Health Care Facilities
No-Deficit Policy
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is the Premier.
We asked questions yesterday and we asked questions last week both on community health programs that had been cut by the government and on deficit policies that had been changed by the government. Mr. Speaker, it is safe to say there is a tremendous amount of confusion outside of this building in terms of hospitals and programs for patients in Manitoba.
We have some hospitals that have allegedly an amnesty, so to speak, on their deficit. We have other hospitals that are quoted today as negotiating their last year's deficits plus this year's cuts with the provincial government. We have other hospitals that do not know whether they have an amnesty from the provincial government or not and how long it will last. They suspect it lasts just past the election.
I would like to ask the government whether they could table today what is the specific breakdown of which hospitals have been approved on the deficit changes that the government confirmed with Seven Oaks and which ones do not have that policy and approval from the provincial government.
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, you know, if there is any confusion these days with respect to that, it is precisely because it is being driven by that member opposite and his colleague for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) and all of his colleagues.
He talks about cuts in health care, and this government is spending one-half billion dollars per year more than it was when it took office in 1988 from the New Democrats. This government is spending 34 percent of its entire provincial budget on health care. That is the highest percentage of any government in Canada. This government is spending the third highest on a per capita basis of all the governments in Canada on health care.
So the confusion, of course, is because of the misinformation being put forward by the Leader of the Opposition. He furthers that misinformation by last year arguing that we ought to be putting more money into hospitals, and this year, when we are putting more money into our hospitals because of covering deficits, he starts arguing that we should not cover the deficits. Well, those are the kinds of things that I do not think are befitting of the Leader of the Opposition and that is why people are confused.
I am glad that he gave me the opportunity to respond to that, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Doer: Maybe the Premier missed Jules Benson's presentation. You know Jules Benson--he is well known to the Conservative Party--the kind of generous pension plan he has been given by the Premier. Maybe he missed his presentation on the budget cuts to hospitals, not increases. Maybe the Premier missed the cuts to hospitals last year.
So all we ask the Premier to deal with this confusion is, can he table today the specific facilities that have received a deficit amnesty from the provincial government? They have all received cuts both years in a row.
Can the Premier, today, indicate which hospital facilities have the amnesty from the provincial government, how long that lasts, what is the long-term plan, so we will know the specific impact of this confusing policy from the provincial government on patient care here in Manitoba?
Mr. Filmon: Mr. Speaker, just to respond to the preamble of the Leader of the Opposition's question, the pension arrangements that are being given to Mr. Benson are precisely the same pension arrangements that the all-party-appointed committee has advocated for members of the Legislature, matching contributions towards RRSP, exactly what all members of the Legislature are going to be given as a result of an impartial, objective review by a nonpartisan group appointed by all members of this Legislature, and, I might say, substantially less than what was given by the NDP government to one Mr. Marc Eliesen and many other political hacks who were appointed by his government.
With respect to the specifics on health, I will let the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) respond to that, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Doer: Now we know where the lack of leadership in answering questions comes from. It comes from the Premier.
We have been asking questions for the last three weeks about health care decisions this government is making. Yesterday, we asked a specific question dealing with the Health Sciences Centre. We have heard that it may be $30 million to $35 million over two years. We heard it may be between $15 million and $20 million. We heard that it is not getting the deficit amnesty that other hospitals may get. [interjection] Well, if the Premier has the answers to the questions, he will end the rumours right away, but if he is just going to chirp from his seat, Mr. Speaker--[interjection] Well, the administrator at the Health Sciences Centre confirmed today that the cuts are in the millions of dollars.
Can the Minister of Health table today the specific reductions by millions of dollars for each health facility and which health facilities get an amnesty on their deficits and which ones do not, so all of us will know what the score is in the province of Manitoba for patient care?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): The honourable member and his colleague next to him spend as much time as they can attempting to confuse the public, but what they do in the process is confuse themselves.
The one thing that is very clear and constant in all of this is the very, very significant increases in health spending in the last few years under this government here in Manitoba. Earlier the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) met with hospital officials, made it clear that $1.2 billion would be going to hospitals, community health centres and personal care homes in the coming year. Within that budget, Mr. Speaker, all of the facilities now have to begin working with government and with themselves and with each other and with their boards and their staffs to develop their budgets.
In the middle of that process, honourable members opposite like to throw in all kinds of confusing statements, and they will no doubt continue to do that, but the Minister of Finance has made the situation very clear.
