ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

Pharmacare

Reduction Announcement

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Premier.

Besides the unconscionable levels of cuts that this government has announced since we last sat in this Legislature, on Pharmacare, the government has totally botched the way in which they have announced these cuts to the people of Manitoba.

These are not our words; these are the words of pharmacists across the province of Manitoba. Some of them have said that the way in which the government has made these announcements has placed patients at risk and wastes money on drugs that may not be required by people because of the way in which the government has announced it.

I would like to ask the Premier, who is responsible for botching the Pharmacare cuts that his government has announced and what has he done to hold that person accountable?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the Leader of the Opposition for that thoughtful and reasoned question that he has put forward.

Unfortunately, the information that had been prepared for the release was under lock, as I understand it, in a print shop, and was in some way inadvertently released prior to its expected date. That being the case, clearly the people who have been responsible have had the appropriate action taken in the sense that we have expressed our displeasure with that unfortunate error.

Having said that, the appropriate response to it was to have the announcement made in full so that the one small group of pamphlets that had been released was therefore not limited to that small group, and dealing with rumours or anything else, the government made the release known publicly.

I would say further to that that I am sure that there are professional ethics and professional requirements on both the doctors, the physicians and the pharmacists to deal in a safe manner with prescriptions for individuals.

Mr. Doer: A pharmacist was further quoted as saying that the way in which the government announced this information was actually dangerous and it was very ill-thought-out.

Now, given the fact that the pamphlet was both released early and also had false information in it, who in government was responsible for wrong information being released too early that created this chaos and confusion for people that are required to have drugs? Who is the Premier holding accountable?

Surely the Premier would expect his Minister of Health to read the material that affects so many Manitobans in terms of their cuts before it is sent to the printer to be released.

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, in fact the material that had been released was under lock and key because changes were being made, and improvements to the benefit of recipients were being made to the program. Therefore, the new material was released to ensure that the improvements were announced publicly as opposed to the incorrect material that had been in the folder.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, we can hardly call the announcement of the government improvements to the Pharmacare program. The Premier uses a very selective term that I do not believe Manitobans would agree with.

I would like to ask the Premier, is it not the responsibility of the minister that is sworn in on behalf of Manitobans to read any pamphlet prior to them going over to a printer? Is it not the responsibility of the person allegedly in charge of the department to read those pamphlets prior to their distribution to the public? Who is in charge of the Department of Health, and whom is the Premier holding accountable for this botched system of Pharmacare now?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the point that the member missed is that the information that was in those pamphlets was being corrected as a result of the fact that the minister, in reviewing the material prior to its release, had wanted to ensure that it reflected decisions that were made by the government and the Treasury Board, and that was not the case with respect to those folders, so the folders were held under lock and key while the improved version of that program--[interjection] I am speaking with respect to the folders that were there and the changes that were made to those folders. It was an improvement and a benefit to the individuals and the people of Manitoba and those folders were improved. Those program benefits were changed to the benefit of the people who would receive the support.

* (1345)

Education System

Funding Reduction

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, across this province parents and trustees have been dealing with the really difficult decisions on the impact of the $15-million cuts to education that this government has imposed. Trustees and parents are faced with cancelling programs, increasing class sizes, eliminating supplies and recognizing that they are unable to meet the many special needs of their students.

Would the Minister of Education, who may be the last person in this province to believe that her cuts are not affecting young Manitobans, would she share with the House today her own special secret of how a cut of $15 million will enhance the quality of education?

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): You know, Madam Speaker, I come to work every day and sit down, and as I begin my work am very aware that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) is figuratively writing a cheque for just under $2 million every day of the week, every week of the year, every month of the year to cover off the interest payments on the debt that they left us, and I cannot believe that they have the gall to ask these kinds of questions given that $15 million is what we spend in a week to pay off the interest on the debt they left us.

Having said that, as a signal of my frustration with the hypocrisy of those who pretend to care about money when they have left us with a situation they have left us, I would indicate that we have done a number of things in Education to try to assist with the fact that we are going to be facing massive transfer cuts from Ottawa, the equivalent of almost the entire operating budget at the University of Manitoba, plus the debt they left us. I say there are many ways in which we have changed the funding formula to allow some flexibility in how money is spent. We have embarked upon a review to get a handle on ways of managing the highest cost of education.

