LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Thursday, December 10,
1992
The House met at 1.30 p.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Mr. Speaker: I have
reviewed the petition of the honourable member for Crescentwood (Ms.
Gray). It complies with the privileges
and the practices of the House, and it complies with the rules (by leave). Is it the will of the House to have the
petition read?
To the Legislature of the
WHEREAS each year smoke from stubble burning descends
upon the
WHEREAS the Parents Support Group of Children with Asthma
has long criticized the harmful effects of stubble burning; and
WHEREAS the smoke caused from stubble burning is not
healthy for the general public and tends to aggravate the problems of asthma
sufferers and people with chronic lung problems; and
WHEREAS alternative practices to stubble burning are
necessitated by the fact that the smoke can place some people in life‑threatening
situations; and
WHEREAS the 1987 Clean Environment Commission Report on
Public Hearings, "Investigation of Smoke Problems from Agriculture Crop
Residue and Peatland Burning," contained the recommendation that a review
of the crop residue burning situation be conducted in five years' time,
including a re‑examination of the necessity for legislated regulatory
control.
THEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that the
Legislative Assembly will urge the government of
TABLING OF REPORTS
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the Annual
Report 1992 for the
Hon. James Downey (Minister responsible for and charged with
the administration of The Communities Economic Development Fund Act): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the
Communities Economic Development Fund Report for the year ended March 31, 1992.
Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister responsible for the
administration of The Crown Corporations Public Review and Accountability Act): Mr. Speaker, a number
of quarterly reports, many of which have been made public previously, so I am
formally tabling: the First Quarterly
Report of the Manitoba Liquor Control Commission ending June 30, the Third
Quarterly Report of the
*
(1335)
Introduction of Guests
Mr. Speaker: Prior to
Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the
gallery, where we have with us this afternoon, 16 student council members from
the
Also this afternoon, we have twenty‑five students,
Grades 9 and 11, from the
On behalf of all honourable members, I would like to
welcome you here this afternoon.
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Health Care Facilities
Pediatric Bed Closures
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, last year I asked the Premier
(Mr. Filmon) a number of questions on the specific reductions in beds that were
contained within the government's planning, and the Premier refused to answer
the question. Subsequent to that, we
proposed a motion on the floor of the Estimates of the Department of
Health. Unfortunately, the government
defeated a motion to have the specific decisions of cuts that would be
juxtaposition to the so‑called reform in the reform package so that we
could have an intelligent debate about the so‑called plan of action. Unfortunately, the government defeated the
motion supported by the Liberals last May.
Subsequent to that‑‑[interjection] Do not be
touchy, do not be touchy. Subsequent to
that, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health announced some 34 bed closings for
children's services and that number has grown.
Our information is that there will be 17 consolidated new beds at the
Children's Hospital and that will be combined with cutbacks of 48 beds at St.
Boniface Hospital, between six to 10 beds at the
I would like to ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon): What is the government's impact study on the
number of beds that will be lost to children in the city of
Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my honourable
friend's sudden interest in this issue.
Let me indicate to my honourable friend that some of the
information he is putting on the record is accurate information, but let me
give my honourable friend some background as to how we have been working to
arrive at these kinds of decisions which are system‑wide in their nature,
not driven by individual hospital's desires, et cetera, but rather driven
across policies that apply across the system which delivers health care to a
little over one million people in
First of all, my honourable friend would be interested in
knowing that at St. Boniface Hospital, a number of beds were to be retired and
an Urban Hospital Council decision based on recommendations from October of
1991 have further, Mr. Speaker, led to the consolidation of children's
pediatric beds and services at Children's Hospital. The reason for that‑‑and St.
Boniface I will deal with directly since my honourable friend raised it‑‑is
because at St. Boniface Hospital the occupancy rate of those 48 pediatric beds
was approximately 35 percent. So I think
it is easy to see that there were probably in excess of 30 empty beds for
pediatric service at St. Boniface.
At the same time, Sir, we had Children's Hospital, which
has been in operation for some 10 years as a centre for excellence for
pediatric care, to care for the children of
*
(1340)
Mr. Doer: Mr.
