Manitoba Hansard — 10 March 1981 (Sitting 34B, 31st Legislature, 5th Session)

31-5-34b

Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 Time - 8:00 p.m. CONCURRENT COMMI TTEES OF SUPPLY SUPPLY - HEA LTH MR. (Virden): Bonif ace. CHAIRM AN, Morris McGregor 1. (a)(2) - pass - the Member for St. MR. LAURENT L. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, there is something that puzzles me. The Mi nister quite rightly and I hasten to say that I don 't take any exception to his remark, gave credit to his Acting Deputy Minis ter for the good work that he has been doing amongst other people, but I'm singling out the Deputy Min ister.

Now he's still an Acting Deputy Mi nister and it's over a year and I want to know why. Either he's not doing the work well, ot the Minister's not satisfied with him or he's not sure he's going to stay, and I think after a year you should make up your mind. Is there any reason why he's not the Deputy Mini ster? 1 have no problem with him at all. I think that I remember when he was the Mini ster of Health and the Mini ster of Education, he was one of the most prog ressive and there the word fitted him quite well. In fact, 1 think that is why the Roblin government was so progressive.

He was very short in his reply, I remember th at amongst other things but, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask the Minis ter what is the situation there and why have we got a Deputy Mini ster of Health at this time. If we don't want any order here, it's our business. Don't you come here and raise hell. MR. CHAIRMAN: All right, one member at a time. The Member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: I'm fin ished for the time being. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Honourable Mi nister. HON. L.R. (Bud) SHERMAN (Fort Garry): Well, Mr. Chairman, the comments in my opening statement, with respect to the Acting Deputy Mini ster, Dr.

George Johnson, are entir ely sincere, as I _su spect the Honourable Member for St. Boni face believe him to be. We have as members of the Commit tee know, gone thr ough a di fficult process of di viding the former Department of Health and Community Services into two departments. At that point in time, the Deputy Min ister of the combined department was of course Mr. Ron Johnson, and Dr. George Johnson was Associate Deputy Mini ster and Chief Medical Advisor to me in my capacity as Mini ster of Health and Community Services. With the change in the department, Mr.

Johnson went to Community Services and because we had not resolved the question either in Dr. Johnson's mind or our own minds as to precisely what the final format and structure of the new Department of Health would be and in that question is involved the precise role and format of the Ma nitoba Health Services Commission, we designated Dr. Johnson as Acting Deputy Mini ster. He has continued since that time, really to perform the duties of Deputy Min ister, although I know that the Honourable Member for St.

Boniface and the Honourable Member for Seven Oaks, both of whom are former Min isters of Health, would be the first to concede that taking the split department the way it is, th at the basic admin istrative duties and admin istrative respo nsibiliti es really are performed on the health side by the Manitoba Health Services Commission. When we had a combined department there was of course no argument that we needed a Deputy Mini ster to handle the admin istrative side.

When you're looking at a department which is a Department of Health from which Commu nity Services and Corrections have been separated, I think that it would have to be conceded that in the area of adminis tration, the primary responsi bility lies ess entiall y with the Ma nitoba Health Serv ices Commission, so that the need for the designation of an officer to fulfill that admin istrative role was a question mark in our minds and has remaine d some thing of a qu est ion mark while we've been searching for a final format in terms of a structural organization of the Department of Heal th.

That exercise is not completed. There are a number of reasons why Dr. Johnson has not been appointed Deputy Mini ster and I think that he could probably answer some of them hi mself, I don't choose to answer for him. But the functions and duties he has carried out have been as the right hand man to the Min ister and he has been most co operative and apparently reasonably satisfied to perform in that capacity as Acting Deputy Min ister.

We're still looking at the final disposition of regional field services, regional personal services, that aspect of Health and Commu nity Services and where it should lie in the future. We have explored at length the question of the ulti mate disposition of the Health Services Commission and since there has been a considerable question mark hanging over that whole organizational structure, we hav en't found it necessary either from Dr. Johnson's point of view or from the department's point of view to designate him as permanent Deputy Mi nister. Further to that, there has been some search in which Dr.

Johnson has participated for a person who might be designa ted as Deputy Mini ster with a view then to giving Dr. Johnson a dif ferent title. That search has not, to this date, produc ed a logical Deputy Min ister. It's continuing but it's not easy to find a person who is either qualified or capable or prepared to take on the Deputy Mi nistry of the Department of Health. I don't think I can give the honourable member any other answer than that, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, it's an answer but it's not one that satisfies me.

If you have a Deputy Mi nister in the Department of Fitness and Amateur Sports and if you have a Deputy Mi nister in the field of Culture, certainly after over a year I think 1545

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 the government should make up its mind and have a Deputy Minister of Health. Certainly that the division that we have now between He alth and Social Development or Community Services the department is smaller but it was a huge department there is no doubt about that. but with all the meetings that are held in that department - and now I'm talking about Health alone - and to co-ordinate with anothe r department especially in Fitn ess and Amateur Sports which is something that is lacking, it seems to me that we should have a Deputy Min ister.

Now the Minister said that they are still looking at the Manitoba Health Services Commission and there is a possibility that it'll go in the stream in the department. But I think the Mi nister will find that he would then need at least an Associate Deputy Minis ter because that person should be at the building with the rest of the staff at the commission and it's something else altogether.

They are the insurance company more or less; they are the ones that are financing the programs of the government; there is less planning there I would think that the Minister has accepted the responsibility for planning for the commission. I remember years ago there was one line in the commission during the Estimates and there was no discussion - maybe a few minutes discussion that's all because it was a Crown corporation - but then they generated revenue. If they felt it cost more money then they'd come and ask for higher premiums and that was it, so they weren't questioned as much as they are now.

That started under the former administration where we felt we had to take the responsibility and the Mi nister is doing the same thing, he's accepting his responsibility. Anyway I guess that'll have to do. I guess their Mi nister did salvage something at the end when he said well, there is a possibil ity they'll look for an administrator and I would take it that Dr. Johnson then would serve in just as an important capacity as the Ch ief Me dical Officer which we started when we were in government.

Now I don't want to embarrass anybody but I want if I may, take this occas ion to say how sorry Manitobans are and I know I'm speaking for Manitobans and I'm sure the Minis ter feels the same as I do to see the gentleman in front of me leaving for a greener pasture. Now there's one thus far, and as I say I don't want to embarrass him but if it was strictly administration I don't think you could have gone any better than finding that man as a Deputy Mini ster. He's cert ainly material for a Deputy Min ister.

Maybe he doesn't want it, I don't know, maybe he'd sooner be in Lougheed country I don't know and I don't want to embarrass him. But nevertheless I think that we certainly join the Minis ter in saying that we're sorry to see him go and that he was a very helpful person for our province here; and I feel that he certainly had the ability to administer the dep artrnent if he had been called on, if he wanted to accept it. Mr. Chairman, may I ask the Mini ster, I see that there·s an increase of one in the staff here. Could the Minister tell us who that person is and what is the role?

Has there being some reorganization or is it another special assistant with special duties; or is the load getting a little too large that the Minis ter felt he should have an extra staff? 1546 MR. SHERMAN: That position is a new position of Assistant to the Deputy Min ister, Mr. Chairman. As the member may recall in the previous complement, the previous configuration, there was an executive assistant to the Deputy Min ister of the department, a Mr. Ed Maclnnes, who served this province long and well.

The workload is such for the Deputy Mi nister or the Acting Deputy Minis ter with the various meetings and delegations and other responsibilities that he has in terms of communications as much as anything else, that the Assistant's position can be justified and that's what the new position is. The person is Miss Jeanie Raymond, who was an executive secretary in my office. Of the three-member secretarial staff in my office, Miss Raymond was number two in seniority, certainly equal to anybody in competence and she has moved over as Executive Assistant to the Deputy and she has been replaced in my office. MR.

CHAIRMAN: The Member for Fort Rouge. MS. JUNE WESTBURY: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I have to apologize for butting in on the Member for St. Bon iface 's ques tions, but I asked about the appointment of a Deputy Mini ster so many times in the last session and the most satisfying answer I received was from the Premier, who told me that he coul dn't move into the Deputy Mi nis ter's office because it was being painted. I was just joking with the Mi nister of Agriculture about that and he told me about the slow-drying paint and that was something like last April or May.

I'm joking about it at the moment, but I happen to think it's a serious matter. I happen to believe what I'm told and that is that people in the department are concerned, not only about this vacancy and lack of appointment, but by others in the department.

I will be speaking on th ose as we go th rough the Estima tes, particularly asking about specific appointments that have not been made, just simply from the point of view - and this is something we heard quite a bit about from the Con servatives when they were running for office, their respect for the Civil Service - and I think that the best way they can show respect for the Civil Service is to promote people into vacant positions in the higher echelons as they become available.

People keep coming to me and to my office and telling us of these positions that have never been filled and it's more than a year that the Deputy Mini ster of Health has been vacant. I think it's a matter of some concern and you know, we had the paint job theory and there have been so many rumours around, one of them being that Dr. Johnson won't touch it with a ten-foot pole but I suppose that's about as accurate as the paint job was.

That's the trouble you see, when these things are just allowed to sort of meander on, rumours do start to circulate and people become, not the people in tho se positions or even th ose cl ose to those positions, but people making a career of Civil Service work feel threatened because they don't see the opportunities being opened for promotion within the department. I think that's unfortunate.

I notice in the opening remarks of the Min ister, he has referred to a number of those same things that we talk about a lot, the preventive care, geriatric medicine and the Mini ster has made statements in support of these thrusts. I think everybody in the

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 health care field in Manitoba feels that this is the way to go and yet we don't really see it happening. The Min ister says in his opening remarks, "We shall move to expand existing initiatives and to introduce new initiatives", so we will be watching eagerly for those ne w ini tiatives to appear especi ally in preventive care, Mr. Chairman.

The Minister has referred in listing here his new initiatives to adult day care and I want to remind those working in the field in particular of the need for day care to be extended into the night hours for thos e eld erly people particularly, living with their families. The reason for suggesting this, Mr. Chairman, to the Mini ster is that I know of families, I have two or three in close contact with my own family, family connections and constit uency connections, where they want to keep the elderly people with them. The family is working.

In one instance it's a woman of about my own age who has her own career, which of course we don't want her to abandon, and she wants to look after her mother at home. She can get care in the daytime but she can't stay up all nigh t watching her mother, she has to have her rest too. So that's something that I hop e someone will address at sometime in the future.

I believe there are many dozens of cases like that where the families would keep the elderly person at home if they could get some kind of a sitting form of service to see that they don't wander at night, they don't get to their medicines and things like that when the family is sleeping. I don't pretend that I have the definitive answer on that; I just observe it as a need that is not being met, Mr. Chairman. I'm not going to go on any more about preventive, I made a speech on it in my abuse of the e1derly resolution and just about every time I make a speech I get on to that.

I think most of the other things I have to say I prefer to address as we go line by line. MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to say in response to the Honourable Member for St. Boniface that I certainly concur in his references to Mr. Peter Schmidt, who is di rector of the Admin istrative Ser vices Division of the Department of Community Services, and who has doubled in brass on behalf of the Department of Health and sits in front of us this evening and whose departure to employment in a province to the west of us is very much to be regretted. Mr. Schmidt has given the province great service over the years.

