - but our response to these challenges is one of leadership and direct action in a constructive way, not head-in-the-sand cutbacks. This fund which I am introducing today is a significant element in our overall efforts to meet these challenges facing our health care system. We will be seeking improvements to the system.

We want more balance between Institutional care and community-based care and health promotion and preventative health services. The fund will be used for programs which meet this objective. The health trust fund will be used to support specific init iatives.

These in itiati ves will in clude support measures to imp rove the health status of Man itobans; prevention and promotion programs; incentives for more economical delivery of health care services by present deliverers; innovative demonstration projects on health care services; promotion of better access to quality care in mental health services, in rural and northern services, and in community health centre.

We will also be providing for educational and training activities which contribute to health service development in a changing world, and we will also be providing developmental funding to explore the feasibility of new ideas, Madam Speaker, which only reflects the fact that New Democrats want to be forward-looking when it comes to health care. This fund reflects the consensus as well of discussions that I've had with health care providers and users since becoming Minister.

I have been told that we must change our system in a pla nned way, entai ling consultati on, collaboration and coordination with providers and users and, further, that the province must take the lead as the catalyst to ensure that this takes place. We have also been told that transitional funding is critical in any attempt to innovatively change the system with a view to making it better. We have listened, we have done our homework, and we are active.

The Health Services Development Fund is a non-lapsing pool of money which will be a clear focus for change and innovation over the long run for all people involved and interested in health care. As a non-lapsing fund, it allows for a measured sensible approach with respect to planning for access

Thureday, 25 February, 1988 to these funds for new inno vative programs without being concerned that somehow that money may run out in that fiscal year and there would be uncertainty as to whether there would be the money available in the future. So this is an ef ficient way of allocating it with respect to a focused approach. We believe it makes sense. We believe that the people in Manitoba will agree that it makes sense.

Let me emphasize that our commitment, both to changing the system and our desire to continue to provide what I believe to be the most comprehensive and finest health care system in Canada, is balanced. We have to achieve both at the same time, and I believe that is possible. I believe it is possible by ensuring that we provide sufficient for our existing system while providing strategically-placed mon ey, strategically oriented mon ey, to steer this health care system In such a way that we impro ve it, gain more effi clencies and meet the new challenges that we have to face.

This legislation enshrines our belief that, through cooperative planning with the use of this special financial commitment, It'll be possible to provide both better and more cost-effective health care Involving all of the people In this process. We want to take this opportunity to invite the various people who are committed to health care in this province: the doctors, the nur ses, the workers, the Institutions, the community groups, the universities, all of them, to work together with us in that collaborative way to build that better future. I know of no invitation similar in the entir e country In this respect.

I hope, furthermore, that our example provides some stimulus to the Federal Gover nment to do some thinking about what it has done in abd icating Its fair respo nsibility for its share of the health care system, and that it twigs Its Imagina tion to look to the future to meet our needs. it's not bashing the feds here; it's an invitation to them; it's an invitation for them to participate with us. That's not bashing.

This Is the olive branch; it's an Invitation. it's not a matter only of money. it's a matter of thought, sinceri ty, concern, and the interesting thing - and I hear some people on the other side saying all you're doing Is asking for more mon ey. All we're asking for is a fair share. Fifty-fifty Is a fair share. To me , 50-50 is 50-50; for the Conservatives on the other side of the House, 50-50 means 60-40. That's Conservative arithmetic, 40 percent Conservative dollars equals a 50 percent commitment.

There are no mathematicians anywhere in the world apart from Conservative mathematicians who will say that 40 percent somehow equa tes to a 50-50 fair share commitment. That's all we're asking for. The irony Is that, as we debate health care in the future - and I'm saying we need that extra share because we have been robbed in my estimation of some $125 million per year by the Federal Gove rnment with respect to health care and education.

The Finance Mini sters from across the country documented that they have lost $8.5 billion in terms of federal cutbacks with respect to their fair share for health and education financing, not a New Democratic paper, but rather one that was put together by all the Finance Mini sters repre senting Li beral Gover nments, Conservative Governments and the New Democratic Party Government, pointing out that the Federal Government has cut back that much.

I find it Ironic that people on the other side who have said that their only solution to health care development 299 in this province is more money, because you will hear them over the course of the next few months getting up asking for more, more, more, somehow say that it is wrong for me to ask for a 50-50 fair share. I've heard the Mem ber for Virden say that it is important that we deliver the health care money in an efficient way. I agree with him on that.

I hope that, as we move to attain more effi cien cy, he will put aside vested interests and say, yes, let's move to achieve that greater efficiency because the extra money that is saved can in fact be used to meet the new challenges facing the health care sys tem. I invite his participation in that approach as well. I look forward to suggestions that he might make in a constructive way in that respect. I think it's imp ortant that we all participate in this process in a constructive way.

I believe that is the only way that we will achieve the type of consensus, that we will reinforce the vision for our future that I think we all have, and that Is that we have a health care system that is excellent and also flexible enough to meet future needs. That is the approach that we want to take. We believe that this health trust fund provides a focus, not the only one, but a focus to allow people to think creatively, to put forward the suggestions like the Member for Virden suggests should be coming forward from different people. We look forward to that approach over the course of the future.

This legislation enshrines our belief that, through cooperative planning, we can in fact have a better syst em. I've been Impr essed by the response of the people whom I have met in the five months or so that I have been Health Minis ter with respect to this issue. They recognize that health care does have pressures. They recognize that there have been federal cutbacks in funding. They recog nize that we have new challenges to meet. What they're prepared to do is work together in a collaborative consultative way to try and meet these challenges In the most eff ective way.

I'm not sure whether that would have been possible 10 or 15 years ago. I think that there was a bit of a fief mentality with respect to health care where people were more interested in their own particular entities than they were in the overall whole. Now they're saying it's important to develop those overviews to see how the pieces fit together before specific investments or actions are taken. They have said that it's important to do that type of planning leading to implementation, not a research type of approach but planned Implementation.

They want to be part of that process, and they say the province must take the lead In ensuring that those activities take place in the near future. I hope that, over the course of the next month or so, we'll be announcing more of this because this relates to the overal l health thrust that we have said In our Throne Speech we will be emphasizing.

