DEBATE ON SECOND READINGS--PUBLIC BILLS
Bill 201--The Health Services Insurance Amendment Act
Madam Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux), Bill 201, (The Health Services Insurance Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur l'assurance-maladie), standing in the name of the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine).
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Madam Speaker: Is there leave to permit the bill to remain standing? [agreed]
Bill 204--The Child and Family Services Amendment Act (2)
Madam Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable member for Burrows (Mr. Martindale), (Bill 204, The Child and Family Services Amendment Act (2); Loi no 2 modifiant la Loi sur les services à l'enfant et à la famille), standing in the name of the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau).
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Madam Speaker: Is there leave to permit the bill to remain standing? [agreed]
Second Readings, Public Bills. Bill 205, The Health Care Records Act. Bill 208, The Elections Amendment Act.
PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS
Res. 31--Highways in Northern Manitoba
Mr. Gerard Jennissen (Flin Flon): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Dauphin (Mr. Struthers), the following resolution.
WHEREAS under previous NDP governments the percentage of highway funds spent in northern Manitoba ranged on average from 15 percent to 20 percent of the budget; and
WHEREAS under the current provincial government the percentage was dropped immediately to 11 percent, and has now been cut further to less than 6 percent in 1995; and
WHEREAS in 1993, the RCMP issued a press release warning drivers that the condition of Provincial Highway 384 had caused one accident and was not safe; and
WHEREAS a Department of Highways official said the road needed major work but that there was no money in the budget for essential clay capping, a problem that is common for roads in northern Manitoba; and
WHEREAS in 1994 the Highways budget for the North was cut to less than $5 million but the total budget was increased to $109 million; and
WHEREAS highways in northern Manitoba have deteriorated greatly due to the cuts of the last six years, and petitions from residents and the NDP over the cuts to northern Manitoba roads such as PH 384, PH 391 and the Cross Lake and Norway House roads have been consistently ignored by the provincial government; and
WHEREAS the poor condition of PH 391 is so serious that the RCMP frequently has to escort the Leaf Rapids Hospital ambulance when it travels on PH 391; and
WHEREAS the cuts to the North have hurt tourism, are driving up costs of goods in the North, and are causing many accidents.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Minister of Highways (Mr. Findlay) to consider increasing the percentage of highway spending in northern Manitoba to 25 percent for the year 1995 and to restore northern roads as an urgent priority.
Motion presented.
Mr. Jennissen: Madam Speaker, I am glad to rise to speak to this resolution today, but I do so also with a certain sense of impatience and urgency. This sense of impatience and urgency is a reflection of what virtually all northerners feel. Virtually all northerners are unhappy with the conditions of many northern roads, especially gravel roads in the springtime. We are not talking about washboard, minor ruts, dust, flying stones and other inconveniences. We are talking about road conditions that threaten life and limb. We are talking about road conditions that at times are so hazardous that accidents are unavoidable, and apart from the high cost for repairing damaged vehicles, there is a much higher cost for lost lives or damaged lives. Cars and trucks can be replaced, but human lives cannot.
There are already enough costs attached to living in the north, an area we as northerners love passionately, without having to pay extra penalties. We are already paying more for food, gasoline and hydro than southern Manitobans pay and substandard roads further force northerners to pay fortunes each year for tires, mufflers and windshields. Sometimes, usually in the spring, some of these roads such as Provincial Road 391 to Leaf Rapids and Lynn Lake and Provincial Road 373 to Norway House and Cross Lake are impassable. Trucks break axles, cars have to be towed through boggy sections. Police cars have to escort ambulances, and there have been accidents, broken bones, injured spines and lost lives. Almost every northerner knows someone who has been hurt or killed on PR391 or public road 373 or public road 384 to Moose Lake or on the narrow twisting road to Sherridon and Cold Lake.
Take for example the Sherridon Cold Lake road. It is in a stretch of 80 kilometres that there are over 200 sharp turns. The road is narrow and frequently used by pulp trucks, that is, trucks hauling huge loads of logs. In many places there are no ditches, just sheer rock sides or steep drops. Also there are long stretches where the sides of the roads have not had the brush removed, and it is very easy to collide with a moose because drivers cannot see an animal until it steps right onto the road.
In the last few years there have been major accidents on this stretch of road. The mayor of Sherridon Cold Lake was badly injured on this road. The Metis leader Edward Head and members of his family were badly hurt on this road as well. There was one fatality, and the same sad statistics hold true for other northern roads. Northerners have complained about their roads but the complaints have largely fallen on deaf ears.
Northern MLAs constantly raise the issue of substandard poorly funded roads in northern Manitoba. The chambers of commerce in most northern towns and cities have written letters to the minister voicing concerns. Certainly the chambers of commerce in Leaf Rapids and Lynn Lake have done so. Many northern residents have written letters to the minister protesting the condition of the roads. Residents from South Indian Lake, Norway House, Moose Lake, Leaf Rapids, Lynn Lake, and so on.
Northern newspapers consistently write editorials about the government's lack of sensitivity to the roads issue. There have been protests, there have been pickets set up.
Let us make no bones about it, transportation is key to our survival in northern Manitoba. Residents from South Indian Lake, from Moose Lake, from Sherridon, must drive a long way over bad roads in order to see a doctor, have their eyes checked, or pick up a prescription. It is not just a matter of driving across town or driving a few kilometres on good roads.
A person from Lynn Lake who needs to see a specialist in Thompson, if one is even available, has to drive at least three hours one way if the road is passable, much longer if the road is almost impassable. If the same person needed to keep a doctor's appointment in Winnipeg, well, the distance between Winnipeg and Lynn Lake is over 1,000 kilometres.
Now, all of us have heard the economic argument: there is only so much money available. It is not that we are unsympathetic to that argument, but I would like to point out what I consider to be weaknesses or flaws in the argument that is based solely on a Winnipeg and southern Manitoba view of economics because that view is very simplistic. It goes something like this: There are limited funds, we find out which roads are travelled most, which are in the worst shape, we prioritize, we fix. That may be impeccable logic in Winnipeg, but it does not fit the northern reality.
Here are the three weaknesses of that argument. First of all, if you use population, if you use a number of people travelling a road as a basis for judging which road gets repaired and which road does not, you are discriminating against a region. Obviously, 6 percent of the population cannot compete with 94 percent of the population. Very often the reason we are not travelling on those roads and cannot be counted is because the roads are not capable of being travelled on.
There are not as many of us on northern roads, but those roads are much more important to us. Those roads, those highways, are often our lifelines, whether it means seeing a doctor or fleeing from a forest fire. We would like to see criteria built on need, northern criteria, and the same holds true for funding northern schools and hospitals.
Secondly, there seems to be an unstated assumption in Winnipeg, the place that we up north call Perimeterville, that the northern area, and often rural areas as well, that these areas are asking for special favours, that we are looking for handouts.
The Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) stated this position clearly when he wrote to the Thompson Citizen in July of 1994--and I am paraphrasing--he said that northern residents believe that the Manitoba government is picking on them. That is what the minister said. Now the minister was referring to health care, but the same thing applies to highway construction and maintenance in northern Manitoba.
It is not that we are whining or petulantly repeating that the government is picking on us, we actually believe it is picking on us. It is picking on us. We are not asking special favours, we are asking the government generally and the Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Findlay) specifically to set aside the biased notion that 6 percent, or perhaps today it is 5 percent of the population deserves only 6 percent or 5 percent or less of the Highways budget.
* (1610)
Despite the huge stretches of roads, despite the sparse population, the North supplies enormous wealth to the south, and that is a fact that is conveniently overlooked quite often. Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of hydro power flows south every year. Tens of millions of dollars flow south in the form of mineral wealth, gold, copper, zinc; tens of millions of dollars flow south in the form of lumber, pulp, fish, fur. Northerners pay taxes, high taxes. The northern tourist potential, hardly even tapped, which is partially due to bad roads, provides not only jobs, but generates millions of dollars of revenue for this government.
Northerners are only asking for a fair share, a fair return for the immense wealth that the North provides for this province, the wealth that the south pulls to itself. We do not want handouts, we just want a fair share.
The third argument, or the third fallacy: One of the great fallacies under which this government labours is the belief that a road is a road, that all roads are more or less equal, that a bad stretch of southern road is roughly the same as a bad stretch of northern road. I do not buy that and northerners do not.