Hopefully, we will be able to lure him back in the not too distant future. MS. WESTBURY: Yes, I'm sorry that I also didn't refer to Mr. Schmidt's contribution and thank him for it on behalf of Liberals who have been sitting around this table and regret that he's leaving. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (a)(2) - pass - the Member for Seven Oaks. MR. SAUL A. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to get some clarification because I'm trying to compare the present Estimates book with the previous one, and just for information purposes it will help me follow this.

Last year, Community Health Centres was a line on to itself, where would I find it this year? MR. SHERMAN: The Com munity Health Centres are now funded under the Manitoba Health Services 1547 Commission, Mr. Chairman, and they will appear as we deal with medical services under the MHS C appropriation. MR. MILLER: I see. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: that the y'v e been transferred to Enn's responsibility, isn't that it? MR. SHERMAN: Not yet, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (a)(2) - the Member for Seven Oaks. MR. MILLER: Mr.

Chairman, there is a matter I want to bring up and I'm doing it under this

section because I don't know any other

section it can be and really it is an administrative problem. it deals with the dilemma of some people, it doesn't happen very often but it's happening and recently a case was brought to my attention. The Mini ster may recall this was mentioned a couple of years ago; at that time it was a hypothetical kind of situation where a spouse, the wife of a man, has to be in a personal care home and is in a personal care home. The woman in question is not 65 years of age and ther efore does not get old age pension, does get a supplement - a spous e's supplement I think they call it I think it's $85 a month.

The husband is 65 and is getting old age pension, however, there's also a 19-year old daughter still living with the father and they are of course maintain ing their own premis es in the apartment block in which they reside. The wife being in a personal care home has to pay the $9 per diem, I think it's $9 or $9.25 per diem. The total family income with old age pension and the wife's $85 is about$850 per month, out of which the residence has to be maint ained as well the $300 per month to the personal care home.

Needless to say, it's obvious if you look at these two things, these two lump sums of money - one rent for the apartment, rent and board and room in the personal care home - is a fantastic drain on their resources. Now I did check with the department, they made some small adjustment, not through this program but through another program, and that's why I bring it up under Administration because really more than one department might be effected. But the amount that they could, in accordance with their regulations, make availabl e is very minimal.

I'm wondering whether the Mini ster has addressed himself to this kind of problem. I recognize it's not too many people fall into that category but I know it has happened and will continue to happen . If both were of pensionable age and both were receiving old age pension then it could be argued, well she's getting her old age pension and that should be enough to cover, if not entirely cover it, cover the major part of personal care home per diem. But in this case she's not getting anything like that.

I'm wondering is there not Mi nisterial dis cretion or som e other means whereby cases such as this can be dealt with because I can see where the usual regulations don't cover it. The regulations are usually made for the norm and can't take into account these oddities that might develop. So I'd ask the Mi nister what is the answer for people like this?

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 MR. SHERMAN: Mr . Chairman , the Honoura ble Member for Seven Oaks asked me if I've addressed myself specifically to that anomaly and the answer, I thin k in all candor, would have to be no, that I haven't addressed myself specifically to that anomaly but there are, as the honourable member knows, a number of anomalies in the system.

We have in my office addressed ourselves to another anomaly which is the case of the married couple, one of whom is in a personal care home and one of whom is maintaining a residence and who receive, in total, a lower pension from OAS, and GI S if they're on it, than would be the case if they were single because that"s the way those federal programs are structured. I had the Health Services Commission identify the number of Manitobans in that anomalous situation for me and ask whether we migh t consider implementation of some kind of a program to meet their needs.

The number of Mani tobans in that situation is approximately 750 and we have asked the Council on Aging for some opinions and some guida nce as to whether it do es constitute the problem that we think it might and if so, what they might recommend we might do to deal with it. I will certainly take the difficulty or the anomaly that the Member for Seven Oaks suggests as notice and put it in the same category for study.

At this point in time, I can only say that either through the Department of Community Services and thr ough Income Security Programs Social Assistance, or through the Manitoba Supplement for Pensioners, formerly the Manitoba Supplement for the Elderly, there could well be some assistance available but I would have to examine that. I think in general, it's one of these cases where the structure and the bure aucracy and the un iversal format doesn't fit and we'll have to have a look at it.

I would like to refer to the Council on Aging to have them determine for us just how many situations of this kind there are and what kind of help is needed. I would think that we could be looking at dovetailing in special programs to meet cases of that kind. I would think they're fairly limited. MR. MILLER: Yes, Mr. Chairman, the kind of case that I picture here is I think, very uncommon. I don't bel ieve there'd be anything like 700 cases in Manitoba or even a tenth of that. I did work through the Department of Community Services, they did look at it.

The irony of it is that they'd be better off if this couple separated, had a legal separation, then she would have no income, could claim social allowances and therefore would be covered in a personal care home. I didn' t want to give them that advice, frankly. lt would n't have been welcome, knowing the man as I do, but it's a ridiculous situation when that appears to be the only way to go. So when the Minis ter says he is going to refer to the Council for Aging, that's a long process. That may be fine if he's thinking in terms of a larger group who have similar, but not identical problems.

I bring this to the attention of the Min ister because this is happening right now. The $300.00 to the personal care home comes due every first of the month; that amount has to be met. What will happen if this isn't resolved very quickly, is that the few funds that he has accumulated over years will be dissipated and he will simply apply for welfare. In other words, you strip the family of all assets. The problem is that for purposes of assets, the combined in comes are consid ered, but for pu rposes of expenditures, each one has to pay their own way and as I say, they simply can't do it.

So I am wondering, putting aside the question of studying it or monitoring it or looking for advice from the Council for Aging, whether the Min ister does not have ministerial discretion in matters such as this whereby certain costs can be waived, the personal care home for example, whether the government cannot take steps to cover the entire cost of a personal care home, rather than contribute $9.00 per day to the individual. MR. SHERMAN : Mr. Chairman, it's a serious problem for those people caught in that particular situation and I will take it under immed iate advisement.

I don't want to offer any false hopes at this juncture. We'd have to examine the situation to see whether anything was jeopardized by our moving in to provide assistance, whether there were cost sharing programs that were affected or not, I'm not suggesting there are; but I think obv iously the honourable member would agree with me that it'll have to be examined. I can't give an answer off the top of my head, but I will certainly look into it without delay.

I think the general question though, is the kind of thing that we do want to refer to the Council on Aging to develop proposals for us for programs year by-year, the kind of thin g that could then be introduced as a program the following year. MR. MILLER: I would like to tell the Min ister that if he or his staff wants information , what little information I have, I'll be glad to give it to whoever handles it, so that they can follow through on it. MR. SHERMAN: I'd like to have that. Thank you. MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (a)(2) - pass; 1. (a)(3) - pass; 1. (b)(1) - the Mem ber for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr.

Chairman, I mentioned to the Mi nister privately that I didn' t think, certainly as far as I was concerned that it certainly wouldn't take us long in debating and looking at and passing his Estimates as we did the previous two or three years. I want to say this publicly now, I think we broke a record last year and the year before. I didn 't hear anybody on the government side or on the other side say that we were trying to stall. I think it was a worthwhile exercise and I think that it was an example of what the Opposition can do in pressing the government, in keeping the government honest.

I think this is what we did, because there are a lot things that have been changed since the session of 197 8. I chose this place to make these remarks on the program planning because this was one area where the Mini ster had pretty well got rid of all the planners that we had in the Min ister's office at the time, or anywhere else and it was felt that the planning would be done by the people in the field and the people in the hospital and so on and thr erefore the government didn't have any direction at all.

I remember the first press conference the Min ister of Finance had shortly after he took office and he said, well, we'll have to cut down, and he mentioned different departments and he had instructed the 1548

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 Min ister of Health to knock off $1 0 million. That was ridiculous before having a chance to know what was needed and if there was too much spent in there. There was a statement made, we've got to cut, so we decide we'll cut so much in each department, and this will come out of Health. There was no planning. There seemed to be no idea at all and for three years it was a question of restraint. Mr.

Chairman, I see no reason for somebody who really bel ieves sinc erely in restraint, to all of a sudden this year and at the end of the last year to say, wel l, things have changed , we do n't need restraint anymore. Either you're sincere and you believe in restraint and if you believe in restraint, what has happened to all of a sudden say we don't need it anymore, it's done the job. There's more inflation than ever before. The deficits are larger every year. The debt, which was the big thing during the last campaign, well that's out of sight right now.

The only thing that happened was an election where the Federal Government was replaced after this government saying that the Crosbie Budget didn't go far enough and just weeks after there was an election. All of a sudden we started getting the programs that weren't even approved, not only in this department but in other departments and then we started to go and the forthcoming election. I've said that before, I hate to single out anybody because I think this Mini ster has done a hell of a job of PR for the department; any other would n't have been able to do what this man has done.

But he does, he must accept the responsibil ity and it seems that this government in the past has been going on on a question of pull or going by the seat of their pants or of flying kites. And this is how the policy has been doing up to this year. Now, I think, and we're going to brag a bit for the former admin istration, I think that we left thi s department in a very good shape. Now, we were abused a few years ago saying that there was all kinds of waste; we had too many employees and gradually these employees are coming back. There was all kind of skeletons.

Then when we challenged that well, that wasn't forthcoming. I think that is one of the reasons why this department is still in fairly good shape. But we can't just look at this year and see what has happened. Don't think that there is anything new, any radical changes in this department at all. I was looking at the thi ngs that were mentioned and they were all not as advanced and every year something will be more advanced and next year it'll be the same thing and the change of government will be the same thing but I think the direction, the planning that we had done, that was continued.

You take the personal care home, there was a big freeze. lt was supposed to stop all the waste but all of a sudden the same program is now going through; it took a little longer and we spent more money because of inflation. The public health, the Mi nister is saying today that we're reviving that and even in a year of restraint and we had some restraint. The last year that we were in office and the time of restraint, if you remember, the main thrust of the department was exactly like it is this year with prevention and public health.

I think that the only place where we did increase staff, we asked for about nine more public health nurses, was at the Health Sciences 1549 Centre. lt was going along, it was left pretty well in the hands, you know, it's always said, well the government is trying to do all the planning and they tell the people what should be done, let them decide for themselves, that was left in the hands of the Health Science Centre and they had problems, we were waiting for them.

The day care for the elderly certainly is a much better program now but the Minis ter repeatedly said that was something new. lt wasn't; it was a pilot project that we had going. Gerontology, I don't think there was any government that had advanced that more than the former government and I'm very pleased to say this Minister and his government in continuing in that and there is improvement, no doubt. Rest bed care was something that we were planning, going in that direction. Research is not something new; it's very small but we made a start.

There was $1 00,000 in the last year put in for research and it was explained that this was very little but it was a start and we hope to go in that direction. There was a committee set up but that was being studied by the now President of the University, Dr. Naimark. The psychiatric beds, if you remember, was a priority and in fact we debated that with the Minister the first year; we felt that should be going on that it should have been on before. The ambulance program we started, the Northern Transportation. The high risk in prenatal also was being discussed with the commission at the time.

The reason why I'm saying this is that there has been some improvement in certain areas. I certainly will not be unfair enough to say that everything this government is doing is wrong, but I think you will understand that if we doubt the sincerity of the government; I don't say they're not interested in taking care of people, I want to make that quite clear but the sincerity in the direction that they are going. it's very difficult for a political party to say; well, you know, our policy did n't work we're changing this.