I believe that the people of Manitoba, the providers of health care, will In fact get through some of the sensationalized stories that come forward from time to time with respect to health care and I expect will continue because, when someone is on a waiting list, there is a dramatization and people focus on one particular person, as opposed to, say, a whole community that might have unsafe water. it's not as dramatic dealing with a whole community that has

Thureday, 25 February, 1988 unsafe water as it is with one person who might be on a waiting list, waiting for a type of organ transplant. I can appreciate that there are the emotions involved in that type of situation. We'll try and deal with the emotional issues. We 'll try and deal with them in a fair way. At the same time, we hope it will establish this collaborative process to make the syst em better. As I said, I've been impr essed by the resp onse that I've received from people in the health care field. I hope to work with them in a cooperative way.

I've invited all of them to participate In this process and there will be times as well when we are negotiating for fees or wages or grants where sometimes the negotiating rhetoric would leave one the impr ess ion that somehow this collaborative process isn't proceed ing.

But I would ask people to bear with that, because that's part of the negotiating process, because I believe that the overwhelming commitment on the part of all people that I've dealt with to date with respect to health care is one of working togeth er, asking the province to provide the leadership, saying that they want to work in a cooperative collaborative way with us. So, Madam Speaker, our record is clear. lt is one of leadership, trust with respect to Medicare and commitment.

Manitoba is now embarking on a path of plan-managed change to our health care system and once again, Madam Speaker, as we have in the past, Manitoba will lead the way in Canada with respect to health care. Madam Speaker, the establishment of the Health Services Deve lopment Trust Fund is a crucial step in this broad-based strategy for change. I believe that togethe r, as Manitobans, we can build a system which will serve us well into the next centu ry. As a result, Madam Speak er, I ask for all people In this Legislature to support this particular bill. Thank you very much.

MADAM SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River East. MRS. B . .. TCHELSON: Thank you, Madam Speake r. I rise today, Madam Speaker, to speak on Second Reading on Bill 2, the Health Services Dev elopment Trust Fund that has just been int roduced for Second Reading by the Honourable Min ister of Health. Madam Speaker, I have some question as to whether the people of Manitoba really do trust in this NDP Government in respect to this "trust fund" that Is being set up.

You kno w, I feel that the people of Manitoba know that this is a desperate government, grasping at straws to attempt to convince the people of Manitoba that they are actually going to do something for a change, instead of just talking about it. The health budge t in Manitoba, the $1.3 billion, Madam Speak er, is out of control and this NDP Gover nment just cannot get its priorities straight and cannot make the choices that the people of Manitoba want and need to provide health care that they feel that they should have.

Madam Speaker , the Mi nister of Health talks repeatedly about Manitoba and Canada having the best health care system in the world. I agree, Madam Speaker, that all people can access health care in this 300 province and in this count ry, but I have said before that's exactly where the syst em breaks down. it's one thing to access the sy stem, and it's another to receive the care that is delivered by that syst em.

Madam Speaker, I have to que stion what's happened in the Province of Manitoba over the last few years, when we've got a government that has cut back hospital beds and reduced services and forced people to travel out of Manitoba for badly needed diagnostic services and tests that aren't provided here.

You tell me that that's a great, wonderful health care syst em. it's a two tiered sy stem, Madam Speaker, a system for those who can't afford it to remain here and receive substandard care, and a system that allows those who can afford to, to travel out of province, to travel down to the States to get the care that they so desperately need. Madam Speaker, the Minis ter of Health talks about Medi care premiums in other provinces, and I have to ask whether there isn't some . . . MADAM SPEAKER : The Honourable Mi nister of Employment Services. HON. L.

EVANS: I have been listening carefully to the remarks of the Mem ber for River East , and I have still not heard her address the principle in the bill that's before the Legislature. We are talking about a particular bill with a particular object. lt is my understanding, according to the Rules of the House, that the principles em bedded in the bill are to be deba ted and discussed and not a wide-ranging review of other matters that are extraneous perhaps to the intent of this particular bill. MADAM SPEAK ER: The honourable mem ber, on the same point of order. MRS. B.

MITCHELSON: Ye s, on the point of order, Madam Speaker, I believe when I first began to speak I spoke in response to the Dev elopment Trust Fund that this government has set up, Bill 2, and I am continuing to address that issue. SOME HONOURABLE MEMBERS: Oh, oh! SPEAKER'S RULING MADAM SPEAKER: Order please, order please.

On Second Read ings, initially in the House the rules of relevancy have been very broadly interpreted and, while sometimes they do get very far-r anging off on totally other topics, it's my opinion that the honourable member was speaking about health care issues and, consequent ly, was within the bounds of relevancy for a Second Reading Debate. The Honourable Member for River East. MRS. B. MITCHELSON: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

The Min ister of Health, in his discussion today on Bill 2 indic ated that there were Medicare premiums in other provinces, and he was just absolutely appalled at the tax levy on the poor. (Mr . Deputy Speaker , C. Santos, in the Chair.) We ll, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have to say that just in the last week here, within the City of Winnipeg, this

Thursday, 25 February, 1988 government, by its lack of funding for ambulance service in the city and in our province, has forced the City of Winnipeg to increase their ambulance fees, which I must say is a tax on the poor. Those who can afford it, Mr. Deputy Speaker, have Blue Cross or extra insurance coverage that will allow them to have that service paid for, but it's the poor and those who can least afford it, who don't have extra coverage, who are forced to pay and forced to accept the added burden and the added cost.- So I can say that this government right here shows lack of consideration, Mr.

