LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF
Thursday, April 29, 1993
The House met at 1:30 p.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
PRESENTING PETITIONS
Mr. Conrad Santos (Broadway): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of
Brian Lamirande, Annette Lamirande, Janice Lamirande and others requesting the
Family Services minister (Mr. Gilleshammer) consider restoring funding for the
friendship centres in
* * *
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second
Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of
J. Kendall, Rose‑Marie Gieni, B.G. Nunn and others urging the government
of
* * *
Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of
Nancy Hilliard, Rob Hilliard, Joanne Swayze and others requesting the Minister
of Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) to consider restoring funding of the
Student Social Allowances Program.
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 15 ESL
students. They are from the
On behalf of all honourable members,
I would like to welcome you here this afternoon.
ORAL QUESTION PERIOD
Federal Environmental
Review
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the First Minister
(Mr. Filmon).
Mr. Speaker, we have been raising
questions in this Chamber since April of 1991 to the government on the
Assiniboine diversion project. We have
raised questions about the scoping of the proposal, the magnitude of the
proposal and the need for federal‑provincial, basin‑wide reviews.
We felt that the project affects the
federal Fisheries Act, the Navigable Waters Act and potentially the First
Nations Long Plains, all of which come under federal jurisdiction, based on
precedent from the
I would like to ask the Premier (Mr.
Filmon) a question I have asked him in his Estimates and Question Period
before. Will he agree to have a federal‑provincial
environmental assessment to deal with the total basin‑wide concerns of
the proposed
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, we have entered into the
provincial process in terms of the Clean Environment Commission review. The member knows full well that the federal
authorities will make a decision based on their criteria whether or not they
believe there needs to be work done that they require for their‑‑any
permitting requirements that they would have.
Mr. Speaker, this is not any
different than a number of other projects that have been undertaken, and it
will be handled by the book.
Legal Opinion
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, the Premier knows, in his
Estimates, I have asked him, on the one hand, how can we have a position about
the downstream impact of Rafferty‑Alameda and not have the same
comparable position for federal‑provincial environmental assessments on
the Assiniboine diversion projects for communities upstream and downstream on
the
I would like to ask the Premier, in
light of the decisions that have been made on the Oldman River‑‑again
a project to divert water from the water system for a few users affecting other
users‑‑in light of the decision that has been made by the federal
courts on Rafferty‑Alameda, will he now tell us whether he has a legal
opinion that will substantiate the proposed way the government is going, and
that is to proceed on a provincial study without a federal‑provincial
assessment?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): It is interesting that this born‑again
environmentalist, who was part of a government that did not conduct a public
environmental assessment review on the biggest project in the history of this
province, the Limestone Generating Station, just absolutely swept it aside with
no public environmental assessment review, is now starting to become an expert
on the requirements for the federal intervention in this.
The federal government has lawyers;
they have a department that is charged with the responsibility of meeting the
requirements of their act. It is the
federal government that must decide whether or not this project meets the
criteria under their act for a federal review.
It is not this government that makes
that decision; it is the federal government.
If he knew anything about environmental assessment, he should at least
understand that.
* (1335)
Mr. Doer: I asked
the Premier a simple question: Does he
have a legal opinion?
We know that the federal
government's inaction on the Rafferty‑Alameda, the Conservative federal
government's inaction on the
I ask the Premier again: Does he have a legal opinion to justify
proceeding on a unilateral basis with the
Mr. Filmon:
The process does not work that we proceed on a unilateral basis. The process works that the project is put out
for review by both levels of government under their acts as to whether or not
it requires a public environmental assessment and review, and we have already
determined that obviously it does under our act and we are giving it that
review.
The federal government has the
responsibility to do the same thing, and the federal government are very fully
aware of the issue of Rafferty‑Alameda, of the
Obviously their lawyers are very
conscious of what their legal responsibilities are, and they have court cases
to ensure that they are documented as to what their requirements are. The federal government will make that
decision as their act calls for, Mr. Speaker.
Information Release
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): A new question to the Premier. Since 1991 there have been biologists talking
about the impact downstream in Selkirk; there have been people in Brandon‑‑in
fact, I believe the City Council of Brandon passed a motion opposing this
proposal.
There are people who have been raising
legitimate concerns on the
The government just made a statement
about unilateral action. Well, the City
of
I would like to ask the Premier
again: Will this material be available
to all interveners and will we have a proper environmental assessment, or are
we going to have unilateral action by the Manitoba Environment department as
cited?