* (1410)
SmartHealth
Records Confidentiality
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health has also said that the new $100-million Royal Bank deal will offer security like the provincial drug program. We understand from the pamphlet sent to every Manitoban that you have to use your PHIN number, your personal identification number, to access the system. I will table a copy of part of the pamphlet sent to all Manitobans. We know that people are able to access the system without using the personal information number, without using the PHIN number.
Can the minister explain how the new system will be secure when, in fact, the security arrangements put in place for the old system appear not to be working?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I can understand how the honourable member comes to ask these kinds of questions, because he knows darn well that a public health information system is a highly desirable thing for us to have and will enjoy very, very significant public support. So his only approach without knowing anything at all is to dream up some boogeyman that he can try to raise in this Legislature, which has been the consistent approach of members of the New Democrats right along.
The honourable member has not answered my question. Who does he want to keep information from? What information is he talking about? If there is a total vacuum of information and nobody can get at it, we are going to have serious problems.
So I would like the honourable member to be clear, what information he is talking about and who he wants to keep it from. If he does not want doctors and pharmacists in emergency rooms to have information, then he should tell us that, so then we know that we do not need to debate anything with him.
Development Costs
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Of course, Mr. Speaker, the minister did not answer the question about the fact that the PHIN number is not being used in all cases to access the system and that the assurances of security in the system are just assurances, more comments, more deny, deny, deny, by this minister.
My supplementary to the minister is in regard to the $100-million Royal Bank contract. Can the minister confirm that the $100 million is a developmental cost? Will he outline for us who will be paying the access fees once the system is up, who will be getting the profits from the system once it is up, and how much the Royal Bank is contributing by way of finances?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I think it might be useful if we arranged a briefing for the honourable member, so that some of the questions that he has can be answered by someone other than myself, that as we move towards implementation of this system, many of those questions will be answered, and they will be answered because we will be asking those questions of our partners in health care.
How best should this be done? How best should that be done? How best should we be protecting the proprietary nature of some of this information? Should we have a PHIN situation that the honourable member refers to? So that what we have announced the other day, Mr. Speaker, is that we are moving forward with SmartHealth and all of our other partners in the health system to develop an automated health care system in Manitoba.
The honourable member, if he waits, he would know that I also announced that this would be developed over a period of five years. I mean, it is not going to be something that is going to appear tomorrow and that he can scare everybody about today, so that we can show tomorrow that his concerns are taken care of.
I can tell him one thing without any hesitation, proprietary information and information that ought to be kept secure will be, and if it requires legislation, my colleagues will be there to provide me with that. I said that very clearly yesterday, as well.
Justification
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Yes, Mr. Speaker, we would look forward very much to a briefing, as would the two companies who phoned me who did not receive tender documents, as well, with regard to the tendering process, to find out how the tendering process and other aspects worked.
My final supplementary to the minister is, how can they justify the expenditure of $100 million, and where will this money come from? Will it come from the so-called savings in the system that they are doing as a result of the hospital budget cuts that are going to occur over the next several years?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Something that the honourable member and his colleagues merrily supported during the earlier part of the '80s, and before that, was double-digit increases in spending year after year in health care and in other areas. [interjection] And double-digit tax increases, as well, they imposed on us and on our fellow Manitobans.
What we are proposing to do, Mr. Speaker, with our public health information system is make a more effective system. That does not mean we have to take out large segments of our system to pay for it, but what we have done is arrested that terrible growth that the honourable members opposite like to foster.
Their continuing questions in the House tend to tell me they want to see that thing continue until we choke the life out of our health care system. That is not on, and the public health information system will help us keep a healthy health system for many, many years.
Prime Motor Oil
Environmental Cleanup Costs
Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Environment.
Back in February of 1993, the provincial government, the provincial Environment department, stepped in to assess a situation at a firm in the city, Prime Motor Oil's site in St. Boniface. That was after six months of monitoring of that site.
A year later, in February of 1994, criminal charges under the provincial act, The Dangerous Goods Handling and Transportation Act, were laid against the principals, as well as the company.
Mr. Speaker, after seven remands, on November 10 of this year, the final disposition of that charge took place. Those charges, and the total fines levied, after findings of guilt against all parties under that act, was a grand total of $400--$200 to the company and $200 to Mr. Maurice Marion, who was a principal of the company.
Now, Mr. Speaker, the estimate for the cleanup of that is between $180,000 and $200,000. That is the taxpayers' expense of cleaning up that polluted site.
Is the Minister of Environment satisfied that the act has been upheld sufficiently, that justice has been done after seven remands for $400, after $200,000 of cleanup costs to taxpayers of this province?
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Second Opposition is obviously well versed and trained in the law, and I am not going to venture into criticizing the actions of a judge.