Deputy SpMker, for those poor in our province who can least alford to pay that extra levy or extra tax. HON. G. DOER: Mr. Deputy Speaker, on a point of order. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: On a point of order, the Honourable Minister of Urban Affairs on a point of order. HON. G. DOER: Mr. Deputy Speaker, on a point of order, the Member for River East is giving us the gang of-19 1ine on ambulance grants and forgets to mention the $1 9.3 million for other social services in Winnipeg. I think that's important for the record, Mr. Deputy Speaker. MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: A dispute over matters of - (inaudible) - is not a point of order. MRS. B. MITCHELSON: Mr. Deputy Speake r, it's unfortunate that the present government is so very sensitive about their lack of funding to the City of Winnipeg that they have to get up on a point of order that really sort of deflects away from the issue. Mr. Deputy Speaker, the Minister of Health, in his speech a few moments ago, stated that the Province of Manitoba spends 9.5 percent of its GNP on health care. That, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, obviously isn't enough or it doesn't have its priorities straightened out when it has to cut back on hospital beds and cut back on services and tests that are so badly needed by the people of Manitoba. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I just want to - let me find it here - tell you a little bit about what this government promised back in 1981, Mr. Deputy Speaker. They said, "health care, not cutbacks." Well, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that was back in 1981. They talked about care, not cutbacks. That was -(Interjection)- Yes.

They thought that the Conservatives previously had cut and slashed and hacked, and they were going to do absolutely none of that. Let me just quote what they said back In 19 81. "Manitoba New Democrats are proud of the work they have done in making health care available to all Manitobans. Programs such as free Medicare, Pharmacare, and non-profit nursing homes were pioneered by the New Democrats. Our health care system has been allowed to deteriorate over the last four years. The Lyon Government has cut back health care budgets. The grants to hospitals have been regularly below the Inflation rate.

Community clini cs have been cut and services in remote areas have not been expanded." 301 Health care is too important to be short-changed, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and that's what they were saying. it's too important to be short-changed. We will restore the health care syste m. That's what they said. Preventative medicine would be a priority. Dental care would be extended to cover all Manitoba children from kindergarten to Grade 12. Well, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I believe there's still a program in rural Manitoba, but I have yet to see a program in Brandon or In Winnipeg for children under 12 , a dental care program.

This is 1981, seven years ago, and what have they done? How have they enhanced it? "We desperately need personal care homes, and these will be built by an NDP Government." Well, I'll tell you, there are more people waiting for nursing home placement now than there were back in 1981. The Minister of Health also, Mr. Deputy Speaker, talked about the Federal Government in great detail, and criticized their lack of funding or their decreased funding. Well, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, in my opinion or from what I can understand, and maybe the Min ister of Health could tell me some time, the Federal Government committed to 50 percent cost-sharing of insured services. They didn't commit to 50 percent funding of programs that are provided by this NDP Government by lack of prlorl zat ion, programs mismanaged, poor prlorlzation of health care dollars. Well, the Min ister of Health is talkin g about am bulance. Is the Minister of Health funding 50 percent of the ambula nce services to the City of Winnipeg? Is he? I'd like him to answer that question for me some time.

I'd like him to answer that question some time. He says that we have to have a 50-50 cooperation type of program. I'll tell you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, there was someone, just off the subject for a minute, but someone who spoke to me at one time when I mentioned, in a marriage relationship, if each side gave 50 percent, it would be a very workable relationship. This very old wise man said to me: "No, it doesn't work that way.

If each side gives 60 percent, you will have a workable relationship." We have a government here today that whines and cries and complains and moans and groans about the other partner in this relationship, and then expects more in return. I say to this Minis ter of Health, if he would give 60 percent, give some credit to the Federal Government for the programs and for the things that they do there, he migh t get a bit more cooperation from that government. Try hard to make it work.

You're not working cooperatively with the Federal Government, you're not working cooperatively with the City of Winnipeg, and you cry and complain and moan. 1 say to you, try hard to attempt to get along and cooperate and communicate and see if you might get some better results. The Federal Government, Mr. Deputy Speaker, is not going to fund 50 percent of a department of continuing care that is financially out of controL lt is not going to do that.

When we have a government that makes poor decisions and mismanages the health care dollars in this ProVince of Manitoba, we cannot expect the Federal Government to come forward and fund 50 percent of that misma nagement. They will fund 50 percent of the Insured services that they are required to fund. Mr. Deputy Speak er, the Min ister talks about cooperation, communication, consultation with all of

Thuraday, 25 February, 1988 those members within the health care field. He says they're going to have a better relationship as a result of setting up this trust fund, and they're all going to work together cooperatively , and they're going to be so happy to work with this government. Wel l, Mr. Deputy Speak er, back in 1983, there was an In itiative by this government to set up a Health Services Review Committee to review the health situation in this province and to provide recommendations for future dir ection.

These were some of the things that this review committee was going to do: to Identify major cost areas and explore consolidation; to look for alternatives In patient care services; to review current bed allocation and utilization; and to review criteria of hospital admissions In both urban and rural hospitals. Mr. Deputy Speaker, this Is back In 1983. We studied and we reviewed and we consulted and we cooperated and everybody came forward with their recommendations from various different departments and groups and organizations throughout the province, and we now are In 1988. Okay? Here we are in 1988.

How much money was spent studying and reviewing and deciding which direction we should take and which direction we should be going in health care? What actually was done with all the years of consu"lng and commu nicating and cooperating? What really do the people In these health groups or organizations In Manitoba feel that this government has done with all of their recommendations? They have done very little, Mr. Deputy Speak er, and now they're talking about consulting and cooperat ing and communicating again. Are we going to do more studies?

Are we going to spend more money consulting with them and le tting them feel that they're making a major contribution to the health care system , and then are you just going to throw out everything they've said, and not do anything, not take action on any of their recommendations? Mr. Deputy Speaker, the people of Manitoba know and the people working In the health community In our province know what needs to be done. What they want is a government that is going to take some action and do something, to do sO mething about the mess that we have here In this province.

Well, the Min ister of Health asks what I might do. I'll just go back to Health Estimates for a minute last year, when I was discussing with the then Min ister of Health, trying to decide where his priorities were and what his priorities were, and trying to get him to explain to me his department as far as health reform and health research . Okay?

Research and planning and health reform were In two separate departments with two separate heads. 1 said to the then Mini ster last year, and I'll quote: "When we're talking about research and planning, it see ms to me that the research and planning stage is the first stage of what might work in health reform. First of all, you research and you plan, and then you develop your reform or your plan of action according to the observations that have been made during research and planning.

