LEGISLATIVE
ASSEMBLY OF
Tuesday,
April 28, 1992
The House met at 1:30
p.m.
PRAYERS
ROUTINE
PROCEEDINGS
PRESENTING
PETITIONS
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.
Speaker, I beg to present the petition of D.J. Seaton, Debbie Wardale, Marilyn
Booth and others urging the government to consider establishing an office of
the Children's Advocate independent of cabinet and reporting directly to the
Assembly.
Mr. Gregory Dewar
(Selkirk): Mr. Speaker, I beg to present the petition of
Sharron O'Neill, John Moss, Gill Moss and others requesting the Minister of
Family Services (Mr. Gilleshammer) consider a one‑year moratorium on the
closure of the Human Resources
Mr. Leonard Evans
(Brandon East): I beg to present the petition of Wanda
McKenzie, Jack Dodds, Graydon Cummins and others requesting the government
consider reviewing the funding at the
Mr. Speaker: I have reviewed the petition of the honourable
member for Selkirk (Mr. Dewar), and it complies with the privileges and the
practices of the House and complies with the rules. Is it the will of the House to have the
petition read?
The petition of the undersigned citizens
of the
WHEREAS the Human Resources Opportunity
Office has operated in Selkirk for over 21 years providing training for the
unemployed and people re‑entering the labour force; and
WHEREAS during the past 10 years alone
over 1,000 trainees have gone through the program gaining valuable skills and
training; and
WHEREAS upwards of 80 percent of the
training centre's recent graduates have found employment; and
WHEREAS without consultation the program
was cut in the 1992 provincial budget forcing the centre to close; and
WHEREAS there is a growing need for this
program in Selkirk and the program has the support of the town of
WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray
that the Legislature of the
PRESENTING
REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES
Mrs. Louise Dacquay
(Chairperson of Committees): Mr.
Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted certain resolutions, directs me to
report the same and asks leave to sit again.
I move, seconded by the honourable member
for La Verendrye (Mr. Sveinson), that the report of the committee be received.
Motion agreed to.
Introduction
of Guests
Mr. Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, may I direct the
attention of the honourable members to the gallery, where we have with us this
afternoon from the
On behalf of all members, I welcome you
here this afternoon.
TABLING OF
REPORTS
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I inadvertently missed the call
of tabling of reports, and might I ask leave of the House to revert back?
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave of the House to allow the
honourable Minister of Health to revert back to ministerial statements and
tabling of reports?
Some Honourable Members: Leave.
Mr. Speaker: It is agreed.
Mr. Orchard : I sense, Mr. Speaker, they want me to leave.
Mr. Speaker, I wish to table for the House
the Annual Reports for the
* (1335)
ORAL
QUESTION PERIOD
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, last week the
We have since been getting a number of
calls from Manitobans about this sale.
Many Manitobans who are now presently working for the
I would therefore ask the Premier (Mr.
Filmon): What should we be advising
those Manitobans who are phoning us now, who have been told they are laid
off? What guarantees did you receive for
their employment with the new company takeover, and will the Premier agree to
table the agreement the government has for the $5 million amount of money going
to the new distribution centre?
Hon. Eric Stefanson
(Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): As I said when we discussed this issue
last week, for all intents and purposes, there are two separate issues‑‑the
decision that the
The information that we have received in
our department is that
Clearly, what we have done with the
agreement reached with
I want to indicate very clearly to this
House that any other more restrictive conditions would not have resulted in
North West Company coming to
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, I would refer the minister to a
letter that the Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik) received from
I also refer the minister to the trading
section of The Globe and Mail business section where it refers very directly to
the 10 percent sale that was just achieved between the
They are very directly related. It is basically the same function. It is the same warehouse. It is money from the provincial
government. What is missing is a
commitment and a guarantee from this provincial government to the employees,
the taxpayers of
Why would this minister put $5 million of
an interest‑free loan into this new operation, this takeover of the
existing warehouse? They deal with the
capital asset. Why would they not deal
with the human assets? Why would they
not deal with the human beings who are phoning our office and saying we are
laid off, and we have no chance of getting jobs at the new place, nor do we
have any guarantees? How can they take
our taxpayers' money and not give us our jobs in terms of the new distribution
centre?
Mr. Stefanson: To make it perfectly clear, we are dealing
with the human aspect, because the point I was making for the Leader of the
Opposition was that
What we have created through the agreement
with North West Company is the opportunity for many of those people to again
gain employment in a particular field where they have some expertise. I cannot
state often enough that they were, in that respect, two separate
decisions.
It is not going to another province; it is
coming to
* (1340)
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, we are talking about the decisions
of this government. It makes a decision
on a capital asset, and the human assets in this province, the employees who
have worked 20 or 30 years at the
The real question is, why do you leave the
human beings scattered to the wind when you only deal with the capital asset?
Why now are employees of
Mr. Stefanson: Mr. Speaker, I hate to be repetitive, but I
think I have to be, so that the Leader of the Opposition understands this
issue.
The decision by
Workers
Compensation Board
Vocational
Rehabilitation Benefits
Mr. Daryl Reid
(Transcona): Mr. Speaker, family disintegration, mortgage
sales and foreclosures are becoming all too frequent for the injured workers in
the
I have here a letter, Mr. Speaker, two
letters, in fact, from different independent medical specialists indicating
that this male living in
My question is for the Minister
responsible for the Workers Compensation Board.
Why has the Workers Compensation Board forced this individual and others
like him to undertake this vocational rehabilitation when it is clear that his
life hangs in the balance?
Hon. Darren Praznik
(Minister responsible for and charged with the administration of The Workers Compensation
Act): Mr. Speaker, the member brings a specific case
to the attention of the House without all of the information or facts on the
case, that are not available to me in discussing this particular matter.
I can tell the honourable member that
within the board, there is certainly a consideration of factors such as those
that the member has outlined. If the
member would like to share with me more specifics of the file, I would be
prepared to ask the administration there to have a look to see if the processes
that are in place to ensure fairness are in fact functioning, but I would need
more information than the member has put forward now.
Mr. Reid: This is already before the minister's office,
Mr. Speaker.
I ask this minister why his department is
forcing totally disabled injured workers onto vocational rehabilitation
benefits so that they can deduct the Canada Pension Plan disability payments
from the Workers Compensation payments to individuals such as this person.
Mr. Praznik: Mr. Speaker, if I may just correct the
honourable member for Transcona for one moment, Workers Compensation Board is
not a department. It is an agency of
government established by this Legislature.
Why I raise that is because the Workers
Compensation Board is governed by a board of directors on which there are three
members appointed by Labour‑‑[interjection]
Granted, under the legislation passed by this House, but the practices,
procedures, policies are determined by that board.
I would remind honourable members that
there are three members on that board of directors who are nominated by Labour,
who have access to me as minister if there are problems in those procedures and
practices, to bring them to my attention.
I also want to point out to the other member, when he mentioned about
the deduction of CPP benefits, what he in fact is suggesting if you did not
allow for that is the double payment of benefits.
Mr. Reid: It is obvious, Mr. Speaker, the minister does
not care for this‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Question, please.
Mr. Reid: Mr. Speaker, my final supplementary question
for the same minister is: Can this
minister explain what type of message this sends to the injured workers in our
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
The question has been put.
Mr. Praznik: Mr. Speaker, in this House, I have never been
one to indicate clearly that all things at the Workers Compensation Board are
perfect. In fact, when this party came
to power in 1988, the place was an absolute mess. Service to injured workers in this province
was abysmal. There were long delays in
processing claims, and it was a disaster, to say the least.
We have steadily been progressing in
improvement of service, and I would remind him that the board of directors on
which Labour has three nominees, three very capable nominees who serve on that
board, have been charged with the responsibility of ensuring that there is
service.
I would say to the honourable member, what
he suggests in this House is that there not be proper procedures to deal with
claims in a fair fashion. If he is
asking this minister or any politician to intervene in specific cases, to make
determinations in fact to diagnosis, that would be wrong.
* (1345)
Midwifery
Government
Initiatives
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): Mr.
Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Health.
Today, Judge Conner of the
Mr. Speaker, we are all very concerned
that these kinds of births continue to go on in our province, and if the coroner's
report on this one is correct, there is nothing to indicate that a similar lack
of appropriate procedures are in place.
Can the minister tell us today what he is
going to do to ensure that deliveries by midwives are appropriately controlled
and the knowledge is there?
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister of Health): Mr. Speaker, I think
all members of the House share in the obvious grief surrounding that
unfortunate death of a newborn. That
happened at a time when one might recall that the issue of midwifery was
brought before government through a report which recommended that midwifery
become part of the
Subsequent to that, Sir, we engaged the
A working group is currently investigating
that implementation and developing an action plan for government to assure that
should midwifery become a profession in the health care system of
Mrs. Carstairs: The minister has had the report of the
I want to know what the minister is going
to do today to protect mothers who want to have midwives to ensure that they
have midwives who are appropriately trained and controlled by the
Mr. Orchard: Well, Mr. Speaker, midwifery is not a
recognized profession with standards for professional service delivery in the
That is exactly what MARN and the
Mr. Speaker, there is no appropriate
access to midwifery at this time.
Hopefully, the working group will make the kind of recommendations which
provide the professional accreditation to allow safe provision of that service
within the
Mrs. Carstairs: Mr. Speaker, there is no legal way to access
it, but the reality is people are accessing it.
I want to know what this government is
going to do now to make sure that mothers who are accessing midwives have a
guarantee to legislation in this province that they are appropriately trained
and that they are appropriately monitored for their health and the health of
these children.
* (1350)
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Speaker, I recognize what my honourable
friend wants to have happen now, but surely my honourable friend would be
patient and wait for the working group to give the guidance to government to do
exactly that.
When I am in a position as recommended by
the working group to introduce such legislation, I would hope my honourable
friend will encourage members of the opposition to ensure speedy passage, but
until the working group gives us the recommendation which, incidentally, they
are attempting to provide to government with full consultation with, for
instance,
Distance
Education Program
Rural
Areas
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (
We all know the importance of post‑secondary
education, and we all want the opportunity to send our children to university.
Unfortunately, this is financially out of reach for many rural families. For this reason, there has been a tremendous
interest in the first‑year Distance Education Program which has proven to
be very successful. In fact, it is so
successful, Mr. Speaker, that divisions are willing to pick up half the costs.
I want to ask the minister why, if
divisions are prepared to do so much, is she denying the Swan Valley School
Division the opportunity to provide first‑year university education to
rural students in the area? Does she not
believe in rural‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr.
Speaker, my department did meet last week with representatives of
At this point, we have not done the
evaluation and, therefore, it did not seem an appropriate time to encourage
other sites to join into a pilot project.
Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Speaker, if the minister says her
department is evaluating, even though they know that the program is a success,
why are communities such as
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, we recognize certainly on this
side of the House and in the department that distance education is in fact a
great interest across this province. We
have in fact established a task force to examine the use of distance education
within the Department of Education and Training.
The specific project that the member has
raised is a pilot project and it has, as she has said, been successful in some
ways, but it does need a total evaluation to determine if in fact it should
continue in its present way. It is a
pilot project.
Ms. Wowchuk: My question is to the same minister.
In light of the success of the program,
why is the minister not taking the necessary steps to work with these
communities to put in place programs to communities that are offering money?
They are so committed to the rural children.
Does this minister not realize the cost of educating‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Speaker, we are certainly concerned about
education in the rural communities, also the northern sparsely populated
communities, so concerned in fact that I have set up within my department
several task forces to examine that area.
I am looking at a task force on distance education, also a task force on
sparsely populated and rural communities, to look at the necessary education.
This is a specific project which the
member raised. This is a pilot project,
and I am quite sure that the people of
University
Review Commission
Appointments
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I asked the Minister
of Urban Affairs about the lost Tory years in the inner city of
Today, I would like to ask the Minister of
Education about the lost Tory years in university education. Since 1988, we have seen a rapid increase in
student fees, an increase in class size, a deterioration of laboratories and
libraries and a decline in graduate students, and yet the minister still
refuses to act on a university review which has been promised for two years.
Will the minister make a commitment today
to appoint the university review commission and to announce its mandate before
the end of May?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Education and Training): I am
certainly working very closely and very carefully, and as quickly as possible,
to appoint the members of the commission for the university review. It will be announced as soon as possible.
We on this side of the House view that to
be very important, but I would also like to say, I accept none of the member's
preamble because the difficulties that the universities are facing now are from
the years of mismanagement of the NDP government before and the huge deficit
that this government is dealing with now.
* (1355)
Mandate
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): Will the minister make a commitment to ensure
that this university review, when she in fact eventually announces it, will
have a mandate that will be very broad and that it will look at the
university's position in the social and economic future of
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
The question has been put.
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Education and Training): The scope and mandate of
the review‑‑I have met with, as I said previously in this House,
the four university presidents, the presidents of the student unions and other
interested Manitobans in an attempt to develop the university review with the
widest scope and a scope and mandate that will assist the province and the
people of Manitoba.
Government
Commitment
Ms. Jean Friesen
(Wolseley): Mr. Speaker, will the minister make a clear
commitment, when she eventually announces that review, that it will include
public hearings that will be accessible to all those communities from
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Education and Training): Mr.
Speaker, I think this government has made its commitment to the public
consultation process very clear, and I think I have as minister also, but the
exact process of the university review will be announced when the review itself
is announced.
Government
Economic Policies
Impact on
Mr. Reg Alcock (Osborne):
Each time, Mr. Speaker, I raise a question
with the Finance minister asking him, really, why his policies have been
failing so badly, he references the fact that there has been a recession. I have some sympathy for him. Certainly, the
country has been in some trouble.
But when you look at
I would like to ask the Minister of
Finance: In the area of wages and
salaries, why is the amount of money, the share of national wages and salaries
in this province, 17 percent lower than it would be if we had just held the
same position we had in 1988? Why are
his policies failing so badly?
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Minister of Finance): I do not know where
the member is leading, Mr. Speaker. He
seems to be going down one or two paths.
Firstly, he seems to be saying that the
government somehow should impose itself in the corporate boardroom through free
collective bargaining, and impose its will on, ultimately, the settlements
reached between those who provide work and, indeed, those who manage, those who
are the owners of the factories.
That is basic economics, Mr. Speaker. This government will not impose its
will. That is derived by way of the to‑and‑fros
within the free marketplace. The
government will not impose its will on wage settlements in this province.
Mr. Alcock: I would just inform the minister, I am not
talking about weekly wages.
Mr. Speaker, the problem is that the total
amount of money being spent on wages and salaries in this province is some 17
percent lower than it would have been had we just held the same position in
this country that we had in 1988. After
four years of the Finance minister's policies, we have fallen badly. I simply want to ask him the question: Why are his policies failing so badly?
Mr. Manness: I categorically reject the member's assertion
that the policies are failing. The
policies are succeeding. You have a
situation in
Mr. Speaker, those are the factors that
ultimately in combination will determine whether or not jobs are created in
significant fashion. Those are the
building blocks on which you base an economy.
I say that indeed the province has been successful in trying to put into
place a stable environment in business in the years to come.
* (1400)
Mr. Alcock: Perhaps I could ask the minister this. If his policies are working as well as he
says they are, why do we have 16,000 fewer full‑time jobs, a considerably
smaller share of the national retail trade, and a considerably‑‑at
17 percent‑‑smaller share of wages and salaries in this
country? How is that an example of the
success that he feels he has achieved after four years?
Mr. Manness: Again, I remind the member that we are in a
recession. I remind the member that we
are an exporting province. I remind the
member‑‑[interjection]
Well, the member says it has nothing to do with the recession, and yet he
berates me for saying that the government is not going to impose higher
settlements on the private sector.
Mr. Speaker, which way does he want
it? Does he want the government to be
all intrusive? Does he want the
government to run the boardrooms of the private sector in this province? I say, no, that is his philosophy. That is his former NDP philosophy, his
Liberal philosophy. The Conservative
philosophy is different, and we will follow our course. Would he be in government, he would follow
his course, and his course would lead to bankruptcy. That is where it would lead.
The Pas,
Employment
Decline
Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The
Pas): My question is for the Minister of Rural
Development. Last year, The Pas lost
over 10 Civil Service positions along with major cuts at the
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the
minister. Has this minister told his
colleagues that cutting more positions in The Pas will only compound the
situation, as bad as it is now with Repap employees continuing to be laid
off? Will the minister get in touch with
his colleagues and make sure that there are no more jobs being moved or‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
The question has been put.
Hon. Leonard Derkach
(Minister of Rural Development): I can
assure the member for The Pas that the announcement that was made with regard
to decentralization in the initial stages has indeed been lived up to in its
entire commitment, Mr. Speaker, in that we are moving towards fulfilling that
commitment as quickly as we can.
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated before, we
have already decentralized more than 500 positions. There are still a few more than a 100
positions to be decentralized before that initial commitment is complete, and I
can assure the member that we are moving as quickly as we can to ensure that
our commitment is attained.
Mr. Lathlin: Mr. Speaker, practically everything is
deteriorating in the North. One may as
well say that we have no infrastructure to speak of in the North that would
support economic development.
Mr. Speaker: Question, please.
Mr. Lathlin: My second question is to the same minister.
Will he, or has he already advised his
colleagues that cutting highway staff and maintenance of roads further will
only result in the roads deteriorating further and loss of tourism, thereby
creating more unemployment?
Mr. Derkach: Mr. Speaker, I have to tell my honourable friend
for The Pas that the whole initiative of decentralization was to ensure that
services throughout
As a matter of fact, I could say to the
member for The Pas that the new Housing Authority will increase its staff in
The Pas, and those will be located in The Pas in the very near future.
Mr. Speaker, our commitment to the area of
The Pas and northern
Employment
Moratorium
Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The
Pas): My final question is for the same minister,
and it is simply this.
Will the minister recommend to his
colleagues in cabinet that there be a moratorium on job cuts in northern
Hon. Leonard Derkach
(Minister of Rural Development): Mr.
Speaker, I have to say to the member that with regard to the responsibilities
of my department and to ensure that rural Manitoba is revitalized, we are doing
everything we can to ensure that private entrepreneurs, that organizations that
may be attracting a variety of businesses into their communities are given
every possible advantage to attract those kinds of opportunities into an area.
For that reason, we have introduced
programs such as the Community Choices Program, the Grow Bonds program and most
recently the REDI program, and I invite members of this Legislature to go back
to their communities and ensure that their communities have every bit of
information about these programs that are available to all Manitobans.
Glass
Recycling Contract
Award
Criteria
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, we have just been informed that a
Manitoba company, Major Industries, has lost the bid in this province to
recycle glass that is used in metallic paint on highways. We have been informed that this contract has
been awarded to an
I would ask the Minister of Highways: What were the criteria for the change in use
of firms?
Hon. Albert Driedger
(Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, every year my department
tenders out for glass beads, which are used in the paint that we use on the
highways for our painting of the lines as a reflector there.
We have followed the same process that we
have in other years. We have asked for
public tenders. We received those
tenders. The tender that we have
accepted is $28,000 cheaper than the next tender, which basically was awarded
the last few years to Canasphere Industries from
Glass
Recycling
Government
Initiatives
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of
the Opposition): I would ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon), Mr.
Speaker, then‑‑I asked the question of what the criteria were, and
I assume that price was one of the obvious criteria. My other question is‑‑
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Doer: The government gives away $5 million‑‑
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Doer: Mr. Speaker, my further question to the
minister is: The issue of recycled glass that is now presently recycled back
for the use of metallic paint, was that part of the criteria?
Can the minister advise us what will
happen to the recycled glass from
Hon. Albert Driedger
(Minister of Highways and Transportation): Mr. Speaker, we have certain criteria
that we put out at the time when we ask for the tenders. If that criteria is basically met and all
conditions are equal, then we look at the price issue of it.
That is no different than Saskatchewan,
because my colleague out there, Bernie Wiens, who is the Minister responsible
for Highways out there, in a letter to Mr. Mitchell from the Moose Jaw company,
has indicated as well: Considering the
tough economic times this province is facing, we must deliver services to the
public at the lowest possible cost.
Awarding to the lowest bidder is usually the best means to accomplish
this.
Mr. Speaker, we have done exactly what we
have done in the past and what the other provinces are doing in terms of
following a process for tendering.
