LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA

Thursday, May 19, 1994

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

PRAYERS

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

PRESENTING PETITIONS

Thompson General Hospital Patient Care

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of Heather Witzel, Joy Smith, Joe Beardy and others requesting the Legislative Assembly to request the government of Manitoba to consider reviewing the impact of reductions in patient care at the Thompson General Hospital, with a view towards restoring current levels of patient care; and further, to ask the provincial government to implement real health care reform based on full participation of patients, health care providers and the public, respect for the principles of medicare and an understanding of the particular needs of northern Manitoba.

PRESENTING REPORTS BY

STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES

Committee of Supply

Mrs. Louise Dacquay (Chairperson of Committees): Mr. Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted certain resolutions, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again.

I move, seconded by the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine), that the report of the committee be received.

Motion agreed to.

TABLING OF REPORTS

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Urban Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the Annual Report 1992‑93 for The Forks Renewal Corporation, and the North Portage Development Corporation, 1993 Annual Report.

Hon. Harry Enns (Minister of Agriculture): Mr. Speaker, I wish to table several copies of Supplementary Information for Legislative Review of the Ministry of Agriculture Estimates.

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister charged with the administration of The Civil Service Superannuation Act): Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the Annual Report 1993 of the Manitoba Civil Service Superannuation Board.

Introduction of Guests

Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the attention of honourable members to the Speaker's Gallery, where we have with us this afternoon His Worship Mayor Doug Webber and council of the LGD of Churchill. These are guests of the honourable member for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson).

On behalf of all honourable members, I would like to welcome you here this afternoon.

ORAL QUESTION PERIOD

Manitoba Hazardous Waste Corp.

Tendering Process

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Acting Premier and Minister of Environment.

On January 17, 1994, we wrote to the Auditor dealing with a number of concerns that have been raised with us by the public dealing with the Manitoba Hazardous Waste Corporation. The Provincial Auditor responded to the government, to the minister, on April 28, and we were given a copy of the report prior to the committee sitting this morning.

On page 5 of the report, the Provincial Auditor confirms one of our questions, and that is dealing with the untendered contracts and the tendering process within the corporation. The Auditor clearly states that their audit disclosed that the corporation did not publicly tender for electrical work and the design of developmental services for the soil remedial building. As well, the contractor for the transfer station was selected without competitive search.

We believe that each of these contracts should have been tendered. I would ask the minister responsible for the corporation, why has this corporation been acting in a way contrary to the practices of the government of Manitoba where contracts should be tendered for the public good?

* (1335)

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, we certainly do not take issue with the comments that the Auditor makes.

The only issue, however, that the Leader of the Opposition did not touch on was that as we have been moving the corporation into a much more competitive mode and as we were seeking out private sector partners, it became very evident that there was a market opportunity which arose rather suddenly late in the season last fall when the work was done after what had been an absolutely disastrous construction year and everything was backed up even in the construction of the remediation facility.

With the opportunity to close down the collection facility that was at Gimli because it was rapidly becoming in violation of its licences and to seize a market opportunity that was available, the corporation did do a review of those institutions or those contractors who had bid on the soil remediation facility to see if they would be interested in putting forward bids on a transfer facility.

As it turned out, the local contractor who had won the contract on the original facility provided what was viewed to be an acceptable offer and the corporation accepted it.

Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I wonder what action the government is taking with their own corporation.

The Auditor further goes on to state that the total cost of the soils building was approximately $880,000. The original budget which was approved on the untendered basis was for $620,000. That is a huge 25 percent variance, a quarter of a million dollars in the minister's area of responsibility.

The Auditor went on to say that the reasons for this variance were certain contracts not publicly tendered; no formal contracts were put into place for the electrical work; significant changes to the original plan were made; and an independent party was not used to monitor contract progress or certify payments such as the architect or engineering firm.

Can the minister explain to the people of Manitoba why, with this process in place, with the untendered contracts, which is contrary to the traditions and rules for this Crown corporation, we had this very, very high cost overrun, and what responsibility does the general manager take for this fact?

Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, first of all, let us not confuse this with the construction of the transfer facility. The tender that the member is referring to was in fact for the electrical services within the building.

There were a number of things that led to the overrun. As a matter of fact, the untendered aspect and the additions to the electrical contract and how they were handled is of the most concern to us, and I believe to the Auditor. The corporation had been using the expertise of a particular member of the corporation to be the project manager. As it turns out, some of the extensions were verbal extensions. I would suggest that they were handled improperly, and the corporation has in fact taken appropriate action.

Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, the response by the corporation for the audit was to be, in my opinion, quite arrogant, saying that the Auditor had no right, or they did not like, I guess is a better way of putting it, the probing into their corporation. Well, it is not their corporation, it is our corporation, and the Auditor is our Auditor.

I was quite amazed by the arrogant response of the management group over there, and I hope the minister is quite concerned about that kind of attitude, which I hear was displayed to the member for Osborne (Ms. McCormick) when she was asking questions in the committee, which is her right and responsibility to do.

I would further raise the fact, Mr. Speaker, that the Auditor identified the fact that the employment contract between Mr. Johnson and the corporation for the period August 5, '93 to November 26 was higher. The compensation level was higher than what was approved by the Crown corporation act and, secondly, when the general manager was then hired by the same president of the board to be a person on contract, the contract was not tendered and was not reported to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson).

I would ask the minister why we have again this corporation that seems to be acting separate from the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Environment, and what action is he taking on untendered contracts which are contrary to legislation that was passed in this Chamber by members of all sides?

* (1340)

Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, I am reviewing the remarks that the member is referring to. I do not like the tenor of them and I have passed that on to the corporation, but I do not see any place in there where they refer to it in a paternal sense of being their corporation.

The fact is that the people that we have brought in to work in the corporation have been charged with turning around the finances of this corporation. It has gone from a quarter of a million dollar loss in operations last year to a half a million dollars worth of profit in the '93 fiscal year for which these managers were responsible. At the same time, they were able to turn around the competitive advantage of the corporation and build the transfer facility out of those additional revenues year over year. Frankly, the reason that we have people on contract as we do over there at the corporation these days is because when their job is done, to get the corporation into a partnership and into the private sector competitiveness mode, they will be done as well.

Infrastructure Works Agreement

Sewer Relief

Mr. Harry Schellenberg (Rossmere): Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Urban Affairs.

As the minister is aware, the rain over the past 24 hours is once again pointing out how necessary sewer relief is in the city. Given the damage of flooded basements of hundreds of residents in Transcona, East Kildonan, Fort Rouge, among other parts of the city, can the minister assure the House that the vast majority of the remaining Winnipeg infrastructure funds will go to the sewer relief projects?

Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Urban Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I presume the member is referring to the Infrastructure Agreement, the three‑levels agreement. Those projects have all been submitted to the infrastructure committee, and those projects are being examined.

At this point, I cannot guarantee‑‑in quotations‑‑which ones will be ultimately announced, because it is a three‑party agreement and requires three levels to ultimately make decisions, but any projects that have been submitted by the city are being seriously considered by the decision‑makers.

Mr. Schellenberg: Since over $30 million is already being spent on an overpass at Kenaston bridge and some $30 million on the Charleswood bridge, why is this government not making sewer relief its No. 1 priority instead of bridges and overpasses?

Mrs. McIntosh: Mr. Speaker, the member has just given the House a rather startling new piece of information in that the Charleswood bridge, he has just announced, is now part of the infrastructure program, which I am sure will be of great surprise to many people working on that project.

I indicate, Mr. Speaker, that priorities are being selected by the three levels of government, and those projects will be announced in due course. They are all being given serious consideration.

Disaster Assistance Board

Claims Processing

Mr. Harry Schellenberg (Rossmere): Since last year, the Manitoba Disaster Assistance Board has taken a great deal of time to make decisions. Has the minister responsible acted to make sure that claims are processed quickly this year?

Hon. Gerald Ducharme (Minister of Government Services): Mr. Speaker, I like the question the member has asked. It gives me a chance to clarify for the record when he talks about claims. We handled 8,000 claims throughout Manitoba in a period of time that it took the administration previously to handle 2,000 claims. So let us get that clear right now.

I do not know what type of claims he is asking about now, Mr. Speaker; however, he should know the process, that we are not reviewing any claims at the present time because it is not under our jurisdiction under this particular rainfall to review any of those claims right now.

* (1345)

Social Safety Net Reform

Federal‑Provincial Committee

Mr. Paul Edwards (Leader of the Second Opposition): My question is for the Minister of Family Services.

As the minister knows and all members know, the federal government is continuing to study the social safety net with a view to coming out with the discussion document some time in June. Now‑‑[interjection] let us be patient.

Mr. Speaker, my question for the minister: Given that three provinces to date, Alberta, Newfoundland and New Brunswick, have all struck their own committees to review this and the provincial side of the social safety net, and, in fact, have made a request to the federal government for joint committees to be put in place for the review which will be happening over the summer and into next fall, is that what the Province of Manitoba will be doing? Will we be structuring our committee so that there is a joint provincial‑federal committee when those hearings take place?

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, I thank‑‑

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Madam Minister will respond to this question.

Mrs. Mitchelson: I thank the Leader of the Second Opposition for that question because it does allow me to put on the record Manitoba's commitment to work closely with the federal government around social safety net reform.

The federal government was to come out with a paper a couple of months ago, I believe, for distribution right across the country and provide some information on what their plan was, Mr. Speaker. To date, we have no idea of what the federal plan is for social safety net reform and whether in fact it is only going to be offloading onto the provinces or not.

We have extreme concern that they lay on the table the information they have and the direction they want to take so that there can be some feedback by provinces. We are quite prepared to look at any proposal that comes forward from the federal government, but there has been great delay in that process.

Mr. Edwards: That kind of wait‑and‑see attitude, Mr. Speaker, I think is typical of this government, but what we are asking for is a proactive approach. There is very little in the social safety net review. As the minister knows, there is virtually nothing in the study of the social safety net that does not include both levels of government.

My question for the minister: Why is she not taking a proactive approach to this and trying to have a joint committee available for Manitobans to speak to, Mr. Speaker, rather than letting the federal government only assess its side of this? Why is this government not taking the same approach that at least three other provinces are to study their own social safety net and meet the federal government halfway?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, I think that the Leader of the Liberal opposition should talk to his federal cousins and ask them what their plans are.

Mr. Speaker, at the last federal‑provincial meeting, the federal Minister of Human Resources indicated that he would be calling ministers back together again with a plan. I think it was emphasized at that time that we wanted to see what the plan was from the federal government.

What is social safety net reform and is it going to be true reform, or is it going to be offloading onto the provinces, all of the costs that the federal government has in the past had responsibility for, Mr. Speaker? We have not received anything from the federal government that would indicate to us that they have a plan in place, that they know what they are doing on unemployment insurance and on social safety net reform.

We are awaiting that opportunity to sit down with the federal government and hear what their proposals, what their plans are. When they bring that forward, we will be able to respond. Today we cannot.

Mr. Edwards: What is clear, Mr. Speaker, is that this government is doing nothing. This provincial government is doing absolutely nothing to try to renew and review its own social safety net.

My final question for the minister: Why is it that three other provinces have come forward suggesting and asking for joint panels when the review of the social safety net goes to public hearings in their provinces, and Manitoba has not made that request, has not even struck a committee to offer to the federal government as a joint panel when they come to speak in this province?

Why has this government not even struck that committee?

Mrs. Mitchelson: Mr. Speaker, give me a break. My goodness.

Mr. Speaker, this is a federal government initiative, and the federal government has to come forward and request things of the provincial governments. Why should we take the lead on a national program that is looking at major reform? They need to get their act together at the federal level, and then we can respond.

I want to categorically deny that we have not done anything in the province of Manitoba. As a matter of fact, we have had a major consultation process that has travelled to Thompson, Portage and Brandon and Winnipeg, a joint process with federal officials and provincial officials. I have been quite involved in that consultation process, Mr. Speaker, so that we can look at the issues surrounding single parents and try to develop a process and put forward a proposal that will be accepted by the federal government to use some of the strategic initiative dollars to ensure that single parents in the province of Manitoba have an opportunity to get into the workforce, to get some meaningful training and to build their self‑esteem.

* (1350)

Port of Churchill

Grain Export Commitment

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Acting Premier.

Has this government received any commitment or guarantees that the Port of Churchill will be getting increased shipments of grain this year, sufficient for the port to break even?

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, at this stage, I cannot say that we received any notification of strong commitments for this year. We continue to advocate the use of the Port of Churchill, and I am glad the member raised that question today because I see members from Churchill here.

We in this government strongly support the use of Churchill, and I notice that back in September, the now members of the federal Liberal government made strong promises that a million tonnes would be exported through the Port of Churchill. They recognize that it is a shorter distance to markets in Europe and Russia. They recognize it as a lower cost way to move export grain out of western Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to know where the federal Liberal government is in terms of the promises they made last fall on the Port of Churchill. We are waiting for them to act, and the Canadian Wheat Board that is responsible for those sales is a federal responsibility.

CN Rail

Hudson Bay Line

Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the same minister: Has this government pressed CN to seriously promote the rail line to Churchill, and specifically, has this government written to CN asking them to work with companies like Paramax, who want to ship 40,000 tonnes of peas through to the port of Russia this fall, and also AKJUIT, who are developing the spaceport in Churchill?

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): The answer to all the questions and all those different issues is yes. I have talked with Paramax. I have talked with CN officials about the offer they have made wanting to export certain products through the Port of Churchill. I have talked to CN officials about the rail line and the AKJUIT project, the opportunities that it will create in the North. There are tremendous opportunities around a number of issues in the North.

I can tell the member that I was quite encouraged, as I have said in the House before, about the comments from CN where they were quite different from what I heard a year, year and a half ago about their understanding of the promise and opportunity on the end of that rail line in Churchill. I look forward to opportunities developing very significantly in that direction.

* (1355)

Mr. Robinson: Mr. Speaker, my final question to the same minister: Has this government told CN that any further layoffs on the Hudson Bay line are not acceptable, both in terms of safety and also in terms of shipping out of the Port of Churchill?

Mr. Findlay: Mr. Speaker, as the member probably knows, there was a hearing held in The Pas on the VIA Rail issue, particularly from The Pas to Churchill, and I made representation. I was the first one to appear in front of the hearings.

The conclusion that we saw from the federal Liberal members on the panel was not all that conclusive in terms of supporting that. They sort of talked around the issue, did not give us the strong commitment we wanted to see, and we would hope that the federal Liberal government does understand the important aspect of that line and maintaining it for all the opportunities that lie ahead. I look forward to their commitment, which I have not seen yet.

Bison Fund

Investigation

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): My question is to the Minister of Justice, and it is regarding the Immigrant Investor Program.

Given that the minister has decided not to lay criminal charges against Lakeview regarding the Winnipeg Renaissance hotel partnership, will she tell this House whether or not a police investigation is ongoing regarding the Bison Fund, a fund which Lakeview both promoted and benefited from?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, the member in this House is always asking me to divulge information such as what is happening in a court case before a sentence, et cetera. However, in the details of that matter, I will have to take it as notice.

Mr. Mackintosh: Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious matter of public interest. It is astounding the minister does not even know‑‑

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Madam Minister has taken the question as notice.

Ramada Renaissance Project

Liability

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): My supplementary: Is the minister aware of any claims or potential claims being made against the province and the taxpayers of Manitoba regarding the Immigrant Investor Program, particularly regarding the Winnipeg Renaissance hotel partnership?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Mr. Speaker, again I would just like to say to the member, it is a policy of long standing that unless someone is charged as a result of an investigation, such investigations are not considered to be the subject of public comment. However, the details of that question, yes, I will take as notice.

Mr. Mackintosh: Just so the minister is clear. It is a question about a police investigation, not an internal departmental investigation.

My final question is: Now that the freeze is off the Renaissance project, what action is the minister taking to reduce any potential liability against taxpayers of Manitoba or eliminate even the cost of defending a claim, a claim which taxpayers themselves will have to bear?

Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, I will make myself clear again in the area of police investigations, should the member have not understood my answer, that again it is a policy of long standing that unless someone has been charged as a result of a police investigation, such investigations are not considered to be the proper subject of public comment.

Abitibi‑Price‑‑Pine Falls

Fines Levied

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Mr. Speaker, the MLA for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson) and I met with the elders and community people of Sagkeeng First Nation who are waiting for justice and for the province to enforce its environment laws and the polluter‑pay principle.

The minister's department staff claim that they are exploring fines levied for the negligence of Abitibi‑Price for their failure to report the Busan 52 spill from March '94.

My question for the Minister of Environment is: Under which acts of the province of Manitoba is the government considering fines, and what are the total fines under this legislation that could be levied against Abitibi‑Price under these various acts?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Mr. Speaker, the member knows full well that there is a joint federal and provincial review of the event that she described. The Province of Manitoba has pretty well completed its portion of the review, and the federal investigation is ongoing. We have turned over our files to Justice. They will make the ultimate determination.

I can assure the member that if the more serious aspects of the incident are viewed to be supportable by the evidence gathered, the fines are very substantial.

Ms. Cerilli: Another nonanswer by the Minister of Environment. I would like to ask him, under the different legislation in Manitoba that could be enforced in this case, what are the considerations being taken by this government in levying of these fines against Abitibi‑Price?

Mr. Cummings: Mr. Speaker, I suspect that the member has been taking legal advice from her bench mate because he knows full well that the Department of Justice will decide the method by which they will prosecute and the judge will decide the level of the fine.

Buyout Conditions

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): My final supplementary for the same minister: Considering that there are now rumours of yet another spill at‑‑

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

* (1400)

Ms. Cerilli: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the members opposite to start talking to the people at the Sagkeeng First Nation and they might learn‑‑

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Radisson, with your question, please.

Ms. Cerilli: I would encourage the members opposite to‑‑

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Question, please. You have had an awful lot of time for your supplementary question.

Now, the honourable member for Radisson, with her question.

Ms. Cerilli: Considering that there are reports of another spill, will the minister be accountable to the people of Manitoba and tell the House if payment for this type of environment and health liability is a condition of the buy out and the government loan of $30 million on this mill?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): First of all, Mr. Speaker, I hope the member is not falling into the trap that so often happens when people have concerns or fears about something that may or may not be happening to the environment in which they live and, ultimately, their health by enhancing the possibility that something might have happened.

Let me be very clear that the ultimate protection and the best response that Abitibi and this government will be able to put forward for the well‑being and the benefit of the people in the community is to get the upgrade done at that plant so that it is an environmentally sound plant, and it will be done. If the principles and the concepts in the agreement are put forward, this will be a plant that will operate well within the guidelines of the environmental act.

VIA Rail

Layoffs

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, I would like to respond to a question taken as notice earlier this week.

The Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Driedger) took as notice questions from the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid) about the move of CN employees from Union Station to 433 Main Street. We are informed it is simply a move that is based on economics, in other words, the rent, and that the end result will be that CN's move will not have any negative impact on VIA's operations, nor will it affect their viability in the province of Manitoba.

Foster Care

Priority Service

Ms. Norma McCormick (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Family Services.

This week, we received the particularly disturbing news that the Winnipeg School Division has justified the cutting of its Child Guidance Clinic services, giving as reasons that the provincial services are in place to meet these needs.

In meeting with the Foster Parents Association, I have learned that about 90 percent of children in foster care never see the assessment, intervention or therapy called in the service plans developed, and about six to seven months is a common waiting period for promises made by placing agencies.

My question to the Minister of Family Services: Will the minister's plan to provide front‑end support services give priority to children who are in the foster care system at this time?

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Mr. Speaker, I thank my honourable friend for that question, because it does give me the opportunity, again, to indicate that we are changing our focus on the way we deal with child welfare in the province of Manitoba with over $6 million more in the budget this year to provide services and some major changes in focus on family support, family preservation and family responsibility. We have changed the focus of the dollars going to the agencies at the Level I level so that no longer do children have to be taken into care to receive supports, and those dollars that are freed up will in fact be able to provide new ways of doing business.

We have been working with Winnipeg Child and Family Services, and I would hope that the issue that has been raised is one that will be addressed through the additional resources and the new way of doing business.

Permanent Status

Ms. Norma McCormick (Osborne): Mr. Speaker, about 12 percent of children in foster care have permanent status. By the time they have come into permanent care, the family connections have already been severed, and there is no natural family to work with.

How can the minister justify reducing the support to foster parents who care for these children when the family to be worked with, in accordance with her plan, is the foster family?

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): As a result of discussions with Winnipeg Child and Family Services, this is one of the reasons we are taking a new direction. In fact, those children who do become permanent wards of the province, of the agency, and are in a long‑term foster situation will have the opportunity to have more permanency. Very often children get moved from one foster home to another, and I do not think that is productive or right for the children involved.

Mr. Speaker, this will provide the opportunity for those who are in long‑term placements as a result of being permanent placements in our system‑‑will be able to have the continuity, whereby the foster parent will receive the basic maintenance support at the reduced level that still provides $320 per month tax free for those basic needs, not forgetting that if there are special needs required, that those rates will not change, and there can be up to $45 a day tax free per child for extra special circumstances.

Special Needs Rates

Ms. Norma McCormick (Osborne): In fact, the minister has preempted my final question.

Can the minister guarantee that the rates for special needs and medical needs children will not be reduced and will not be the subject of contractual negotiation between the foster parent and the agency?