Well that is, in effect, what happened; restraint hasn't been working or the reason for this is because of the elec tion. That's goin g out. Now, we'll take it, whatever it is we'll take it. I think that the department, the Minister said, I think there was what 11 5 more, a million dollars spent but a lot of that is catching up. You know when the Minister, as I say, without any planning, the first year when we talk about an increase in hospital budget it was 2.2 and I waited and waited for weeks to find out what was the formula and the Minister finally said; well I'll tell you.

We started at zero, if you look at zero, we had a choice to go between zero and 13 percent they were asking, we decided on 2.2 and that was the explanation. And we heard these things about restraint and you know, the need, very important, what was the saying? Cost and then need; then the time of underpaid and overworked and that seemed to be changing all of a sudden and I'm glad that it is. Now, I'm not suggesting that the Min ister can go ahead or the department will spend money all over the place.

I am just saying that there was catching up to do and we were losing out and many of these programs were very well established programs and I think we're the envy - I think it's safe to say that we had and probably at the present this province is probably at least amongst the leaders in this field. lt

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 still is but it was also when this government took over; these programs were there and they were the envy of many of the other provinces. I'm saying this, I feel vind icated somewhat because it was quite insulting to hear that we had made a mess of this department, not necess arily just by the Min ister, by the government during the last elect ion, and there was all kinds of wasting in staff and so on and the things that we were talking about, planning and so on. This is coming back and these programs are coming back and the restraints are coming back.

I want to make something clear because I never had a chance to talk on the Hall Report. The Mini ster is aiming at us when he said those that had a complain were proven wrong. I don't accept that. Maybe the Mini ster Begin, who said that legally that they were using that money; my fight is not with the Federal Mi nister; I heard a different statement and we never agreed with that. At no time did we say that legally the government was wrong.

What we did say, that with the money that was coming, and we understood, we had fought for this business of having more flexibility, and I think that was needed because we had an awful setup where they covered, for instance, acute beds but not personal care beds so the trend was to go towards building acute beds. lt was ridiculous and I think that somebody, a few provinces, said that's enough, we had too many after . Manitoba was one of them. I remember the Opposition were saying that we weren't building enough, my friend was Minis ter, not building enough acute beds.

We got this flexibility that we'd been fighting for and we're not even saying that all the money should be spent immediately because it'll be less as the years go by. But we did say that the first year there should have been more money because there was a reduction, an actual reduction of the funds that came from the province. So you know, I don't intend to start that all over again but I want to make it clear that I'm not backing down on what I had said a couple of years ago and the figures that I prepare are still there.

Never was it suggested that legally the government was wrong but we felt that there wasn't enough money, especially in the hospitals and maybe with Medicare. The prevention also, I know that when this Mini ster was in Opposition that he always felt that prevention was an important thing and so do I. I think that now we should talk; the Min ister said there was a change in the department, they split the department and it's in three different departments. I agree with my colleague from Transcona who said that fitness and amateur sports, call it what you want.

I think that if we ever form the government again the Mini ster responsible for Health would be the Min ister responsible for Fitness and Amateur Sport because that would be the thrust of whatever we did in sports and in fitness and in recreation. We would be less interested in the professional part of it but in whatever is going to give the people a chance to participate in sports and give them a better chance of better fitness in their lifestyle and so on.

So what I'm sorry about is that there seemed to be no dialogue, the Mi nister will probably deny that, but speaking with the Mi nister of Fitness and Amateur Sports it's quite clear that there's very little dialogue between the different departments, the Department 1550 of Health and the Department of Education and so on. We had set up an interdepartmental committee when we looked at that and we talked about the fitness and we talked about this question of also not just the exercise and these programs of the jogging and all of these things but in the nutrition and so on because the food is very important.

So we feel that there should be a little better rapport between those two if at all possible. That is a situation that we think could be improved greatly. So I say it would be our suggestion that they should look at that and maybe think of the same Min ister probably having two departments, but have the responsibility of working together on that, Mr. Chairman. If I was vindicative I'd crow and I'd say what happened to the doctor?

And here's where I want to attack the present Mi nister because he was one of those who kept saying the word and until you say it long enough it sticks and I think it was very unfair, it was a confrontation between the doctors. I'm not going to take the easy road, I'm going to say that I sympathize with him because I've gone through that and I know that he has a responsibilty and I know that it takes two to have a confrontation, but I say to him that he will have my co-operation.

I think the doctors should be well paid but I think that they're not the only ones in this field and I admire the Min ister for having said so. I didn't consider that do ctor bashing and I don't consider that confronta tion. I consider that the Minis ter was exercising his responsibility, taking his responsibility seriously but he had it much easier than I had it. First of all he didn't belong to a Socialist Party which is not the first love of the medical profession, it's automatic although I could see that the same problem was happening all across the Dominion and all the provinces.

Now that doctors have to be very careful who they are going to complain to? If they criticize this government where are they going to go? So there's another thing, that was never explained, all of a sudden a big confrontation was over the question of hiring out which most of the members of the medical profession didn't understand - they thought that I was trying to stop them from opting out - and hir ing out meant exact ly that the government could not hire any doctors without the permission of the Manitoba Medical Association or the MMA.

Now I don't hear about that any more and I'm positive that this Min ister and this government would not accept that, would not put anything in an agreement that they will not be able to hire any doctors unless they go to the MMA; it doesn't make sense. In fact I question the fact that the MMA can bargain for doctors on staff. lt doesn't make sense that the free enterprising system will decide who is hired by the government but the judge decided that that was the case.

So I don't intend to be vind icative; I don't intend to cause the Mini ster more problems with that, but I couldn't help but remind him of the days that he was I think a little tough and he kept on talking about the confrontation every chance we had and his First Mini ster talked about this government that wanted government by confrontation which I felt was very unfair. So I wanted to say this because there's no way that I'm going to have too many criticisms of this department this year. I'm not going to go back on

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 every item, go back to three years from now. I tried to explain that the setup now has to be looked at; the package of the last three years. I say that it is obvious, by this it is a confession that restraint doesn't work; that restraint the way it was applied hasn't worked.

Now I would hope that the Mi nister will be careful in the spending and there's a lot of money being spent - I'm not saying that we're happy with everything - but this year is not the year to criticize the department and the Mi nister after having made these comments and as far as I'm concerned these Estimates will go a lot faster than they did the last previous year. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Rock Lake. MR. HENRY J. EINARSON: Mr.

Chairman, I listened to the Member for Transcona this afternoon in the kind of what I thought was some poli tical connotations in his opening address in response to the Minister of Health and I let it go by but now that I'm hearing it from the Member for St. Boniface once again, when the opposition members talk about the restraint that we had applied when we first became government of this province, I should like to remind the honourable gentleman opposite, Mr. Chairman, that never in Manitoba's history did a political party take over after seven or almost eight years of socialism in this province, that's No. 1.

No. 2, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to go back in history like my honourable colleagues did this afternoon and this evening and remind them that in 1969 when they became government, and I ask you, Mr. Chairman, what was the financial situation of the province at that time? Did they have a surplus of what was it, $40 million? Or was the surplus somewhere in the neighbourhood of $45 million? Perhaps the latter figure might have been closer to being correct.

Then when the election of 1977 came along we made some promises in our campaigns to the people of Manitoba, not knowing what the financial situation of the province was having done that. Mr. Chairman, I think that we have honoured just about every one of those promises that we made to the people of Manitoba in the fall of 19 77. Then you know what the evide nce of that elect ion was - we became government then we took over the reins of government and when we took over the particular portfolios, what was the financial situation of the province at that time? What was it October 24th, 1977?

What was the deficit then? Or was there a surplus? I think no, Mr. Chairman, we had a considerable deficit Were we lead to believe, Mr. Chairman, that the deficit, what was it $18 0 million or was it $200 million, or what was it, Mr. Chairman, $224 million? Perhaps that might be a figure a little bit closer. If it was a $224 mill ion de ficit, Mr. Chairman, that's a far cry from a surplus of $45 million in 1969. I think, Mr. Chairman, those facts have to be borne out when we listen to the comments from members opposite in discussing these Estimates. So this is what we were faced with, Mr.

Chairman, to have to accept not only providing health services to the people of Manitoba and something that my colleagues and I have accepted that responsibility ever since 19 66 when I was first elected to this House. But we found out, Mr. Chairman, that we had to accept a different kind of fiscal responsibili ty. So 1551 when my worthy opponents opposite keep harping on the freeze that we had to place on various services and probably cutting back on civil servants who provide those services, that we were somehow doing an inj ustice to the people and to the taxpayers of the Province of Manitoba.

I suggest to you, Mr. Chairman, it was plain and simple fiscal responsibility that I and my colleagues and the Premier of this province were prepared to accept and prepared to face up to. So we had to have a freeze for the temporary period of time. Having done that, Mr. Chairman, now I hear my colleagues from the other side saying now that things are looking a little bit better, is there an election in the wind? So we're trying to paint the picture and make it look much better. I think, Mr.

Chairman, what it really means the kind of Estimates and the kind of Budget that we're pro viding of roughly $700 million before this Committee has shown as proving to the people of Manitoba that we have succeeded in accepting our fiscal responsibility, bringing ourselves in a little bit better financial position and, at the same time, trying to provide and to improve the kind of health care and health facilities that are required to provide for the people of Manitoba. I just want to take you back, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to put it on the record for my own Constituency of Rock Lake.

I remem ber when we became government again they had formed what they called the Rock Lake Health Asso ciation in my constituency; they had a program there, it was a package deal, been going on for several years under the previous administration. The two towns, Pilot Mound and Crystal City had been working together for several years; they had agreed with the previous government on a particular plan between the two towns and, you know, Mr.

Chairman, there was a sum of money, a voluntary fund that had been established and, if my memory serves me correctly, because of the plan that was evolved by the previous government, allowed to progress. Those people took about $9,000 out of that voluntary fund, only to find out a few years later that the thing was going to be scrapped; it would be null and void; those people, they lost that $9,000 that they had put into that. As a result, they finally came and agreed on a package deal, closing one hospital, adding on personal care units and upgrading another hospital. I can tell you, Mr.

Chairman, the previous government at that time, they dragged their heels and they dragged their heels for about a year. What had to happen, Mr. Chairman, was merely to sign the regulations in order that they could get on with that project. In the month of Augus t of 19 77, the regulations sitting on the Mi nister's table at that time were there and they were not signed; in September when we had an election campaign they were still not signed; on October 24th, when we took office, they were still not signed Mr. Chairman.

I remember so well how I had to ge t involved and get this government to start the ball rolling by getting those regulations signed so they could proceed with the program that they'd been waiting for for years to see accomplished. I want to say Mr. Chairman, to this Mi nister and to the government, that on behalf of the people of the Constituency of Rock Lake, that part of it Crystal

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 City, Pilot Mound area where we've now established additions to the personal care home in Pilot Mound, we closed the hospital which was by agreement of the people of that community, have upgraded the hospital in Crystal City and things are going very well; also with an ambulance service that is being provided. something that was long overdue. I want to say. Mr. Chairman, also in the Swan Lake Hospital we have upgraded the x-ray and lab facilities in that hospital. I want to say, Mr.