* (1410)
Mr. Doer: The minister did not answer the question. The question was: Was the issue of recycled glass considered in
the decision the government made? We
have been advised that tons of recycled glass from this province will not now
go back to the metallic paint in the highways but will rather go in the
landfill sites of
I would ask the government: Was that considered in the decision? What is the cost benefit of those items
ending up in the landfill site if indeed that is going to happen?
Mr. Driedger: Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me indicate
that I will not jeopardize the tendering system that we have in place right
now. However, there are some problems
because of the glass that has been basically sent to
We know there is going to be an expanded
mountain of glass for the future, so we are looking at seeing whether we can
incorporate something in terms of the construction in highways or other
innovative ideas that are being looked at in terms of making use of the glass.
Wildlife
Poaching
Mr. Edward Helwer
(Gimli): Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the
Minister of Natural Resources.
There was another slaughter of wildlife in
the Interlake area during this past weekend.
There were seven pregnant elk cows found slaughtered by poachers. The communities of Poplarfield and the whole
Interlake area are in an uproar over the slaughter of the deer, elk and moose
in the Interlake area.
Can the Minister of Natural Resources tell
us what his department is doing to try to stop the poachers from slaughtering
our wildlife in the Interlake area?
Hon. Harry Enns
(Minister of Natural Resources): Mr.
Speaker, I wish to, in the first instance, thank the honourable member for
Gimli for raising the question. It
saddens me and shocks me, that kind of wanton waste of the wildlife in this
instance, particularly this time of spring when we think of life beginning, and
all of these animals were heavily pregnant with calf.
My department has been instructed to
pursue most vigorously the situation, and charges will be laid if we can find
the persons responsible for this action.
Heritage
Grants
Government
Commitment
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
The Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey) yesterday
said that the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Enns) was acting on his own
last Friday. Yet after the vote, the
minister was applauded and congratulated by his colleague. Then the government members, with the
exception of the government House leader, walked out of‑‑
Mr. Speaker: And the question is? Order, please.
Mr. Lamoureux: My question to the Premier is, Mr. Speaker:
Given the new‑found support of the Manitoba Heritage Federation, will
this government reverse its decision and not politicize heritage grants?
Hon. Gary Filmon
(Premier): Mr. Speaker, I just want to assure the member
for
The fact of the matter is, our government
has made a move with respect to the Heritage Federation because of concern for
very substantial costs that are being expended on administration and not going
to heritage projects that many people in the province depend upon.
Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Natural
Resources was applauded and congratulated.
Everyone in the caucus was pleased to see what he did.
My question to the Premier is: Does the Premier support or endorse what the
member for
Mr. Filmon: A budget decision was made by the government
that was reviewed by the Treasury Board and ultimately by the cabinet. At the time that the review took place, I was
still a member of Treasury Board.
Certainly I am a member of the cabinet
that approved that budgetary decision and, obviously, I support the decision
that was made by the government because we believe that funds that are raised
for the purposes of going to heritage projects should go to heritage projects
and not to building up a bureaucracy and administration costs.
Mr. Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.
NONPOLITICAL
STATEMENTS
Mr. Daryl Reid
(Transcona): Mr. Speaker, may I have leave to make a
nonpolitical statement? [Agreed]
Mr. Speaker, today, April 28, is the
National Day of Mourning. April 28 has
been declared a Day of Mourning in recognition of Canadian workers who have
been killed or injured on the job or suffered from work‑related
illnesses. It is a day to remember the
supreme sacrifices that workers have been forced to make in order to earn a
living.
It is a day for all of us to rededicate
ourselves to the goal of making
Hon. Darren Praznik
(Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, may I
have leave of the House to make a nonpolitical statement? [Agreed]
Mr. Speaker, as Minister of Labour and on
behalf of members of this side of the House, I would like to join with my
colleague the MLA for Transcona (Mr. Reid) in recognizing today as the National
Day of Mourning for those who have been injured or killed in the workplace.
I think the comments of the member for
Transcona are most apt in that it is time for all of us to rededicate ourselves
to the goal of reducing and eliminating risk and injury in our workplaces, and
ultimately that goal will only be accomplished through co‑operation and
working together towards that common cause.
I would hope all members of this Assembly would join with us in
recognizing this day and taking forward that spirit of co‑operation to
achieve the common goal.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (
Mr. Speaker, as the Labour critic for our
caucus, it is with pleasure that I stand up in recognition of this very
important day, and it is important that we all recognize it as the National Day
of Mourning, that in fact we all as legislators have a role to play to ensure
that we do whatever we can to ensure that our workplaces today and tomorrow,
into the future, are safe.
I would echo the remarks that have been
made by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Praznik) and the member for Transcona (Mr.
Reid), and hopefully we can work together in a nonpolitical way on some of the
areas in which, with co‑operation, things can be facilitated in a much
faster fashion. Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker: It appears that the honourable member for
Gimli (Mr. Helwer) wants to make a committee change. Does the honourable member for Gimli have
leave to make his committee change?
[Agreed]
Committee
Change
Mr. Edward Helwer
(Gimli): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the member
for St. Vital (Mrs. Render), that the composition of a Standing Committee on
Public Utilities and Natural Resources be amended as follows: the member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer) for the
member for La Verendrye (Mr. Sveinson).
[Agreed]
ORDERS OF
THE DAY
Hon. Clayton Manness
(Government House Leader): Mr. Speaker, I move,
seconded by the Minister of Environment (Mr. Cummings), that Mr. Speaker do now
leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a committee to consider of
the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty.
Motion agreed to, and the House resolved itself into a
committee to consider of the Supply to be granted to Her Majesty with the
honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau) in the Chair for the
Department of Health; and the honourable member for Seine River (Mrs. Dacquay)
in the Chair for the Department of Education and Training.
COMMITTEE
OF SUPPLY
(Concurrent
Sections)
HEALTH
* (1440)
Mr. Deputy Chairperson
(Marcel Laurendeau): Order, please. Will the Committee of Supply please come to
order. This afternoon, this section of
the Committee of Supply, meeting in Room 255, will resume consideration of the
Estimates of the Department of Health.
When the committee last sat, it had been
considering item 3. Continuing Care Programs, (1) Salaries . . . .
Mr. Gulzar Cheema (The
Maples): I do not have any
questions on this issue. I thought we
wanted to pass and get on with the Mental Health Services. We have taken a lot of time.
Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis
(
One issue we did not touch on yesterday
evening was the question of very high care people, people with very high care
needs. The minister says over cost, I am
not sure. I think this is an area where
there is overlap between this department, of Family Services, and Housing and
perhaps others. But I raise it because
we continue to hear from a number of individuals who feel frustrated dealing
with the department or with the fact that it is so difficult to address their
needs. The needs appear to be with
respect to home care and probably more sensitive home care options with respect
to more options around long‑term housing.
I am wondering if the minister can shed any light in terms of how this
perceived problem, in my sense, is being addressed. What solutions are being looked at?
Hon. Donald Orchard
(Minister of Health): Mr. Deputy
Chairperson, I realize that there may well be some frustrations in the system,
and I simply say that we try and work as diligently as we can to remove those
frustrations and undertake provision of services to the degree possible, and to
the degree possible in some ways is new budget allocation as well as program
expansion considerations.
But bear in mind, we have introduced the
Self‑Managed Care Project where we are trying to determine the
feasibility of that aspect for program opportunity for independent living. I simply indicate that I think we have made
some quite significant progress, certainly not as much or as quickly as some
would observe, but we are certainly not going backwards.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: How many committees are there with respect to
continuing care and independent living arrangements?
Mr. Orchard: Two, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, the Continuing
Care Advisory Committee and the Self‑Managed Care Project Advisory
Committee.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Could the minister‑‑and he could
table this, he does not have to necessarily take up time now‑‑provide
us with information on the membership of each committee, how often they meet
and what each of their mandate is.
Mr. Orchard: Yes, we can provide that, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: A final question. It flows out of a case‑‑and I do
not want to name the person or get into the details of the individual, but it
does raise some bigger issues and longer term issues‑‑of a woman
who has a clear physical disability, a debilitating disability. She went through considerable personal
trauma, ended up in the psychiatric ward at Health Sciences Centre and spent
months working with Home Care or Continuing Care officials trying to find
suitable living arrangements and felt many obstacles and blockages along the
way.
I am sure the minister knows who I am
referring to and it points to a broader issue as well. I am wondering if the minister can tell us
why this happens and what is being done to ensure that people are not taking up
beds in expensive institutions when they could be out in the community in a
less expensive arrangement, if the will could be found and if all the different
players and parties to such a case could get together and co‑operate.
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I simply indicate to
my honourable friend that where the ministry is involved and particularly
through the Continuing Care Department, I think we make very significant effort
and with very significant success, program delivery which does exactly as my
honourable friend indicates, i.e., provide services in the community to avoid
institutionalization. In most of the
cases that is a lesser cost alternative.
There are other instances, however, where
provision of those services in the community are more costly than the
institutional provision of care. We
recognize that and I think have made a deliberate choice that we would allow
the individual's choice to prevail and maintain service in the community.
Guiding us throughout all of those
individual cases and decision making has to be the overriding objective of
providing safe care for the individual, safe living environment for the
individual, because I think my honourable friend would concede that should we
make arrangements other than within an institution‑‑in other words,
independent community living arrangements for an individual‑‑there
is an obligation on behalf of government and the ministry to ensure that those
arrangements provide for safe patient care.
That cannot always be assured in as
expeditious a fashion or to the satisfaction of individual clients and has
caused prolonged negotiations around the structuring of service provision, but
it does not reflect a lack of will upon the ministry to undertake structuring
those arrangements where the appropriate need and the appropriate individual is
identified. But, let me tell my honourable friend that some of the discussions
do become prolonged because of unique circumstances which compel the department
to be guided by an abundance of caution so that the individual would not be
compromised in terms of their personal safety through the arrangements that are
desirable and are being explored and investigated for implementation.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: I will leave it for now and perhaps at some
point later in Estimates, if I have questions, pursue it then, and I am sure
the minister will not have any problem if we have to revisit this issue as it
may in fact overlap with Community Services after all. I am prepared at this point to pass some
lines and move on to Mental Health Services.
Mr. Orchard: I might just add some information that was
requested yesterday before we pass the line.
I have got one of the committees, the Advisory Committee for the
Continuing Care Program.
Membership: Michael Rosner, Nancy
Whiteway as an alternate, Mrs. G. Hewitt, Mrs. Jane Edwards as an alternate,
John Lane, James Lee, Bea Sharp, Elizabeth McKean, Margaret Mackling as an alternate
to Elizabeth McKean, Jane Ackroyd and Helen Peterson as an alternate, Pat
Sisco, Frank Maynard, Lynne Fineman is the membership of the committee.
* (1450)
A number of those individuals represent
the Manitoba League for the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada, the Canadian
Parapalegic Association. One is a
caregiver, the Manitoba Society of Seniors, Alzheimer's Society, Age and
My honourable friend last night indicated
the Adult Day Care Program and I would like to share some information with my
honourable friend. We have 48 program
sponsors; that is down from a high of 58 sponsors, so there are 10 fewer
sponsors. The days of care has tended to
level out from a high of 48,000 in the year there were 58 sponsors, to 45,207
days of care last year with 48 sponsors.
The numbers of individuals served has gone from 927 when there were 58
sponsors providing service to 1,459 individuals served. The budget has gone in that period of time
from $1,224,000 to $1,511,500. So, Mr.
Deputy Chairperson, there are fewer sponsors, a slight decrease in the number
of days and days of care, but a significant increase in the number of
individuals who are part of the Adult Day Care Program.
In terms of respite care, we have every
year a growing number of admissions.
There were 924 last year. Those
represented an increase, the largest number of days of care in the history of
the program at 13,724. There are the
largest number of homes ever providing respite care at 42 in 1990‑91. The number of individuals served was the
highest since the inception of the program at 565. The number of beds is the highest since the
inception of the program which totalled 55 in the province, 25 in rural
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: Item 3.(a) Administration: (1) Salaries $282,300‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $51,700‑‑pass.
(b) Home Care: (1) Salaries $1,335,400‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $3,151,100‑‑pass; (3) Home Care Assistance
$62,000,000‑‑pass; (4) External Agencies $1,297,500‑‑pass.
(c) Long Term Care: (1) Salaries $725,000‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $66,300‑‑pass.
(d) Gerontology: (1) Salaries $251,600‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $74,200‑‑pass; (3) External Agencies $2,892,900‑‑pass.
Resolution 67: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty
a sum not exceeding $72,128,000 for Health, Continuing Care Programs, for the
fiscal year ending the 31st day of March 1993‑‑pass.
Item 4. Provincial Mental Health Services
(a) Administration: (1) Salaries
$396,800.
Mr. Cheema: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, is the minister going
to have his staff at the Mental Health be here before we want to start, or
shall we just proceed?
Mr. Orchard: Yes, just proceed if you wish.
Mr. Cheema: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I think this is one
area where we want to have some solid proposals from the minister in terms of
seeing the way reform is going, because the minister made a commitment as of
1988 and in 1990 campaign and the way the process was put in place.
In terms of making a mental health services
approach from a reasonable point of view, there should be a balance between
community and the institutional care.
The commitment was made, and we have seen progress, and that is why we
said in 1990 that we want to make sure that our progress will continue.
There have been a number of debates in
this House, in this committee and outside this committee. In my view, I want to say that we were very
pleased, and we are still very pleased with the progress so far. But we want to see, in these few hours, some
of the solid proposals, and how the minister is going to give the direction to
the Department of Health, how they are going to change the system, and the time
frame which has been expressed in the past.
Probably two to four years is a reasonable time frame for the change in
mental health services.
Also, we want to see the numbers, how this
$212 million is going to be spent. Right
now we spend 87 percent in the institutional care versus 12 percent in the
community. That trend is almost the same
in this country; it is not only an isolated case in
I must add here that the other provinces
are also having a good look at reform in mental health in
That community setting definition we would
like to see from the minister's office.
Now what will that mean to the average patient and to average
Manitobans? What is the
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, one thing that is
very positive which has happened here in Manitoba is that the decisions that
our minister is going to make will be based upon the advice he is getting from
the community groups in the name of Regional Mental Health Councils, which have
representation from various groups.
They operate at a distance from the
minister's office, and I think that is very positive. It is very risky for the government to do
that, but I think that is the right approach.
That way, whatever the criticism that will come in the changes through
the system, it will not be only to the government but also the people who are
making the decisions. So I think that is
one positive approach which will help the minister to implement some of the
policies.
As we understand, I do not want to take
too long about what I want to put on the record, but certain things are very
important from our point of view. We
must let the health care provider know where we stand, and how we view the
mental health care system in
I think basically we want to see a road
map from the minister's point of view now and see how he views how the system
is going to change, whether he is going to put the fears to rest to a lot of
other groups who are still questioning that things may not be happening. I personally believe that things are
happening, but I want to make sure that the process will continue.
I think one thing that was very positive
was when there was a cabinet shuffle. We
would have been very disappointed, I personally, to see a change in the
ministry of Health because when you have changes, when you have a major policy
direction being developed in a department which deals‑‑even the
component of this department is $212 million‑‑with more than many
other department in the cabinet.
* (1500)
If you were to have a change it would have
a very negative effect because it takes time to understand the system. It takes time to understand the process. It takes time to make connections within the
community, and it takes time to build a credibility, not among your own
colleagues but other health care professionals and the opposition
politicians. It is very, very important
to have a base line credibility built in the department to show
leadership. I think that that is there,
and that is expressed to me not only by people with whom I come in contact, but
people from a political spectrum, saying that finally things are happening and
specifically the health care economists, and the people who have to do with
ethics in medicine, or the various professional groups have expressed their
intention. That is why we have not seen
for the last few months any major front page or third page stories on mental
health.
I think that is a positive sign because
people want to give time. I think that
is a very reasonable approach. We have
always said there are going to be some difficulties. No question, difficulties are going to be
there, but as long as we can continue to change some of those aspects of the
mental health system and work within the communities and try to achieve a noble
goal, which is to achieve the best for the patient and take them away from the
institution model which is completely outdated by any reasonable person or by
any reasonable government or by any reasonable party in this country.
That is the message that we want to convey
to the minister and specifically when the new division of Mental Health was
reorganized, that was two years ago.
Under the leadership of the ADM and Mr. Reg Taylor who has established
credibility in the department. I think
this is very essential again as to how the system is going to reform because
you have to have the kind of knowledge and background and confidence of the
people in terms of making some changes.
Not to take more time, I want to put those
things on the record, then we want to see from five angles now even though the
basic plan‑‑plus we want to see what is going to happen in the
acute care institutions in
I think those are the five areas we would
like to see some actual planning and when we see the actual planning, I think
then we can question the numbers because numbers have not changed. I do not anticipate the numbers to be changed
in the books right now because when we change the system, we have to see how
those things are going to be implemented.
So I will ask the minister now:
Can the minister give us the overview of where the policy directions are
moving? Then we can move into specific
questions.
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I say at the outset
that I have appreciated the support that I think the concept of reform of the
mental health system has enjoyed in the Legislature. I think it has been one of the few
opportunities where, on most occasions, we have worked towards a common goal.
My honourable friend has been quite
consistent in supporting the process and supporting it with patience, knowing
that you do not achieve instant results.
I think that kind of support is the ingredient that should make the
reform and the change, that all of the observers and participants in the system
have observed for a number of years, happen.
That co‑operative approach will ensure that it will happen.
Basically, let me indicate to my
honourable friend, again‑‑I will do a thumbnail sketch of where we
are at in terms of the process.
Subsequent to the initial discussion paper in 1988, the Regional Mental
Health Councils in the province have been working diligently. The provincial advisory council has been
working providing the provincial overview with regional representation for a
lesser period of time, but during an important period of time in that they
helped us make changes.
We had the rough draft or conceptually the
Phase II discussion paper crafted, and the provincial advisory council, through
its diverse membership, put a significant amount of final touch to that
discussion paper which laid out the four to five‑year plan of action that
we hope we can undertake.
The concept is still the same in that we
intend to move the budget with the patient from institution to community. We have established a commitment to building
support services in the community in advance of the movement of the patient. We have a significant amount of work going on
throughout the province to achieve that move.
That is why my honourable friend observes
that basically, for instance, at the Brandon Mental Health Centre, Selkirk
Mental Health Centre, the budgets remain increasing rather than
decreasing. But the opportunity is
clearly understood by all, that as individuals could be removed from Brandon
Mental Health Centre and Selkirk Mental Health Centre and our other
institutions, that the budget will follow service provision in the community
and that this budget, if I can use direct terminology, is a very flexible
budget.
(Mrs. Shirley Render, Acting Deputy
Chairperson, in the Chair)
In other words, if, pending a receipt of
our action plan‑‑I will give my honourable friend an update. The three western
What is happening‑‑there are a
number of initiatives ongoing at the regional mental health council level,
supported by staff resource seconded to assist those mental health councils‑‑is
an identification of current resource available in terms of housing, for
instance, or accommodation, in those three regions of the province, so that we
might be able to, where there is an appropriate existing residential
alternative, we may be able to achieve some patient support in those
communities quicker than what most of us had envisioned.
Predicating the whole initiative, we did
work very closely with Brandon Mental Health Centre to establish the care needs
of the individuals who are in the Brandon Mental Health Centre so that we have
a better sense there in terms of our long‑term residents of what their
needs are, and where they may be appropriately met in the community and under
what circumstances.
That dynamic of understanding who the
people are, working with the original Mental Health Councils and our staff as
identifying the appropriate relocation that can take place. I think the greatest strength of this process
now, if I can maybe be so blunt to try to simplify it is that I think it is
fair to say that six years ago or whatever, whenever the time was when I was
proposing as an opposition critic that there should be some pilot projects on
moving the system from institution to community, that I think it is fair to say
that there were two solitudes in terms of the mental health community.
* (1510)
There was the strong institutional
solitude, and there was the very strong community solitude. Without oversimplification, the two did not
have a great deal in common. The
institutional side, I think it is fair to say, viewed the community side as
being people who believed they could get away or provide services without any
institutions. The same generalization by
community supporters, community‑based care advocates would say that the
institutional side was perceived as being inflexible in that they did not
believe there was a role in the community.