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): As I have indicated, Mr. Speaker, what the basic maintenance rate is is indeed a rate that does provide for basic needs for children, and that is for food and clothing. Special needs rates are available on a sliding scale, based on the needs of the individual child, up to an additional $45 per day tax free for unique circumstances.

That will all be negotiated with individual foster parents, and there has to be agreement by the foster parent and by the agency that the new contractual agreement will serve and meet the needs in a better way for those children that we serve through our child welfare system.

AIDS Prevention Programs

Aboriginal Workers

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, studies find that the overall health status of aboriginal population is much lower than the original population in Canada. Furthermore, in 1989, Health and Welfare Canada predicted there could be an AIDS epidemic within the aboriginal community and identified them as a vulnerable group. We know that aboriginal people constitute about 60 percent of the individuals utilizing the Street Station project, yet only 1 percent of the workers are actually aboriginal.

My question to the minister is: Will he advise the House what plans are in place to train a greater number of aboriginal people, and will he indicate what specific measures he is taking to train aboriginal people to be involved in the AIDS community and the AIDS work?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, last evening, we talked a little bit during the Estimates review of the Department of Health about population health issues and about the health status of Manitobans. When the honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) and I were engaged in some discussion, we talked about the health status of northern Manitobans and how, indeed, that health status is not at a level that you will see in other regions of Manitoba. Yet, interestingly, people in northern Manitoba have equal access to health services, albeit distances have a role to play and everybody recognizes that.

But a lot of people did not realize that the access is more or less equal amongst Manitobans to medical services. However, the specific question the honourable member raises about Street Station, I will pass that on to the people who operate the Street Station.

* (1410)

Government Strategy

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, Manitoba is only one of two Canadian provinces without an overall AIDS strategy. Will the minister tell the House today what plans are proceeding to develop an overall AIDS strategy, and will he make a commitment towards greater education, particularly in the aboriginal community that has been noticed as a target group?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, the Mount Carmel Clinic people work very hard and very diligently and in a very committed way attempting to address the needs of the people in the areas they serve. Certainly, their effort to ensure the prevention of the transmission of the HIV virus is very commendable and something we support, and is one of the initiatives that our government undertakes in regard to trying to ensure the prevention of the transmission of this disease.

Aboriginal Health Centre

Program Announcement

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Will the minister indicate today when we can expect an announcement on the funding and programs that were put in place to establish the aboriginal health centre?

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): In terms of the question most recently asked by the honourable member, I would like also to remind him of the support of our government for the POWER organization and the work they do as well, and with regard to the last part of his question, I think the only thing I can say at the present time is that at the appropriate time, appropriate announcements will be made.

Cigarette Sales to Minors

Legislation Enforcement

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Mr. Speaker, I have a petition here that was signed by over a hundred members, people from Swan River, a petition initiated by the St. Andrews United Church. These people are very concerned that the bill that protects the health of nonsmokers is not being adequately enforced. In fact, they have done test runs, and it is very easy for minors to purchase cigarettes.

I want to ask the minister responsible what steps he is prepared to take to ensure that minors are not able to purchase cigarettes.

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, this has been quite the subject of discussion in recent months right across this country. My job would be a lot easier had it not been for steps taken by the federal Liberal government with regard to tobacco taxation.

The Leader of the Manitoba Liberals laughs about this, Mr. Speaker. I think that is reprehensible. He should not be defending that sort of a policy through his laughter in the House today.

To make matters worse, I actually felt pity for the federal Minister of Health. On the day that announcement came out, an hour or two later, we Health ministers were all to be meeting with the federal minister. It virtually blew out of the water any hopeful outcome of a federal‑provincial‑territorial Health ministers meeting. We all could have done without that.

The member referred specifically to the legislation that we have in Manitoba. I have already said that‑‑[interjection] Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Liberal Party (Mr. Edwards) is very distracting this afternoon.

Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The honourable minister shall deal with the matter raised by the honourable member for Swan River. Carry on with your answer.

Mr. McCrae: Mr. Speaker, I have said already in this Chamber, either in Question Period or in Estimates discussion, that we will be bringing forward that legislation at this session to make it more effective.

Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, indeed this is a very important matter that does affect the health of our young children.

I want to ask the minister, since the smaller packs of cigarettes, the 15‑cigarette packs or the kiddy packs that are available right now, are the ones that are purchased most often by young children because of their limited funds, I wonder whether he would consider banning that size pack of cigarettes in Manitoba.

Mr. McCrae: That is one of the issues that all governments, all ministers across the country are looking at.

In spite of what the federal Liberals did with respect to the taxation issue, they did a number of other things at the same time. Addressing that particular issue is one of the things.

The previous federal government had passed some legislation but had not proclaimed it. The new government has done so. That has some very strong measures in it which we acknowledge. Working with that legislation alongside whatever we can do here in Manitoba, we will be addressing a number of areas.

Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.

NONPOLITICAL STATEMENTS

AIDS Candlelight Memorial

Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for Kildonan have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed]

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Speaker, I am making a nonpolitical statement about the international Candlelight Memorial honouring people living with AIDS that will be held this weekend.

AIDS takes its toll on families and communities in many ways. It may threaten intimacy and trust which are the underpinnings of family life, close community relations just at the time when they are most needed. Even when immediate families and friends have not abandoned a person living with AIDS, irrational fear of transmission added to religious or cultural stigma may lead to rejection by others. Some people become isolated in their fear and their ability to provide much needed support and it is therefore compromised.

The international Candlelight Memorial gives us an opportunity to speak out and end the misconceptions and fear about AIDS, a vital step if we are ever going to conquer this world‑wide epidemic. We need to stop the idea that AIDS is only a gay disease and that there is nothing that can be done to prevent it.

In Canada, public health officials are still reporting high numbers of new cases of HIV infection. Native leaders cite an urgent need for improved education and awareness in aboriginal communities. In the homosexual community where the loss has been greatest, resources are required to maintain current levels of awareness and knowledge levels, but we cannot ignore other groups where AIDS is a growing problem. We have learned, after 10 years of AIDS prevention education, that negativism does not work. We simply cannot say to people, do not do this, do not do that. We need to encourage people to talk about the issue openly and honestly. A positive language and a positive attitude are our best means of accomplishing this.

Today, as we recognize the international AIDS memorial, I hope all members of the House will join me in rededicating our efforts towards breaking communication barriers and stopping the AIDS epidemic. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Fermat Mathematics Contest

Mr. Speaker: Does the honourable member for St. Johns have leave to make a nonpolitical statement? [agreed]

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate a young fellow from the constituency of St. Johns, Mr. William Chartrand. He is a Grade 11 student at St. John's High School. He wrote the Fermat mathematics contest. It is Canada‑wide and over 16,000 people wrote that exam. He placed first in Manitoba and he placed 19th in Canada with the fourth highest score, just a tremendous accomplishment. We are very proud in the neighbourhood.

Just on behalf of all Manitobans and the members, I want to wish him the best.

Committee Changes

Mr. Neil Gaudry (St. Boniface): I move, seconded by the member for Crescentwood (Ms. Gray), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Public Utilities and Natural Resources be amended as follows: River Heights (Mrs. Carstairs) for Osborne (Ms. McCormick).

Motion agreed to.

ORDERS OF THE DAY

Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I suspect by the magic of all‑party agreement in the House that we may be able to turn the clock at five o'clock into six o'clock if you would care to canvass for all‑party agreement.

Mr. Speaker: Is it the will of the House to call it six o'clock at five o'clock, thereby waiving private members' hour? [agreed]

Mr. Ernst: Mr. Speaker, in that case I move, seconded by the Minister of Family Services (Mrs. Mitchelson), that you now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.

Motion agreed to, and the House resolved itself into a committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty with the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) in the Chair for the Department of Education and Training; and the honourable member for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay) in the Chair for the Department of Health.

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY

(Concurrent Sections)

EDUCATION AND TRAINING

Mr. Deputy Chairperson (Marcel Laurendeau): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This afternoon, this section of the Committee of Supply meeting in Room 255 will resume consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Education and Training.

When the committee last sat, it had been considering item 4.(h)(1)(a) on page 42 of the Estimates book. Shall the item pass?

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I wanted to ask some more questions about the province‑wide special courses that have been offered. I think we had covered the ones that were offered last year. I wonder if the minister could tell me what courses have been offered in previous years. For example, were there ones‑‑I would like the full answer‑‑but I am particularly interested in which ones have been successful and, hence, have been repeated or where the department has been evaluating these programs and what conclusions they might have come to.

Hon. Clayton Manness (Minister of Education and Training): Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we do not have that information in detail other than to report that in 1992‑93, the first year, there were only three courses offered at that time.

Ms. Friesen: Can the minister tell us what those three courses were? So that was '92‑93, and there were three courses; '93‑94, there were‑‑what was that number‑‑was it 14?

How much was spent on the three courses in '92‑93? How many people were involved?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, 49 participants were involved, and the total cost in '92‑93 was $7,800.

Ms. Friesen: When the minister says total cost, does he mean the total cost to Workforce 2000? We are not including there the private‑sector money. [interjection] Okay.

Could the minister tell me of the courses which have been offered‑‑and I am looking over both years now‑‑which ones have been onsite and which have been offsite? I think that is one of the categories that is asked for in the regular forms of Workforce 2000.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, although we do not have the specific breakout with us at this time, most would be offsite.

Ms. Friesen: Were there any which were outside the province?

Mr. Manness: No.

Ms. Friesen: I was interested in the Deming one on Total Quality Management, simply because it is the only one that I saw advertised in a general way. First of all, is that simply because I only read a certain type of journal or newspaper where I would see that one, or were the others generally advertised?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we do not advertise. This was advertised as a result, as indicated yesterday, and that there were other co‑leads, specifically the Canadian Manufacturers' Association, health care products and the printing industry, just to name three, who maybe brought a budget together to do their own advertising, so we do not advertise. In this case it was advertised, but I am led to believe it was not our initiative.

Ms. Friesen: So these courses are not the initiative of the department and the minister does not advertise.

Mr. Manness: I said the advertising.

Ms. Friesen: Okay, so the minister then takes the initiative for these programs, but does not advertise them.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we do not initiate this particular course. We do not sponsor it. We did support, under Workforce 2000, the participation of a handful of nine, to be exact, trainees.

Ms. Friesen: I will come back to the general question of advertising and open accessibility in a minute, but on this particular question, were the nine people departmental employees, government employees?

Mr. Manness: They were employees of the organizations who were partners with us in the sponsorship of the program.

* (1430)

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister indicate who those were?

Mr. Manness: At this sitting we do not know who the participants are, and we do not know the number or if any belonged to the following groups, but obviously the nine belonged somewhere‑‑the Canadian Manufacturers' Association, the Printing Industries Association of Manitoba, the Manitoba Tourism Education Council, and the Manitoba Woodworking Education Council.

Ms. Friesen: That accounts for four or five, does it, or would some of them have two?

Mr. Manness: As I said, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I do not know the allocation of the nine. Maybe some of the numbers I listed out had none, and maybe one of them had three or four. I just do not have that information.

Ms. Friesen: So none of the people who were supported at this program by the department were civil servants?

Mr. Manness: No.

Ms. Friesen: Then on the more general question of open accessibility to these courses, presumably it depends upon information and advertising. What steps does the government, as one of the partners in this program and indeed the initiator as the minister has said, what step does it take to make people in the general public aware of the availability of these programs? They are called Province‑Wide Special Courses.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, as I have referenced in a response yesterday, in most cases this is an agreement between Workforce 2000 and sponsoring sectoral associations who come forward and say that our sector needs training in this specific area of expertise. If agreement is struck between the government and the association, ultimately, then, it becomes the responsibility of the sectoral spokespeople to notify their members. Because, indeed, this is an agreement in the first part struck between a specific association, Workforce 2000, and then the members under that association are provided with the information.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Deputy Chair, so what the minister is telling me is that these programs then were only available on a membership basis?

Mr. Manness: Well, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again, as the member can identify, we had three of these courses in '92‑93. It has expanded to 14. All of them can be classified in the terms of pilots how successful they might be the first year they are offered and whether or not, therefore, they are worthy of offering the next year.

In that context, I suppose large enrollments in themselves are not as important as making sure that the curriculum and the training material itself are developed for the pilot. I imagine after that moving into the next year, and then a decision has to be made as to whether it is put by way of pamphlet. I would have to think it would be by way of pamphlet. I do not think resources would allow for a significant media buy to advertise.

Ms. Friesen: The issue is not so much larger enrollments or smaller enrollments, but it is whether a publicly funded program has been made available to everyone. One step in that is knowledge, knowing when the courses were given and when they were available. That is the point I am making.

The minister is saying that is not his responsibility, that he left that to membership organizations, and he anticipated that they would tell their members so that only members in that case knew whether these courses were being given.

Mr. Manness: What is different here as between publicly funded? I mean, I know when public institutions bring forward courses they start slowly and they build. Not everybody has open access to those, either. I guess I ask what the difference is. We are not putting in every dollar as it was indicated in this side. We put in two to leave her one?

I do not know what point the member is trying to make, and to the extent that they do work, well, obviously word of mouth was spread around, and indeed then it will be written up in pamphlets of training. Then at that time the greater call outside of the support of industries or sectors will cause Workforce 2000 to make decisions at that time.

Ms. Friesen: The point is very clear that other institutions, public institutions with public money which offer courses, publish calendars, they are known, they are available to all the public. The Department of Industry, Trade and Tourism, which runs programs for small‑business people, publishes a list of courses which are available, the times that they are given and how one applies for a seat in those courses.

Here we have in Workforce 2000 a small section of it which is publicly funded and which is not available in the terms of knowledge at this stage. The minister talks about word of mouth. He also talks about membership. Well, those are relatively small circles. I am talking about open, accessible programs on a province‑wide basis.

Mr. Manness: I would be prepared to ask the member whether she is absolutely certain that every public institution in its first year of operation put out a calendar? There is no way she could ever be certain of that. This is the beginning of a program. Obviously, as it begins to develop and to the extent that this information is lodged with institutions, to the extent that ultimately it begins to build, Workforce 2000 may very well put out its own calendar. That is the point I am trying to make.

I understand what she says when she talks about institutions having calendars. Sure enough. But right now, what is the use of putting a calendar out when you are piloting courses which may not exist a year from now?

Ms. Friesen: They existed this year, and only members were allowed to apply because only they knew about it.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, that was the thrust of the report coming out of the STAC report and indeed Workforce 2000, to be directed to instantaneous needs of business and sectors in the industry. Of course the member has been against Workforce 2000 since the beginning of time. She wants the money all forced to her institution and the formal institution. She does not want to see a dollar escape.

That is the way, the truth. The NDP are diametrically opposed to a dollar of training leaving formal institutions, and all of the structures and all of the locked‑in bureaucracies and all of the waste and duplication where it exists. That is what the NDP wants. Of course we said, no, we are going to take that off, and we are going to make it open to more people on a spontaneous basis.

Ms. Friesen: Now we have heard that from the minister, I hope we do not have to hear it again. He said it once. I can understand why he is defensive about this program, a program which has not been advertised, which is essentially open only to closed circles and closed memberships. I can understand why he is defensive about that. If the minister has evidence of any publicly funded institutions which do not have calendars or make available publicly their programs, then I would be interested in hearing it.

The comparison I drew very directly was to Industry, Trade and Tourism and to the small‑business programs which are run there. I put my position on Workforce 2000 and my position and our party's position, indeed, on workplace‑based training very clearly on the record in my response to the throne speech. The minister was in the House at the time. He knows very clearly where we stand. So this misrepresentation and distortion of the facts that he has done now, I hope, can be laid to rest. We have heard it once. Let us not hear it again. The issue in this program is public accountability. That is where I am starting with these province‑wide courses.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the member says that public institutions, i.e., community colleges calendar all their events. There are market‑driven arrangements, market‑driven training initiatives between local employers and community colleges which are not calendared. Not everybody has access into them. It is an agreement between a company and/or a sector and the community college, not calendared. Nobody knows about it. An agreement, no different than this. No different than this.

Ms. Friesen: Under this government, that is exactly what has happened.

Mr. Manness: Right on, but full accountabilities in place.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister then table the evaluations of these courses?

* (1440)

Mr. Manness: The member asked that of me yesterday. I indicated at that time those evaluations are presently being looked at by way of the guide. We have them, but we do not have them with us today.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, will the minister table those evaluations? When will they be tabled? Where are the evaluations from the previous year? When will those be tabled?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, staff informs me that the evaluations that would be done would be done on the basis of participant reaction to the course. Those are very highly confidential, but, again, the member can laugh and scoff all she wants. The reality is she either has to believe in the Provincial Auditor who has seen internally all of this information‑‑she either has to believe that Provincial Auditor or not. [interjection] Well, the members say no. The members say no. Do they know something that I do not? Do they know the Provincial Auditor has not had access to specifically‑‑[interjection] The Provincial Auditor has access to look at anything she wants with any methodology she wants and can do it in her way.

All I know is that when she reports that performance criteria are in place to monitor achievement results and that assessment of the risks and benefits for each activity. There has been that indeed, at least on the surface, and I would say beyond that the program is working well.

Now the member says she wants to see the evaluation of these new pilot areas. I can tell that the only thing I could share with her if I could, which I will not, would be participant reaction to the courses. More in keeping with how the evaluation ultimately will reach the business community and whether or not the course has been successful will be the call for additional training under this area. We will have to leave it at that point.

Ms. Friesen: The evaluations then are based upon participant reaction, and they are not available to anybody other than the minister. The minister believes that the Auditor has seen them, but I think if the minister looks at the record, the Provincial Auditor indicated this week, when I asked her, that this is not the kind of evaluation that she had looked at, that she had looked at financial evaluation. In fact we had a small discussion clarifying some of the terminology that she had used.

The minister then is not prepared to share with us the evaluations of individual courses. Let us look at the evaluation of the program. Now this is a program that was announced in 1990 during the election which was announced again in 1991 by the first Minister of Education. Here we are in 1994. Could the minister perhaps tell us what evaluations he has conducted on the program?

There were three courses which were offered last year. There have been 14 courses which were offered this year. I asked initially this afternoon about the evaluation of those first three. Were any repeated? Were the reasons given for repetition? Were any deleted? What are the reasons for deletion? Can we look upon them as a collectivity? What has been the evaluation of the program from that sense?

Mr. Manness: Is this on the province‑wide specialized courses?

Ms. Friesen: I am talking about the province‑wide special courses still.

Mr. Manness: All of the original three or four in the first year of study were provided again in '93‑94.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister tell us which those were?

Mr. Manness: No, I cannot. I do not have that information here, but we will provide that information.

Ms. Friesen: Can the minister tell us when that information will be provided?

Mr. Manness: The next sitting of this committee.

Ms. Friesen: Was the Deming seminar a repetition?

Mr. Manness: No.

Ms. Friesen: Was the health industries a repetition?

Mr. Manness: To help out, rather than going through one by one by one by one, we think not. We think that the ones that may have been now in place for two years are train‑the‑trainer.

Ms. Friesen: Were there seven train‑the‑trainer programs this year?

Mr. Manness: Three.

Ms. Friesen: There were three train‑the‑trainer seminars, and what was the total number of participants in those?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, as I referred yesterday, one of the ones I listed is going to be in place for '94‑95, so really there were two reaching out to 21 participants.

Ms. Friesen: Are those 21 the total number of participants, because when we looked at the Deming seminar, there were obviously many more participants, but only nine whom the department had supported? So how are these arranged?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I do not know why the member draws a parallel or indeed tries to draw a link between the two. Train the Trainer were specifically 21 participants in two seminars, whereas the Deming seminar we supported nine attendees unrelated to the Train the Trainer seminars.

Ms. Friesen: I am actually simply trying to get information about how these courses work, who pays for them, who attends them, how they are advertised, the basic kind of information, so the minister does not need to get sort of agitated about it.

I am trying to figure out for myself, because there are no brochures, there is nothing written on it, how in fact these work. So the Train the Trainer ones work differently from the Deming one.

Mr. Manness: As far as the numbers, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I provided all of that last night. I went through that listing, and I indicated the number of participants slowly, line by line. So I provided all that information, all right?

Ms. Friesen: Obviously, there are different ways of putting together these courses, and the Deming course was put together in a different way than the Train the Trainer course.

Could I ask how some of the other courses were put together? I believe one of them was on competing in Mexico, and I have down seven participants in that. Now, were those the total number of participants, or were there others from other supporting organizations?

* (1450)

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the last two I mentioned yesterday, one of them I had referenced as '94‑95. I was in error in not referencing the Gaining the Competitive Edge in Mexico seminar and not referencing that it too was in '94‑95. It is coming into place; it will be reaching out to seven participants.

I would think those seven participants would come from these companies, because these are the industry participation, and I would think they would not participate unless they had a participant. They are Information Corporation/Computer Solutions, Can‑Oat Milling Products, Vita Health, Standard Aero, Bristol Aerospace, Kelly Associates and Di‑Tech Wire Sawing Systems. Yes, there are seven companies that are co‑sponsoring this seminar.

Ms. Friesen: How long will that seminar be for?

Mr. Manness: It will be a one‑day workshop.

Ms. Friesen: Each company will select its own representative at that seminar.

Mr. Manness: That is correct.

Ms. Friesen: The Creative Thinking courses‑‑I think there were either three or two of those, one perhaps which was repeated, one was creative in lateral thinking, the other was the Edward de Bono‑‑how were they put together, and what were the industries involved?