Would it not stand to reason ," and he had the department split, "would it not make more sense to combine research and planning In health reform into one area and, If you've got to hir e the staff and have them working, have them working along together in the same department, the same director , 302 so you have the coord ination, the communication to move from one phase into another?" And do you know what the Minis ter responded to me? We should have hired you a year ago.

We ll, so I'm telling you I have made some positive suggestions to the Minis ter of Health in the past and I hope to continue to make those types of suggest ions and recommendations. - (Interjection) - I'm glad to hear that the Minister does welcome those suggestions, and maybe he'll take some of the suggestions to heart and implement some programs in the near future that have been· talked about and talked about for years under NDP adminis tration and really have had nothing done.

You know, the people of Manitoba really are not happy with this NDP Gove rnment, and not happy with the dir ection they are taking in health care. They believe that this government plans and organizes its health care to partisan politics, not to what's practical or acceptable or needed. They find this government has trouble making decisions.

I think that the people of Manitoba, Instead of having more study and more organizations, more funds, more bureaucracies set up would like this government to take some action for a change, to do something constructive to provide for health care here in the Province of Manitoba. it's fine for the government members to sit there and laugh, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but the people of Manitoba aren't laughing. No, they're not. They're extremely concerned. Not jus t the Conservatives on this side of the House, but the people of Manitoba, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, perceive that we have a government with a health care budget that's out of control, a government that spends out of control, cannot get its priorities straightened out, and they can't make decisions and they can't make choices. We've seen that in many aspects of government, and health care Is just another one of those. Let me just tell you what the people of Manitoba are saying, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The people of Manitoba know exactly what they want, and I hope that this government can help them in some small way to receive what they should be receiving.

They want prompt elective surgery here in the province. They want to be able to get needed surgery. They want to have a bed available when that surgery is required. By cutting back on acute care beds, Mr. Deputy Speaker , they are not going to receive those kinds of services. They want to be able to get prompt emergency surgery too, and they don't want to have to wait In emergency wards in hospitals for that type of care. And I will tell you, by cutting back on acute care beds and services, they are not going to receive that care.

They don't want partisan politics influencing health care decisions, because health care goes beyond partisan politics. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we on this side of the House care, very much so, for the health care of the people of Mani toba. The Minis ter talked earlier about the CAT scan that was opened in Brandon and the CAT scan that is opened at the St. Boniface Hospital . Do you know, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we in the Province of Manitoba are just now getting caught up with other provinces with the numb er of CAT scans that are available to service the people of Manitoba.

Where other provinces are going on to bigger and better equipment already , we're in a catch-up phase.

Thursday, 25 February, 1988 We've had to use the majority of our resources just to catch up because of a government that didn't plan and priorize and organize properly so that we would have the same services as other provinces had. Now that we have caught up, we're behind again already, because there's a new machine that can do faster, better diagnoses that we do not have that other provinces are already putting In place. The people of Manitoba want psychiatric services for the mentally ill, the psychiatrically ill, Mr . Deputy Speaker.

We have a situation here in the province where our top psychiatrists are leaving. They have no confidence in this government and the system here, and they're leaving to go on to bigger and better things, better opportunities elsewhere. The Min ister says: "If they don't like it here, they can go." Well, Mr. Deputy Speak er, I hope that he's going to take into consideration that we are soon going to be out of all of our highly qualified medical professionals unless he accepts a di fferent att itude and gi ves some encouragement for them to stay here in the province. We have problems with our cancer treatment, Mr.

Deputy Speak er. We have people who are waiting six to eight weeks for radiotherapy in this province. We have machines that are outdated. I have yet to get the answers on whether this government has ever provided a capital sinking fund so that, when those machi nes become outdated, there's provision for them to be replaced. I don't believe, Mr. Deputy Speaker, because I'm sure the Mi nister last year would have come back with a prompt answer had he had a positive answer, so there's lack of plannin g again by this NDP Government.

We're cutting back on ophthalmology beds, hospital beds, and I know that they've implemented an out patient surgery, and I really commend a program that can cut down on having people admitted to hospital for procedures that can be done on an out-patient basis. I agree with that wholehearted ly. But those people who need ophthalmology surgery who are elderly and are disabled are not the people who are going to be able to go in one day and back out the same day, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

So we have a situation where, because the beds have been cut back, those people who are having difficulty seeing, who need attention, need corrective surgery, are waiting for longer periods of time to get that surgery. As a result -they're the elderly, they're somewhat incapacitated - they're either confined to their home and their quality of life has decreased, or they might go out and, because they weren't able to get that surgery and able to see, walk down a flight of steps or out onto an icy street and slip and fall and break a hip and end up In the hospital, costing more to the system as a result, not less.

We have a complication of cutbacks in opthalmology care for our elderly. Either way, whether they have to stay Inside and wait because they can't see to get out and have their quality of life decreased or whether they break a hip and end up in traction or with a hip replacement, their quality of life is decreased . So these are things that I think the Minister of Health has to look at and consider greatly when he's making decisions on where to spend and where to priorize and what to do for the people of Manitoba. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I believe that the Min ister maybe could have implemented or intr oduced some initia tives in respect to doing some routine testing 303 0 the Province of Manitoba. I've introduced a resol ution and will be speaking on that later on in the Session, and I'm going to actively pursue through the Mini ster my reasoning and my justification, my rationaliza tion for testing.

When we can test and discover and find out how many people and who are carrying the deadly AIDS virus, it will add to our knowledge and our factual information and our research as to know where to target our education and where to target prevention and promotion when it comes to caring for AIDS. I'm sure the Minister will agree with me that it's something that is not going to go away. The numbers are increasing. The people of Manitoba don't need to have health tax dollars spent needlessly on treating AIDS patients if we can prevent the disease from spreading further.

So I think the Minister's going to have to look at that very carefully , and maybe make some recommendations as to where we should be going. I know I certainly will. The Min ister probably has a few questions to answer when it comes to specific init iatives by this trust fund. Is there going to be some duplication of services? We already have people within the Department of Health and departments within the Health Department that should be able to quite adequately plan and prlorlze and Implement health change and health refo rm.