Obviously, if we had anticipated that this would be the level of fine, we would have, in fact, issued tickets which would have been in a higher amount. The law allows for fines in these circumstances to mete several tens of thousands of dollars, and the judge obviously made his decision based on the information that was before him.
Mr. Edwards: Mr. Speaker, there was a finding of guilt. There is at least $180,000 worth of damage done to the taxpayers.
I want to just ask the minister--[interjection] Well, Mr. Speaker, if the minister is upset, why was there not an appeal launched? They had 30 days to file an appeal. Why was there no appeal? Secondly, why did this minister not ask for, through the Crown attorneys, a jail sentence or have a stiffer fine? The maximum was $500,000.
Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, in this particular case, I think the member willingly overlooks the fact that we may be able to recover personal recoveries from the owners to offset these costs.
The fact is that, historically, the opposition has been very adamant that this site presented a situation of grave danger to the environment. In fact, during the process of cleanup and the management of this site, it has been determined--and while it is unsightly, it needs to be cleaned up and there was, in fact, a lot of inappropriate action in the handling of the materials--that, in fact, the concerns have been unsubstantiated in terms of spreading off-site or of providing a long-term and lasting detriment to the environment.
I think the member ought not overlook the fact that we will continue to get everything we can from the owners responsible to recover the costs associated with this cleanup.
Mr. Edwards: We have just heard that so many times, it is losing credibility.
Mr. Speaker, back in February of this year, the minister's official Mr. Wotton said that it is a possibility the government could be stuck with the bill, but explained that the issue is going to be an element of the Justice department's investigation. We were told earlier this year that the Justice department, through this process which provided for a $500,000 fine and/or six months in jail--that this would be the remedy we were going to get.
My final question for the minister: Why has this minister not sought compensation for the public expense from these people found guilty of polluting? Why did they not appeal the decision if they were not happy with it? Can the minister guarantee the people of this province that we are going to get some of this money back?
* (1420)
Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, obviously, the member would not accept my guarantees if I did give them to him, so I think we will deal with the next part of that question.
An Honourable Member: How many times have you given them?
Mr. Cummings: Well, who do you want me to fire, the judge or the lawyer?
Mr. Speaker, I have great respect for the judicial system. We anticipated that the process--obviously many of these processes one would handle differently if--[interjection] Perhaps the member has another question. I would be interested to hear what it is.
Water Supply--Selkirk
Government Strategy
Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Natural Resources.
In 1993, all levels of government commissioned a ground water study for the town of Selkirk as part of the commitment under the Partnership Agreement on Municipal Water Infrastructure Program. The report found that there is no surplus capacity in the aquifer.
I want to quote from the study: In extended dry periods, the situation becomes critical.
I would like to ask the minister if he is aware of this study and what steps his department is taking to address this issue.
Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, I will take that question as notice.
Mr. Dewar: Mr. Speaker, that is rather unfortunate. There is a great deal of uncertainty in the community over this study and the future of the water supply. The mayor of Selkirk has said that the planning board needs more information and this province should provide it.
Will the minister then make a commitment today that he will meet with the officials of the town of Selkirk, the R.M.s of East St. Paul, West St. Paul, St. Clements and St. Andrews to assess this problem and to find solutions to our community's long-term water supply?
Mr. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, I will give the member the undertaking that I will meet with those municipalities and the people he has asked me to meet, and I can meet with all the other ones and we will make arrangements.
Amsco Cast Products Inc.
Negotiations
Mr. Gregory Dewar (Selkirk): My final question, Mr. Speaker, is for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism.
Can the minister tell the House the status of the negotiations for the purchase of the Amsco Cast Products plant in Selkirk? Will he include in those negotiations a guarantee that there will be no jobs lost at the Selkirk plant?
Hon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): For the member's information, it is not the responsibility of the government to negotiate any particular deal. In fact, we are here to provide services if there is some support we can give to the completion of a successful deal, preserving the jobs that are there.
Firearms Control
Safety Courses
Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the honourable Minister of Natural Resources. It deals with firearm registration.
There are three elements, as I understand it. First of all, we have to have a hunter safety course and also the FAC under the provincial law and the firearm safety course under federal law. Under the current legislation, hunters must take a firearm safety course even if they have been hunting for over 40 years, in some cases 50 years, and the costs are quite substantial.
One person from Thompson is attempting to charge members of the Fox Lake First Nation $1,242 for a maximum of 15 people. In addition to this, the band is supposed to supply a classroom and an interpreter.
For many northern First Nations residents and northerners, in general, the costs are extremely difficult to cover, as well as totally insulting. If refresher courses are needed, they should be done by local hunters.