Chairman, this has all cost money, but we were able to, with the kind of fiscal respo nsibility this government has accepted and we're doing this very same thing in many other areas of Manitoba. So Mr. Chairman, when I hear this freeze that the honourable members are talking about that was only a temporary situation and we've now reached the point where I think we're able to provide the kind of services and the health care facilities for the people of Manitoba that they need and they deserve. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Mem ber for Fort Rouge. MS. WESTBURV: Yes, Mr.

Chairman, I'm not much less confused than I was last year about where you can talk about certain things in the Estimates, so I'm just going to follow on from what I've already heard under this item. -(In terject ion)- Yes, I know where we are, but what it covers - it covers the works, I guess. Mr. Chairman, I want to say, first of all, that I'm just delighted with the report from the Council on Aging and I hope that sometime it'll be made possible for ordinary common and garden variety MLAs to meet the people on that Council so that we can pass on our congratulations.

I'm talking in plural, I mean all of us, because I think they've done a very good job. I'm pleasantly surprised, I have to admit, I didn't expect it to be as extensive as it is in this first year. I would like to know what's going to happen now to their recommendations. I know that it's much too soon for you to have acted on them, however, I noticed that a number of their recommendations refer to other departments apart from the Health Department. I presume that those recommendations will be passed on to the departments concerned, but surely not just as words on a piece of paper.

They must have some clout behind them as coming from the Council on Aging. For instance, there's a housing policy here, there are mobility and utilities, pensions and wills. Now just to send them on as words on a piece of paper is not going to really achieve it, because you're talking to people with different respo nsibi lities. I suppos e there'll be some intergovernmental committees or something working perhaps on these regulations. I think you're ready to answer that. Perhaps I can wait for your answer to that before I go on. MR. SHERMAN: Mr.

Chairman, I appreciate the comments of the Honourable Member for Fort Rouge relative to the Council on Aging; they'll certainly be passed on and certainly an opportunity can be arranged for all MLAs who are interested to meet with them. I can assure the honourable member that various members of the government have met with them and thanked them; I appreciate the legitimate 1552 right of all other Memb ers of the House to do the same and I'll arrange such an opportunity. The recommendations of the council are going to be acted upon.

We have looked at them as a government and the specific reco mmendations that relate to specific departments have been conveyed to the Min isters resp onsible. I can assure the Honourable Mem ber for Fort Rouge that action will be taken on virtually all of the recommendations.

We can't act on all of them all at once, but all of them will be taken seriously and pursued and certainly tour or five of them are being actively pursued at the moment through the designation of officials within our respective de partments, particularly in the Departments of Community Services and Health, to explore and refine specific recommendations made by the council and put them into action formats that can be placed in front of the government for follow through. Just on that point, because it reminds me of some thing that the Ho nourable Mem ber for St.

Bonitace raised, I' d just like to observe for the record, Mr. Chairman, that we do have a Committee of Cabinet, a Standing Committee of Cabinet, which provides the necessary cohesion between certain departments whos e areas of int erest and responsibilities overlap and which does perform the function and meet the need that the Member for St.

Boniface referred to. it's one of three Standing Committees of Cabinet; it's called the Standing Committee on Community Services; it's chaired by the Min ister of Health and it's com pr ised of six Ministers repr esenting departments who have mutual concerns and respon sibilities in the whole field of social services. The membership of the Council is made up of Health, Community Services, Consumer and Corporate Affairs and the Environment, Education, Cultural Affairs and Historical Resources, Labour and Manpower and Urban Affairs. That may add up to seven.

If it adds up to seven, then it's seven, but it's approximately one-third of the Cabinet. Fitness and Amateur Sports, I'm sorry, Mr . Chairman, yes, the Memb er for St. Bonitace suggests Fitness and Amateur Sports, yes, that is correct, Fitness and Amateur Sport is also on that Committee and we meet regularly to deal with these challenges that pervade all those departments and that require mutual and united action. The recommendations from the Council on Aging are directly in front of that Committee. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Fort Rouge still wanted the floor I think. MS. WESTBURV: Yes, Mr. Chairman.

Whil e I appreciate the fact that the recommendations of the Council on Aging are now public, I mean government policy I take it from the Mi nister's remarks and I realize that it will take some time to effect these policies - we'll be watching with interest as that develops there is one suggestion that they make in one of the eight major areas of concern as outlined in the introduction and that is, that the young adult handicapped should reside separately from the elderly in personal care homes because having both groups in the same facility is usually a dis service to both and this is something I made a speech on in the last ses sion, Mr.

Chairman.

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 The reason I feel strongly about it is that there was a young man who had been at school with one of my children, who was injur ed in an automobile accident and when the family tried to bring him back to Winn ipeg from the east, they found it very very difficult even to place him anywhere and eventually we were able to put him in the Muni cipal Hospitals where he lived a very short time after his return to Winnipeg.

This seems to me something that could perhaps be done fairly quickly just by designating certain flaws or certain parts of Extended Care wings or hospitals for the young Extended Care patient. We have that already as a polio ward, they're separate and they have almost a lifestyle of their own at the Muni cipal Hospitals and certainly Dr. Johnson knows more about the Muni cip al Ho spitals than I do because he put in many years there.

He knows about that but I do wish that perhaps you could proceed with this business of separating the young Extended Care patient from the elderly Extended Care patient because some of them still do have certain social needs that could be better answered if they were in a separate place - not necessarily a separate address or even a separate building - but in a separate part of the building if something could be developed along those lines. Mr. Chairman, I was wondering in the ID A Program that was instituted, the computer program, I wonder if there is any health provision in that.

I was reading about a program in Atlanta where the National Centre for Disease Control had all their employees put into the computer system not only their health problems but their weaknesses, such as whether they smoke and whether they wear seat belts when driving or have criminal tendencies and so on, and by doing this they were able to project whether these people would live beyond the next 10 years and that sort of thing, and that made me wonder whether the people who are linked up to - what do you call that - the IDA Computer Program, whether there was any health coverage in that at all for those people. MR.

SHERMAN: To my knowledge there isn't, Mr. Chairman, but it's a pilot project as the honourable member knows and certainly the direction in which we are moving te chno logi cally in com puter programming and information systems and in video electronics, is a direction that embraces that kind of exchange of inform ation. In fact we're on the threshold of an explosion in dis semination of medical information by computer in hospital systems in North America generally, and are exploring very intensively at the moment a pilot project concept which would apply in a hospital system in Winnipeg or in part of that system.

But I don't know of any component of that kind in the IDA project at the present time. Ulti mately any system like that would be utilized for that kind and many other kinds of information, always keeping in mind the requ irement for confidentiality of medical records of course. In an active sense we can point to the Immunization Program in the province which has been progressively computerized over the past two to three years and is being extended into further areas of rural Manitoba this year and which will be ultimately fully computerized.

We're in an age where ultimately a great deal of the transmission and exchange of medical and health information will be 1553 communicated that way and we have to keep up with that technology and are attempting to do so. MS. WESTBURY: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I don't know whether - the Mem ber for St. Bonif ace in his remarks referred to the salaries of doctors and other health professionals - I don't know whether this is where we're supposed to talk about that. I had intended talking about it under Division 5 but I'll talk about it now if you're not going to tell me under 5 that I can't talk about it again. MR.

CHAIRMAN: lt really should come under the Health Services Commission, that phase. MS. WESTBURV: Right. Well, that's where I was going to but the Member for St. Bon iface referred to it here so I just wanted to clarify that. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, I want to speak on one of the recommendations of the Council on Aging but before doing that just a word or so of answer to my friend, Mr. Einarson. He went back in history and talked about the surplus that we might have inherited. I can go further than that.

I can tell him that nobody got a surplus especially in these days in comparison to those days to dollars that Mr. Campbell left. You know Mr. Campbell was the one that was preaching about the little red school house and pay as you go and I think that when they had that money I think they laughed at him and they hurried in and it was your friend here who helped spend a lot of that money. That's some of the programs we had here and that was one of the times that the Conservatives were more progressive.

My friend said that the deficit was approximately, I think this year it will be about $13 0 million and we had a little more than that but you have to remember that there was much more money coming from the Federal Government and also that we had quite a program of capital construction. But that's not really the point. The point I'm trying to make is this - that exactly what you said in 1977 and you said we're in a mess, we owe too much money. The main thing you'd say, hey kids go back and tell your parents that every single one of you, the kids, the father and the mother owe this much money.

We owe way more than that now. You added to this debt and you have a deficit. My point is I'm not debating the right of you people to have a certain policy but you came in with restraints and all of a sudden you abandon restraint and I want to know why. Because if you bought restraint it was because it was sad, like you say and I'll grant you that, we'll argue that another day, and it's sadder now, much sadder and that is the point that I'm trying to make. Mr. Chairman, what I'd like to talk to now as I said, a recommendation and I thought maybe I should have a reso lution in the House.

But then anything can happen in the House and many of these resolutions are left on the Order Paper so I thought that instead of that we should discuss it at this time. This is an area that I know the Minis ter and I agree and I'm talkin g about the compul sory force retirement age at 65 which I think is a shame. Now I would hope the Mini ster supported me when I spoke on this when I was the Min ister and I supported him

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 since he's the Mini ster but nothing is happening. I wonde r, now might be the time with the recommendation that we had, I think we see where we're going. I would ask the Mi nister and I hope that he will answer this, that I would hope he will provide, and this government, will provide the leadership. The leadership doesn't mean that necessarily you will change all the Acts but I think that there has to be a kind of declaration of policy of where we're going.

I think that this is something that is going to be very difficult for one province to do alone; I think it has to be across the country if we're going to change that. I think this has to be a subject put on the agenda of the First Mini sters when they meet and at the level of the Minis ters. 1t might be that this government can develop a kind of a model and maybe start the ball rolling with some amendments in Manitoba. I really bel ieve that society and government are coping-out. it's a real cop-out that we're doing vis-a-vis society and our older people.

Now we are starting to realize that we must take care of our people. There is more done in gerontology, there is more done in the field of health which wasn't always that good and it's recognized and it's not an area where we're divided; it's something that we agree with but nothing is being done. Things have changed so much. I remember when I started as Mini ster and Dr. Tavener can correct me and I won't have the right figures but I'll make a point anyway that, for instance, the average people in Portage School was about 14 or something one time, then it went to around 40 or 45.

I know what it is now. the last year that was there we had a fire and that killed a few but the deaths were all in the 80s practically and that is changing. We're talking about research; we're talking about the lifestyle; we're talking about the good life and we are improving. People are not old at 65, not necessarily old at 65, but they will be old if they all of a sudden you're perfect at 64 and 11 months but at 65, you're, you know, go ahead and wait till the great reaper comes in and gets you. I think that's unfortunate, I think that's a real cop-out. So now what do we hear?

From the Labour Union and so on, they say, oh, no, you've got to give the youngsters a chance, the young people a chance. If that is the case, if you're going to be consistent, well make sure that every young person who is entering the labour force gets a job and go at the other end and chop him off, maybe 64, maybe 63, then you won't have any unemployment but that's not the answer. This is discrimination against people that have been discriminated against for too long and I think it is very very bad. I think that we are facing now people that are living longer.

I think that they're an asset, they can do much more. If they can do more now just imagine that a few years ago, if you looked at politicians, for instance, when you had Churchill, De Gaulle, Eisenhower, Adenauer, Stalin, Franco and those people, how old were they? Look at some of the greatest artists that we had, the painter, Michaelangelo, when did he start? There's all kinds of examples. There are athlete people running when they're in their 90s and doing this kind of work and I think it is unfortunate.