I believe that this new trust fund that has been set up Is just going to provide for duplication of specific services that can already be provided. Are we going to have the Department of Research and Planning and the Department of Health Promotion and Health Prevention within the department, and then are we going to have another bureaucracy or group of people that are going to try to implement these programs? I think these are questions that need to be answered.

I've already mentioned that the Mi nister has said that he's looking forward to consultation, cooperat ion, commun ication with the various groups and organizat ions within the health care field, and I'm wanting to know whether he is serious at this time about using the recommendations and using the input that is provided to him by these groups that are knowledgeable in making plans and providing specific programs that are supposed to benefit the people of Manitoba.

As I say, the Min isters of Health under this NDP Government, in the past, have invited various people many different times to come forward and to give their opinions. A lot of them have put a lot time and effort into providing information that they feel would be of benefit to this government to help provide a better standard of health care in this province. To date, Mr. Deputy Speaker, very little of that Information has been used by this government to improve health care. What I am saying is: Is this bill just smoke and mirrors again?

Is this government just giving lip service to attempting to improve the situation and doing absolutely nothing just because their image is so poor in the Province of Manitoba? The people of Manitoba are not going to be fooled any longer by a government that professes to care and professes to have the best medical progr am, the best Medicare system, in the whole world when often the services that are provided are substandard and not available to those who need it most. I think, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that there are going to have to be some questions answered, and soon, by

Thul'8dar, 25 February, 1988 the Mini ster of Health, not only of us in Opposition but on behalf of the people of Manitoba who have come to expect better than what they are receiving from a government who has mismanaged and wasted our tax dollars in many areas. I'm sure that there are some questions In the minds of our constituents and the people of Manitoba as to how well they are managing and how well they are prlorlzlng our health care dollars. I am going to wait with anticipa tion for the Minis ter to see what he is going to do with this trust fund. Thank you. MR.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for River Heights. IMS. S. CARSTAIRS: Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speak er. When I received this bill yesterd ay, I had to question If this government really believed that anyone in this province would ever take them seriously again. This is the biggest bit of fluff In legislation that I have seen in my three years as a member of this Assem bly. lt is intellectually disho nest because it purports to do things which it does not do. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I don't know why that should come as a surprise, because the same Minister who introduced this bill was the same Individual who introduced the heritage trust fund bill on Limestone - the heritage trust fund that now is never going to materialize and was never going to in the minds of people on this side of the House In any case. Now, instead of having a fund, we are going to have a $40 million deficit In the first few years of Its operation.

If we take this particular bit of legislation, then we must ass ume that, If you can't do something positive, then you put on the agenda a meaningl ess document, hoping that the public will believe you, believe that you are really and truly doing something when everybody knows that you'r e not. We get talk, talk, talk and legislation, but we get absolutely no action. We will, If we listen to this bill, spend more money on staff and more money on bookkeeping for audits to be conducted, but we will tragically get no money spent on the servicing of the health needs of the people of this province.

What is so very difficult to understand is that, If you look at last year's Estimates of the Health Department, every single lntlative that Is mentioned in this bill is covered In those Estimates. Why are we spending some $536,000 on policy and research If we don't do anything with it? I mean, I thought that they were research ing, that they were conducting policy initia tives. If they are not conducting it, then obviously we have a saving to watch for in the Mini ster's Estimates of some $0.5 million.

If we are not already spending some money in community health services, In programs and operations, then we have a $79 million cut that we can obviously see in this Minis ter's budget. If we are not spending any money already in mental health services, then we can have, it looks like, an additional $40 million savi ng. But we won't have those savings because those monies are being spent. They are being spent on service in this province to our citizens, but part of each component of those expenditures surely must be, how can you spend those monies more effi cient ly.

How can you provide more economies? 304 There are so many areas, Mr. Deputy Speaker, where we need to have action and we need to have action now in the health care field. We don't need another pretty piece of paper; we need a service. Let's take an example of some of those services that we require. In this city alone, there are 400 people lying in acute beds who req uire geriatric service in a personal care home, 400 of them who are getting inappr opriate care because this govern ment will not take the ini tiative to give them appropriate care.

We have people who unfortunately have been placed in personal care homes and now, because they have been institutionalized, cannot be removed, who should not have been put there. We have to ask what kind of intermediary programs are we putting into place in this province so that an Ind ividual can move from living on their own to living with some modicum of care to final ly, and hopeful ly, never having to go to the personal care home. Why don't we have an Initia tive like that announced by the Minister of Health today? Several days ago, I asked him about a home care appeal board. He says there is one.

We ll, it's a farce, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You ask - if you have a difficulty with home care - for an appeal to be heard by the indiv idual who's delivering the home care service. That is not an appeal. An appeal is made to an inde pendent body , a body who is not involved in the delivery of the care. lt cost nothing, but we don't have it in Manitoba. We have heard, for at least five years in this province of a need for community health clinics, a need well documented, a need that we all recog nize.

Why did we not get a min isterial statement announcing that yesterday instead of this bit of nothing that we got delivered on our desks? Why do we not hear about the reduction of testing, because there is an ove rabuse of testing in this province, and we know that and it is, too, well-documented. The doctors at St. Bonlface got together and decided that they, themselves, will put into place an educational program to reduce the use of ECG's. They reduced that testing required in that hospital by 41 percent. How does this government deal with the doctors of this province?

Well, at every opportun ity, it blames them for every single ill of the Medicare syst em. Yet we know that given a choice between the doctors of this provilice and the politicians on the government side, every Manitoban would choose the doctors. When we look In terms of the necessity of coordination of services by the Health Minis try, we watched with sadness last summer the announcement of the closure of psych iatric beds at St.

Boniface, immedia tely followed by the announcement of closure of psychiatric beds at the Victoria General, and realized there had been absolutely no coordination with the Minis try of Health. That's the kind of in itiative we want to hear in this House, not the establishment of a trust fund which will do nothing but provide more difficulties in auditing the Department of Health.

