Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, another family has come forward with the personal care home situations in Manitoba. The Normand family, dealing with what they feel to be the premature death of their father, is now launching a court suit against the Holiday Haven Nursing Home, which, of course, is funded and accredited by the provincial Conservative government.

They are alleging gross negligence, care deterioration and recklessness of supervision at the home. Families today joined our Health critic--families dealing with the Beacon Hill, Heritage Lodge, Kildonan place and Holiday Haven Home have joined with us in calling on the provincial government to have a public inquiry.

Would the Premier (Mr. Filmon) please answer in a positive way to the families of the four homes I just mentioned and call a public inquiry dealing with our personal care homes here in the province of Manitoba?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the member for Concordia brings this particular case to Question Period. This family has made allegations. They have chosen the route of civil litigation in which to pursue that. During the course of that litigation, the facts will come out. They have powers within that to garner the information which they want, and like all Manitobans, I think we have to wait for the facts to come forward.

Let us not forget that the Chief Medical Examiner for the province investigates all deaths in personal care homes or reviews all files related to deaths in personal care homes. That safeguard is always there in place. This family feels differently. They are pursuing it, as is their right through the civil courts, and we will see what happens with it.

Mr. Doer: Families have waited in Manitoba since this Premier (Mr. Filmon) promised in 1990 to deal with the personal care homes. Families have waited since 1992, since the Rusen inquest of the Anne Sands death. Families have waited since 1994 from the policy alternative report that the government has had. Families have waited since 1995 when the Premier promised to implement 39 recommendations on personal care homes. Families cannot wait any longer, Madam Speaker. Now the Morrissette family has taken the government to the Human Rights Commission alleging that vulnerable adults in the personal care home system in Manitoba receive less rights and less protection from the provincial government than vulnerable children, vulnerable children in any setting including a child care centre.

I would like to know, Madam Speaker, will the Premier override the stonewalling from the Minister of Health and deal with all of the issues since 1990, on personal care homes, and have a full public inquiry on behalf of the families of the vulnerable people in our personal care homes here in Manitoba?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, what I am interested in as Minister of Health as is in this side of the facts. The Leader of the Opposition continues to take innuendo and allegation and try to spin them into facts. Even the Free Press editorial writers identified that very clearly last week.

* (1340)

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, last year, the Premier (Mr. Filmon) said that the opposition was fearmongering when we were raising questions on the Holiday Haven Nursing Home.

I would like to ask the Premier if he had taken action on the Speech from the Throne, the Anne Sands inquest, the policy report that he had, the 1995 report that this government received and the 39 recommendations, if he had taken action on the questions raised by the member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) and the families, would Julius Molnar be alive today?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, that question from the Leader of the Opposition is absolutely the kind of contribution to this debate that is absolutely unwarranted. The Chief Medical Officer of our province has ordered an inquest, I believe, into the death of which he is talking and that inquest will reveal the facts.

The Leader of the Opposition is so impatient, so impatient to make a political issue whether there is one or not, that he ignores that process. I cannot be that irresponsible. This side of the House, we would like to see the facts. We have always said let us see what the facts are. The member opposite has already been the judge, the jury, has made the decision. I wish all of us could have his wisdom.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, this morning, families from four different nursing homes came together to say that staffing levels are inadequate, that no one listens to their complaints when they raise their complaints and that there is need for a public inquiry into the way personal care homes are operated. There has already been an inquest and one of the people from the inquest said those conclusions were not followed.

My question to the Minister of Health is why are you stalling? Why are you doing less for senior citizens? Why do you not do the right thing and today order a public inquiry so those people can have their voices heard?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, why will the member for Kildonan not wait to determine the facts? Why is his Leader, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer), making the decision to come to this House and say here are the facts on that particular case when the Chief Medical Officer is conducting an investigation? That is not a responsible way to deal with these issues.