I think over the four years that we have
had discussions there has been a considerable melding of those two opinions and
an agreement that there are necessary elements of both institution and
community based care.
Having come to that understanding and
agreement, the broad framework of moving from institution to community where
appropriate is now achievable. I think
really that probably is the hallmark of the process in Manitoba‑‑that
understanding of what the system can do.
That understanding has been facilitated by a lot of work by Reg Toews,
my ADM, and his staff in the Mental Health Division, and my deputy minister and
others in the ministry who have really worked a lot of hours in bringing the
process to fruition.
It also represents, I think, a reality, a
growing reality that the current system is simply inappropriate. It is potentially too expensive today, and
certainly it is unaffordable into the future.
The cost of maintaining institutional service provision is simply beyond
the affordability and, when you balance that off that it is not the most
appropriate care in many cases, the system has to change.
The process is there, understood by I
think many players and understood to a degree that was never possible before,
because on our advisory councils and on our Regional Mental Health Councils we
have involved family and consumers so that their input is part of the process
of change.
I think they have made a significant
contribution. I have to admit that at
the provincial advisory committee meeting about two months ago, or two and a
half months ago, I attended it on a Saturday morning, and I do not think anyone
would disagree with my statement that the most powerful commitments to change
and statements about the change process were made by the consumer
representatives and consumer group representatives on our provincial advisory
council. They have that incredible skill
of bringing the issue right down to the fundamental issue of meeting the needs
of people requiring service. I mean that
is the goal over and above all.
We are moving with and working with
Selkirk Mental Health Centre in terms of understanding the dynamics of patient
care there and where alternatives can be appropriately brought in. Similarly,
we are working with a similar understanding in the
I see the process moving rather
rapidly. I think if there is one
reaction that came out of the tabling in January of the Phase II discussion
paper, it was a fear‑‑I think it is fair to say‑‑by
some of the Regional Mental Health Councils that by not being specifically
mentioned, they were being left out and put on the back burner in terms of the
opportunity to make changes and to move the system towards the community.
I guess when you have that kind of concern
that they are going to be left out of the process, you would know the process
has a life of its own and is going to achieve results independent of the
obvious desire we have and the obvious drive we have as a ministry and as a
government behind achieving that.
I say to my honourable friend that these
Estimates, I think in presentation next year, will reflect changes in our
institutional budgets, showing the movement of that to community when we print
these Estimates next year. That is the
kind of dynamic development of the estimate process that we have stated in this
program. These are not the end product
of a program delivery, but they are the budget that we have to work with in
terms of the reallocation of budget.
Maybe I will stop now. My honourable friend might have some
questions of specifics.
Mr. Cheema: Madam Acting Deputy Chairperson, I will have
lots of specific questions, but I just want to add a few more comments.
I think it is very essential that such
major changes are going to be made and at a very, very high political risk in a
very critical instability in terms of the public mood. I think that, when we started the process in
'88 and '90, it was unheard, but now I think that was the first step towards
making health care nonpolitical.
I think the second step is coming with a
general trend that is changing and people are seeing health care as a
nonpolitical entity. I think the
department must take pride in that. I think
it is very essential. It was very risky
for everyone who works in the department.
They are risking their jobs, and many allegations and counterallegations
and very, very risky when you want to just hang on to your own jobs.
I think the process was very
essential. It was important, and two
years' time was required for maturing the process; now we need two to four
years minimum time to transform the process.
So I just wanted to add those comments that, when we started, it was
thought to be a very naive approach from a politician's point of view, that you
cannot trust a political process to make changes, but I think that has proven
completely wrong. That is very good for
the taxpayers.
The next question comes of which people
were asking then and they still would have a question. The minister was asked even a question on CKY
radio of why we would trust Mr. Orchard when 21 years ago, started from 1971,
started from the Clarkson report, various ministers came and went without even
having the courage of their conviction to change the system. Some of them were in power for a long time,
but they did not have the courage, they did not have the knowledge, they did
not make an effort, and the government did not have the courage to take a major
step. So I think that should answer to a
lot of people's criticism, that there are some things happening.
It is so strange that things when
happening in such a major fashion do not show the results tomorrow. It is going to show the results in five to 10
years, probably a longer time, and by that time most of the individuals who are
working in the department probably will be gone. The minister probably will be resting
somewhere with his so‑called big pension plans and so‑called big
salary. He will be enjoying somewhere,
but I think it is very essential to make those comments and show that things
can change and it will change.
I will ask the question now in terms of‑‑I
want to first start with Winnipeg Region.
I want to go with the community hospitals, and my first question is
naturally about the
* (1520)
(Mr. Deputy Chairperson in the Chair)
Now there is a group out at the
The professionals who have worked very
hard to serve those communities, where are they going to go? How are they going to serve? How are we going to restructure the whole
thing in terms of the
If you have a plan in terms of five
people, 10, 15 or any given number to have the reorganization done in a
systematic way. It is just a matter of,
say, five minutes from
I think it can be done, so I just wanted
to see whether the minister has any plans right now or are they going to wait
until they release the whole package, or is there something I am thinking too
advanced in this area, or am I out of touch with the plan. I just want to know what is actually
happening in terms of the
Mr. Orchard: I am receiving Thursday of this week their
recommendation to government in how to proceed with the acute bed issue at
In that regard, the deputy minister and
myself, but particularly the deputy minister, have been working recently with
the Wolseley Residents Association. They
have, I think it is fair to say, a very significant interest in the issue, and
we have attempted to provide as full an understanding as we can to the Wolseley
resident group as to what directions we envision the change taking, so they can
have some comfort around the commitment we have made of making sure that the
services of the hospital are adequately replaced in the community.
That may well be our first significant
test case of moving institution to the community. As I say, I am receiving the report Thursday
at a meeting of the Urban Hospital Council with a full opportunity for media,
because the media‑‑it is a press conference forum. We decided to take away this mystique of
discussions and interim papers and leaked reports and that sort of
environment. We decided some months ago
that the process of discussion of issues that the Urban Hospital Council was
undertaking would be opened up. We would
lay a bunch of the issues on the table, so that there was no opportunity for
sensationalism. I am trying to seek the
right language, but really comment with incomplete information, I guess, is
what we are trying to avoid.
So, on Thursday when the Urban Hospital
Council presents me with a couple of recommendations, I will be there receiving
them so that the media can ask comment about the council and myself in terms of
the process that government is going to take in accepting the recommendations
and then the opportunity for questions of the council to see what underpinned
their recommendation to government.
Mr. Cheema: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, can the minister tell
us if the announcement is going to be also made inside the Legislative Assembly
to table the report?
Mr. Orchard: No, I think the meeting of the Urban Hospital
Council is set already for the board room of the MHO offices. I think I am going over there Thursday
morning to have the reports presented.
Mr. Cheema: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, will there be
opportunity for the minister to have a statement later on inside the House or
for us to have copies of the report so that we can also have some input or make
informed choice or judgment or whatever you want to call it?
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, yes, I receive the
report very publicly. My honourable
friend will as well. I think that is the
action plan. I mean, I am over there at
a press conference receiving them, so there is no reason why you would not
receive them as well.
At this stage of the game, I will not be
announcing immediately what the process of implementation will be of the
recommendations, but certainly we are not going to tarry on sharing an action
plan publicly, because I have said that as quickly as possible we will react to
recommendations made by the Urban Hospital Council, either rejecting them as
inappropriate for implementation by government right now or accepting the
recommendation and then proceeding to move through a development of an
implementation agenda.
Mr. Cheema: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, can the minister tell
us then‑‑we will wait for it on Thursday‑‑if there is
any plan for the other community hospitals, for example,
Mr. Orchard: The
The two teaching hospitals were part of
the original task force; that is my understanding. Now we are going to be looking at all of the
hospitals and the revamped task force has representation of the Winnipeg
Regional Mental Health Council as well so that we have a more complete
interface now to deal with the acute psychiatric bed capacity from a Winnipeg
perspective.
That working group or that task force, it
is expected that they may well have some recommendations by the end of the year
or some direction by the end of the year that they can bring to government.
* (1530)
Mr. Cheema: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, that was my next
question, the time frame. Can the
minister tell us now what is the target in terms of bed numbers in the city of
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I will give my
honourable friend two figures. When you
talk provincial averages in terms of number of acute psychiatric beds, we are
about at the Canadian average. Mr. Toews
informs me that, when you consider
Mr. Deputy Chairperson, we deliberately
did not establish targets for closures, and targets for remaining or continuing
capacity on the acute care side. We did
that very deliberately. I do not want to provoke an argument with members of
the previous administration, but I think that was a mistake that was made in
terms of initiatives such as Welcome Home where certain targets were set. The target became the goal rather than the
care to the individual. We have avoided
that. We think that was a lesson that
should be learned and not repeated.
Even in the Phase II discussion paper, we
did not set targets for a reduction in bed numbers across the system. That was deliberate. I will say, however, that led to some
observation that our program did not have any teeth, that we were not really
serious about changing the system. We
did not spell out where government was going, and how many beds we thought
could be closed. We think the process
that we have got in place where the Urban Hospital Council has looked initially
at all hospitals and made a recommendation or will be presenting a
recommendation.
The next step in
Mr. Cheema: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, if somebody does not
know the process they will be astonished to know that the Tory government, the
so‑called right‑wing government, has such an attitude which is a
very responsive attitude in this area, because you would never set a target for
a system you do not know yet, how it is going to evolve. I think this is the way to go. Just see how
it is going to work within one hospital and whether the experience is going to
go within community care and then expand to the other areas and see.
That is why when individuals say, well,
let us have a 50‑50 ratio of mental health, we do not know how it is
going to come. Any person who picks up the number is just probably dreaming that
they do not know exactly what is going to happen. I think that is the way to do it. Just have one hospital like the Misericordia
or any other hospital, see how it will work, how the system is going to change.
That is why, if it is the end of the year
by the other hospitals, then total two to four years, that is the minimum time
frame it is going to require to change a system. I think that is why I wanted to reinforce
that. That is a very, very realistic
number in terms of time, in terms of the whole process. Certainly, the issue of
the other community hospitals, I think when the regional councils are involved,
they have to look at the location, the type of population, the type of the care
they are providing at present and then what kind of rules those hospitals will
play in terms of serving their own needs, and in terms of rather the so‑called
capacity that is required or there has to be some different mechanism put in
place.
When are you going to take some of the
burden away, in terms of, from those hospitals?
As you said, in community care some of these patients will not require
hospitalization. That is why I think it
will become easier and more efficient and more effective and more can be sold
to the public. This is what is happening
and then there is less pressure to justify the so‑called restructuring or
the closing or whatever name you want to give, given bad circumstances, not of
given but of a given hospital to restructure those hospitals.
I think it is a very, very positive
approach in terms of the process.
Nothing can be done more than that because this is the way to do
it. You can have the people who are
going to provide this service. You have
the individual organizations who are going to be giving advice. You have the department who is having a look
at you, you have the statistics, you have the health policy centre and you have
the will to do it. So this time frame is
the only thing and whether that time frame can be changed, if there is a major
change in the government, a major change in the policy of a given
administration. I do not anticipate
something like this happening.
That is why I think the next
administration is going to enjoy the fruits of this process of what is
happening today. That is why we do not
see much noise coming out from other groups, but then at the same time we
wanted to make sure the community resources are put into place before anything
is done. That has been the fear and that
was a failure in the past.
Otherwise, you will end up with many patients
on the street, and ultimately you will end up‑‑when I say "on
the street," they are not getting the service that they were getting
before. To provide them the meaningful
productivity of life, as the minister has said, the Department of Housing has
to get involved, the Department of Family Services has to get involved and
above all you have to have the second part of your Mental Health Act. That probably will fit if the consultation is
taking place in six months or nine months.
I think that is probably a reasonable time
to develop a Manitoba health act to make sure those policies are implemented
into real life, that there could be a problem if we do not have the right law
in Manitoba to uphold the principles and goals and objectives of the mental
health care system.
I wanted to ask the minister: What is the ultimate role going to be for the
two teaching hospitals in terms of the St. Boniface Hospital and the Health
Sciences Centre in this area of mental health reform?
Mr. Orchard: I am going to give an indefinite answer. I am going to give you as much as I can, but
I am very, very attentive to potential recommendations that will come in from
the Winnipeg Regional Council. There is
an advisory body looking at the
* (1540)
We made a commitment at Health Sciences
Centre to the Faculty of Psychiatry basically in terms of the redevelopment of
the psych health building. I realize
that has caused some consternation within the mental health community at large
in terms of appearing to be at odds with where we were heading in terms of
provision of psychiatric care in the community.
But, Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I do not think it will be viewed as out of
sync or at odds two or three years from now, because, first of all, we
recognize that the faculty role of psychiatry must be maintained in
Secondly, some of the capacity at the
psych health building is in terms of intermediate forensic care. As my honourable friend knows from recent
events in the
Other provinces have had to undertake the
same kind of action because of the rather quick changes that occurred to
federal statute. So that role is there
and will continue to be there because of the presence of the psych health
building. There is an adolescent
component that has been identified as a need which will be accommodated at the
new psych health building, and then a replacement of really quite old bed
capacity for general admission for psychiatric health.
Now, clearly, that will become the most
modern facility in
In terms of the roles at the other
hospitals, including St. Boniface, I have to tell my honourable friend that I
do not have as clear a future role that I can see being there. That is not from lack of care or concern, it
is simply because I can see a changing role for all of those facilities under a
reformed system. I am really quite
anxiously looking forward to the work of the task force as well as the Winnipeg
Regional Mental Health Council and their recommendations and then, of course,
the overview position that the provincial advisory council can put on any
proposed changes of the bed structure within
Mr. Cheema: I do have other questions, but I have one of
my good friends visiting, a former member from Crescentwood, so I want to go
and talk to him and I will let the member for
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, might I ask, do you
think that we will go beyond the mental health line today?
Mr. Deputy Chairperson: No.
Mr. Orchard: Okay, fair enough. Thank you.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: If I could first get a clarification on the
process involving the paper that the minister released in 1992. It was
indicated at that time that there would be a consultation process based on that
plan. Could the minister give us some
information about what kind of consultation process, who is being consulted,
where it is, what the time line is?
Mr. Orchard: The consultation process is ongoing in terms of
the Regional Mental Health Councils, as I indicated in answer to my honourable
friend earlier on, I think, around the Phase II paper. For instance, Central, Westman and
Other Regional Mental Health Councils are
doing the same in their respective regions.
I think it is fair to say that the most advanced group would be Central,
Westman,
I guess I will receive correspondence and
feedback in my office directly from either individuals or organizations who
have reviewed the document and have offered their comments around the process,
and those are then forwarded on to the Mental Health Division for their
assessment and their determination of appropriate changes, if any were
recommended, et cetera. The provincial
advisory council is open to the summarization of those written responses to the
discussion paper.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: What is the role of the advisory committee in
all of this?
Mr. Orchard: The provincial advisory committee? As a provincial advisory committee with
representation from all of the regions to provide that system‑wide
approach, appreciate each Regional Mental Health Council will have potentially
different objectives. The provincial
advisory council has the opportunity to provide a provincial perspective to the
reform so that ideally a proposal in community A would not compromise community
B. It might be an excellent proposal as
viewed by the Regional Mental Health Council from community A but may
compromise goals of the Regional Mental Health Council in which community B is
located, as an example. So that is why
you need the system overview vetting process.
As well, the provincial advisory council
has representation from the professional disciplines as well that must be
involved and must be part of the reform process. So we have got two very valuable components
embodied in the Provincial Mental Health Council: first of all, your regional representation;
and then your professional representation as well as the very, very key
component of family and consumer representation, which, I think, is probably as‑‑I
may be challenged, but I think it is as complete an opportunity as has ever
existed to bring all of the players together around the process of reforming
and changing our mental health service delivery system.
I think it is fair to say consumers and
family members have never had that kind of opportunity in the past and
certainly they have it today. As I
mentioned to the member for The Maples (Mr. Cheema) at the provincial council
meeting on a Saturday some couple of months ago, probably the most powerful
presentations were made by the consumer and consumer‑support
representatives on the provincial advisory council. They have been playing a key and important
role.
* (1550)
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Will we ever see a provincial plan?
Mr. Orchard: Well, maybe my honourable friend might want to
give me some sense of what she envisions as a provincial plan. What would you consider a provincial plan
that you would like to see?
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: I would like to see something resembling what
the minister has been promising for four years, as I understand it, some
overview in terms of mental health reform for the
Mr. Orchard: Again, I do not want to provoke unnecessary
disputes in Estimates today, but if my honourable friend is asking me to‑‑and
I will pick a figure, let us say that there are 1,500 acute care beds in mental
health service in Manitoba today, and if my honourable friend wants to see a
plan, a la NDP in the past, that will be reduced by 750 beds in five years, she
will not see that kind of plan. Because,
as I pointed out in answer to my honourable friend the member for The Maples
(Mr. Cheema), that was the plan that the NDP brought down in terms of the
Welcome Home project, and then the target for decanting individuals from the
institution, the number, became the program, the policy and the driving force,
not the services to the individuals. So
we have not approached this with a plan a la NDP which has fixed and finite
numbers and targets of achievement at the end of year one, year two, year
three.
What we have indicated is an endorsement
of a process, a process underpinned by a policy which moves patient and budget
away from institution into community with bridge funding to establish the
support of the necessary support of services for community service provision,
and then a movement of the individual from the institution. That does not have a target of closed beds
per year and will not have. But surely
my honourable friend must recognize that represents a pretty significant plan
with a commitment of government, with a commitment of professional groups, with
a commitment of resources to achieve that and a goal of reallocation of the
existing budget to more appropriate locations of service delivery in the
community. Surely that cannot be rejected by my honourable friend as not being
a plan for future mental health service provision.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, our questions come out
of four years of that kind of rhetoric from the minister and this government
around mental health care reform. The
questions I am asking flow directly from the process that the minister has put
in place, and the questions are quite logical extensions of the rhetoric and
commitment that he has made. We are not
alone in the expression of these concerns.
They are fairly widespread now in the community.
I think the minister indicated for a
number of years that out of all of these glossy consultations, entitled
partnerships in mental health, would come a paper of some detail and overall
vision. After a long period of time
waiting for that we were told that a provincial advisory committee was struck
to indeed develop a consensus and come forward with that overall strategic
document. Shortly after that a document
was released at a press conference which turned out to be less than specific,
less than visionary, less than comprehensive, certainly less than all of the
rhetoric that the minister had been using around this whole area. So now we are wondering where that overall
strategic document is so that we can then begin to assess how the dollars are
flowing, where they will flow, what it means.
Those concerns are not NDP rhetoric. They come directly out of the community and,
particularly, the Canadian Mental Health Association who wrote to the minister
about a month after the January 1992 document was released indicating the same
kind of sentiments we have been raising over the last several years. I quote from that letter: The government's recent discussion paper is
general and disappointing. It does not
contain the detail required to assess where government is going. It is silent on government's plans for
development of the new psych health centre.
It does not provide any detail on the services that are proposed to
replace the beds that are to be closed at the Misericordia.
The letter goes on, Mr. Deputy
Chairperson: Those are concerns we have
been expressing for a long period of time.
We still have those questions, and we are wondering when we might see
the kind of detailed document for which we could offer comment and constructive
criticism.
Is the minister saying that what we can
expect to see is a series of regional plans, and, if so, could he give us a
time frame for when those plans might be released for public scrutiny and
constructive input?
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Deputy Chairperson, I really sort of
accept my honourable friend's jaundiced view of this process. I think, if I can be so blunt, that my
honourable friend was part of a government, if you want to talk process, that
since 1971 had the opportunity to undertake this process and did not. I do not know why. In 1986 my honourable friend was in cabinet
when as opposition critic I was suggesting just exactly these kinds of moves
towards the community as indicated by the Canadian Mental Health Association,
at the time, in discussions I had with them. At that time they shared very
directly their frustration with the current government in doing nothing to
change the health care system.
In terms of 1986, I thought having the
commitment of the opposition that the government of the day might have been in
process of developing some pretty sophisticated action plans for changing the
mental health system, and to my dismay none existed. I mean, you had the opposition urging you to
do something, and you did not.