We know that there has been a proliferation of walk in clinics, a proliferation that is questionable in terms of the medical treatment that it provides, questionable in terms of double and triple billing because people who attend walk-in clinics are then told to go and make contact with their physician of choice. We heard the previous Min ister of Health tell us, over and over again,

Thursday, 25 February, 1188 something had to be done to control that prolif eration. Why did we hear nothing In that way yesterday instead of this ball of fluff? In the area of mental health, we have known since 1972 that we are operating in a model that is the most expensive in North America. We also know that we are operating with a model which is not effective in terms of its treatment of the mentally ill and the post-mentally ill, but we have heard nothing in terms of changes in that direction.

What we need from this government is some forward thinking, some positive movement, some act ion - not immobi lization. No more looking at, no more studying, no more investiga ting, no more rationalization, we need action - a-c-t-i-o-n -action. That means you move from one position to another position, and this piece of legislation has nothing in it that will promote, encourage or enhance action.

I don't understand how a government that talks about caring can introduce a pieCe of legislation which has no caring in it. lt has no caring in it because, if you care, you don't sit around and talk about lt, you do something. One has to question how did this little bill, because that's all it Is, very little, how did it ever come about?

Well, it certainly didn't come about from the doctors or the nurses or the paramedlcs or the delivery of community services for the mentally handicapped or the mentally ill. it certainly didn't come about from home care workers. lt obviously came about at a caucus meeting of the government party all sitting arou nd and saying, my goodness, we have to do someth ing, the people are upset about health care. So what we will do Is we will present a bill, Bill No. 2. We will present a bill that says nothing, does nothing, but sounds wonderful. Well, we don't need anything else that's sounds wonderful.

We need something that is wonderful. We need a health care system that is responsive to the needs, that is cost-eff ective, that delivers services when it is required that they be delivered. We need a health care system that is compassionate. Mr. Deputy Speaker, we do not need this bill to add to other bills which sit on the statute books and create nothing. We need a bill that creates momentum. We need initiatives that cause changes In our health care system, and this bill falls in all criteria abominabl y. Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honourable Member for Morris. MR. C.

MANNESS: Thank you very much, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I rise to speak on Bill No. 2, The Health Services Development Trust Fund Act. My comments, Mr. Deputy Speaker, will not be overly long, but I think there are some Impor tant matters that should be put on the record . Mr. Deputy Speaker, I, in experiencing life like I have over the last number of years - I won't quantify the num ber -have come to become very suspicious of people who use the word, best, longest, rightest , most , those types of superlatives, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

If one hearkens back to the Introductory comments of the Minister of Health, and if one wanted to do a count, 305 which I think somebody will once the printed version of his speech comes out, I'm sure they would come across that word . . . A MEMBER: How many times? MR. C. MANNESS: . .. at least 10 times. He said this about Manitoba's health care system. He said it was the best system in the world. He said it was the most compr ehensive, that we have the best home care and the best model within that area, and he went on and on and on. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, human nature being what it Is, it's usually the case of somebody , some individual, some group, when they claim they've got the best, that quite frankly it causes people on the receiving side of that Information to stand up and say, I wonder if we really do. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I have relatives and friends throughout this whole count ry, as indeed I'm sure that most of us do, and thank goodness we have the freedom of mobility in this country where we can go and talk to those friends and relatives and that we can discuss certain issues and matters, not only within family but within provincial, within national jurisdiction. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I've had the occ asion to address the topic of health care In various provinces throughout this land. Yo u know, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, what strikes me on occasion after occasion is that nobody who I talk to when we are talking about health care, when people from other provinces are talking about health care, will say that the health care within their province, Indeed within their state, is not anything but the best. So, Mr. Deputy Speaker, as soon as I have the Min ister of Health rise and say that we are the best in this and that and the next thing, I become suspicious. Quite frankly, in my own mind, I don't know whether we do have the best.

I'm not saying we don't, but I don't honestly believe that anybody has the right to say they have the best within the health care. I don't believe you can quantify it. Well, Mr. Deputy Speaker, we have the Member for West Klldonan saying, of course we can. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I make the assertion that I did because you can move Into areas which are much more objective, much easier to guage, measure, such as areas of taxation and you can't make the comparisons there. it's almost impossible to do, to compare rates of taxat lons is between provinces and between states. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, it was on that basis that I say to the Mi nister of Health and indeed to the gove rnment, I don't accept your statement that we have the best health care system in the land and Indeed in the world, using the words of the Min ister of Health. Mr. Deputy Speaker, five years ago, when I was a new member of this Chamber, I would be here and I would take a bill like this and I'd say, well this is a pretty good bill. How can anybody in their right mind have problems objecting to the purposes of a fund? The purposes, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, from A to H include activities that contribute to the development of prevention and promotion programs in the health care field, and so on and so forth to the last item, saying generally to support measures aimed at Improving the health status of Manitobans.

Thureday, 25 February, 1988 How can anybody object to those objects within the bill? Mr . Deputy Speaker, I cannot quarrel with the objects. But, Mr. Deputy Speaker, this is five years later and what we've seen over and over again, what this government does when its in trouble, when there's a perceived and a real problem in the community as they rush into this Chamber and they give something a fine heading, in this case the Health Services Development Trust Fund, and they try to sell it. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I'm not going to go into the litany of the many bills that have come forward other than to mention basically two. The first one was something that was going to be called The Family Farm Protection Act. I'm not going to dwell on that. I'm just going to mention it. That was supposedly done, in my view, to spell out to all Manltobans that the Government of the Day had the solution to the problems attacking the Family Farm. Well, Mr. Deputy Speaker , the former Minister of Agricultur e says nobody said that. He's right. He never said it.

But he purposely left the perception out In the commun ity that's what this bill would do. - Mr. Deputy Speaker, there's more of an important bill In the past that this one parallels to a very large degree. lt's something that was given to us as Manltobans four years ago. lt was called the Jobs Fund. Mr. Deputy Speaker, remember what happened. We had this problem with unemployment rates. So what happened was the Government of the Day said, uh huh, we are directing, In our view, significant amounts of money through the public service in creation of employment and we're not receiving our political due.