There is one here, for example, which has I think 32 participants, and one which had one.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, what we know about the Creativity and Lateral Thinking conference, is it was a one‑day seminar reaching out to 90 participants. It was organized‑‑and these participants came from small‑, medium‑ and large‑sized businesses, and it was put together by an association of employers called the Winnipeg Quality Network.

(Mr. Ben Sveinson, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)

Ms. Friesen: What was the cost to the department of that? What was their portion of the cost?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, out of a total cost of $26,630, the department contributed $9,530.

Ms. Friesen: And the other creative thinking conference, or was that a seminar?

Mr. Manness: That is the only one we have listed. There was another Six Thinking Hats certification program, but as far as creativity, I think that is the only one we have listed.

Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I guess I have to seek your opinion. We have been charged to review '94‑95 Estimates. I do not mind this, but I am not going to spend an awful lot of time in reviewing '93‑94 numbers. We have been doing that now for several, several hours. Again, we are here to consider '94‑95 Estimates.

The member, if she wants to dig up all of the detail with respect to a year gone by, I will accommodate‑‑[interjection] No, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, that is where the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) is wrong, because the Public Accounts does deal with the past. What he always tries to do is go forward, and he knows it. So he is dead wrong again.

I am saying, I will try and continue to provide this information, but I do not have all '93‑94 here. Much of it is back at the shop. If the member wants to continue to focus on the training that was all done last year, fine, but again, I indicate, we are here to review '94‑95 Estimates.

Ms. Friesen: Well, the minister has very few plans for the '94‑95 Estimates. There is money in place. There are general indications that courses might be offered in some areas in some places. There is very little to go on, and there are no evaluations for last year that are available publicly.

So it seems to me quite reasonable to ask some specific questions about how the department has dealt with these kinds of issues in the past. It is the only way in which we can get some indication of how the money that is allocated this year may or may not be spent.

Mr. Manness: You are asking for details from last year. That is the difference.

Ms. Friesen: Well, I have asked the minister. The minister says I should not be asking for detail. I have asked for detail. I have also asked for generalization, general comments upon or evaluations of the earlier programs, but even those kinds of program evaluations are not available.

So that leaves me with very little alternative but to ask some specific questions and to try and develop the generalizations myself and to present them to the minister and to suggest, is this in fact the way that the program looks to him? That is what I am trying to do, is to develop from the individual examples that we have a generalized understanding and a generalized interpretation of where the government thinks this program is going. It seems to me that that is a reasonable process for Estimates.

I can understand the minister does not have all of the detail here. I am quite prepared to accept that, but I do expect that the minister will be interested in providing detail to questions which are asked at Estimates time.

So could I ask about the Thinking Hats program now, the other creativity program? I understood yesterday that there was one person whom the department supported at that. Again, I am interested in, were others able to participate in this? Was it cost effective in a sort of broad, Manitoba sense?

Mr. Manness: This was partnered with, again, the Canadian Manufacturers' Association, the Winnipeg Quality Network, Red River Community College and the EITC, the Economic Innovation Technology Council of government. This was a component of an industry‑driven strategy and introduced to Manitoba quality‑related, creative thinking. Subsequent to this seminar, the individual achieved certification, and subsequently, at no cost to Workforce 2000, had a significant number of seminars, including one at Red River Community College. Twenty people from the board of Red River and executive managers were in attendance, again at no cost to Workforce 2000.

Here you have a case where we have tried to help bring and develop that expertise in our province. With the infusion, as I indicated, of $6,000 we now have that expertise in the province and now others are using it outside of Workforce 2000.

Ms. Friesen: That $6,000 was to support one person at this program, or were there more people that were supported in that one?

Mr. Manness: One person.

Ms. Friesen: Six thousand dollars to support one person. How long was the training involved?

Mr. Manness: We do not have that. We can get that.

Ms. Friesen: This was supported by others including the EITC and the Canadian Manufacturers' Association and Red River. Were there other people who were trained at this time, or was there only one person who was trained?

Mr. Manness: At this time, one.

Ms. Friesen: So all of those organizations put additional monies in to train one person, in addition to the $6,000 that the department put in?

Mr. Manness: Again, we do not have that detail here. That is what I am trying to say to the member. We do not have that here. We do know they partnered it. We know they sponsored it and they hosted it. To what extent everybody put shares of money up, I have no idea.

Again, I reiterate for the record, I do not have this information with me. This is old information. We are not here to review old information.

* (1500)

Ms. Friesen: Again, it is the only information available to us. When the department does not put forward the list of ones that it is going to support in the year, we cannot examine them then. We would come the next year in Estimates and the minister would say, that is old information, you cannot ask that. So there is a logical difficulty there, and I am trying to pursue it in as reasonable manner as I can.

I am quite prepared for the minister to submit information afterwards. Indeed, if the minister would like to publish the list that I assume his department staff have of who supported these, how much money was there, who was trained, what they were trained for and what the spin‑offs were and what the benefit to Manitoba was, I am sure we would not have this difficulty. I suggest to the minister that that kind of information should be publicly available.

Mr. Manness: We gave to the NDP caucus and to the Liberal caucus‑‑indeed, the package of materials is in the hand now of the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway). It is an incredible listing of detail. I dare say, I do not know what more the members want. It shows who received what. It has been provided, so I do not want the record to say that we have not provided an elaborate amount of information.

Ms. Friesen: I think the minister should recognize‑‑and I understand he probably does not review everything that goes out of his department. What was provided and what the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) has in his hand is indeed quite detailed, but it is the small grant program. We did receive that from the minister, and we did receive the payroll tax deduction program. These other programs of Industry‑Wide Partnership and Province‑Wide Special Courses are not ones on which we have received any detail, which is why I am beginning with that kind of a question.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, as I recollect, members did not ask for that information. [interjection] All I need is a request for that information‑‑not expected to do it today, but indeed give us some time to put it in a proper fashion similar to that information given.

The member keeps taking us through, for the last several hours, and again trying to extract all this information which is her right to do but not at this sitting. I will provide everything that she wants in a similar fashion to the other two programs. All I need is a request, and I will undertake to do that. To stay here today and try and go through all of this in a painstaking fashion, without the opportunity to bring it together in some consistency, is, I think, unfair to the process and indeed to staff.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Acting Deputy Chair, I am just clarifying for the minister the information we do have and the information we do not have.

If the minister is prepared to create a list which does indicate the partnerships involved in each of these province‑wide special courses, the number of participants, the number of participants supported by the department and an evaluation of the program‑‑[interjection] I said program. Surely you evaluate your programs.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the first three requests are fine, but when the member starts asking evaluations, I will ultimately decide in what fashion they come out obviously. Again, I refer to the Provincial Auditor's report which has looked at the management style, not only in the financial but the deliverables with respect to the training, because the audit was more than just financial. [interjection]

I would challenge that statement. It is more than just financial.

Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, certainly the first three requests we will attempt to provide.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister indicate when that will be provided?

Mr. Manness: Whenever it is we might have it ready.

Ms. Friesen: In the absence of a specific date with information which presumably is already tabulated and that his department staff are reading from, could he then tell me something more about the creative‑‑

Point of Order

Mr. Manness: On a point of order, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the member makes a flamboyant statement that my staff are already reading from prepared material which in essence could be tabled right now to answer her concern. That is‑‑

An Honourable Member: No, I did not say that. Give me a date.

Mr. Manness: The member said "presumably" is ready, prepared. It is not prepared. I state that for the record.

The Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Sveinson): Order, please. The minister did not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts.

* * *

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Acting Deputy Chair, my frustration is in the minister not giving me a date. Is this a one‑week event, is this a two‑week event or is it the month event? When will we be able to get the list of 14 courses with the three pieces of information that I have asked for? That does not seem difficult to me for the minister to give me a date for that.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, that we can do in a week.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister indicate what the benefit has been or what he anticipates the benefit will be to Manitoba and Manitobans and which segments of the Manitoba economy, from the Creative Thinking courses?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, it is in total keeping with the whole thrust of the framework for economic development. The member may discount that document, maybe has never read it but probably has. She would see that the heavy emphasis in that document falls into the areas of innovation and creative thinking in a global context and a global society, very much based on the latest information technologies that are in place. The basis of all today, the great natural resource, is the ability to create and to be of creative mind in today's reality of wealth generation.

So we are trying to put into place an opportunity through seminar, through preparation of curriculum, to challenge our decision makers to be ready for that competitive perspective that is required in today's smaller global village.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, two out of the 14 courses were in that area. How does the minister look at that package of courses in terms of the general priorities of Manitoba? Two are devoted to innovative thinking. How do the others relate as a package, as a group, to the priorities in the economic framework document?

Mr. Manness: Well, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the whole thrust is training. We are in a training section and the Train the Trainer concept‑‑the member would know this better than me. What we are trying to do, of course, is encourage as a result of the recommendations coming out of the STAC report. We recognized that we had a culture, a business culture in this country, which was not forcefully requiring their employees to train or making commitments to it.

So we have tried to cause the system to lurch into that realization, and we have done it through, hopefully more speedily, these seminars and Train the Trainers which will build an enthusiasm with partnering employers who then will take these individuals who are now trained and hopefully let them move through their companies, through their sectors, through their industry, and indeed let this training culture take root and grow. Again, that is in keeping with the whole thrust of training.

* (1510)

Now the member, of course, believes that most of it, if not all of it, should be done in an institutional sense. We have said no. It has to be done at the worksite, and it has to be done in a less formal manner for a period of time. So Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, again that is what Train the Trainer is all about last year, this year, and now it will be training for export.

We know that the very social systems the members decry every time they see us making a reduction are going to have to have tax‑supported revenue somewhere. The old traditional industries are certainly suffering worldwide. We are not exempt from that. So we have to create new activity.

A very significant part of that activity is going to have to be based on exporting, outside of our provinces, new goods, but also taking existing corporations and businesses of all sizes and saying, look, you are going to have to expand your horizon. It is no longer just Manitoba or Saskatchewan and Ontario. You are going to have to get out into the world, and it is to expand this thinking. So there is another seminar put into place for that. It is all, though, directed towards greater economic wealth generation for our province.

Ms. Friesen: So the minister's basic approach to this is simply the development of the training culture. There has not been an attempt in each of these sections of the program to match it specifically or in proportion or in sense of priorities to the economic framework document‑‑so many for health, so many for environmental industries, so many for innovation ideas. That is what I was looking for.

Is there an attempt to sit down and try and parallel and match those? Where are the priorities of the government as it looks through those six or seven areas of the economic framework document?

As the minister is ready to reply, perhaps I could remind him for the second time this afternoon that our opposition is not to work‑based training. I remind him he was in the House when I laid that out very clearly. It is the second time he has used that as his defence, or at least his form of attack. It is not correct, and I do not think we need to hear it a third time.

Mr. Manness: Well, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I do not need to continue to hear a lot of things either. I do not cry out to the record like the member for Wolseley. I have heard many repetitive statements too, which I have difficulty accepting, but I do not go crying off to the record like the member for Wolseley. I take my lumps.

The point I want to make is, we are into an area now that represents 2.8 percent of the total Workforce 2000 expenditures‑‑2.8 percent‑‑and it seems to be that the member is digging in so much because she does not have worded or written detail. I am going to provide her with the information she asks in this 2.8 percent slice of the total Workforce 2000 pie within a week.

At that time, I am sure, she will come to the realization that the courses and the seminars that we are talking about are indeed worthy of support and, secondly, are in keeping with the thrust of the framework for the economic development document.

Ms. Friesen: I was giving the minister an opportunity to explain in fact how they did relate. The purpose in doing that was to look at the next $100,000 that the minister has on this line for next year and to see, to get some indication of what it is we are doing when we pass that line.

Is the minister sitting down with that framework document and saying a certain proportion is going to X, Y and Z areas? Has that been done in the past? Is that what we anticipate in the future? In the absence of the detail today, I am looking to create the generalizations that will give me some comfort about that particular line.

Mr. Manness: Well, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the question is fair. I will try and share with the member some of the broad thrusts that we hope to see developed under this smaller area for '94‑95.

Planned, and for delivery in '94‑95, are export‑related courses, including Train the Trainer for Export, and Gaining the Competitive Edge in the Pacific Rim; the development and delivery of courses related to industry‑specific foundation skills are planned, particularly directed at small business; activity related to training associated with the implementation of quality initiatives, notably ISO 9000; and creativity will be enhanced.

Further, there will be offerings of Train the Trainer workshop, piloted in '92‑93 and revised in '93‑94, particularly Train the Trainer for the Printing Industry in technical writing skills.

So, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I do not know whether that adds an awful lot, other than the discussion we have had, but I think it puts again into place the process that we are trying to follow. Yes, we are trying to match to the extent that we can, the thrusts that have been set forward in the framework for economic development.

The framework of economic development talked about six areas, rightfully so, but through it all there was a tremendous emphasis on exporting and creativity and innovation, which can fall into all those six areas, but into other areas too.

All we are trying to do is make our industry aware of what they are going to need to do to be competitive, because I dare say, I do not know where a lot of their people are trained and in what institutions, but indeed somehow, somewhere that has been forgotten. That is the way Canada and indeed Manitoba has been, and I think we can put a lot of‑‑and although I do not look for blame, I still sense, in my view, there are a lot of people who are professional in nature who have high positions but have totally forgotten how important wealth creation is and how important it is to be maintained and how different wealth creation changes from the generation we are going into from where we have come. A lot of our formal training institutions of course give this very, very little emphasis.

What we are trying to do is catch up. Obviously, the void has been in place, in my view, for 15 years. Can we do it in the space of a short time? Well, I do not know. Can we do it with Workforce 2000? Probably not totally. I know one thing, if we do not do it quickly, and given the roadblocks of change that exist in so many of our institutions, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, it will never get done, and the wealth of the province will suffer accordingly.

Who was calling out for Workforce 2000? How come it was basically the community and particularly the wealth creators? Why were they calling out for it? Of course the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) said, well, they are probably calling out for it because they want a free government handout‑‑and he nods in the affirmative, because that is his narrow view of the world. He believes that all this training was going to happen in institutions, but something has gone wrong because it has not happened.

That is the basis behind Workforce 2000. Yes, within the specialized course area, to the extent we can meld it with the thrusts coming out of the economic framework, it will be done. It is broader than that too, because as soon as we move into the emphasis on exporting, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, that covers all six areas and indeed other areas of our provincial economy.

* (1520)

Ms. Friesen: The issue again is not work‑based training. There is no difficulty with work‑based training. The issue is the accountability and the way in which that is conducted.

Again, I have laid out a number of principles that we believe in on work‑based training. Again, on this line, I am trying to get more information, more accountability and what is available to me in one of the opportunities that we have to do that.

The courses in this particular section, the Province‑Wide Special Courses, seem to have been aimed primarily at management. Is that the case? Were there any people who took part or were supported who could be defined as employees rather than management?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we cannot answer that definitively, although our suspicion is it would be probably in the area of mid‑management to higher management.

Ms. Friesen: I would like to move to the Industry‑Wide Partnerships next. Could the minister tell me first of all how much of the budget will be devoted to that next year and how much was devoted last year?

Mr. Manness: Approximately $1.8 million or 44 percent of the budget. This is '94‑95‑‑no, I am sorry, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson. The dollars were correct. The percentage was '93‑94. Whether that percentage is the same or not we will get the number shortly.

Ms. Friesen: What were the dollars last year?

Mr. Manness: The dollars last year were $1.295 million.

Ms. Friesen: There are 26 partnerships listed for '94‑95 that will be developed with this. Could the minister give us an indication of what he is anticipating in that area?

Mr. Manness: There are not agreements, but there are discussions in these areas, manufacturing. Again, I am kind of reluctant to indicate the subsets, the sectors within manufacturing who are presently engaged in discussion because again there is nothing complete. A group under Construction, a supporting group: agriculture and rural development, community business personnel service and transportation and communication. I will see under this heading who it is we are dialoguing with, the Manitoba Trucking Industry Education Advisory Committee. MTIEAC, I think it is called.

Those were being worked in developmental stages; the others are in progress or approved. These are the ones that come to my desk for final approval. For instance, again, under the heading of Manufacturing: Health Care Products Association has been approved; Manitoba Aerospace; a human resource co‑ordinating committee and the Manitoba Apparel Human Resource Committee.

Then I also have others under the heading of Construction: communication, telecommunications, agriculture and rural development, community business personnel service and again transportation and communication.

Ms. Friesen: So how many have actually been approved for this coming fiscal year?

Mr. Manness: Virtually all these that I have are carry‑overs from last year. It is hard to define the year. In some cases the list that the member has there represents up to a period of time, and then they go beyond that.

Again, just to reiterate, these programs can start any time and flow into the next year. That is why the approvals for some of these may have been made a year ago and are still flowing because the start‑up does not always begin at the approval time.

Ms. Friesen: The categories then that the minister has given me seem to be the same over the course of the two years. Does that indicate those are the only categories for these kinds of partnerships or are these the only people who have applied? This would not cover the manufacturing and industrial base of the province.

(Mr. Deputy Chairperson in the Chair)

Mr. Manness: The headings provided is what is happening right now, but I could add to those. We have tried to take the Manitoba economy and break it into basically 10 sectors. They are, again, the manufacturing goods producing; construction; agriculture related; transportation and communications; business community services; financial insurance realty‑‑of course, we have had nothing under that; wholesale‑retail‑‑and we have had nothing there; primary and other; businesses relocating, expanding, and we have, up to this point, had nothing there, but we are putting a value into that group this year for the first time. [interjection] Well, but we probably have not spent it.

As we try and take a snapshot of the Manitoba economy, that is the way it breaks into these sectors. The number that I have listed, the six broad headings, of course, is where we have had activity over the last two years.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, that is helpful. I guess I am surprised that there has not been any interest or activity in the primary section.

Mr. Manness: Yes, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I share the member's interest in that because in '92‑93 there were three agreements for $32,800, but in '93‑94 there were none.

Ms. Friesen: What were the three for, which areas of primary industry?

Mr. Manness: Again, we are going back to '92‑93. I am sorry, we just do not have that.

Ms. Friesen: Would the minister undertake to provide that?

Mr. Manness: I will attempt to try and provide that.

Ms. Friesen: How much has been assigned to the relocation number, the relocation label this year?

Mr. Manness: $500,000.

Ms. Friesen: Is the minister involved in any discussions with any particular group?

* (1530)

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I am not, but if I were, I could not share that with the member anyway because of the sensitivity around any negotiations. I certainly would not be the lead minister in that. The way it happens right now, the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism (Mr. Downey) are leads, and once they feel it is time that I be brought in on a training capacity or function, then I am brought in.

Ms. Friesen: The business community services has some programs both last year and this year. Could the minister give me an example of what kind of partnership might be involved there, and what services that particular industry is looking for?

Mr. Manness: Manitoba Tourism Education Council, Manitoba Motor Dealers' Association, Manitoba Guide Training Steering Committee, Manitoba Environmental Industries Association, Lord Selkirk Community Adjustment Committee and the Automotive Trades Association.

Ms. Friesen: There are a couple there that I am not familiar with. The Lord Selkirk‑‑what was the rest of that‑‑and the Manitoba Guide Trainers. Is that outfitters and guides?

Mr. Manness: The short answer is yes. It is part of our tourism thrust in the North.

Ms. Friesen: What is the Lord Selkirk?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, it is a community adjustment committee, and what it attempts to do is to cost‑share in the development of the second and third phase of the labour market survey for the community and districts of St. Clements and St. Andrews.

Ms. Friesen: The Lord Selkirk one, the community adjustment one, is that one that is in process now or is that completed or is that anticipated?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, what I find interesting here‑‑it is one thing for the NDP to really begin to try to find shortcomings in the Workforce 2000, but I find it strange when the Liberals of course are attacking us on Workforce 2000, not that they have done it much, but they do it sometimes, because here is a situation‑‑again, many of them are joint funded. Here is a case where Human Resources Development Canada put in $46,000 and asked us to partner with respect to this. We put in $7,075. Industry has put in $2,925 in kind.

Again, this attempts to work in partnership with as many people as possible and a significant number of times, certainly since I have been the minister and have been trying to read these agreements, a large measure of times with the federal government.

Ms. Friesen: I chose this one because it looked like an appropriate use of money, and I am trying to find out about it. I do not know why the minister is so immediately defensive. My question was quite neutral. What was the Lord Selkirk association, and what were the plans and what is the partnership? I understand it is a federal‑provincial partnership with some small amount of private sector money, and it deals with a labour force development strategy.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I was not defensive. I was just pointing out to the‑‑I was trying to draw the Liberals into this debate a little bit. That is all I was trying to do, because I can tell the member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) is dying a slow death there trying to get into the debate.

The reality is, here is a project, in keeping with the thrust of many of the questions put by the member yesterday, here we are trying to measure the training and indeed the labour market skills in the area and the training needs.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister tell me something more about this? The community‑based measurement of skills and needs and training needs seems to me quite an appropriate use. I would like to hear a little more about it and how it is working.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I cannot offer any more information other than to say that we expect the project to have been completed recently if not by the end of April, and the results will come, and ultimately the project will be finally completed hopefully by the end of June when all the results will be analyzed. That has not been done. The surveys are just being completed right now.

Ms. Friesen: The minister says surveys. I know nothing about this project. I am asking for information. What is being done? The minister says surveys. What are they surveying? Who are they surveying? What are the anticipated results?

