Madam Speaker: The hour being 5 p.m., time for private members' hour.
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, I move, seconded by the member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar), that
"WHEREAS the Urban Shared Services Corporation (USSC) has announced plans to privatize laundry, food services, and purchasing for the Winnipeg hospitals; and
"WHEREAS it is estimated that more than 1000 health care jobs will be lost over the next year as a result, with many more privatized in the next two or three years; and
"WHEREAS under the terms of the contract, Ontario businesses will profit at the expense of Manitoba's health care system; and
"WHEREAS after construction of a food assembly warehouse in Winnipeg, chilled, prepared food will be shipped in from Ontario, then assembled and heated before being shipped to the hospitals; and
"WHEREAS people who are in the hospital require nutritious and appetizing food; and
"WHEREAS the announced savings as a result of the contract have been disputed, and one study by Wintemute Randle Kilimnik indicated that, 'A considerable number of studies have compared costs of service deliver in health care between self-operation (public sector) and privatization. Invariably, privatization is more expensive.'; and
"WHEREAS there is a long list of hospitals in Canada that have experienced poor results with centralized food services similar to those being contracted by the Urban Shared Services Corporation; and
"WHEREAS several alternative plans were proposed that would keep more jobs in Manitoba, cost substantially less and keep food preparation and purchasing in Manitoba; and
"WHEREAS no one in Manitoba seems to benefit from this contract, especially patients.
"THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba condemn the Minister of Health for failing to protect jobs in both health care and the food industry in Manitoba by purchasing both prepared food and ingredients outside the Province; and
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba condemn the Minister of Health for allowing privatization of our health care system; and
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the Minister of Health to put an end to the Provincial Government's plan to centralize and privatize Winnipeg hospital food preparation and distribution system."
Motion presented.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, we often get criticized on this side of the House by members opposite, unjustly I might add, as being opposed to all government's initiatives. In fact, it is my opinion that had the government of Manitoba listened to the New Democratic Party for the last five years, we would not be in the situation in terms of health care that we are in today.
You know, no better illustration can exist than the controversy regarding the home care contract that came up today, another privatization initiative of this government that has been roundly criticized and condemned by the population. When they get into trouble on these constant deals, they waffle, they make one statement after another, and it certainly does not improve the situation in terms of how Manitobans can deal with these issues. Yes, we are opposed to this deal, but we are opposed to this deal for sound and practical reasons which I would like to illustrate on a point-by-point basis.
Before I talk about the point-by-point denunciation of this privatization project of the Filmon government, I want to talk a little bit about the principles involved. You know, Madam Speaker, I am beginning to believe that the only principle involved is to hang on and cling on to government for as best you can for as long as you can. But I digress. There is no doubt that there can be economies of scale realized through various changes and variations in distribution and the logistics distribution in the health care system. No one disputes that, but, as has been the case in so many other projects undertaken by this regime, the project undertaken is a grand scale not clearly thought out and is rife with difficulties and problems.
Why is it that we in little Manitoba, why is it in Manitoba, that we have to have the Cadillac of information systems deals, the SmartHealth deals? Why is it that we in Manitoba--I do not know where these ideas come from, be it the information system, the SmartHealth. We are going to design the greatest system in the world, according to various ministers of Health, that is the most advanced and the most expensive beyond any other jurisdiction in the country, and I think the plan is to sell this system to other jurisdictions just like the plan was to sell the economies of scale realized by Connie Curran to other jurisdictions.
Now we have a food system proposal that is put in place that is unlike any other proposal and any other jurisdiction in the country. You know, Madam Speaker, some jurisdictions have gone to a centralized system. No jurisdiction has gone to a system where all of the hospitals and all of the nursing home facilities--
An Honourable Member: But we have.
Mr. Chomiak: That is right. The member for Lakeside is right, where the whole system is going to be centralized in one centre. You know, Madam Speaker, it is astounding. We are going to take an idea that has had failures in other jurisdictions, and what are we going to do? Are we going to learn from those failures? No. We are going to take a system and we are going to make it bigger. It is extraordinary. This was done without public discussion, without public consultation.
You know, just at the onset when you see the stars in the eyes of the various ministers as they talk about this proposal, you ought to know there is difficulties. We had those difficulties with Connie Curran, we are having those difficulties with SmartHealth, and we will have and we do have those difficulties with the shared services agreement.
Madam Speaker, it is not that there are no other alternatives to this system. When the proposal came out, a nationally recognized accounting firm did a study, and they looked at the proposals put together by USSC. The proposal as put together by USSC, as deficient as it is and as inaccurate as it is and as rife with financial inconsistencies as it is, is not as financially sound as the proposal offered by that nationally recognized accounting firm, which, at the same time, would have preserved more jobs and provided for more made-in-Manitoba product. That proposal is a public document, and, you know, it was presented to two ministers of Health and was rejected outright without consultation.