So what we should do is pull part of it away from the various departments, supplement it with additional borrowings, bring in

an act, put up some new slgnage and let the people believe that they're doing something. That was the logic behind the Jobs Fund. Mr. Deputy Speaker, what Is an awful lot different in this bill? The objects are fine, they're noble, but the object Is nothing but to deceive. To use the former words of the Member for Churchill on one of the bills that we brought forward, "lt's a sham; it's a practice of chicanery; it's nothing but a shell game." I dare say that, If you compared the wording In this bill to the one that came forward years ago under the Jobs Fund, you would not see a great divergence in that wording.

Remember what happened from that, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We had the Provincial Auditor stili today saying that this government has not properly disclosed to Manitobans, through the elected Opposition members, how it Is they plan to spend the funds under the Jobs Fund. Mr. Deputy Speaker, do you read what's in this bill, full, full discretionary powers to the Minister to determine how the money that will flow Into this trust fund will ultimately be spent. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, that is not the essence of the parliamentary system that we are here to support. lt's incumbent upon the mem bers opposite on the Treasury Bench to tell all Manitobans, during the Estimates process, how it is they are expected to spend this money. Nowhere in this bill are we told how it is that the expenditures in support of these very fine objectives will be presented to members within this House. Mr. Deputy Speaker, again the whole area of ministerial discretion comes forward here again allowing the Minister of Health to direct the funds any way possible.

Again, let's reflect back to the Jobs Fund. What is the latest community - is it Community Assets Program? A MEMBER: Community Places Program. MR. C. MANNESS: Community Places Program, Mr. Deputy Speaker. How many of the associations within our communities, indeed within your constituenc y, Mr. Deputy Speaker, made application under that program? And yet nobody knows the criteria, nobody knows the basis under which they are either rejected or accepted . Mr. Deputy Speaker, it's strictly at the discretion of the Minister or of some committee of Cabinet. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, the parliamentary system can't work that way, and yet the government brings in this bill under the guise of trying to convince Manitobans that they're going to Improve the health care system by somehow creating a fund. Mr. Deputy Speaker, where are the funds going to come forward for this trust fund? lt says in the bill that the Minister of Finance, from time to time, will direct funds out of Consolidated Revenue. Again, Mr. Deputy Speaker, just like occ urred on the Jobs Fund, he's going to take it out of the existing health area and direct it into something which has a higher profile. 306 Mr.

Deputy Speak er, there's going to be an opportunity, by the wording in the bill, that there will be outside money that'll flow in to the extent that that is needed, to the extent that this bill is needed to accommodate that flow - then I'd have to support it. But, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to my best understanding, this bill isn't required to do that. There are plenty of trusts of government whereby the Minister of Finance can accept outside money and direct as the Government of the Day sees fit. This bill isn't needed to do that. If it is, I have to support it. I have to say that.

If this bill is needed to accept outside money to keep it away from all those greedy Ministers who want to push it somewhere else and protect it in the name of health, then I can support it but, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I know it's not needed for that purpose. Mr. Deputy Speaker, you know why it is needed?

Because if you're going to put green signage up that's going to say the Jobs Fund, if you're going to put up another colour of slgnage that's going to say, all of a sudden, the jobs here or this building here Is provided under the powers granted under the Health Services Development Trust Fund, Wilson Parasiuk, Minister, then to do that, you have to have The Trust Fund Act. Mr. Deputy Speaker, that's what we're talking about In this bill, nothing more and nothing less. 1 had to copy down and rebut a few of the comments made by the Minister of Health In his

preamble. He said: "Isn't it a shame that the two wealthiest provinces in Canada have health premiums?" Across the way, I said: "Doesn't that say something?" And the Member for St. James said, "Sick, what a sick comment !" Mr. Deputy Speaker, I made that statement under some understanding. I just didn't hurl it across the floor as an empty statement. Mr. Deputy Speaker, why are those provinces the two wealthiest in Canada? Certainly not simply because we have an NDP Government in Manitoba. That obviously has some bearing, but why is it that those provinces are the two wealthiest? Mr. Deputy Speaker, I'm not

Thuraday, 25 February, 1988 going to go into the long list of reasons that I have, but I will say to you that the system that we have in place today, whether it's the best or not - and maybe it is - would be wonderful and every member on this side would applaud it and, to a large degree, does applaud it if it were paid for.

What we have in place today - and if the NDP were half honest, they would tell Manitobans this - what we have in place today is a system that, although it may be high and we will say it's eroding quickl y, really is false because lt hasn't been paid for. lt hasn't come close to being paid for in many respects. And yet, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, we have Ministers opposite who attack those provinces, who are saying to their citizens, we want to give you high health care service too, but at least we want to pay for it today so that the citizens who are consuming those health services tomorrow will be able to pay for them on their own and will not also have to pay for those consumed previous ly. Mr. Deputy Speaker, that's the only statement I'm trying to make, and yet the Minister of Health comes In here and he says, Isn't it a shame the two wealthiest provinces in this country still have health premiums?

He went on further to say that we spend $5,6 16 per capita, on average, on the health care sys tem. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I'm sorry I didn't get all the numbers down quick ly, but it seem ed to me he said that the Canadian average was $1,5 68.00. We were some $50 per capita above the Canadian average. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, If it's on that basis, that for every million population we spend $50 million more, that the Minister of Health can stand In his place and say that we have the best sys tem; If that's the basis, $50 per capita, then indeed this political debate that's going to swirl around the whole health care is going to be one that's going to cause great confusion in the mi nds of Manltobans. Because, Mr. Deputy Speaker, If what the members opposite are saying, the more money you throw at it, the greater opportunity, therefore you have to call it best or better.

To use those superlatives, that is a sick attitude. Well, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the Member for West Kildonan said I said it. I never used those figures. I gleaned those figures from the prese ntation given by the Minister of Health. Nowhere, I didn't have them. They were foreign to me. I wasn 't aware of them. I accept them. But, Mr. Deputy Speaker, yes, there are many things. I don't pretend, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to know everything like the former Minister of Finance. I never have. A MEMBER: He knows everything. MR. C. MANNESS: He knows it all. He thinks he knows it all. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, I'm not going to rush to the defense of Prime Minister Mulroney and his sacred trust statem ent. lt won't stand here. Certainly the Prime Minister hims elf knows what he meant when he made the statement and knows what was in place at that time and the members opposite do also. But, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the Minister of Health in his remarks referred to the Session that we have for legislators whereby the drawback under Established Programs' Financing and 307 the Impact that was going to have on the province was within the area of health and post-seco ndary education.