Mr. Manness: I do not have much more to offer. I think I cannot be any more straightforward, what is attempted under this program and our contribution to study the employer needs in the area, study what set of skills are in the area, see what shortages may be in place and to just make recommendations as to how they may be fulfilled‑‑probably a pilot of exactly what the member was wanting for the whole province yesterday, and which indeed we have tried to do as a department.

Ms. Friesen: It was the kind of survey, I think, that was envisaged in the STAC report of 1990. That is an interesting version of partnership then. It is a federal‑provincial partnership essentially with some input in kind.

What other kind of partnerships are developed in this kind of a program, for example, tourism education or the motor dealers? How do those partnerships work?

Mr. Manness: I will talk about the Automotive Trades Association because I have it right before me. Here is a total cost of $30,000 to a training initiative that deals with I‑CAR auto collision repair training. The proposal has been approved by Workforce 2000. The total cost is $30,250. Workforce 2000 has put forward $16,500, and again, Human Resources Development Canada has put forward $13,750. There is another example of a partnership.

Ms. Friesen: What is the anticipated result of that partnership? There seems to be quite a bit of flexibility involved in these different programs. The Selkirk one, for example, is going to end up in a survey. Does this one end with people trained, or is it trainers trained, or what is the purpose of it?

Mr. Manness: I am using this as a model, I suppose. What is attempted here is to upgrade the skills of journeymen, journeypersons, I suppose, to take into account the new technology that is in this industry. It uses the I‑CAR national curriculum. It is delivered by MPIC trainers in MPIC facilities. It is the introduction, as I have said before, of new technologies and processes, and it is done in co‑operation with the Apprenticeship branch. It has reached out to, so far, 153 journeypersons and 537 segments of training, units of training.

This is one the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) would have fun with, and he would say that this represents support to used‑car salesmen‑‑a kind of a cheap shot, but that is fine. That is the way he likes to play politics.

* (1540)

Even though the member for Elmwood offends a lot of people in the automotive industry, the reality is‑‑I have been waiting for a long time for this, Mr. Deputy Chair, as you can tell, and I have some concerns too about some of the money going into the automotive industry, and I have said that. But here is an area where you try to upgrade the skills ultimately of people who were trained under old technologies. You can say, well, really the paying customer should pay for that, and that could be an argument made‑‑and it could be a good argument made, I guess, depending from where you come‑‑but the reality is everybody makes contributions to these programs. Secondly, ultimately if we can have our insurance rates drop as a result, hopefully, of lower cost of Autopac repairs, then you and I have more money in our pocket at the end of the day. That might be a long stretch, but that is what taking new technology and reducing the per‑unit cost is all about.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Deputy Chair, in the small donations, not small donations, the small allocations to businesses under the other Workforce 2000 program, there are a number of grants for training of new car technologies. I wonder, how does the minister decide or how does the program decide between the allocation to individual owners and to the industry‑wide basis. Obviously, in an industry‑wide basis like this, there are savings to be made in terms of training; there are savings in terms of systematic training and also training which brings people together across the industry. I think there is a fair amount of value in that.

Again, when I spoke on this in the House, I indicated that I thought that was a useful way of proceeding with workplace training. It was not an area that I found the government talking much about publicly. That is why I am interested in pursuing it here. How do you make that decision?

Mr. Manness: Well, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, what we try to do, we have individual requests. I guess what we will do is back off and try and determine whether the requests are in keeping with the requirement across a broader cross section of an industry. So rather than just rush out, and very rarely do we rush at any time with respect to this program, but rush out and receive and provide under an application for an individual‑‑let us say a car dealership, if we look at the training requests, we will make a determination whether or not those are required across the industry.

In that case, we will say no to the individual application, and we will say no, but we will be prepared to work with the association and work for the good of all. Under that umbrella then, individual companies then can come forward, but they will have to come under the umbrella of the association.

So we get a better value for our dollar, if we can do it by way of a sectoral agreement because then we can say to all, look, this is for the whole industry; we expect you then to also make a significant contribution on your own. That is what has happened in the vast majority of cases.

Ms. Friesen: Well, what struck me in the Birchwood case is that there were in that case five grants which were made to Birchwood for the different parts of its company. One wondered why, for example, Birchwood was not joining with other Toyota dealers or with other Honda dealers or with other Saab dealers, although I do not know how many there are of those, and doing that on an industry‑wide basis, or BMW. Why did that not happen?

Mr. Manness: Well, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again, I do not know. The member uses as an example Birchwood motor dealers. I am surprised the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) again‑‑I am trying to draw him into this debate‑‑would not because I know his‑‑

An Honourable Member: No, I never mention Birchwood.

Mr. Manness: Yes, I do not think he will ever mention Birchwood again and certainly not on the record.

Anyway, what I have reviewed with the member is the preferred route at the beginning, and as I have said, even to Birchwood, who have dialogued with me and, indeed, the automotive association, at the beginning, we took a pretty wide intake, and we did that deliberately. We are now looking for the methods that will enact the criteria since I have been in office that would be in keeping with the statement I made just now and which I think is in keeping with what the member for Wolseley (Mrs. Friesen) has said. We are wanting to drive more away from individual commitments to industry‑wide by the method that I have recorded.

Ms. Friesen: But the Birchwood case was the third year of the program. It was not at the beginning. Certainly, that is my concern with it. It did not seem to be a cost‑effective way to go. Well, it is one of my concerns. There are others we will discuss later. I do not mean to single out Birchwood, particularly. There were certainly other automotive dealers who were involved in similar situations and who might have been brought together with sections of the industry to, in fact, deal with this on a more cost‑effective basis.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I realize I do have some involvement in this whole thing at the very beginning. To use the automotive industry, when we first brought forward Workforce 2000, the automotive industry wanted to have eligibilities against the payroll tax reductions. When I was the Minister of Finance in charge of that, I said no.

At that time they then turned over to the Workforce 2000 plan which did not have a well‑prepared, at that time, sectoral outreach. It was individual application by firm, and that is how some firms, of course, were able to be more successful in terms of '92‑93. Of course, what we are doing since is anywhere we can force it to a sectoral agreement, which of course will call upon greater amounts of monies from the sector, then under that umbrella let the companies that have the means and/or the interest come forward.

Ms. Friesen: I think it was not '92‑93 that Birchwood was. It was '93‑94. So it is quite recent, I think.

The minister talked about, in his new approach, calling on greater resources from the association. First of all, could he explain what he means by that greater resources? Is the association putting in more money into these than it did before?

Mr. Manness: I did not mean that specific to the automobile trade association. I meant that generally to all, against all sectors.

* (1550)

Ms. Friesen: In reference to the automotive association, or indeed any of the other associations, the environmental association, the tourism education association, does that mean that since these are membership organizations the training that is offered under this umbrella, these partnerships, is only available to managers and employees of those particular members of the associations?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, again, to the extent that the training is homogeneous across the industry and this system is nurtured and indeed matures, we would not really be accessible to applications from people within that industry who came to us outside of the industry agreement. To the extent, though, that there might be a firm within that industry or sector who had a specialized need or a specialized training outside, again, the homogeneity of the requirement, then they could enter directly as a business outside of the industry association.

Again we are learning, too, as we go through this process and to the extent that we can define and indeed measure homogeneity of training across a wider cross section and that is where we prefer to deal with an association rather than many individual firms.

Ms. Friesen: How representative are each of these associations, for example, the Tourism Education Association? It is not one that I am familiar with. Who would belong to that, and how representative would they be of the tourism industry?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we cannot say it with certainty. I do not know whether that is the educational arm of TIAM, the Tourism Industry Association of Manitoba, or not. Therefore, I know there are private people there, there are some nonprofit organizations that also belong to this group, but it is full characteristic. I cannot speak to it just now.

Ms. Friesen: Would the minister undertake to let me know at a later date?

Mr. Manness: Yes, I will.

Ms. Friesen: The Motor Dealers Association, does the minister have any information with him or available at a later date as to who is represented in that association?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I will try and find out exactly who makes up the Manitoba Motor Dealers Association also. I think, from memory, it represents all of the car dealerships in the city of Winnipeg and the province. [interjection] Yes, it seems to me there are 26 or 30 members or something, but I will attempt to find out how many of that total industry are part of that association.

I have to point out, the member seems to say, well, they may not represent everybody. They may not, but we are not going to pass a law that says everybody has to belong to them either. This is a free association.

Ms. Friesen: The minister mentioned that some businesses outside the associations could enter directly in special cases. Could he tell us whether any have?

Mr. Manness: Are you talking specifically motor vehicle dealers or generally?

Ms. Friesen: Just generally. Again, obviously what I am looking for is the open accessibility of these courses. When they are organized through associations and as a general principle restricted to members of those associations, that is not an accountable and accessible program.

Mr. Manness: I guess the best way to answer the question is, firstly, we have tried to reach out to the needs of the industry, No. 1; No. 2, somebody has to accept the challenge. So if there was no association there it makes it more difficult for us and for that industry. Thank goodness there are associations there.

Individuals not belonging to that association can apply directly to the program. Never have we turned down any individual in any field because they are not a member of an association.

Ms. Friesen: My question was, have any applied directly and been involved? Again, my concern is that there is wide public knowledge about the availability of these courses.

Mr. Manness: Yes, it has happened where companies who were not part of an association have come to us and we have supported their training. And again, as I referenced earlier, some, being part of an association, have come to us on their own for some very specialized training outside of the general requirement of that industry, and we have also supported that.

Ms. Friesen: Would there be an example of that that the minister has available?

Mr. Manness: We will try to get an example of that, but again from memory in 40,000 or 50,000 success stories we just do not have that at our fingertips.

Ms. Friesen: Sorry, I missed that number, 40,000 to 50,000 success stories in the industry‑wide partnerships?

Mr. Manness: In the whole Workforce 2000 program.

Ms. Friesen: I was just referring to this program in which there are 26 partnerships this coming year. I would appreciate knowing if there have been other applications and if they have been accepted. Again my principle is the same one that I was posing in the last section of Workforce 2000, and that is industry‑wide partnerships are a good idea, work‑based training is a good idea, but we have public money going into this which is not widely known or equally available, and that is my concern.

Mr. Manness: I do not know; when the member says, it is not widely known, that calls into question that we have not done a good job of advertising the program. I guess somewhere in the member's remarks she might like to indicate how it is or whether or not she feels we should spend $50,000, $100,000, $200,000 advertising the program better?

I know that because when I sponsored the Parents' Forum and some criticized me for not advertising, I said no, I am not spending the $40,000 required to take that out in all of the newspapers of the province to advertise that.

It is very, very costly to have the message put out. Then I imagine as soon as we did, if we were to do it now, we would be criticized for of course making political statements on the eve of an election. It seems like you cannot win when you are in government.

The member makes the statement, well, not everybody knows about this. I can tell you, if we put half a million dollars into advertising the program so everybody knew, plus the results and the achievements, we would be severely criticized by members opposite. I know we would.

* (1600)

Ms. Friesen: Well, this is not a government which is afraid to advertise, so I do think that there are other ways in which one might advertise. We are working in partnership with associations. Is there any requirement in the grant for example that the associations advertise it? They have access to the industry, not just to their own members. There is a possibility.

People around this table I think have just suggested two other possibilities which they may want to put on the record. Perhaps this is the very area of innovation and creativity and Six Thinking Hats and Edward de Bono and lateral thinking that the minister might want to indulge in.

Mr. Manness: We can carry the message only so far, and we ask the associations‑‑we do not have to ask them, they take it to their membership. We sense that our industries are sufficiently small in numbers of firms within them that not much happens that is not known regardless of the size of the industry.

We sense that the scale we are talking about, there are very few businesses who are not aware of the opportunities under this program.

Ms. Friesen: It is a general way of thinking that elites do have, that word of mouth, association members, people in the know that people will know. I just remind the minister that it is the money of all the people and there are ways, creatively and inexpensively, of ensuring that there are means for all the people to know that these courses and these programs are available for them. I am sure it is a way of thinking that all governments get into, but it does tend to narrow accessibility and is, I think, something which there are ways of avoiding.

Mr. Manness: I would ask the member, if we embarked upon any of those ways could we expect any criticism whatsoever from the NDP? If we would try to publicly sell Workforce 2000 in an informational sense, would the NDP then not be critical of our attempt to make the program better known?

Ms. Friesen: I think the minister understands my purpose clearly enough. This is public money which should be publicly available. Public knowledge, publicly tabled curriculum, public evaluation are what we are asking for in this program, and public accountability. Accessibility, evaluation and accountability, the kinds of things which we demand of public institutions we are also looking for here.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, there has never been a public institution, never since the beginning of time, that has gone through the rigour of analysis as this money. There has not been ever a public institution called upon to spend the dollars. Never has anybody had to publicly‑‑never has a Minister of Education sat in the chair to be held accountable for the institutions, the formal institutions of the university and/or the community colleges to the degree that I have been held accountable for Workforce 2000. Never. I have never seen a Minister of Education, in all the years I have been in this Chamber, 13 years, have a go on accountability with respect to those questions.

Ms. Friesen: You have not been in the Chamber for the last three days. Three minutes there and 40 minutes out.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I was in the session today for 30 minutes in the House.

Ms. Friesen: That is quite a statement from the minister, and I certainly will look forward to quoting that back at him on a variety of occasions.

Perhaps he might care to look at the annual report of any university across the country.

Mr. Manness: I am the accountable, not the report.

Ms. Friesen: You do not have a report for Workforce 2000. That is an absolutely outrageous statement that Workforce 2000 has been subject to any level of accountability. You cannot provide today even the names of the programs, the names of the people, the partners who are involved, the detail of 12 months ago.

You are confused about which year Birchwood motors got its grant. I quite understand that you do not have the information available today, and we will accept it when you do provide it. Then to claim on top of that that in fact this is the most accountable program in government is really stretching things a little bit.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, nobody said this was the most accountable program in government. Nobody said that.

For the member, we have given information to the member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) and to the NDP caucus that magnifies several hundred times any information that I, as the Minister of Education, in many cases can request from the universities. Academic freedom is incredible power, and the member sits there and defends it, but a Minister of Education has no call on a lot of the internal governance issues and indeed the dollars supporting it and indeed the reserve accounts of university.

Mr. Deputy Chairperson, try to go through this detail within a public institution and you will have the door slammed in your face.

Yet, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I am the Minister of Education held accountable for everything that happens within some of our formal institutions. So let me say to the member, we do not have an annual report yet with respect to Workforce 2000, not yet. We may not have one, but in due course we probably will. The reality is, I am answering questions. I am giving detail to the members, and I am going to give them more detail. I tell you, we are fully accountable for this program, this very good program, I might add.

Ms. Friesen: I think the minister will find that if he picks up the phone and phones the university and asks them for curricula‑‑[interjection] Well, pick up a college. Pick up any post‑secondary institution and ask for curricula, ask for qualifications of the teachers, ask for evaluation of the programs, ask for the years in which they are given. Any member of the public can do that.

I am trying to represent the members of the public and to get some basic information on the record about Workforce 2000. I think probably it would be better for the minister if we stuck to that rather than get into these outlandish statements that he wants to put on the record, but that is his choice. If he would like to head off into deeper pastures, it would be quite interesting and quite useful for other purposes. [interjection] That is right, yes, in great detail.

So in terms of evaluation then, could the minister tell us what evaluations have been done on the last year of industry‑wide partnerships?

(Mr. Jack Penner, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we have done reviews and we have done reports and some of them border on evaluations. Some may not. It depends, but this is the list of things we have done to try and monitor exactly what has happened under the 27 sectoral initiatives.

Ms. Friesen: I just want to make sure with the different terminologies that are used here. The Estimates line says industry‑wide partnerships and the minister is using sectoral initiatives. Those are the same thing, are they?

Mr. Manness: The same terminology. We have had participant evaluations in all training initiatives. We have monitored the worksite through visits. We have done summative project reports, a final report including outcomes in the human resource committees. We have done specified external evaluations in some of the longer‑term partnerships. I am thinking about particularly here, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the aerospace industry to name one.

* (1610)

Ms. Friesen: Are those final reports in the human resources sector available?

Mr. Manness: None of these are available. These are internal working documents.

Ms. Friesen: What was that the minister said about accountable, open, responsible, will give detailed information? It could have been only 30 seconds ago.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, that is why the Provincial Auditor gave us a passing grade because everything was in order.

Ms. Friesen: Did the Provincial Auditor read the final reports of the human resource program?

Mr. Manness: I would not know.

Ms. Friesen: My understanding from the Provincial Auditor was that she did not read those reports, that she dealt with financial accountability.

The Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Would the honourable member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) like to make comment?

Ms. Friesen: So there have been evaluations done, and it looks like a diverse list. The worksite visits, how often would that be done during the course of an agreement?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we direct most of our visiting to the wage‑assisted areas. Over a year, we would visit possibly once a quarter, at least two or three times a year.

Ms. Friesen: I understood that we were talking about the 27 sectoral initiatives or the Industry‑Wide Partnerships, and that was where the minister gave me the list of participant evaluations, worksite visits, summative program evaluations, final reports in the human resources sector and external evaluations with the aerospace.

Perhaps we need to clarify what that list was about. I understood it to be the 27 sectoral initiatives. I have not yet moved to the Training Incentives Contracts section.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we have monitored, under industry‑wide initiatives, all of the agreements struck. I will use some, for example: Cal‑West, D.W. Friesen, Manitoba Fashion, Manitoba Rolling Mills, Manitoba Pork. We have monitored Brandon and District Chefs Association, Manitoba dental lab technicians association and Manitoba Motor Dealers Association to pick one that is well known. Of course there is not one that we have not monitored.

I have just gone down the list. We have final reports developed in about half of the areas, and we have evaluations, formal evaluations, I guess, outcome evaluations in about a third of these areas. Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we do our best to evaluate these programs in some consistent fashion.

Ms. Friesen: I am not sure I would agree that it is consistent if only 50 percent have a final report and if only a third have outcome evaluations. Is it intended that those will all be completed in a consistent manner?

Mr. Manness: Yes, we provide consistency in all of our decisions. We bring principles and consistency to all of the programs that we have introduced in government.

Ms. Friesen: When does the minister anticipate that final reports will be available on all the programs completed?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, many of the agreements that we, again, looked at in '93‑94 that called for still support in '94‑95 are still in place. Within three to six months of the completion, we will attempt to have a final report at that time.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister tell us, again I am still speaking of the sectoral initiatives, what is involved in monitoring? How often are the worksites visited, and is every worksite visited?

Mr. Manness: In the wage‑assisted areas, we will monitor more frequently, as I have indicated before, than we would, for instance, in some of the agreements by sector with associations. In that case, we call on the association to be more active with us. We will monitor in the terms of financial accounting and to make sure the bills and the receipts are done.

Now I know exactly what the member is going to say. She is going to say, oh, well, it could collapse right here, but we refuse, quite honestly, to increase the staff a thousandfold. We are out there virtually in almost every worksite, and to have inspectors running around to all the worksites in place, of course, would mean more money would go into bureaucracy than into training. I know that is the NDP way, and I know they would like to do it that way, but we will not.

An Honourable Member: Here he goes again.

Mr. Manness: The member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway) says here I go again. Well, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I mean I was not born yesterday. I know where the line of questioning ultimately will lead, so that is the difference in philosophy between the members.

An Honourable Member: Go to your corner and create a diversion.

Mr. Manness: I am not cornered, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson. I have said straight up that this is a good‑faith model, and to the extent that some break faith because there is greater opportunity given where training is now happening in so many more workforces, workplaces than happened before, then obviously the only way we could make sure that it happened in every case was to hire literally hundreds of more inspectors. We refused to do that.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Acting Deputy Chair, I was following up on what the minister had said, and he did say that under sectoral initiatives worksite visits took place. So my question was, how many worksite visits take place and essentially under what conditions? How often do you visit them? Does everybody visit it once, twice? What kind of inspection takes place?

(Mr. Deputy Chairperson in the Chair)

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, there is no hard and set rule. I mean, again, when we deal with the associations, they are called upon to have a role and responsibility also in monitoring their members in some of the activity under the program, and we will do audits from time to time in the sense of arriving in certain areas. Do we visit every training site under every program under umbrella? Probably the answer is no.

Ms. Friesen: It was not quite the question I asked. I asked under the 27 sectoral initiatives is every worksite visited? Is that what you said?

* (1620)

Mr. Manness: Well, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, that is what I said.

Ms. Friesen: Okay. What did the minister mean when he said, under the 27 sectoral initiatives that a summative program evaluation was done. Could he describe what one of those looks like? Could he tell me who does it, and are any of those available?

Mr. Manness: What we mean is, for example, the association and training consultant prepare a final report including the number of participants who completed, feedback from instructors and participants and recommendations for future training. Of course, monitoring also occurs to the human resource committee structure of most projects.

So, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, Workforce 2000 will talk to the personnel managers within the various companies and ask for an assessment from them, also. Of course, it comes together as one summative report.

Ms. Friesen: Are those available, any of them available? Is there a summation of all the reports of the sectoral initiative to date that is available?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, it just goes to the file, and it is included with all the information therein.

Ms. Friesen: So the answer is no, that they are not available.

Mr. Manness: Who is asking for them?