I attended the initial offering and the initial establishment of the USSC, and when the proposals came out at that session for what they were going to do with food services, nothing of the sort that we are seeing today was proposed, but some time between the time they announced it and the time we have seen this warehouse being constructed in St. Boniface, the government got this grand idea for building this plan.
You know, Madam Speaker, this proposal in principle I do not think can work. I do not think this proposal in principle can work, and it sort of fits in with all of the grand schemes of the Conservative government in health care over the past few years, be it Connie Curran or be it the SmartHealth initiative. It is always the Cadillac proposal. It is always rife with, oh, we are going to be able to sell the technology and sell the potential of this, and every single occasion when they have touched it, it has dissolved. I am very tempted to go into some detail with some of those other plans, but I have much to say about this particular deal.
* (1710)
Madam Speaker, why we oppose, having indicated already that there are alternatives that were proposed, and, in fact, alternatives have been proposed from other proponents with respect to alternatives to this plan that would be more cost-justifiable and would save more jobs. The government has totally rejected that proposal and is proceeding with the grand scheme, if I can call it that, the USSC grand scheme.
Madam Speaker, what are some of the specific difficulties we have with this plan? Firstly, we are in the majority viewpoint of Manitobans who are very suspicious about the government's motives and the plan itself. I mean, the poll that took place said more than 90 percent of Manitobans were opposed to this. Now, I am not saying that that is necessarily reason for the government to back off, but, surely, that would be a reason for the government to reconsider, to review, to consider exactly what they are doing when, in fact, the vast majority of Manitobans are opposed to this.
The last two times the vast majority of Manitobans opposed the government on one of their initiatives was the home care situation, which they were forced to back down from and only were forced to back down from through the hard work of many Manitobans, and, secondly, MTS, and, Madam Speaker, I need not repeat what happened in the House today with respect to what has happened with the MTS deal, the broken promise and the utter--I cannot even find words to talk about the fact that people are profiting and making millions of dollars at the expense of Manitoba taxpayers and at the expense of jobs and the at expense of service. It is obscene what has happened at MTS.
Now, Madam Speaker, we have another deal--because that is what it is--that is being proposed that has all kinds of holes in it. One of the most curious difficulties about this whole project is the numbers that have been put forward to justify this deal. The corporation, this nonprofit corporation that is set up, this Crown corporation that is set up by these great administrators of Crown corporations, these great defenders of Crown corporations, this corporation that has been set up by members opposite put out figures of savings. They are talking about--and I, unfortunately, misplaced my file, and I do not have the exact figures, but they are roughly correct, and I can be corrected. They are within the ballpark. They are talking about savings of something like $3 million a year annually in food savings. That was how they justified it, and it certainly looks good on paper--$3 million in savings a year.
Do you know what they failed to say? Do you know what they failed to tell you? Madam Speaker, $2.5 million of those savings are the cost to build the great warehouse facility and to pay down the loan to Newcourt Capital of Toronto, Ontario, to pay for the costs.
What kind of accounting is that? That would be like saying that by paying for my house, I am saving money--it is incredible--on my food costs. That is what they are saying: $2.5 million of the $3 million in so-called savings is going to pay down the debt--on a debt, by the way, the government promised was privately funded. It is not privately funded; it is funded from our tax dollars, $2.5 million that is going to pay Newport Capital of Toronto, Ontario. That is going to be the food savings. On top of that, the figures that were provided to justify, on top of that I did not see figures of the $600,000-Versa contract within those savings, so even the very justification for this deal in financial figures is wrong.
I might add, I resent the fact strongly that we as legislators in this Chamber have made a deal to enter into a 20-year commitment to this Capital firm in Toronto, Ontario, and we who are spending taxpayer dollars have no say in that deal, absolutely no say. It was entered into by the government's establishment of a Crown corporation. I think that is an affront to this Chamber, and that is an affront to taxpayers that we have--in fact, they are doing it all over the health care sector. They are marginalizing the minister's responsibility, spending our tax dollars, and we as legislators have no say in this deal. We have no say on the expenditure of this money, even though it is our tax dollars. I am offended by that, and I think that is contrary to the democratic principles, but it is typical. We saw it in MTS, we are seeing it--and today the minister justified the extension of the home care contract and the breaking of his promise by saying: we no longer operate it; it is the WHA that operates it; and I am not responsible. I object to that strongly.