Speaker, this is the problem in this debate.
We had announcements last May; we had asked for specific information
last June; we asked for specific information from the Premier (Mr. Filmon) last
year, who would not give us that information.
I do not know whether this is a government‑wide
initiative led by cabinet or just the Minister of Health, because we cannot get
any answers from the Premier, just the same way as it happened in
We want to know what the overall picture is and what the
impact is going to be, because we have a lot of people at the line level, a lot
of volunteers at the line level who are worried about the impact on children of
the consolidation of 17 beds at the Health Sciences Centre being opened and
some 67 beds being closed for a net reduction of 50 beds in the system. If those numbers are wrong, we would have
asked the minister to provide those before to us so we could operate out of the
same set of figures that he must have somewhere in his files.
Mr. Speaker, how can the government make an announcement
two or three weeks ago and have the numbers change so radically three weeks
later? Is it a result of the budget
decisions that are trickling down into the health facilities, and what impact
will this have on the children of
Mr. Orchard: Mr.
Speaker, my honourable friend touched on the issue of how these changes will be
able to meet the medical needs of children in the province. That is exactly what we have been dealing
with with the Urban Hospital Council and professionals across the health care
system to assure that decisions made will provide good quality health care for
those children in
My honourable friend should understand that while St.
Boniface's pediatric unit was occupied at approximately 35 percent, the
Children's Hospital was being utilized, bearing in mind 11 beds that have never
been brought into service, six beds that were not used currently at Health
Sciences Centre Children's Hospital, the occupancy rate was under 70 percent,
69.5 percent, to be exact.
Mr. Speaker, with the commissioning of the additional
beds, we are able to provide the services to children from St. Boniface, from
Misericordia, from Grace and from the other hospitals and only have, Sir, an
occupancy rate based on past experience of 79 percent at Children's
Hospital. We can assure those kinds of
needs for services to children will be met in the new configuration and what
better place than‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please.
Mr. Doer: There
are people and volunteers at the line level who believe that this reduction of 50
beds for children will have a profound impact, a negative impact, on the health
services available for our children in the province, so we ask the minister to
table his studies on this, because his numbers keep changing from his own press
conference three weeks ago to our questions that our Health critic asked two
weeks ago. They keep changing and
changing.
A further question to the Minister of Health, and we are
trying to be as accurate as we get from the community, Mr. Speaker, because the
minister will not table his material: We
have been informed that the children's rehab centre, which had 20 beds, have
had those beds closed, the beds that are for residential beds for children
needing rehabilitation, and that they are going to change those 20 beds into
day programs. We have been further
informed that there has been no financial decisions made by the government
about funding those day beds in terms of those children.
Has the minister got the impact study of what those
additional 20 beds lost to the system will mean, and what impact will it be on
children in terms of the day program? Is
there funding in place for all those people in terms of those children who
could be adversely affected again by the changing numbers that we keep getting
from the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), we think, more on the basis of
cutbacks than on the basis of reform?
Mr. Orchard: Mr.
Speaker, again my honourable friend does not seem willing or able to
acknowledge that with the consolidation of pediatric programs from all of the
hospitals currently providing that service, with significantly underutilized
pediatric wards in all of the hospitals‑‑35 percent utilization at
St. Boniface‑‑even with that consolidation to Children's Hospital,
the occupancy rate will be 79 percent.
That is sufficient capacity in one institution, which is our centre for
excellence for children's health care.
Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend uses the concerns of
volunteers. Maybe my honourable friend
should carefully consider the statement of the acting director of Children's
Hospital who said: Children's health
care will be met at Children's Hospital, and all the needs will be met there
because they have the expertise, the ability and the capacity.
Now, let me deal with children's rehab centre. Yes, Mr. Speaker, the occupancy rate there
was approximately 15 percent; in other words, of 20 beds, there may have been
two, three or four occupied at any given time.
Sir, those services again for inpatient can be provided with the
existing capacity at Children's Hospital.
Surely my honourable friend would not argue against the
enhancement of outpatient services, community‑based services out of the
rehab hospital. That is health care
reform.