* (1600)
I have gone through the process and I could
take my time to do it again this afternoon, but I do not think it would help
allay my honourable friend's alleged concerns, because the major concern my
honourable friend has is one of narrowed partisan approach to this issue. My honourable friend is concerned that a
Progressive Conservative government might actually be able to achieve on the
social program delivery side, such as mental health reform, something that a
New Democratic Party government anywhere cannot achieve, which flies against
the sort of perception New Democrats like to create, inappropriately I might
say, that they are the only people that can do things on the social side of
service provision.
I accept the criticism of the Canadian
Mental Health Association in that they indicate that the second discussion
paper is not focused enough. What they
want is a target of, presumably, number of beds to be closed. I believe that would be an inappropriate
target to give out because, as with the Welcome Home Program that my honourable
friend was directly involved with as a cabinet minister, surely she would
recognize and acknowledge that the target became the program at the expense of
the services to the individual.
I am not going to make that mistake. I mean, goodness gracious, if there is one
thing that government ought to do it is to learn by the mistakes of either
previous government action of your own experience in government or other
governments in office. So I accept the
criticism. I do not accept the concern
from the Canadian Mental Health Association that nothing is going to happen.
There is going to be a significant amount
of change because many people across the whole spectrum of service provision
and right to the consumer and their families are involved with planning this
process of change. That means it has a
purpose and a life beyond government.
As my honourable friend the member for
Maples (Mr. Cheema) said, the process is in place and even a change in
government cannot change the direction that the community is going to take
mental health reform. It is much larger
in terms of its involvement than it ever has been before in the history of the
province, more professional groups, more regional sensitization and involvement
in the planning and change process.
Now, specifically to answer my honourable
friend, I will repeat the answer that I gave to the member for The Maples. The Westman region involving Central, Westman
and Parkland region are actively working an action plan to a draft paper or a
presentation paper which hopefully will be before the provincial advisory
council as soon as June this year.
Depending on what sort of consultation, discussion process is required
at the provincial advisory council and certainly at government level, we may
well be seeing implementation of action plan as early as December this year or
January next year.
At the same time, I indicated to the
member for The Maples (Mr. Cheema) that I will be receiving a report from the
Urban Hospital Council Thursday of this week around the issue of acute
psychiatric beds at
(Mr.
Jack Reimer, Acting Deputy Chairperson, in the Chair)
At the same time, Interlake, Norman
regions are creating and developing action plans and analyzing the future role
of the Selkirk Mental Health Centre in serving individuals in their region, in
Eastman and in northern Manitoba, and will be presenting to the provincial
advisory council appropriate plans of action based on their consultation around
the discussion paper.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Let me ask a few specific questions. That will be more fruitful than the
general. On what basis was the 20‑acute‑care‑bed
target made?
Mr. Orchard: When I receive the Urban Hospital Council
report on Thursday, I will be better prepared to answer that question.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Is the minister saying that target of 20
acute care beds came from the Urban Hospital Council?
Mr. Orchard: I am saying to my honourable friend that on
Thursday of this week I am receiving a report on the Misericordia psychiatric
beds from the Urban Hospital Council. I
believe there are 20 beds involved. I
cannot give my honourable friend the details of the report. I can share it with her on Thursday.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I am asking
about where the department came up with the figure 20 acute care beds. This is separate from the Urban Hospital
Council; it is part of the minister's press release; it has been mentioned
before, and it comes out of the department.
I am just wondering on what basis, in what framework, this 20‑acute‑bed
target came from.
Mr. Orchard: The Urban Hospital Council wanted to receive
a report from the task force working group on the feasibility of reallocating
services from 20 acute care beds. System‑wide
analysis identified Misericordia as the hospital for which that adjustment
could be considered and proceeded there to develop recommedations which I will
receive on Thursday.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Is the minister saying that this figure of 20
beds came out of Urban Hospital Council officials and has no origins in his own
department?
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, we are very
supportive within the ministry of that target, and it is not taking a half a
wing away‑‑that would be inappropriate to leave half a
facility. Naturally, the 20 beds is
around the capacity of a ward. It is
part and parcel.
I sense from my honourable friend's
question that now she is questioning whether we should close the 20 beds or
consider closing the 20 beds when just 10 minutes ago she read criticism that
her party shares with a community group that there are no specifics. How in the world can you go from A to Z in
five minutes and remain consistent in terms of your commitment to reforming the
mental health system?
The Urban Hospital Council, knowing the
agenda that government had of reforming the mental health system to move away
from institution to community, charged a working group to identify a process by
which beds could be closed, services replaced and individuals cared for in the
community. They undertook that task as
part of what they believe was the provincial government's goal, what they believe
was supported by opposition members even of moving away from institutions to
community‑based care. They have
made that investigation, and I will receive the report with their
recommendations on Thursday around the issue of changing where we deliver
mental health services away from the institution to the community.
I do not quite catch what my honourable
friend is trying to achieve in this questioning. Are we seeing a change in philosophy that the
NDP may this afternoon tell us, do not accept the report, do not even consider
closing acute care beds? Is that where I
sense the NDP are going to come from in the next half hour or so?
* (1610)
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the minister
can chortle and giggle and go through all kinds of antics as he pleases. This is not an uncommon response on the part
of the minister when he is clearly uncomfortable with the question and when he
is clearly looking for ways to detract from the intent of any question.
Is it not interesting that someone can ask
a question as basic as where did a figure come from, and the minister gets his
jollies out of leaving impressions that such an objective question looking for
basic information takes someone off in a certain direction and contradicts in
another direction and all of these silly little conclusions that the minister
can come to. Well, I am getting a little tired of this when I am asking for
basic information, something I know we are not used to getting in this
committee, but I am not about to give up trying.
I am going to ask again where the figure
20 came from, because that figure came up long before we heard about the
psychiatric bed closing at the Misericordia or the closure of the 22‑psych‑bed
unit at the Misericordia. That number 20
was floating around long before, then it appeared in the minister's documents,
it has been a figure generated from his department, and I would like to know on
what basis this figure 20 comes from. Is
there a plan from which the figure 20 is drawn or has the figure 20 been pulled
out of thin air and the minister is asking for the Urban Hospital Council to
develop a plan around this number? I do
not know. It is a simple,
straightforward question and if the minister does not feel comfortable
answering it, perhaps he should just say so instead of going through all these
little antics and silly, time‑consuming efforts at this committee.
Mr. Orchard: Well, Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, the
Urban Hospital Council charged the working group with identifying a process by
which‑‑I believe the target was even 22 beds because it sort of fit
with ward size throughout the hospital, to see whether there was an appropriate
plan of action that can be undertaken to close 20, 22 beds, a wing of
psychiatric care in an urban hospital, with the process of moving those
services to the community.
I make no bones about it. That fit with the agenda that government had
set in terms of reforming the mental health system as identified as early as
1988 in the first discussion paper where we said the institutional‑based
care is out of balance with community care and we must move from institution to
community. The process is a starting point in the urban hospital environment,
picking a ward so that you have some sense around the rationalization and the
change. You do not close half a ward,
you do not close two beds in one hospital, two beds in another hospital, five
beds in hospital No. 3, and seven beds in hospital No. 4. You take an economical unit and consider how
you would replace those services with community‑based services,
completely in tune with the direction and the agenda that government laid out
and has consistently laid out.
I believe it is even in tune with outside
organizations that my honourable friend from time to time quotes. I think they agree with the process of moving
from institution to community with supports in the community. The Urban Hospital Council created the bed
number as a workable number to consider as a target for reduction instead of
pulling, as I say, half a ward here or half a ward there, a unit, because these
are CEOs that are around the table. They
understand the economics of staffing and maintenance of wards versus individual
beds. The task force was charged with
that goal and proceeded to deliver on it.
I do not know, despite the fact that my
honourable friend seems to think I am offended at her questions, I am puzzled
at them because I cannot understand where my honourable friend is coming
from. I used to think that my honourable
friend supported the move from institution to community with supports in the
community. That is what this whole
discussion has been about in terms of the Urban Hospital Council investigation
of the closure of one ward in a
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: I do not think it is probably worth getting
into reducing all of the Estimates for Mental Health Services to that level,
Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson. Suffice
it to say, I think the Urban Hospital Council and all of the groups that the
minister refers to and individuals involved in this field will find it
surprising to hear that they are responsible for this magical number of 20,
when there has been no plan and no study done to put this all in a context.
Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, that number
could be 10 beds; it could be 50 beds; it could be 200 beds. I do not know; the minister clearly does not
know, and we are not getting any further then we were last year. I asked last year in Estimates: have there
been any studies done to determine the optimum number of psychiatric beds for a
community for
I was hoping that in the space of one year
maybe some of that work had been done, and we would have a framework to
determine what is the optimum number of beds that a community should have
access to and go from there. So let me
ask a question about beds pertaining to the new psych services building at the
Health Sciences Centre: Could the minister
tell us what number of beds will be developed in that new building?
Mr. Orchard: I now find out where my honourable friend is
coming from in terms of the 20, 22 beds.
I did not realize my honourable friend wanted to know what the optimal
number of psychiatric beds would be in the
I guess, I have to ask my honourable
friend and seek her advice because I just checked with staff, and I do not
think any jurisdiction or there is any standard of an optimal number that they
are aware of. Now, if my honourable friend
knows of an optimal number that she is aware of from her extensive experience
in research in the mental health system, she might want to share that with
committee. We do not have the knowledge
of such an optimal number and that is why I said, from square one we did not
set out with some targeted numbers in terms of the reform. To the best of our professional knowledge,
there is not an optimal number of beds that is a guiding factor that might help
us to establish that.
* (1620)
If I could offer my honourable friend some
comfort, five years from now
In terms of the psych health centre, the
total capacity of the psych health centre would be 118 beds with‑‑that
is with the constructed number. Right
now, it appears as if we will be commissioning or opening some 89 of those this
fall for utilization for various purposes and have the balance of the capacity there
as a resource that can be used within the emerging and reforming mental health
system.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Could the minister indicate what operating
budget is being planned for the psych services building?
Mr. Orchard: We will provide, I think, that information as
part of the Hospital line later on in the Health Services Insurance Fund.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Could the minister give us a breakdown of the
118 in terms of types of beds?
Mr. Orchard: Yes, I can.
I think I have already given most of that information earlier this
afternoon, but I will be glad to do it again.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Oh, sorry.
That is okay.
Mr. Orchard: [interjection]
Well, that does not add up, so we are not going to give you that.
Twenty in terms of intermediate forensic
service capability, 18 projected for child and adolescent, and 80 general
admission, I guess, would be the‑‑or general adult.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Could the minister indicate where the
emphasis will be with respect to the 89 opening this fall?
Mr. Orchard: Right now, it looks like we will be
implementing 10 child and adolescent, 65 adult, and 14 forensic.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Is it at this line or in the Hospital line
that the minister can give us some information on the actual breakdown of the
construction of the psych services building?
Mr. Orchard: Probably that would be better with Mr. Cook
here. We could make note of that and provide that information when we hit
Hospital line.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Perhaps I will ask the questions now so that the
minister can ensure that he could try to find this information. I am wondering if he could give us how much
was budgeted for the psych services building, whether it was tendered. How was it tendered? On a stage basis? If so, for each stage, how much was
allocated, and then how much the tender came in for?
Mr. Orchard: We should be able to provide that detail.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Just a couple of more questions and I will
pass it back to the member for The Maples.
I have heard some concerns with respect to
the current situation with the Thompson regional council. Could the minister tell us what happened to
Grace Goodmeyer?
Mr. Orchard: The individual resigned from the council and has
been replaced by Glen Schmidt.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: What are the current plans with respect to that
particular regional council?
Mr. Orchard: To continue operating as a regional council.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Sorry, I was not more specific. Could the minister indicate what the
timetable is for that regional council with respect to some plans in terms of
mental health reform?
Mr. Orchard: Norman and Thompson councils are working
together with the ministry in terms of developing their plans for the regions.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: With respect to, we have talked about in the
past, the question of psych beds being allocated to regions in facilities that
now do not have such beds, I am wondering if the minister can give us a
breakdown of plans in terms of numbers of beds for each of those facilities
throughout the province; and secondly, if those beds are being reallocated from
the reduction in Winnipeg, potentially at the Misericordia Hospital, or from a
reduction at the Brandon Mental Health Centre?
Mr. Orchard: I missed the last part of the question.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Is the allocation for those beds coming from
the reduction in
Mr. Orchard: I think, from neither.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Perhaps I will back up. Could the minister give us the information to
the first part of that question and then indicate from what source these beds
are coming from, since it is the minister who has been talking about moving
beds from the institutional to the community‑based side?
Mr. Orchard: I think in this case my honourable friend
would appreciate that it is not moving beds from the institution to the
community. It is moving institutional
beds to another institution that she is asking about.
That is very much part of the discussion
that we are having with the councils in terms of‑‑my honourable
friend would appreciate that at one point in time Thompson had psychiatric
beds, and they are no longer commissioned as such, I guess is the appropriate
word, and consideration is being given to reinstatement of psychiatric bed
capacity at Thompson General Hospital as well as at Flin Flon and The Pas.
I would not want to have my honourable
friend left with the impression that that would be what we would consider a
community‑based service. I mean,
that is an institutional bed just in another location closer to home. Those plans are currently in full discussion
with the regional councils in Thompson and Norman.
* (1630)
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: The minister is quite right, that such a
transfer would not be from institution to community‑based service. Pardon me if I was not totally clear about
what I was attempting to say in addressing this issue of beds in large
institutions versus smaller communities closer to communities. I am just trying to get a sense, since the
minister has been talking about reallocation of resources from within the total
mental health field, where the resources are coming from to meet the needs of
some of those communities that do not have psych beds.
Will we at some point get a total plan for
comment that addresses the province as a whole?
Or will it be only on the basis of a region‑by‑region
strategic plan without the benefit of some way to address and have input on a
provincial‑wide basis?
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I think I
indicated, and I will use the example of Westman as a region, Central Mental
Health Council, Westman Mental Health Council, Parkland Mental Health Council
are developing an action plan around Brandon Mental Health Centre and the
service provision in that region of the province.
That action plan, or that plan of reform
will be presented to the provincial advisory council to get the, sort of,
provincial perspective on that regional initiative. As
So there will be both the regional input,
the regional creation of the initiative, the vetting through a provincial
advisory council which has a system‑wide overview, and then government
having the final say with, hopefully, being able to assure that the system fits
with the general goals and intentions of the reform processes enunciated in
January of this year.
Mr. Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, before I left
I was on the issue of the
I think I will not be doing my job if I do
not mention a few things about what the member for
So, I do not think‑‑there is
something missing or probably I am not catching up or something. It is especially wrong that you cannot have
not even one way or both‑‑you cannot have four or five ways about
the major reform.
It is not something where you are going to
move a chair from this place to the next part of the table, you are moving
very, very sophisticated care and patients who are very, very vulnerable, you
do not want to frighten them. You do not
want to do anything which will really put them in a risky situation. I mean, this is a group of patients who have
not got the kind of respect in the past.
I think that is what it is, giving respect back to the patient, and they
are not able to speak for themselves.
They do not have a political body.
Otherwise things would never have got to the point where they are today. So you have an organization, the Regional
Mental Health Council, who are working on their behalf and speaking on their
behalf and you want to make sure the process is successful.
As a personal point of view, I think you
want to make sure that it is successful.
So you have to have a clear‑cut definition, and that is why we
have been asking the minister that there has to be a definition to help at the
community care in
I mean, it is very easy to raise
issues. I mean, one can criticize, but
at the same time, do we have an alternate?
How are you going to provide the services? You cannot have $212 million‑‑and
the member for
You tell them right now, that this is a
debate forum. Forty hours of the
taxpayers money is being spent and the people are reading this, I can assure
you that. They are reading this, and
they want to know, and the people in the Regional Mental Health Council are
putting in a lot of time and effort and they would like to know from three
political parties how you are going to change the system. I have a disagreement here. I think in terms of taking advantage of the
situation‑‑that is what is happening, but I am sure the people will
judge that. Who am I, one member, to
question those things?
Certainly, I want to express my views
because it is so important that you put so much energy and time and effort and
taxpayers' money and the patient's dignity‑‑a lot of patients who
have got the services in the past, their families, their health care providers,
everybody is concerned. But we cannot
just shoot down the process without seeing at least the end product or a part
of the end product.
I will go to my question. Now that the ministry is going to make an
announcement this Thursday, can the minister tell us how they will provide us
with data about the admission, time period and severity of illness and the
number of patients that are part of the Misericordia Hospital and how those
patients are going to be deployed just, sort of, in the community? Will they be able to give us their community
component concept on Thursday so that the patient and we can know which way the
government is going to move?
Mr. Orchard: In anticipation of the report and the
recommendations that are going to come from it, I think that the type of care
required by patients admitted to Misericordia will have been really central in
terms of the recommendations around support services that will be envisioned as
necessary to achieve that change from institution to community as it applies to
the Misericordia experience. As I said
this afternoon, I cannot prejudge. I
have some sense of general direction in what they are going to recommend, but I
will simply say to my honourable friend that I think it is mid‑morning
that the press conference is, and I will assure my honourable friend that
before noon he and the critic for the New Democrats will have the report so
they can understand the recommendations that are being made to government and
take that opportunity even possibly as soon as Thursday afternoon to offer some
comment around the recommendations from their respective understandings of what
is possible to be done there.
So, can I simply leave the further details
that my honourable friend might want to ask?
Not that I want to delay the process of the consideration of the
Estimates, but I think they might be appropriately focused when each of us has
in our possession the Urban Hospital Council recommendations.
Mr. Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, that seems
acceptable to me, because we will still have a few hours to study that report,
but the information that we want to have is the total data as long as it does
not contravene any confidentiality of the patients. Other than that we have analysis available to
us to see the type of patient and also the community complement, what kind of
services are going to be put in place and the time frame. I think that will probably make our job easier
to at least have a better understanding of the whole thing.
* (1640)
My next question is in terms of the
I would like to ask the minister, in view
of the information we have from the task report and other sources of
information from the ministry of Health, can the minister tell us what is the
future of that building? Are they going
to develop a centre close to the Brandon General Hospital, where it will make
more sense, rather than continuing to spend money on the building which is 100
years old and also has a stigma attached to that place in the mental health
system, which is very, very essential to take that kind of stigma and negative approach
away. It was very clearly defined in
that 40‑ or 50‑page report that those were the serious problems,
and they gave the minister a good idea of how much money will be required over
a period of three or four years to upgrade versus to set up a new building, and
how many beds they are going to require.
Can the minister tell us what are the
recommendations they are going to accept out of that report? Specifically we want to know how the new
building which we would like to see adjoining
I think it will also provide an
opportunity for a capital program in the
I would like to know whether something is
going on in that regard or not, or will we see a statement in the capital
budget of this year for the
As I said earlier, so many things are
attached which are very, very negative and this does not make economical sense
in the long run. We had two or three
inquests when patients were walking out of their building. That was between '88 and '89. There was some
problem. Upgrading was required. I think that is the area where a lot of
people have concern.
The second question that is going to come
out of that question is: What is going
to happen to the future of health care professionals? But I will ask that later as a follow‑up
question.
Mr. Orchard: I think we enjoy two‑‑if I can put
it this way‑‑significant advantages in developing maybe a more
mature action plan in the Westman region, Central,
We did commission the Drysdale Report to
give us as current an estimate on what renovation costs would be, because that
sort of puts in context the investment that we make if we are going to maintain
the centre at its current physical capacity and location.
Now the Drysdale Report, along with the
general direction of mental health reform, triggered a number of processes, and
internally within the department we have probably got a more mature
understanding of the patient needs in Brandon Mental Health Centre.
My honourable friend is correct that a
number of those individuals can be quite appropriately served in a personal
care home setting, some with maybe a more intensive setting of personal care
home, but certainly not the formal mental health institution setting that they
are currently in. The age profile has
been established, and there is a significant number of the current resident
count that is 59 years or older.