Last week in the House we heard his colleague the member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton) talk about huge numbers of telephone calls and then admitted he was talking about a dozen or so. The members of the New Democratic Party should wait to see what facts come out, and we will then act accordingly based on fact, not on innuendo.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, how does this minister reconcile his statements this afternoon? How can he reconcile those statements when we raised the issues about Holiday Haven in the fall, when we sent 19 complaints to the Minister of Health, when I sent three letters directly to the Minister of Health calling for a change in management at Holiday Haven and it took finally a death at Holiday Haven for the minister to step in? How can the minister now refuse to follow up on complaints raised, not just by people at Holiday Haven but at other nursing homes? They are covering up.

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, no one is covering up. If there are legitimate complaints, they will be investigated. But what we have are members opposite taking bits of information, stretching the facts over and over again to make an argument for a case today that those facts have not yet demonstrated to prove. We have an inquest by the Chief Medical Officer; we will await those results. [interjection] Well, the member says one case. It is on that one case that they base their argument.

Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) has come to this House with the conclusions of that inquest, and it has not even been completed. Please let the system do its work.

Mr. Chomiak: On a point of order, Madam Speaker, I think the minister overlooked the fact that we raised examples of 19 separate situations at Holiday Haven, three separate letters, and we are not basing our case on one death but on many instances that the minister is refusing to acknowledge.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Kildonan does not have a point of order. It is a dispute over the facts.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Kildonan, with a final supplementary question.

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, I am appealing to the Premier (Mr. Filmon), as did the families this morning when they appeared. Will the Premier, who was prepared to order a public inquiry with Justice Hughes into the jail system, give the people of Manitoba the assurance, the senior citizens who have no voice, that he will call a public inquiry into personal care homes? If you did it for the jails, surely you can do it for the people in the personal care homes.

Mr. Praznik: The member for Kildonan, with great dramatic effect, says the senior citizens in our facilities have no voice. Does he imply that in their jail they are not visited by their friends, relatives and families on a regular basis? Is he implying that members of this Legislature do not as MLAs--

An Honourable Member: . . . implied. You do not care.

* (1345)

Mr. Praznik: The member said people do not care. Madam Speaker, this side cares. What we do not do are the kinds of sleazy tactics that the members opposite do and the Free Press clearly identified.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Madam Speaker, Beauchesne Citation 492 lists the terms that the minister was talking about as being unparliamentary.

Madam Speaker, I would ask that you would not only call the minister to order but ask him to at least once respond to some very real concerns that are being expressed on behalf of many Manitobans and today four separate nursing homes that are in question. Will you please ask him to not only be in order but to answer our very serious questions that are being asked on behalf of the people who are in our personal care homes, something that he should be concerned about rather than the kind of tactics we are seeing from this minister in this House?

Madam Speaker: I believe the honourable member for Thompson was raising a point of order on unparliamentary language. I would ask that the honourable Minister of Health withdraw the word. It was directed to a member or a group of members, and remind him that all members are to be referred to as "honourable members."

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, I believe I was quoting an editorial, but if I have offended the rules of parliamentary language, I certainly withdraw it, and I will table the editorial as well just for the purposes of the record.

Madam Speaker: I thank the honourable Minister of Health.

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, when we asked the Minister of Health why the Pharmacare program was being radically changed, it was clear that the real decisions were being made over here in the Minister of Finance's (Mr. Stefanson) office.

Will the Minister of Finance explain to this House why a little failing Grow Bond company, Rimer Alco, whose liabilities exceeded its assets at its last annual statement on March 31, 1996, who owes its shareholders, its bondholders, the government of Manitoba, banks and others money, why would this company be awarded by Treasury Board, which the Minister of Finance chairs, a contract when they are in deep financial distress, have no demonstrated capacity in the field and yet they are being given a contract by the Treasury Board, chaired by the Minister of Finance? Will the Minister of Finance explain why his Treasury Board awarded this contract to this company?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I believe in the bidding competition for that particular contract that this company, I am advised, was the lowest bidder and met the bond requirements that were part of that bid.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, what does the Minister of Finance have to say--the minister who is responsible for Treasury Board, not the Minister of Health--to the Canadian Federation of Independent Business who wrote to him, to the government on February 20 and said, "While this company may be an excellent manufacturer, it has not demonstrated any experience in . . . a home care service business"? He further said, "I am concerned that the decision to choose Rimer-Alco may have been influenced by the potential embarrassment of another failure."