Allow me to clarify this. In many northern communities, there is either no road or one road. In many southern communities, there are several roads; you have a choice. You can always detour. You can use a different road if you need to. In northern Manitoba, that is not the case. There are only two ways you can get out of Flin Flon and go north or south. There are at least eight roads out of Brandon. There are at least a dozen roads out of Winnipeg, and, in fact, if you take the map of Manitoba and randomly look at the south, you will find some places such as Elm Creek, four ways out of town, Winkler, four roads leading out of town, but there is only one way out of town for such communities as Lynn Lake, South Indian Lake, Norway House, Cross Lake, Snow Lake, Sherridon, Cold Lake, Nelson House and Moose Lake. There are no choices for those communities regarding roads.
That is why it is vital to keep that one lifeline open, to keep it in good shape. It is simply not acceptable to equate southern roads with northern roads. If you do that, you are comparing apples and oranges. So I reject the arguments that are based purely on population or on the fact that we are getting special treatment, because I do not believe we are, or the mistaken belief over there that all roads are equal. I reject those three assumptions or fallacies.
Now the minister himself admits that northern roads are in bad shape. In fact, in one of his letters dated June 14, 1995, he refers to PR391 in the following terms: unreliable road conditions and actual road closures, and he is right. I would argue then that the minister has a responsibility to make those road conditions reliable to prevent road closures.
Indeed, some repairs, some fixing is taking place, and for that all northerners are thankful and I do thank the minister, but it is too little coming too late.
The minister often points out that northern roads, particularly PR391, were built to rough pioneering standards; they were built in a hurry. There is some truth to that, but that does not mean that we should sit idly by and only do the minimum.
That begs the question, what happened the last seven years? In the last seven years, this government could have been much more aggressive in improving northern highways, and when this government finally does do a little paving in the North, it always seems to result in a minor catastrophe. Well, at least it did this summer in Wabowden, and perhaps it is unfair to point out that one example, but our cynics, our critics up North say that the Filmon government is so unused to paving roads in northern Manitoba that the one time they do it they screw up, because they have not had any practice. It is hard to believe--[interjection] It is hard to believe there is not--[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Jennissen: It is hard to believe there is not some ideological basis--[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Jennissen: I will try that for the fourth time, Madam Speaker, thank you. Practice makes perfect.
It is hard to believe there is not some ideological basis for not wanting to improve northern roads. As my esteemed colleague from The Pas has pointed out on numerous occasions, this government will build roads, pave roads for ducks in the south but not for humans in the North. Certainly the statistics are disturbing to us northerners. The allocation appears very one-sided.
Let us compare two years a decade apart. In the years 1981-82, under the NDP, the northern Manitoba capital projects road budget was $21,464,090.06, roughly $21.5 million. The provincial total was $97,950,255.67. The highway construction expenditure for northern Manitoba that year was 21.9 percent of the provincial total, roughly 22 percent. Now, look exactly a decade later, 10 years later, in 1991-92 under the Tories. The percentage allocation was 5.7 percent, according to my figures, and why should anyone question my figures?
An Honourable Member: Did you say '82-83?
Mr. Jennissen: I said 1981-82 and '91-92.
That low allocation has been more or less maintained since 1991-92. How do northerners react to this? They think it is unfair. They are fully aware that funding for a northern highways project is only one-quarter of the historical norm. They feel that blatant favouritism is being shown, that southern Tory constituencies are much more likely to have highways built and repaired than northern NDP constituencies, and they sometimes feel that is done as retribution for voting the right way, from my point of view, and the wrong way from the members opposite.
What irks northerners most is that some of the southern highways are being twinned or paved or upgraded when there was no obvious serious need to do so at the present time, whereas the area of greatest need was being more or less ignored in northern Manitoba. Southern inconveniences are being addressed while northern emergencies are being virtually ignored. That is why the residents of Nelson House protested last summer. To the government's credit, a portion of PR391 has been resurfaced, and I thank the minister for that. It is not enough. We are tired of protesting, of writing letters, of pleading with the minister and his government.
We ask the minister to escalate highway construction in northern Manitoba, and we specifically point out highways and roads that are in most urgent need of upgrading, PR391 from Thompson to Lynn Lake and the South Bay road to South Indian Lake, PR373 to Norway House, PR374 to Cross Lake, PR384 to Moose Lake, and the Cold Lake-Sherridon Road. We realize that this will require a much larger allocation than what is presently budgeted for. To make up for the lost years, years of neglect, this resolution urges the Minister of Highways and Transportation to consider increasing the percentage of Highways spending in northern Manitoba to 25 percent of the budget.
Let me finish by saying every year this province benefits from our hydro power. Northern hydro power generates hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue for this province every year, each year. Is it too much to ask that the North, whose hydro power makes your electronic highway possible, should ask this government, this minister to give the North a few decent, well-maintained, ordinary gravel highways? Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Thank you, Madam Speaker, for an opportunity to comment. I respect that the member, in all honesty, comes here because he genuinely believes the mission that he is on, that he wants more money spent in the North. He did not identify any particular roads or any particular areas that there is very urgent, urgent need.
An Honourable Member: We just want our fair share. That is all.
Mr. Findlay: Okay, fair share, but I also want the truth on the record now, for the member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin).
The member talks about, and I go back to his resolution that the NDP government spent 15 to 20 percent of the budget. Well, let me give the member the actual figures that were spent, the real numbers. In the six years from '82-83, which was the first year the NDP was in government where they had a Highways budget, to 1987-88, and these are the numbers that the department brings forward because they are the truth. They vary from 15.2, 12.5, 13.9, and, yes, they got all the way up to 18.2--they actually got into that range once--11.7, and 10.5. Now I say six years, if you add that up and you divide it by six, pretty simple arithmetic, it is 13.6.
* (1620)
I asked the member when he was giving the information, he said 22 percent, 21.5 million, 97.5 in total budget. I asked him what year; he said '81-82. Guess who was in government in '81-82? The Tories were in government in '81-82 because the highway construction is done in the summer and the election was November 1981. So guess who was in government? Guess who was in government? The Tories. The member should stick to the truth.
I can listen to any legitimate argument that is based on need and fairness, but, for gosh sakes, let us talk the truth, the facts, and do your homework to be sure you know what you are talking about.
In this past year, we spent considerably more because of road conditions based on weather. Yes, there were problems. There have been problems all over the province. When I hear the words, I want my fair share, I need more, I hear that from 205 municipalities throughout this province--R.M.s, LGDs, north and south. North and south.
I would ask the member for The Pas to go out and drive on some of the PR roads--
An Honourable Member: I have.
Mr. Findlay: Where have you been?
An Honourable Member: All the roads are in southern Manitoba.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. This is not a time for debate between two members. This is the time for individual private members to have the right to put their comments on the record when they are recognized in appropriate speaking order.
Mr. Findlay: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
In '95-96, we spent 7.5 percent of the capital budget up there. In the spring program, 14 percent was dedicated to the North. Madam Speaker, 5.2 percent of the actual miles travelled in this province are travelled in that region, and we spend 17.4 percent of the maintenance budget.
Now, if I told those numbers to the number of R.M.s I will meet next month in Brandon at the annual UMM, they would be upset, saying that is unfair, special treatment for the North.
An Honourable Member: When did you pave the . . . to the highway?
Mr. Findlay: We have representation--
Point of Order
Hon. Darren Praznik (Deputy Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, on a point of order, the member for The Pas makes accusations from his seat. Let him put that false information on the record, because his accusations are untrue.
Madam Speaker: On the point of order, I did not hear the comments from the honourable member for The Pas and I can only rule on what is on the record.
I would also like to remind the honourable minister to pick and choose his words carefully. "False" is a word that many people have been cautioned about the usage of.
* * *
Mr. Findlay: Madam Speaker, the reality of the economic--[interjection] The member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) can speak after I am done; I should be done about 4:30.
Madam Speaker, the reality of the economic circumstances--we are talking about a bill to strike home right here. This is where the rubber hits the road. The NDP government in six years ran up a deficit of $3 billion. That is a bill they left unpaid. Every year the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) has to spend $300-million interest on NDP debt that was not paid.
Madam Speaker, as members speak from their seats, that could mean $100 million for education, which they are constantly yelling for; it could mean $100 million for health, which they are calling for; it could mean $100 million for highways that the North wants spent. But they spent the money in the past, ignored the fact they did not have the revenue. You cannot run your household like that. You cannot run the government like that. That is where the rubber hits the road of the failed social policies--[interjection]
The member does not want to accept the reality that exists. If she wants to go back through the budgets of the NDP years and total up the income, total up the expenditure--[interjection]
Madam Speaker, she can speak at a quarter to five if she would like.
Total up the incomes, total up the expenditures, you will find a gap of $3 billion. That, at 10 percent interest, which is about the going rate, comes up to $300 million a year. Would we not all like to have that to look after today's needs? I do not think there is any untruth in that at all. I need it for highways for all of Manitoba desperately. [interjection]
See, Madam Speaker, the members bring a serious resolution here, but they think it is a fun thing. [interjection] You are laughing at every moment.