You don't say well, 65, so there would be less people and I know that it's difficult for government because there are a lot more 1554 people came into the labour force because the ladies now insist, and they should, to have an equal chance of working. But we don't say, like we used to, say there's got to be a breadwinner so give the job to the man, and the woman if ther e is anything left. That was discrimination and some people were pushing that at the time. Now they're saying, well, the older people. That doesn't mean that these people will stay at that age.

I think that there should be some incentive and have a little more flexibility and give some incentive for people to retire, even an earlier retirement. I think that's possible if some people can do something but not quit at 65, get a pension and work somewhere else. You would have to tighten up certain things. Remember now, and I think that many of you will agree with me, that the next generation will have problems when they start paying off the pensions because there will be a lot smaller group that will do the paying and a lot more receiving the money.

So I think that this is one thing, for instance, I've reached the maximum of my pension here and I still pay my pension and that's the way it should be. I've nothing to gain and every year I'm paying on my pension and I've reached the maximum that I'm going to reach. I don't mind paying it when I'm working. So, Mr. Chairman, this is no laughing matter. The next generation will be saddled with a responsibility when it comes to pension and that has to be looked at. We've got to review the whole pension scheme to be able to do it.

I think that people should have at least a minimum of what they would get under a pension but not their pension and go and work somewhere else; I don't think that's right. There should be only one pension; it's to help the people that aren't working. I'm not talking only about people although it is a fact that you're condemning people at 65 at times to a life of poverty because they can't work and they might not have that kind of pension and they might be able to do a much better job than many of us.

So I think that this is unfortunate and I think that we start looking at the problem, and there is a problem, and I think we've got to do something on that. The baby boom has passed; there are certainly not the births that we had before. This a resource that we're just throwing away and it is most unfair. I'm not talking only about people that might need it financially, which is something they might need.

I would much sooner die of starvation than die of loneliness and some of them come in and you give them their watch and slap on the back and say, George, that's a good job, now you either put your name and make damn sure you get on the list for a personal care home because there are not too many of them; there is a long waiting list or wait till you kick the bucket or something. 1 think that this is certainly something that we, as a member of society, shouldn't be very proud of.

Talk to the people and they say with Reagan there, that might help, you know, the guy is 70 and he's taking probably the most difficult job in the world and he's going to do it. it's a fact that you see people that have been working who are very happy, especially, let's say their children are placed, are married, and they have their own responsibility; maybe they lost their spouse and they're out there. One day all of a sudden, bang, they retire. Were you talking about Mount Carmel again or what?

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 MR. ENNS: No, no. MR. DESJARDINS: Okay. Now, Mr. Chairman, it's okay to have a little fun but I think this is very very serious. I think, Mr. Chairman, that we all agree. I know that the Min ister agrees with me because he's made the statement and I would like to hear him comment, not just, yes, that's a good idea and we're going to be together. I would like him to answer me.

Is he ready to try to provide the leadership from his government and himself to start talking about it at Minis ters' meeting and maybe the First Min isters. it's something that we should direct our attention to because we are losing a resource and it's discrimination against these people that are capable of working. Now, as I say, give some kind of incentive for them to retire if they wish and that doesn't mean that a man, the person will go on forever and ever and keep the same job.

They're talking about promotion; that's why I say that it's not going to be easy; there's going to be a problem but there should be a model set out, somebody should work on that and it should be that at a certain time you accept le ss responsibility and get a lower pay. You need less, your family might be away. I think that you'll have to deliver, I'm not saying somebody is going to be kept at a job until he's 95, no matter what, if he can come to work. I think ther e has to be some way to meas ure if the people are ef ficient and then encourage them to take maybe less responsibility as they go along.

There are certain jobs, certain work that you can't do at that certain age and that's not discrimination. If you are looking for a leading man, an actor, in a love story it's going to be pretty difficult to get a guy 95 to act with one of those young girls. So in fact that might kill him a lot faster than anything else. Mr. Chairman, I would hope that the Mi nister will give us some idea to see if he, not only if he agrees, if he feels that this has gone far enough, because it will take years, that we go ahead and try to change the public opinion and the leaders to get them to accept this responsibili ty.

As I say, it won't be easy but I'm sure it could be worked out; if it would help also the problem that we will have with our pension in the next 20 years or so. MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Chairman, the Ho nourable Member for St. Boniface will get no argument from me on that thesis. He never has and he never will. I agree with the position that he has set forward and as he's pointed out I think we have both exchanged mutual agree ment on it in the past. We are attempting to take some leadership in Manitoba in that area. I know that he appreciates that it's a highly complex field.

No province can move very far in it unilaterally, nor can a Health Mini ster move very far in it unilaterally. lt really involves a combination of a num ber of depa rtment s and ministerial responsibilities and involves both levels, in fact to a considerable deg ree all three levels of government plus the private sector, so that there is only so much that one can do other than preach the sermon.

I can assure him that I am preaching the sermon; the Council on Aging is preaching the sermon and certainly in what I believe about geriatric medicine and geriatric medicine means geriatric health care, it means a good quality of physical condition for our 1555 elderly, for our senior citizens, for all those in that category to which we all aspire. We all wish to reach a healthy age in good health and in that respect the kinds of things that we are trying to promote, to talk about and to preach, as I say, a dovetail precisely with the feelings of the Member for St. Boniface on this subject.

I think that part of the work has to begin at the level of pensions and pension arrangements, both of a governmental and private nature, and some spade work has been done in that area now by my colleague, the Mini ster of Labour and Manpower in this province and a National Conference on Pensions has been called for the end of this month and the first part of April to which representatives of our government have been invited.

Two or three of the Min isters from this government probably including myself or, if not me, then someone whom I deputize will be attending that conference to explore at least in a preliminary way, an initial way, what initiatives the Federal Government is proposing may be looked at, may be worked on in a mutual way to address the problem of pensions and security for the elderly.

I don't know that I can add much to my comments other than to say that I subscribe to the view that's been outlined and Health will do what it can but we cannot make progress without the co-operation and the participation of other departments like Labour and Ma np ower and the co-oper ation and participation of other provinces and federal officials. MR. DESJARDINS: Is that the Federal Government? MR. SHE RMAN: Yes, the National Pension Conference. MR. CH AIRMAN: 1. (b )(1) - the Memb er for Transcona. MR. WILSON PARASIUK: Mr. Chairman, I apologize for coming late.

With respect to Program Planning, that didn't exist in the Estimates format as set out last year. In fact, I didn't see it anywhere in the breakdown of the Estimates for last year. Did it have a comparable entry last year in the Estimates Book? MR. SHERMAN: lt appeared in the Estimates last year but in a different form, Mr. Chairman. lt was originally shown under Continuing Care and it was part of the operations of the office of Continuing Care.

We've broken it out and shown it separately because where Program Planning is very concertedly related to the changes that are taking place in our age demographics, in the aging of the population, and what we have to put in place in terms of programs to meet those changing age demographics, it really did fit fairly lo gically in the area of Continuing Care but we are envisioning it now in a br oader sense.

Certa inly the challe nges of the changing age demo graphics are still pr imary challenges for us in planning but we broke it out and now identify it as a separate function because long term program planning for all the changes that we face in expectations, demands, needs, technological changes, capital, plant and facility changes are very important too. So we don't want to limit it just to the concept of continuing care and an aging population. MR. PARASIUK: I see that we're really in the set called Executive Func tion, we' re talking about

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 Min isterial Program Planning. The next one on this set will be Pharmaceutical Services. Does Program Planning and Pharmaceutical Services report directly now to the Ac ting De puty Min ister in th at Pharmaceutical Services and this particular group, Program Planning, especially in relation to the aged, used to be under the Community Health Directorate and as such I assume under an Assistant Deputy Minister at that time? Are these particular functions that the Acting Deputy Minis ter has taken on? MR. SHERMAN: Yes, Mr.

Chairman, they report directly to the Min ister through the Deputy Mini ster, the Acting Deputy Mi nister in this case. In sofar as the Council on Aging is concerned, it's a new body as the honourable member knows. it's set up as a separate body, an agency of government on an equal plane with the Alcoholism Foundation and with the Manitoba Health Services Commission in terms of reporting line and it reports directly to the Mini ster which means in effect the Deputy Min ister much of the time. MR.

PARASIUK: I will be up front with my next question in that I'm going to sneak it in and the Minis ter can dis regard it now and come back to it when he comes to the Minis ter's Salary. I had a constituency item that prevented me from getting here right at 8 o'clock. I would have raised it then in the item above this; namely, the fact that we have an Acting -(I nterjec tion)- the Acting Deputy.

I can understand that Acting Deputy for a three-month period or a six-month period but I recall making this case last year asking for an explanation from the Min ister as to why we had an Acting Deputy for such a long time and it's a year later. MR. CHAIRMAN: I just wonder, we have covered that ground earlier and if we keep replying back into the former ... We are on (b). MR.

PARASIUK: Okay, well, I'll come back to it then when I discuss the Min ister's Salary in that for Admini strative Manage ment Procedures it seems strange that the Program Planning Department in my estimation will operate more effectively if it's tying into someone who is seen as being part of the long term management of the department. it won't work as effect ively if it's relating to someone who is seen being part of the short-term management to the department. it strikes me that the whole concern regarding an issue such as this is one that surely is long term.

You won't be able to establish a set of policies overnight, taking into account the demographic consideration of aging is something that will ha ve to affect de partmental polic y, departmental planning, departmental programming for many years to come.

I know that the Mini ster says that this reports to him through the Deputy. it's just that given the pressures on the Minis ter of being in the House, of doing a number of other thin gs, the day-to-day management does fall on the Deputy and a greater degree of certainty, a greater degree of leadership, a greater degree of management in my es timation exists if the Deputy is permanent. Again, I'm sorry that the government hasn't seen fit to make the decision to establish a permanent Deputy Mini ster in this respect. 1556 MR. CHAIRMAN: 1. (b)(1) 1. (c)(1) - pass; 1. (c)

(2) Mem ber for Transcona. pass; 1. (b)(2) - pass; pass; 2.(a)(1) - the MR. PARASIUK: The Operationa l and Suppor t Services here tends to deal with the whole mental health area and in this respect, since we're talking about administration, I didn't have a chance to look at the Ombudsman Report today which was tabled but there are reports in the news indicating that the Ombudsman has had to look into a number of cases or has had a number of cases referred to him by patients in mental health institutions asking that their situat ion be reviewed and asking that they be relea s ed.

The Ombudsman said that he has investigated some 30 such cases and 15 cases, I think, he has asked for a special review by specialists in this respect. Furthermore, he said that in two cases the outside review indicated that the people should be released. He qualified that however by saying that he was told that these two people would have been released anyway.

Now the reason why I raise this at this particular time and I think it's the appropriate time is that last year when we were discussing amendments to The Mental Health Act, some long awaited amendments, I can recall that provisions called for the establishment by statute of a review board. I can recall my saying to the Mini ster that I thought it was a good idea that we had the review board, it was overdue, we should have it.

I exp ressed the concern that other corrections, other improvements in my estimation to The Mental Health Act could have been made and that I suggested that possibly we delay the passage of the Act for some time, some short time, to improve upon it. The Mini ster was quite adamant at that time in saying that wasn't possible, that we really had to bring in this improvement to The Mental Health Act.