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, the member is misrepresenting the
process. The fact is that information
will be made available in response to the questions. That will be part of the
process.
The concern that the member
continually wants to raise from that side of the House about whether or not
there is some different way or some approach to this review that we have
ignored is totally wrong. We are taking
every precaution. We are cognizant of
any concerns that might be raised around this issue and we will take very great
care to make sure that the commission responds appropriately, and that is the
position I have taken from the start.
Hearing Postponement
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, we recall the last major sets of
recommendations from the Clean Environment Commission to the government.
I would ask the government again,
that consistent with previous studies on Selkirk by independent biologists, the
city is saying the reduction of these target flows places progressively greater
stress on the pollution‑control efforts of the city and that
acceptability of waste‑water treatment.
I would like to ask the
government: In light of all their
concerns in terms of the deficiency in the study now and the lack of
information, will the government be holding hearings downstream in other
communities, as we have asked before, and will the government halt this hearing
process until all the information is available so that all the basin‑wide
data that is necessary to review this project is available for decision making?
* (1340)
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, I have said consistently that
the commission made the recommendation for the hearing sites based on the
concerns and the presentations that they had.
The number of concerns and
presentations that were presented from the city of
The member raises the question about
the condition of the water at Selkirk.
He knows full well that we have been the only government that has made
some progress towards cleaning up the rivers going through the city of
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, we passed The Environment Act to
take away the City of
This is not going to deal with the
problems raised in the study.
I would like to ask the government
again: In light of the fact that the
city is saying that this will have a significant impact on the flow regimes and
users along the entire river, including the reaches through
Mr. Cummings:
Mr. Speaker, these are all issues that will be on the table in front of
the commission in terms of the request for information. If there is information that is not seen to
be complete, the commission will ask those who are making the request to make
sure that it is answered, or the appropriate licences will not be possible.
The Department of Natural Resources
is working consistently to provide additional information to the requests from
the commission. The proponents have
consistently been brought back to the table to provide additional information
as a result of the request that we have received as a result of the publication
of the guidelines.
Mr. Speaker, this will be a complete
and open hearing process.
Social Assistance
Child Care Subsidies
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
I have a constituent of mine who has
just recently been offered a job. She is
receiving social assistance. This
particular individual cannot afford to have a nonsubsidized daycare spot. In an attempt to try to find a spot, she has
been unsuccessful and, unfortunately, it looks like she is going to have to
turn down this particular job.
My question to the minister, Mr.
Speaker, is: How does the government save
money by keeping someone on social assistance as a direct result of cutting
back on subsidized child care spaces?
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family
Services): Mr. Speaker, we have explained before, the
changes that we have instituted in Child Day Care with this budget, that we
have had to cap the number of subsidized spaces that government can
afford. We had some 10,000 children in
subsidized care within the last year. By
attrition, we are going to move that down to 9,600.
If the individual that the member
represents would need some assistance, I would assure him that we have staff at
the daycare office that would assist in trying to help out.
Mr. Lamoureux:
Mr. Speaker, I will definitely pass on the name. Again, I would ask the
minister to answer the question in a more direct fashion by saying, how does a
government justify having individuals remain on social assistance because there
are no subsidized daycare spots that are out there in order to help them get
off of social assistance? How can you
put money‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. The honourable
member has put his question.
Mr. Gilleshammer: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member that we
will do everything we can to assist people who have a job offer to leave the
social assistance program. We are
limiting the number of subsidized spaces this year. There is always a graduation process from
daycare as those children move into the public school system.
I would encourage the member, if he
wishes to speak to me privately, we can assign somebody from the daycare office
to assist that person to see if we can facilitate a subsidized spot.
* (1345)
Child Care Centres
Subsidized Spaces—Flexibility
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
Will the minister consider adopting
a more flexible approach in the number of daycare spaces available in those
areas where the use of the daycares varies substantially from season to season?
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Family
Services): I would invite the member to perhaps come to
Estimates in the near future where we talk in more detail about the daycare
budget and the daycare system. Again, we
were looking at some additional licensed spaces and, again, I would offer to
act as a conduit. If the member wants to bring me that information, I will put
his constituent in touch with the daycare office to see if we can assist him.
Provincial Court Judge
Justice Department
Review
Ms. Becky Barrett (
When will the Minister of Justice
take action to ensure that this judge will no longer hear these kinds of cases?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and
Attorney General): Mr.