I will answer the rest of the question with the next one.

Ms. Friesen: Would the Minister of Education, in that same spirit of directness, that same willingness to take responsibility, acknowledge today full responsibility for the property tax increases of up to 17 percent that thousands of Manitobans across this province are facing as a result of her cuts?

Mrs. McIntosh: No is the short answer.

I say that the highest cost of education, of course, is wages. Boards have tried valiantly to get a handle on that cost. Boards, some of them, took advantage of Bill 22 days; others did not. Boards have made priorities in spending, some of them very wise decisions; others could have been more wise but it is their decision.

Teachers, as well, have the ability to make the decision by the amount they agreed to settle at the bargaining table for, and teachers have the power then to decide whether school boards will continue having to raise more money for salaries or not.

So there are many people who can affect the decisions as to the mill rates, the prime ones being, of course, those right at the table and indirectly impacted by federal transfer cuts to the equivalent of the University of Manitoba operating budget and the legacy of debt we inherited from them.

Minister of Education

Lack of Confidence

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Will the minister tell us what steps she has taken in the last few weeks to restore the loss of confidence in her, as minister, expressed by her partners in education, parents, trustees, principals, superintendents and teachers right across this province?

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): I do not accept the faulty premise upon which the question is based. I would indicate to the member that I am in far closer touch with some those groups than she is, and I would indicate that I regularly visit, weekly, schools in Manitoba, have had many very good discussions with parents who support this government completely in its thrust towards higher standards, assessment results.

I have spent hours in dialogue with teachers who have marked our language arts exams, who say it was the most exhilarating professional development experience in their careers. I will gladly put those people in touch with the member, since she is doing her--already the first day of the session--sarcastic laugh without knowing the content of the conversations I have had with those very same interests groups, so her premise is faulty.

I have concluded my response.

* (1350)

Seven Oaks General Hospital

Closure

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): My question is to the First Minister.

While the First Minister was off on his travels this winter, the Health minister has been considering recommendations to close Seven Oaks Hospital, recommendations made by his Urban Health Planning partnership committee which admitted, and I quote: Also the recommendations will be costed to determine any cost savings.

My question for the First Minister: Now, especially in light of reports, including one from a member of the minister’s committee, that the recommendations will in fact increase rather than decrease costs, would the Premier take this advice?

Do not reopen historic wounds by this all-out attack on the well-being of north Winnipeggers and commit and pledge to maintain our full-service community hospital we worked so long and hard for.

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the honourable member is already falling into the habit of assuming from what he reads in the newspapers that certain decisions are or have been already made. Those things have not happened. The design teams have indeed been busy putting proposals together, which come before the urban planning partnership, which is responsible for looking at the cost-effectiveness of all of these recommendations that are being made. That process is underway. It is not concluded, as the honourable member’s question would suggest.

But I remind the honourable member that, unlike him, I cannot just pretend that we are not working in the fiscal environment that we are working in. Our federal partners are pulling back, the honourable members opposite have just finished being reminded that we are spending millions and millions of dollars all the time to pay for debt that they imposed upon us and future generations. It is that kind of environment we work in.

The honourable member’s question takes no account whatever of that fiscal reality all provinces are working in.

Mr. Mackintosh: Would the minister, who ignores reports that the fiscal reality will worsen, would he just explain with this closing how the government, while providing needed and deserving direct community access to emergency surgical medicine and psychiatric services in eastern, western and southern Winnipeg, can be so arrogant and so mean as to even consider ripping away such access from all the people of the northern part of this city?

Mr. McCrae: It is not a question of either of the traits the honourable member has referred to. Any government in Canada today is trying, all governments in Canada today are trying, to deliver the highest possible quality and volume of services with the dollars that they can make available. This government is under no different exercise than is going on elsewhere. This is not, by the way, Toronto, where a dozen hospitals have to close. This is not Saskatchewan, where 52 rural hospitals have to close. This is not Ontario, which, before Bob Rae left office, closed 10,000 hospital acute care beds. This is Manitoba.