Madam Speaker, what about Manitoba suppliers? What about Manitoba quality products? You know, when the deal was announced, they conveniently forgot to say, well, we are going to--well, they did not conveniently forget to say we do have the chairman or the CEO stating that products would be brought from outside of Canada. Are members opposite not concerned about Manitoba content? Are they not concerned about rural Manitoba and about our produce? The only reason it is an issue is that we have made it an issue, and UFCW and CUPE and other workers have made it an issue. That is the only time it was recognized by members opposite that, hey, maybe there is a difficulty with Manitobans. What about Manitoba products and Manitoba suppliers?
You know, Madam Speaker, the other hidden aspect of this deal that has not been told, and I hope members opposite outside of Winnipeg listen to this carefully, is the plan. They cannot justify financially that operation of that centralized service serving solely Winnipeg hospitals; the savings cannot be achieved. They can justify it only by expanding to nursing homes and expanding outside of the city of Winnipeg, so that will be the next step, expanding outside of the city of Winnipeg. So all of you members opposite who have got food distribution sites in rural Manitoba, who have kitchens, who have jobs out there, you better watch because that is their plan. The plan is to extend it beyond Winnipeg because it cannot economically be justified based on being in Winnipeg.
Madam Speaker, I am amazed how quickly my time has gone. I have not elicited all of the other difficulties. There are concerns about culturally appropriate food from Inuit who come from the Northwest Territories to Winnipeg and people of ethnic background. There are concerns about the fact that, once you scramble this egg, you will not be able to go back to the other facilities. In jurisdiction after jurisdiction where they have tried this experience, in British Columbia, in Quebec, in Atlantic Canada, they have had to turn back the clock because it has not worked. There are concerns about--[interjection]
You know, I hope members opposite can get up and actually deal with some of these issues because they certainly seem to be trying to deal with them right now. There are concerns about the whole financing question, and the fact that we will be locked into this contract whether the food is delivered or not--and we have locked in the hospitals.
That capital deal that was entered into is one of the worst deals that I have seen. Now, you guys have had bad deals. You have had some bad deals that have been entered into, but that capitalization deal binds the facilities, whether or not they get the product, for a 20-year period, and they have no say, and we as legislators are going to be using tax dollars to fund your grand scheme--and I wish I had more time. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity to speak on this particular issue. I must tell the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) that we on this side certainly welcome the opportunity to debate this particular issue on a factual basis.
* (1720)
The member does raise a number of issues that we hope to address in this debate. I indicate to the House that the member for Kildonan has requested that we deal with this issue, as well, in the Estimates process. I know we are going to be arranging to have answers for many of the detailed questions that he will be asking during that process because I think it is good to have a public airing of this particular issue.
One of my regrets is that the United Food and Commercial Workers, Mr. Christophe's group, has chosen not to want to debate this in a factual basis but has spread all kinds of misinformation around the province. I do compliment the member for Kildonan because he has refrained from some of the ludicrous, actually silly comments that have come out of UFCW.
I have to compliment CUPE as well in this process because last April CUPE brought to my attention, along with the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak), some of the important issues in labour adjustment. There was a presentation by CUPE here at the Legislature, and we indicated that we wanted to make sure that labour adjustment issues were handled properly by Urban Shared Services. That has taken place, and I have had visits from CUPE representatives more recently on some of these issues. Regrettably, UFCW, as I have said, had indicated at the time, last April, not to even take an interest in this issue.
What I find such an irony is last summer I happened to see one of their senior people at a funeral, and I asked them when UFCW would be raising some of these issues. I was sort of told, well, it is kind of not important. I guess in the fall they discovered the issue and the fact that they would be competing with CUPE for the support of the new employees of this facility for who would be the bargaining agent, and they were into their election campaign.
An Honourable Member: All of a sudden it was important.
Mr. Praznik: It was, and there was an irony in the fact that CUPE was here dealing with some of those issues last April, and UFCW could not find the time to be dealing with them at that point, but that is really beside the point to the debate.
Madam Speaker, I find it very, very interesting, the concern expressed by the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) about 20-year commitments for capital money. I have never heard New Democrats express concern about the 40-year money that this province had to commit itself to in order to finance general provincial debt. One has to put it somewhat in context.
The member has flagged correctly the expected savings minus, of course, the cost of servicing a new facility to provide the centre for the food processing in the system which I understand is under construction today in the St. Boniface portion of Winnipeg, but what the member has forgotten in his estimates of the cost is the estimated $35 million of capital funding, public money, that would be required over the next few years to revamp the existing kitchens in our facility. In fact, I understand that the Health Sciences Centre, the estimate is somewhere near $20 million to revamp their food processing system.
Of course, that money likely would have to be borrowed as well and committed over a long period of time and, of course, those numbers should also fit into the calculation of the cost. I think that is fair. If one is comparing apples to apples, one has to compare the capital costs that have been avoided by putting this into place.