Speaker, the latest news report setting out the latest case that has been of
some concern compounds my concern about the role that this particular judge is
playing. Obviously, the Department of
Justice disagrees with the findings in this latest case. The Department of Justice is appealing the
matter as well as the other matter. With
regard to the judge himself and the role that he has played, I have instructed
my department that I expect them on Monday to have reviewed transcripts into
these matters and to have placed before me options for where we might go from
here.
Ms. Barrett:
Mr. Speaker, well, I would like to ask the Minister of Justice why he
did not have that kind of immediate timetable of three days after the second
incident. What kind of assurances can
the Minister of Justice give the women and children because these are the
people who are being abused by this provincial court judge? What assurances can he give the women and
children of
Mr. McCrae: I
do not think the honourable member should be preaching to this government, Mr.
Speaker, about a commitment towards the eradication of this kind of behaviour
in our society.
In a comprehensive way, this
government has taken this issue head‑on and we have gone head‑on
with the judiciary and with well‑known media commentators and others in
our defence of the zero tolerance policy of this government towards violence in
our society.
So I do not need to take any lessons
from the honourable member who supports a party that did diddly‑squat in
the number of years that it had to do something about this terrible societal
problem. That being said, other than
supporting that particular kind of political party, I have no criticism for the
honourable member, because of the interest that she has shown in this and
appropriately so.
* (1350)
Ms. Barrett:
Mr. Speaker, when will the Minister of Justice actually start
implementing the recommendations of the Pedlar review dealing with the
education of the judicial body in the
Mr. McCrae:
Mr. Speaker, the reason I am troubled about the latest news is that we
have indeed made significant progress here in
So it is not the honourable member's
intention, it is her tone when she raises her question; this tone of righteous
indignation which is so incorrect. You
cannot describe a New Democrat in those terms because it is not right. They are hypocrites when it comes to this
kind of an issue. So the point‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please.
Point of Order
Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice, in
response to some very straightforward questions, was skating on some very thin
ice in terms of being parliamentary, and I think he just went through the ice
when he referred to this member as being a hypocrite. That appears on both lists, has been ruled as
unparliamentary. The tone I think was very
clear, because the minister tried to politicize what were very nonpolitical
questions asked on behalf of the women and children of
Mr. McCrae:
In my zeal to promote zero tolerance I used language that I should not
use, and I am sorry for that.
Mr. Speaker: I
would like to thank the honourable member for that.
Mr. McCrae:
But I would like to say‑
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. That is fine. The honourable minister has withdrawn the
comments.
The honourable minister, to finish
his response.
* * *
Mr. McCrae: Mr. Speaker, we view this matter very
seriously and I have told my department that I expect by Monday to have
appropriate options available to me beyond the normal course of the appeal that
we have already stated that we are going to proceed with, and if there are
further options available I will know about it Monday and we will proceed from
there.
St. Boniface Hospital
Bed Closures
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, we understand today that a
further 39 surgical beds are to be closed at St. Boniface Hospital, to be
replaced by day surgery beds.
Can the minister confirm whether the
closings of these 39 beds are in addition to the 38 surgical beds which he
announced would be closed on November 18, 1992 at Health Sciences Centre and
St. Boniface, or are these additional beds in addition to the 38 he announced
in November?
Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, the information that I have
received from St. Boniface Hospital indicates that over the past, oh, roughly
12 to 16 months, they have initiated in some of their surgical programs a new
method of patient management wherein it delays or eliminates the need for
admission prior to surgery, and that has reduced the length of stay
significantly. The experience that they
have had over the past 12 to 16 months has led them to the conclusion that they
can maintain their level of surgical activity with fewer beds, and they intend
to announce in the very near future, it is my understanding, the process of
retiring those surgical beds from service.
Mr. Speaker, I want to reiterate and
reinforce that this has been on the basis of some 12 to 15 months of experience
in surgical program that has led them to the conclusion they can offer quality
patient care with fewer surgical beds.
Mr. Chomiak:
Mr. Speaker, my supplementary to the minister remains the same as in the
initial question, because I think the minister did not deal with the question.
Are the 39 beds to be retired or to
be closed by St. Boniface Hospital in addition to the 38 surgical beds that the
minister announced would be closed in November between St. Boniface and Health
Sciences Centre? Are they in addition,
or are they part of the beds that the minister announced in the original
November announcement?