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Point of Order
Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Madam Speaker, I was not laughing at the issue; I was laughing at the incompetence of this Minister of Highways.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Thompson does not have a point of order.
* * *
Madam Speaker: Order, please. Now, I recognize this is a very important issue, and most members will have an opportunity to speak to it if all members co-operate and allow the member that has the floor to finish his remarks.
Mr. Findlay: Now ladies and gentlemen, we all understand that there is need, there is need everywhere, there is need in the North. I know there is one road in and one road out of the communities. The department, through maintenance and capital construction, is working hard, has worked hard, to be sure to meet the needs of the North. The member for Flin Flon (Mr. Jennissen) did recognize some projects were done, but he failed to recognize the number of projects.
I would just like to tell him the projects that were done in '95-96: Highway 6, a complete grade widening of 24.8 kilometres; Highway 380, spot grade and drainage improvements, completed; on PR 280-290, grade improvements and pavement, completed; PR 373, grading and granular base, it is complete. There are several projects on 391, base and AST, gravel, grade improvements. On it goes to the tune of $7.2 million and three seal coating projects. It is major money spent. I think that the people who drive on those roads, on these projects, realize the improvement. More projects are scheduled in the program for next year and the year after.
Madam Speaker, I want the member to know that this government serves all of Manitoba. I have discussions with a lot of different levels of government, with PRs, towns, villages, R.M.s, and they all want more, but they realize that we must live within our means. There is no other way; we cannot spend money that we do not have today as was done during the NDP years. That kind of philosophy of governing is over.
Madam Speaker, we spent in the vicinity of $100 million to $110 million in our years in government. The NDP in their years of government were lucky to spend $85 million a year on highways. So who has put the greatest effort in in terms of highways for Manitoba? I think this government has done an exceedingly good effort.
He also fails to recognize Hydro put a lot of money into northern roads in the mid-'80 years. They are not able to do it now.
Another issue that the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Jennissen) would be, I think, intelligent to bring to the House, and that is that the federal government, which collects all kinds of tax revenue out a highway system, puts nothing back and nobody says anything about it. We try. The minister previous, from 1988, developed the national highway program. This was the lead province. All provinces were in tune; everything was ready to go, and the federal government kept saying maybe, no, not yet, we are not ready. Last year, about this time, we got the federal minister at least to commit that he would make a yes or a no by December 15.
I committed that I would get all the provinces' money commitments on the table. We got $2.7 billion of commitment over the next five years from nine out of the 10 provinces, only Quebec was not ready to say anything yet for obvious reasons. The federal government said, we did not have our commitments up front. We all had it on letter, five-year projections of what we would spend, all we asked them to do was match it in any fashion.
The federal government collects out of our national highway system between $4 and $5 billion a year in excise tax. In Manitoba, our users of the highways--
An Honourable Member: Billion, right?
Mr. Findlay: Billion, yes, $2.5 billion. The taxpayers in Manitoba contribute to the federal treasury about $180 million a year in taxes, and they do not send any money back after the SHIP is over this year, will not be sending any money back to the road network of Manitoba.
* (1630)
The provincial government--[interjection] Now, that is a third, a third, a third. I would love them to do that with the provincial roads. We put $100 million in and the federal government puts zero. I would like a third, a third, a third with them. The member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux) might take that message back. It is time to come to the table and be equal in our expenditures. [interjection] Infrastructure was sewer, roads, municipal projects. [interjection] In the infrastructure program, a third, a third, a third.
I like that principle and we have advocated to the federal government infrastructure 2. We are prepared to go 50-50 because we cannot ask the municipalities to contribute to our provincial roads. They can go 50-50 any day. Our 50 cents is there; our $50 million is there; our hundred million is there. Just come and match it. We are ready. They collect out of this system more in taxes than we do.
Madam Speaker, I recognize, as I have already said, what the member is saying, and we try to meet the needs as best we can. We are trying to meet them in terms of having jobs in the province and convenient travel, safe travel, but we always must talk about the truth, what in reality is going on out there. We must not stretch it to try to make political points because nobody gains.
If we are going to go after political points, let us go after the federal government. Why does the member not bring forth a resolution that says, we should ask the federal government to pay a "fair share," which are the words I heard often today, towards the highway network of this country. The Premiers have been on this agenda, Ministers of Highways have been on this agenda since 1988. The federal government, because nobody really gets together and says we must work solidly, they get away with saying no.
But the member for Inkster, yes, infrastructure 2. Highways across this country would be a tremendous investment because the federal government, in terms of taxes paid at any job, gets $2 to a province's $1. They always get their money back--always.
But, Madam Speaker, so far they have not done it, and for the members from the North, they may say, well, the National Highways Program is only Highways 1, 16, 75 and the Perimeter. Well, if we as a province have to spend less money on those roads, we have more available for the North--that is absolutely what would happen--and more available for all the secondary road networks of this province wherever.
Madam Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to speak, and I also thank the member for bringing it to the House because it gives us a chance to talk about the reality of what is going on and maybe the initiatives we should be on.
Committee Change
Madam Speaker: Order, please. May I quickly recognize the honourable member for Gimli with committee changes.
Mr. Edward Helwer (Gimli): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine), that the composition of the Standing Committee on Economic Development be amended as follows: the member for La Verendrye (Mr. Sveinson) for the member for Emerson (Mr. Penner).
Motion agreed to.
* * *
Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): Madam Speaker, two things I want to say right off the start, and that is when I get up to raise issues, issues that were brought to me by the people that I represent in the communities of Cross Lake, Norway House, Moose Lake, Easterville, Grand Rapids, when I get up to raise those issues I am not here to grandstand. I am not here to score political points. I am merely trying to do my job, just as I am sure the minister tries to do his job whenever he comes into this Chamber and throughout the week that he does his work as Minister of Highways and Transportation.
Secondly, I want to invite the Minister of Highways and Transportation--because he seems to have a different understanding of what fairness is all about. He seems to have a different understanding of what the reality is in terms of the way that resources are allocated in this province by this government.
So, therefore, if he lacks that understanding, I will invite him to travel with me from Ponton to Cross Lake and Norway House, especially right now. The former Minister of Highways, some year and a half ago, drove from Ponton to Cross Lake, and I was told by the members of Cross Lake First Nation that when he arrived in Cross Lake, his car was just covered with mud; you could not recognize what kind of a vehicle he was driving. Apparently, when he got out from his car finally, after he recovered somewhat, made an announcement to people like Ernest Monias: I am ashamed; I am ashamed of that road.
An Honourable Member: I do not know whether I said it that way.
Mr. Lathlin: That is what the people from Cross Lake told me, and I believe them.
Now, there are two things. I am not here to score political points; I am here to represent those people who elected me into this office, but I also invite the Minister of Highways and Transportation to put his money where his mouth is. Come with me, travel from Ponton to Cross Lake and see for himself what conditions those roads are in. We are not exaggerating; we are not making light of the situation. We are very serious. It is a serious situation. The minister knows full well that in some cases it is a life and death situation. The RCMP, from time to time, advise people not to travel the roads because of the fact they present too much danger, that their lives will be in danger if they were to travel.
The minister knows, too, that in some cases RCMP have had to escort ambulances coming from Nelson House to Thompson. So it is not a joke; it is not a light matter. We are serious.
Madam Speaker, it is a well-known fact that this Filmon government has abandoned, in our minds, northern Manitoba's highways. Some may wonder why. Others simply accept it as an attitudinal thing on the part of ministers who come mainly from the south of Manitoba. Northerners do not understand how this government can justify a reduction of Highways expenditures in the North, and it is a reduction, no matter how the minister puts his numbers across. Northerners know that the North is receiving little or no support as far as the Department of Highways is concerned. They are also aware how much more money used to be spent in the North, contrary to what the Minister of Highways is trying to portray.
The previous government, in seven years--how much has this government spent on highways and transportation in the North? How much money have you spent in the North during your term, during the term that your government has been in office, how much? Okay? Then compare. For example, northerners recognize that the 15-year period that the minister talks about, they recognize that money was spent. There was enough money spent, $13 million, $14 million, almost triple the amount this government has spent during the last three years in northern Manitoba. Northerners know that. Northerners know and recognize that their roads at one time were in better condition than they are now. They know that. They also know that the province's overall Highways budget at the time was averaging out at $92 million.
* (1640)
However, looking at the last five years, northerners have also seen the Filmon government increase the overall budget to average about $104 million, while at the same time reducing the North's portion to an average of $6 million. The Minister of Highways and Transportation says the North is receiving a proportionate amount of the Highways budget based on a population count.