*
(1345)
Mental Health Care
System
Community‑Based
Services
Ms. Judy Wasylycia‑Leis (
I would like to ask the minister if he will be totally
forthcoming with the people in this Legislature and outside the Legislature
about the exact number of beds being cut from
Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, if my honourable friend had been
present at the official opening today of the psych health building, she would
have heard from myself, as well as from officials there, that the new building
is very much a part of community mental health services because, Sir, part of
the regime of care at the new psych health building is office and central
location for 13 workers delivering community mental health services in the core
area based out of that facility and working in the community, Sir.
In addition to that, Sir, that facility provides
inpatient care for adults, for adolescents, forensic care and teaching roles
which were not able to be adequately delivered in the old facilities.
In addition to that, Sir, there is provision for space
for a mobile crisis team, community‑oriented mental health service to
deliver care in the community.
In addition to that, Sir, I will provide more information
after the next question.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: What the
minister has just said is shocking and appalling. He is saying community‑based services
are going to be housed in an institution.
Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Minister of Health (Mr.
Orchard), since all the research in the field shows that it is absolutely
imperative for community‑based services to be in the community,
accessible to people and not in threatening institutions, will he give this
House assurances today that any community‑based alternatives he is
developing, and goodness knows we are desperately anxious to see some details,
will he assure us that those services will not be housed in the new psych
health services building?
Mr. Orchard: Mr.
Speaker, I am absolutely astounded at my honourable friend's lack of
knowledge. My honourable friend is
saying that community mental health workers working with citizens in the core
area do not need a base to operate from.
Are they expected to operate from a corner of the street? No, they need office space, and, Sir, that
office space is part of‑‑[interjection] Well, my honourable friend
says they do not. Well, maybe that is her idea of how you provide services,
that you do not have a home base to operate out of.
Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the community support groups,
the support group of manic depression, of schizophrenia would be very, very
offended by my honourable friend's comment that they should not be part of the
psych health building, because again, as consumer support groups, both of those
groups are going to have offices in psych health to help the people who are
there become part of the community again in must faster order.
My honourable friend's comments would offend those
organizations who are‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please.
*
(1350)
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Mr.
Speaker, the minister has recommendations on his‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please. The honourable member for
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Let me ask
the minister once more if he will tell us and the people of
Mr. Orchard: Mr.
Speaker, let me deal with two of the issues my honourable friend has
raised. I hope to be able to provide her
with some comfort in these answers.
Mr. Speaker, I think it was in June of this year that we
accepted the Urban Hospital Council recommendation to replace the inpatient
services at
Subsequent to that, in terms of the first phase of the
reform document‑‑and here I will have to stand corrected on the
number, but I believe St. Boniface Hospital has indicated that they would take
from service 24 of their psychiatric beds.
Mr. Speaker, we have agreed with that.
Mr. Speaker, none of those beds have been taken out of
service as we speak. When they are taken
out of services, the range of community supported alternatives will be in
place, like mobile crisis team, housed in the new psych health building, like
community mental health workers, 13 of whom will be home based out of the psych
health, like additional funding to our self‑help groups that we announced
some six weeks ago, much to the light of those self‑help groups.
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please.
MATTER OF PRIVILEGE
Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis (
Mr. Speaker, today and in the past we have consistently
been confronted with a minister who will not provide the same information to
elected members here in this House as he is willing to provide to some groups
and individuals outside of this House.
We have heard examples today with respect to pediatrics. Today, I have
asked very specific questions about information pertaining to bed closures and
details of alternative plans.
Mr. Speaker, I will table as evidence, in making this
motion of the minister's disregard for the rights and privileges of members in
this House and his callous treatment of our democratic principles, I will table
material that his department has been circulating among select groups in our
communities about the psychiatric bed closures, clearly spelling out the exact
numbers of beds being closed at St. Boniface, at Misericordia and at Grace, and
that number totals 60. It is our concern‑‑
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: This is
not a question of unsatisfactory answers.
This is a question of privileges of members in this House being denied
and our democratic principles eroded.