My honourable friend mentioned several
potentials. An affiliation with the
I do not want to prejudge the plan that
the councils will be presenting this June to the provincial advisory council,
but I have every confidence that we will have the elements that my honourable
friend has alluded to in terms of Brandon General Hospital and accessing
existing facilities within the communities served in those regions as potential
immediate opportunities for service provision for some of those individuals
where the services can be delivered appropriately.
Then, of course, an identification of the
kind of community resource that would need to be developed over a two‑,
three‑year period of time.
I cannot prejudge whether the councils
will conclude in their June report‑‑I simply have no sense of this‑‑whether
there should be some ongoing role for the physical facilities of Brandon Mental
Health Centre or whether they would be recommending the function be
reallocated, for instance, to Brandon General Hospital in part, and to other
service‑delivery locations within Brandon and within some of the
surrounding communities. I think clearly
their discussions will no doubt make recommendations around at least the areas
that my honourable friend has suggested.
Mr. Cheema: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, I want to again
reinforce one of the issues, which is development of an acute centre close to
the
That is a given, and that is from the
Drysdale report. It is quite a detailed
one and certainly did a good job on getting all the data collected. I just want to reinforce that again. I do not know what the minister is going to
tell us in his capital budget. I am not
trying to have a sneak preview here, but I simply want to reinforce that this
is one area where everyone is screaming about the infrastructure and so many
things can help the local economy. That
is one consideration, especially when you have something that you need. That should be given due consideration.
The next question is a larger one, not
only because of
As long as those four areas are taken care
of, and the health care providers are explained about their total situation, it
will make the job easier. Second, it
will give them security, and third, we will have trained individuals who have
already participated in the process for 10 or 15 years. Some of them have them have been there for a
long time. Also, they know the families;
they know the patients; they know the old structure and also the new
policies. So I would like to know from
the minister if there are any specific directions or if special protocol is
going to be followed upon dealing with major changes.
* (1650)
Mr. Orchard: Mr. Acting Deputy Chairperson, when we
approached the whole reform system, the one thing that was pointed out by the
Brandon Mental Health Council, the Westman Mental Health Council, and we always
had it in the back of our minds, except we never had it articulated as decently
to us‑‑I did not articulate it as reasonably as members of the
Brandon Mental Health Council did at a meeting that my assistant deputy
minister and I attended in Brandon in January preceding the announcement of the
second phase discussion paper. We always
were sensitive about the employee and the change that the employee goes
through, and you can develop an environment of either being part of the change
or threatened by the change.
Advice that we got when we visited
As my honourable friend can well
appreciate, there was a lot of concern about what the future is with employees
of the Brandon Mental Health Centre, because it has been rumoured for 15 years
and they have always been sort of in limbo in terms of having a positive
direction.
(Mr. Bob Rose, Acting Deputy Chairperson,
in the Chair)
The case that was made to us, and as best
as I could do it in terms of the presentation in Brandon, I took their advice,
and that is that within the care providers at Brandon Mental Health Centre you
have probably got your best resource of knowledge in terms of understanding the
system and, from working within the institutional side, understanding its
inadequacies and having an understanding of what the change for the community can
mean.
It was pointed out to myself and to Mr.
Toews that we must make sure employees understand that we know they can make a
valuable contribution, and I stated that at the press conference in
We very much want to‑‑clearly,
there may well be dislocations and job loss, and we want to mitigate against
that to the best of our ability. Again,
we are going on some previous experience where that was not done carefully
enough. It caused a lot of
consternation, and we do not intend to make that mistake again.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: I have a few more specific questions.
Although this may not be the time or the place for questioning the minister, I
intend on continuing to do that. At some
risk in terms of being ridiculed, let me ask a few more questions along the
lines of my questions around beds and what makes sense in terms of number of
beds in institutions and communities, and so on. The minister in his Estimates book indicates
that there are some 5,000 to 6,000 clients in the community. I am wondering if the minister could tell us
where those individuals are, how serious are their illnesses, how long they
have been in the community, what success rate we have seen, and, on the basis
of that, if he has any sense, how many beds one needs to have available at any
given point in time.
Mr. Orchard: I think that is exactly the dynamic of change
that we are trying to determine and to see in terms of final capacity, if you
will, or end capacity or post‑reform process capacity. We think that we will have sufficient acute
bed capacity to meet those needs. I
cannot tell my honourable friend today what they might be and where they might
be. That is very much an issue that our
regional councils and the ministry in co‑operation with professionals and
others will attempt to determine. Let me
give my honourable friend an example, and I will try to be very brief on this
example.
When my assistant deputy and I visited
The Burlington Regional Mental Health
Council, as part of their service‑purchase arrangements, purchased the
use of two of those beds. After the
first year or so of use, questions started to come to the Burlington Regional
Mental Health Council professionals, how is it that you appear to be committing
and bringing into the institution, to the bed, more severely impaired
individuals than we admit to the other 48 beds, but yet in a shorter period of
time, your service provision, your approach, appears to be having a much more
well individual being discharged from the psychiatric facility?
Now that sort of shook up the, I think it
is fair to say in their observation, psychiatrists who were committing to the
other beds there, because their method of providing care certainly was not
delivering the kind of effectiveness for the individual that the Burlington
Mental Health Council approach was doing on those two beds they were using.
So when one talks about bed capacity, that
is such a variable, because in this example alone the example was that they did
not have enough beds in Burlington, but yet these people who serve in the
community for severely impaired people were making use of only two beds and
doing it on much shorter stays with much better outcomes. It is what you do in the regime of service provision
that will determine how effectively you undertake service provision, that will
determine how many beds you need. That is what the whole reform process is
about, sir.
The
Acting Deputy Chairperson (Mr. Rose):
Order please. The time is now 5
p.m. and time for private members' hour.
Committee rise.
EDUCATION
AND TRAINING
Madam Chairperson
(Louise Dacquay): Order please.
Will the Committee of Supply please come to order. This section of the Committee of Supply has
been dealing with the Estimates of the Department of Education and
Training. We are on item 1.(d) Personnel
Services: (1) Salaries. Will the minister's staff please enter the
Chamber.
My understanding is that the honourable
Leader of the Liberal Party (Mrs. Carstairs) was awaiting a response from the
honourable Minister of Education and Training (Mrs. Vodrey) upon the calling of
five o'clock yesterday.
Mrs. Sharon Carstairs
(Leader of the Second Opposition): The
minister indicated that they had gone to a new process in their relationship
with the Civil Service and my question was, when do they intend to have the
regular process re‑established and reattached to the Department of
Education?
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey
(Minister of Education and Training): We in the
department are working closely with the Civil Service Commission, and the Civil
Service Commission is interested in also working towards restoring of the
staffing authority. We do not have a
definite time at the moment but it will be as soon as possible.
Mrs. Carstairs: There is a tremendous inconsistency between
the Supplementary Information for Legislative Review tabled in this House in
'91‑92 and '92‑93 with respect to the staffing of the community
colleges.
Just to give you an example, we were told
last year that the staff for the year ending 1992 would be 677.34 for
In every single one, significant
differences between the numbers we were told and the numbers that were actually
staffed, some up and some down. Can the
minister explain why there were these fundamental differences in the numbers
between last year's book and this year's book?
Mrs. Vodrey: The answer is that each of these numbers is a
case‑by‑case specific basis rather than a global answer to answer
the total number of staffing, and because of the details I would like to ask
the honourable member if I could provide her with that information as soon as
possible. Also, if I could suggest the
appropriation lines for the specific colleges where I can discuss it in greater
detail as 16‑5(c)(2) is the appropriation for Red River Community
College; 16‑5(d)(2) is the appropriation for Assiniboine Community
College; and 16‑5(e)(2), the appropriation for Keewatin Community
College.
* (1430)
Mr. Dave Chomiak
(Kildonan): Just one final question in this area. This branch of the department is charged with
the responsibility of implementing the Affirmative Action Program at the
Department of Education. I am wondering
if the minister could outline specifically what the Affirmative Action Program
is at the department and what the status of the various components of that
affirmative action is at this time.
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I am informed, first of
all, that the MGEA management and our affirmative action committee from our
department met this morning and that we take the issue of affirmative action
with both seriousness and sincerity. I
would like to just give the honourable member a little bit of information on
our affirmative action.
Manitoba Education and Training continues
to promote affirmative action strategies, and, wherever possible, efforts are
made to place affirmative action candidates in vacant positions. All staffing authorization requests must
include an affirmative action strategy.
The Civil Service Commission's Employment
Counselling and Support Services Branch is used when recruiting for entry level
and term positions. This branch has been
established in support of the government's commitment to affirmative
reaction. Outreach recruitment is also
used as a source of referrals. Managers
and supervisors are responsible for implementing affirmative action strategies
and maintaining commitment to the Affirmative Action Program within their
respective operating units. The affirmative
action co‑ordinator works closely with the Society for Manitobans with
Disabilities in order to facilitate work experience opportunities for people
with disabilities, and Red River Community College is developing a strategy to
ensure all staff are provided with cross‑cultural training awareness of
the needs and the concerns of people with disabilities, and client‑centred
awareness training.
The department seconded a female native
employee to the Civil Service Commission to finalize the inventory of
Manitobans of native ancestry who have graduated from post‑secondary
institutions. She also serves as
aboriginal adviser on affirmative action issues.
Windmills is a workshop that challenges
our thinking about workers with disabilities, and this was delivered to
managers at
In terms of actual positions at this
point, senior appointments of affirmative action target group members '91‑92,
we have an assistant deputy minister, who is a woman, the Assistant Deputy
Minister of Administration and Finance, Dominique Bloy.
In terms of college presidents, women, we
have the president of Assiniboine Community College, Brenda Cooke, who is now
the president, and we have Pat Ferguson who is the acting president of Keewatin
Community College.
At the director level, in terms of women,
we have Jane Holatko, who is director of the Internal Management Audit. In senior management and management
representation of affirmative action target group members‑‑
Those were the appointments made in the
last year, and now, I would just like to add to some of those people named by
also mentioning the chairperson of the Public Schools Finance Board, Pat
Mosiewich, who is a woman; and then women who are directors, Gail Bagnall,
director of Curriculum Development and Implementation Branch; Jane Holatko,
whom I mentioned, the internal Management Audit; Louise Gordon, who is the
acting director of New Careers; Carol Sigurdson, who is the director of the
Student Financial Assistance; Caroline Loeppky, who is the director of the new
Student Support Branch that I have spoken about.
In terms of women who are native women, we
have Juliette Sabot, who is director of the Native Education Branch. On the college side, would the member also be
interested in the college, post‑secondary side of the department?
Mr. Chomiak: Yes, I would be interested. I was wondering if the minister would have
more of a statistical breakdown in terms of percentages. Would she have that? That would simplify matters I would think.
Mrs. Vodrey: I do have some statistics for the member but
these statistics are accurate to December 28, 1991, and we are working on
updating the statistics for the next few months.
In terms of the Department of Education
and Training excluding community colleges, number of employees, 742. These are of employees who are currently
employed and who have declared themselves as affirmative action
candidates: males 31 percent or 230,
females 512 or 69 percent, native 4.31 percent or 32, disabled 2.29 percent or
17 individuals, visible minority 2.43 percent or 18 individuals. For
* (1440)
I have just been informed by my staff, I
would like to make sure that I have clarified for the honourable member that
the total number of employees that I have given is the total number of
employees broken then down into total number of males and total number of
females, and then from that total group I have taken percentages for total
number of native, total number of disabled, total number of visible minority.
I think I have just given
At
In the Department of Education and
Training, the total number then is 1,791; 791 males or 44 percent; 1,000
females or 56 percent. Of those, 3.2
percent or 58 are native; 1.6 percent or 28, disabled; 2.2 percent or 39 are
visible minority.
I would like to stress that these are the
employees who have, in fact, declared themselves affirmative action
employees. But some people, we are
aware, have chosen not to declare themselves in an affirmative action category. So these numbers are of those who have
currently declared themselves, but I am informed by my staff that there are
certainly likely more and the numbers are larger, but we, at this point, can go
only by those people who have declared.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I thank the minister for
those numbers. I require two
clarifications, however.
Firstly, is the minister saying to me that
the totals are correct, but what is not clear is the category of declared
affirmative action employees. In other
words, the total of 1,791 is the total of all employees. The only differential would be the case that
some individuals may or may not wish to declare themselves affirmative action
within that total. Is that correct?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I am informed by my staff
that those total numbers are correct.
The affirmative action numbers we are informed by the Civil Service, and
those are, as the member has suggested, correct about those people who have
presently declared themselves affirmative action.
Mr. Chomiak: My second clarification is, the minister gave
me the male and female totals for
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, for
Madam Chairperson: Item 1.(d) Personnel Services: (1) Salaries $334,600‑‑pass; (2)
Other Expenditures $25,700‑‑pass.
Item 1.(e) Financial Services.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I am wondering why there
are eight staff transferred and why this appropriation is paying for the
transfer of the eight staff to the Public Schools Finance Board.
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I am informed by my staff
that this is a result of the Provincial Auditor requiring us to delineate the
Public School Finance Board and the operating, and the changes to the staffing
level is due to the transfer of eight Capital facility staff to the Public
Schools Finance Board in accordance with the recommendation of the Provincial
Auditor's office, and the transfer was initiated last July.
Mr. Chomiak: I note that one of the activities of the
Schools' Finance Branch is to provide assistance and accounting to school
division districts, et cetera. I know
from my discussions with various school divisions that there is an incredible
stress period around budget announcement time of the grant to school in order
to crunch out the numbers, et cetera. I
wonder again whether the department or the government has looked to any kind of
a multiyear or any kind of a phase‑in, particularly since there is a new
funding formula in effect‑‑whether any kind of multiyear budgeting
program or system is being put in place to assist school divisions in proper
planning and accounting of the monies provided to them.
Mrs. Vodrey: I would just like to mention to the member
that the details of the Schools' Finance Branch would be covered under the
appropriation 16‑2, but what he has found noted in this particular line
are the resources to operate the Schools' Finance Branch, and so that may
clarify what their particular role is at this point.
In terms of the multiyear budgeting, we
are not at the moment contemplating multiyear budgeting because there is some
difficulty in terms of the Estimates process with ours being a yearly
process. Perhaps we can talk more about
that if it comes up again in the next appropriation.
* (1450)
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Abe Peters, who is very, very well
respected in the education community, is now assigned a new position within the
monitoring of the private schools, and I am wondering if the minister can
indicate whether this is the department or the branch or the agency which Mr.
Abe Peters functions out of?
Mrs. Vodrey: No, this individual would be covered under the
PDSS section of the Education Estimates and the appropriation line is 16‑3.
Mr. Chomiak: Could the minister therefore outline to me
what is meant by under the category Expected Results on page 29 of the
Supplementary Estimates book where it says "Ensuring School Divisions,
independent schools and other grant recipients are accountable"? How does this branch ensure that the grants
to the private schools are accountable to the department, and what are the
specific activities undertaken by this department to ensure that?
Mrs. Vodrey: First of all, the public schools are required
to submit information through FRAME, the financial reporting and accounting system
in which they categorize their expenses, but this is a data collection
method. It is not an accountability
method; therefore, all public schools and all independent schools must submit
an audited financial statement to the department for that accountability.
Mr. Chomiak: One of my concerns last year with the so‑called
centralization of communications out of the various departments centrally in
government was that communications costs would rise within the departments, and
we see it happening in almost every branch and every component of the various
departments.
We see the communications costs in this
agency going up by roughly $12,000 and I am wondering if the minister can
account for why that increase in communications expenditures.
Mrs. Vodrey: I am wondering if the honourable member is
mixing up the Communications branch with actual communications activities,
telephone, postage and so on. Yes, it is
up, the line is up and it is up $11,700.
Under the changed mandate, the Schools' Finance Branch assumed
responsibility for certain communication costs that were previously charged to
PSFB.
Mrs. Carstairs: I know the minister answered this question,
but I am afraid I do not understand her answer.
There was a transfer of eight capital facility staff as per the
recommendation of the auditor. That
makes sense. What I do not understand is
why their salaries did not go over, why their salaries have remained in this
particular line?
Mrs. Vodrey: The residual salary budget of the $54,100 was
removed from the 1992‑93 budget, but it has been exactly offset by the
increase for the merit increments and the general salary increase for those who
remain.
Mrs. Carstairs: Madam Chairperson, that does not make any
sense, I am sorry. I do not know how you
can show an increase in salary from $33,000 a staff person to $40,603 a staff
person, which would give each staff person of that department an increase of 34
percent. I do not think that is what the
government has done. If it still requires $1.4 million to pay the salaries of
these people, then explain that to me.
* (1500)
Mrs. Vodrey: I am informed first of all, that the $54,100
was a partial year amount put into this budget because the change for those
eight individuals was made at the end of July, so the salary budgeted for and
noted here was for April, May, June and July.
I am also again informed by staff that in fact it is correct that this
also has been offset by the merit increase and also the general salary increase
for those individuals remaining.
Mrs. Carstairs: I am looking at page 33 of the Supplementary
Estimates. It indicates no figure of
$54,000. So the minister keeps
referencing a figure of $54,000 which I cannot find on my page. Maybe it is on some other page, but it is not
on my page. Also, last year this staff with this department was supposed to
have 48.26 staff. There was an Adjusted
Vote down to 44.26. Nobody has shown where those four people went either.
I am prepared to take this question in
written form if they want to give it to me some time in the future.
Mrs. Vodrey: This is a complicated technical and accounting
issue which, my staff informs me, may take a little time for us to get the
exact required explanation, so I will take that under advisement and provide
that to the honourable member.
But, just in the point of the four staff
from last year's Supplementary Estimates, I am informed by my staff that four
additional staff members were transferred to Administration and Professional
Certification. Those were people working
in the area of pupil transportation.
* (1510)
Madam Chairperson: 1.(e) Financial Services: (1) Salaries $1,472,300‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $268,500‑‑pass.
1.(f) Management Information
Services: (1) Salaries.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I am wondering if the
minister could describe for me, and I have got in my notes in plain English,
precisely what Management Information Services, what activity this branch and
this component provides, because I am not terribly enlightened by the description
contained on page 34 of the Supplementary Estimates book.
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, to provide some additional
information on the Management Information Services branch, this branch exists
solely in a support role for programs offered throughout the department. This includes reactionary support for
numerous ad hoc information requests, and also statistical analysis generated
throughout the year, along with several planned systems initiatives.
Currently, major production systems that
are supported include: library systems,
separate systems in both DREF and IRB; professional school personnel; student
records for the independent study program; student academic records, Grades 10
through 12; student enrollment; grants systems, separate in both PSFB and BEF;
GED; basic electronic mail and messaging service.
The four primary support functions
provided by the branch are: branch
administration and management which is the general operational co‑ordination
and financial administration; policy development and implementation; liaison to
central agency, the Information Technology Review Office; annual co‑ordination
of departmental information technology plans; ongoing facilitating and
administration of departmental information systems and related procurements and
also secretarial and office support.
Secondly, computer data centre operations
which co‑ordinate departmental data, security and disaster recovery
planning, maintain ongoing computer system operations, perform technical
systems programming and tuning.
Thirdly, applications development to
facilitate overall systems, related project management, co‑ordinate and
implement departmental computing standards, systems analysis and design of
planned initiatives and systems projects, central co‑ordination of
departmental data in electronic formats, major development project about to be
undertaken is the Medix project.
Fourthly, end user and office automation
system support and in that to co‑ordinate and implement departmental
computing standards, provide technical guidance to departmental programs re
technology procurement and opportunities, maintain a centralized information
centre for departmental staff to have access to technological tools on an as‑needed
basis, an aid program to aid program areas in developing business cases re
system procurement. They also trouble‑shoot
technical difficulties experienced by departmental staff and provide training,
formal and through skills transfer, to departmental staff as it relates to
computer hardware and to computer software.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, with all due respect to the
minister, I still do not understand how we can spend three‑quarters of a
million dollars in this branch in this department, and I still cannot get from
the department or the minister cannot table for me information like retention
rates, drop‑out rates, statistical data relating to students in the
province of Manitoba.
With all due respect to the minister's
comment and description of this department, I do not understand how we can
spend this much money and not have access for use by the minister and by the
department that kind of information.