Madam Speaker, that is absolute nonsense, and the minister knows that. Frankly, the minister's answer does not wash with anyone living in the North. It does not. The fact is that the North has traditionally received much more money from the province. Northerners know that they used to get their fair share of the Highways budget and as a result of their getting their fair share of the Highways budget, were able to enjoy better road conditions. Since then, however, the roads have deteriorated to the point where they have become health and safety hazards. It is not safe to travel on them. So how can the minister say that he is treating the North fairly? How many roads can the minister identify in southern Manitoba that are like the one that goes from Ponton to Cross Lake to Norway House?
I challenge him to show me a road in southern Manitoba, because I do a bit of travelling down south when I am down here, to go to different meetings and stuff like that. Every time I go somewhere I have yet to run across a road that is similar in condition to the one that I travel on every time I go to Cross Lake from Ponton.
Madam Speaker, the minister also knows that from time to time constituents sign petitions, they write letters, they write letters to the editor, they write letters to this government. Delegations come in from time to time. The minister is also aware that in one case a constituent of mine went so far as to blame this government for the loss of life of an Anglican priest serving in the community of Cross Lake, and the minister can sit there and laugh and ridicule and say we are trying to score political points.
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Point of Order
Mr. Findlay: Madam Speaker, on a point of order, I have sat here for 10 minutes listening intently to that member and then he says "the minister can sit there and laugh and ridicule." I have sat here consistently for 10 minutes to listen to him make legitimate points. I would ask him to withdraw that comment.
Madam Speaker: On the point of order, I did not hear the comments made by the honourable member for The Pas. I will take it under advisement. I will review Hansard and, if necessary, report back to the House.
* * *
Mr. Lathlin: Madam Speaker, the roads in the North are continuing to receive the same level of attention or, should I say, lack of attention, because this government is choosing to ignore the welfare of the North.
Another example of this could be the government's negotiations with Norwin. We are told that Norwin will have to accept a cut in funds available to them. We are told that, if they do not accept this budget shrinkage that the government is giving them, the project will be tendered out. We saw what last year's government action did in respect to Norwin being forced to take less. The winter roads in some dozen remote communities were not open for as long as they were in past years.
Northerners are telling me that this government does not care what happens to the North, and that makes perfectly good sense to me, because I remember right after I was elected for the first time, I sat here and I listened to the then-Minister of Northern Affairs saying to the Chamber, it is too bad that the North did not know how to vote. Do you know what, Madam Speaker? Because I knew the minister before, it saddened me to hear the minister utter those words then. It made me sad because I thought I knew the minister better. Then I started to realize that that attitude, those words were clearly reflective of this government's attitude as far as the North is concerned. Since then, I have been able to reconcile those statements made by the minister and the attitude that this government displays whenever they are dealing with northern issues.
Madam Speaker, of course, the then-Minister of Northern Affairs would have said those things because he meant them. It was not a joke.
(Mr. Marcel Laurendeau, Deputy Speaker, in the Chair)
The other thing that I wanted to mention before I sit down is this government is fully aware that it is much more expensive to live in the North. Food, services, gas, et cetera, are all more costly. The Minister of Highways's own admission of equality for the North does not take into account those increased costs which all northerners have to experience. He is therefore openly admitting that he is being unfair to the North as far as the Highways budget is concerned. Northerners know that. I know that. They live with this knowledge every day. We live with that every day. Their cars break down. You know, the minister travels the paved highways in the south, purchases a vehicle, probably has it for 10, 15 years, because that is how long it lasts because the roads are good. If he were to live in Cross Lake, that same car would not last two years because of the conditions that you would have to travel if you were coming from Cross Lake to Winnipeg. It is expensive.
As I said earlier, the RCMP have, from time to time, closed roads because of the safety and health hazards that they present, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I am going to stop there for now, but I do want to say that northerners, many tourists, my colleagues and I all know that there are some very, very serious problems in the way that the highways budget is being administered by this government.
The member for Flin Flon (Mr. Jennissen) in his private member's resolution is seeking to address this problem. The resolution seeks to bring true equality to the North. I urge all members of this House to take seriously and not make light of the poor conditions of northern roads, with a view to ensuring that the North for once is treated with equality.
As I have previously stated in this House, the North only wants what is fair and just, nothing more, nothing less. We just want what is fair. Northerners just want those things that you people in the south here take for granted every day. Northerners do not want to be alienated anymore and shut out from the family, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Northerners want to feel that they are a part of Manitoba. Northerners want to feel that they are citizens of Manitoba whether they live in Cross Lake, Nelson House or in Winnipeg, and they want to be treated as such by this government. Thank you.
Hon. Albert Driedger (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I like these kinds of resolutions. I think it is good that we have a chance to sort of express some views on issues that are very important. I certainly do not criticize the members opposite for bringing forward and lobbying on behalf of their constituencies out there. This is a very common thing in the Department of Highways. I, having been the Minister of Highways and Transportation for five and a half years, feel that criticism is directed more at me possibly than even the present Minister of Highways and Transportation (Mr. Findlay).
* (1650)
But I would like to take and use this opportunity to caution some of the new members who come in here from time to time, as the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Jennissen) who I have respect for, as I do for most members in the House, but would caution them not to get too carried away with some of the statistics that he perceives that he has, because everybody can play with figures the way they want to. I do not want to spend too much time going into the figures end of it, but I just want to give him an illustration.
In 1982-83, which was basically at the time when the Sterling Lyon administration had been defeated by the Pawley government--but what happens usually when you have a change of government, the budgets that have been prepared previously sort of carry through because the process is there. So that 1982-83 budget which basically was just shy, just a smidgen shy of $100 million, that was basically the Conservative budget that was brought forward at that time, and the high figure--if we take the last 13 budgets--the highest figure spent in the North was done under a Conservative budget. [interjection] Yes, it was. In '82-83 it was our budget and it was 15.2 percent.
But then, Mr. Deputy Speaker, what happened under the Pawley administration, each year they cut the highway program more and more. Revenues kept going up. They prioritized differently. It was in 1986-87 when we hit the all-time low of $84 million being spent on highway construction. That was under the NDP administration, and 11.7 percent was spent up North.
During my administration in 1988, when I took over, we spent higher percentages than that in the North every year--
An Honourable Member: What about '81, '82, '83, '84, '85?
Mr. Driedger: No, no, I am taking from what I have here. Yes, for the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), I just clarified. I say that only it really does not matter that much; it does not really matter that much. I am just cautioning the member for Flin Flon (Mr. Jennissen), do not get too carried away with figures because they come around and everybody plays with them whichever way they want.
But I have to tell you that since 1988, at the time when our government took over again, we have fought up from a budget of $87 million. We got it up to $92 million, and then out of the next six budgets there was only one year where it was under $100 million.
I argued all the time, desperately, as my colleague has as well, that roads are the economic lifeline in the province. We need to have good transportation. We have fought hard with the federal government, appealing: Stay out of putting gas taxes on; let the provinces do that so that we could generate revenues for the roads. It never worked; it never worked. But, by comparison with other provinces, we have kept our budget up there. Saskatchewan cut the living dickens out of their budget. They were down to a capital program of around $60-some-odd million at one time. Unbelievable, and they had a higher capital at one time than we did. So it was a matter of how governments prioritized.
I always felt we should have put more priority on highway construction than we did, but the government of the day at that time and to this day always felt Health, Education, Family Services, the social programs, by and large, the ones that affect everybody, should have higher priority and money was channelled there. We managed to maintain that level, but I will tell you something, it was very difficult.
For members to criticize the government--I do not think it is wrong to lobby, but be careful when you criticize and say that these things have not been taken care of. I took the liberty--when I was the Minister of Highways and Transportation, I was lobbied and challenged as the member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) challenged the present minister: Come and have a look. In August 1993, I took the challenge. I did even before that. I travelled with some people from Lynn Lake all the way to Thompson. The fellow that was driving me was driving a big Chrysler--[interjection] No, we were on a tour at that time, and he insisted on hitting every pothole. After miles of this, I said, you know what, Bill, you do not have to hit every pothole. I can see where there are holes. You do not have to ruin your car. We sort of got there to Thompson ultimately safely, too.
Then, in 1993, I took the liberty and did a tour up North. Again, people challenged me: Come and see how bad the roads are. I had the privilege of travelling most of the roads. I did that time. We travelled up to Ponton and from Ponton down to Norway House and the Cross Lake road. It happened to be a rainy day. I did not choose very wisely. Mr. Deputy Speaker, they make fun of the trip I had up there. It was wild because the first stretch of road was very slick. It was not that the road was soft; it was just grease. It was raining, and I had a blue car. That is right, you could not tell the colour really by the time I got down to Cross Lake. Everybody had some fun with that.