Madam Speaker, one of the fundamental parts of change in food delivery on the institutional side, and I think it is an important point to mention, is that the traditional system of providing food services in institutions has been the hot cook, insulate, deliver system. The development of new technology in delivering food, of chilling food through the--[interjection] Well, the member for Concordia (Mr. Doer) shows again his ignorance on issues, because he speaks of microwaves. If he had taken USSC up on their offer to study the issue in greater detail, he would have found out that microwave ovens play no role in this, but that would interfere with the Leader of the Opposition's case or the statements he likes to make. He never, of course, likes to have the facts interfere with the statements that he makes.
Madam Speaker, that is a fundamental issue of changing the means of preparing and delivering food. The hot cook, insulate, deliver system has become very much in institutions an outdated system of delivery. It was based on the technology of many decades ago. Today, much more effort has been put into better ensuring that food that is prepared is much better to be chilled in the delivery system and heated before being served than the other method.
I had a chance to visit the Health Sciences Centre some months ago. We were going through the tunnel system, and it was around lunchtime. All of a sudden, we hear this horn go off and this train goes through the tunnels carrying pile upon pile of meals wrapped in these thermal bags. One of the people with me indicated that some of the food travels from the kitchen to the wards, and it is between a quarter- and a half-mile between the distance and the hallways and up and down--[interjection] Well, you see, is this not interesting? There are the New Democrats again, they do not really want to deal with the facts, do they? They really do not want to talk about--and I must say, the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak), I have to differentiate him somewhat from his Leader because, in his remarks, he did raise issues, correct us about, what are the financing arrangements? We can debate that. What are the supply issues? That is good public policy debate, but his Leader could not stick to dealing with issues of public policy or facts. No, he has to make comments about all the food that will come from Toronto to be prepared. I suspect if he speaks on this matter he will tell you that toast will come from Toronto.
The member for Wolseley (Ms. Friesen) made comments earlier about all the food being frozen, which is not the case. They talk about home-cooked meals as if today in our hospitals in January we have plane loads of fresh peas coming from California, and people peel them in our hospitals and boil them nice and fresh, that the Jolly Green Giant's frozen peas are never found in an institution in Manitoba.
This is the point of how the New Democrats, with somewhat the exclusion of the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak), who does, in my experience, like to have a good debate on policy and issues, but the rest of his party would much rather take out ludicrous statements, throw them out, make it sound out of this world, walk away and really not care if the people of Manitoba have a thorough and factual airing of the issue. They treat the people of Manitoba with great disrespect. In fact, I would suggest the member for Concordia (Mr. Doer) and a number of his colleagues are very contemptuous of the people of Manitoba by thinking that by a few 30-second lines, eight-second lines that sound outrageous that that encourages a good public debate. Of course, it does not. It has not served, I would note, the Leader of the Opposition well during his political career, and I would expect it will not in the future as well.
Madam Speaker, let us deal with some of the issues that the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak), I think, has raised with respect to supply. In fairness to the member for Kildonan, I will say to him, the public debate that is generated, which is a good public debate, has certainly made the awareness of the opportunities here and the need to ensure Manitoba companies work hard to gain the contracts of supply are an important one. That is a very important issue. I know in the latest report I had from Mr. Sheil, who is the CEO of Urban Shared Services, he tells me that it is possible that even a greater share of product will be purchased in Manitoba than is today the case. If it is the public debate that has led to that, that is great. That is a good opportunity for the development of opportunity for Manitoba suppliers.
Members talk about a variety of food and where it comes from. It is interesting when people talk about chilled or frozen food. I am advised that today between 45 percent and 50 percent of all food and food products currently served in Winnipeg's hospitals are prepared chilled or frozen, so this is not a significant change. One should not leave the impression on the record that no frozen products are used in today's food. In any large kitchen, the reality--in fact, it is a very good reality, because before we had access to those kind of frozen food products, before we had refrigeration, the spoilage of food, the potential contamination of food was much greater.
* (1730)
You know, when I hear members opposite talk about we do not want this new technology, keep the old, it makes me wonder what the world would be like if New Democrats were running it when people invented refrigerators. If you followed the philosophy of the New Democrats, we would never have adopted refrigerators because it might have put ice cutters out of work, and it does not really matter if unrefrigerated food spoils, it is home cooking according to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer). Technology marches on, and it should march on, because ultimately it improves the quality of service and of life for all of us. That has been the case over and over again in the history of the world, despite the comments of members opposite.