I would, therefore, like to move that the matter of
discrepancies and the matter of withholding of information that is available to
the public and provided to the public by the Minister of Health is dealt with,
that the breach of our privileges is considered in this regard and that the
matter in fact be dealt with by the Committee on Privileges and Elections.
Hon. Clayton Manness (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I refer you to Beauchesne's 415
which says, "A question of privilege or point of order raised during the
Question Period ought to be taken up after the Question Period, unless the
Speaker considers it to be an extremely grave matter."
I also refer to Beauchesne's Rule 416 (1) which says,
"A Minister may decline to answer a question without stating the reason
for refusing, and insistence on an answer is out of order, with no debate being
allowed." This is the key
point. "A refusal to answer cannot
be raised as a question of privilege."
Mr. Speaker, this is totally out of order. You cannot even listen to a request for
privilege in a case like this. It is out
of order at this time.
*
(1355)
Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, the government House leader
should perhaps also be aware that Beauchesne's is very clear that a question of
privilege must be brought to the attention of the House at the first possible
opportunity. That is Beauchesne's
Citation 115.
We have had matters of privilege raised in this House,
Mr. Speaker, prior to Question Period, during Question Period and after
Question Period, so that in and of itself is hardly sufficient to negate a
matter of privilege.
Also, I would point out to the member that it is not a
question‑‑and also to the Premier (Mr. Filmon), who seems to wish
also to act as Speaker at times in this House‑‑that the matter she
raised was not in regard to inadequate answers.
We know on this side, we would be up on a daily basis if we were able to
raise matters of privilege in terms of inadequate answers, particularly from
the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard).
What she raised as a matter of privilege, Mr. Speaker, I
think is very indicative of the increasingly arrogant attitude of this
government in providing information outside of this House and refusing to
provide that information to members of this House including when that
information is asked for in Question Period. The member for
I say, Mr. Speaker, your ruling as to whether this is a prima
facie case of privilege, I think you should address the question of what role
this Legislature plays when one has a government that is so arrogant they will
not provide information on fundamental important public issues such as health
to members of the opposition. That
should be a matter of privilege.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Second Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, Beauchesne's and through the
rules we will see that interference of any kind with the official duties are
breaches of privilege of any member. I
think it is primarily your responsibility to ensure that in fact there was no
deliberate withholding of information that MLAs of this Chamber should have
had. One would like to believe all
ministers and members are honourable, that their intentions are good and that
information that is necessary for all of us to be able to have in a very open
process, that we should do away with the games playing.
It is more important that this information, because it is
in fact a privilege that we do have inside this Chamber, is provided for us, so
my opinion, Mr. Speaker, given the seriousness of this particular matter of
privilege, is that you take it under advisement and come back with whether or
not you believe that this is in fact a deliberate withholding of information
that in fact MLAs would be entitled to.
Mr. Speaker: I would
like to thank all honourable members for their advice on this matter. Indeed, as I have done in the past, I will
take this matter under advisement, consult with the authorities and come back
to the House with a ruling.
Health Care System
Information Release
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister
of Health.
Mr. Speaker, the health action plan has the right goals,
but a flawed process can undermine even the best intentions. The normal newsletter of the MMA reports of a
meeting between the MMA and the Deputy Minister of Health. It reports that the Deputy Minister told the
MMA that the government has various studies which will outline the number of
bed closures, but these studies will not all be released to the public and the
physicians.
Mr. Speaker, we want the health action plan to succeed.
People are concerned, but we want the minister to tell us why, when the beds
are being closed, the information is not being made public.
*
(1400)
Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Well, Mr. Speaker, the information is being
made public. That is why we had, first
of all, the action plan which identified a number of beds which were going to
be closed to two teaching hospitals.
Subsequent to that, last month, we identified the nature of 264 of those
beds in a very open process. In addition
to that, in approximately May of this year, we indicated to the House that we
were accepting the Urban Hospital Council recommendation, for instance, on the
closure of the psychiatric beds at Misericordia and replacement with community‑based
services.
That is the question my honourable friends have been
asking me, and every step of the way, we have been providing them with as much
advanced notice on decisions around bed closures and refocusing of the services
as we can. That was the process a month
ago. The process yesterday was on the
complete consolidation of pediatrics.