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I am surprised that the
honourable member claims that nothing is being done, because in the first part
of my answer I think I spoke very clearly about the systems which the
Management Information Services branch is already engaged in. It certainly does require a significant
amount of funds to gather information, to store information, to analyze information
and to retrieve information. I have
given the honourable member some of the very significant work being done by
this branch in order to support the statistics that we would like to have.
Now we are interested in moving into the
next stage which the honourable member also has talked about, and we too have
said that we are interested in being able to be as accurate as possible. We are in a proposal stage to look at moving
on to the next phase, but at this point, we are relying currently on the systems,
which are costly, that we have in place now, and we are also relying on some
additional data, some very good data, from other jurisdictions, such as
Statistics Canada.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, the minister has made my
point, I believe.
Last year the former minister indicated
that the province had signed on to the school indicators program and indicated
that data would be available for 1992. I
am wondering if the minister would provide us with that data in relation to the
school indicators program.
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, for the information of the
honourable member, I would just like to let him know that the school indicators
project has not yet occurred, that it is still in the development stage, and
the Council of Ministers of Education is working on this.
They are looking very carefully at the
curriculum needs and curriculum in the provinces which will be participating,
but the tests are not yet constructed nor administered.
* (1520)
Mrs. Carstairs: I am going to make some assumptions which I
think are correct, and then the minister can correct me it I am not. It seems to me that Management Information
Services, last year, was part of Administration and Professional Certification.
At that point, the global budget for those two departments was $1.7
million. It is now $2.11 million, for a
23 percent increase.
I would like to know from the minister, if
those assumptions are all accurate, and I think they are, what additional value
are the students of a public school system getting for the increase of
expenditure of 23 percent, including the addition of 10.29 staff persons?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I am advised that the
explanation is that when the communications appropriation was wound down, there
was an appropriation number free and that there was an intention then to
establish MIS or the Management Information Services separately under the
appropriation 16‑1(f). Resources that were previously budgeted to
Administration and Professional Certification were then realigned into this
particular line.
Also, as I mentioned earlier, in
Administration and Professional Certification, there was the reorganization
with the pupil transportation and four SYs then were transferred in along with
the funds attached to those individuals.
Mrs. Carstairs: Madam Chairperson, I do not blame the present
minister for that, but I want her to know that it has been duly noted that when
the government wants to make its numbers look good, as it did with the Public
Schools Finance Board pushing it into public schools support, it did so.
Now, when it wants to make its numbers
look good on the other side, it is separated to lines of the administration so
that the increases do not look quite as much as they might have been, nor in
the case of the Public Schools Finance Board going into public schools support,
the increase did not look as bad as it in reality was, and it has been duly
noted.
Even four staff years, I do not think,
would make a difference of some $400,000, which is the figure that I come up
with as the difference between 1.7 as a global figure for last year and 2.11 as
a global figure for this year. I would
like to know what other expenditures are anticipated, other than four staff positions,
by this particular section.
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, this is another accounting
issue which, I am informed, tends to be quite complicated. I would just like to make a point very
clearly to the honourable member that these changes have not been made to make
anyone look good. These changes have been made at the recommendation of the
Provincial Auditor. The Provincial
Auditor recommended a realignment of function to the appropriate line to put
the function in a line matching its function.
At this point, the honourable member is trying, it seems to me, to be
looking at two lines together, creating some confusion, so what I would like to
offer is that we would be pleased to provide a reconciliation of those figures
to the honourable member.
* (1530)
Mrs. Carstairs: I am quite prepared to get that at some
future date in time, but just so they know where I am coming from, because I
want to be very clear, what I have done is exactly what I said I would do in my
opening comment. I have taken the line
from Administration and Professional Certification, which in my detailed
Estimates is $1,349,100; I have taken the line for Management Information
Services, which again, according to my books, is $766,600. I have combined them together for a figure of
$2,115,700, and I have compared that with the figure when these two were
combined, which was, for last year, $1,720,600, for a net difference of
$395,100. It is that $395,100 for which
I would like an explanation, because it amounts to a 23 percent increase, and
if they give that to me in written form at some time in the future, I will be
quite satisfied with that.
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, we are certainly prepared
to provide that information, that reconciliation information, but at this
point, I am informed that there appears to be a comparison between last year's
1991‑92 pre‑Adjusted Vote figures to 1991‑92 Adjusted Vote
figures, and then combining two appropriation categories, 16‑1(g) and 16‑1(f)
for 1992‑93, but we do have an explanation for that, and we will be
pleased to provide it.
Mrs. Carstairs: Well, then one of the explanations may be
that there were some significant changes made during the budgetary year of last
year, which I could not ask about last year because I had the figures given me. If there was this massive increase during the
year '91‑92, then I would also appreciate an explanation for that.
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, we will provide an
explanation to the honourable member.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I do not think that the
preadjusted‑adjusted figures will account for the difference that the
member for the Liberal Party is requesting.
I also would appreciate copies of the information to be provided to the
member with respect to the reconciliation of that sum.
Mrs. Vodrey: I will be also pleased to furnish that
reconciliation information to the honourable member. I am informed that though the number being
used by the members opposite is an increase of 23 percent, I think we will be
able to demonstrate, when we actually bring forward that information, that the
increase is more in the range 2.6 percent.
Madam Chairperson: Item 1.(f)(1) Salaries $471,000‑‑pass;
(2) Other Expenditures $295,600‑‑pass.
Item 1.(g)(1) Administration and
Professional Certification.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, firstly I note that at the
bottom of page 39, there is a footnote to the Estimates which indicates,
quote: "Net increase is due
primarily to the relocation of Professional Certification."
The figure of increase is from $265,000 to
$314,200. I am wondering if the minister
could provide us with an explanation as to the component of that increased cost
being somewhere in the neighbourhood of close to $50,000.
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, yes, the total increase in
the Other Expenditures is $49,200, to be exact, and the breakdown for the
honourable member's information is that the Communications line, which is a
constant expense, is $21,000. Then the
projected expenses in other areas are telephone, toll‑free lines, postage
in the range of $13,000 and fax and photocopy, $3,200 and travel, $12,000.
Mr. Chomiak: The Professional Certification has been
relocated. Can the minister please indicate how many staff relocated from
* (1540)
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, there are a total of 11
staff, and two of those staff were reassigned intergovernmentally. Nine staff were people who were hired for
their specific position, and of those nine, eight of those live in the rural
area.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I assume then that there
were 11 staff, previously, who were located in
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, of those 11 individuals,
six of those individuals were permanent staff positions, and all six of those
individuals have relocated elsewhere in government. Five others were term positions. One of those term positions is still
currently working with government, and the other four positions ended when
their term ended.
Mr. Chomiak: Were all of these individuals offered an
opportunity to relocate?
Mrs. Vodrey: Yes, they were all offered the opportunity to
relocate.
Mr. Chomiak: Can the minister indicate for me the 11
individuals? The names and positions of the 11 individuals, as well as the
method by which those individuals were hired.
Mrs. Vodrey: All the 11 individuals were hired by
competition, and the names of the 11 individuals and their positions are: the first individual is Lorne Bogusky, hired
in a professional technical capacity, program director, and then in
administrative support; Rita Upton, who is a clerk; Karen Simard, who is a
clerk; Gaylene Magnowski, who is a clerk; Donna Evanchuk, who is a clerk;
Veronica Laycock, who is an administrative secretary; Marilyn McCorrister, who
is a clerk; Shawna Graham‑Gross, who is a clerk; Leanne Rowat, who is a
clerk; Donna Pollock, who is a clerk; and Roberta Michalchuk, who is a clerk.
Mr. Chomiak: Were there other applicants for the position
that is now occupied by Mr. Lorne Bogusky?
Mrs. Vodrey: I am informed there were approximately 21
applicants for this position.
Mr. Chomiak: Just that I understand correctly. There was an advertisement, 21 applications
came in, there was a competition and the Civil Service Commission selected Mr.
Lorne Bogusky for that particular position.
Mrs. Vodrey: Yes, I am informed by the staff that this was
done according to Civil Service procedure and under Civil Service delegated
authority.
Mr. Chomiak: Can the minister indicate when that particular
hiring process took place?
Mrs. Vodrey: I am informed that the competition occurred
last summer, that is the summer of '91, and that the individual assumed his
position in and about September '91.
(Mr. Ben Sveinson, Acting Chairperson, in
the Chair)
Mr. Chomiak: Just for my own understanding, a clarification
again: Did the minister state that there
were 21 applicants for that particular position?
Mrs. Vodrey: I am informed that details of this were
available in the personnel section, so the numbers that we are giving you at
this moment are approximations, but I am informed by staff that it appears that
the number of applicants were about 21 applicants.
Mr. Chomiak: There were approximately or in the range of,
give or take five or 10 individuals, 20 applicants for the position now
occupied by Mr. Bogusky, correct?
Mrs. Vodrey: It is, I am informed by staff, much closer in
the range of 20.
Mr. Chomiak: As a result of this move, roughly, we have seen
an increase of $50,000 in expenditures‑‑$49,000, specifically, is
what the minister indicated for the Professional Certification for increased
communications costs, faxes, telecopies, et cetera. Does the minister or the department have any
figures that indicate whether this will be an ongoing increase or to what
extent they think costs will increase as a result of the relocation?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Acting Chairperson, of the $49,200, we
anticipate that the $21,000 that I mentioned for communication is a fairly
constant amount. In terms of the
remaining $28,000, that is an estimated figure, and we need to have the
opportunity to go through one full year or cycle in order to determine how firm
those figures are.
* (1550)
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I assume Student
Records is also under this particular appropriation. I wonder if the minister can indicate how
many staff are now in that particular area of the appropriations, that is
Student Records, which has now been decentralized. How many staff were there previously?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I am informed that of
the 11 staff persons in Russell, there is not a person at this point working on
student records. There is, however, one
person in
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I was under the
impression that the component that dealt with the student records had been
relocated. Is that not a correct
assumption? What has been relocated?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Acting Chairperson, just to clarify, it is
the Professional Certification which has been decentralized to Russell, and the
student records is still operating in
Mr. Chomiak: The minister has obviously received
representation information from the Manitoba Teachers' Society with respect to
the establishment of a separate professional body for teachers in the
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I would like to tell
the honourable member that I have met with the Manitoba Teachers' Society
several times since I have been minister, and I have a series of ongoing
meetings with Manitoba Teachers' Society.
We have set them up on a very regular basis. The agenda is submitted by the Manitoba
Teachers' Society.
During those meetings, we have had some
very good and very frank two‑way discussion. In that discussion, Manitoba Teachers'
Society has outlined some of their concerns, and I know that it is a matter
which they would like to discuss further.
They have prioritized some of the issues which they would like to bring
forward for consideration, and I certainly have understood that this is an
important matter to the Manitoba Teachers' Society.
However, under the Legislative Reform
Panel, the issue of teacher certification and the control of entry to practice
was considered by presenters to the Legislative Reform Panel. So at this time, until I have the report of
the panel, I think it would be very difficult for me to comment and to
prejudice their work in any way.
I would like to leave it at this point,
that this is currently under discussion as one of the issues that Manitoba
Teachers' Society has put on an agenda to bring forward for discussion, and I believe
that our meetings together have been very good two‑way discussions.
* (1600)
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I take it from the
minister's response that she has no opinion on the issue of a professional body
for teachers, pending receipt of the submissions made to her panel on
Legislative Reform.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I do think that was a
bit of a presumption on the part of my honourable friend. What I want to be very careful of is: (1) not to prejudice, first of all, the work
of the Legislative Reform Panel; and (2) to say to him that this matter is
under open discussion between the Manitoba Teachers' Society and myself. We have not closed the matter, but it is a
matter of process.
In addition, as I have said to him, the
issues which the Manitoba Teachers' Society has wanted to discuss with me as
minister, they have given to me a series of issues which we discussed
briefly. Those issues are now being
prioritized and brought forward on an agenda set by the Manitoba Teachers'
Society at the very regular meetings that we have together. I look forward to discussing this further
with the Manitoba Teachers' Society face to face.
Mr. Chomiak: I would like an opportunity to discuss the
matter face to face with the minister during the Estimates process. I return back to the question that I am
raising with the minister. The minister could very well use that response for
every single issue on the Education agenda, because frankly the panel on
education reform canvassed a variety of issues that went from one spectrum to
the other spectrum with respect to education issues. That has not precluded the
minister from commenting on specific issues.
I simply want to know what the minister's
opinion is with respect to the question of a professional body dealing with
teachers, and notwithstanding that she is having discussions with the Teachers'
Society and regardless of that fact, it is a question I have queried the
previous minister on every Estimates process.
It is a question that comes up on the
public forum when we have debates when the minister, the Leader of the Liberal
Party (Mrs. Carstairs) and myself have debates constantly, and I am wondering
what the minister's comment is or the government's position is with respect to
that particular issue. If it is a
question that‑‑well, I will await the minister's response.
Mrs. Vodrey: I understand that the member would like to
take this opportunity, would like me to discuss with him first what my position
is. But I, as minister, have made a
commitment to ongoing discussions with the Manitoba Teachers' Society, the body
directly concerned with this decision, and I will be discussing this issue with
the Manitoba Teachers' Society first to make sure that I fully understand their
positions, what they would like to bring forward, exactly what their proposals
are, and if their proposals are in one or two parts. Following those discussions, then I think he
and I will have more to talk about.
Mr. Chomiak: I will largely leave this line of questioning
at this point insofar as I am probably not going to get anywhere with respect
to the minister in terms of‑‑the fact remains that the issue does
not just concern the minister and the Manitoba Teachers' Society. The issue is a concern to all Manitobans and
everyone involved in the education field, and it is not confined to one
separate area. I would suggest that it
is a far broader question than simply narrowing it down to the minister's
discussions.
The bus transportation study is involved
in this‑‑[interjection]
The Acting Chairperson
(Mr. Sveinson): Order, please.
The honourable Minister of Education would just like to address that one
part.
Mrs. Vodrey: I would like to take a moment to address
that. The honourable member has
obviously understood the point that I have been making. Yes, this is an issue for discussion between
myself and the Manitoba Teachers' Society.
It has also been an issue for discussion with the people of
Mr. Chomiak: How many of the total staff years of 27.26
with respect to this branch of the department are involved in bus
transportation?
Mrs. Vodrey: The answer, I am informed, is four.
Mr. Chomiak: Can the minister indicate for me, please, what
basically the activities of those four individuals consist of?
Mrs. Vodrey: The functions of the pupil transportation unit
are: to ensure regulatory compliance in
regard to school bus vehicle operations; to perform school bus inspections for
replacement of older school bus vehicles and quality control inspections of new
buses; to provide annual training or seminars for transportation supervisors,
school bus driver instructors and school bus mechanics; to develop bus vehicle
purchase specifications; and to ensure, through quality control initiatives,
that manufacturers' school bus units meet requirements. They are also responsible for school bus
fleet inventory and preventative maintenance programs and also to maintain
accident statistics and analysis.
Mr. Chomiak: Can the minister indicate what the status is of
the bus transportation study that was undertaken by the previous minister?
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Acting Chairperson, just to refresh my
honourable friend's memory, it was on August 23, 1990, that the previous
minister wrote to school divisions and invited them to participate in a pilot
project related to capital support for contract bus service. This pilot project was to be implemented and
directed by a transportation steering committee. Membership on the committee was formulated at
the direction of the then minister and finalized by an invitation coming from
the deputy minister's office.
The mandate of the transportation steering
committee, also known, by the way, as the Pupil Transportation Committee on
pilot project, is to examine key program and funding issues, such as pupil
safety, standards, control and flexibility, contracting options, definition of
service requirements, determination of current costs, labour agreements and
other agreements in place at the present and cost to modify or to remove those.
* (1610)
The transportation committee has been
divided into two subcommittees, safety and finance. The chairperson of the safety subcommittee is
Rita Roeland and the finance subcommittee is chaired by Dennis Kostick. The first meeting of the transportation
steering committee was convened or held on March 22, 1991. Meetings have been held monthly, as have meetings
of the subcommittees with a few exceptions.
The finance subcommittee is addressing
four main themes: first is special education transportation; secondly, rural
versus urban needs; thirdly, various approaches to contracting out; and
fourthly, requirement for control and flexibility. The safety subcommittee is addressing student
control ridership program, training programs‑‑for example, bus
drivers, mechanics, transportation supervisors‑‑the issue of
cleanliness, bus driver rapport with students, parents, divisional office and
school staff, length and time of routes, special needs students and
transportation, overall safety regulations and their adequacy, vehicle
evaluations, and the CSA standards and provincial standards.
Data with which to examine these issues
has been generated by a detailed questionnaire which was sent to all school
divisions and districts in
At this time, the safety and the finance
subcommittees are well underway in the writing of their respective reports.
Analysis of survey data is being performed by Glen Doerksen with assistance
from Brian Hanson and the department.
Once the subcommittee reports are
complete, it will then fall to Larry Bisson, by the deputy minister's
memorandum of September 17, 1991, to synthesize and to write the final
report. The target for the completion is
the spring of this year. Then there will
be submission to the minister by the late spring, and we are looking for that
to be completed as soon as possible.
At the moment, I think it is important to
say that
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Acting Chairperson, that begs the question
of why $440,000 had to be spent on a bus transportation study.
I am wondering if the minister can
indicate to me how many school divisions participated in the pilot study.
Mrs. Vodrey: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I would just like to
inform the honourable member that the $400,000 was an estimate out of capital
for bus contracts, set aside for the contract busing pilot. We now have 78 contracts at $3,000 a contract
for a total of $234,000 at this point and eight divisions taking part.
Mr. Chomiak: Mr. Acting Chairperson, can the minister
indicate which eight divisions are participating with the project that
comprises the 78‑contract buses?
Mrs. Vodrey: The divisions are: St. James‑Assiniboia, Assiniboine‑South,
St. Vital, Pelly Trail, Flin Flon, Frontier, Churchill and
Mrs. Carstairs: Mr. Acting Chairperson, I want the Deputy
Minister of Education to know that I sent him over the glass of water because
he should know better than to swallow medications without having something to
drink, and as a good teacher he should know better than that.
I want to get into the issue of teacher
record and certification and to begin those remarks by saying that there have
been calls from a number of groups for a number of changes to teacher
certification. We often say that we
cannot do anything about the faculties at the university because they are
autonomous, but here is a place where we really can do something, because if we
refuse to certify the teacher, then obviously they have to make the appropriate
curriculum changes at the Department of Education, at the Faculty of Education
so that their students, who are educated, meet the criteria as set by teacher
record and certification.
Can the minister tell me how long it has
been since there has been a thorough review done of exactly who should or
should not be certified and what new program initiatives should perhaps be
examined for the purposes of certification?
* (1620)
Mrs. Vodrey: I am informed that the regulation governing
the requirement for certification was revised in 1988. The requirements for certification, academic
and professional, are reviewed by the Board of Teacher Education and
Certification which then advises the minister.
Certainly, prior to 1987,
(Madam Chairperson in the Chair)
I am also informed that the
Mrs. Carstairs: Madam Chairperson, there has been a decision
recently taken by the faculty of business at the
Can the minister tell us if she has had
any discussion with respect to the same kind of an entry‑year requirement
for the Faculty of Education?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I am informed that the
faculty is itself considering potentially two years in another faculty as an
entry requirement into the Faculty of Education and that my department has met
with the Faculty of Education and the University of Manitoba and this has been
one of the issues which has been brought forward for discussion.
Mrs. Carstairs: Madam Chairperson, can the minister tell me
if they are looking to change the accreditation so that there would be a
differential accreditation? Some
universities, in fact, give an elementary certificate which only entitles
teachers to teach at the elementary level, others a 7‑12
certification. It is my understanding
that we are still granting in
Is there any thought that we might change
that method of certification in the province?
Mrs. Vodrey: I think what the honourable member is leading
to is the concern that the amount of information on the academic side of
training of teachers is certainly growing, and that education may itself be
heading into areas of specialization.
I am informed that in the report prepared
by the university, the initial teacher preparation report, that there will be a
proposal in there to discuss certification or equating certification with early
years, middle years and senior years. This is certainly something which I think
would require some further discussion and would also be very important to
consider further discussion on.