The honourable member talks about closing. Well, what has been closed? The honourable member has to be accurate sometimes when he raises questions in the House, does he not?

There is nothing that has been closed and no proposals for closures have been acted on.

* (1355)

Mr. Mackintosh: Would the minister just listen to the thousands of rallying, petitioning, letter-writing families of north Winnipeg, indeed, enraged families of north Winnipeg? Just listen, and that should be consultation enough already, and now simply take our hospital’s closing off the table, and that of Misericordia Hospital, so that no further consultations are even required.

Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, I will listen to Manitobans from wherever they come or wherever they live. The point is that we have to run a health system for all Manitobans. It is not an easy thing to do in this day and age, as the honourable member would probably want to agree. The fact is that people, wherever they live, are going to need services, and we are going to have to provide them. So we have to listen to stakeholders and consumers of health care services, which we have been doing for years, and which is the subject of ridicule from honourable members opposite. First we listen too much and then on the other hand we do not listen enough.

You cannot have it both ways, Madam Speaker. I am doing exactly what the honourable member says on a daily basis.

Home Care Program

Privatization

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, in the cabinet document on the privatization of home care that we provided to the public because the government was afraid to announce the policy, in that document it says, quote, it is Manitoba health policy to divest all service delivery to nongovernment organizations.

My question to the Premier (Mr. Filmon): Can the Premier explain the reason behind that policy decision by his cabinet?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, in a staged way and in a way which causes as little disruption as possible, it is felt that the appropriate course is to take the direct service delivery part of home care and make it subject to competition, which we expect will bring about a cost-effectiveness and also bring about a higher quality of care.

Indeed, Madam Speaker, we have already been able to demonstrate that by bringing in the concept of competition, we can improve overnight, 24-hour, seven-day-a-week service. We have shown that we can bring forward home intravenous therapy programs and that we can provide backup services for the rest of the home care system which is not always able to guarantee its services, for whatever reasons. The fact is we have not been able to guarantee services. We want to do that, and we are going to have more and more, not less and less, but more and more clients for home care in the coming years, and we are going to have to find some cost-efficiencies so that we can provide service to all those people. That is what we are doing.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I am experiencing some difficulty hearing the honourable member for Kildonan.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, can the Minister of Health confirm that one of the reasons the government is privatizing home care is because of recommendations from the government’s very good friend Connie Curran, who had a contract to produce a home care action plan which the minister has never made public. Can the minister confirm that it was Connie Curran who recommended the privatization of health care?

Mr. McCrae: I would not confirm or deny anything about who has recommended that. There are a lot of Manitobans, Madam Speaker, who think we can do a better job in home care, including me. I have felt for a long time that the fact we cannot guarantee services to people, that when a publicly employed person is on vacation, the program that we find so very useful still has not been able to provide guarantees that you can get your care when someone is on holidays. Or if somebody calls in sick, it is not fair to me, I do not think, to tell the family of a client or to tell the client, well, sorry, you are going to have to look after your own. That is not good enough.

We are trying to find better ways to deliver those services and whether it was Connie Curran or whether it was the honourable member opposite at one time or another or Peter Olfert or Michael Decter--Peter Olfert speaks very highly of the competitive system that produced 24-hour-a-day, seven-day-a-week service. He said so, as reported in the Winnipeg Free Press that he is very proud of that. It would not have happened if it had not been for a private contractor providing the service, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, can the First Minister or the Minister of Health explain how it is more fair and how they can provide more service by providing millions and millions of dollars to friends of theirs in the private sector to provide home care and fracture the system and spread money around and cause increased administration costs and change the kind of care provided to patients, how that is going to improve the quality of patient care?

Mr. McCrae: I would like the honourable member to share with me his profit margin estimates so that he can show me how it is that millions and millions of dollars will go into the pockets of individuals. That certainly is a red herring that honourable members opposite, because of their philosophical approach to things, like to bring forward.