My question to the minister is, has he considered a course of action or has he engaged in any dialogue with his federal counterparts to address this very important issue?
Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Speaker, the member raises a very valid point. The legislation and the regulations that are being required are by the federal Minister of Justice, who is basically coming down demanding that all guns be registered, that a special course be taken.
We, as a province, put a position forward to the federal minister saying that in Manitoba those people who have taken a hunter safety course, one of three courses basically that are given voluntarily in the province, should qualify under the FAC.
Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that the member for Rupertsland make contact with the federal Member of Parliament Elijah Harper and other Liberal members and tell them to raise this issue with the federal Minister of Justice, because I agree with none of it.
Mr. Robinson: Mr. Speaker, further on an issue, Treaty No. 5, which was signed on September 20, 1875, states: It is further agreed between Her Majesty and the said Indians that the sum of $500 per annum shall be yearly and every year expended by Her Majesty in the purchase of ammunition and twine for nets for use of the said Indians.
This is further guaranteed under Section 35 of Canada's Constitution where existing treaty and aboriginal rights are hereby affirmed.
Given the high cost of sending instructors to northern communities, can the Minister of Natural Resources explain why local people are not used where possible to conduct the firearm safety courses, or the RCMP?
Mr. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, I am proud to say that over the course of years, the courses that have been offered within the province, the hunter safety courses, have been done by people voluntarily. We have people within my department who basically train the instructors, and these people go out and give these courses voluntarily.
Mr. Speaker, I want to be careful, but I am sure that the member for Rupertsland is again making reference to the requirements for the federal course that is being taken.
I am prepared to take that issue, get more information on it and write to the federal minister, raising the objection and the concerns it has raised in terms of the costs to the people.
Mr. Speaker, while I am on my feet, I also want to say I anticipate that if the federal government proceeds with the gun registration, it is going to cost millions of dollars to do it, and it will have totally no impact whatsoever.
Mr. Robinson: Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for answering my first question during my second question.
Since these courses are costing as much as $100 for more hunters, some of whom have hunted for maybe over 40 years, 50 years, will the minister try to work out some flexibility in the courses, which are insulting to many long-term hunters? Some do not read English and some do not understand the English language, for example. Perhaps a program initiated through New Careers could be considered by the minister.
Mr. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, I have no problem with the suggestion in terms of seeing whether we can work something out, but I have to repeat again that the courses the Manitoba government is responsible for do not cost the people that kind of money, because they are being administrated and basically the training is given by people who do it on a volunteer basis.
It is again the federal government that is creating these kinds of problems, and this is going to be part of a major make-work project by the time they get through with all this gun legislation.
Cable Television
Negative Option Marketing
Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs.
On February 1, 1995, the Manitoba cable TV subscribers are going to be faced with an undemocratic marketing process known as negative options, where the cost of the service will be automatically added to the customer's bill and can only be removed if the customer phones in to cancel the service.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I would like to know, can the minister tell this House how many Manitoba consumers will be affected, and does he support this approach?
Hon. Jim Ernst (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I can first of all say, no, I do not know how many people are going to be affected. Secondly, my department is looking at that issue at the present time.
* (1430)
Mr. Maloway: Mr. Speaker, we have been getting calls from consumers about this undemocratic process, and we would like to know when he plans to take steps to ban this approach.
Mr. Ernst: As I indicated, Mr. Speaker, to the first question, my department is looking at this at the present time.
Aspen Park
Furnace Replacement Costs
Mr. Jim Maloway (Elmwood): Mr. Speaker, my final question to the same minister is that for nearly two years, the residents of Aspen Park in Gimli have been waiting for reimbursement for their faulty gas furnaces.
I would like to know from this minister, will he keep the government's promise to reimburse the Aspen Park residents for the cost of replacing their faulty furnaces?
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I would like to remind the honourable member that a true supplementary question is to get clarification on the initial question, okay? Now, does the honourable member have another supplementary question?
Mr. Maloway: Mr. Speaker, my new question to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs is this. Will the minister keep his government's promise to reimburse the Aspen Park residents for the cost of replacing their faulty furnaces?
Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Housing): Mr. Speaker, I believe that the member wishes to have that answered by the minister responsible and has directed it to the wrong minister.
I should indicate that the matter of reimbursement for the furnaces has been looked into. We will be making an announcement very shortly. We looked at legal precedent. We looked at court cases established in that area.
We know, of course, the fault was not the government's in the matter of the furnaces. However, we have looked at legal precedent, and we will be making an announcement shortly on that issue.
Impaired Driving
Prevention Programs
Mr. Clif Evans (Interlake): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister responsible for the Liquor Commission.