How does the Minister of Finance explain Treasury Board's action in awarding a contract in spite of the fact that there are deep concerns about this company's ability to even survive, let alone to service this new contract? I will table this letter, Madam Speaker.

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, I will certainly be responding to the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, but as the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) has indicated, there was a process that this proposal went through. Rimer Alco was the lowest successful bidder meeting all qualifications. It is that simple.

The member for Crescentwood comes continuously with innuendos about companies throughout Manitoba trying to paint doom and gloom of various entities throughout our province, but the reality is this went through a process and Rimer Alco was the lowest tender, Madam Speaker.

* (1350)

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, will the Minister of Finance confirm that the recommendation, the unanimous recommendation from the bid selection committee was that the contract be awarded to another company, that in fact the other company to which the contract was recommended was in fact the low bidder for the contract for a three-year period, low by some $75,000? That was the recommendation of the committee that reviewed the bids, including an external accountant, an accountant who said: I have grave concerns about the ability of this company to deliver the services.

Will he in fact confirm that fact?

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, without accepting any of the numbers put on the record by the member for Crescentwood, I have already indicated, as has the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik), that this tender went through a process and Rimer Alco was deemed to be the lowest bid meeting the necessary qualifications. It is that simple.

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, we have been imploring this government to stop the privatization of health care and admit there is no place for profit when lives are at stake. Now, in privatizing the home oxygen supply service, this government is more concerned about propping up the failing businesses of their friends than ensuring the health and safety of Manitoba patients.

I want to ask the Minister of Health: how does he respond to the CFIB letter that was sent to him on February 20 that states that Rimer Alco clearly does not have the demonstrated expertise, knowledge of the program or experience in dealing with this smaller group of the community?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I am somewhat amazed by the question from the member, because the member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale) in the last question implied we should have awarded the contract to another company. Now she is telling us from the same party that we should not have awarded it to anyone, so I am not quite sure where the New Democrats are coming from on this.

Ms. Cerilli: I want to ask the Minister of Health: why is this government putting the health and safety of more than 800 home care patients, 30 of whom are children, at risk with a company that clearly lacks the capacity to provide this kind of home care service of oxygen supply?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, I would like to know when the member became an expert in the supply of oxygen, first of all. Secondly, why would I put them at any less risk if I was awarding it to the contract that the member for Crescentwood is now promoting?

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, a point of order.

Madam Speaker, my words were that the recommendation of the bid committee was that the contract should be awarded to another company. I did not recommend it; my party did not recommend it. We oppose privatization of home care. I want the minister to correctly quote me and not to twist words as he is so wont to do.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Crescentwood does not have a point of order. It is clearly a dispute over the facts.

Ms. Cerilli: Can the minister table any documents to confirm that any other company had a higher bid than Rimer Alco when his own committee consisting of a Department of Health official, an official from the Victoria Hospital and an official from Government Services recommended against this company and other companies had a $75,000 lower bid over three years?

Can he produce any information that would contradict that?

Mr. Praznik: What I find most interesting about this whole issue, if one knows the history of the company Rimer Alco and their role in bringing oxygen concentrators to the province, if there is one thing that they have managed to do in their history in Manitoba is result in a significant lowering in the price of oxygen. They have created a competitive market in oxygen that has saved hundreds of thousands of dollars in our health care system.