We take a more pragmatic approach on this side of the House. We want to provide services to people, and we are looking for ways to do that in the most cost-efficient way. Competition is one way that has demonstrated many, many times that the result can be improvement, and we fully expect that to be the case, or we would not be embarked in this process.

Community Hospitals

Government Commitment

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, shortly we are going to be receiving the '96-97 budget of this government. That budget, and the theme of that budget, is going to clearly demonstrate that this is a government that does not have compassion, is not a caring government.

I want to ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon) a question regarding health care, or possibly the Minister of Health, whichever feels more comfortable.

My question is based on the 1992 action plan that was tabled by the then minister Don Orchard, which clearly demonstrated that the community hospital is the future when we talked about the deinstitutionalization of health care. We have seen a 360-degree turn from this minister.

My question to the minister is, what is the vision of this government when it comes to health care? Does it have a vision? Does it believe in community hospitals--

* (1400)

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): True to the document brandished today by the honourable member, yes, Madam Speaker, unlike the honourable member and his friends in Ottawa, yes, we have compassion, yes, we are committed to that document, and yes, we are committed to community hospitals.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I ask the Minister of Health, how can he say yes he is committed to this document when this document is very clear in indicating that we need to expand our community hospitals, not cut them back, not close down the Seven Oaks Hospital, not convert the Misericordia Hospital.

How can he explain that contradiction?

Mr. McCrae: We have, in the city of Winnipeg, five community hospitals. The honourable member suggests we expand. Will he please put before this House how many more community hospitals he thinks we can have here in the city of Winnipeg when he says we need to expand?

If we had that on the table we would have something to discuss.

Home Care Program

Privatization

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): My question to the Minister of Health is, with the recent announcement in terms of the home care policy of this government, we ultimately believe that you are going to see the establishment of a two-tier system; those that have the economic means will be delivered a better service than those who do not.

My question to the minister is, how is this minister prepared to assure Manitobans that there will be one tier of home care services and that the workers that deliver that service are in fact going to be able to enter into that profession as a career, not as a minimum wage job?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): The honourable member is asking a couple of things. He is asking about the concept of a two-tier medical system, and then he sort of imports into his question the labour aspect of it. I do not know which one he wants me to answer, but certainly we are clearly on the record--and by the way, in raising the question the way he does he falls into the trap laid for him by honourable members opposite in the New Democratic Party and throws his lot in with them and their union boss friends, all of which is somewhat strange considering he is a great supporter of the federal Liberal government which year after year removes from our health budgets dollars with which to build new community hospitals.

He still has not told us how many he wants us to build, but I can tell you it is not our policy to build any more. I will just put that on the record, and the honourable member might want to put on the record how many additional ones he would build.

He asks his questions ignoring altogether that in Saskatchewan, for example, there are user fees for home care. There are not in Manitoba. He forgets altogether the fact that in Liberal provinces to the east, there are either user fees or contracting out going on in those provinces. So we would like to understand the honourable member, where he is coming from.

Hog Industry

Levy Collection

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, hog producers across the province continue to be frustrated with this Minister of Agriculture. The Minister of Agriculture, on December 15, said his department would be looking into the collection of the outstanding levies, and he made that same commitment to the producers at Selkirk that the levies would be collected.

I want to ask the minister if he can tell us what his department has done to ensure that the levies have been collected and whether or not there are still outstanding levies and how much.

Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): Madam Speaker, allow me to make it very clear to the honourable member for Swan River that the responsibility for the collection of levies under law and regulation are those of the duly organized established agency, Manitoba Pork. It is entirely within their responsibility to ensure that these levies be collected. I have assisted Manitoba Pork by calling in some of the principals, of those who have been in arrears in forwarding these levies to Manitoba Pork, and let it be known very clearly that this government expects all levies owing to Manitoba Pork to be paid.

My understanding is that most of them, if not all of them, have in fact been paid. I would have to defer to specific advice from Manitoba Pork, but certainly the biggest amount of them have been paid, and my expectation is that all of them will be paid upon the implementation of the more flexible marketing system which will commence on July 1.

Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, I want to ask the minister why he made a commitment in the House that they would be looking into the matter when he says that his department cannot do anything. They have, in fact, not taken any action and in fact there is $300,000 in levy outstanding.