In the past two years, this government has made major changes in The Liquor Control Act which allows for four private wine stores to open seven days a week. Unfortunately, a program established to educate youth about the risks of drinking and driving has been cancelled due to a lack of public funding just in the past few weeks.
Has this minister or the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) taken any initiative or action to see that to prevent alcohol and risk-related trauma in the youth program is continued, so that the youth between the ages of 16 and 24 may continue to have this program made available?
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister charged with the administration of The Liquor Control Act): In answer to part of the preamble, the changes in the act were passed in this Legislature some two years ago and are now being implemented, so I do not think that the member need be surprised by it.
This government gives substantial funding to the Addictions Foundation to present programs within the communities and within the system, and that support for the Addictions Foundation is continuing.
Mr. Clif Evans: Mr. Speaker, this program has been made available and was used last year alone by some 1,500 students, including 50 from Riverton High School who have attended this program. I would like to table letters from my high school students asking that this program be maintained by the government.
Will the minister read these letters and request that his government spend and provide the $40,000 that is needed, so that we can continue educating our young people in the dangers of drinking and driving?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, there are many worthwhile programs sponsored by the Addictions Foundation and by other community groups. The government's support for the Addictions Foundation is in place, and their programs are offered within that funding that they receive.
There are other groups that receive funding from other sources that perhaps are not continuing on, but our commitment to the Addictions Foundation has been a very substantial one.
Highway Construction Projects
Oak Hammock Marsh
Ms. Norma McCormick (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Highways and Transportation.
The Department of Highways' 1994-95 construction project identifies as a previously approved project the upgrading of Highway 220 from Provincial Trunk Highway 67 to the Oak Hammock Marsh. Ducks Unlimited and Manitoba Highways say this work is necessary to control dust by increased traffic.
Can the minister tell me, what is the projected cost of the asphalt surfacing on this road, and how does this compare to a more environmentally acceptable alternative of using compacted and coated gravel?
Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, the member asked us very specific dollar figures. I will bring those to her at the next sitting of the Legislature.
Ms. McCormick: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary is to the same minister.
When this project was first approved, it was anticipated that the annual visits to the Ducks Unlimited facility would increase from 85,000 to 210,000. In fact, the number of visits are less than half those projected.
Will the minister explain why his department is continuing with this project when the road is not being used as projected?
Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, thousands and thousands of people, particular young people, young people in school, go to Oak Hammock Marsh for the educational value of that very important sanctuary.
Mr. Speaker, I answered her question previously and said I will find out the appropriate cost, but I would think dust in the air is very environmentally unacceptable and we are trying to control dust.
Ms. McCormick: My final supplementary to the same minister: As the Ducks Unlimited facility is in a deficit position and its very survival may be in question, would it not make sense to hold off on this costly project until the numbers of visitors to the facility at least come close to the projected figures?
Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, I am really appalled that this member will be criticizing this department for building good roads to help tourism activities in rural Manitoba, particularly with learning the educational value about wildlife. I am really amazed that this member is against educational value of wildlife in rural Manitoba.
Post-Secondary Education
Tuition Fees
Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Family Services has just tabled a document indicating that university fees will increase in Manitoba to $4,700. My understanding from discussions with AUCC this week and, in fact, from a meeting that AUCC held in Manitoba is that they anticipate that fees will rise, in fact, to $7,000 to $8,000 in the first year of Axworthy's program. It depends upon the kinds of assumptions you make, and I expect we will have the chance to debate this difference in figures later on.
But the real question, Mr. Speaker, is the impact on young Manitobans. I would like to ask the Minister of Education, will the minister confirm that recent studies have shown--and these are American studies--that for every $1,000 increase in fees, there will be a 7 percent loss of students. Using the minister's figures for now, that indicates around a 15 percent loss of students in Manitoba.
I want the minister to confirm these projections.
Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I cannot confirm her projections, but I can say if the member reads the document tabled today by our minister, we have taken a conservative approach.
We did that because we honestly cannot believe that the federal government will move to a program which will see incurred that type of total indebtedness by our student body upon graduation from a post-secondary institution.
So we chose the words in the document tabled by the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson) very, very carefully because in our view, this whole income-contingent payback system has to be thought through very, very deeply, and in our view, has to be looked at very, very carefully, because just to see students finally leave post-secondary institutions with upwards of $40,000 or $50,000 indebtedness, in our point of view, does not represent a solution.
Ms. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, so we are, in fact, working with a range of options from about $5,000 to around $8,000.
I want to ask the minister, because the tabled paper only deals with university fees as an example, will he tell us whether the same assumptions will be applied to community college fees? That is, will their fees be doubled as well?