Mr. Speaker, there are no hidden agendas when we have the
information that we can share with integrity, when we are assured that we are
going to be able to deliver those services adequately in the system in a
reconfigured bed structure, community service alignment structure. We make the announcements and announce the
intentions to retire from service certain beds.
That has been the most open process in
Pediatric Bed Closures
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, we would like to believe that,
but that is not the case. It is a very
serious matter when the minister is saying the process is open when one of the
deputy ministers would go to a meeting and would tell them it is not open. It is a very serious matter. We want him to succeed, but people must know
how the services are going to be delivered.
Can the minister tell us how the services in the
Children's Hospital are going to be delivered as an outpatient as well as the
relocation of other resources when we are dislodging so many patients, which
everyone thinks is a good plan, but we must have the right answer to implement
that plan? Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, on the specifics of the
pediatric beds, I simply want to give my honourable friend as much assurance
around this issue as I can because, Sir, you have to appreciate that this was a
topic that the Urban Hospital Council gave consideration to. Mid‑year last year, it was agreed that
there was an opportunity for consolidation of pediatric services to Children's
Hospital.
Subsequent to that, the CEOs and the caregivers have
analyzed the opportunity to consolidate to Children's Hospital. They believe that they can offer the quality
services in at least as fine a fashion as was currently provided at other
hospitals, entirely at one centre of excellence, namely, Children's
Hospital. That, in essence, is what the
acting director indicated in the media yesterday, because as the director of
that Children's Hospital facility, she has every confidence that they can meet
the children's in‑patient needs in children who have currently been
carried out in several other facilities.
That is why I accepted the recommendation.
Bed Closure
Protocol
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, many experts in the field are
not questioning the goals of the minister.
They simply want more information.
Mr. Speaker, one of the recommendations in the health
action plan was to put protocols in place six months prior to closing of
beds. Can the minister tell us today,
where are those protocols? At least,
patients should know what kind of services they are going to receive, where
they are going to go, and more importantly, people who are going to deliver
services have to know how they are going to be functioning.
Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, let me deal with that in two
parts.
First of all, emergency services at hospitals will still
be able to provide emergency care to children if presenting at various
community hospitals, including the teaching hospital, St. Boniface. The only service that is being consolidated
to one centre of excellence is the in‑patient services, the actual
services that require the admission to an acute care bed.
Mr. Speaker, I have every confidence that the protocols
that have been used for admission across the system for children will serve the
admission needs of children in one centre of excellence, Children's
Hospital. We in fact, with that facility
can meet the longstanding goal of providing excellent service in one centre of
excellence, the Children's Hospital.
That is why it is the Children's Hospital‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please.
Pharmacare
Claim Deadline
Mr. Conrad Santos (Broadway): Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the honourable Minister
of Health, this Progressive Conservative government is like a hard master,
heartless and cruel, who likes to reap where its trod not, and who likes to
gather where he has trod not.
There are now a growing number of Manitobans, Mr.
Speaker, who found out too late that because of arbitrarily changing of the
rules on the filing of medicare, they have lost their refund claim of at least
$300,000.
I have with me a set of 12 letters from different
organizations which I would like to table, protesting this move.
My question is:
Will the honourable Minister of Health, in the face of this mounting
opposition, reconsider the rules about deadline of filing medicare claims?
Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, in, I think it was, late
December last year, I made the announcement that the deadline for filing of
April 30 would be a finite deadline.
Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that some Manitobans, for
whatever series of reasons, did not file before April 30. That is regrettable, but to revisit the issue
and to reopen that issue would be something I cannot consider now. I do not think the decision was an
unreasonable decision, because bear in mind that the Pharmacare receipts that
are needed to make the claim are in the individual's possession on December 31
of any given year. We have allowed four
full months, Sir, to make that application for refund, and we have urged
Manitobans to apply as soon as possible after December 31‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please.
Mr. Santos: Mr.
Speaker, we are all human.