Madam Speaker, one of the areas that was of great concern to me as a former Minister of Labour and was raised--and I thank the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) for having been part of hosting a visit by CUPE. I believe CUPE represents five of the nine locals that are in the current food system, and they raised a host of issues affecting employees. I think it is very, very important that we recognize when change takes place that we attempt to accommodate the staff in that process. Because of, I think, the intervention of this minister and brought on by the event of which the member for Kildonan was part, we made it very clear to the hospitals, who are the owners of Urban Shared Services, that they had to improve or double their efforts in accommodating staff.
It resulted in an enhanced voluntary retirement incentive program that was applied for by a significant number of the staff now being processed through. It resulted, as well, in additional training dollars to train those staff, who will not find a position in the new system, for other jobs in the hospital system. I am expecting that when the whole process of working through the labour issues are done that the vast majority of people who currently work in the system will either be working in the new facility, will have taken a voluntary retirement package, or will have been found another position in the hospital.
You know, Madam Speaker, members opposite make fun of voluntary retirement incentive programs. For many people who are close to retirement, the additional 30 weeks allows them to retire somewhat early, or if they are a young person working in there on a casual basis may allow them to go to university or pursue other parts of their life. Anyone who did not want to leave, we were committed to attempting to find other employment in the hospital system.
Now, the only place where I understand there may be some problem here, and it is regrettable because it goes back to the Leader of the Opposition's (Mr. Doer) good buddies in the United Food and Commercial Workers, is there may be problems in St. Boniface because, I am told, and I stand to be corrected, but what I have been hearing out of the system is that union was discouraging its employees for applying for the new jobs in the system. So, if there are people there who find that they are not employed after this process, then I think they are going to have to look at UFCW and perhaps the Leader of the Opposition in the eye and question why in fact they have taken such bad advice in this process.
I know in talking to a number of the facilities; in Concordia, in fact, they had such a success rate, they have a number, I understand, of positions in their facility that they will have to fill with additional people because they have had such success in the process. I intend to ensure that this House has a full report on this matter--
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Praznik: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): I must say that I almost enjoyed the remarks of the Minister of Health. I must say he obviously has a humorous bent. He must be a fan of Monty Python because the kind of logic I heard there in a 15-minute speech that was supposed to be debating a matter of quite significant concern to people was incredible.
You know, when he got up and said about history, history, history--oh, I am sorry, I did not mean to offend the minister. He has probably gone to check and see if the Olsten contract has been really renewed. I must say, it has not been a good week for the minister. I thought yesterday was classic where he defended the renewal of the Olsten contract and went outside and said actually it was not really extended. But, you know, his defence of this, I think, rivals with the member for Pembina (Mr. Dyck) yesterday who said that patients like to be out in hallways because that is where the action is. Well, Madam Speaker, I have seen it all now. This is going to be it. This is their next election campaign. They are going to run, and the Tory platform on health care is, No. 1, we put patients in the hallways, that is where the action is; and No. 2, we are going to give you frozen food when it comes to lunchtimes.
I do not know. The defence that the minister just put forward is right up there with--I think the ultimate media event of the last year was when somebody had the brilliant idea of hauling in a chef. Was it the minister?
An Honourable Member: Yes.
Mr. Ashton: Now picture this, Madam Speaker. People have been hearing about this food. It is has been well documented, the reaction elsewhere, in New Brunswick. I was reading actually that one of the patients in New Brunswick got so upset with the food that they mailed it to the Premier. You know, they had a brilliant idea. What they were going to do is they were going to serve the same food to the PC cabinet. You know, they even brought in a chef to do it.
Now, is this going to be it? How many members of cabinet now, 18 members of cabinet, right? So, they are going to have a chef for every 18 patients out there running around with a little white hat. They are going to say, do not worry, this is just as good as the regular food is. I mean, that was a real winner. I sat there, and I said to myself, who came up with this brilliant media strategy, right? It is like PC cabinet gets served this food, served by a chef. Now who is going to believe that is going to be the same food, presented the same? Well, the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik).
But let us go further. I mean, there is not a member on that side who does not understand that the public does not like this idea. I know the member for Rossmere (Mr. Toews) understands that. He has been sending out letters in his constituency, three pages long. It is like a Monty Python skit, you know, this food is not frozen, bang, bang, bang on the desk. It is just rethermalized. The minister was beyond himself when he sort of before said, well, some of the food that is currently served is frozen. Now he is going to raise it to 100 percent. There is a real winner. Where are you going to stop here? Where are the limits on this?
The minister also--I mean, look at the logic here--says, well, some people are going to lose their jobs. Madam Speaker, 500 people are losing their jobs. The number of people who are going to get any replacement jobs under the new system is significantly smaller than the number of people losing their jobs.