What I am noticing now is we have the New Democratic Party saying we should not have reduced the price of oxygen thereby freeing up more money for health care. What they are in fact doing, Madam Speaker, is supporting an industry that has overcharged us in Manitoba for oxygen for years.

I wonder how many campaign donations they got from oxygen suppliers.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

* (1355)

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): My question is also for the Minister of Health. Perception is important on this whole issue of the oxygen generators and the contract that has been let out. I have had opportunity to talk to two or three individuals with respect to this particular contract, and there is a great deal of concern that it appears that the government might be trying to bail out a particular company.

I would like to table a shareholders' report that gives some sort of indication of the company that was, I understand, awarded this particular contract.

My question specific to the Minister of Health: was there any special treatment given to Rimer Alco in the awarding of this particular contract?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): If one looks back at the history of this particular company coming to Manitoba and beginning in the oxygen business with the oxygen concentrator, they have been the first competitive force in the supply of oxygen in many, many years. The result of this company has been they have forced significant decreases in the price of oxygen supplied throughout our system. They have saved hundreds of thousands of dollars, and as a consequence there has been a fierce competitive war with the traditional suppliers of that product.

What I hear today are members of the opposition, quite frankly, continuing wanting to see that protection continue. Rimer Alco, as a company, have saved the taxpayers of this province hundreds of thousands of dollars in oxygen costs, if not millions, over the last number of years.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Inkster, with a supplementary question.

Mr. Lamoureux: My question is fairly simple in terms of the preferential treatment. This is a company that has received thousands of dollars of assistance through Grow Bonds, and others.

My question specific to the Minister of Health: was any preferential treatment given to this company in the awarding of this contract?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, I understand from the department officials that I spoke to on this matter that in terms of the costs--and I believe Treasury Board has reviewed this--that they were the lowest bidder and met the performance bond. Quite frankly, I know that those who were not and those who have concerns about the continued existence of Rimer Alco--because they are a tremendously competitive force in the marketplace--have brought these matters to members opposite, and I think very much that is what this is about.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I would seek assurances from the Minister of Health and the Premier that in fact there was no ministerial interference in the dealing out of this particular contract.

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, what I can say as the current Minister of Health is I am assured by those who have worked on the numbers on this contract that they were the lowest bidder. Let us also put in perspective, because I see a great deal of attack about Rimer Alco, that Rimer Alco as a company has done more to reduce the cost of oxygen and save money in health care in our system than any other supplier in decades. Let us keep that in mind as well before we start attacking the company.

Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Madam Speaker, I think we have established that the bid was awarded to Rimer Alco even though they are not the lowest bidder and that it was against the recommendation of a government committee that another company be awarded the contract. This was not the best bidder by any stretch of the imagination.

Will the Minister of Finance confirm that Rimer Alco was unable to come up with the required bid bond of $1.75 million to ensure that they could perform the requirements of the contract, in other words, that no bonding source would take a chance on this failed company? Why did Treasury Board agree to go with this company when they could not secure the bonding necessary?

Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): Madam Speaker, there is a familiar ring to this kind of question from the opposition. They come with half facts, incorrect information. The facts are that Rimer Alco was the lowest overall cost proposal submitted for the services. One of the conditions when we award these types of contracts is that they have to be bonded. That will certainly be a condition of awarding the contract to Rimer Alco. Let us be clear on that. My understanding is, yes, they can and will be able to obtain the bonding that is--

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Finance, to complete his response.

Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, these members opposite are unbelievable. To finalize the contract, bonding has to be in place. I am told that, yes, the bonding is and will be in place for Rimer Alco, but no contract will be finalized with Rimer Alco unless the bonding is in place. That is easy to understand. They seem to have difficulty across the way understanding. In typical fashion they come with incorrect information, half-truths, and put absolutely wrong information on the record as the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) did just last week on the whole issue of gaming in Manitoba, a common pattern.

* (1400)

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Burrows, with a supplementary question.