Ms. Friesen: I have been asking for any evidence of evaluation of Workforce 2000 for some time. Now I am asking specifically where the reports are, and are these particular ones available? These sound quite general, quite interesting, a useful guide to the public on how the money has been spent, what has been successful, what has not been successful, what future directions we might want to look at in work‑base training. It seems to me that even a summation of these reports and an evaluation of the program would be helpful.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, as close as we could come, some of the reports I am talking about are participant by participant or, more importantly, employer by employer. That is privileged information; that is not public information.

Ms. Friesen: But we are looking at sectoral initiatives, not employer by employer.

Mr. Manness: Right, but under that there are employers who come forward and we, of course, go down to the employer level. Even though the agreement has been struck with the association, the reports that we have are employer by employer.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the examples that we have of sectoral initiative in this case are the two that we discussed. One was the Lord Selkirk one and the other was automotive repair where MPIC did the training and people came from a variety of areas to an MPIC location and were trained. Now in that case, that seemed to me that what the minister was proposing there was the way in which sectoral initiatives worked. Now how does the minister go from that to evaluate that by employer by employer? Why is the evaluation not done by the sponsoring partner?

Mr. Manness: We asked the association to do a global overview too, but that does not remove us in our responsibility from still dealing on the micro basis with their employers and to making sure, to the extent that we can, and have resources to make sure that the training is taking place and there was a final report with respect to individual employers.

Ms. Friesen: But the initiative and purpose of this is to deal with the sector to ensure that the skills that the sector needs and the sector sees that it wants to develop are being done. So why is the primary evaluation not done with the primary partner, which is the sector, and which is looking at the long‑term needs of that sector in the Manitoba economy? Why does the minister then go back in his evaluation to the individual employer? I can see that there is a place for the individual employer in the evaluation, but surely the primary evaluation should be with the partner, and surely that is quite eligible for being a public document.

Mr. Manness: Primary assessment is done with the industry partner, but we still have requirements beyond that, and that is why of course we have received such a report, a glowing report from the Provincial Auditor, because we try to do all of this. But the member is asking, why do you not make the report that is done by the association public? I can say that maybe a time will come in the not too distant future where that might happen.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, in each of the cases of the sectoral programs, could the minister give us an idea of what kind of training plan has been tabled or what kind of curricula has been developed? The two examples which we have had so far of the sectoral program, obviously the Lord Selkirk one does not apply and the MPIC one was done with a national curriculum. Can the minister indicate in the other areas what kind of curriculum has been involved, for example in the motor dealers' one?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, everybody has to give us a training plan. We do not necessarily have a curriculum in all cases, and we attempt to make sure those plans are followed.

Again, we are not going to make those public either.

(Mr. Jack Penner, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)

Ms. Friesen: So is it fair then to say that this $1.8‑million program that the minister is asking us to pass involves largely self‑policing by the industry‑‑no curriculum is necessarily available, although it may be in some cases‑‑that a training plan is tabled to the minister of perhaps four to five lines of print?

I mean that is what is left on the form for it, perhaps some of them are longer, that the evaluations which are done are done in some part by themselves, and that the outcome evaluations have only been done for a third of the ones that have already been completed, and this is the $1.8 million that the minister wants us to pass.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, that is not fair at all. As a matter of fact, it is terribly unfair. I am disappointed that the member would even attempt to chronicle in the fashion she has, the discussion over the course of this afternoon.

It would be much fairer to say, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I am sure any objective measurer would indicate that there is a tremendous mix of training techniques and beyond that as between in‑house/outside.

Let me use an example: Red River Community College, for instance, delivers some partial programming under Workforce 2000. For instance, I can think of D.W. Friesen, one of our great printing companies in Altona, offers certification of entry‑level graphic arts training. My colleague is sitting beside me, and I talk about this often. Part of that training, of course, is outside of the facility. Why would we ask them to give us the curriculum of the outside institution, in this case Red River Community College?

* (1630)

So, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the plans are what are the most important. The member can say, well, yes, but the people that do then give you plans, it may be only a three‑ or four‑line plan. I do not know why she would say that, other than to be mischievous. I do not know why she would state that.

Ms. Friesen: Because that is what is on the form, there are four lines.

Mr. Manness: Well, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, a form with four lines does not stop you from adding to it four pages. So I point that out to the member.

Then I can also say the Manitoba Aerospace project could use a public institution to a significant fashion, and it does. So then does the member want us to have on file all of the curriculums of the public institutions? So we just cannot be providing for ourselves, indeed calling forward all of the curriculum, when much of it, of course, the firm does not even have; it is offered elsewhere.

I just make the final comment that given the nature of this programming, which, again, is out of keeping with the traditional state model, and that is where you force everything through public institutions. This is a good‑faith model, and it builds on some trust. It says, we have trust in some of our employer groups. It says that we trust you well enough that this training is going to be done. It is going to be in a formula fashion way.

Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we will continue to evaluate the best way we can. Ultimately, I am sure, we will be reporting in a greater fashion with respect to results, but ultimately, at the end of the day, we do not have a battery of inspectors to go around to make sure that the files are all full, No. 1, and No. 2, to make sure that every minute on the training is done, because that is the old, hard‑bent, state institutional life. That is what we are trying to get away from, in some dimension, in our province.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, nobody was asking for a battery of inspectors. I was simply asking, were the worksites visited once?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I said, there were 40,000 people trained over‑‑[interjection] I have to indicate that under those 27 agreements there could be literally a thousand worksites. I guess what I am saying is that no, we did not visit all of those many, countless numbers of worksites that fall under those 27 agreements.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, is that in fact the general number the minister works with, that there are a thousand worksites in the sectoral agreements? Again, the only two examples that we have discussed in detail here have involved one worksite and a public survey, the Lord Selkirk one and the MPIC one.

Now, I would be interested in learning‑‑and again the minister must recognize that there is no public information on this program, so what we are getting here today is the basic step‑by‑step introduction to Workforce 2000. I am going from the two examples we have discussed where there was one workplace. Now the minister tells me there are a thousand worksites in the 27 sectoral agreements. It certainly does change the nature of the questions, I agree with him, but that is new information.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, my statement was made not remembering the reference to 27. There is no way we can separate this programming from the individual businesses, so my statement still stands, but it is across all the programming of Workforce 2000. So when the member says, well, then you should maybe focus in on this area, we still are out there doing what we can across the many applicants who come in under all of the areas of programming.

Ms. Friesen: When I first started this line of questioning on the 27 sectoral initiatives, the minister said that there were participant evaluations, worksite visits, summative programs, final reports on human resources and external evaluations involved in the aerospace one. Now, since the minister seems to have been going back and forth to the larger program, does he want to sort of set the record right and tell me again what is involved in the evaluation of the 27 sectoral initiatives?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I put that on the record.

Ms. Friesen: The minister said that there were worksite visits then under the sectoral initiative and now he says, there are not. So I am trying to get the record straight. What exactly happens in the sectoral initiatives in terms of evaluation?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I said, worksite visits in those cases where there is wage assistance. That is what I said, and that happens. That happens every 10 weeks to every 13 weeks. Yes, I did say that.

Ms. Friesen: Under these sectoral initiatives, how many wage‑assisted parts are there to that? Again, for example, the two that we have discussed in detail, I understand had no wage assistance involved. So how many did, under these 27 partnerships?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I have no breakout for that. That is old information. Sorry.

The Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): Shall the item pass?

Ms. Friesen: Would the minister undertake to provide that information? We are talking about evaluation. The minister said there were worksite visits. At this point, well, I really would just like to get it straight. Were there worksite visits or were there not? Is there wage assistance in the sectoral sections or not? I am trying to get the basic public information on this program.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I said that there is wage assistance in this area, and we will attempt to find for the member which of the 27 categories provide some level of support in a wage assistance manner.

Ms. Friesen: In the financing of these programs, where there is wage assistance, how is that accounted for? I have an example here‑‑I do not think I have the financial information on the MPIC one. Was there any wage assistance on the MPIC one? Maybe we can use that as the continuing example.

Mr. Manness: We are quite sure that there was not, but again we could stand to be corrected.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister then give me an example of where there was wage assistance and how that is accounted for in the Estimates? Does it, for example, come under this $1.8 million, or is there another section of these lines under 16.4(h) that accounts for the wage portion of that?

* (1640)

Mr. Manness: An example might be wage assistance provided to Carte International to train some transformer technicians.

Ms. Friesen: How would I find that on the Estimates line? Is that included in this $1.8 million?

Mr. Manness: To the extent it happened in the past and if it were to happen again in the future, it would be included in the $1.8 million.

Ms. Friesen: Under the other expenses on this line, there is also a section called Social Assistance. I wondered if the wage assistance portion came out of that.

Mr. Manness: That is the line.

Ms. Friesen: So where do I find the $1.8 million? How does that break down? What portion, for example, of the sectoral initiative wage assistance comes out of that? Or is there a breakdown for that?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the $1.8 million is included in the social assistance line of $3.2 million, so, yes the support for wage assistance would be included in this line.

Ms. Friesen: I am sorry, I missed a step there, I think. In that $3.2 million, the wage assistance portion of the sectoral initiative is included, but it does not include the whole $1.8 million. Does that $1.8 million come out of that $3.2 million line?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I am looking at the same page‑‑the $3.27 million plus the grants transfer payments of $400,000 totals under the program expenditure $3.67 million. The $1.8 million I have been referring to is one‑half of that $3.6 million.

Ms. Friesen: I am just a little puzzled about then applying the terminology of "social assistance" to something which presumably is a little broader than that.

Mr. Manness: That is the code used throughout government in all of our programs. That is common across all of our programs apparently.

Ms. Friesen: So any grant to an external agency is classified as social assistance?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I refer the member to 144 for definitions, of the glossary, page 2 in the Supplementary Information booklet at the bottom. That includes payments to citizens and groups. So it is a general heading meant to relate to all those factors.

Ms. Friesen: In my book it actually says Clothing for Citizens, Fees and Services. So is this defined as a fee to citizens?

Mr. Manness: The word is "allowances." That is in mine. It says allowances. So it is a catchall area.

Ms. Friesen: So when we look at that $3.27 million or $3.67 million‑‑it is just that I would have expected this to be under grants and contracts.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, these are not grants. These are programming funds.

What is different between the top line and the bottom line, the $400,000 is in keeping with an agreement we have with the Manitoba Aerospace Industries Association, a five‑year agreement, '91‑96, and that is a payment directly to the association; whereas, again, the bottom line is a payment either directly to or in support of the activities of trainees under this program.

Ms. Friesen: It is more than trainees. It is paying for facilities in the sense of classrooms and for trainees.

Mr. Manness: "In support of" is what I said. I did not say it was paid directly to them. It is in support of their training activities. So some of it obviously would be directed to the activities around that training and would not flow through their hands.

Ms. Friesen: I am trying to connect this to other departments I am familiar with. When Culture, Heritage and Citizenship, for example, distributes money for programs, I am not sure that they distribute it under a line called social assistance. I could be wrong, but it has certainly never struck me before.

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we acknowledge that the definition is gray, but it is what we have used for years within Education or within Training and within all of government.

Ms. Friesen: When the government then calculates its payments in social services, is this calculated as part of it? When we talk about, for example, the increase in social assistance payments, do we then add up all of these kinds of categories and are these included in that‑‑what most people would think of as a rising welfare bill? Are these things included?

Mr. Manness: Definitely not.

Ms. Friesen: Where is that bill calculated then? What is that based on?

Mr. Manness: That is within Family Services, within particularly that line. That is one‑half of the department. The member knows that is based on volumes; that is based on the changes in the programming. It is built on price increases. Those are the basic components that go into building the social allowance totals. It does not begin to pick up all of the training needs and the other needs of individuals that are sponsored in a number of other departments as what would appear to be miscellaneous lines.

Ms. Friesen: Mr. Acting Deputy Chair, I want to look at the Training Incentives Contracts now, a section of Workforce 2000. Could the minister tell us, what is the amount of money anticipated to be spent in that area this year and the amount of money last year in that line?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, before I talked about the total of $1.67 million and I allocated $1.8 of it to industry‑wide initiatives. In the training incentives area, that total is $1,645,000.

Ms. Friesen: What was the number on that line last year?

Mr. Manness: The number for that line last year was $1,558,600, and that was the actual expense for '93‑94.

Ms. Friesen: This does not include the programs which are run under the payroll deduction account.

Mr. Manness: No, it does not.

Ms. Friesen: That payroll deduction section is not included in either of the industry‑wide partnerships or province‑wide special courses.

Mr. Manness: That is correct.

Ms. Friesen: So there is in fact a further section of Workforce 2000 developed in conjunction with industry partners under the payroll tax deduction program which is not included in this 16.4(h)(1).

Mr. Manness: That is correct. That is housed in the Department of Finance.

* (1650)

Ms. Friesen: The Training Incentives Contracts then, could the minister again tell me what has been evaluated in past years, what has been learned from those evaluations, what the minister has found valuable in previous years, and which initiatives have been discontinued?

Mr. Manness: Well, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I am very happy the member has asked this question, because of course this is where so many of the individual firms have access to Workforce 2000. Regardless of scope or size or where they are located or who they are, they have an opportunity to be part of this wonderful program.

The member asks how it is we monitor and/or evaluate. This is not an exhaustive list of what we do in every case, but this is what we do generally, and in some cases we may do more than one, if not several, with respect to any one firm. We ask the participant to do their own evaluations at the end of their training. We will do a telephone survey and talk to employers primarily.

I made reference before to the thousand work sites. That was a number not literally to be taken but meaning a very large number, worksite monitoring. Do we attend at all of the worksites? Obviously not, but we do monitor and visit those that we can. Then we, in some cases, will visit the training site if that is not necessarily the worksite. Then we will request third‑party evaluations. In this case, the federal Business Development Bank would be a third‑party example. Then we do a survey of the training outcome, and we will survey the employers three to six months afterwards again to determine the impact. So this is what we attempt to do. Again, this has been shared with the Provincial Auditor as to the methods of intervention that we use, and, as no doubt part of the reason that the report, favourable as it is, has come back in the fashion it has.

Ms. Friesen: I think there is some dispute about the nature of that satisfaction. Can we take each of these items then and examine how they have been used?

The participants' survey, how has that been conducted? Is that a written participants' survey done by each participant in every course, and are the results given to the department or to the trainer or to the employer?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, again, as I ran down that list, I said that not every one of these applied to every participant and/or every program. We do have a large number, though, but not all participants, are surveyed. They file an evaluation, and we keep those on file.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister tell us what proportion of courses or programs have participant evaluations? Are we looking at 50 percent, 75 percent, 90 percent?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we sense that the number would be around 50 percent, although we are not absolutely certain, but we feel that is a fair estimate at this time.

Ms. Friesen: Why are some evaluated in that way and not others? Is it something that is peculiar to a particular type of courses or to a particular type of training program? Some lend themselves to different kinds of evaluations. Or is it the nature of the trainer, that some are perhaps more careful than others? What are the reasons? Half are being evaluated in this way; half are not. Is there a rational reason for that?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the short answer is yes to the all of the above plus the fact that we do not have all the resources necessary to enforce it or to make sure it happens in all the cases. So the member has answered her own question.

Ms. Friesen: Well, no, I have not. What I did was give the minister a few ideas that he might want to cite in response, and he chose not to respond with any of them. It would be possible, for example, if the minister believed that this type of evaluation was appropriate, to ensure that there was a contingent fee applied to that, that until those participant evaluations came in, in areas where the minister felt that they were required, then you simply do not pay their final stage of the contract. Has that happened, or is that not something the minister considers appropriate?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I will take the recommendation under advisement.

Ms. Friesen: The telephone survey of employers, is that conducted with every employer, or is that again a proportion of employers? Does it depend, for example, if you have had participant evaluation, you would not phone the employer?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we did evaluations by telephone roughly of 20 percent of all of the clients, the employer clients.

Ms. Friesen: Then we are back to worksite monitoring. What proportion of the worksites were monitored, and on what basis were they chosen to be monitored?

Mr. Manness: Exactly the same answer applies as to under the other program. We would monitor every site where there was wage assistance involved and try to do the best we could in the rest, but, again, we would not visit every site. I do not even know what percent in total we may have visited.

Ms. Friesen: What proportion of these programs are wage‑assisted or have a wage‑assistance component under this small grant program?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, less than 5 percent.

Ms. Friesen: The third‑party evaluation that the minister talked about, how many third‑party evaluations were done?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, in that as many as a third of the training contracts would have been at public institutions, and, of course, those are very easy to approach and to provide third‑party evaluations, so that I would say roughly a third.

Ms. Friesen: The minister gave earlier as a specific example of that, the Federal Business Development Bank. Could the minister tell us how many were evaluated in that manner by the Federal Business Development Bank?

Mr. Manness: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, without an awful lot of work, I cannot provide that number.

The Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Penner): The hour now being six o'clock, committee rise.

HEALTH

Madam Chairperson (Louise Dacquay): Order please, will the Committee of Supply please come to order.

This section of the Committee of Supply is dealing with the Estimates for the Department of Health. We are on item 6 page 87 of the Estimates manual. Would the minister's staff please enter the Chamber?

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Chairperson, I guess you indicated we are dealing with 21.6?

Madam Chairperson: Yes, we are on item 6. Insured Benefits.

An Honourable Member: We can go on to 7, can we not?

Madam Chairperson: Item 6. Insured Benefits (a) Salaries and Employee Benefits $5,678,500‑‑pass; (b) Other Expenditures $2,337,900‑‑pass.

Resolution 21.6: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $8,016,400 for the Department of Health for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1995.

Item 7. Health Services Insurance Fund (a) Manitoba Health Board $350,000‑‑pass.

(b) Healthy Communities Development $12,000,000.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I have a few general questions that concern the whole appropriation 7 that I will attempt to go through at this point, and I appreciate the assistance of my colleagues in allowing me to deal with some of the questions at present.

My initial question to the minister is with respect to funding to the hospitals, and the minister has indicated that expenditures to hospitals are down this fiscal year, that is '94‑95, by $5 million, and that is correct. The last fiscal year funding to hospitals was cut by some $20 million from $950 million to $930 million, and now it is down to $924 million which in the two‑year period, by my calculations, amounts to approximately $45 million less in the last two years going into the hospital sector.

* (1430)

I have asked this minister the question before, but it has been brought to our attention that there is a government target of a cut of about $100 million over three years which includes the last fiscal year, 1994‑94 and 1995‑96, which would constitute about $100 million. Therefore, in the last two fiscal years $45 million has been achieved. Presumably there will be a further reduction to achieve this $100 million goal in the next fiscal year. I wonder if the minister might comment on that.

Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Chairperson, I am not likely to confirm the figures the honourable member has used. To say $45 million less in the last two years is very much a simplification of all the things that happen, and to say that over the next three years $100 million will be taken from the budgets of the hospitals is another oversimplification.

I know the genesis of the honourable member's raising of this matter, and I have made it clear that the numbers used by the honourable member, the number used by the MHO, indeed numbers used by the Department of Health for the purposes of long‑term planning, can only be described as speculative at this time, and if used inappropriately could be suggested that they are being used only for the purpose of scaring people. I am not into that, and I do not think that is the right approach.

I will acknowledge that we are challenging facilities across the province as part of our health care plan to make the best and wisest and safest use of the facilities they have because, as we have been and will continue to develop community alternatives, the possibility exists for the appropriate downsizing of acute spaces in Manitoba. It is going to be necessary that we have the right number of spaces to deal with pediatrics, for example, that we have the right number to deal with medical needs in hospitals, surgical needs, obstetrical and all of those things. It is through a very careful and phased approach that we are able to do this.

We do, through our correspondence with the facilities in our ongoing relationship with them, challenge them to look beyond the one‑year budget year that we are planning for and to begin to study proposals for how we expect to make this happen. If we did not do that, the extension would be that we would be building all of these services in the community and retaining unnecessary services and very expensive services in acute care facilities.

That is where I think the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) yesterday suggested that we disagree on some areas. That seems to be an area where we disagree, where the party of the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) suggests that we keep all that capacity in our acute care places and as well build new capacity in the community. If you think for very long at all and you look at revenues across this country, you know that particular approach cannot work. If I am wrong about that, the member will correct me.

The issue here and the things that we should, in my humble submission, be debating are whether we are doing this job appropriately, safely, whether acute care can be downscaled, whether we are moving quickly and well enough in the area of the community. Those are things I do not mind discussing and debating with the honourable member. Obviously, I do not because we have a solid record of achievement over the last two or three years that demonstrates that the plan is working. We have independent evaluation to demonstrate that what we are doing is being done safely and the health status of Manitobans is not being affected in a negative way. In fact, it is expected we will show that the health status of Manitobans will improve as a result of the renewal and the reform measures that are being taken.

I have said I am not going to be involved in a discussion about phantom numbers, even though the member has seen that number on a piece of paper. Indeed, I am confirming that the department is challenging facilities to be efficient and to stop wasting money. I acknowledge that is what is happening.

To play around with numbers the way I am being invited to do, I am not going to do that because I do not want to be guilty of trying to scare people, as I might, if I did engage in that endeavour.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, the real issue is the fact that when acute care bed downsizing takes place, the community‑based services should be in place prior to the downsizing. Arrangements should be made for the retraining of staff to move from acute care, if at all possible, to community‑based care prior to upheaval in the staff.

My next line of questioning, however, concerns a different issue, and it has to do with waiting lists. Can the minister indicate whether there is any kind of statistical data or information, be it for the Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation or any other government agency that is looking at the whole question of waiting lists for surgeries and other procedures. I know that there has been a study with respect to surgery and repatriation to rural Manitoba, but this specific question that I am asking is in relation to the waiting list for surgery in the city of Winnipeg specifically?