Mr. Manness: Well, Mr. Speaker, again, I do not know whether it is up to me to try and give greater impact or greater rationale as to the federal government thinking or musing on this particular issue, but, certainly, we are well aware in our responsibility that right today, college tuition fees represent between 9 and 11 percent of the total cost of educating towards a diploma or towards certificate standing.
So, Mr. Speaker, I think it is wise to expect there will continue to be pressures on tuitions in colleges, notwithstanding the federal reform with respect to post-secondary fees.
Again, I would sense that if Mr. Axworthy and the federal government has their way and they go the way they appear to be wanting to go, there would be a significant impact on tuitions in post-secondary institutions.
* (1440)
Ms. Friesen: Mr. Speaker, well, if we use the American projections, what we are looking at is a loss of post-secondary students in Manitoba of several thousand students over the next few years.
My question for the minister simply is, what is his long-range plan? I raised this with him in June, and at that time the Premier (Mr. Filmon) said that he could not believe, in fact, that the federal Liberals had such a program in line. I cannot believe that story can possibly be true, he said.
So where is the government's long-range plan for these students? Community college fees are going to rise; university fees are going to rise. Are these people simply going to join the ranks of the unemployed?
Mr. Manness: Mr. Speaker, the member asks a very good question and one that I have no difficulty answering. We showed within the Education Estimates in last year's budget where the focus was. With every additional dollar that we had, we took in support of the community colleges, and that will continue.
We are very mindful of the very significant recommendation that came down from the Roblin commission, and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson), I am sure, would support this statement. Every extra dollar that we can find within the education envelope will be directed in support of those students choosing to go into the community college system.
New Careers Program
Status Report
Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I, too, have a question for the Minister of Education.
As part of the government's decentralization program, the New Careers office was opened in 1990, with quite a bit of fanfare I might add, and at one point--
An Honourable Member: Were you there, Len?
Mr. Leonard Evans: I was there. At one point, they had nine staff positions, but the New Careers program in Brandon seems to have almost disappeared, and the staff have been reduced by six, leaving three people with virtually no programs and no students.
So my question to the minister is, is the minister about to close this office entirely in the near future, or is he waiting until after the next election?
Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I do not know if the member is asking for yet another invitation to another event, should there be one within the area of education, or really what the essence is of his question.
It will come as no surprise to members opposite, particularly those who have focused in on some of the policy decisions made with respect to the ACCESS program, that all of the training programs are being evaluated from time to time, and for those that are found wanting in some dimension, there are policy changes that are made that reflect upon them.
I cannot answer definitively the question put forward by the member today, but I can tell him, and it is in keeping with the response I made to an earlier question, every dollar that we save or that we sense is not being spent well in any of the training programs, Mr. Speaker, will be redirected into the community college system.
Decentralization
Brandon, Manitoba
Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): I have a supplementary question which should be directed, I guess, to the Acting Minister of Rural Development in charge of decentralization or perhaps the Minister responsible for the Civil Service Commission.
Will the minister confirm that there has been no net increase in civil service jobs in Brandon since the decentralization program started? In other words, can he confirm that the 99 jobs slated for Brandon have been cancelled out by a series of reductions, such as the cuts to the New Careers office?
Hon. James Downey (Acting Minister of Rural Development): Mr. Speaker, I will take the numbers part of the question as notice.
However, I can inform the member that I do know that the Manitoba Agricultural Credit Corporation has been moved to Brandon. We do know that rural library services has been moved to Brandon and several others as part of the decentralization program.
Mr. Leonard Evans: Those are all part of the 99 jobs I referred to, Mr. Speaker. I invite the minister to look at the employment data available from the Civil Service Commission.
Will the minister acknowledge that with the job losses at the Brandon Mental Health Centre, including transfers to other regions in the province, as well as the elimination of well over a hundred positions, that the decentralization program has become meaningless for the city of Brandon and that the provincial payroll in Brandon is declining significantly?
Mr. Downey: Mr. Speaker, I do not accept the decentralization program as being meaningless to Brandon or any other community. In fact, all one has to do is listen to what the mayor of Brandon or some of the municipal leaders have said, how positive the decentralization program has been for generally the areas outside of the city of Winnipeg.
Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.
MATTER OF URGENT PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
Health Care Funding Announcements
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen), that under Rule 27.(1) that the ordinary business of the House be set aside to discuss a matter of urgent public importance, namely the confusion in the health care system caused by recent conflicting funding announcements.