Using his majority, he won the day and The Mental Health Act was passed eveh though a number of groups, the Civil Liberties Association and other groups, some professio nal people from the universities had expressed concern with it. That's why I'm somewhat shocked to hear that the Act hasn't been proclaimed given the fact that it was rushed through last year. Can the Min ister indicate why the Act hasn 't been proclaimed and why especially the

part concerning the establishment of a review panel hasn't been proclaimed? He expressed great concern about it last year and I agreed with him, I thought there was consensus regarding it last year. MR. SHERMAN: Well, Mr. Chairman, I don't accept that there was any rushing through of the Act last year because of the necessity of getting the Mental Health Review Board in place.

Certainly the Mental Health Review Board is part of the future direction envisioned and contained in the Act but there were other change s that were hig hly desirable; other reforms in Mental Health Statute Law in this province that had been awaited for some considerable period of time and were highly desirable and at the time of the Committee debate a number of objections to the proposed bill were raised by delegations appearing before the Committee and were founded in error. I'm not referring to one or two of the evaluations that were proposed by the Ho nourable Mem ber for

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 Transcona. In fact I concede and I conceded at the time that he or colleagues of his in the Legislature identified at least two areas that needed amendment and im provement. But in general, the delegations that appeared from the public with respect to the bill and who recorded strenuous criticisms of it and objections to it, based their cases in error and I think that I demonstrated su bseq uently where th ey were in error. Th ey amounted to a misrea ding, a misunderstanding of the previously existing legislation and a misread ing and a misunderstanding of new sections in the new bill.

So the position that the government took and that I took with respect to that bill last year was that with the im provements that came from legislators at the Commit tee hearings, it was then a desirable, reasonable, rat ional and necessary bill and constituted the first reform of this kind of statute law in many years and it was desirable that it be passed and proclaimed. We have not proclaimed the

section having to do with the Mental Health Review Board because we have not completed the work necessary to staff the two panels that would be required to carried out the responsibilities that would be vested in the Mental Health Review Board. The panels require staffing by expertise in the field of psychiatry and require some considerable funding. It has not been possible to put that package together yet in tim e for this year's programs. There are other programs that I feel are necessary in the field of health which take equal priority.

Some selection processes had to have been made because of the limitations that we always face in government, in funding terms and the Mental Health Review Board will be established as soon as we can do so and at that point in time that

section of the Act will be proclaimed. But the Memb er for Tr anscona is cor rect in identifying that as an important reform that is not yet in place, but it will be in place and certainly the government is committed to putting it in place as soon as it can be practically achieved. With respect to the Omb udsman 's Report and some news coverage on that subject today, I haven't seen that

section of the report either, but it's my understanding that the Ombuds man made the point that where he has requested that assessment be done of a patient appealing his detention; that where the Om budsman ha s suggested tha t an outside psy chia tric expert be called in to provide the necessary third party assessment; that has been done and he ha sn't had any di fficulty with that course of action. So the inference I drew from the report was that no hardship has been worked on patient's in finding thems elves in that situation, but I haven't seen the report verbatim yet. MR. CHAIRMAN: The Member for Transcona.

MR. PARASIUK: Yes, well I ha ve a numb er of comments to make on the Min ister's statements. It strikes me that what we are talking about here is something that the Minis ter can couch in terms of what is practical or what isn't but I think he's tread ing on some dan gerous gr ound because it strikes me they were talking about justice at this particular stage.

I don't know of people saying. well we really won 't set up and fund an appeal procedure for people who are in jail, who are appealing that 1557 they sho uldn't be contained by the state, and if people said, well gee, you know, our court system's too expensive; the appeal procedure's too expensive; it's too expensive to pay judges; it's too expensive to pay staff; it's difficult to put this type of package together and we'll just hold off for one or two years because we have some other priorities. I don't think that argument would wash particularly well.

It strikes me that people who are in mental institutions are in fact being confined by the state and that they should have the best appeal procedures possible, available to them, just as we would want that for people who are going through the correction system. I'm not sure whether the argument that it costs a fair amount to staff the two panels is a sufficient one in this particular case.

I don't know how much in the way of staff is required and how much in the way of funding is req uir ed but the Mi nister ha s told us that he's increasing the spending of the department here by some significant amount, some $115 million, which is a fairly sign ificant inc rease in expe nditur e. He's increasing staff; the staff increase isn't that large but the expenditure incr ease is fairly large.

Even if you look at the total for departmental operations, I think we have a staff increase here of some 25 and as I said I don't know how many staff are requir ed or how mu ch funding but surely within the overall categories of the department's spending plan, this type of priority should have received im mediate attention because it strikes me that we are talking about the concept and operation of justice here. I'm surpri sed that the Ombudsman receives 30 complaints or requests in one year.

We are talking about people in mental institutions going through the procedures of applying to the Om budsman for a review in 30 cases, that's quite a large numb er. I don't know if there are signs up in those institutions saying if you don't think you should be here please contact the Ombuds man and he'll look into this. In fact, I'm quite certain that isn't the case. I know because I raised this with the Mi nister last year in discussing the Act, that there was no advocate, there's no pati ent's advocate which has been rec ommended by some gr oups for the mental institutions.

So that on their own these people are determining that the feel they have sufficient cause for appeal. They are contacting the Ombudsman and we are putting this onus, this responsi bility onto the Ombudsman and the Ombudsman is doing what he can to investigate this in an init ial sense and I wonder whether in fact that's his particular function. But secondly, we're asking him and we're not complaining when we set up review panels or some type of review process in 15 of the instances.

So we are responding in a sense but in a very unsystematic matter and I would think it surely should be within the priorities of the Min ister and I would expect that one could make a very strong case to Cabinet, that if people bel ieve in justice, if people believe in rights - inde ed rights - we've had a lot of discussion in this Legislature over the last little while about rights and whether in fact rights are best protected through legislation or appeals to the courts, or appeals to parliamentar y supremacy and you name it. but we've spent a lot of time talking about rights and I think all the legislators have spent a lot of time confirming their respect and desire for the fullest expression of

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 civil rights within this countr y and the greatest achievement of civil rights at the individual level within this country. I would think that our desire for that should extend to people, all people in society, indeed those people in mental institutions. They must feel incredibly frustrated. So I don't think the Min ister's explanation is strong enough. I hope that he would reconsider during the course of the year and see if it would be possible, because we aren't even starting this fiscal year yet, to see if it would be possi ble to speed up the procedure. We passed the Act last year.

We won't bring it in for another year now. I mean I would be quite willing to speak in favour of a special warrant if the Minister brought it in. I would be quite in favour to speak in favor of Supple mentary Estimates, if he brought jn Supplem entary Estimates with respect to this particular item. MR. DE PUTY CHAIRMAN, Robert Ande rson (Springfield): 2(a)( 1) - pass. The Ho nour able Mi nister. MR. SHERMAN: Mr.

Chairman, just let me reassure the Honourable Member for Transcona that there is money in this appropriation for the Mental Health Review Board. lt is money that is being expended to com plete the planning and organiz ation of the establishment of the board, so we are moving on it. But I can't guarantee him or give him a specific date or a date guarantee as to when we will have the necessary psychiatrists and the necessary machinery in place. I would hope to achieve it over the course of the current calendar year. MR.

DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: 2.(a)(1) - pass; 2.(a)(2) - pass; 2.(a)(3) - pass; (a) - pass - the Mem ber for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: 2.(a)

(3) Professional Training. I can see that last year it was un der In stitutional Mental Health, Professional Training. But the Mi nister has here for last year $403,500 and here what I have is $202,800 for last year. Then of course there is a further $98,594 increase but what's that from 2 to 4? Where was the rest of the money for training? MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Chairman, this Professional Training now includes psychiatric nurse training from the Manitoba School. That's been transferred over from Community Services and Corrections and puts the total Nurse Training Program under one central office. MR.

DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: (b)(1) - pass - the Member for Seven Oaks. MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, just a question or rather co-operation from the Min ister. I wonder if he'd ind icate as we go along whether there has been, in any of the last year's appropriation, whether there's been an unde rspen din g or a shortfall in spending so that we know if the amount has been expended as indicated. I know it's not the end of the fiscal year so you don't know down to the penny but if there is a significant difference between what was voted and what was actually spent, it would help us a great deal. MR. SHERMAN: Mr.

Chairman, we can certainly try to do that. These figures are not ever ent irely 1558 precise, as the honourable member knows. In some cases we're underexpended and in some cases we're overexpended, but I'l l ask Mr. Schmidt to ride herd on that as best he can as we go through. MR. MILLER: Mr. Chairman, we can do it either

section by

section or clause by clause rather, or even the totals themselves, und(;lr 2. The full amount this year is shown as 29.5, as compared to 24.3 last year. What I'd be intere sted to know is the extent to which 24.3 is, in fact, the amount that is expected to be spent over an und erspending of a significant amount. So it could be on the basis of the

section rather than line by line. MR. SHERMAN: Yes, we'll supply the information on that as best we can, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: (b)(1) - pass - the Member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJAR DINS: Mr. Chairman, we have the salary, now there's an increase of three. Can you break that down, the six, are those medical people, are those doctors, psychiatrists or what? MR. SHER MAN: This is the Commu nity Mental Health Dir ectorate. The staff of six includes a psyc hiatrist, a psych olo gist, a social worker, a registered psychiatric nurse, an administrative officer and an administrative secretary.

Three of the SMYs, we're looking at six as compared to three over the course of the year, three of them are from the former Community Mental Retardation and Mental Health Directorate in Community Services and Corrections. The remaining three were transferred from the Eden Mental Health Centre, Mr. Chairman; those three had been funded the previous year; those three had been under Appropriation 2.(d), the Eden Mental Health Centre. They had not been funded in the previous year and that explains the increase in salary funds in this year's appropriation. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr.

Chairman, if I understand the Mi nister, he's saying that there's actually no new staff man year, they're transfers three from Eden and three from Community Health. MR. SHERMAN: That's right. MR. DESJARDINS: But is the fund transferred with them? There's no new people, certainly that 35.8 is not the salary of six people, especially those kind of people. it's not a good comparison if you look at 35 and then 201 for the same amount of people. MR. SHERMAN: Those three had not been funded last year, Mr. Chairman, because we hadn't expected to fill them last year; this year we are going to fill them. MR.

DESJARDINS: Oh, they're actually three new people then. The staff man were there and they weren't filled and you're jus t moving the three positions and there was no amount of money. MR. SHERMAN: That's right. MR. DESJARDINS: The 35 represent the thr ee that are trans ferred from Communi ty Services and

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 Corr ect ions, and tha t would not be the medical people. I would imagine that's what, the secretary or what? Thr ee for 35 MR. SHERMAN: Those I think would be the social worker, adminis trat ive officer and adminis trat ive secretary. MR. DESJARDINS: God, what did you pay them? What did you pay them? Part-year probably. MR. SHERMAN: Last year it wasn't intended to fill all those positions, so we would have expended part year funds last year. MR. DESJARDINS: You had th ose six positions before, they weren 't filled. MR. SHERMAN: Yes. MR.

CHAIRMAN: (bX 1) - pass; (bX2) - pass - The Member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, this is the first year, usually the Min ister gave us a little mo re de tai l; he ga ve us the position and the positions that were filled and open and we haven 't got that now anywhere and this is why there's a bit of a mix-up. I guess we don't have to worry about it, but maybe Mr. Schmidt could ... MR. SHERMAN: In this directorate or in the whole department? MR. DESJARDINS: I haven't got any thing. Well, give us in the whole department; at least that'll be a start. MR.