Mr. McCrae: Very briefly, I will respond to a matter raised by the member for Crescentwood (Ms. Gray) last evening with respect to Sandra Sloan that was related to the issue of the diabetic condition of this particular individual.

I did indeed receive a letter from this individual. It was dated January 7, and it explained difficulties Ms. Sloan was experiencing respecting the financial aspect of her situation.

On March 4, I responded and suggested this person apply to the Life Saver Drug Program. The program is aimed at providing medications that are lifesaving to Manitobans who cannot afford them because of low income. The application form to the program was made available to Ms. Sloan. As of May 18, I understand no application has been received by the Life Saver Drug Program.

I do encourage the honourable member, if she wishes, to follow this up further. If there is something more that I am not aware of, I would welcome further information about it because, as I say, I think we are talking about a person I have met too and spent a fair amount of time discussing issues with.

Before I get on to the specific question the member raised, the member for Kildonan, he was saying you should have community services in place before you look at acute care downscaling, and there is something to what he says, but we also have to remember there is a role here with respect to the average length of stay, which is another very important dimension of all of this, that has an impact on capacity in our hospitals.

For us to pretend that there have been no advancements in surgical medical procedures in the last number of years is to pretend‑‑average length of stay is very much a factor. I do not have a lot of examples before me, but they do exist, of course, where for certain surgeries length of stay has been great‑‑[interjection] Well, yes, gall bladder, laparoscopic surgical techniques, eye surgery techniques, all of these things and others. Obstetrics is another example where length of stay has been greatly reduced.

The equation the member is talking about ignores that factor as well, so that ultimately we can expect to see outright savings from the health care expenditure when you look at community care, which does not cost as much as acute care, and when you look at the average length of stay issue.

* (1440)

Again, I guess you can ask, you can measure what we are doing and make criticisms but look at comparisons that exist elsewhere. Were there community provisions made for the closure of 5,000 beds in Ontario? The honourable member for Kildonan nods his head in the affirmative. I wonder if that is a universally held view. I doubt that it is. I doubt there was much stock taken for what measures were available in the community when they closed 52 hospitals in Saskatchewan. Those things are also relevant to this discussion.

Now, the honourable member asked about waiting lists for the various surgeries, and I know long before any talk of health care renewal or reform ever took place, waiting lists existed. I remember complaining about them when I was in opposition in Manitoba. What was the response of the New Democratic government of the day to the waiting list problem in Brandon?‑‑well, shut down 42 beds permanently‑‑for the first time in Manitoba. That was the response.

Let us put these things in perspective, but let us also remember that Dr. Ross Brown is the chair of the appropriate access review group. That committee is composed of a number of people who have an interest in management of waiting lists. By saying what I have said, I am not saying that waiting lists in all areas are acceptable. I am not saying that because there are people on waiting lists who would like to get that aspect of their lives over with, get on with their surgery and get on with their lives. I fully understand that.

Sometimes they are in pain. Sometimes they live with a considerable amount of discomfort and inconvenience. It has an impact on their jobs, an impact on their families, and I understand all that. That is why we need to have an appropriate access review group to address these matters. That is why we need to have bed utilization planning, so we can improve those circumstances. We know we have enough capacity in our hospitals but when I hear, for example, about a pile‑up or a jam‑up in an emergency room, one of the first things I ask‑‑I mean, Winnipeg is only so big‑‑what is the situation in all the other emergency rooms? Are they all piled up at the same time or is there a place for people? If it is not an emergency, it is in surgical beds or even medical beds. Are we working, are all our hospitals in Winnipeg working as a team so that we can serve the people who need the services?

The terms of reference for the appropriate access review group are to develop better mechanisms for managing urgent referrals and scheduling in orthopedic surgery, cardiovascular surgery, angioplasty, oncology and cataract surgery; to review present schedules and waiting lists by physician and hospital for the above procedures to determine the following: protection of patient health status, consistency, appropriateness and equitable access.

Another term of reference is to develop consensus protocols for determining priority of access to services; to review priorization criteria used for scheduling urgent and elective procedures and determine the consistency of these criteria across the system and the interactions between hospitals providing these services; to identify accountability measures or practices currently in place with respect to medical management; to recommend to the Minister of Health implementation of improved mechanisms for managing urgent referrals and scheduling in the selected areas.

The honourable member needs to be reminded that while at one time there was quite a long wait for cataract surgery, that has been reduced very significantly through the mechanism of the consolidation of cataract services at Misericordia Hospital. We expect to reduce costs, and we also expect to conduct 600 additional surgeries in the space of a year. Now, I was not directly involved at the time, but I do not know what position the honourable member took when it came to that consolidation.

I know there were people in some other facilities who might have expressed some concern about that, but again I say, the proof is going to be in the pudding in a lot of these things. We are going to be the subject of lots of discussion. Ultimately, in these areas, I think we are going to be able to show that we are bringing about improvements. The appropriate access review group will report, and we expect a new system, for example, cardiac surgery, to be in place later this year.

I think some of the areas of concern are the ones that I have named: cardiac, cardiovascular, orthopedic, angioplasty, oncology, cataract surgery and also areas respecting‑‑I mentioned orthopedic, hip and knee are areas of concern. As our population ages, there are going to be more people needing those kinds of surgeries to improve their quality of life.

We are aware of those areas where further improvements are needed, but I do want to remind the honourable member that when I was in opposition, I sat just in the seat next to where the honourable member is sitting. I used to complain about waiting lists. I was quite shocked when, with no other plan in sight, the New Democrats of that day responded to waiting lists by closing beds at the Brandon General Hospital. It is quite an unforgettable thing. So let us keep those things in historical perspective.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I also hope the minister will keep in perspective the fact that he has, this government has had over six years to deal with this situation. I wrote to the minister this week concerning a constituent of mine, who is a 58‑year‑old gentleman, who requires heart surgery. He is in very desperate straits and has been told he cannot get heart surgery until late '95 or the spring of '96, I believe. I am not asking the minister for a response today, but it was an illustration of a serious situation. I have been contacted by the family, quite desperate because of his condition, and I hope and urge that the minister will look into that as soon as possible with respect to this individual, Mr. Felbel. I have sent a letter to the minister this week.

Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, I appreciate that the honourable member has made me aware of that particular situation. One of the more difficult aspects of dealing with people with cardiac situations is that some, in the judgment of their physician, require surgical intervention soon, very quickly, and in some cases the physician will advise the patient and the patient's family that it will be some time. That, I suggest, is a function of the physician too, working with his or her colleagues in terms of prioritizing the urgency of cases. Rather than discuss the case the honourable member is talking about here, I will indeed follow the matter up that he has raised with me.

* (1450)

It is not the only one. There have been others too. If you put yourself in the position of a person who is told by his or her doctor that you need to have heart surgery, it can be quite a stressful time, because as an organ, the heart is known to be one of the most vital organs in the human body. So if you are told that you need to have some kind of surgical intervention with respect to that particular organ, it is enough to cause a stressful situation for you, and I understand that.

There again, though, I cannot substitute my judgment for that of the physician who plays a role in scheduling. The honourable member knows the role a physician plays in the scheduling of OR time in the hospital and the priority that physicians place on their particular patient's condition, but beyond that, I will follow up further.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I also want to raise another matter with the minister with respect to an individual case. The individual has also tried to contact the minister directly. His name is Mr. Barr [phonetic]. He has contacted the minister's office. I have not had a chance to forward a letter, but I just want to outline the situation to the minister because I have done some follow‑up on this myself.

Apparently this gentleman's wife was admitted to the hospital, and she had a kidney stone that was too large to pass. Apparently they were going to move her to Health Sciences Centre to a machine called a lithotripter that would pulverize the kidney stone, thereby removing the problem.

Now, I understand the lithotripter machine is down for four weeks of the year. I was advised that it was down for four weeks of the year. In any event, this woman could not get the surgery apparently in Health Sciences Centre and it is the only machine available. She was forced to have shunting surgery done and sent home. She will have to then be sent back to have the pulverizing done and have the shunting removed.

The gentleman was also of the opinion that other individuals were in the same position, and it seems like a real difficulty and a real human concern whereby they have to have minor surgery, because they cannot have access to this machine, while waiting for access to this machine. I would appreciate very much if the minister could look into this and provide me with some kind of explanation as to that situation.

Mr. McCrae: I understand. I know of the individual to whom the honourable member refers. I also know of the issue. The only thing is I thought it was pronounced lithotripsy, but I am certainly not the expert on that. This is a machine that operates most of the time at Health Sciences Centre, and through routine scheduled maintenance, my understanding is that the honourable member is correct that for a certain number of weeks in the course of the year the machine is down but can be revived for nonelective or emergency circumstances.

So I cannot comment on the treatment the physician prescribed for the person about whom the honourable member is speaking, except to investigate further. That can either be brought up to operation quickly should it be necessary, or if it is on an elective basis, a case can wait until the maintenance procedures are completed. That is my understanding of the situation, and I think it is a question of a technology that I understand is less intrusive than other ways of dealing with these particular problems, and it is a good kind of thing to have.

It is also good to make sure it is in proper working order at all times. I understand that on another occasion when the lithotripter was down, I do not know if anyone had any issues to raise or complaints to make, but I knew that was the practice with this particular machine. I need to know more about whether this other surgery would have been necessary in any event. That is my point. If it was only because the lithotripter was down, I would want to know more about that because the lithotripter can be brought up to speed relatively quickly should it be required.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I thank the minister for that response, and either myself or Mr. Barr [phonetic], I am sure, will contact the minister concerning the additional information.

Seven Oaks Hospital is very highly valued by the people of the community that I represent. There have been some changes in the past, and there has been some talk about making or developing it into one or more of a centre of excellence. Can the minister advise me as to the status of that at this point?

Mr. McCrae: The honourable member will recall our discussions about Wade‑Bell and the tertiary review that was conducted. There was also a secondary review, and that will include places like Seven Oaks, which I fully agree with the honourable member, Seven Oaks Hospital is one of those community hospitals in Winnipeg that is part of that secondary review.

When we talk about excellence, I have a lot of kind words to say about Seven Oaks Hospital. In fact, the honourable member has heard me say some kind words about Seven Oaks Hospital, and he has heard me be a little critical of him too in regard to Seven Oaks. Seven Oaks has been a leader, if I may say so, in terms of looking at a renewed health system in the future in which Seven Oaks is a key player. I believe, by its own initiative, Seven Oaks Hospital is demonstrating to the rest of us that there is room for improvement in the system. As a Minister of Health, if I cannot accept that there is room for improvement, then I am not doing a very good job, because I think there is room for improvement. As long as we recognize that and keep trying to bring about initiatives to improve patient care, then we will be going in the right direction.

I think, for example, of a headline in last weekend's newspapers talking about nurses as hostesses, and all through the article efforts being made by Seven Oaks Hospital are the subject of ridicule. I think, well, what kind of contribution is that article to what Seven Oaks is trying to do? Every service it offers, it is trying to make it more appropriate to the client, to the patient who, after all, is why we build all these structures and invent all these machines that help make people better and help diagnose their conditions.

I try not to be critical of the media, but sometimes the media only responds to what they are told by other people. That story quotes people making very negative and snide and disrespectful and unhelpful comments about the efforts being made by the Seven Oaks Hospital. Well, I will stand strong in defence of the Seven Oaks Hospital against those kinds of stories and comments made by people that lead to those kinds of stories. [interjection] Absolutely.

The people involved at Seven Oaks, from the nursing profession right on through to all the others involved, are involved in what is called a total quality system of delivery of service. The nurses, I mean, who is more important in a hospital than that group of professionals known as nurses who provide hands‑on care to patients? My understanding of the total quality system is that the nursing professionals at Seven Oaks are very much part of that team, very much want to be part of that team, very much like being part of that team and take a great deal of satisfaction out of patients and visitors to that hospital who find their experience more pleasant for their efforts.

So I am going to be a big supporter of that, not only at Seven Oaks. I have singled them out because the honourable member did, too, but I have been to Concordia Hospital, to Grace Hospital, to Misericordia Hospital, to St. Boniface and Health Sciences Centre and Victoria Hospital‑‑

An Honourable Member: Eriksdale.

Mr. McCrae: I have not been to Eriksdale yet. I have been also to Deer Lodge and I think I have been to pretty well everywhere. I have not visited Riverview yet, but I will be doing that too. What I find in each of those places is pride. They are all proud of the services they provide. They strive every day of every week to make sure those services meet the kinds of standards they should. Even if those standards sometimes are not high enough in the view of the people who are working under them, they try to make them even better, try to make it better for the patients who come there, try to make their stay more comfortable. Kindness is everywhere in those buildings.

* (1500)

I have to say I am pretty impressed, and you could hardly believe visiting some of these places that they are the same places we hear talked about in this Chamber or in the newspapers or various places you read about our hospitals. Those are places of caring, and there is not anybody in there who feels otherwise.

So Seven Oaks, which is the one referred to, is part of the secondary care review and the terms of reference of this advisory committee are as follows: to provide a detailed, comprehensive plan for secondary care services currently carried out in hospitals in Winnipeg with recommended volumes of activity by service and by facility; identify the current and projected needs of the target‑area residents by means of appropriate needs‑assessment methods, including sociodemographic data and health status analysis and the opinions of key stakeholders and constituents of the community; confirm the current activity and location of hospital‑delivered secondary care services within Winnipeg provided to patients, clients by analyzing clinical utilization data and perform appropriate analyses, for example, peer group comparative analysis, bed utilizations practices, et cetera; identify and describe the current components within the hospital‑delivered secondary services within Winnipeg and analyze for gaps, deficiencies, duplications and identify areas where services may be delivered outside of hospitals; identify and describe other models, national and international, of secondary care services provision; liaise with clinical working groups to review the data and discuss potential models for secondary care services provision; identify and describe enhanced utilization management opportunities while ensuring comparable or better levels of quality of service; determine the options for assignment of responsibility for teaching and research with respect to secondary care services; identify alternative means of compensation or funding mechanisms for hospitals and providers to better harmonize principles of service delivery; identify any enhanced or different management structure that would ensure most cost‑effective provision of secondary care services; review the comprehensive planning report prepared by Wade‑Bell.

The committee members are Dr. John Wade and Bob Bell, the co‑chairs, and there are working group members. There is a Dental Surgery Working Group that is composed of Dr. Boyar, Dr. Claman and Dr. Muirhead. There is the Ear, Nose and Throat Working Group, and that is composed of a number of people who have expertise in that area.

Same with the General Surgery Working Group and Ophthalmological Consolidation Implementation Team. There is the Ophthalmology Working Group, the Orthopedic Working Group. There is the Reconstructive Working Group, the Urology Working Group, and this secondary review should, in the long run, result in improved and co‑ordinated service delivery for Manitobans, especially in Winnipeg.

That word "co‑ordination" is the one that is so key here. That is what I think centres of excellence and consolidation are about. It is a co‑ordination of services so that we can get more value for our dollars, and certainly ophthalmology is demonstrating that that is exactly what is happening and will happen.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, we are at one of these precipices where the comments of the minister could prompt me to spend a good deal of time entering into discussion about a different vision and a different view for the health care and the hospital sector in Manitoba, but I do have limited time, and I do not want to engage in a lengthy debate.

But I do think I have to put on the record the points that‑‑I do not disagree with the minister's view of the service provider, the kind of people involved in the system. I do disagree with this government's vision as to what the future is for the hospital system. I do disagree with the move toward what strikes me as a move towards a profit, competitive, U.S. kind of based health care system.

I do disagree with the fact that there could be expansion to our home care system to provide a service that has now been not tendered out but given to a private company and to provide‑‑we are going to disagree on this until the chickens come home to roost. I have a different vision, we have a different vision as to what we see the government has, but despite the fact we have a different vision, that does not necessarily mean that we denigrate or downgrade the efforts or what is being done at those centres and those hospitals.

It is just that our vision as to how it is should be accomplished is different than the government's vision, and I doubt that the twain shall meet. It is just not going to happen, and that will ultimately be decided I suppose by the voters.

I have a couple of other questions in different areas. I wanted just to jump to Pharmacare for a second and ask the minister, at one time I understand in the Pharmacare program there were two employees of the Department of Health who inspected drug prices to provide for some kind of consistency of pricing and some kind of base level of pricing? I understand they are no longer employed, and I am of the impression that the absence of some kind of price controls and price checks is one of the contributing factors to perhaps increased drug costs. I wonder if the minister could comment on that.

Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, the reason I hesitate on that one is that the people the honourable member is talking about left the government service so long ago, at least five years ago, and in the event now we suggest‑‑well, we know‑‑that the kind of monitoring that will be possible through the Drug Program Information Network will more than adequately offset that change from years ago.

The honourable member is right in some of his earlier comments that there are some areas where it is good for us to both put our points of view on the record, but we are not necessarily always going to agree, it is true.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I now sort of leap into the area of personal care homes for a second. It was by use of the language I trundled onto the area of personal care homes.

* (1510)

From the figures the minister gave me about those paying maximum prices now in personal care homes would mean that there is an additional several million dollars going into the personal care home system as a result of higher payments by residents. For example, the appropriation is $250 million this year, and that, therefore, means that there is an additional, shall we say, roughly two million or two and a half million into the system that is as a result of the fees paid by residents. Would that be a correct statement?

Mr. McCrae: When you look at the total effort in the area of personal care in Manitoba, while it could be said that more money came into the program through increased contributions by personal care residents, it also has to be pointed out that there have been newly constructed personal care spaces, there have been general salary increases, merit increments, reclassifications and pay equity for personal care employees, excluding nurses, because that was done under other arrangements.

There were, as I say, general salary and merit increases. There was significant new construction. There were then thereby additional operating and interest costs. More people had to be hired. A lot of jobs have been created in the health care sector in the last year. One of these days I will get it all organized in such a way that I can tell you how many jobs have been created, because it is very significant when you consider that it appears to me that we have opened more beds than we have closed, and that is something that some people miss sometimes.

I guess the question is, what kind of beds? That is a very, very relevant question. You have to remember also that there was an expansion last year in the adult day club spaces, and there will be a further expansion this year of adult day club spaces. Psychogeriatric services have been enhanced as well.

So it is true that from those residents who have been assessed as such, more money has come from them, but more money has also been put into this program by the government too to enhance the services that are available and make more services available.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I know there is an appeal structure in this area that people can appeal decisions made with respect to fee payments, and I know that there is a task force looking at the whole area of personal care homes.

Can the minister also indicate whether, based on the experience of the last year and problems that have occurred, the government is considering changing the arrangements with respect to the fees paid by patients in the upcoming year?

Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, the last increase, there was an increase last October, but we did not increase the quarterly ones last August. That did not happen, and throughout this fiscal year, you will not see increases on a quarterly basis as had been the case in the past. So that the answer is no, we are not increasing those per diems.

You need to remember what you get for your money. You get nursing care, you get accommodation, you get your meals, you get your drugs looked after, you get activities, all of those things. These are homes and you get, if it is necessary, appropriate security arrangements. That is one of the issues we are looking at through our standards committee, but you get the things that you need or as high a quality of life as we can make it for the dollars we are asking the residents to contribute.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I note from some of the comments the minister had made earlier that before the end of these Estimates, or shortly thereafter, we will be getting a complete listing of all of the lottery funded programs, so we can have a breakdown. I hope we will be provided with that when we reach that particular section of the appropriations.

My next question is concerning the whole question of the Healthy Communities development, which is a new initiative that was started last year, I understand, and which is continuing this year.

* (1520)

I am not quite certain, I wonder in a very short explanation if the minister could actually explain for us this particular initiative.

Mr. McCrae: Very briefly, Madam Chairperson, to describe what this is, it is monies placed into a fund to assist in that phased approach to health renewal, that phased approach to moving expenditures from hospital to community. Here again, this number is reducing, which demonstrates that the plan is working.

In other words, as programs are established in the community, it takes a year or so, budgetarily speaking, to get it properly in a line in the budget, what monies that this is reduced by, you will see in other appropriations of government.

A good example is mental health, where there were reductions in acute spaces in Winnipeg. You will see in permanent lines in the budget in the future, those dollars show up in the community. I hope that explanation is clear.

Ms. Avis Gray (Crescentwood): Madam Chairperson, I am wondering if the minister has any details that he could table for us on the Healthy Communities development, the $12 million. Can he break that down? Does he have a table of information that could give us a bit more detail than $12 million?

Mr. McCrae: While the Health department staff is putting together some description there, I would just like to say a word about Edith Parker, if I may. Edith Parker is going to be serving on the Manitoba Medical Services Council, and I think our discussions did not do her credit, and I would like to just put very briefly some things on the record.

Edith Parker is a retired nurse. Before her retirement, she was the maternal child nursing director of St. Boniface Hospital until her retirement in December of '91. She had worked at St. Boniface Hospital for eighteen and a half years. From 1972 to 1987, Edith Parker served on various committees for the Association of Women's Health and Obstetrical Gynecological and Neonatal nursing, and she is still a member.

She currently serves on a committee charged with the redevelopment of perinatal standards. She serves on the planning and evaluation committee for the Youville Clinic. She received the MARN award for nursing administration in 1988, and only one of those awards are given out per year.