But I have to also say that from the junction of Norway House and Cross Lake, that stretch going to Norway House was relatively a good road. For a gravel road, it was a good quality road. From that corner going into Cross Lake, there were stretches that were bad. They needed gravel, they needed work. I do not deny that.
Then from there we travelled all the way across to The Pas and then we drove into Moose Lake because the chief and the mayor of the community had called and said, you know, you cannot travel on this road. I and my assistant travelled down there, and that is why I want to caution a little bit when people say, come and travel the roads. We did, and that road was actually, at that time, in better shape than many of the roads in the south. They were, yes.
An Honourable Member: Not the Cross Lake road.
Mr. Driedger: I did not say Cross Lake, I said the road to Moose Lake. For members, just to put it in the right perspective, they say, you know, do not make fun, it is dangerous. I want to tell you what dangerous is. You try driving Highway 59 from Ile des Chenes to Winnipeg in the morning during rush hour, or in the evening, because nobody even stops when they come off the side roads because you cannot get into the traffic. They peel onto the shoulder and start squirting gravel until they finally find an opening to get in.
Do not talk to me about danger because there is danger on all kinds of roads. You know we all have compassion, and it always hurt me when anybody got killed on highways because some people invariably always say it is the government's fault, it is the Department of Highways' fault, we should sue them. This is not an unusual thing.
If you want to talk about roads and compare roads, and you want to talk about cost spent on roads, let us compare because I have been there and I will tell you something. You have preferences, everybody has preferences, and decisions are not made on political decisions necessarily. We have a system in place in the department. [interjection] Just a minute. There is a system in place. Every highway is graded, and if you want to go on Highway 52 in my constituency, it has the poorest grading of a PTH in the province--am I right?--so do not talk to me about these kind of things. You stand here and you criticize and you say, oh, it is picking on the North. Bull, bull, it is not. That is not right at all.
I just happen to travel, every summer I travel north. I love the North. I love to travel in the North, and I can tell you your parks in the North are better than ours in the south, and your roads are not that much worse than most of the roads in the south. I will tell you something, based on traffic on these roads--[interjection] Well, this is the truth and if you do not like it, find out for yourself. I did. Do not challenge me about travelling. I have done it, and I do it every year up north. I am a hunter and a fisherman, and I love to travel out there. I will tell you something, drive these roads. I will take you out to the roads in the south portion of the province.
There is nothing wrong with lobbying. There are over 200 municipalities and LGDs that lobby for roads. Every town lobbies for their roads in town to be done. The City of Winnipeg lobbies the Minister of Highways for cost-sharing. We have done that as well. The City of Brandon, the City of Portage, the by-passes, everybody lobbies the Minister of Highways and Transportation. It is very difficult to take and prioritize things, and if you think the decisions are all made on a political basis, it does not work that way. You think they are made that way; they are not. I will tell you something, and I will compare--
An Honourable Member: Look at the facts, Albert.
Mr. Driedger: Well, look at the facts. I will tell you--some of facts were put on the table.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. I am really having difficulty hearing the honourable minister's presentation. I would really appreciate it if he would be given the opportunity to continue.
Mr. Driedger: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am trying to speak loudly on this so you can hear me because it is important. But I would suggest that instead of being as critical as they are of the province here that they should take and combine with us to put pressure on the federal government who have a moral obligation to take and participate financially in these things.
I shamed the federal government when Jake Epp was my MP, shamed them into a SHIP agreement, Strategic Highway Improvement, and the only reason they participated with Manitoba, Mr. Deputy Speaker, was because they had given the East money. They had not given us money and we got money. So we should work jointly with the federal government. We should take and push them together in terms of supporting that.
* (1700)
Lobby for your individual roads if you want, that is fine, but I think as far as the province's responsibility is concerned, that we should all work together to try and make the federal government accept the responsibility for a national highway program, which has always been my pet project and has been this government's pet project.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The hour being 5 p.m., the first private members' hour is now complete. When this matter is again before the House, the honourable minister will have four minutes remaining.
The proposed resolution of the honourable member for Kildonan, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.
Res. 32--Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale),
WHEREAS Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (also known as Chronic Fatigue and immune Dysfunction Syndrome, Fibromyalgia Syndrome) is a devastating illness for which there is no known cure or effective treatment, and for which the method of transmission of the disease is unknown; and
WHEREAS Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome strikes people of all age groups, including a growing number of children, but women between the ages of 25 and 40 are most at risk; and
WHEREAS recent biomedical research has identified Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome as a serious illness which affects a number of systems in the human body, including the immune system; and
WHEREAS the syndrome is characterized primarily by chronic debilitating pain, incapacitating fatigue and many influenza-like symptoms, and is often accompanied by a variety of cognitive dysfunctions; and
WHEREAS more serious and longer-lasting neurological impairments, including seizures, psychosis and dementia, have also been observed in some patients; and
WHEREAS the disease can produce extreme debilitation and prevent sufferers from working and other normal daily activities, leading to a severe decline in their quality of life; and
WHEREAS because so little is known about the disease, people with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome are often misdiagnosed and receive inadequate medical treatment; and
WHEREAS there is a need for education and training of health professionals regarding Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and increased public awareness of the disease; and
WHEREAS estimates indicate that approximately 5,000 to 7,000 may be infected; and
WHEREAS a number of groups and organizations and individuals, including the ME Support Network, and the Nightingale Research Foundation are asking for treatment and education programs to combat this debilitating disease.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the provincial government to consider developing education and treatment programs for the general public and health care professionals to deal with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.
Motion presented.
Mr. Chomiak: I welcome the opportunity of having a chance to debate in this Legislature a very significant health issue, health preventative issue, women's issue, children's issue and an issue that affects many, many Manitobans.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, for those members who may not be familiar with the disease, I just want to point out some of the aspects of this disease. This severe disease is characterized by muscle failure with marked fatigue, pain or exhaustion in the exercised muscle, inability to return to the normal state of mental and physical activity, marked variability and fluctuation of symptoms, major sleep disturbances, problems of dyslexia, memory loss, aphasia and severe malaise.
ME is a non-HIV acquired immune deficiency syndrome. It injures both the immune system and the central nervous system. This double injury allows the chronic viral infection and illnesses to take hold. Although some people recover, most individuals remain chronically ill or weakened. Others follow and relapsing occurs. Despite the fact that many ME patients may appear normal, their muscles and memory fail. Many are left in chronic pain. They have difficulty standing, reading and walking. They frequently lose or have to lose their occupation.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, to try to assist members of this Chamber in understanding this disease and this problem, I would like to read to you an abridged letter that I received a while ago from someone who is a sufferer, and I will just quote from this letter: Like many people with ME, I am relatively young, 32 and well educated. Before I became ill in 1987, I was the marketing director for a company, one of Canada's leading presses, and I had a bright future ahead of me, but, for the last several years, I have lived on a combination of social assistance and CPP. I desperately want my old life and my old health back. I was lucky to find a knowledgeable physician quickly that many of the estimated 5,000 to 10,000 ME sufferers in Manitoba have spent years before finding a physician competent to diagnose their condition, and a lack of physicians who are trained to identify or understand this condition means that many others are still on their own, wondering why their lives are being taken from them.
Leaving aside the personal cost, the drain on the health care budget from the many physicians and specialists typically seen before the diagnosis is substantial, and because the length of time before diagnosis is a major risk for the condition becoming permanent, lack of knowledgeable treatment increases the cost to society of having so many who could be the most productive members of society permanently disabled.
This is brought to my attention by an individual named Duncan Thornton.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, we have spoken to many people about this disease, and one of the problems with it is that we encounter scepticism by friends, family and health care professionals. So little is known about the disease that people are often misdiagnosed and receive inadequate medical treatment. As I indicated earlier, it is estimated that 5,000 to 7,000 Manitobans with this disease are receiving care, and how many are not receiving care or are being misdiagnosed? This goes to the heart of this resolution.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, there are many support groups and individuals involved in support groups who have been lobbying for some time to have some form of formal recognition for this disease, and we in this legislative Chamber have a very unique opportunity during the course of this debate and this resolution to pass a resolution saying we recognize that this exists. There is no doubt that it does, and we recognize that a role must be played by the Department of Health in educating professionals and others and providing support and research to try to deal with this debilitating disease.
We have many resolutions of a great deal of importance that appear before us on a regular basis in private members' hour. Sometimes it is symbolic what we say and what we do, and sometimes it is quite significant. I believe that by members of this Chamber unanimously passing this resolution, we could go a long way towards helping those who suffer from the disease and helping those in the health care professions to better understand and to better deal with this debilitating disease.