Will the minister admit that he has made a wrong decision
and reverse this in the next fiscal year's budget, or at least will the
minister accept extreme illness or death in the family as reasons for
justifiable delay?
Mr. Orchard: Mr.
Speaker, I am compelled to indicate to my honourable friend that again every
receipt necessary to achieve a refund is in the individual's possession as of
the end of December of the filing year.
You know, we have made the provision of four months thereafter to make
the refund at their leisure, and we would fully reimburse the individuals.
Mr. Speaker, I cannot answer for circumstances of why
individuals were unable to meet that filing deadline four months into the next
year, after they have had the receipts.
Sir, it is with regret, but government has to have programs available to
all Manitobans with some consistency of approach, and with regret, I have to
say the decision is one that we will adhere to.
Mr. Santos: My final
supplementary, Mr. Speaker, will the honourable Minister of Health cease and
desist from being a willing agent of this cruel and heartless government in
imposing this confiscation of entire funds instead of just claiming some kind
of a late penalty?
Mr. Orchard: Mr.
Speaker, my honourable friend has really got me in a terrible box with that
question, because to even acknowledge the question, would admit to the
premise. There is no one other than
narrow‑minded New Democrats who would ever call this government cruel and
heartless.
*
(1410)
Education System
Funding Formula
Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): Mr. Speaker, the member for Pembina (Mr.
Orchard) should have been at Waskada last night. Some 300 people were
congregated in the
My question is to the Premier. Will the Premier now acknowledge that the
funding formula that this government has put in place is offloading education
costs on a continuing basis to school divisions, to property owners in
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Mr. Speaker, of course, the preamble by the
member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) is absolute nonsense. The goal of this
government is to have a fair and a reasonable funding formula. Fairness and reason were never
characteristics of the government that he was a part of, so I know that he
would have difficulty understanding that.
The funding formula has been hailed by people throughout
the province as providing‑‑
An Honourable Member: Name
them.
Mr. Filmon:
Some Honourable Members:
Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please.
Mr. Filmon: ‑‑have
been hailed for bringing forward, not only a fair and a reasonable, but a
sensible way of funding for the public schools in
Mr. Speaker, if we continue to provide funding for the
public schools in excess of inflation, and they continue to spend well beyond
those levels, the reality is that they then have to face their taxpayers and
justify why they want to spend that money well over and above, not only
inflation, but well over and above the funding levels that are given by this
provincial government.
This provincial government has provided fairness and
equity that was never seen from the New Democrats when they were in government.
Mr. Storie: Mr.
Speaker, the only school divisions in the province of
Mr. Speaker, in the notice that was sent out to the
parents who attended the
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please. The honourable member for Flin
Flon (Mr. Storie), time is extremely scarce.
Put your question, please.
Mr. Storie: Mr.
Speaker, will the First Minister now acknowledge that this funding formula is
making property tax owners in every constituency in every school division pay
more, while this government continues to offload millions of dollars‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please.
Mr. Filmon: Mr.
Speaker, as usual, the member for Flin Flon is either ignorant or is
misrepresenting the facts, and in most cases, it is both. The reality is that this government has
continued to fund public schools in this province to more than the rate of
inflation increases. The reality is that
if school divisions want to insist on spending more than that, if they want to
go not only beyond inflation but beyond the increases beyond inflation that
they are given, that is a choice that they make. They then have to face their
own ratepayers in order to justify that choice.
Mr. Speaker, we have been fair, we have been reasonable,
we have been equitable, something that was never done by the former New
Democratic government.
Mr. Storie: Mr.
Speaker, the fact of the matter is and the Premier knows it, that increased
support to private schools‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order,
please. The honourable member for Flin
Flon, kindly put your question, please.
Mr. Storie: My final
question to the First Minister: Will the
First Minister now, perhaps with the support of the Minister of Education (Mrs.
Vodrey), call together a committee consisting of the Manitoba Association of
School Trustees, The Manitoba Teachers' Society, the Manitoba Association of
School Superintendents, to correct the flaws that are apparent in the school
funding formula that is going to increase property taxes in communities like
Waskada by 40 percent over the next two years?
Mr. Filmon: Mr.