Why did he say in December that they would be doing something when in actual fact his department has done nothing to collect these levies?

Mr. Enns: Madam Speaker, I appreciate the format that we have fallen under. I mean opposition members get to ask three questions and even though they get the answer in the first question they ask, they have to persist carrying on with the second question.

Madam Speaker, the Department of Agriculture, the Manitoba government, does not have the responsibility, more importantly, the legal statutory authority to collect the levies. Manitoba Pork does. I have made it very plain that I expect all levies to be fully paid up prior to any change in the marketing structure.

Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, since the minister says he expects all levies to be collected, and there are outstanding levies, some $300,000, is the minister telling us then that he will not move towards dual marketing, he will stay with the same system if those levies are not collected? He expects them to collect it. They do not have the ability to collect them. Is he going to delay dual marketing?

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.

Mr. Enns: The honourable member is simply wrong. Manitoba Pork has the ability to collect them, and if they are not voluntarily offered, then there are procedures prescribed under the regulations to enforce the collection of any outstanding levies. I believe she is also wrong in the figures that she is quoting.

My understanding is the bulk of the levies have in fact all been collected. There may be some individual counts--and I note that just this week the manager of Manitoba Pork sent out a letter to all hog producers reminding them that all levies owing must indeed be paid up. My expectation is that most hog producers, who are law-abiding citizens of the province, will abide by the direction.

Dwayne Archie Johnston

Parole Hearing

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Justice.

I wonder if the minister could table any correspondence that she has received from the National Parole Board concerning the upcoming April hearing of Dwayne Archie Johnston.

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I will look and see what, if any, correspondence has arrived regarding any decision or information sought by the National Parole Board.

Mr. Robinson: Madam Speaker, I will combine two questions in one. I would like to also ask the minister if she will table the written presentation by this government concerning the audit done by the National Parole Board on Mr. Johnston. Also, I would like to ask the minister whether she will have a representative, or not, from her department at the day parole hearing or risk assessment hearing of Mr. Johnston tomorrow.

Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Speaker, again, I will take as notice any documents received from the National Parole Board and get back to the member, as well as any information about representation on the hearing tomorrow.

* (1410)

Treaty Land Entitlements

Resolution

Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the First Minister (Mr. Filmon).

Over a month ago, on March 1, Ron Staple, the vice-president and general manager of Repap Manitoba, wrote to him requesting him to finally get serious in resolving the outstanding treaty land entitlement issues.

I would like to ask the Premier whether he agrees with Repap, and others, that the treaty land entitlement issue is an extremely important issue and that to leave it unresolved any longer would be a serious mistake and that it is in everyone’s interest that it be finally resolved.

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister responsible for Native Affairs): Madam Speaker, I must indicate to the member for The Pas that I agree wholeheartedly, as does this government, that this is a very important issue. We certainly want to see it resolved as quickly as possible in a fair manner.

As the member well knows, and he has been involved in over the years in his involvement in local government in his own community, there are a number of responsibilities between various parties. There is some dispute between us and the federal government, but the Province of Manitoba is certainly willing to get on with the issue of dealing with our obligation with land. I am pleased to tell him that we are working towards that end very diligently.

Mr. Lathlin: Madam Speaker, does the Premier (Mr. Filmon) agree with the mayor and council of the Town of The Pas, who also wrote to him recently, that the dispute involving the Mathias Colomb Cree Nation’s efforts to protect its traditional territory has at its root the issue of treaty land entitlement? If he does, when is the Premier going to finally put something into action and quit sloughing off his responsibilities to others?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, with all due respect to the member for The Pas, we as a government are very much trying to settle so many of these outstanding aboriginal issues.

I would point out to him that just a few weeks ago, joined with his colleague the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) and the member for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson), we attended at Nelson House to sign the third Northern Flood Agreement. We have signed agreements within the last number of months withYork Landing. We are involved in, I think, the beginning of a very crucial process to resolve the remaining Northern Flood Agreement. We have been working very diligently to resolve Treaty Land Entitlement, and we have achieved in our tenure of office far more than governments before us. So I think this is not a time to get into the partisan battles, quite frankly; it is time to look at the issues and move the parties towards resolution.