This is not the first time we have brought this resolution forward. This is not the first time we have raised the issue in the Chamber. We have raised it during Question Period, and I dealt with this issue with the present Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) during the course of Estimates quite extensively. We had discussions about it in our attempts to try to enlighten and inform the Department of Health and others that something should and ought to be done about this disease, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
You know, this disease has probably been with us for some time. It has only been recently that we have probably been able to isolate it and to try to deal with it, and therein lies one of the major problems. I wonder, as we advance in technology and as we advance in society and in science, if there is going to be a variety of ailments and diseases that have to be recognized and have to be dealt with, and there are many that come up regularly in Question Period in this Chamber.
We have to be able to adapt our health care system to recognize the reality of new diagnoses, new illnesses, new treatments and new forms of education, and this is one of those examples where we cannot be inflexible, we cannot sit back and say, no, this does not exist, we cannot sit back and say, no, we are not going to do anything because maybe two provinces out of the 10 are not doing anything about it.
This is an opportunity, a unique opportunity, presented to us in Manitoba to do something positive and something concrete to assist those sufferers and all those potential sufferers, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and help them with their disease.
We are not asking for millions and millions of dollars in research money to be put forward by the province. We are not asking for hospital beds to be opened up to study. Our goals are not to spend substantial amounts of money. Our goals are quite modest but very significant. Our goals are to have the Chamber recognize the significance of this disease and to, within and throughout the Department of Health and through the Department of Health with health care professionals, have them come together to educate them better, Mr. Deputy Speaker, as to this type of disease. In fact, we will probably, by virtue of doing this, save money in the health care system, save costs, and of course more importantly and above all, save pain and needless suffering by many, many of our fellow Manitobans.
* (1710)
So this is not a political issue by any stretch of the imagination. It is not even controversial. It is well recognized and well documented, and there are many Manitobans who suffer from this illness today. All we are asking is for recognition and acknowledgement and support, and that is not, I do not think, too much to ask of the Department of Health and of the province in order to help, at minimum, the 5,000 to 7,000 chronic sufferers in the province of Manitoba.
Several months ago, I was door knocking in my constituency, and I returned to a house that I had been at previously. I met a woman who had been vibrant and dynamic and actively employed, and she was no longer vibrant, active or employed. I asked her what the problem was. She was suffering from this illness, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and it was a stark contrast from the woman whom I had remembered meeting approximately a year or a year and a half earlier in previous door knocking.
It very much brought home to me the significance of this illness by this encounter with this woman. I was shocked to see her condition, and when I discussed it with her, in some ways she was fortunate because she was in a situation where her health insurance plan was such that it recognized it and was paying for her long-term disability which she was under because of the disease. But there are many, many Manitobans, some of whom I have talked to, who are not so fortunate to have either health care plans that recognize it or to have health care plans at all, insurance plans that is, that provide for disability and therefore they are caught.
In addition, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the thrust of this particular resolution is to educate. It is to educate professionals and to educate those in the health care field to recognize and to be on guard and to diagnose as early as possible, in the early stages, these illnesses to prevent both deterioration of the individual and of their system as it relates to this disease, but also to lessen the impact on the health care system.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, we have many opportunities to deal in this Chamber with a variety of issues. We have just come through a controversial Question Period where we have disagreed about a number of actions of the Department of Health. It is legitimate on all sides of this Chamber to have legitimate viewpoints on particular issues and to argue them. I do not think in this case we are in a situation where we can argue about the disease itself, the significance of the disease itself and the problems encountered by sufferers and those in the health care field in diagnosing and treating this illness.
We have an opportunity in this Chamber to move forward and to do something very positive in the health care field, to actually proceed from this resolution which will alert professionals, which will alert the health care department, which will assist those who are sufferers and members of support groups and say, yes, we recognize. We will lend you our support, what support we can lend you. We will try to do our part to improve your quality of life and to deal with this illness so that we can do as legislators our part, which is what we are elected to do, to try to improve the life and the quality of life for not only those suffering from the illnesses but their friends and families who must watch their loved ones deteriorate as the disease progresses, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Now, I have brought forward many resolutions, and I have been fortunate to have a number of them passed in this Chamber, some of them unanimously, and I thank all of my colleagues in the Legislature when they have done that and they have recognized the significance. I am asking all members of this Chamber, imploring all members in this Chamber, to take this next step to recognize this illness, to do our part--it is modest, but it is significant--to educate and to try to provide some support to those in Manitoba who are suffering from this debilitating disease, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
There is no ownership. There is no politics in this. It is a straight health issue; in fact, it is more than that. It is a human issue. It is something that we are elected in this Chamber to do, to try to better the lives of our fellow Manitobans. It is an opportunity for members of this Chamber to do something positive to assist our fellow Manitobans who are suffering from this, and I urge all members of this Chamber to look very carefully at this resolution, to recognize the significance it has on Manitobans, to look at what we are asking for. It is simply a recognition, an acknowledgment and an education component that will, in fact, Mr. Deputy Speaker, go a long way towards helping those Manitobans who are suffering from this disease and those potentially who will suffer from this disease in the future.
I urge all members of this Chamber to seriously consider this issue and to assist all the sufferers and to pass this resolution today, to pass it unanimously and to send a positive message to those 5,000 to 7,000 Manitobans and their families who are suffering from this.
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I am pleased to rise today in this private members' hour to say thank you to the honourable member for Kildonan for raising the issue of chronic fatigue syndrome in our Legislature today. I do not think that issues like this get discussed as often as so many other issues of the day, as they sometimes tend to come and go; but, with respect to this particular matter, I think that a discussion like this today and any other consciousness-raising exercises with which we can become engaged help all of us and help the general public, too, because a debate in the Legislature of a province can have the effect of tending toward a greater level of public awareness about a matter like chronic fatigue syndrome.
So I say to the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) that he does a service when he raises an issue like this. I am sure anyone who suffers from this syndrome would be able to speak more eloquently than I or even the honourable member for Kildonan to help create and promote an understanding of the kind of life people suffering from this syndrome have to live. So, on behalf of those people especially, I think that we should be pleased that this private members' hour part of our procedures offers us an opportunity to discuss this particular problem which can be so devastating for people who suffer from it.
As the honourable member's resolution points out, the syndrome is devastating, and the fact that there is no known cure or even effective treatment makes the sense of desperation more acute, because, imagine if you can, Mr. Deputy Speaker, what it must be like to have to live with the symptoms that people with chronic fatigue syndrome have and live with the knowledge that not enough is known about it for there to be an effective treatment or cure, let alone any knowledge about the method of transmission of the syndrome.
It causes some concern too to know, as the honourable member's resolution says, that the syndrome is affecting a growing number of children; women as well between the ages 25 and 40 being at risk causes me and everybody concern. You know, a lot of people think that between the ages of 25 and 40, maybe I hope a little older since I am a little older, that one is at--[interjection] I am 47.
But at that kind of an age there is a recognition that in the average, healthy person that those are the productive years of a person's life when they make their greatest contribution to their family or to their society or to their community or to their fellow citizens.
* (1720)
So it is a very serious prospect to have to be thinking that especially among women in that age group they are going to be facing that risk and potentially depriving themselves of the satisfaction of making the kind of contribution that they might be able to make but depriving society as well of the benefit of those contributions. Now, I do not claim to have any more expertise than the honourable member or indeed all of the professionals who have yet to complete research on areas related to cause and effect and treatment and cure, so that is what makes this discussion so difficult.
But I think if the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) and myself and others who take part in this discussion today, if we raise a little bit more awareness about the whole matter then we will be more likely to be engaged in further discussions in the future, which is the right thing to do.
This and other conditions for which little is known or not enough is known are in the same sort of position as other syndromes and diseases of the past for which research has been done and much has been learned and people have been able to benefit. So there is reason to be hopeful even if it does not seem to loom very large today; there is reason to be hopeful because of the wonders of technology and research and the results those efforts have brought to us in the history of mankind and certainly in the modern history as it relates to medical research.
The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba has been forwarded the revised case definitions of the chronic fatigue syndrome so that the medical profession can be better informed about the subject, and I think that is one of the things the honourable member wants to achieve by bringing this resolution to us today.
I realize that if you are a medical practitioner and you get into the practice of your profession you deal with the things you know about for the most part and research is left to researchers and others, but it is important that any new developments that might come to light with respect to chronic fatigue syndrome be shared with the profession and that they make whatever use they can of that information in order to alleviate the concerns, the problems, the symptoms, the effects that their patients have, because certainly in my travels throughout this province and in all my discussions with professionals of all kinds, but certainly physicians, they too have as their central desire that of the alleviation of suffering amongst their fellow citizens.