Ms. Parker received an award of excellence for nursing contribution from the Canadian Organization of Obstetrical, Gynecological and Neonatal Nurses. A scholarship in her name is awarded to a University of Manitoba nursing student doing work at the graduate level in either maternal child medicine or administration. The first scholarship was awarded this year. So I appreciate the chance to put that on the record. I think we will be well served by that experience.

I would like to answer the honourable member's question. The kinds of things we are talking about that are contemplated in the $12 million, as the honourable member put it, are the Municipal‑Riverview project, which are 23 long‑term care beds, the mental health with respect to acute care in Winnipeg, the Pediatric Consolidation, Winnipeg Support Services to seniors, Mental Health Child and Adolescent and Psychogeriatric initiatives, the Ophthalmology and Ophthalmology related to Home Care. This is all last year that I am talking about, and adult day club alternatives, as well as prostate care. That was last year.

This fiscal year the breast cancer screening will be developed, more work in mental health, psychogeriatric in Winnipeg, the Winnipeg Central Bed Registry, and further regional association development.

Pending projects are the Provincial Respiratory program, the Community Residential Space for Severely Physically Disabled, Provincial Support Services to Seniors, Antenatal and Nutrition Services, and Terminal Care Protocol.

Those are some of the things that we are talking about in this appropriation or taken from this appropriation.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I thank the minister. That gives me a bit better idea of some of the projects that are being funded through the $12 million.

I just wanted to get back to the Life Saving Drug Program. Does the minister have the information as to what is the yearly income limit for someone to be eligible for the Life Saving Drug Program?

Mr. McCrae: While my staff is looking for that information, I would like to say a word about Dr. Barbara Gfellner, who is another public interest representative on the Manitoba Medical Services Council.

Barbara Gfellner is an associate professor in the Department of Psychology at Brandon University. She received a doctorate in the field of psychology from the University of Manitoba and has been at Brandon University since 1978. She teaches courses in the psychology of aging, special issues in gerontology, child and adolescent development, as well as introductory psychology. She received the Senate Award for Excellence in Teaching in 1990.

Dr. Gfellner was described in today's newspaper as a physician, by the way, and she is not. She is a former president of the Child and Family Services of western Manitoba, serving on the board for eight years. Currently, she is a member of the multi‑agency committee on high‑risk youth, associated with the Brandon crime prevention committee, and chair of the Brandon University research ethics committee. She is involved with a number of social service and community associations as an evaluation and research consultant.

In addition to teaching, Barbara Gfellner is involved in research, having held two national health and research development program grants in adolescent sexuality and the social context of adolescent drug use, and a social sciences and humanities research grant for the study of mobility and related issues among older adults in Brandon and the Westman area.

Over the past 14 years her research has included the study of psychological and functional health and well‑being, coping behaviours, needs, social supports and resources of older adults in a number of community environments, including those discharged from hospital and those in institutional settings.

* (1530)

In that case too, Madam Chairperson, I suggest that a person with that background can be of very significant service and will be a strong person involved in the Manitoba Medical Services Council. It needs to be said, too, that these people are extremely busy people and have lots of responsibilities, and it is nice to have their willingness to help their fellow citizens in this kind of capacity.

The answer to the question is still coming. So if I could maybe deal very briefly‑‑I will wait for another question. If the honourable member wants to ask another question, maybe I could deal with that.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, the reform initiatives that are going on at the Health Sciences Centre and St. Boniface Hospital, particularly as a result of the APM contracts, I understand that there needs to be ministerial approval to go ahead with the recommendations that they have presented. What we have been told from the hospitals is that everything is at a standstill, that nothing has moved forward since they have formed their recommendations.

Can the minister tell us where that is at and when he plans to make a decision on what will happen in regard to those recommendations at those two hospitals?

Mr. McCrae: As the honourable member knows, this project produced hundreds and hundreds of recommendations generated by the staff of these hospitals. The role of APM was to lay out a methodology and to assist in bringing all of these people together to make those hundreds and hundreds of recommendations from, incidentally, thousands and thousands of ideas. I am told that not every idea ended up becoming a recommendation.

It is true that some of those recommendations have a job impact, and I am very concerned about that, and I am also concerned about patient care. Most of those recommendations, however, have been very carefully screened in the area of patient care. Care is also being taken to ensure that as we get into implementing recommendations that we reduce the job impact to the absolute minimum.

It is that exercise that we are presently engaged in with the hospitals. We are asking the hospitals how the implementation team will deal with the job impact, whether it be a shift from one job to another, or a layoff, or what it is going to be, and to ensure that our labour adjustment mechanisms are in place and that people are able to take advantage of the opportunities that are available there.

I am told that within the next week we will hear again. We are dealing back and forth between the department and the hospitals, and so it takes a little longer than even I had thought it would take to work these things through. There is a bit of an advantage in this approach, and that is that the job impacts, the human impacts are reduced, and that is one of my objectives as Minister of Health.

I am almost ready to answer the honourable member's question about the lifesaving drugs. I just would like to say that another public interest person associated with the Manitoba Medical Services Council is Lynn Raskin‑Levine. Ms. Lynn Raskin‑Levine is the managing partner for the Winnipeg office of KPMG Management Consulting. She heads the firm's health care practice in Manitoba. She also serves as a vice‑president of the KPMG Centre for Government, an international institute dedicated to innovation and advancement of health care and public sector issues.

Throughout her career, Ms. Raskin‑Levine has specialized in assisting organizations to define their strategic potential and to manage the change necessary to achieve it.

Since pursuing consulting, she has successfully conducted many, many assignments with leading health care facilities. Among her clients, Madam Chairperson, are Concordia General Hospital, Deer Lodge Centre, Grace Hospital, Health Sciences Centre, Manitoba Health Organizations, Riverview Health Centre, Medical Arts Building, Seven Oaks General Hospital, St. Amant Centre, Victoria General Hospital, Workers Compensation boards of Manitoba, Nova Scotia and Alberta.

Her credentials include a Master of Business Administration in health care administration, and on and on and on. I have got several pages. I will not go through them all, but I say here again we have another very quality individual whose credentials in the health care field are extremely impressive. I think we should all count ourselves as fortunate that she has agreed to assist us in our efforts.

Madam Chairperson, with respect to the specific question put by the honourable member, all patients with cystic fibrosis, all patients with rheumatic fever are covered under the Life Saving Drug Program with no income limits. Everybody is covered for those.

Other drugs under the program‑‑there are other drugs supplied under the program, and the test is the income less the deductible, and co‑payment amounts of Pharmacare are calculated. If below the social allowance cutoff, which is $1,360 a month for a family of four, the person would be eligible financially, and if medically eligible‑‑medically eligible, as chronic and life‑threatening.

There is a combination of condition and income, if your income is below that social allowance cutoff of $1,360 a month for a family of four, and that is after taking into account the deductible and the co‑payment as well.

* (1540)

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, when the minister responded back in regard to Ms. Sloan, the MLA for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) talked to her again today. She did not apply for the Life Saving Drug Program. She talked to the home care staff to see if she would be eligible, and they told her that she would not. Given what you have told us today, she is not eligible, although her income‑‑it is in the form of a disability pension‑‑is $1,000 a month, and she spends $250 a month on her drugs, which she can claim through Pharmacare, so that is one‑quarter of her income per month that is going to Pharmacare payments. That excludes vitamins and Gravol and other types of drugs that she needs.

I guess my question to the minister, and we may not get an answer today, is there anything else, any other programs that she might be eligible for?

Her concern is with that kind of income, even with a bit of interest, income for $15,000 a year, when you pay, the deductibles have gone up and she gets 40 percent back on Pharmacare, plus other costs have come up, have gone up. She now does not get access to Handi‑Transit as she might have. That is not necessarily the minister's problem, but it continues to add up.

So we really have some of these individuals who are sort of at the difficult level; they maybe are not eligible for Life Saving Drug Program. She would be better off in some ways to be on social assistance because she would have these costs paid for, but, of course, she is an independent person and does not want to do that.

So my question would be, is there any other program or is there someone in the department that she could pursue these issues with?

Mr. McCrae: Absolutely, Madam Chairperson. From what the honourable member has told us, my officials tell me that this person would qualify. I am sorry if somebody working in the Home Care program misinformed Ms. Sloan. Unfortunately, this kind of thing has happened in the past, and I regret it when it happens, when staff misinform people out there in the public. In fact, it makes me very mad when it happens, and when it has happened, I have reported that to senior people in the Department and tried to have matters dealt with, because that is not right.

If the information the member gives me is correct, it is my advice that Ms. Sloan may well qualify. So not only will we give some other name or number, we are going to send somebody out to see Ms. Sloan to address the issue of her qualification for the Life Saving Drug Program.

I think I talked about this with Ms. Sloan myself. I am not sure, but we talked about other issues, I recall. We are going to arrange to have someone go and see her. I say that. I do not do this for everybody, but it sounds to me like she has been misled, and I do not like the sound of that.

Mr. Neil Gaudry (St. Boniface): Madam Chairperson, my question to the minister is in regard to moving the offices of St. Boniface community to a downtown location in early 1991. I had asked a question last May to the previous minister. He had all good intentions of replying to my letter of April 22, because every time I would ask him, he would say, it is on my desk, all I have to do is sign it. It is still there, so maybe you could pick it up and change the date and sign it, Mr. Minister.

I have always had a concern that groups that did write to me at the time that there were concerns, like Sister Clermont Outreach Program, the Norwood United Church, Age and Opportunity from St. Vital Senior Centre had indicated that. Every time they have discussed this with me, I have had to say, well, it was just a temporary location. But it is now three years. I looked up the definition of "temporary" in the Webster's dictionary, and it says very clearly "having a limited duration." I guess my letter is also the same thing. It has not been replied to.

An Honourable Member: It was the former Minister of Health.

Mr. Gaudry: It was the former Minister of Health. I am not attacking him, because he apologized last May 13. He says: With all the apologies I can muster to my honourable friend, I will provide that information to him as I indicated I would and did not the last time he posed the question.

So I would ask the minister, what is the situation on those offices returning to St. Boniface at this time, and if he has had any contact from the different groups that have had concerns and what impact as far as those records show at this time?

Mr. McCrae: You can always count on the member for St. Boniface to say something nice about a person's intentions, and I always appreciate that. Unfortunately, I cannot give him a definitive and final answer any more than I gave his colleague from Crescentwood recently when we discussed this matter. It is a question at this point that has not been resolved in a permanent way by the department, so I cannot sign something that gives a permanent response. I could sign something that gives the kind of response that says, we are working on it, or that the matter is still under review or being looked at by the government or whatever.

All I want to know from the honourable member is if there is something wrong with the service being delivered, because as you know, this kind of function is not something that is office‑bound. If all we ever did was sit around in our offices, you know how much would really get done out there. However, I recognize there is a need for space. Whether the space needs to be located here or somewhere else, it has a lot to do with the service being provided, whether it is being provided to the public directly from that space or whether the people are out there amongst the public delivering services that way. That is a whole other matter.

I am sort of urging the department to get things in a position where we can give the honourable member a more appropriate response than that. I do not have any apology to make except that I will try to move this along and get a better answer than that for the honourable member.

Mr. Gaudry: Madam Chairperson, I have a letter here that I received last February, and I meant to write to the minister in regard to this issue but I always figured we would go back early into session and that we would go back into Estimates. I think I would like to read the letter into the record.

This letter came from a daughter. It says: I am writing on behalf of my mother, Mrs. Henrietta Haas, who is one of your constituents. Mrs. Haas was admitted to St. Boniface Hospital on January 20, 1994, with an asthma attack. She was in the hospital until Wednesday, February 2. She was very weak when she was released and was only taken off her oxygen supply on Monday morning. The home care provided one visit by a nurse on Thursday, February 3, and no further plans for care until Tuesday, February 8, was inadequate. My mother became violently ill on Friday, and no help was sent. Fortunately, my sister‑in‑law was available. On Saturday morning, I called an ambulance to take my mother back to Emergency, as she was too weak to take a Ventolin treatment on her own. On Sunday, she was readmitted to the same bed on the same ward that she left. She has pneumonia and is in a very weakened condition. I feel that she was discharged from the hospital too soon, and the nurses in Emergency and Observation are of the same opinion. I wish to alert you to this situation so that it does not recur. Thank you for your kind attention. Yours sincerely, Elaine Haas. [interjection]

My colleague from Crescentwood answered the question, but I do not think it is the proper answer. I am just wondering if these cases, what do we do when they are brought to our attention, to make sure that this does not recur?

Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, I appreciate the honourable member bringing that to my attention, and I do not mind if in future those kinds of things come forward, he contact me, because we will make inquiries about those things. Even so, it sounds, from what I am hearing in the letter that the honourable member has read, that a decision was made either by a physician or by a physician in consultation with a hospital. That is usually how discharges are brought about. I cannot substitute my medical judgment for that of others who have better knowledge of the case itself.

* (1550)

I encourage the honourable member, either through me or directly, to perhaps put the inquiry to the hospital involved, and they can follow up and give an appropriate response. Sometimes, as a result of these things, shortcomings are uncovered, and it gives hospitals and physicians an opportunity to look at their own practice or their own practices. I have seen letters written from hospitals to people who have made complaints advising the people that an adjustment has been made in our policy in that respect.

Thank you for your interest because that is how we are able to keep a high‑quality health care system going. I do not think that letter‑‑unless the honourable member is suggesting otherwise‑‑illustrates any systemic difficulty or problem but a case that perhaps did not go to the satisfaction of the people most closely involved. So I am not trying to pass the buck, but I am saying if the honourable member wants my assistance in tracking this down further, I will make that service available, but it can also be referred to the hospital or the physician involved for further response.

Mr. Gaudry: I thank the minister for his response. My next question has to do with‑‑just two days ago, I was talking to one of my constituents who had wanted services in St. Boniface from a Francophone doctor, and it did not seem that it was available, a fact that Dr. Nicole Caron‑Boulet, who is Francophone but very involved with seniors‑‑and he mentioned that there was a couple from Victoria who had made their studies in Sherbrooke, Quebec, and had applied to come back to their local residence of St. Boniface, he and his wife. Both are doctors and had requested to come to Manitoba and were denied their licensing to come to Winnipeg but did get a licensing to go provincially. They were sort of forced, I guess, to go to the rural area, or it was sort of a fact that they had to serve in the rural areas before they would be allowed to come to St. Boniface.

The fact that I think St. Boniface is a heavy Francophone community, I feel that there should be Francophone doctors available to the community. I was wondering, why is it that they have to serve rural before they would be allowed to come back to St. Boniface? I understand that later on in the year they will be going to Ste. Anne. Ste. Anne has already, as far as I am concerned, several Francophone doctors, and I think St. Boniface should get the Francophone doctors. I am not sure; I could find out more information, but is there a regulation to the fact that they have to serve in rural areas before they come to Winnipeg?

Mr. McCrae: Clearly, as cognizant of the needs of a Francophone community or any community where there is a certain community of interest and certainly in rural Manitoba where there is need for certain specialities‑‑we are cognizant of all of those things. So how best do you deal with it? Well, in future, we think the best chance we have is through the Physician Resource Committee, which is the result of the new MMA agreement.

However, the specific case the member raises, he simply is just going to have to give us more information in order for us to give a better response to it. We are pleased to be able to do that.

The Physician Resource Committee, however, for future matters like this, will be there with the co‑chairpersonship of Dr. Ian White and Mr. Denis Roch of the department. The MMA will be represented by Dr. Bob Sanders and Dr. Robin Carter.

The province additionally has appointed two nurses who happen to be in the employ of the government, but Ms. Barbara Millar and Ms. Carolyn Park are also on that Physician Resource Committee. There will additionally be other persons representing the public interest on that committee, the MMA, the Urban Health Advisory Council, the Northern and Rural Health Advisory Council, the Faculty of Medicine, the College of Physicians and Surgeons, the Professional Association of Residents and Interns of Manitoba, the Manitoba Health Organizations, the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation will all be involved in addressing the very issues the honourable member raises.

We do not want to be unfair to anybody. However, we have to address the reality of the numbers of physicians in the more built‑up areas of Manitoba versus the dearth of physicians in less‑populated rural, northern areas. This is the best chance I have seen for a long time, and other things have been tried, to ensure that service is available. We have more physicians, taking out altogether the cultural issue the honourable member raises which is a legitimate one, but we have more physicians in Winnipeg than we need. We better recognize that.

The physicians represented by the Medical Association, I believe, recognized that there needs to be a more favourable distribution of physicians in order to see to the population health needs of Manitobans wherever they live. I just think that this is the best hope we have had in a long time of seeing that we have physicians where they are needed in Manitoba.

Certainly, the case the honourable member raises has dimensions to it that if this were a case that applied to the responsibilities of the Physician Resource Committee, I would ask that the matter be referred to that committee for their review. Certainly the members that I would appoint to it, I would advise them we want them to keep their minds open on issues like this.

People, for example, who perhaps leave Manitoba to train with the intent of returning to Manitoba for the purpose of practising medicine, there has got to be some sense of fairness involved in the deliberations of the Physician Resource Committee. I think from my discussions with MMA people, as well, that they view this as an important job to be done and that it can also be done in a sensitive way.

There is reason to be a little bit comfortable about this, and that reason is that, you know, we do not need to shift very many physicians to rural Manitoba. We do not need to force march a whole bunch of physicians to rural Manitoba because in some of the communities one physician would be a wonderful thing, one. I think sometimes when we spend a lot of time in Winnipeg, we maybe forget about that a little bit, and we do not want to do that because people in Manitoba are Manitobans wherever they live, but if the honourable member will make more information available to us, we will do more research, investigation into this particular matter.

Mr. Gaudry: Madam Chairperson, I thank the minister for his reply, and I will certainly get more information and pass it on to the minister.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I wanted to clarify something from the minister in regard to obstetrical care in Manitoba, and particularly in the Winnipeg hospitals. Is it the policy or philosophy of this government that the government supports providing low‑risk obstetrical services in our community‑based hospitals? Is that a fair statement?

Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, the whole issue of obstetrics in Winnipeg has been dealt with in two or three reports, one being that of the Manning report. There is also one on midwifery and another one on the economics of obstetrics by Michael Lloyd. It will not be too, too long, I hope, that we will be making our policy on obstetrics in Winnipeg known.

Some things that we are told that should make us fairly proud as those who are residents of Winnipeg, and that is that it is a safe place to have babies. I think the Manning report is clear that for normal pregnancies‑‑I guess that is what most of them are; the highest percentage are low‑risk pregnancies‑‑they can be safely cared for in tertiary care. That is a finding, I think, of the report. I am sure it is a finding of the report because the report recommends a favourite option being tertiary care services or deliveries in our teaching hospitals.

* (1600)

That does not mean to say that so‑called normal deliveries cannot be conducted elsewhere, and I am not saying that they cannot be done elsewhere. In fact we have gone so far as to throw our support to regulated midwifery in Manitoba, and the location of such services will be discussed further by the midwifery implementation council headed by Carol Scurfield and a committee still to be named. But I am not precisely sure what the honourable member is getting at, but I would like to know some of her views as we head towards making our position known on obstetrics. So I will not get into it in too detailed a way, because as I say, it will not be long before we will be making our plans with respect to obstetrics known, and our plans will be the result of looking at all of these various reports that have been made available to us.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, is not the cost of providing beds in the tertiary care centres, is the cost not higher than providing a similar kind of service in a community hospital?

Mr. McCrae: I think the honourable member has to understand that our position is that cost is not the only driving factor here when it comes to bringing newborns into the world. This goes beyond a health issue for me, because in my view being pregnant with a normal pregnancy is not an illness. So I do not view it like that.

So cost, while it is relevant, is not the driving factor here. That is why I was so happy to visit Victoria Hospital, for example, and look at the LDRP system that they have in effect that is seen by families as a quality way to‑‑I have to be careful how I choose my words, because when you are delivering babies, I have never done that, so I do not know exactly what kind of experience it is‑‑but as a family experience, you can make it into something that is, all things considered, a wonderful experience.

Through the LDRP, I think, we have moved a few steps closer to that kind of an experience. Now, what is the price tag? You know, I never took the time to ask, and maybe I should and will, but cost is not the only driving factor when it comes to bringing children into the world. We will have that in our minds, as we develop, as we move closer to an announcement on obstetrics.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I know that cost is not the only factor, and although the minister says he has not taken the time to ask the question, I am sure he could right now, because I would imagine one of his staff has the answer. So if he could do that and just provide us with what the average cost is in one of the tertiary care centres for an obstetrical bed versus the community hospital.

Mr. McCrae: I should not say that I have never asked, because I have been told, as I was briefed on the Manning report, and I do not have a copy of the Manning report with me today. Certainly other people have seen the Manning report, and we do not have the number of the members looking for, but we will make it available to her in the near future.

Ms. Gray: I have a copy of the Manning report. I guess I would ask the minister‑‑he is saying "soon"‑‑can he be a little more specific on when we may have a policy announcement on obstetrical care?

Mr. McCrae: Well, it has to be soon, and I say that, because I know that there are people who are extremely interested in knowing which direction we are going. I know of staff in some hospitals in Winnipeg who are almost on needles and pins wondering what the future of the service in their particular facility is going to be. I am very mindful of that, and I am trying to move this along as quickly as I can, but I will not move faster than good judgment would allow. That does not give much of an answer to the honourable member, I know, but if you can get me out of these Estimates this afternoon, it might be a little quicker.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, we certainly look forward to hearing about the direction of obstetrical care in Manitoba and in Winnipeg as well. The minister made some comments earlier and talked about waiting lists. My colleague from Kildonan talked about waiting lists which have been here longer than this government has been here and probably will continue to be here when this government is not. Waiting lists are probably a fact of life, as far as health care in Canada. I know I have received letters, and I am sure the minister has received letters as well, concerns expressed by people who feel that there have been undue delays in the area of hip repair, other kinds of surgery such as heart surgery, et cetera, and I think the minister attempted to address some of those concerns in his comments.