He drew mention of that particular Session that we had. Mr. Deputy Speaker, you know what struck me the most that day was when you talked to the NDP, or you talked to the groups who are organized within the commu nity to go on th e attack of the Federal Government for supposedly reneging on what it was they thought they could provide to the provinces, had the economy produced at the level it was assumed to. What struck me the most through all these dis cussions - and I've been seen them all -i s the word "needs." The word "needs," Mr.

Deputy Speaker, is set out there far removed from reality. lt's as if, because somebody has an identifiable need, it is some thing therefore that has to be 50 percent funded. Mr. Deputy Speaker, that logic cannot be sold by the NDP, because people know that we have needs far beyond the capacity of any government to provide. And yet, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, read all of the commentary that usually comes forward from the NDP within the area of health, within the area of all community serv ices, and you'll hear the word "needs" without the slightest tie into the reality of how we as a people are prepared to produce and to be taxed. Mr. Deputy Speaker, the Minis ter also said that Western Canadian provinces have cut programs to save money. Mr. Deputy Speaker, other than Manitoba, that may be true. I don't know whether it's true or not, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but this is still a free country.

One would assu me, if that were the case, that there would be line-ups in our institutions, in our health institutions, by people from outside of Manitoba who are now being denied that service, that program, by their own provinces. Where is it, Mr. Deputy Speaker? 1 see no sign of it. Where is it? Well, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it doesn't exist. And then the Minister of Health - and this is, of course, what's at issue here, Mr. Deputy Speaker - he says, the messa ge is clear. Progressive Conservatives cannot be trusted to maintain health care services. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, what the NDP does, when they're down low in the polls, they go back to their high card. Of course, the high card is you get out on the streets, you get out on every platform possible and you tell the people th e big lie. The big lie is, of course, the Cons ervatives are going to cut pensions. The big lie is the Conservatives are going to shut down the senior citizen homes and, of course, the big lie is the Cons ervatives are going to cut social programs. Mr. Deputy Speaker, you know what? The big lie is beginning to lose very quickly the grab it has on Manitobans.

The Minister goes on to say that the Provincial Government has been robbed by the Federal Government to the tune of $1 20 million a year under transf erring. Mr. Deputy Speaker, that's not true. That's a great fallacy. Before I comple te my comments on this bill and, as you know, I don't often rise on health issues to speak , but let me say, Mr. Deputy Speaker, one can see exactly what the NDP are trying to perpetrate on Manitobans by the introduction of this particular bill. lt's nothing more than a cheap attempt, the cost of the paper that it's written on, to buy favour with Manitobans. Nothing more.

Thureday, 25 February, 1888 We ll, the Mini ster In ch arge of the Workers Compensation Board chuckles at me, Mr. Deputy Speaker . But as my colleague, the MLA for River East, says, until the Min ister clearly points out the source of new funding In a manner and which the Cabinet and the Government of the Day is going to direct funding, and on the basis and the criteria by which outside groups are going to be able to tap Into· that fund, I dare say, Mr. Deputy Speaker, this bill, and this act to be I suppose, is nothing more than an attempt to buy favour. Mr.

Deputy Speaker, again for the record, I have no quarrel with the object and the purposes of the bill, but indeed to bring it forward in this fashion, particularly after the attempts on so many occasions to use nothing but hollow legislation to give support to the perce ption that they are doing some thing, I have great trouble at this point in time wanting to support it. Thank you. MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Honour able Member for Klldonan. MR. M.

DOUN: You know, I appreciate the privilege given to me by the Member for Vlrden and the Member for Brandon West, you know, In not being a fourth generation Canadian, to allow me the privilege to speak in this House, repr esenting my constituents and the people of this province.

I kno w they consider that somewhat offensive to this august body, except I intend to continue to speak for people despite the fact that I've only been here 23 years and In spite of the fact that I am what they would refer to as a new Immigrant, one who is not worthy to stand up In this House because I'm not fourth or sixth generation or augustly Canadian born. I'm sorry for that. I apologize for that, but I am proud of this count ry. I am proud of the programs in this count ry. I'm also proud of the health care sys tem.

I would like to make a comment, particularly about this bill, which I think Is what was missing from what I have heard In the previous speec h. This bill is designed to provide for initia tives to come to government to be able to Innovate in the health sys tem. The difference, as the Member for River Heights points out, she asked the question, why, when you have departmental research staff who can provide Initia tives, why not let them provide the Initia tives? Well, one of the rea sons, Mr.

Deputy Speaker, one of the reasons I'm sure ever ybody in this House unde rstands Is that you are asking for Input and Initia tives from the commun ity. You do not let departmental staff or politicians innovate or instigate that. You allow the communities to take some action on their own.

I am particularly appalled by the front bench Member for Morris who, If there were a Conservative Government in this province, would most likely be the Min ister of Finance, self-proclaimed financial expert, self proclaimed researcher, and a man who understands the financ es and the impl ications of the financial relationship between the health care syst em and the finances and deficit debt of this province. Let me remind the Member for Morris what he said, and why they are not the government of this province, and why the people of this province will continue to reject them. He said, "Mr.

Deputy Speaker, " and I'm 308 quoting him as verbatim as I can, "we cannot quantify health care services in Manitoba. We in Manitoba cannot stand up here and prove and say that we have the best health care system in Canada." When I asked him, he said: "There is no way of doing it." We ll, I would suggest to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for his edification, there are many ways of doing it. One of the ways is the number of people recei ving services when they re quire them.

For example, prior to Medi care In this countr y, we kno w that 37 percent of Canadians had no access to health care services if they could not afford it. We know how many Americans now have access to services. That's one way of quantif ying it. Another way of quantifying it very simply is: How many services are available to people that they have to pay for and how many services are not? That's another way of quanti fying it. How many people in this province get service compared to how many people in the State of Mi s

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	33-3-11
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	33rd 3rd hansardpdf 11.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	c344d6289c716732e8a8a3468f118750a20d348a

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