SHE RMAN: Vacant positions for the whole department as of March 31, 19 80, a total of 51 or 4. 1 percent. MR. DESJARDINS: That's out of 1, 33 1? MR. SHERMAN: That's out of the total staff, yes, 1 ,33 1 and-a-half. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, is that the same vacancy now or no, not now because you've got a MR. SHERMAN: No, as of February 28, 1981 the vacancies are 42, or 3.2 percent. MR. DES JARDINS : That of course is, we're still looking at 1, 33 1, because you're not starting the new thing until March 1s t. So 42, you didn't fill that many. MR.

SHERMAN: The vacancy figu res would remain the same, but the percentages are based on the permanent positions only, not on the term positions. MR. DES JARDINS: Mr. Chairman, th ose are permanent positions. My next question then and I'm looking because that's the information that I have, the overall, why is the Min ister asking for 25 new positions when he's got 42 that haven 't been filled? He's only filled nin e of the positions, so actually you're asking for 42 plus 25. 1559 MR. SHER MAN: Well the new ones that we'r e asking for, Mr .

Chairman, are explained dir ectorate by dir ectorate and program by program and we're dealing with a situation that's continually changing and fluid, through resignations and retirements and transfers, so that the base that we're working from may be there in a theoretical sense, but we always have some vacancies as a result of retirements and transfers, etc. MR. DES JARDINS: understand that, Mr . Chairman, but you had 51 nearly a year ago and now you have 42. That's only nine and you're asking for another 25, so that's 67 positions more that you're going to fill this year. MR.

SHE RMAN: Yes, the vacancies that ar e currently vacant are being actively pursued; that is candidate recruitment into those positions is being actively pursued and we would hope to fill the ones that we're requesting. MR. DESJARDINS: Geez, you're getting as bad as those awful socialists with all this. MR. CHAIRMAN: (bX2) - pass; (bX3) - pass the Member for Transcona. MR. PARASIUK: I kn ow that you're developing this great sense of momentum, Mr. Chairman. I want to ask a general question about the community, well Mental Health Program. It really relates to both (

b) and (c), in that the Min ister, in his statement, says that there was too much of an emphasis on anti institutional emphasis in the early '70s and what you need is something else. Can I get an indi cation from the Mini ster whether it is still the policy of the government to try and place people in a community setting, or is it the policy to follow a route which in the short run might appear cheaper, but in the long run, I suggest, is going to be terribly expensive, both in financial and psychological terms, of continued institutionalization of people who are mentally ill?

I'd like to ask a general question like tha t of the Mini ster, what the thrust of the government is in this respect and then I'd like some numb ers as to how many people are being provided for who are living in a community setting because that's what (

b) says, this provides program support, funding of services and care and accommodation for persons living inthe community. So I assume they should have some notion of how many people are in fact, living in the community, rec eiving support from the province. Then of course, when we go to (

c) when we get into institutional mental health services we'll find out how many people are in the institutions at Brandon, Selkirk and Eden Mental Health Centre at Winkler. MR. SHERMAN: Yes Mr. Chairman, the figu res for the institutional hospitals will be available as we move to that phase of the Estimates. On the general question as to treatment modes and forms, we're not placing any new emphasis on institutionalization, as opposed to treatment in the community. The point that I made in my opening statement was that the two institutions, Selkir k and Brandon, and particularly Selkirk had, as a consequence of a thrust that was aimed largely at deinstitutionalization, as

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 substantially as it could be implemented, and that was North America-wide, I would suggest, for a decade or more. The two institutions had deteriorated as a result of that emphasis, in terms of the physical conditions of their respective plants, in fact Selkirk, as the honourable member may know, lost its accreditation for a period of years; has since regained it, but there certainly was a prevailing school of thought that was pretty general in North America that said we should empty our institutions if we possibly cou ld, get people into communi ty settings.

Accompanying that kind of approach and thrust there was a resultant de-emphasis on maintenance of the physical plant where institutions were concerned and what I'm saying in my statement is, we recognize there will always be people who have to be cared for in institutions; we are always going to have an institutional population; and we have introduced upgrading programs for both Selkirk and Brandon, the first major steps of which are being provided for in the requested expenditur es this year, to put those plants back in proper physical shape.

That should not be interpreted, by any means, as a suggestion that we're going to start putting people in institutions rather than in the com munity. I doubt that the institutional populations will rise at all, but we will always need those institutions. On the second point, Mr . Chairman, if I have recalled the honourable memb er's ques tions corr ect ly, when we talk about the comm unity facilities, we are referring to facilities such as Sara Riel Residence, which is a 15 -bed facility established by the Grey Nuns in the St.

Boniface-Norwood area under a three-year funding agreement with the province; we're talking about Eden Mental Health Centre, which will have a six to eight-bed community residence attached to it and operated by it - part year funds were voted for that last year and the additional ful l-year costs are contained in this year's appropriations; we're talking about two new six-bed communi ty residences; we're talking about the respite care progr am; we're talking about the outpatient services and follow-up services of the mental hospitals themselves.

In the mental hospitals themselves, there are approximately 800 inpatients, the total num ber of out patients served is approximately 14 ,000 and the total number still being served and treated in a follow-up capacity is approximately 5,000. MR. CHAIRMAN: Could I say to the Member for Transcona, have you further questions on the Mental Health on (c). Could we pass (

b) then get to (

c) because you're directing the questions of that. MR. PARASIUK: Sure, I could appreciate what you·re saying with respect to Brandon, Selkirk and Winkler. MR. CHAIRMAN: Let's get to there then. Is that okay? MR. SHERMAN: Mr. Chairman, for the record I want to correct a statment on those last figures I gave the Honourable Member for Transcona. The total inpatient population of Brandon and Selkirk is I think I said about 800. Actually I'm not far off probably on that figure. As of December, 19 80 it's 1560 approximately 900.

The figure of 800 that I gave the hono urable member should refer to those post mentally ill patients who are in foster homes or group homes. So there are approximately 800 in foster homes or group ho mes in the commu nity; approximately 14,000 being treated as outpatients and approximately 5,000 in follow-up programs. MR. CHAIRMAN: (b)(3) - pass - the Member for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, this is all under (

b) then all these group homes. MR. CHAIRMAN: No, we're doing the (c). We went too far here. MR. DESJARDINS: No, we're still on (b). No, the group homes I said. I'm talking about group homes, that's under the Community. Let's go by beds, that's an increase of how many beds since last year that you're asking for? Are there new group homes on stream or are being . . . MR. SHERMAN: We're asking for two new commun ity residences, six beds each and we're asking for the full implementation of the six to eight bed community residence attached to and operated by the Eden Mental Health Centre.

I can't answer the question about gr oup homes and foster homes because those are placements in the community and precisely how many homes that would break down to I'm not sure I can provide that figure. But the figures of patients are those that I've given - 800 in foster homes and group homes. But in terms of commun ity reside nces being proposed by the govern ment for funding we're looking at two new community residences and the Eden Mental Health Centre commun ity residence coming on str eam.

We'll also be assumin g full responsibility for the operating costs of Sara Riel as of April 1s t, as of the start of the new fiscal year. That was, as the honourable memb er kn ows, established by the Grey Nuns and operated by them for th ree years but we' ll be assu ming the full operating costs of that residence. MR. DESJARDINS: That's 12 beds. MR. SHERMAN: That's 15 at Sara Riel. MR. DES JARDINS: Wh ere are these beds for respite care? The Mini ster mentioned that; at this time where is that being done?

Those are people that normally would be kept by the family staying in the home and when the family has to maybe go on a holiday or something, is that it? Where would they have these beds? I think Sara Riel has some eh? MR. SHERMAN: Part of the program is del ivered by the hiring of foster parents to come into the home and take care of the . . . MR. DESJARDINS: Like home care. MR. SHERMAN: Yes, like home care, take care of the family member while the other members of the family have a holiday. MR. DESJARDINS: In their homes.

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 MR. SHERMAN: In their homes. Ther e is some respite care service provided by Sara Aiel but in the majority of cases it's the case of foster parents moving into the home temporarily. MR. DESJARDINS: Okay. MR. CHAIRMAN: (2)(a)(3) - pass. The Member for Transcona. MR. PARASIUK: I think we're on (2)(b). MR. CHAIRMAN: (2)(b)(3) right. MR. PARASIUK: Of course the obvious question there is we've gone from $77,0 00 last year to $13 0,000 this year and yet in his general explanation the Min ister gave us no explanation for such a huge in crease in this particular area. MR.

SHERMAN: I can provide that list. We go from 77,000 to 430,000, that's correct. The additional full year costs of taking on the operation of Sara Aiel amount to $1 68,000; the additional full-year costs for the commu nity residence at Eden Mental Health Centr e are $65,000; th e two new community residences will amount to part-year costs and they account for $1 00,000; and the Respite Care Program which was budgeted last year at $1 0,000 is budgeted this year at $30,000 which amounts to an incr ease of $20,000 and that should add up to the difference. MR.

PARASIUK: These two new centres, where are they going to be, in Winnip eg? MR. SHERMAN: They are going to be in Winnip eg, Mr. Chairman. MR. PARASIUK: They haven't been established yet? MR. SHERMAN: No, but we will establish them this year. MR. PARASIUK: I think the question is, are they going to be established through organizations? Are they going to be admin istered by the department, by the government di rectly or are they tying into organizations, service organizations or non- profit organizations? MR. SHERMAN: I'l l have to check that, Mr. Chairman, if you will give me a minute. I'm advised, Mr.

Chairman, that they will be established and oper ated by private boards of organizations in the community; we're in negotiation with a numb er of organizations whose boards will operate them funded by the provin ce. MR. PARASIUK: So in doing this, the principle that is being used is that of non-p rofit organizations; that is, you are not asking for pr ivate profit-making corporations to make application to provide for community health care at the community level for people who are mentally ill. MR. SHERMAN: Mr .

Chairman , I don't like to provide the Honourable Member for Transcona with further ammunition and further weaponry for other de bates but the answer to his question is yes. 1561 MR. PARASIUK: Okay. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2. (

b) Transcona. the Memb er for MR. PARASIUK: I almost, well, I can't help but ask the Min ister if he has any particular reasons why he would be discriminating, in my es tima tion, so positively with respect to the mentally ill, why he has such concern for them that he would go the route of the non-profit organizations? MR. SHERMAN: I wouldn't put it in the category of discrimination, Mr. Chairman. I'm not aware of any pr ivate organization that has come forward and requested an opportunity to partici pate in the field.

I certainly would not dismiss such an applic ation carte blanche but at the present time the field seems to be one that occup ies th e attention of non- pr ofit organizations. MR. CHAIRMAN: 2.( b)(3) - pass; 2.( b)(4) - pass - the Mem ber for St. Boniface. MR. DESJARDINS: Mr. Chairman, we've finis hed the page and I think we've progr essed fairly well, I wonder if we could call it a night. MR. CHAIRMAN: Comm ittee rise. SUPPLY - CONSUMER AND CORPORATE AFFAIRS AND ENVIRONMENTENT MR. DE PUTY CHAIRMAN, Arnold Brown (Rhineland): 4.(d)

(1) Salaries - the Honourable Mi nister. HON. GARY FILMON (River Heights): Mr. Chairman, after giving me such a lead in for I think ab out 25 min utes prior to the closing of the afternoon Session I hope th at the Member for Churchill wasn't going to not allow me at least a very mod est shor t respons e to his request for a statement. Mr.