I will tell you who else is getting affected. The minister did not mention this in his statement. What about the people that supply the food currently to Manitoba? I know of one case, a supplier of turkeys, low-sodium turkeys. His market is wiped out because that is going to come in from Ontario now. I say to the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns), who, I believe, is a reasonable person, that he should be leading the charge in cabinet and saying to the minister, I will drop this plan on behalf of Manitoba producers. I note that we were at a recent event where I think--[interjection] Well, I will say to the minister, I know he knows this is right up there with the home care plan, you know, the privatization of home care.
I do not know what it takes over there for people to understand a couple of things here. First of all, there are actually things out there that the public thinks are better run by the public sector, okay? There are some things. Now, we are not getting into the phone issue, but two-thirds of Manitobans opposed the sale of MTS. Manitoba Hydro--and I know and I look to the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns), MPIC. He had made some very eloquent comments recently at an event which I really respected.
I just want to look at this for a moment. You do not have to be a brain surgeon in this case for the Minister of Health to understand that first of all--and I go back to the previous Minister of Health--people like home care operated by the public sector, nonprofit basis. People do not want somebody coming into people's homes, running a home care system, knowing that they are part of a profit statement at the end of the day.
I remember people in this House during the home care strike, where they were standing up and said, oh, no, the people were on our side. You know, everywhere in Manitoba the reaction was clear, whether it was Neepawa, whether it was right here in Winnipeg, whether it was Thompson or Dauphin. All over the province, people said, look, come on, let us be reasonable, we do not want privatization of home care.
It is the same thing with food services. There was this poll that was run recently, and now you can criticize the source, and I noticed the minister managed to put in a few attacks at some of the unions that have been fighting this. That is not unusual. Of course, they do not do that in Brandon with the same union when it comes to a hog plant.
But just go down on Portage and Main. Go to Main Street and Portage itself. We will go to Morden or Winkler and Pembina. Let us go out to Morris. Go and ask people what they think of the government's new plan to fly in this food from Ontario and rethermalize it and serve it in hospitals. [interjection] Well, the same member yesterday who says people want to be in the hallway so they can be part of the action says no problem. He at least is consistent and I hope he is--by the way, I would say that they should appoint him as the next Minister of Health. We would love to have those policies in the next election.
* (1740)
But, you know, just ask the patients. Now, if you do not believe me in terms of what they think of this, ask some of the patients at some of the facilities that have this food in place at the current time. They do not like it. I understand what you are doing, but I say to the members opposite, you are treating Manitobans as a guinea pig. What is happening here--you know, there are individual hospitals in New Brunswick and in British Columbia that have tried this, and they backed down on it.
But you know what the reality is? You are allowing Manitobans to be used as the guinea pig as part of an effort by those who know that the only major sector left for them to crack in terms of food services is basically this sector, the hospital sector. We are part of a North American plan. If they can get a centralized system here, they are hoping to take it all across North America. It is big bucks. I wonder what the stock options are going to be on this one, Madam Speaker.
That is what you are allowing to happen. The Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) keeps slip-sliding away when it comes to the reality of the debate. He says, oh, we are going to save money and put it into patient care. That has been disputed. There are people who have pointed to the fact that the minister's numbers just do not add up.
But I will go one step further. A lot of people have said to me in my constituency, they are saying quite clearly if it happens in Winnipeg, Thompson is next. They say when you are in a hospital, one thing that you look forward to--you know, it is a highlight of your day in a lot of cases. When I was younger, I spent a significant amount of time in a hospital once, quite some time. You know, it is the food. It is part of the quality of patient care.
I even remember when the Minister of Health took shots at the current food service situation. I tell you, Madam Speaker, I tell the members of the government, you think anybody has concerns about current hospital food, wait until you see what is going to happen with this new system you put in. Every single time someone gets a meal that does not fit up to what they think is acceptable quality, you are going to get the blame. You thought home care was a winner, privatizing home care; wait till you get this hospital food out there. Actually, at the rate you are going, good timing, you are going to have it in place just in time for the election. Do you know how many Manitobans end up in a hospital, how many Manitobans have relatives--or in a personal care home or--well, in a hallway? Now we understand what happened in St. Boniface in the last couple of weeks was part of the master plan. Those people, you could say they wanted to be where the action was--a real winner. But has somebody not sort of said, whoa, hold on a second, Mr. Minister?
Well, there were various references to the Minister of Health's (Mr. Praznik) ambitions. I say to members opposite--this is just a bit of friendly advice here--the best thing you can do politically for those of us that oppose you is go ahead and serve this food across the province. That is the best thing. You know that. You know you cannot win this with the patients, so why are you allowing the Minister of Health to run around when he is not too busy trying to explain the Olsten situation? You know, from the minister that brought you Olsten, now the minister that is going to bring you food services.