Mr. Speaker: Before recognizing the honourable member for Kildonan, I believe I should remind all honourable members that under our Rule 27.(2), the mover of the motion on a matter of urgent public importance and one member each of the other parties in the House is allowed not more than five minutes to explain the urgency of debating the matter immediately.
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, I recognize what the rules say with respect to this motion, and I will I think clarify why this debate is so necessary.
In the last several weeks, the words out of this government with respect to health care have been so confusing and so distorted that it defies logic to try to determine what has happened in the health care sector. As a consequence, Mr. Speaker, at a meeting of the board of directors at Health Sciences Centre yesterday and in dealing with staff, we have staff at the various centres in the institutions that are in crisis because they do not know what is happening with this government and on the day-to-day decisions that are made.
If we do not have this opportunity to debate this matter today, we may adjourn and we may not be able to deal with these issues before Estimates which will probably be in late February or early March. This is the first opportunity for us to have the opportunity to deal with this following the Throne Speech Debate.
I want to mention to all members of the House what is at stake. Within the last week, some deficits have been paid by this government to some hospitals and some have not. Within the last week, Jules Benson, the chief accountant of the province had said hospitals are being cut 2 percent, perhaps personal care homes are going to get 1 percent, perhaps community centres are going to get 1 percent, and now we hear that Health Sciences Centre has been cut $15 million to $20 million next year.
Hundreds and hundreds of jobs are at stake, Mr. Speaker, and members on the opposite side make jokes about this. Hundreds of jobs are at stake, hundreds of patients' lives and hundreds of patients' health in jeopardy as a result of this. At the same time, the government is signing or in the process of signing a $100-million contract with the Royal Bank to give some of this money to the Royal Bank to develop a computer system.
There is nothing more urgent or crucial than our health care system and what this government has done. We have an opportunity now in this Chamber to try to clarify for those health care institutions that are meeting this very moment to determine what will happen to the staff, to determine what will happen to the dollars. We have an opportunity to perhaps clarify and stop and deal properly with this $100 million that is going to the Royal Bank. We have an opportunity to deal with that today before the government signs on the dotted line.
It may be our last opportunity in this Chamber before we adjourn. It may be the last opportunity, the only opportunity, before we go into Estimates, before the contract is signed, before the hospitals have to put out their notices of layoffs, before the budgetary decisions have to be made. We do not have another opportunity to do this.
I do not think that I have to indicate any further about the urgency and the importance of this debate in this Chamber and the significance of health care and the fact that we represent Manitobans and there is no opportunity for Manitobans to discuss and to have clarified what is happening with respect to the health care cuts, what is happening, because the minister says, Estimates. By that point in time, the numbers will be formed. It will be too late. In fact, I daresay it is too late at this point, but we are attempting to resurrect some opportunity to discuss and to impact on this government before it is too late, because two weeks ago, it was 2 percent to the Health Sciences; now, it is somewhere in the range of 8 to 10 percent. Who knows what it will be tomorrow? Who knows where this money is going? We need it for community-based health care. We need it to improve health care. We need to make determinations on this.
This may be the only opportunity for members of this House and Manitobans, through us, to have an opportunity to not only influence this government with respect to these significant decisions, but at the same time, Mr. Speaker, perhaps the government can try for once in the course of this debate, because they have not done it in Question Period and the minister has not done it in the hallway, to explain to Manitobans just what the funding cuts are, just where the money is going, just whether our community health centres are going to get the 1 percent increases they are supposed to get, or not; where this $100 million is coming from; where it is going; how it is being applied before they sign the contract, not after they sign the contract.
* (1450)
This may be our only opportunity in this Chamber to deal with these most significant issues because if we adjourn--and in fact there is no means on the agenda of this forum, of this Chamber to deal with it. There is no bill. There is no opportunity to discuss and debate this issue. The throne speech is completed. Resolutions are on the Order Paper, but there will be no opportunity for this resolution, or a resolution of this kind to arise given that the members opposite have made this determination only in the last 48 hours. Only in the last 48 hours have we heard about these significant matters, and this may be our only chance to deal with these significant factors.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe that the members of the NDP would come in here and embarrass themselves as they have just done. I cannot believe that. This House has been in session since the 1st of December. On the 2nd of December, or the day following the throne speech, they have in fact in past years introduced matters of urgent public importance, but what happened over the last eight days? Did something change?
On December 2, the first opportunity they had to do this, Manitoba was spending more on its health care than any other province in Canada. That has not changed in the last eight days. Manitoba has the third-highest level of health care spending per person in Canada. That has not changed in the last eight days.
We are spending on home care now--we have increased it more than 90 percent since this government has been in office. That has not changed. So for eight days there was no matter of urgent public importance. What happened?