Mr. Orchard:
Mr. Speaker, I will clarify this for my honourable friend if my
assumption is incorrect, but I believe that this is another group of surgical
beds as a result of, as my honourable has indicated, not‑for‑admission
surgeries and probably more important, a new process of admission patient
management to lower the length of stay, so that they can offer the same level
of service they have in past years with fewer surgical beds.
* (1355)
Mr. Chomiak:
My final supplementary: I am
wondering why this is taking place now and how this relates, Mr. Speaker, to
the report of the provincial surgery committee which is scheduled to report May
1.
Is this in relation to the surgery
committee? Is it co‑ordinated through
that committee, and why is this taking place prior‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please.
Mr. Orchard:
Mr. Speaker, you know, from time to time, I get troubled where my
honourable friend comes from and from whence his concerns come.
Surely, my honourable friend
recognizes that as more and more surgical procedures are accomplished in not‑for‑admission,
where advances in technology such as laparoscopic surgery become the modus
operandi, so that, for instance, gall bladder surgeries are now very, very
short stays, improving the quality of outcome, improving the quality of the
surgical procedure and the discomfort to the patient‑‑all of these
trends are happening in
Now, Mr. Speaker, as these processes
of change come into play, hospitals will respond accordingly and reduce the
number of‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please.
Sexual Assault
Identity Release
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second
Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister
of Justice.
I think all members of this House
have applauded and supported the initiatives that have been taken at provincial
and federal levels which will prevent the release of a convicted criminal when
that person has been convicted of an assault, because what in essence they are
attempting to do is to protect the victim, not the criminal.
Yesterday, we heard of an incident
in which an individual has been convicted of abusing his stepdaughter, has been
given an 18‑month sentence, and the judge has not only refused to divulge
his name but has put a court order on his occupation as well, despite the fact
that the victim believes that this individual's name should be released.
Can the minister tell the House how
it is determined that the protection of a convicted sexual abuser's name and
identity is made?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and
Attorney General): Mr.
Speaker, I thank the honourable member for this question.
I think what usually happens is that
for fear of making public the identity of a victim of sexual abuse or assault,
the name of the accused is often ordered to be withheld. In this particular case, there are certain
factors that come into it that I think are somewhat different from the usual
case where this happens. One of the
newspapers is looking at this with a view to having a review of the judge's
decision on that matter and so is the Crown.
* * *
Mr. Speaker: Just prior to recognizing the honourable
member for
A rule that is very rarely used‑‑and
I just think at this point in time I would like to quote it for all honourable
members. It is Beauchesne's 493. It says:
"All references to judges and courts of justice of the nature of
personal attack and censure have always been considered unparliamentary . . .
."
I just caution all honourable
members in the phraseology that you might be using.
Mrs. Carstairs: Mr. Speaker, that is why I was very careful
not to mention any names. In fact, we
are under a court injunction not to do so.
Public Protection
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs (Leader of the Second
Opposition): With a supplementary question to the
minister: There certainly is public
knowledge that the individual who has been convicted in this case has as his
normal function a profession which deals with other young people.
Can the minister tell the House what
follow‑up is being done by the Department of Justice to ensure that
future victims are protected?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Justice and
Attorney General): I think basically we are dealing with the
same question as previously. Because of
what the honourable member has said about the occupation of this person and the
likelihood of this person coming in contact with young people, that is
precisely the reason that the Crown is looking at the ruling in this case with
a view perhaps to appealing it if that is possible so that no one is going to
be unwittingly in contact with someone who has been found to be a danger.
* (1400)
Reduced Workweek Essential
Services
Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, the government is sending out
yet another letter, this time from the Minister responsible for the Civil
Service Commission, in regard to Bill 22, attempting to explain to the many
people in the public sector what will be happening with this bill which, by the
way, has only just been tabled in the Legislature for second reading and has
not been passed and probably will not pass for some time.
One of the questions that is being
asked, and I ask this either to the Minister responsible for the Civil Service
Commission or the Minister of Finance (Mr. Manness) who brought in this bill,
is, it refers once again to the fact that, in this case, institutional,
seasonal and essential positions will not be included under the seven days off
in the summer and three days off without pay in the Christmas period outlined
for other employees.
I would like to ask the minister if
there is a definition yet of exactly what an essential service is.
Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister responsible for
The Civil Service Act): Mr. Speaker, first
of all, I think with respect to seasonal operations of government, I am sure
all members of this House would want this particular program to utilize common
sense. Certainly, in some departments
such as the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Agriculture,
Department of Highways, where a very important part of their function is during
the summer period, we have the flexibility in this model to ensure that certain
parts of their operation that are essential in the operations of the government
will operate during this period and the employees affected will take other time
during the year.