Mr. Martindale: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Finance if he could clarify whether or not, as he has said--well, he said two different things. Is the bond in place or will it be in place? It cannot be both; it has to be one or the other. And why was the bond not in place before the contract was awarded?

Mr. Stefanson: As I indicated, upon review of all of these contracts, one of the requirements is that bonding be in place to ultimately award the contract. I am told that, yes, bonding is in place, and it will have to be in place to award a contract to Rimer Alco or any other company that is successful. Simple to understand. I think everybody else can understand this other than 23 people across the way.

Mr. Martindale: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Health why he awarded this contract to a company with very little experience, without trained staff, and why is he putting 800 clients at risk, 30 of them children, vulnerable children, high-risk clients of home care? The home care people who are experts in that field tell me that if people are untrained and inexperienced, then someone could die as a result of their inexperience. Why are you giving this inexperienced company this contract?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, first of all, just a few minutes ago in this House we heard the member's colleague say that even if the company was experienced and met all these qualifications, we should not award it to them anyway because it should be kept in-house. So is this an ideological debate, or is it one that really is concerned about the consumers in the province?

Madam Speaker, company bids have to meet the requirements of the contract, and that is to provide appropriate and safe service to the people that they are serving.

Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, last year this government brought Louis Riel's letters home to Manitoba and so reclaimed these documents for our history. Now this same government is selling 35 historical documents, including Riel's power of attorney and letters of administration, the 1873 patent of the Hudson's Bay Company and the 1907 land sale of the St. Peters Band to the Rural Municipality of St. Andrew's, viewed by many historians as the most disgraceful land swindle in Canadian history.

To the minister responsible for Land Titles: does the fact that the recent budget turns the Land Titles Office into a special operating agency more interested in profit than in heritage explain why what should be protected, Manitoba historical artifacts, are now being privatized and sold for profit on an exclusive basis to legal firms?

Hon. Mike Radcliffe (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): Madam Speaker, I do not accept any of the inflammatory and salacious remarks that were raised by the honourable member for Osborne with regard to the preliminary remarks on this; however, I will take her inquiry as well founded, and I will take that as notice and bring back the specific information to this Chamber.

However, with regard to special operating agencies, I would assure my colleagues here that special operating agencies--

An Honourable Member: Are you selling them or not?

Mr. Radcliffe: --do create--and I heard response from the front benches which I believe I have addressed.

Special operating agencies have reformed the way that government provides effective and efficient service to the people of Manitoba, and I would commend the earnest attention of the member to that issue.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On a point of order, Madam Speaker, my understanding was that the minister had taken the question as notice. I just want to assure the minister we do not get paid by the word in this House, something I would probably benefit from, but if he has taken it as notice, he should probably come back at another time and explain it.

Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, on the same point of order.

Mr. Radcliffe: Madam Speaker, I would like to be responsive to my honourable colleague across the way and to assure him that old habits do die hard, but I would assure him that I want to be as complete and as open with the administration of our departments, so therefore I want to give every opportunity to my colleagues in this department to give them all the information that I have at hand.

Madam Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, indeed the honourable member for Thompson does have a point of order. I would remind all honourable ministers that if they take a question as notice, that is all that is required and no further comment is required.

Ms. McGifford: Madam Speaker, I would like to point out to the minister that whatever my words were--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Osborne was identified to pose a supplementary question in which there is to be no preamble or postamble.

Ms. McGifford: Well, I will try not to be salacious.

My question is for the Minister of Culture. While selling the record of the St. Peters Band land sale to a legal firm fits with the continual betrayal of aboriginal people in this province, by what authority did this government decide to offer historical artifacts and records as promos for legal firms?

Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Madam Speaker, I was just visiting our Heritage services branch this morning. The one thing that I was so very impressed about is how well they work with all departments of government to assist all departments of government and citizens of Manitoba where decisions are being made. So I just wanted to, first of all, say to the member that the services of the Heritage services branch are available and they are very willing to assist.