Mrs. Carstairs: Let me make it perfectly clear that I am not
just concerned about specialization. I
think specialization is extremely important for those teaching at the secondary
level and particularly the new 9 to 12 concept, but I think it is equally
important that those teaching in the elementary years, particularly the early
years, have very clear skills in the teaching of reading.
That particular form of specialization, if
you will, which is not normally considered a specialization, must be considered
a specialization for the purposes of certification. I have to tell you that although I have a
master's degree in education, I do not feel qualified to teach elementary
children under any circumstances whatsoever.
I simply do not have the skills or the knowledge to perform that
function.
* (1630)
There are two specific areas that I keep
having teachers raise with me, and indeed parents, with regard to the training
of teachers that to my knowledge is not required at the present moment for
certification.
One of those is in cross‑cultural
awareness and a better understanding of the mosaic that makes up
The other area is the special needs area
in which teachers frequently find themselves with a special needs child
mainstreamed into the classroom situation which has now become the acceptable
model, but that teacher has little or no background, experience, or training in
the special needs area required for the handling and the educating of that
particular child.
Are there any decisions being made or even
debated with regard to adding those two curriculum contents to a degree in
education in the
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I am informed that within
the document Answering the Challenge‑‑and as the member knows I did
sit on that committee‑‑there is a strategy No. 42, and in that
strategy it recommends that the department require that all teachers applying
for teacher's certification in Manitoba have a minimum of one full course or
six credit hours in special education.
At the moment, that is being studied by the Board of Teacher Education
and Certification.
In regard to the cross‑cultural
awareness, I think that is certainly a point which I would be interested in
discussing further with the Faculty of Education and recognize that certainly
in today's school programming across the province, that could really be a very
valuable point.
Mrs. Carstairs: There was a Civil Service audit done on the
hiring practices with regard to the Department of Education. We have tried to get a hold of that audit
through freedom of information. We have
been denied.
Can the minister tell us if anyone hired
within this department or this particular section, Administration and
Professional Certification, including the bus transportation issues and those
hired for the new office for Professional Certification were subject to that
audit?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I am informed that the
audit which was performed was not an audit about individuals. It was an audit about practice within the
department, and the audit then did not focus on individuals in this area.
Mrs. Carstairs: I think in the list of individuals, which the
member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) asked for and the minister gave, there was
the appointment of a clerk Gaylene Magnowski.
Can the minister tell me how many people
applied for that particular clerk's position for which Ms. Magnowski was hired?
Mrs. Vodrey: I am informed that we did not interview for
each individual position singly, but instead there were interviews for 10
positions which were available. There
were in the range of 240 applicants for those 10 positions. There were approximately 37 individuals
interviewed for those 10 positions, and ultimately, 10 individuals were
selected to fill the 10 positions.
Mrs. Carstairs: Can the minister tell us if experience within
the field of education was considered a primary factor in the hiring of these
individuals?
Mrs. Vodrey: I am informed that for those 10 individuals,
the criteria and the skills required were computer skills and clerical skills,
accounting skills, evaluation skills for documents and also people skills, and
that it was only in the area of the program director that educational skills
were specifically required.
Madam Chairperson: Item 1.(g)(1) Salaries $1,034,900‑‑pass.
Mr. Chomiak: I just had a couple of more questions in this
area.
One of the major areas of concern that has
been expressed by teachers in the field and by the Manitoba Teachers' Society‑‑and
I raise it at this point; the minister can correct me if she feels I should
direct this question at some other point in the Estimates process‑‑is
the question of violence in the classroom.
I am wondering if the department has any
initiatives in this area or any undertakings in this area to deal with that
particular aspect of what is occurring in society today.
Mrs. Vodrey: We might like to have a more full discussion
under the PDSS appropriations, 16‑3(b), but because this has been such an
important issue‑‑it has been raised to me in the discussions that I
have had with representatives from the field and with parents and with other
educational stakeholders‑‑I would like to provide the member with
some of the initiatives which we, in the department, currently are undertaking
in relation to violence, the violence issue, and the concern expressed within
the schools and also within the community in general.
The first is a provision of in‑services
for teachers and parents in dealing with violent behaviour. Secondly, the provision of consultative
services to schools. Thirdly, the
department has identified 65 educators who can act as resource persons for
teaching youth about issues such as anger management. Fourthly, provision of curriculum support
document entitled Learning Activities to Prevent Violence Against Women.
Also, it is important to note that
violence, and I am sure the member understands this, is not an isolated issue
alone, and that no one course or one policy or one unit can adequately address
the issue of violence within the community.
The department is attempting to address the issues and concerns
surrounding violence in a broader context, and some of the ways we would like
to do that are to work more closely with schools to develop positive learning
environments.
* (1640)
I refer him again to our new branch, the
Student Support Services Branch, which I think will have a very good
opportunity to look at some of the at‑risk characteristics for students
in the area of violence and also providing relevant courses such as the Skills
for Independent Living, and also portions of our health curriculum and also
providing formal mechanisms for parent involvement and participation in
decision making, for example, the special needs policy and providing relevant
curriculum support material dealing with violence against women.
Certainly there is a recognition that this
is an area of specific concern both again in the wider community and also
violence within the schools.
Mr. Chomiak: The minister made a reference to a study
being undertaken by the Faculty of Education at the
Mrs. Vodrey: Yes, the report was received by the previous
minister. The report was also released
to the public late last fall in November 1991, and we would be pleased to
provide the member with a copy of the report.
It was sent to all school divisions and all major educational
organizations. The report has also been
reviewed by the department with an implementation proposal currently being
developed. I think it is important to
say, and we are very pleased to say that to this date the department has not
received any negative comments about the study or about its recommendations.
Mr. Chomiak: Can the minister indicate when the department
will be coming out with specific proposals relating to that study?
Mrs. Vodrey: As the member knows, this is a complicated
matter. It does have many implications for the future, but we are certainly
looking at it carefully, and we will be prepared to talk about it shortly.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I am sure the honourable
minister is quite aware of the‑‑well, she has indicated the serious
implications of it, but it affects the lives of many students, many potential
teachers and the like quite dramatically.
Soon‑‑I wonder if the minister can give us a time
frame. Are we talking about the summer,
the fall? What are we looking at in
terms of‑‑because people's lives could very well be planned and
could very well be developed on the basis of what the department's response is
to that particular volume survey of teachers and teacher demand.
Mrs. Vodrey: The conclusion of the study, for the member's
information, was that throughout the 1990s, the annual demand for teachers
should be approximately equivalent to what it is today. If the number of
education graduates are maintained throughout the decade, the supply should
satisfy the demand. However, there was
some indication that there may be some shortage in specific areas and, of
course, it is very important for us to make sure that people considering
professional training and so on will have knowledge about that as soon as
possible.
I will say to the member again that the
recommendations are under review, and I will be making a public announcement
about that as soon as possible. That
should be within the next few months.
Madam Chairperson: Item 1.(g)(2) Other Expenditures $314,200‑‑pass.
Item 2. Financial Support ‑ Schools
(a)‑‑
Mr. Chomiak: I anticipate we will be on this appropriation
for a fair amount of time. Just at the
onset, I wonder if the minister would be prepared to table, as the previous
minister has in the past, a number of fact sheets of information relating to
grants under this appropriation.
The minister for the past several years
has provided us with school division breakdowns for special needs grants;
school division breakdown for the former block equalization and guaranteed
support, which is now roughly a block categorical, et cetera; a supplementary,
total special need support on a division‑by‑division breakdown; a
summary of grants to all private schools in the province, as well as the
instruction and support services to all private schools in the province. I wonder if the minister would be prepared to
table that information for our purposes for the course of this discussion under
2.(a).
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, we will be pleased to table
those, but we would like to make sure that we have a complete package available
for the honourable member. So we will
table those as quickly as possible within the next day or so.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Chairperson, I thank the minister for
those comments. I am sure we will both
be looking forward to receipt of those particular documents.
I would like to commence my discussion in
this area by discussing the Education Finance Committee. I will ask the minister a question I asked
previously. Does the minister presently
have an Education Finance Committee? If
she does, who comprises it?
* (1650)
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Chairperson, I would like to tell the
member that, yes, in fact I do have a minister's Advisory Committee on
Education Finance and the representatives on that committee are, from the Manitoba
Association of School Trustees, two members: Brenda Leslie, and Jerry MacNeil
is the alternate; the Manitoba Teachers' Society: Donna Goodman the representative, and Aubrey
Asper is the alternate; Manitoba Association of School Superintendents: George Buchholz is the representative and
also the chairperson of the committee, Les Milne is the alternate; the Manitoba
Association of School Business Officials:
David Bell is the representative, and Laverne Cherry is the
alternate. There are also citizen
members on this committee: Glenn Dressel
is the vice‑chairperson, Clark Burnett is a member, and Cathy Vanstone is
the alternate.
There has also been a recommendation come
forward for a representative specifically to offer forward concerns of northern
interests, so I will be looking at adding an additional member to that
committee. I am in the process of
putting the finishing touches on that representation.
Mr. Chomiak: Can the minister indicate when the committee
last met?
Mrs. Vodrey: I would like to tell the member that I met
with the committee; it was about two weeks ago.
Then the committee has met itself, and I am informed that that was last
week and that the committee will meet again on May 2.
Mr. Chomiak: Are there not any departmental officials on
the committee, as has been the case in the past?
Mrs. Vodrey: I am informed that Dominique Bloy, the Assistant
Deputy Minister of Administration and Finance, is secretary to the committee
and that staff attend the committee as needed to give details that may be
required by the committee.
Mr. Chomiak: Can the minister outline for us what the
mandate of the committee is at present?
Mrs. Vodrey: Yes, I have outlined terms of reference for
this committee; firstly that the committee will provide advice and
recommendations to the minister concerning, first of all, the implementation
and the evaluation of the new funding program for the 1992‑93 school year
and also general matters pertaining to the funding of education in Manitoba.
Secondly, with respect to the first term
of reference, the committee will also meet at least quarterly during the 1992‑93
school year. They will receive and
consider briefs and presentations from the education community concerning the
implementation of the new Schools Finance Program, and they will also evaluate
any proposed changes to the SFP as submitted by the Department of Education and
Training and others. Also, they will
present a report to the Minister of Education and Training (Mrs. Vodrey) by
August 31, 1992 recommending any changes to the SFP for the implementation in
the '93‑94 school year.
Mr. Chomiak: Can the minister indicate whether a proposal
call or any kind of other communication has been expressed to the community,
and the education community in particular, soliciting their opinions with
respect to the SFP, which would therefore solicit briefs to the minister's
advisory committee to allow them to evaluate the program based on those
submissions?
Mrs. Vodrey: Yes, as I was explaining to the honourable member
in the terms of reference, with respect to doing its work, the committee may
receive and consider briefs. I am
informed that during the previous meetings, the committee did discuss what kind
of information they might seek. No
briefs or presentations have been received at this point.
Mr. Chomiak: Yes, that is why I would like to follow
up. Has there been a general call, or is
the community aware that this committee exists presently in order to hear
responses to the community as a result of the new funding formula?
Mrs. Vodrey: Just for clarification, this advisory
committee was not designed for a public hearing process per se as its only
mandate. However, if it does wish to
receive briefs and information, then certainly it has been included in their
mandate that they may do so, but I would just also like to tell the honourable
member again that each association that may have a particular interest is
represented on this committee. I
personally have met with over 20 school divisions, and MAST, Manitoba
Association of School Trustees, in a sense of partnership, has polled each
school division in the province and asked for their response and their input
regarding the effect and the implementation of the new Schools Finance Program. They will be providing to the department
their analysis.
That is a very helpful, I think, process
which is going on and a very good indication of partnership. In addition to that, as I mentioned at the
time of the announcement, staff have visited each division in this province and
have had a chance to sit with each division and meet with them, discuss the
effect and help divisions look at their actual budget, and certainly have been
available past that initial meeting to visit again where they have been
requested or where divisions have had some difficulties. They have also made themselves available by
telephone, which has been a very big help to divisions.
Madam Chairperson: Order, please.
The hour being 5 p.m., it is time for private members' hour. Committee rise.
Call in the Speaker. * (1700)
IN SESSION
Mr. Speaker: The hour being 5 p.m. and time for private
members' hour.
Committee
Report
Mrs. Louise Dacquay
(Chairperson of Committees): Mr.
Speaker, the Committee of Supply has adopted a certain resolution, directs me
to report the same and asks leave to sit again.
I move, seconded by the honourable member
for La Verendrye (Mr. Sveinson), that the report of the committee be received.
Motion agreed to.
PRIVATE
MEMBERS' BUSINESS
DEBATE ON
SECOND READINGS‑PRIVATE BILLS
Bill 52‑The
Pas Health Complex Incorporation Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable member
for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin), Bill 52, The Pas Health Complex Incorporation
Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi constituant en corporation "The Pas
Health Complex", standing in the name of the honourable Minister of Urban
Affairs (Mr. Ernst).
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave that this matter remain
standing? [Agreed]
DEBATE ON
SECOND READINGS‑PUBLIC BILLS
Bill 16‑The
Health Care Directives Act
Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable
member for The Maples (Mr. Cheema), Bill 16, The Health Care Directives Act;
Loi sur les directives en matiere de soins de sante, standing in the name of
the honourable Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard).
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave that this matter remain
standing? [Agreed]
Bill 18‑The
Franchises Act
Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable
member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway), Bill 18, The Franchises Act; Loi sur les
concessions, standing in the name of the honourable member for Sturgeon Creek
(Mr. McAlpine).
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave that this matter remain
standing? [Agreed]
Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable
member for Osborne (Mr. Alcock), Bill 25, The University of Manitoba Amendment
Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur l'Universite du
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave? [Agreed]
Bill 27‑The
Business Practices Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable member
for The Maples (Mr. Cheema), Bill 27, The Business Practices Amendment Act; Loi
modifiant la Loi sur les pratiques commerciales, standing in the name of the
honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau).
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave? [Agreed]
Bill 31‑The
Municipal Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable
member for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry), Bill 31, The Municipal Amendment Act; Loi
modifiant la Loi sur les municipalites, standing in the name of the honourable
member for Niakwa (Mr. Reimer).
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave? [Agreed]
Bill 50‑The
Beverage Container Act
Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable
Leader of the Second Opposition (Mrs. Carstairs), Bill 50, The Beverage Container
Act; Loi sur les contenants de boisson, standing in the name of the honourable
member for Gimli (Mr. Helwer).
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave? [Agreed]
Bill 51‑The
Health Services Insurance Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable
member for The Maples (Mr. Cheema), Bill 51, The Health Services Insurance
Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur l'assurance‑maladie, standing in
the name of the honourable member for St. Norbert (Mr. Laurendeau).
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave? [Agreed]
Bill 54‑The
Consumer Protection Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable
member for Elmwood (Mr. Maloway), Bill 54, The Consumer Protection Amendment
Act; Loi sur la protection du consommateur, standing in the name of the
honourable member for
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave? [Agreed]
Bill 77‑The
Liquor Control Amendment Act
Mr. Speaker: On the proposed motion of the honourable
member for the Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans), Bill 77, The Liquor Control
Amendment Act; Loi modifiant la Loi sur la reglementation des alcools.
An Honourable Member: Stand.
Mr. Speaker: Is there leave that this matter remain
standing in the name of the honourable member for the Interlake? Leave?
It is agreed.
Mr. Jerry Storie (Flin
Flon): Mr. Speaker, the other day when my colleague
the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes) introduced this piece of legislation,
it was, I think, to say the least, a timely introduction. It followed on the heels of a week of
interesting revelations about the nature of the use and abuse of products which
contain alcohol.
The fact of the matter is that this minor
amendment to The Liquor Control Act is an important one, and I think, Mr.
Speaker, it signals a very serious recognition on the part of the people of
Point Douglas, but also people of Manitoba, to the incremental way in which our
life style and the things we do contribute to our own ill health and sometimes
to our death.
Mr. Speaker, this particular piece of
legislation was provoked by the fact that over the course of the last number of
years it is believed that some nine, perhaps more, individual Manitobans have
died as a result of ingesting what is nominally called cooking wine. We have to acknowledge on our part the rather
swift action of The Manitoba Liquor Commission and the minister in recognizing
the danger that this particular product posed to individuals. We want to say that we hope that The Manitoba
Liquor Commission will continue to go further to ensure that this product is
still available for those who are still using it in the way that it was
intended, but that it is somehow limited in terms of the market, so that the
use of this particular product will not be abused.
We know that you cannot prevent people
from abusing substances. That is the
long and short of that matter. If people
have a will to ingest materials and goods which were not intended to be
ingested, we cannot prevent it. Mr.
Speaker, we can do what we can do to make access to those products less
convenient. That is what this particular
amendment was intended to do.
We know there are many people out there
who use cooking wine, Chinese cooking wines, other cooking wines in a
responsible manner. We know that there
are commercial institutions which use them as a matter of course. Mr. Speaker, we do not want to prevent access
to these products by those people. What
we want to do is to make sure that the person who is perhaps already confused,
perhaps already intoxicated from drinking alcohol, or using other substances,
we do not want to encourage the use of this product when it can be fatal by
making it easily accessible.
Mr. Speaker, it is not simply a matter of
the people that were consuming this product, there were other accomplices in
this. The accomplices were retailers who
knowingly sold these products to individuals who were already intoxicated or
had been abusing other substances for profit, not because they believed for a
minute that the people who were buying the litres and litres of this particular
product were using it for its intended purposes. They understood that abuse was going on.
What we want to do, Mr. Speaker, is not
keep people from using the product the way it was intended, but make sure that
its access is limited only to the extent that it is practical and
reasonable. I believe the steps that the
liquor commission has taken with respect to some, I do not know what it was, 22
different brands of cooking wine are reasonable and practical, and I think they
will receive wide support in the public.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to think that we
will see speedy passage of this legislation, because it is a very reasonable
response to what is a personal tragedy for the families of the people who have
died as a result of ingesting this material.
I think it is a reasonable limitation on the right of people to have
access to this product.
* (1710)
Although the bill does not deal directly
with the issue of how the liquor commission is going to make this available for
purchase or how the liquor commission is going to treat it in terms of
provincial excise and so forth, taxes, but I believe it is the intention of the
member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes) to make sure that this is available
without any penalty or tax that would normally be applicable to alcoholic
beverages or to products with alcohol in them that are intended for
consumption.
We want to make it very clear that while
we want to limit access and that may inconvenience some people, we want to make
it very clear that nothing in this legislation is intended to add to the cost,
the nominal cost, of these products. In
other words, we do not want the Manitoba Liquor Commission saying, well, there
is 18 percent alcohol in this, it could be used for a beverage, or we are
selling it, it is the liquor commission, and therefore these duties, these
As my colleague from Point Douglas (Mr.
Hickes) said in introducing this legislation, this is not a situation that is
unique to
Mr. Speaker, this act is quite specific in
the product that it is dealing with, but I think we could go on and expand this
debate quite easily in this Chamber to a number of other products. I do not need to remind the members of the
government, and particularly the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard), that the
member for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia‑Leis) almost two years ago now
introduced a bill which would have prevented‑‑the fact of the
matter is that the member for St. Johns introduced a bill two years ago to
prevent the abuse of products which were being sniffed, another set of products
that were being abused by the public. To
this day, the government, although it supported that particular measure in this
Legislature, has failed to introduce any regulation, has failed to come to
grips with that very real problem, the abuse of another substance.
I do not think it is a stretch of the
imagination to say that there are young people, there are people on the streets
of the city of
Mr. Speaker, those products which the
member for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia‑Leis) identified, whether it is Lysol
or other aerosol products, or shoe polish, or mouthwash, any of those products
which can have damaging effects on people's health, which can be fatal if
ingested, should be controlled.
Although members opposite might want to
suggest that it is almost impossible to keep people from abusing those
products, I do not think that means we should not try to limit the access.
If we can prevent the death of one
individual by limiting impulse buying or the ability of people to impulse‑buy
products which are going to be harmful to them, then I think we should do
it. I think it is quite clear that many
of the deaths that have occurred, particularly with respect to cooking wine,
are impulse buying.
The fact that the Redi Mart or the
supermart or the local mom‑and‑pop grocery store or convenience
store gives access to individuals in this intoxicated state so easily and at
such liberal hours, so to speak, I think is reason enough for some controls to
be put in place.