I can tell him that I have had
discussions with several of the employee associations that would be affected,
and they are very amenable to this particular process.
Mr. Ashton:
Mr. Speaker, common sense would indicate that if you talk about
essential services, you know what you are talking about. I would like to ask again, because that is the
question, and to either the Minister responsible for the Civil Service
Commission or Minister of Finance who introduced the bill: What is an essential service? What is not going to be affected by this?
We have already seen courts being
dealt with one way, liquor commissions the rest. What is an essential service? When will we know what services are going to
be included in that?
Mr. Praznik:
Mr. Speaker, I would like to just separate somewhat the question of the
member for Thompson because there is a difference between seasonal operations
whose operations have to go forward during the summer season particularly with
respect to Natural Resources, Agriculture, Highways, for example, and essential
services. I tell him with respect to
some essential services, for example, in Health, et cetera, that we also have
the model of Easter Monday when the public service is not working and there is
a set of operational rules that apply on Easter Monday, for example, and
various days between Christmas and New Year's.
In each department we are working
out those rules currently and how this will apply in those areas, and I think
if he were to look at those models with respect to essential services, he would
have a good idea of the guideline that is being worked on now.
Mr. Ashton:
Mr. Speaker, the public of
Are conservation officers going to
be considered essential services or not.
Are social workers or are court systems?
When will the minister give us a list of exactly what services will and
will not be available under this provision?
Mr. Praznik:
Mr. Speaker, the member for Thompson‑‑and I say this with
all due respect‑‑I think is somewhat confusing seasonal operations
with essential.
We provide essential services in
government on Easter Monday. We provide
it during the Christmas season, whereas seasonal services‑‑certainly,
I would not think that members opposite would expect that certain seasonal
services in the Departments of Highways, Agriculture, for example, Natural
Resources, not take place in the summer which is their busy time, when those
days can be taken off at other times of the year.
So I just point out to him that he
should separate essential from seasonal, because they are very different.
Education System
Reform Report Release
Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, over the past two days, we have
seen the Minister of Education destroy any credibility that she may have had in
this House with her blatant disregard for the facts both in terms of actions
and in terms of her words.
First, it was the letter to Mr.
Hobbs of Flin Flon where she claimed to have funded education above inflation
over the last five years, and then yesterday she was given the opportunity to
clarify precisely when she received the report on education reform and why she
kept it secret for the last number of months. Again, she chose the devious
route in this House.
Now, I ask the minister to be
straightforward in the House today. When
did she first see the report on education reform? When was it sent‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. The honourable
member has put his question.
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and
Training): Mr. Speaker, let me answer a few of the
questions that the member has raised.
First of all, the letter sent to the
member's constituent was absolutely correct.
The government share of funding for education support to schools has in fact
increased by 36 percent, not the numbers that member used. So that, Mr. Speaker, was correct.
Now, he asks when did I see the
first report, and the member did not ask that question yesterday. I am happy to tell you, I saw the report of
the task force in November and there were a number of issues which had to be
dealt with in the intervening time. I
have a great number of issues that I am happy to speak to him about, and let me
begin by saying that, as I said yesterday, the report was delivered in English,
the report was to be translated, the translation was to be accurate in tone.
There was no difficulty with the
service that we received in the issue of translation by any means. The issue was that the committee members had
to approve that the translation was accurate and was consistent with the
English copy.
Property Taxes
Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): Mr. Speaker, the minister had another
opportunity to be straightforward and chose not to again.
I am going to give her another
opportunity, Mr. Speaker. Can the
minister explain how she can truthfully write in her letter of April 23 to the
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and
Training): Let me tell you, Mr. Speaker, first of all,
again, in relation to the report, that this government received the sign off
from the task force finally on March 29, 1993.
From that point then, the report had to go to print. The report was then released as soon as
possible following the printing.
In relation to the issue of
taxation, I think that we have expressed our concerns through Bill 16 to
protect the interests of the taxpayer in this province.
Mr. Plohman:
Missed again, Mr. Speaker, missed again.
Mr. Speaker, I want to ask this
minister today, and she has another opportunity to be straightforward‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
With your question, please.