So I think that in the crush of the everyday life of the average physician, busy keeping their appointments and looking after their patients, there is not enough information around about this problem, and so they are not able to be as helpful as they would like to be. It is my hope that a recently revised working definition of the syndrome will lead to increased research so that treatment and prevention technologies can be advanced.
Chronic fatigue syndrome is a clinically defined condition, characterized, as the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) has set out, by severe disabling fatigue and a combination of symptoms that prominently feature impairments in concentration and short-term memory, sleep disturbances and musculoskeletal pain. Diagnosis of chronic fatigue syndrome can be made only after alternative medical and psychiatric causes of chronic fatiguing illness have been excluded. When you are dealing with a process of elimination, when you cannot, I guess, figure out whatever else it is might not be wrong with a person, that is how you come out with that sort of a diagnosis. I guess if I were a practitioner, I would find that really not a very satisfactory sort of way to arrive at any kind of definitive diagnosis of my patient's condition.
So, therefore, because of all of that, no definitive treatments exist. I am told that some people affected by the syndrome, some people's symptoms improve some with time, but I am told also that with most they remain functionally impaired for years. That must be an extremely terrifying prospect to go on day after day, month after month, year after year, not knowing what the problem is, not being able to get help from the family doctor or anybody else and wondering if it will ever go away. I cannot imagine, Mr. Deputy Speaker, anything more frightening than that.
There are some issues with respect to chronic fatigue syndrome research, and the central issue in this research is whether the chronic fatigue syndrome or any subset is a discrete entity. This issue depends on whether clinical, epidemiologic and pathophysiologic features convincingly distinguish the chronic fatigue syndrome from other illnesses. Anxiety disorders, major depression and other symptomatically defined syndromes can manifest severe fatigue as well. Several psychological symptoms are diagnosed more frequently in populations affected by chronic fatigue syndrome.
With respect to clinical evaluation of cases, that includes history, physical examination and mental status examination, tests that strongly suggest an exclusionary condition must be resolved, and there, again, the frustration. There are some conditions that explain chronic fatigue; those are the ones.
The following ones exclude a patient from the diagnosis of unexplained chronic fatigue. I put some of this information on the record simply in an effort to assist in bringing the matter forward in the sense that there is a real--if you happen to be a person or a family member or associated with a person with chronic fatigue syndrome, these matters are extremely important, even though not enough is yet known about the condition.
There are some things that exclude a person, so that if you happen to think that you have symptoms of chronic fatigue syndrome and some of the following situations reflect your life, you may be able to, in consultation with your physician, exclude the diagnosis of chronic fatigue syndrome, which may create another problem for you, but at least you can set that one aside if you have these conditions. Any active medical condition that might explain the presence of chronic fatigue is, of course, what we are going to be told is what explains your fatigue, so some other medical condition will do that--any previously diagnosed medical condition whose resolution has not been documented beyond reasonable clinical doubt, any past or current diagnosis of a major depressive disorder, alcohol or other substance abuse within two years before the onset of the chronic fatigue and, lastly, severe obesity.
The honourable member certainly, as I repeat, does us all a service. Every time he--and he brings up a lot of things in this House. There is no question about that. We do not always appreciate his efforts, but on this one I think we can probably find agreement that we do indeed appreciate the fact that the honourable member has cared enough to bring forward this matter to ask that we consider developing education and treatment programs for the general public and health care professionals to deal with chronic fatigue syndrome.
* (1730)
That is something that I will certainly bring to the attention of our epidemiological people within the department just to ensure that our department is, as busy as we are and as many things as we have to do, this is certainly an area of significant concern for people in our province, our fellow citizens. So we will take the concerns raised throughout this resolution by the honourable member, take them seriously and discuss them further within the Department of Health.
Mr. Gerry McAlpine (Sturgeon Creek): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I, too, rise and am pleased to put a few words on the record with regard to this chronic disease, as it is so called, whether it is chronic fatigue syndrome or chronic mononucleosis or chronic Epstein-Barr or whatever other name that you want to give.
I think what I would like to do, and I do not know whether I am going to be able to have all the time to be able to put all the remarks that I wish to put on the record, but I will go to the point that you ask and give me the full time that I am allotted. I want to express some understanding of the history of this.
You know, I had some difficulty with what the honourable member, even in his compassion, because I share his compassion, but I have some difficulty with what he is proposing. Maybe once we hear what we have in terms of what I am offering, and I do not profess to be an expert on this aspect of chronic fatigue syndrome, but chronic fatigue syndrome goes back 125 years. It was first diagnosed or referenced by a psychiatrist, a Dr. George Beard, in 1869. He called it at that time, and I cannot even say it, neurasthenia, which is an exhaustion of the nervous system.
Then sometime after that, a neurologist, Dr. Silas Mitchell, diagnosed the similar symptoms and recommended rest care as a prescribed form of treatment. In that he suggested that the treatment deal not only with rest, but with proper health in terms of proper diet, rest and to remove the patient from the environment in which they were being affected that would cause them to have this condition.
It is interesting that, during the epidemics that there have been over the 125, 130 years the history of this diagnosis, and even in the epidemics in the USA and in Europe, this practice of removing the patients from their environment was carried out for many years to follow. This was practised even before medicine became a science, and it was a treatment of contextual healing. If we examine contextual healing, what we are doing is that we are looking at the context of the people who are affected by these symptoms that are described with this so-called illness.
Fifty years ago, Mr. Deputy Speaker, there was medical research that begged to believe and suggested that chronic fatigue syndrome was a brucellosis bacteria. The people who have spent years on the farm around animals, because that is a bacteria of animals, and people who have spent time around animals know how it affects animals in terms of their ability to provide milk for their young.
So there have been many diagnoses over the 125 years. Studies in the 1950s and 1960s demonstrated that victims of postinfectious fatigue to be inherent and what they would do is the psychoneurotic suggesting meant that the people who had this were mentally disturbed.
Then in 1955 there happened to be an outbreak of chronic fatigue syndrome in the Royal Free Hospital in London and the neighbourhoods around that hospital where a medical student and subsequently a doctor and then a nurse and subsequent to that followed by 300 staff were affected by this. But, Mr. Deputy Speaker, the epidemic outbreak, most recently, was in 1985 in Lake Tahoe and the medical authorities again studied it and they came up with nothing--some over a hundred years later after studying this. The profile reflects that CF is a nervous disorder related to stress but no evidence exists to support that.
One of the things that I think is really important here and I think that a doctor going back to 1765, a Dr. Robert Whyatt, wrote that physicians of the day--and this is when we are talking about trying to determine what the causes of diseases are--tend to diagnose as hypochondriacs or hysteric all cases whose nature and causes they were ignorant of.
Maybe that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, exists today. You know, I have on my wall in my home this wall plaque, and I think that really what it does it describes in terms of where I am coming from and I think that the way society has to go in dealing with health care or any diseases that we are dealing with. I would like to say that for the record. I would ask that if there is anybody who--and this is a quote that goes back a number of years just to give you an illustration and I share this with you. I quote: The doctor of the future will use no medicine but will care for his patients in the use of diet and the cause and prevention of disease.
Now I wonder how many people in this Chamber are aware of who made that quote. I will tell you, it was Thomas Edison. Thomas Edison made that quote. But where have we gone in society today?
Diseases to qualify, in terms of our medical, as thing-like entities in terms of what we are talking about. And I respect what the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) is saying because people are devastated because they are looking, they are seeking for help, and the only place that they can reach out for help on this is through the medical profession. They are the so-called experts, but there have been some failings over 125 years, and the reason being that the diseases to qualify as thing-like entities must have specific characteristics. They must have a check list in order to determine and to be able to diagnose and then to treat. If they cannot diagnose, they cannot treat it, which is a problem with chronic fatigue syndrome, because we heard the honourable minister list all the symptoms with chronic fatigue syndrome. Now, what symptom do they treat?
It is quite obvious that chronic fatigue syndrome cannot follow that checklist like blood pressure or cholesterol, and it gets confusing for many because of the many other conditions. It gets confused with such symptoms as malignancies and auto-immune deficiencies or diseases, chronic and subacute bacterial conditions, fungal and parasitic chronic inflammatory conditions.
* (1740)
In search of a cause for chronic fatigue syndrome, Mr. Deputy Speaker, why do we not look at the contextual conditions, contextual healing. As I said at the outset of my remarks, I do not profess to have a great deal of knowledge, but I have done a great deal of studying, and the research that has been done and whose direction I follow is from a Dr. Dean Black. Many of you have heard in this Chamber--I have spoken of Dr. Dean Black who has done an insurmountable amount of research and study on all aspects of health, and a lot of what I am sharing here with this Chamber today is what he offers in terms of dealing with contextual healing.