In addition to that, for eight days they have had an opportunity to debate it. Every member, I believe, of the opposition has spoken, every member, Mr. Speaker, and yet, they each--[interjection] Perhaps I am mistaken. Almost every member of the opposition has spoken on the throne speech debate. Do we see them stand up, chapter and verse, on matters of health care? No, we did not hear that. So if it is such an important issue, what has changed? Nothing has changed.
Quite frankly, I think they are so inflated with their own importance over having delayed the vote last evening and prancing around in front of the television set saying how great they were in delaying the House that they finally realized this morning in the cold light of day that they have to do something when they come in here and not come up with kinds of make-work projects like they are plying with this particular issue, Mr. Speaker.
Lastly, I want to tell you that the matter is so urgent that the Estimates of Expenditure that the member refers to take place on April 1, 1995, four months from now. There is no urgency. There is no matter of urgent public importance, and I submit, it is clearly out of order.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Second Opposition House Leader): I would argue, Mr. Speaker, that there is in fact a need to debate this particular issue today, that it is in the public's best interest to have this issue debated primarily because of two concerns that have been pointed out time in and time out since yesterday, where we have had the Health critic from the Liberal Party, we have had critics from the New Democratic Party raising the issue. We have not been provided any sort of answers, and I do believe there is reason that this debate is necessary.
Let me start off by pointing out that there are, in fact, no relevant bills that are before this House in which we can enter into this discussion. Let me also point out that the grievance is not an opportune time because before we can start giving grievances might not be until four or five months down the line potentially.
The budget debate--the Premier (Mr. Filmon) of this province has indicated to the Leader of the Liberal Party (Mr. Edwards) that he will introduce a budget after the federal Liberal government has introduced their budget. In terms of the Estimates, the Estimates follow the Budget Debate, so that would again mean that we are talking four, five months down the line before we are even into the Health Estimates.
Mr. Speaker, when the government has indicated to the different health organizations and professionals that hospitals would be looking at, for example, a 2 percent cut, when we look at some of the hospitals having current deficits, some of which I understand are in fact being forgiven, I believe that there is the need to further clear the air in terms of where this government is going on health care.
This is the primary reason why we in the Liberal caucus feel that the public's interests would in fact be best served by hearing what the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) and other ministers have to say about health care because it is vitally important in the province of Manitoba.
It is also equally important to get on the record the opposition's concerns, and it would be a very well-spent day if we would start talking about the health care and what this government is doing with respect to the 2 percent cut to the hospitals and the whole issue of deficits with the hospitals.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
* (1500)
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I would like to thank all honourable members for their advice as to whether the motion proposed by the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) should be debated today.
In accordance with our Rule 27(1), I did receive the notice required. According to our Rule 27 and Beauchesne Citation 389 and 390, there are two conditions required for a matter of urgent public importance to proceed: a) It must be shown that the public interest will suffer if the matter is not given immediate attention, and b) that the subject matter must be so pressing that the ordinary opportunities for debate will not allow it to be brought on early enough.
In my opinion, it has not been demonstrated that the public interest will suffer if the matter is not debated today. I am therefore ruling the matter out of order.
Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): It is with regret, Mr. Speaker, that I challenge your ruling.
Mr. Speaker: The ruling of the Chair has been challenged. Shall the ruling of the Chair be sustained?
Voice Vote
Mr. Speaker: All those in favour, please say yea.
Some Honourable Members: Yea.
Mr. Speaker: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Speaker: In my opinion, the Yeas have it.
Formal Vote
Mr. Ashton: Yeas and Nays, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: A recorded vote having been requested, call in the members.
The question before the House is, shall the ruling of the Chair be sustained.
Division
A RECORDED VOTE was taken, the result being as follows:
Yeas
Cummings, Dacquay, Derkach, Downey, Driedger, Ducharme, Enns, Ernst, Filmon, Findlay, Gilleshammer, Helwer, Laurendeau, Manness, McAlpine, McCrae, McIntosh, Mitchelson, Orchard, Pallister, Penner, Praznik, Reimer, Render, Rose, Sveinson, Vodrey.
Nays
Ashton, Barrett, Cerilli, Chomiak, Dewar, Doer, Edwards, Evans (Brandon East), Evans (Interlake), Friesen, Gaudry, Gray, Kowalski, Lamoureux, Lathlin, Mackintosh, Maloway, Martindale, McCormick, Plohman, Reid, Robinson, Santos, Schellenberg, Wowchuk.
Mr. Clerk (William Remnant): Yeas 27, Nays 25.
Mr. Speaker: The ruling of the Chair has been sustained.