Department of Education
and Training
Supplementary Estimates
Mr. John Plohman (Dauphin): Will she tell us, since her Estimates are
only 10 days away or so, precisely when she is going to table the Supplementary
Estimates for the Department of Education, so we can see exactly‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. The honourable
member has put his question.
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Education and
Training): Mr. Speaker, I look forward to tabling the
Supplementary Estimates, as I look forward to the Estimates process with my
honourable friend. That will occur as
soon as possible.
Point of Order
Mr. Plohman:
On
a point of order, missed again, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker:
The honourable member does not have a point of order.
Emergency Room
Physicians
Patient Care Monitoring
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The Maples): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister
of Health.
We have been receiving some phone
calls from constituents who are concerned about the strike of the emergency room
physicians at five major hospitals. The
strike has been going on for 48 hours.
Initially, the impact may have been very low, but now that the weekend
is approaching things could get worse.
Can the Minister of Health tell
us: Who is monitoring the patient care
during this time?
Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my honourable
friend's question because the situation is, to date, quite stable. We, on a daily basis, contact all of our
major urban hospitals in
We are redoubling our efforts
tomorrow at two o'clock to assure that as we approach the weekend, we hope we
can manage as effectively as the facilities have managed over the last two
days.
Mr. Cheema:
Mr. Speaker, one concern was raised that patients are unable to get
proper information about where they have to go and get their treatment.
Can the Minister of Health tell us
who is ultimately responsible to make sure that information is given properly
to the patient? Also, is there some
phone number the patients can get hold of so that they do not have to go twice
to the same hospital?
* (1410)
Mr. Orchard:
Let me deal with my honourable friend's question in two parts.
First of all, we have a substantial
and good working relationship with the
Secondly, in terms of those who will
come on their own, either have a friend or a family member drop them off or
bring them to emergency, the advice has been consistent that they check with
the hospital to assure that they can receive the services there and have that
advice‑‑
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please.
Transportation Costs
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The Maples): One of the concerns raised by patients is who
is going to be paying for the transfers between these hospitals during this
strike time. Can the minister tell us
who is ultimately responsible to pay those costs?
Hon. Donald Orchard (Minister of Health): We recognize that there may be some
difficulties that emerge, but the standard method of payment now‑‑for
instance, third‑party coverage for ambulance service‑‑will
cover the costs, it is our understanding.
There is the issue of interhospital transfer, which is currently covered
under existing policies.
If there are difficulties that
emerge, we would be sensitive to trying to resolve those, Sir.
Provincial Sales Tax
Impact
Base Broadening
Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): On Saturday, May 1, families and children in
this province will become acutely aware of the negative impact of this
government's budget when the 7 percent sales tax will be placed on hundreds of
new items including children's clothing, baby supplies, meals, take‑out
foods and snacks. The newspapers have
already said that their sales will be hurt by this tax when it is applied to
them.
Can the Minister of Finance advise
this House whether he has any studies or information showing to what extent
consumer spending will be reduced by the imposition of the 7 percent sales tax?
Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I thought the member would rise
and congratulate us for holding the sales tax, which he says is so regressive,
at the second lowest in
I acknowledge that the government
has had to broaden the base somewhat. We
did so because we wanted to collect sales tax on those purchases outside of
So I would think that the member
would be happy as far as his question.
Indeed, if the sales tax extension itself is going to bring forward an additional
$20 million or $25 million, that is then how much, obviously, will be less able
to be spent by the people of the province.
Mr. Speaker:
The honourable member for
Mr. Leonard Evans: Well, the people of
Mr. Speaker:
Order, please. Question, please.
Revenue Growth
Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, what is happening to his retail
sales tax revenues? I am particularly
talking about the first three months of this year, because I note that retail
sales have declined by 1.5 percent in February, and, year to date,
Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I wish the member had given me
some notice. I certainly would like to
provide him with the very latest specific detail on that question.
Certainly, over the last three
months, sales tax revenue growth has maintained the forecast, which is slightly
increased. There is no doubt in the last month that there has been a slight
decrease in the actuals, but over the course of the last several months, we
continue to be on forecast.
Mr. Speaker:
Time for Oral Questions has expired.
Speaker's Ruling
Mr. Speaker: I
have a ruling for the House.
On Wednesday, April 21, 1993, during
debate on the second reading of Bill 16, the Acting Speaker took under
advisement a point of order raised by the acting government House leader, the
honourable Minister of Energy and Mines (Mr. Downey), about language used by
the honourable member for
In reviewing Hansard, I note the
member for