Chronic fatigue syndrome, as both the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) and the honourable minister have indicated, affects young, middle-aged people who are active in their professions and have achieved a level of professionalism. Those are the people who are affected by this, and it is sad to see the debilitating conditions that some of these people are in. But I do not share the same feeling that the member for Kildonan shares in saying that we should throw more money into this, because if we examine that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, who are we going to give the money to? Who is going to do this? Is it the medical doctors? Is it the drug companies?
The honourable members across the way, they talk about drug companies as the big problem to society in terms of our health care, the people who are making the money. I do not disagree with that, but I think if we examine what this resolution is going to suggest, I do not feel that that is going to be the answer. I mean, people have been trying to deal with this in a positive way and in a compassionate way for 125 years.
The condition we now call CF or chronic fatigue syndrome as I mentioned was first described in 1869, and since then we have had recurring epidemics to the point it has grown to be the seventh most common medical complaint, yet the medical profession, by their own admission, cannot explain it.
In 1985, there were the two separate research reports that CF was caused by a virus. The offending virus is the one called Epstein-Barr. The medical profession at that time felt that they had hit on something, but there is no conclusive evidence to support that as well, and the virus is associated with the infection, mononucleosis. The authors were careful to say that this theory was only a possibility.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, I think that we certainly do have some difficult decisions to make on all the things that we are going to do in terms of dealing with health care in the province of Manitoba. I do not think anyone here denies that, but I do not think that the answer is to put more money into it. [interjection] The member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) says that is not what he is saying, but what do you do? Who do you involve? Well, I distinctly heard the member for Kildonan suggest that he did not say that, but if you read the resolution that he brings before this House, that is--
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member's time has expired.
Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I just wanted to put on the record that myself and my two colleagues, Liberal MLA members in this Legislature, support this resolution, and we would like to see it come to a vote.
Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have had the misfortune to have two young friends, both very active people at the peak of their learning careers and in the beginning years of their jobs, neither of them in any sense people with any history or any indication of any kind of mental illness or any sense people who were not highly energized and highly active, who have had this syndrome.
I think it is most important that we pass this very nonpartisan resolution so that people who are suffering from this very debilitating condition can have a sense that the members of this Legislature understand the need for further research, as the member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine) has pointed out and as the honourable Health minister (Mr. McCrae) and the mover of this motion. I think all of us have had calls from people with chronic fatigue syndrome. Probably many of us have either friends or, even closer, perhaps family members who have suffered from this debilitating disease. So I urge all members to support this motion. Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You may call for the question.
Mr. Mervin Tweed (Turtle Mountain): I too am pleased to speak to the House today on this resolution. I think all members in the House and the people of Manitoba share with everyone the common thought that health and fitness, health issues, are certainly in the hearts and on the minds of the people of the province of Manitoba, as being identified in this House every day as I sit and listen to the members opposite and members from this side of the House speak about health care and health issues. I think that it is very important that we have new ideas like this brought to the floor.
It is certainly new to me as far as I have heard of the illness, but, personally, I do not know of anyone who has it. I certainly, from listening to the other members speak on it, know that they have a personal interest in it. Thinking of people's health and the care of the people, particularly with an illness such as this, and reading through the resolution, and it is stating that there is no known cure. I am sure, for anybody who becomes diagnosed with this syndrome, I guess that to be told or to understand that they really do not have a cure at this point in time for the illness must be very devastating--not only a cure, but there is no treatment for it.
Again, it seems like it is so vague in the sciences. There is certainly a lot more room for study and a lot more room to make people understand the illness. I also note in the resolution that the member discussed that the method of transmission is completely unknown also. I cannot relate it to anything that I have ever done in my life, except I do know, myself, personally, when there is something wrong that I cannot fix, and I cannot understand why it is not working properly and I do not know what caused the breakdown of it, it certainly frustrates me. I am sure that, when it deals with people's health and the health issues, it certainly has to be catastrophic to the person.
* (1750)
It is a term "chronic fatigue syndrome" that is used to describe a very large group of symptoms. A lot of these symptoms can be persistent, or you can go into a relapsing fatigue which is lasting six or more consecutive months. I just cannot imagine experiencing something like this myself for that long a period of time. To suffer with this syndrome, and, again, not know how I got it, not know if there is a cure for it, knowing there is no cure for it or even effective treatment, it would certainly be very disheartening.
I understand, too, that the illness may also include short-term memory defects, difficulty concentrating, unrefreshing sleep--and I think everybody in this House can identify with that as far as one of the symptoms. After spending long hours here some days, no matter though your eyes are closed, whether you are resting or whether you are getting any sleep or not is certainly up for the question. A sore throat is also one of the symptoms, tender lymph nodes, muscle pain. Again, I think something that we can probably relate to, to a degree, but maybe not understand again why it happened to us, what caused us to get this.
Whenever I suffer from muscle pain and joint ache, I usually know why I have it. It is from exertion or overexertion, and I know that in a couple of days it will go away. Unfortunately, the people that suffer from this particular syndrome do not know that. They have really no understanding of when it will end, and, if it does end, why it ended.
Headaches and sickness follow exertion, and again, in this case, I am led to understand that exertion is basically just any kind of movement that we consider to be normal. In this case, with people that are suffering from the syndrome, they become sick and ill after those kinds of exertion. The definition, chronic fatigue syndrome, has been revised over the years and has recently been revised and will likely continue as we do get to know more about this illness and understand it, understand how we get it, how it is transmitted, and hopefully the cure will follow. It is something we have seen throughout history, so it is not a new illness. It has just recently been systematically separated out so that we can identify it and understand it and study it.
The illness appears to be associated with abnormalities of the immune system, which I think even I can understand that. If your system is abnormal, is the word, I would say, weak or suffering some sort of a defect, it certainly would suggest that it can enter your system. Certain hormones, as well as depression, frequently, but not always, follow the infection. Again, I think that the depression part of it, you definitely are going to feel that way after enduring some of the symptoms that I have described earlier. It would certainly be an easy thing to fall into as far as you are tired, you are worn down and you are susceptible.
The diagnosis of the syndrome can be made only after alternative medical and psychiatric causes of chronic fatigue illness have been excluded. So, before they can actually tell you that you are suffering from the fatigue syndrome, they must separate through a series of testings and alternative medical causes to eliminate the idea of a chronic fatiguing illness. The presence of prolonged or chronic fatigue requires clinical evaluation, so therefore there is a lot of time spent studying the patient, and the clinical evaluation is used to identify underlying or contributing conditions that require treatment.
There are many conditions which exclude a patient from the diagnosis of unexplained chronic fatigue. They are any medical condition that may explain the presence of chronic fatigue, i.e., if you exhibit some of the suggestions I presented to you earlier, that would be one of the first steps. Any previously diagnosed medical condition whose resolution has not been documented beyond reasonable clinical doubt--I would think from this statement that would mean that the process is a very long and drawn-out affair, and a lot of clinical diagnosis has to take place. Any past or current diagnosis of a major depressive disorder--and I would certainly suggest again we have endured some of that type of medical history in our own families or people that we know, and I am sure it is certainly one of the causes.
Something else that I found to be quite interesting was the fact that alcohol or any other substance abuse within two years before the onset of chronic fatigue and severe obesity may also be contributing factors to the disease. Although the illness may be prolonged, many patients do gradually improve and eventually recover. I am certainly pleased to hear that. I think if you can take on this syndrome, not know how you got it, not know how to treat it and to know that basically there is no cure for it, it has to be a very frustrating time in one's life.
I guess if there is a bright side to it, it is the hope that many patients do gradually improve and eventually recover. In that instance, I can cite an example where I have a person that I know that has suffered from a disease that basically they said in time, hopefully, it would leave him. The chances were good and I certainly know that that encouraged everyone within our family and his family to look forward to that day.
Something that struck me about the syndrome, and it quite actually astonished me or astounded me was the fact that it includes a growing number of children, but particularly women between the ages of 25 and 40 are most at risk. I would suggest, not being clinically wise or a doctor of any profession, that these are as I like to look at myself and the minister has suggested earlier, those are we hope to be our most productive times of our lives. When you think of people that age, usually with children, with families, careers, there are so many things that are happening to them--[interjection] Yes, athletics also. It must be a devastating blow to these people to come into contact with this kind of an illness.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order, please. When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member will have three minutes remaining.
The hour being 6 p.m., this House now stands adjourned until tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. (Friday).