Mr. Speaker, we are very anxious to hear
some comments from the minister responsible for the Manitoba Liquor Commission
(Mrs. McIntosh), the member for Riel (Mr. Ducharme) who is putting.
An Honourable Member: Puttering around in the Leg.
Mr. Storie: Puttering around in the Leg, he says. We are anxious to see this debate proceed. This small amendment could be incorporated
into the statutes of the province with a very quick vote.
I am hoping that the Deputy Premier (Mr.
Downey) will stand in his place very shortly and announce the government's
intention to support this legislation.
We can pass it, and we can give legitimacy to the minister's statements
supporting the member for Point Douglas (Mr. Hickes), give legitimacy to our
intention to protect the health of individuals through this amendment and
ensure that no additional people die needlessly, because we as a Legislature,
we as a province have failed to take due precaution in terms of making this
product available.
Mr. Speaker, I know that my colleague from
We can begin to deal with the social cost
that is being wreaked on these young people by implementing this particular
bill. I hope that members opposite will
join with us quickly, Mr. Speaker, and support this legislation.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the time.
Mr. Speaker: Prior to recognizing the honourable member for
Flin Flon (Mr. Storie), I had inadvertently, when I was going through the
scroll of bills for second reading, on the bill that the honourable member for
Flin Flon had just spoken on, Bill 77, I had said it was the proposed motion of
the honourable member for the Interlake.
It was actually supposed to have read the honourable member for Point
Douglas (Mr. Hickes).
I had also asked leave that this matter would
remain standing in the name of the honourable member for the Interlake, which
actually should have been the honourable member for Point Douglas.
For clarification: As previously agreed, this matter will remain
standing in the name for the honourable member for Point Douglas.
SECOND
READINGS‑PUBLIC BILLS
Bill 36‑The
Health Care Records Act
Ms. Judy Wasylycia-Leis
(St. Johns): I move, seconded by the member for Brandon
East (Mr. Leonard Evans), that Bill 36, The Health Care Records Act; Loi sur les
dossiers medicaux, be now read a second time, and be referred to a committee of
this House.
Motion presented.
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have this
opportunity to introduce this bill, Bill 36, The Health Care Records Act to the
Manitoba Legislative Assembly and to begin what I hope will be a process of
dialogue and constructive debate on a very important issue addressing a serious
gap in health care policy.
Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by saying
that there are those who came before me who deserve credit for the work that
has been done in this area and on this bill.
Although I have the privilege of standing
before this Chamber and introducing Bill 36 for second reading, this bill is
here in actual fact because of community efforts over a good long period of
time, and because of the hard work of a former colleague of mine, former NDP
health critic Jay Cowan, the former member for Churchill.
* (1720)
Mr. Speaker, it was Jay Cowan who began
the process that led to this bill being introduced in the year 1992 at the
Manitoba Legislative Assembly. It was
Jay Cowan, when he first became health critic, who began the process of
consulting with community groups, health care professionals and organizations
to address the serious gap in health care policy.
So I want to first give credit where
credit is due and to indicate to this House that if members in this Chamber
find this bill to be, or parts of this bill to be, innovative, substantive and
significant then it is to my forerunner in the New Democratic Party, Jay Cowan,
to which the credit should be directed.
It is to the community groups who worked
with him over a period of time to whom credit should be directed. If there are flaws in this bill, if there are
gaps in this area then I am fully prepared to accept all the blame.
In fact, I want at the outset to say, I am
not here to suggest to members that this is a flawless bill, that it is perfect
by any stretch of the imagination. I
made those comments in the past. I have
made them at the outset of any private members' bill that I have introduced
with the hope that through a dialogue, through committee work, through
presentations from community groups, through hard work at amendments‑‑a
good idea can become an excellent bill, excellent legislation for the
In fact, I also want to say at the outset
of my remarks that this bill is here addressing an important gap in public
health care policy which should have been addressed by the present government,
by the government of the day. It still
can be addressed by the government of the day.
If the only way for this idea to proceed and be entrenched and ensconced
in legislation is for the government to introduce such legislation, then I want
the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) and his colleagues to know that they can
take the ideas, they can take the best parts of this bill, package it as if it
were their own and present it back to this Legislative Assembly. I do not feel any sense of ownership around
this bill. I do not believe my
predecessor Jay Cowan feels that kind of ownership around this bill. What we would like to see is this gap in
policy addressed and in short order legislation passed by this Assembly to
recognize some very serious outstanding principles.
That gets me, Mr. Speaker, to the main
principles of this legislation. This
bill is about something as fundamental as legal right to access of one's own
health care medical records. I do not know how many members in this Chamber
actually know and realize that each one of us, as an individual, does not have
that inherent right presently. Except
for the good will of an individual physician, or the open‑mindedness of a
health care facility, we as individuals have no right to access our own health
care records. That was not really
apparent to me until I had to access the health care system and had to deal
with many levels of our health care system as a result of an illness of my own
son.
It came as a shock to me, Mr. Speaker,
that social workers, psychologists, psychiatrists, educators, school
counsellors, teachers, principals, school boards all had access to my son's
records, but I was not allowed to see those records. It certainly hit home to know that as a
mother or as a direct user of the health care system I did not have that
inherent right.
So, Mr. Speaker, this legislation attempts
to address something that basic. It is a
very fundamental, first‑base principle, the right of each one of us to
access our own health care records and to have a reasonable process put in
place to ensure that right of access, to ensure limitations on that right of
access, to ensure an appeal process for when access is denied under the
provisions of this law, and to make it possible for each and every one of us to
know about our own health, our own well‑being, our own problems, our own
illnesses, our own medical needs, our own health care requirements so that we
in turn can have a greater role in the delivery of our own health care system,
and thereby lead to a more efficient, effective health care delivery system.
Mr. Speaker, I believe, and I am sure
there are others in this Chamber who believe as well, that the goal of health
care reform, something we all share, cannot be separated from empowerment of
individual health care consumers. I
believe, as do many others, that through accessing our own health care records,
having more information about the system and the practitioners that address our
health care needs, that we can actually lead to more effective, efficient
health care delivery.
Mr. Speaker, let all members in this
Chamber know that today, in 1992, consumers of health care in Manitoba do not
have a right of access to their own medical records unless legislation provides
that right, and so we end up with the most unusual situation in Manitoba today
where it is possible because of legislation to access one's records if one is a
client of Workers Compensation. One is,
in certain circumstances, able to access records pertaining to mental health
because that is stipulated in mental health legislation. But on the general front of health care
records and access to those records, there is no general provision, no
legislative right.
* (1730)
Let all members in this Chamber know and
understand and discuss that health care consumers have an inherent right to
personal information and that that information should not be withheld, as a
matter of human dignity. That is what we
are talking about, something as basic as dignity and respect about ourselves,
about our well‑being, about our place in this society today. This legislation first and foremost begins to
provide criteria, stipulation, methods by which one can access records
pertaining to the health care status of that individual.
This legislation also addresses another
fundamental principle, and that is the question of confidentiality. It seeks to entrench in legislation, it seeks
to entrench in statute law, the principle of maintaining confidentiality. Nowhere is that spelled out. It may be a principle followed by many
practitioners and a general rule of thumb in all of our health care facilities,
but is not entrenched in law. There is
no legal basis by which an individual can challenge a breach of
confidentiality, can demand that confidentiality be recognized, be
acknowledged, be entrenched.
So, Mr. Speaker, we have two very basic
and fundamental principles in this legislation.
I hope that members in this House will agree that it is an area that is
worthy of debate, worthy of detailed deliberations, worthy of committee
consultations.
I hope that members in this Chamber will
see fit to at least have this bill passed from second reading to committee
stage for that very important input and advice about amendments to this legislation,
for, as I said, there are flaws in this bill.
I have consulted with many groups and
organizations and individuals. I have
pursued a process put in place by Jay Cowan before me. I have heard the benefits of such legislation
from many, and I have heard some specific concerns from some organizations
about how such legislation should be drafted and framed.
I am pleased, Mr. Speaker, that we have
had the benefit of some very solid advice and input from such organizations as
the Health Care Consumer Rights Committee of the Manitoba Association for
Rights and Liberties, the Health Record Association of Manitoba, the Manitoba
Association of Registered Nurses, the Manitoba Nurses Union, the College of
Physicians and Surgeons, the Manitoba Medical Association, many nonprofit, self‑help
community health organizations, many health care trade unions and many
interested individuals and concerned citizens in our society today.
There is, I think, a growing and
overwhelming recognition that this legislation is long overdue. It is something that is happening across this
country. I hope that we are ready for
this challenge, and I look forward to the advice of all members on this serious
matter. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Leonard Evans
(Brandon East): Mr. Speaker, I wish to join the debate on
this particular Bill 36, introduced by my colleague the MLA for
I rise to support my colleague the member
for St. Johns (Ms. Wasylycia‑Leis) in this very basic piece of
information which, as she explains, is something that has been advocated by
many organizations in Manitoba, health care organizations and other community
groups such as the Manitoba Association for Rights and Liberties, the Manitoba
Association of Registered Nurses, the Health Record Association, various trade
unions, the College of Physicians and Surgeons and so on.
Indeed, there has been research done in
this matter by our former colleague, Mr. Jay Cowan, when he was critic for
Health. I think I agree as well with my colleague the member for
I find, in fact there is a precedent, I
suppose, Mr. Speaker, in this House, in this very session, because I believe it
was the member for The Maples (Mr. Cheema) who brought in the private member's
bill on health care directives. This is
legislation referring to living wills, and lo and behold, not long afterwards
the Minister of Justice (Mr. McCrae) brought in Bill 73, The Health Care
Directives and Consequential Amendments Act.
So there is a precedent for the government taking a good idea and going
to bat with it.
(Madam
Deputy Speaker in the Chair)
I find generally that in this country it
is very difficult for citizens to get information. In fact, it is even, in spite of freedom of
information legislation, difficult to get information on the operation of this
government, and it is certainly difficult‑‑well, it is impossible
to get information on medical records in this province.
If we did pass this legislation, it would
make it possible for health care consumers to access their own records. As I stated before, the Manitoba Association
of Rights and Liberties is on record in this matter and have indicated in one
of their reports that health care consumers do not have a legal right to
examine and to copy their records. There
is an exception. The exception is users
of psychiatric facilities and workers under The Workers Compensation Act. Those are two exceptions.
We argue, and MARL, the Manitoba
Association of Rights and Liberties argues, that this right should be available
to all. There should also be a right to note in the record any corrections of
factual information or disagreement with the contents of the health care
record. Believe it or not, that is
something that happens often, in fact happens too frequently in many areas,
including this area of medical records, so this would be a step forward in
providing access to information to Manitobans.
There has been research on this particular
question done by various authorities.
Back in December of 1977, there was an article prepared by Professor
Alan F. Weston called Medical Records Should Have Access. In this particular report he wrote, and I am
just quoting: The movement to give
patients a legal right of access to their medical records parallels attempts by
parents and students to get access to school records and of consumers to get
access to credit bureau records. These
are part of a growing citizen self‑determination and place limits on the
power of institutions to determine important aspects of people's lives without
due process‑oriented procedures.
* (1740)
As I said, Madam Deputy Speaker, this was
an article written by a Professor Weston back many years ago in 1977, about 15
years or so ago. Since that time there
have been developments in
As I understand it, the provinces of
As I indicated a moment ago, we have moved
partly in this direction by legislating access to medical records and doctors'
reports for Workers Compensation claimants‑‑this was back in 1983‑‑and
also for patients being examined or treated in psychiatric facilities. This occurred in this Legislature in 1987.
I would observe that medical records can
have and do have a profound impact on a person's life. They are, after all, used by many
professionals as a way of determining medical treatment and including possible
confinement of those particular individuals, and they are used to determine if
an individual is entitled to compensation or to insurance. So in many ways they may have a powerful
influence on critical events in a person's life. This is one very important reason for members
of the Legislature to support this particular bill of my colleague the member
for
We believe also that to deny access to
these fundamental, important records to the very individuals whose lives could
be most significantly altered or affected by those same records is a denial of
natural justice and simply unfair. The
previous government, as I said, had recognized the inequity, at least in these
two areas, that is, the Workers Compensation area and the psychiatric
facilities area. So it has been
recognized previously.
Historically there has been some
opposition by the medical profession to this type of legislation, that is,
legislation that would require them to provide access to and copies of medical
records to patients. There are a number
of concerns, and we might as well recognize them and lay them on the
table. One concern is that the
individuals involved could misinterpret their records and medical condition and
therefore lead to some problems simply through misinterpretation of the record,
of the material, of the comments of the doctors.
A second point of opposition by the
medical profession is that a person's health might be adversely affected by information
in the records. That is, knowing the
truth as indicated in the record could have an adverse effect on the
individual, perhaps leading to some psychosomatic problem. Therefore, it is argued by those doctors that
only the medical team is capable of determining whether or not the release of
information would be detrimental to the individual.
Another argument used to oppose this type
of legislation goes along these lines:
that the records are the property of the physician, of the doctor, or perhaps
of the hospital or the laboratory, and the patient is paying for this treatment
in services. The patient is not paying
for the information, so therefore the patient has no right to the information.
Again, I am not saying that these
arguments do not have any validity whatsoever, but they are among the prominent
arguments put forward by the profession.
Another argument that doctors may use
against this legislation goes along this line:
medical professionals may have written derogatory, defamatory or
frivolous comments in records because they were not concerned that the patient
would have access to them. In other
words, they may have, in a moment of weakness or in a moment of frivolity,
written some type of comment that they may not wish the patient to see,
regardless.
But, of course, this is an argument
against retroactivity, and we are not talking about retroactive access
here. So, presumably, if a doctor or a
lab technician or a hospital official realized that the patient could have access
to his or her records, that these kinds of defamatory or frivolous comments
would not be inserted into the records.
Also, another argument against it is,
well, the records may contain information about more than one individual. That, indeed, is a problem. But, again, that could be corrected if the
physician recognized that people should have access to these records, and
therefore perhaps attempt to keep them separate. Then, another argument still,
is that it might encourage frivolous lawsuits and open health care workers to
charges of negligence. I would trust
that would not happen. But, at any rate,
that is the concern that the medical profession has.
Another argument used is that medical
professions will be less forthright and candid in their record keeping if they
know patients will have access to those records. Therefore, the professional involved may be
not as forthcoming in writing down valuable information, and therefore the
records would be less than complete and less valuable to other professionals
who may need to access those particular records.
I am advised that other jurisdictions
which have passed legislation allowing access to records have found that these
criticisms, although they have potential, have not been well‑founded, or
where they have been founded they have been dealt with successfully by
particular features of the legislation.
In other words, there could be clauses within the legislation to ensure
that some of these criticisms would not have any basis. In other words, there could be adequate
protection for doctors. There could be
adequate protection perhaps against frivolity on the part of the consumers,
that is, frivolity in engaging in lawsuits.
I should put it in another way perhaps‑‑a clause that would
discourage frivolous lawsuits.
Mr. Justice Horace Krever, in his 1980
report of the commission inquiry into confidentiality of health information,
supported the development of statutory right of access to medical records in
the following way, and if I could quickly sum up by using this quotation: The principles upon which this position is
based can be summarized as follows.
First, as an incident of human dignity a patient ought to have the right
of access to the most personal information about himself or herself. No person even though he or she may be a
professional with much knowledge and experience should be entitled to withhold
that information. Second, the patient in his or her own interest should be able
to correct any information which may appear on his record. Third, the patient will have a better
understanding of his or her treatment and be in a better position to assist in
future care. Fourth, access to the file will allow a patient to make an
informed consent to the release of information from the file to a third party
when necessary. Fifth, access creates a
feeling of trust and openness between patient and health care providers and the
quality of health care will thereby be enhanced.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I see my time has
expired so I will have to conclude. I
will simply say that I would commend this legislation to other members of the
Legislature, and hope that they will give it their support as I have indeed
given my support to this bill. Thank
you.
Mr. Jack Reimer
(Niakwa): I move, seconded by the member for St. Norbert
(Mr. Laurendeau), that debate be now adjourned.
Motion agreed to.
Bill 56‑The
Public Health Amendment Act (2)
Ms. Judy Wasylycia‑Leis
(
Motion presented.
* (1750)
Ms. Wasylycia-Leis: Madam Deputy Speaker, I am also pleased today
to be able to introduce Bill 56 at second reading before this Legislative
Assembly and again to encourage all members in this Chamber to look at the
content of this bill very seriously and to ensure that a thorough dialogue and
opportunity for input is had at the committee stage.
Like Bill 36, Bill 56 has had a long
history of dialogue and discussion in the
Also Bill 56, like Bill 36, came about as
a result of a lot of hard work and research and consultation by a former member
of this house, a colleague of ours, Jay Cowan, the former NDP Health critic and
member for Churchill. This bill
addresses the fact that there is nowhere in legislation a requirement to report
adverse reactions to vaccinations.
So, Madam Deputy Speaker, this bill does
precisely that. It is basically a bill
to allow for some reasonable reporting of adverse reactions so that we have a
better basis of knowledge upon which to make decisions, a better mechanism for
ensuring some redress for individuals who have suffered the consequences of an
adverse reaction or who have dealt with the pain and sorrow of a family member,
a child who has died or become seriously disabled as a result of an adverse
reaction to a vaccination.
I want, Madam Deputy Speaker, at the
outset to indicate quite clearly that the introduction of this bill does not in
any way indicate a questioning on our part as to the benefits of mass
immunization. It is generally accepted
by all of us that immunization has been a factor leading to the reduction of
many diseases. We know that the general
population has benefited, and we will continue to advocate for immunization
that leads to the reduction of disease and for the introduction of new vaccines
when benefit has been demonstrated.
That is why in recent times we have been
raising the issues of meningitis. We are
pleased to note that this government is moving to ensure coverage under our
health insurance plan of haemophilus vaccination B. Pardon me, if I have not got the exact
medical presentation of that vaccination down pat, but I am sure members in
this Chamber know what I am referring to.
Madam Deputy Speaker, let there be no
mistake about our commitment to immunization and mass vaccination. However, we cannot ignore the fact that there
is evidence and considerable evidence to show that immunization has caused
disability and death in some healthy infants, can cause disability and death in
some healthy infants.
As has been stated by parents affected by
this situation, vaccine‑damaged children and their families are a small
percentage of the population but they are a hurting percentage. Furthermore, it
is clear from reports and committees who have reviewed this matter thoroughly,
it is highly likely that even the most sophisticated vaccines will carry some
risk of adverse reaction.
As a report, by the Infectious Diseases
and Immunization Committee of the Canadian Paediatric Society reported some
years ago, although the number of people involved is small, the injury is
tragic.
We are bringing this legislation forward,
even if the benefits will only make a difference for one individual. There have been some concerns expressed with
respect to this legislation. I am not
here to pretend that this bill has had unanimous support in every aspect and
facet of our society. There has been considerable concern that such a bill
might lead to less commitment to public immunization. There have been concerns that this may be a
duplication of efforts.
In our view, this bill requires among
other things that a detailed family history be taken, that advice on the
benefits and possible adverse reactions to vaccinations be provided, that
mandatory reporting of adverse reactions is required for accurate determination
of the incidence of vaccine‑damaged persons and that this information be
registered with the Minister of Health (Mr. Orchard) and the Department of
Health with the government of Manitoba.
It is our view that these are not onerous
demands on the part of practitioners and facilities and health care
professionals, that these provisions make sense, that they can only benefit all
of society in terms of our understanding of the benefits and negative impacts
of vaccination, and that in fact this mandatory reporting and legislative
provision outlined in Bill 56 may make a difference in terms of preventing any
unnecessary deaths or disabilities among healthy children.
It is our view that this bill deserves
serious consideration, that we ought to hear from the groups and individuals
concerned at committee, and that we ought to proceed with some form of
legislation recognizing the adverse reactions to vaccinations in the context of
what makes good healthy public policy, that being immunization on a broad basis
according to certain standards and guidelines.
With that, I encourage all members to look
at this bill seriously, to have an open dialogue on it and to proceed further
at committee stage.
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order, please.
The hour being 6 p.m., this House is adjourned and stands adjourned
until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow (Wednesday).