Does the minister have information, though, as to if we have seen a decrease in waiting lists over the last number of years? [interjection] A decrease in waiting lists, do you have statistics on whether there has been a decrease in waiting lists for, say, heart and hip and‑‑

Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, the shortest waiting list, or the shortest wait, is somewhere like in Beverly Hills or maybe Palm Springs or somewhere like that, where there are so many rich people who can get the service that the dollars they have will afford to them.

Sometimes we in Canada, some of us, I do not think we are entitled to that Beverly Hills sort of service. As far as I am concerned, we are entitled to the best we can give them with the dollars we have. We can use Beverly Hills maybe as an ideal. Maybe we can move that quick, although we may do better than Beverly Hills in some areas. I am not sure.

I have some information though, some stats on hip replacements for Manitoba over the past few years. In 1986‑87, hip replacements at Brandon General Hospital, there were 103 hip replacements that year in Brandon. Moving ahead to '89‑90, there were 120; and to '92‑93, the last year for which I have numbers, 135.

* (1610)

At Grace, seven years ago, they had 107 hip replacements. Last year they had 172; Misericordia, from 58 to 64; St. Boniface, 88 to 106; Victoria, 54 up to 77; Concordia, actually had a drop from 15 in '86‑87 down to 10 in '92‑93; Seven Oaks, from 57 to 79; and Health Sciences Centre, 213 all the way up to‑‑well, all the way‑‑it moved from 213 to 216 seven years later, but on all of the urban hospitals from 695 surgeries up to 859 surgeries per year.

Province‑wide, when you include Winkler, Carman, Steinbach, Morden, where they do those procedures, province‑wide in '86‑87, they did 725, and in '92‑93, they did 929, and that is for hip.

With respect to knee replacements, and I will just go from province‑wide here, between '86 and '87 and '92‑93: In '86‑87, there were 194 knee replacements province‑wide, and there were 443 last fiscal year, which says that has to be part of the reason for that, the aging population that we have in Manitoba. Obviously, what it says is, we are creating pressure on the system with this kind of growth and these kinds of procedures.

A waiting list is not an easy thing to describe. It is like an average. What is average? Is the highest number the average or is the lowest number the average? A waiting list is even more difficult than an average, because some people's doctors will place them on a waiting list at a very low priority level.

In the case of my dad when he had his hip diagnosed that he needed it replaced, I told him, Dad, you are going to get on a waiting list. It could take you six months or whatever it was in those days, or nine months or whatever, and he said, well, it does not hurt that much, and I will not bother. I said, well, Dad, you wait too long and I am going to be saying I told you so, because you are going to be on a waiting list. So he waited and he waited, and I said, Dad, when do you think you might want to get your name on that waiting list? Well, I am getting around pretty good.

Well, he was getting around just fine, and then it started to hurt pretty bad and getting around was harder and harder. So finally, he got his name on the waiting list. Well, he waited. That is why they call it a waiting list. He waited about six months or something like that, and he got his operation. It was a successful operation and everything, but I said, Dad, you could have saved yourself so much trouble if you, as an informed consumer, had played a role in your own case here. You could have avoided a lot of that discomfort.

Well, frankly, Dad was like most other people, I think. Nobody wants to go under the knife, as it were, if you could put it off, which is what the‑‑[interjection] Sorry, I should not use that kind of language. But that was what my dad called it, and he was the patient. So I guess I can use it in that context at least.

I give that example to try to point out that I cannot answer the honourable member about a waiting list. We have physicians in Manitoba who have patients on their lists, and we do not know about those lists. So how do you describe what a waiting list is? Some people are told by their physician that they will be on this list for quite a while. [interjection] The honourable member for Flin Flon is talking about a dictionary. I made the point a little while ago that you look in the dictionary under "temporary" and there is a picture of Jerry Storie there in the dictionary. That is especially true of the member for Flin Flon, because we know what his future plans are, and that is to move on and get on to something else.

Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin Flon): If they had the word "dufus" in the dictionary, there would be Jim, but they do not.

Mr. McCrae: Dufus? How about dunderhead? Oh oh, now we are in trouble.

An Honourable Member: You called?

Mr. McCrae: Fate works in wonderful ways, Madam Chairperson. I just mentioned dunderhead and in walks the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer).

For the enlightenment of the Leader of the Opposition, we were talking about what is a waiting list. A waiting list is‑‑it is a difficult question to answer. If I could give a better answer, I would. But there are a lot of people who think a waiting list is, you get on the end of it, and you wait your turn. The fact is, for many procedures, certain things about your condition can change, and your doctor can make a diagnosis or judgment that you need to be moved up on that waiting list, and that is what happens from time to time.

We have our various surgeons in Manitoba working together as groups. We have had the appropriate access committee, which is headed up by Dr. Ross Brown from St. Boniface Hospital, to report and take action on getting those waiting lists properly prioritized so that patients do not have to wait any longer than absolutely necessary.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, does the minister know why we have seen an increase in the number of surgeries that we have done in hip replacements and, he also mentioned, knee replacements? Does he know why we have seen an increase?

Mr. McCrae: This is a difficult area, Madam Chairperson. If the honourable member looked at the tape that I provided to her, the W5 program talked about‑‑and if she has not I would certainly understand, because I know we have all been very busy on these Estimates, but I made available, and at her leisure and that of the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak)‑‑

An Honourable Member: That is it, break the copywrite law.

Mr. McCrae: Oh, I did not take any money for it.

An Honourable Member: It does not matter, you cannot do it.

Mr. McCrae: Oh, oh, now I am in trouble for that too.

An Honourable Member: As a former Minister of Justice, I think you just got on the record because you have broken the law of Canada.

Mr. McCrae: Every time I turn around, Madam Chairperson, I get myself into trouble, especially when the member for Concordia (Mr. Doer) is watching, but in any event, if I am guilty I will deal with that at a later time and I will maybe talk to the member for St. Johns (Mr. Mackintosh) and get some quality legal advice on‑‑or the Leader of the Liberal Party (Mr. Edwards) perhaps, or the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak). He could be an accomplice in this.

An Honourable Member: Could he?

Mr. McCrae: He could, yes, because he accepted it.

An Honourable Member: He cannot be an accomplice unless you committed a crime.

* (1620)

Mr. McCrae: Well, if he accepted property that he should not have accepted, then we are both in trouble. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) I think, Madam Chairperson, is trying to distract me from my train of thought here. [interjection] I have been here this long, you know.

An Honourable Member: You are not supposed to release material like that. It is against the Interpol convention, as you know.

Mr. McCrae: Okay. Now I am really scared. Are you all done charging and cautioning me?

An Honourable Member: Yes, I just want you to be very careful, Jim.

Mr. McCrae: As I was saying, as set out in the W5 tape that I made available for the honourable member, it deals with issues like this. At what point is it appropriate to have surgical procedure with regard to cardiac, with regard to orthopedic? Are we improving the quality of people's lives always by engaging in surgery for people at certain points in their lives? I am referring to those who are very elderly. Is it appropriate to do that hip replacement or that knee replacement?

I do not know the answers, and the W5 program did not answer the question either, but I believe we have a better opportunity today to begin to answer some of those questions than we have in the past. Because of the need to renew our health system we have professionals working more closely than ever before to examine these issues. I do not know if that appropriately answers precisely the question the member asked, but it is getting close to the issue. How many people are on that waiting list who will never have the operation is a very genuine and honest question that I would ask. I do not know how many. I suspect there might be some who might come to the end of their lives before they get those procedures. If that happens, should it, and should they have been on the list in the first place? I do not know all the answers, but I certainly know some of the questions that are going to be addressed through the various processes we have been able to set up.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I am jumping around in issues here, but I wanted to ask this question about MHSC and receiving an MHSC card in case we had to get information from other staff. If an individual has an MHSC card so they are qualified to receive services and they get married and that person comes from another country, but they are married, is the person that they marry then entitled to receive an MHSC card or to be under the same number as their spouse?

Mr. McCrae: To make a complicated answer simple, at the time that one becomes a landed immigrant, one is insurable under our system in Manitoba.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, just to make things simple, this is a case that I have just become aware of, but I do not think we are going to solve the problem here. Who is the best person for us to talk to at the Manitoba Health Services Commission to sort out‑‑this is an issue of spousal abuse and MHSC cards, et cetera. Who is the best person that we can talk to?

Mr. McCrae: The honourable member could contact directly Mr. Bob Harvey at 786‑7215. By the way, we do not call it MHSC anymore.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I know we do not call it MHSC anymore, but I still call it that so I know of which I speak. It does not have a name. It is integrated into the Department of Health.

I wanted to ask the minister about appeals for rate increases for individuals living in personal care homes. He gave some information earlier on, and I have written him some letters, which he has promptly responded to. I wanted to know if a lot of the appeals that came forth after the rate increase was announced for October, have those all been dealt with?

Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, we expect all outstanding appeals that we presently know of to be disposed of by mid‑June, which is pretty good. I know that the board and the staff have worked extra hard to deal with the appeals that have come forward.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, for those individuals who appealed the rate increases but were not successful, and in those cases they would have not only the new rate increases to pay, but do they also have to pay retroactively to when they appealed? If that is the case, are there any special arrangements that are being made? Obviously, these people who appealed felt that there was a financial hardship involved, so not only are they going to have to pay the increased rate, but for some of them they would have to pay the retroactive rates as well. Are there any arrangements that are being made to assist these people to do that?

Mr. McCrae: Madam Chair, there are so many rules and things like that to keep track of. I would prefer to let the member let me take that question and get an accurate response for her. I may be able to do it very shortly. It may take a little longer, we will see.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I want to ask a question about physiotherapy services. Children who require physiotherapy services, where within the department would they receive those services? I am referring specifically to a number of children who formerly would have received them through the Winnipeg School Division No. 1. So where now would those children and families be accessing those physiotherapy services?

Mr. McCrae: Under our health system, people who need physiotherapy services can obtain them, either through the hospital system or through the private system, so that those are the services that are available.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, would the minister happen to have any information then on what the cost might be to obtain those services through the hospital system versus what the taxpayers in essence were paying to have those children receive those services through Winnipeg No. 1?

* (1630)

Mr. McCrae: I am not able to respond with respect to the school system service, but with respect to the hospital‑based physiotherapy services, they are part of the insured system here in Manitoba.

Ms. Gray: I am jumping around from topic to topic, but we are going to be completed by five o'clock. The Self‑Managed Care Pilot Project that is going to be expanded in rural Manitoba and in Winnipeg and the North, I believe, can the minister indicate‑‑he was going to have some individuals, I think, sit on a committee that was going to be continuing to review the Self‑Managed Care Pilot Project, some individuals from the disabled community. Am I correct in that?

Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, on the earlier question with respect to personal care and the appeals, we will get a letter off to the honourable member or inform her within a reasonable period of time on that point.

Madam Chair, with respect to the expansion of the, and this time we are both using the word right I think, Self‑Managed program‑‑in the past before we came to this stage, there was a committee that we were working with, a committee of people who were self managers, and I met with that committee just last week to discuss this very matter about just how we might manage in the future.

A number of them had really found the experience enjoyable and meaningful and everything, but they were ready to get on with the rest of their lives too and that was all very well. We are looking at the hiring of a person to assist us as we expand this program, a disabled person who will have some insights that we can use in this area. We have not given up altogether on the idea of having some form of liaison with interested parties in the self‑managing community out there. We do not want to lose touch with them because we have actually developed quite a relationship even in the short time I have been in the office.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, that is a good idea, to hire an individual. Are you going to advertise this position?

Mr. McCrae: Yes.

Ms. Gray: I am glad to see that position will be advertised as well.

I wanted to ask a few questions about ambulance services. I understand that there are some changes that are occurring within ambulance services and the northern transportation that is provided to people in northern Manitoba, and I am wondering if the minister could give us an indication of what some of those changes are.

Mr. McCrae: I think I will have to ask the honourable member if she could put her question again in a different way. We are having a little trouble understanding the way she has put it.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, I believe it was some changes to who can provide ambulance air carrier service in northern Manitoba, and that the government was asking possibly for tenders for individuals to come forward and indicate whether they are interested in providing the service. I know there was some concern expressed with the aboriginal community because of time frame.

There was an extension that was given, but there seems to be some concern about limiting the services, also about the fact that the regulations that would be required for some of these air carriers‑‑that there may be some groups that are interested but probably cannot comply with the regulations in a reasonable amount of time. In effect, they feel they would probably do a better job and provide a better service if they were given the opportunity to meet the standards and meet those regulations which may take longer than what initial time frames were that the government had asked for.

Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, the honourable member has clarified the question. The Air Ambulance Licensing Review Committee, also another George Bass chaired committee, put out a report. I have met with some stakeholders, and others in the department have been involved in such meetings. The member for Flin Flon (Mr. Storie) will recall we discussed this briefly one day, and a number of concerns have arisen in regard to our moving forward with the recommendations of the Air Ambulance Licensing Review Committee.

My concern was that not everyone felt that there had been an appropriate airing of their particular concerns, and I have a sense of déja vu here that I have done this before, but that is all right. What the chair of the Manitoba Health Board did was wrote a letter in May to various stakeholders as follows: Dear sir, madam or whatever, re Air Ambulance Licensing Review Committee.

On February 1, 1994, Manitoba Health introduced a standard for licensing basic air ambulances. The standard was developed as the result of a broad public and professional consultation process. Following introduction of the standard, a number of groups, such as the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, the Central Air Carriers Association and the Medical Services Branch of Health Canada expressed some concern with the proposed air ambulance licensing process and standards.

In response to these concerns, Manitoba Health is establishing a committee under the chairmanship of Dr. Brian Postl to review outstanding issues arising from the implementation of an air ambulance licensing process. The proposed medical standards and basic medical equipment schedules have been forwarded to the Standards Committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba for review and any suggestions they may have for improvement.

Your organization, as a stakeholder in the air ambulance field, is invited to appoint a representative to the Air Ambulance Licensing Review Committee. If at all possible, committee representatives should have some background in aeromedicine, medical evacuation of patients by air, northern air operations or outpost medical procedures. Please forward by May 21, 1994, the name, address and telephone number of your representative to the Air Ambulance Licensing Review Committee, name and address and so on.

* (1640)

This letter was sent out by Gail Roth [phonetic], chairperson of the Manitoba Health Board. It was sent out May 2 to: Dr. J. Mansfield, Assistant Registrar of the Manitoba College of Physicians and Surgeons; Chief Sydney Garrioch, he is the chair of the Chief's Health Committee for the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs; Brokenhead Ojibway Nation, Scanterbury; Ms. D. Hohle [phonetic], Secretary of the Canadian Air Carriers Association, a box number in Leaf Rapids; the chairperson, the Thompson Regional Council; Ms. J. Lutley [phonetic], who is the chairperson of the Northern Regional Council; the president of the Manitoba Medical Association; Mr. Keith Cale, Acting Regional Director of the Medical Services Branch for Health Canada; Chief Arnold Ouskan [phonetic], who has the health portfolio for the Manitoba Keewatinowi Okemakanac Inc.; the executive director of the Manitoba Association of Registered Nurses. Those are the people to whom this letter was sent.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, the individual who is with the Air Carriers Association then, would she be representing interests of some of the current and potential air carriers such as Keewatin Air, Campbell Air? I am trying to think of different air carriers that I am familiar with.

Mr. McCrae: Yes, Madam Chairperson.

Ms. Gray: I received a letter from a physician out in rural Manitoba, and he makes some interesting comments about health reform in general, but one of the things that he spent some time talking about was that he felt that in regard to Pharmacare and Pharmacare coverage and the cost of drugs, there was a wide variety of medications that physicians prescribed. He felt that oftentimes physicians were not as aware as they could be about how lesser‑cost drugs could be as effective as more costly drugs. He felt, as a physician himself, that this was an issue. Is there anything that is being done that the minister is aware of, either through the College of Physicians and Surgeons or through the government, that is going to assist physicians in being better educated in terms of the whole issue of medication management and drug costs and what is appropriate for patients?

Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, the efforts in this area are the kind of information that we send out in newsletters from the department to physicians and that the Manitoba Pharmaceutical Association makes available to the medical profession. As there are changes in our formulary, that information is made available to the medical profession. No doubt the pharmaceutical companies, generic and otherwise, make their products known to the medical profession. I think the medical profession itself has various ways of attempting to provide educational opportunities to its members. I think the DPIN will present us with some opportunities to explore new ways, also to get a message through. The legislation provides for certain things to happen which addresses some of the things that the member is raising.

I dare say that the doctor who wrote to the honourable member, that kind of information ought to be shared with the colleagues in the Manitoba Medical Association as well as just with the honourable member, in my view, because that would help as well.

Ms. Gray: Madam Chairperson, actually this doctor did. He copied Dr. Ian Goldstine and Dr. Jeff Matte [phonetic] from Manitoba Health Organization, so he did pass on that information to them.

I had one question about the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation. I noticed in the budget that its budget has increased substantially. Is that a one‑year budget, or is that over a period of a number of years, and are there specific projects or endeavours that the department is hoping that this centre will undertake with this increased budget?

Mr. McCrae: Madam Chairperson, the first part of my answer is this, that the $437,500 that the honourable member refers to on page 125 of the Supplementary Information amounts to the last quarter funding only for the centre from the Health Services Development Fund. The previous part of the year was in the $12‑million figure for the Manitoba Health Services Innovations Fund. In other words, as we talked earlier, this is one of those areas that is now being hived off and out of that Healthy Communities‑‑whatever it is called‑‑appropriation, and the Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation now gets its own appropriation. I hope that clears up what could be taken to be a misleading, rather large increase in funding.

The 1993‑94 Health Estimates provided funding of $437,500 to cover the three‑month operating period of January 1, 1994, to March 31, 1994. Recently, we have signed a new five‑year contract to take us to December 31, 1998, with the University of Manitoba, which provides the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation with total funding of $9.5 million over the term of the contract. In addition to delivering five major deliverables each year, beginning in 1994, the centre has introduced a Clinical Scholar Program which will encourage clinicians working in the health sector to examine healthy policy issues through the provision of scholarship support.

* (1650)

Here is another opportunity I think I should take to tell honourable members that these are gambling dollars that are used to fund the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation. That centre has now become internationally celebrated or renowned, and certainly internationally respected, for the work it does on population health issues. It is this centre that more people should know about because it is the centre that is able to evaluate what kinds of programs we should be getting into a renewed health care system. It is this centre that is able to tell us why we are going in the wrong directions in so many areas and which directions we should be going in. This is the centre that settles a lot of misconceptions we might have. This is the centre that shows us where our strengths and weaknesses are.

So I think that certainly the research and evaluation community has a lot of respect for the centre, and we should use the services of the centre and remember that health renewal based on sound information and evaluation is going to be quality health renewal.

Madam Chairperson: 7.(b) Healthy Communities Development $12 million‑‑pass.

7.(c) Hospital $924,571,700‑‑pass; Less: Recoveries ($3,712,200)‑‑pass.

7.(d) Medical $272,486,700‑‑pass; Less: Recoveries ($1,831,300)‑‑pass.

7.(e) Personal Care Home $250,187,300‑‑pass.

7.(f) Pharmacare $54,164,000‑‑pass.

7.(g) Ambulance $6,001,300‑‑pass.

7.(h) Northern Patient Transportation $2,577,200‑‑pass; Less: Recoveries ($400,200)‑‑pass.

Resolution 21.7: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $1,516,394,500 for Health, Health Services Insurance Fund, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1995.

8. Addictions Foundation of Manitoba.

Ms. Gray: I believe the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) and I have actually been asking questions in regard to the Addictions Foundation, and the minister has provided those answers as we have been going through the Estimates process.

Madam Chairperson: 8. Addictions Foundation of Manitoba $10,524,300.

Resolution 21.8: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $10,524,300 for Health, Addictions Foundation of Manitoba, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1995.

Item 9 we are omitting, is that correct? Expenditures Related to Capital?

Item 10. Lotteries Funded Programs (a) Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation $1,900,000‑‑pass.

10.(b) Children's Hospital Research Foundation $416,700‑‑pass.

10.(c) Manitoba Health Research Council $1,752,600‑‑pass.

10.(d) Manitoba Health Services Innovations Fund $10,000,000‑‑pass.

10.(e) Evaluation and Research Initiatives $174,900‑‑pass.

10.(f) Special Hospital Requirements $6,367,100‑‑pass.

Resolution 21.10: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $20,611,300 for Health, Lotteries Funded Programs, for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1995.

What is the will of the committee? Call it five o'clock?

The hour being 5 p.m., committee rise. Call in the Speaker.

IN SESSION

Committee Report

Mrs. Louise Dacquay (Chairperson of Committees): The Committee of Supply has adopted certain resolutions, directs me to report the same and asks leave to sit again.

I move, seconded by the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine), that the report of the committee be received.

Motion agreed to.

Mr. Speaker: The hour being 6 p.m., this House now adjourns and stands adjourned until 1:30 p.m. Tuesday. Everybody have a great long weekend.