Chairman, the member asked for a synopsis, I suppose, of some of my thoughts, however brief and however short the time that I'v e had in preparing for the challenges with respect to the Environment side of the portfolio I occupy and certainly I thought that over the dinn er hour that I might put down a few of the comments that I have made in discussions with my staff and start by quoting from a brief address that I gave to some of the members of the staff just last Thursday. I believe, Mr.

Chairman, that now is an extremely im portant time to be in volved in the areas of Environmental Ma nagement and Public Health. The task confronting us requir es that we must through all our resou rces and expertise ensure the preserva tion of our environment. The quality of environment that our childr en and grandchildr en will inherit depends to a large extent upon the groundwork that we lay toda y. lt is my bel ief that the greater public awareness of environmental conc erns which is evident today, as perhaps it has never been in the past.

This greater public awareness will place a very great chall enge before my department and all those

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 involved in evaluation I can 't un derstand my writing at this point, you see I was working all dinner hour on this - in evaluating the effects of all the types of deve lopment on our environment and inde ed in ensuring that we do every thing within reason to protect the environment in which we live. This will in volv e cons tant evaluation and reassessment of standards of pollution control in light of ever changing condi tions and new information as well as the development of new tech nology.

In addition there will be much greater need for commun ication with the public, making them aware of the potential environmental concerns as well as the alternatives that are available in facing any environmental issue. Also ensuring that they have a full unde rstan ding of the facts and as much tech nical kno wledge as possi ble when they are passing judgment on any decision with respect to environmental issues.

Finally, I believe that many of the environmental pollution issues which many may perceive as hazards or pro blems also pr esent an unpr ecedented oppor tu nity and challenge for technolog ical development in areas such as waste management, energy recovery, reclamation and so on. I would hope that my department and I will present a positive attitude towards tackling these challenges rather than merely a reactionary stance. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: 4.(a)(1) - the Member for Churchill. MR.

COWAN: When confronted with the types of problems with which we are confronted the diffe rence between a po sitive app roach and a reactionary stance sometimes is a subtle difference. I would wonder if the Min ister could elaborate more on what he considers to be a reactionary stance as opposed to what he has told us is going to be hopefully his department's approach and that is a positive approach. MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: 4.(a)(1) - the Member for Churchill. MR. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.

I did present the Min ister with a list of more specific concerns and que stions earlier in the day and perhaps he can ind icate if he feels he is prepared to deal with any of them and we can take them on the basis of his preference. He ind icates that he'd like me to just start opening up with whichever one I feel like opening up with first.

The one which I think should be discussed first, not because it is a priority over any of the others but because in alphab etical order it comes first on the list, is that of pos sible arsenic contam ina tion in Northern Manitoba as a result of mining activity both past and present in that area. In 19 78, I think it was the Min ister of the Environment at that time, who is now the Mini ster of Finance, indicated to us that a study was being undertaken by the department in respect to trying to determine the levels of arsenic contamination in lakes in the Snow Lake area.

The next year it was the Mi nister of the Environment, who is now the Mini ster responsible for Autopac, who ind icated that that study was still in the process of being developed and completed and that it should be ready last summer. 1562 The question that must follow to the Mini ster for the third time during these Estimates debates is, has that study been completed yet and if so is the Mini ster prepared to table a copy of that study so that we can look it over and come forward with any suggestions or criticisms which might arise from our perusal of the same? MR. FILMON: Can I just ask for clarification.

Are we referring to mercury or arsenic? MR. COWAN: Arsenic. MR. FILMON: Arsenic. Mr. Chairman, the concern for arsenic in in potable water supplies, arsenic coming prim arily I gu ess from mine tailings in northern communi tie s and we have been doing studies in Snow Lake, Wekusko, Herb Lake and we will be completing studies this summer in Gods Lake. To date, we have not found any levels of arsenic that provide any human risk in potable water supplies. MR.

COWAN: Is the Minis ter indic ating that the report on Snow Lake, Wekusko Lake and Herb Lake have been completed and that the report on Gods Lake is still in the process of being completed? MR. FILMON: Preliminary reports were completed in the first two lakes that were mentioned. We are in the process of rechecking to ensure that our findings are correct and Gods Lake will be done this summer. MR. COWAN: Is the Mini ster prepared then to table the reports for Snow Lake, Wekusko and Herb Lake? MR. FILMON: I would be prepared to table those reports.

I don't have them, but I can provide them for the member provided they are accepted as prelimin ary and that further studies are going on, if that's understood. MR. COWAN: I can certainly give him the assurance that they will be accepted as preliminary and that will taken into consideration when reviewing them. The Minis ter ind icated that there was no level in the water supply which was determined to be harmful to human health. Can he indicate if in fact there were levels of arsenic found in those water supplies? MR.

FILMON: In some cases there were traces that were found just at the detectable level, given the equipment that was being used. MR. COWAN: Could the Minister be more specific as to what that level was?

The reason I have to ask tha t qu estion is, depending upon the type of equi pment tha t is being used, th ere would be different detectable levels, so if the equipment that was being used was extremely sensitive and they were at just a detectable level, then they would be much lower than if the equipment being used was older and less sensitive, so it's necessary for us, in respect to this question, to have a more absolute figure than the figure which was provided to us.

I'd ask him if he's willing to find that figure and provide it to us, it doesn 't have to be this even ing. (I nterject ion)- He indi cates that he would be willing to do that. Has the public in those communities, and I include in that the Gods Lake community, which would .

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 MR. FILMON: Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure the member - I was nodding heads with my staff and not with the member, so I don't know what he has assumed that I've agreed to, so -(I nterjection)- I agreed to provide whatever information we have, which will likely include what the types of equipment was and the levels detected by that equipment. MR. COWAN: Has the public been involved in those studies to any extent, and I would include in that question the study that is being undertaken in Gods Lake, which would include the communities, I imagine, of Gods Lake Nar rows as well as Gods River. MR.

FILMON: The public has not been in volved to this moment, but through our Director of Community Relations we intend to inform the public as to what we are doing, for in stance, from this point forward including this summer's studies and testing so they will be aware of what we're looking for and what types of tests are being carried out. MR.

COWAN: I hope the Mini ster is able to follow through on that commitment better than the previous Min ister was, because we had asked the same question of the previous Mini ster and the previous Min ister had given us a commitment, or at least I had interp reted his statement to be a commitment, that the public would be involved in those particular studies in the future and that appears to have not been the case although the Mini ster is telling us that that will be the case in the future. I can only hope that he is more successful in accomplishing that task than was the previous Mini ster.

While in the area of pollution and pollutants in Northern Manitoba, it would be appropriate to ask the Min ister if he can provide us with an update as to the department's activities in respect to mercury contamination in fish that are caught in Northern Manitoba. The specific questions that I would hope he would be able to answer would be, what is happening in the commun ity of South Indian Lake? Are the levels increasing, by that I mean are the levels of mercury contamination found in the fish which are caught in that area increasing?

What other areas are being watched in respect to possible mercur y contamination? What other fishing areas, what other river systems are being watched? What I'm asking for in general is an overall report on the mercury contam ina tion pollution problem in No rthern Manitoba. MR. FILMON: There are ongoing studies in line with the Federa l-Provincial Ageement which involv es the Federal Medical Services Committee on Health and Environmental Division of our department. On the study, $96,000 is provided for in the budget as our share.

The costs of the study and they in volve studies both of people and they will be attem pting to establish the sources of level of mercury in fish and how mercury enters the food chain in the northern area. MR. COWAN: Is the Mini ster then indic ating that his department in co-operation, in conjunction with the Federal Department, has to date been unable to identify any source for this mercury contamination? 1563 MR. FILMON: No, there's been no po sitive identification as yet. I might indicate that the total program tha t's been developed envisages a $1 million expenditure in this study. MR.

CO WAN: Gi ven the seve rity and the signi ficance of the problem, that's probably a wise investment of the money and I'm not certain how it com pares with other studies tha t are being undertaken or what the province's participation in that commitment is, but I do know that the problem is a significant problem. The problem is a serious problem. The problem is one of grave concern to many of my constituents. For that reason, I would hope that the Mini ster would be able to provide us with a bit more information as to the exact details of that study.

The Mini ster ind icated that test ing would be done on both people and sources to try to attempt to find out where the mercury contamination is originating from and to find out what effect the consumption of mercury contamina ted fish is having on the people in the area. I might add that at the last Estimates debate, at that time, the Mini ster of the day ind icated that they were looking for the source of the mer cury contamination and we had quite a discussion on what that source might be.

We talked about the potential ind ustrial contamination sites that could be in fact contributing to the mercury contamination. The re didn't seem to be any relationship there. We talked about the possibility of having metals being released into the water more readily because of acid rain, rainfall becoming more acidic and that has an effect of course, on the release of heavy metals into the soil and into water.

We talked about a numb er of other areas which could be those areas which would be ind icted in an investigation for a source and at that time I think we were at the same place we are today and we just didn't know what the source was. So I'd ask the Min ister if they are any closer to determining what the source is and by that I would hope he would be able to provide us with some insights as to which areas have been elimi nated as possibles for the source of mer cury contamination. I would ask the Mi n ister if he can ind icate to us what the studies on the people in the area are showi ng.

Do the y show an inc reased level of me rcur y contamination? Do they show a decreasing level or is the level staying the same? There are a numb er of questions which should be obvious to the Mini ster in respect to what's happening in regard to those people who are consuming mercury contami nated fish in the area. I'd hope he'd take this opportunity to answer as many of them as he can. MR. FILMON: Mr. Chairman, the effects on people would have to be obtained from medical sources and in this case it would be lhe Federal Medical Services Division of the Department of Health who would be able to comment on that.

Our Environmental Ma nagement people are not in that category of testing and evaluation. Just to further clarify for him I'll quote some of the objectiv es of what's being undertaken: "To determine background levels of mercury in their own environment to establish the sources of the increased levels of mercury in fish and people and to find out the mechanisms by which mercury enters the food chain and the significance of these phenomenon to the people of the area and to

Tuesday, 10 March, 1981 future water management activities." I would also say that no potential sources have been ruled out at the present time and no prelimin ary conclusions have been conveyed to me or my department at the moment. MR. COWAN: Last year, the Mini ster ind icated that in fact the department was depending on medical advice provided by Medical Services in respect to determining whether or not this problem had reached one of significant proportions to the people in the area. At that time he said they have not identified the problem as reaching a stage where it is a problem.

Is that the case today, would the Minis ter reaffirm that origi nal comment by his predec essor which was made a year ago? MR. FILMON: Mr. Chairman, we have n o additional information to indic ate otherwise. MR. COWAN: We also had quite a discussion at that time in respect to involving the people of the community, and we're talking about South Ind ian Lake in the specific now, in the whole pro

Document details

Collection	Manitoba — Debates (Hansard)
Citation	31-5-34b
Type	hansard
Volume / chapter	31st 5th hansardpdf 34b.pdf
Language	en
Format	pdf
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	eb1ccf5a7b711150fccf2eef03c06fe3c37b8ea8

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