Is somebody not reining that minister in? I mean, this politically is the symbol for a lot of people of just how out of touch you are in terms of health care. Believe you me, I talked to somebody around Christmas, a good friend of mine, who is not all that political, but said to me: this is the ultimate symbol of how out of touch the government is after 10 years. They think they can run in and treat patients like a big guinea pig and serve this rethermalized food. It is going to symbolize everything from the line-up in the hallways, the waiting lists, the rest of it because this is the ultimate. You can blame this, you can blame that, you can blame the other for a lot of the other things you have done, but this is one of those bold new frontiers that you are charting for yourself. You are the Minister of Health. This is like the new vision of the Tory Party for the new millennium here--rethermalized hospital food. I mean, there are a lot of changes that we need in the health care system, but I can tell you there is not a single Manitoban out there that will list this as being one of the changes they want to see. They want a care system that still treats quality patient care as the No. 1 priority, and part of that quality is, Madam Speaker, having proper meals.
So I want to just say to the members opposite, we can stand here politically and we can say, I suppose, keep on doing this, but we feel strongly enough about this that we have moved a resolution in this House. We are determined to try and stop this because, even though it is the best thing politically for us because it symbolizes your approach on health care, we know that there is going to be an uproar from the patients. You just talk to people in facilities who have this food in place, and you will find out what I mean.
I say to the minister, through the members of the government who are here to listen to this--the minister says he is willing to debate that--I just received an invitation today to a debate that is taking place next Tuesday at the Franco-Manitoban Society. I am prepared to go and debate the minister. I believe there are going to be some other panelists who have been invited as well, including the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry).
I encourage the minister to get out of this Chamber and talk to real people because I tell you what, Madam Speaker, if Manitobans had a chance to vote on this, they would vote 99 percent in favour of this resolution, 99 percent against rethermalized hospital meals, and they would vote in favour of a health care system that recognizes that one of the aspects of the quality of patient care is proper food. The current system we have, I believe, with some appropriate changes, with some improvements, which is part of what is needed, that is what we need. We can build on the current system. We do not need to treat Manitobans as a guinea pig with rethermalized hospital food.
Mr. Gerry McAlpine (Sturgeon Creek): Madam Speaker, I am pleased to put a few remarks on the record with regard to this resolution, and I must congratulate the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) for bringing this resolution to the floor.
I think it warrants, certainly, serious consideration, as anything to do with health care certainly does, but I think that beyond that they have not really said anything that would convince me that they are really serious about this issue.
The honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) sounds good in debate, but he has not really put anything on the record here that would support or convince the people of Manitoba that there is any substance to what he is saying.
I think that is the important thing that people in Manitoba want to hear. They want to hear the true facts on what is happening as far as the health care system in this province. [interjection] You know, the honourable member for Concordia (Mr. Doer) says, go door to door. Well, I can assure him that I have gone door to door, and these are things that I am hearing. As far as this matter in terms of debate is concerned, the member for Thompson may be a good debater, but he is not putting anything on the record that is going to convince anybody, because all he is going to do is he is just going to irritate and confuse people and is not going to be able to make the decisions and logical decisions. It is unfairness to the people of Manitoba when a person like that talks as he has done.
I really believe, listening to the member for Concordia in terms of the resolution, that his intentions are honourable. He is sincere in terms of what he is doing. I support him wholeheartedly on that in terms of the representation that he is doing and in terms of that aspect, but I certainly cannot support the member for Thompson putting a pile of rhetoric on the record, because people do not--they are tired. It is the political image that we as members have towards politicians because of rhetoric that is put on the record such as that, misleading people, and that is sad.
Madam Speaker, I had some serious concern about this issue when it first came to the surface, because I think the idea of it warrants serious consideration, but as far as I am concerned, I have seen and I have gone the extra mile on this and looked at this. It is not a perfect world out there. It was not a perfect world in terms of the food services, and as far as the hospital staff and the food services of the various hospitals and institutions throughout this province, they are doing a tremendous amount of good in terms of what they are doing, but when they are serving the number of people that they are serving, there are going to be problems.
* (1750)
We have to move on with the times. We have to look at this in the interests of our health care future. We have to look at changes. We have to look at improving the situation, no ifs, ands or buts about that, and if we do not do that, we are going to be left in the dark.
You know, it was interesting, I travelled over the last week or 10 days across the west from Vancouver to Winnipeg. When you read the papers in Saskatchewan or you read the papers in Alberta or British Columbia, the headlines are the same. The health care headlines are exactly the same. We have an NDP government in British Columbia, and do you think that they are popular in British Columbia? You want to get a British Columbia paper and just see what--they are impeaching those members out there for things that they are doing. Those are the health care professionals or the people who are the saviours of health care.