Speaker, this government has consistently provided additional funding to public
schools over and above the rate of inflation.
This government has provided increases in health care, in education, in
family services, not only that exceed inflation, but indeed by substantial
amounts in many cases. As a result, in
this budget year, we are spending a greater portion of our budget on health,
education and family services than ever was spent by the New Democrats when
they were in office. They cannot argue
with those facts because they are true.
Workers Compensation
Board
Physiotherapy
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
I received a letter that causes a great deal of concern
for all of those injured workers in the province. As the minister is aware, there are
negotiations currently that are ongoing between Workers Compensation and the
private practice of physiotherapists.
There is a threat out there that they will stop treating Workers
Compensation patients if the dispute is in fact not resolved. The primary reason, from what I understand,
for this is because Workers Compensation is imposing that they pay a set fee
for a particular condition such as capitation.
Mr. Speaker, physiotherapists directing Workers
Compensation patients to the hospital is an alternative that they are looking
at. My question to the minister is: Will the minister report on the status of the
negotiations and tell us why the WCB is dictating to the physiotherapists without
enough opportunity for consultation?
Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister responsible for and charged
with the administration of The Workers Compensation Act): Mr. Speaker, I would point out to the member
for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) that certainly the concern that he has about
provision of services is always one that I think the Workers Compensation
Board, their chair, the administration and certainly this government shares
with him.
But I would point out to him, when there are negotiations
going on between any agency, business or organization and the people from whom
they are purchasing services, there is always information that flows out, that
often opposition critics are used as a vehicle to intervene in those
negotiations.
I have great confidence in the board. I have great confidence in the new chair of
that board, Professor Wally Fox‑Decent, that the best interests of the
Workers Compensation Board and their claimants will be looked after. I think it is probably best not to become
involved in a public debate, which what is in essence a collective bargaining
situation, that is best settled at the bargaining table rather than in the
public realm.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr.
Speaker, if an agreement is not reached, you are going to have injured workers
who are going to be put in a situation where they have to go to the hospitals,
if this dispute is not resolved by the end of the month.
My question is to the Minister of Health (Mr.
Orchard): What arrangements has the
Department of Health made to accommodate this potential increased demand for
the services of physiotherapists working in the hospitals, given that by the
end of the month, there might not be any agreement within Workers Compensation
and there is already a current backlog in the hospitals?
Mr. Praznik: Mr.
Speaker, again I would point out to the member for
I would just suggest to him, in the interests of the
claimants of Workers Compensation, of the Workers Compensation system and in
the interests of collective bargaining, that those issues are being dealt with
by the board.
As I have indicated, I think members of this House should
have confidence in the chair of that board, Professor Wally Fox‑Decent,
to ensure that the claimants of the board are properly looked after, and yet
the interests of the board in their negotiations are not compromised by making
or taking issues and trying to create the public hype that fuels one side in
those negotiations.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr.
Speaker, there is a six‑month waiting list in order for an injured worker‑‑if
they are put in a situation of having to go into the hospital. That is in fact in the best interests of the
worker, that something is being done.
Mr. Speaker, my question then is, in the cases of
extended treatment, that the physiotherapists attempt to recover their fees
directly from the patients involved, that is one of the things that is at least
being talked about.
Can the minister give us some assurance that in fact the
worker will not have to pay for any potential fees from a physiotherapist
because of a change in system from this current board?
*
(1420)
Mr. Praznik: Mr.
Speaker, I can assure the honourable member that whatever entitlements under
The Workers Compensation Act that claimants are entitled to, they will be
provided.
Surely the member for
Those negotiations are going on. The board will ensure that the claimants
receive proper medical attention. If he
is suggesting to this House that the board should be instructed to write a
blank cheque, that would not be in the interests of anyone.
Manitoba Public
Insurance Corporation
No-Fault Insurance
Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the
minister responsible for MPIC.
When this minister was in opposition, Mr. Speaker, he
left the impression with the public of
Mr. Speaker, my question to the minister is, on behalf of
the people of
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister charged with the administration
of The Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation Act): Mr. Speaker, I am not sure which page of
which year the member is quoting from, but it has always been my position‑‑and
I hope that I have conveyed it consistently‑‑that I am prepared to
look at all aspects to make sure that we make insurance as reasonably priced
and as practical for the people of this province as much as possible.