I can tell him with respect to his question that we are very serious, that I have regular discussions with the Treaty Land Entitlement chiefs. We are exploring ways in which to resolve at least the issues between the province and the Treaty Land Entitlement communities. If the federal government is not prepared to do their part, so be it, but we are willing to do ours, and we are trying to find ways and mechanisms to achieve that.

Mr. Lathlin: Madam Speaker, could I ask the First Minister one more question? That is, since most Manitobans, including Repap, Town of The Pas, and not to mention the authors of the AJI report, support the resolution of Treaty Land Entitlement, why is this Premier continuing to stand in isolation of others in opposing the final resolution of Treaty Land Entitlement? What is motivating him to do nothing?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, we have sat in this Chamber since the beginning of Question Period, and we have heard members of the member for The Pas’ party continually ask my colleagues here about money for health care, money for other things, and yet the member for The Pas gets up and wants us to make a payment of some $20 million for which we have no responsibility. I ask him, which hospital should we take it out of? Which services?

Madam Speaker, this government is firmly committed to meeting our obligation, which is to provide unoccupied Crown land. This Premier, who has kept very close to these discussions with this minister, is firmly committed to meeting our land obligations, and we are exploring with the Treaty Land chiefs the means to do that. I am sure he would agree that the obligations here with the federal government are not being met, and we should have a united stand as a province to ensure that Ottawa lives up to its responsibility to all Manitobans and aboriginal Manitobans, and his seeking a divided position simply means we would have to pay money that is not our responsibility.

Grow Bonds Program

Woodstone Technologies

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Rural Development.

In the summer and fall of 1993, the Grow Bond office negotiated with and approved issuance of a Grow Bond to Woodstone Technology. It was then called Woodstone Foods.

Did the minister approve the planned issuance of the Grow Bond at the end of 1993? Did he give his approval to that process?

Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Development): Madam Speaker, there is a process by which all Grow Bonds are approved, and first of all, it is the community that is involved in any Grow Bond initiative through a Grow Bond corporation; secondly, we have a review committee which does recommend to government with respect to all Grow Bonds that are entered into. So there is a process that is negotiated or is proceeded with in all Grow Bond projects. To date, we have some 20 Grow Bonds in this province that have been entered into by Manitobans throughout this province. Indeed, significant dollars have been invested in these projects and have indeed provided a good amount of capital investment into our province on various projects.

With regard to Woodstone, Madam Speaker, there was a process that was entered into, and that process was followed.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, I think that was a yes.

Madam Speaker, did the minister then approve the expenditures of Woodstone, submitted in writing by the company in December of 1993, as quite appropriate under the terms and intentions of the Grow Bond, which his government had approved?

Mr. Derkach: Madam Speaker, a Grow Bond is entered into when a company wishes to either set up in this province, and it has to be a Manitoba company, or if a company that is already operating in this province as a Manitoba company wishes to expand its operations. In the case of Woodstone, the intent of the Grow Bond was to provide for the expansion of Woodstone products, which would allow for greater employment in the community of Portage la Prairie and also increase the production of Woodstone, and it was with that intention that the money was invested in by many of the people within the Portage area and in Manitoba.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, why then did the minister not act to protect investors by requiring Woodstone to change its offering memorandum to reflect the fact that the monies that were spent and accounted for to your office in December of 1993 were not spent for the purposes in the offering memorandum which was issued some three months later? Why did he not act to cause the memorandum to reflect reality and to protect the investors whose money is now very much at risk?

Mr. Derkach: Well, Madam Speaker, our information comes from the company through an audited statement that comes to us on an annual basis. The information that comes to us also comes from our Grow Bond officers who are working in the field with the company. It is in that way that we get the information as to whether or not the intentions of the company are realized and proceeded with. The information that I received was that indeed the expansions of the company were proceeded with to ensure that the production of the company was in fact doubled, or its capacity to produce products was doubled, and it was the people in my department and the Grow Bond corporation who monitor and work with the company to ensure that indeed those funds are invested in an appropriate fashion.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.