The same thing in Saskatchewan, the headlines are the same, and Alberta, a Conservative government in Alberta, yes. Governments today have to take control of these issues. We have to address the serious issues and try to improve on this for the long term.
Madam Speaker, I have taken an interest in certain things as far as health care is concerned for my own personal benefit. A lot of people--and maybe the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) is not aware of this, but as soon as food is cooked beyond 118 degrees, the food is dead. It has no value in terms of nutrition whatsoever. It is bulk. It fills you up, but it does not provide any nutrition.
Let me expand on that. Say, vegetables as an example, Madam Speaker, the peas and the carrots that we grow and the things that we are going to get from the province of Manitoba through this system, the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Enns) is going to be the hero of the province of Manitoba because with the diversification of the farms and everything like that, we are going to be able to benefit from this value-added as far as these are concerned.
But let me tell you, Madam Speaker, that once the temperature reaches, in cooking these foods, beyond that 118 degrees--and you have to imagine a chef cooking for thousands of people in, say, the Health Sciences Centre, as an example. Is he going to be able to monitor that with it on an element on a stove or whatever it may be, or even a microwave? I mean, you cannot do it with a microwave. You are going to kill the enzymes in those vegetables and food that provide the nutrition for the patients, and the thing is, if you kill the enzymes in those foods, the body has to produce those enzymes in order to digest that food.
Madam Speaker, under this system, this allows the opportunity to control the service of the food. I believe that this is very innovative in terms of providing food for large numbers of people, and I think that from the aspect of that, if we really examine that and test this opportunity--and I look on this as an opportunity, because the system that we have been under over the last 50 years, as an example, in terms of the traditional food services, has not been satisfactory in terms of the needs of the patient, not to my satisfaction or my understanding.
I think that the honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) talks about treating Manitobans as guinea pigs. That is not the intention of this government at all. This government's intention is to look out for the best interests of Manitobans. We have had the experience in our own--and the member made reference to this, as far as our own caucus is concerned, with having that food served to us. There was no chef brought in from Toronto, as the honourable member alluded to. I mean that is garbage, pure garbage, and that is unfortunate that kind of talk can go on the record, and it is there for people, like all Manitobans, to read. Those are the wrong messages that honourable members are giving in this Chamber, Madam Speaker, and I think that he should re-evaluate and rethink what he is saying before he gets up and puts comments like that on the record for Manitobans to read.
Madam Speaker, we talk about the matter with regard to losing jobs for the people who are serving in those industries. I believe that we are in a changing environment. People, regardless of what the vocations that they are in, we are going to be faced with that, whether it is in the health care industry or in the agricultural industry or whatever industry we are in. We are going to have to realize change. We are going to have to accept change, because if we have no change, we are not going to have any growth.
You know, they talk about the privatization of this. It is interesting--and I have been here for a number of years, and the socialists, in regard to privatization, they remind me--it is like a boil on their posterior when they deal with privatization. They just do not have the capabilities of dealing with it. They have no understanding of it.
It is unfortunate. There are people over there who have had some private experience in private industry; but, when you hear them talk in this Chamber, they talk like a bunch of--well, I cannot find the word for it, but maybe it is better that I cannot, because I may be out of order in saying it. Madam Speaker, I do not want to be unkind, but that is the truth.
An Honourable Member: Yes, there is a German--a Mennonite word for it.
Mr. McAlpine: Maybe I would have to speak several languages, or learn to speak several languages, before I would be able to put those comments on the record, and then we would need an interpretation. [interjection] It would take me a while to get my tongue around that. The honourable Minister of Agriculture, I think, has a few choice words. Well, I respect his wisdom.
Madam Speaker, I think that we also have to look at the aspect of what it is going to cost us to improve the kitchens in the Health Sciences Centre. Here we are talking--you know, what that reminds me of is putting good money after bad. That is all we are doing; that is all we would be doing. We would put $20 million in the Health Sciences Centre, and then a couple of years from now, what would be doing? We would be throwing that stuff out, all that good equipment, and it would be worth about 20 cents or 30 cents on the dollar.
The honourable member for Transcona (Mr. Reid) talks about operating rooms. Well, I have had some experience with operating rooms, just for his benefit, with the Grace Hospital. I guess, really when we talk about the socialistic attitude with the boils on the posterior, he is the member, the member for Transcona, who is one of the first members that comes to mind. That is typical socialism.
Madam Speaker, I would like to address, would really like to address the matter with regard to the expenditures that we as a government are going to have to deal with in putting money into the Health Sciences Centre, or any institution for that matter, to improve or to put the equipment in position or place that would enable us to serve the people. As far as they talk about the service--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. When this matter is again before the House, the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek (Mr. McAlpine) will have two minutes remaining.
The hour being 6 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned until 10 a.m. tomorrow (Thursday).