The member for Brandon East knows full well that when we
have seen increases in the last three to four years that were as low as 2.5 and
varied in the 5 percent range, they were reasonable and practical results for
the people of the province. We are
seeing some very disturbing trends, however, this year.
Mr. Speaker: Time for
Oral Questions has expired.
Speaker's Ruling
Mr. Speaker: I have a
ruling for the House.
During Question Period on December 2, 1992, the honourable
member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), in posing questions, alleged that the Premier
buckled: ". . . in to a lobby led
by insurance agents, spearheaded by his own Minister of Government Services
(Mr. Ducharme) . . ." and that the minister in question was taking credit
for doing so.
Subsequently, the Minister of Government Services rose on
a matter of privilege and moved that the member for Thompson produce any
evidence supporting these allegations or apologize. After receiving advice from
the House, I took the matter under advisement.
The honourable minister fulfilled the first condition of
privilege by raising the matter at the first available opportunity. As to the second condition, that of
establishing a prima facie case, I am ruling that this is not a matter of
privilege.
Privilege, as defined by the authority, Joseph Maingot in
his book, Parliamentary Privilege in
In Beauchesne, Citation 25, Speaker Fraser of the House
of Commons says that privilege is what sets honourable members apart from other
citizens giving them rights which the public does not possess; parliamentary
privilege does not go much beyond the right of free speech in the House of
Commons and the right of a member to discharge his or her duties in the House
as a member of the House.
Beauchesne, Citation 69 states, and I quote: "It is very important . . . to indicate
that something can be inflammatory, can be disagreeable, can even be offensive,
but it may not be a question of privilege unless the comment actually impinges
upon the ability of Members . . . to do their job properly." Privilege,
Maingot asserts, is concerned with the special rights of members in their
capacity as members in their parliamentary work, not in their capacity as
ministers or party leaders, whips or parliamentary secretaries. Therefore, allegations reflecting on the
conduct of a minister in the performance of his or her ministerial duties do
not come within the purview of parliamentary privilege.
Bourinot from the Fourth Edition at page 51 states and I
quote, "libels or reflections upon Members individually have also been
considered as breaches of privilege which may be censured or punished by the
House; but it is distinctly laid down by all the authorities that to constitute
a breach of privilege such libels must concern the character or conduct of
Members in (the) capacity" as MLAs in their parliamentary work as distinct
from a minister. To constitute privilege
there must be some improper obstruction of the member in performing his or her
parliamentary work in either a direct or constructive way.
However, Beauchesne Citation 481(f) stipulates that one
Member must not make a personal charge against another. As I indicated in my ruling on August 3,
1988, it is unparliamentary to make a personal charge against another
member. I am, therefore, ruling that the
words used by the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) were unparliamentary and am
calling on him now to withdraw those words unequivocally.
Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, I note that it is not a matter of
privilege according to your ruling. That
is unfortunate, in a way, because I would have had the opportunity to provide
further information to members in regard to matters that were raised. If you are saying that, indeed, any comments
that I have made were unparliamentary, I have always had one rule in this House
since I was elected in 1981 of 11 years, and if I have inadvertently ever used
any language in the past I have always withdrawn that language. If any of the words I used were
unparliamentary, I certainly would withdraw them and would certainly abide by
your ruling. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker: I thank
the honourable member for Thompson.
NONPOLITICAL STATEMENTS
Mr. Jack Reimer (Niakwa):
Mr. Speaker, may I have permission to make a nonpolitical statement?
Mr. Speaker: Does the
honourable member for Niakwa have leave to make a nonpolitical statement?
[agreed]
Mr. Reimer: Mr.
Speaker, today in the city of
December 10 is a significant day to launch the
declaration of the International Year of the World's Indigenous People because
today is also International Human Rights Day.
I think it is essential to us as members of the Manitoba Legislature to
recognize this day in the upcoming year as one of great importance.
In