The details of the authority, Madam Speaker, I will take as notice and get back to the member on that.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Osborne, with a final supplementary question.

Ms. McGifford: Again, to the Minister of Culture: since this sale was planned while the Minister of Culture was the Minister of Justice, could she please tell the House who recommended the privatization of historical records and exactly why?

Mrs. Vodrey: I have noticed the member's questions often are not totally accurate in terms of the information that she brings forward. Sometimes there appears to be a kind of a slant or an edge to them, so I think the most important thing would be to bring back to the House and bring back to the member information on any of what she has put on the record to determine in fact if she is accurate and then to give her the information she requires.

* (1410)

Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): Madam Speaker, my questions are directed to the Minister of Health.

On March 16, 1995, just days before the provincial election was called, the then Minister of Health announced over $600-million worth of capital in health care spending which he termed to be commitments and nonpromises. As a matter of fact, Madam Speaker, I remember the then Minister of Health stopping me in the hallway and asking me to congratulate him because he had made this commitment for capital and The Pas personal care home was included.

I would like to ask the Minister of Health today to tell the House when that commitment will be acted on, because the people in The Pas are anxiously waiting as to when that project might become a reality.

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, in the budget that was announced at the end of last week, in the new capital program we have additional dollars. We are going to be entering into a process with the regional health authorities to identify their priorities within that. I am certainly aware of the facility in his community which is old and in need of major work--we are talking about the personal care home--and I am sure that that will come out of that planning process with the Norman Regional Health Authority. In fact, we have already had some discussions about it.

Mr. Oscar Lathlin (The Pas): Could I then ask the Minister of Health to tell the House as to when the beds for mental health--again, the former Minister of Health promised for a long time--will be finally opened?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): I very much appreciate that question. I know the dollars for the capital conversions for those mental health beds--I believe there are 10 or so planned for The Pas. That is included within our already--our capital projections. I know that we want to be into that construction or conversion fairly quickly because they affect our plans with respect to the future of the building in Brandon. They are also very critical, I believe, to the future of The Pas Hospital and making better use of existing space within that facility.

Mr. Stan Struthers (Dauphin): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Natural Resources.

Drastic increases in park entry fees, camping fees and the eliminating of seniors' passes have contributed to this government's cash cow of $1.6 million. This government's tax grab extends to fishing licence fees, as well, for seniors, and that money will be swallowed by general revenue at a time when fish habitat should be a concern of this government.

Can the minister table what percent of the $1.6 million has been raised through increases in park entry fees, camping fees and the elimination of seniors' passes?

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, the member yesterday and again today is implying that there are copious amounts of money that are not going back to maintain the parks for which we are responsible. Let me just remind him, there have been hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on Hecla and washrooms and showers in Otter Falls, Falcon Lake, Birds Hill Park, Birds Hill Park electrification, Falcon Lake, New Nutimik Lake, and St. Malo campgrounds have been electrified. The sewage lagoon was done in south Nopoming and Duck Mountain, prairie restoration in Beaudry Park, the parking and area redevelopment at St. Norbert, just a few of the things that the department has spent very wisely in using those dollars on behalf of the people who use the parks.

Mr. Struthers: That is not the money that has been raised through the fees though.

Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Natural Resources): Madam Speaker, again, the member is wrong.

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, yesterday I asked the Minister of Health about the pilot project to transfer the postcardiac surgery rehab program from the St. Boniface Hospital to Reh-Fit.

I want to follow that up with a question to the minister to see if the pilot project is going to include a study to see if the participation rates lower because of this transfer and if particularly it affects the participation rates of people who live in the northeast end of the city of Winnipeg, especially if there are any other additional user fees that are charged.

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the member for Radisson may be very surprised at my answer, because the kind of concern that she would have over such a move is exactly what I would share as well. In this pilot project, I would expect if it is not in there now that it has to be to ensure that we are not diminishing the opportunity for people to use the program. I share that with her as well, being an MLA who comes from the northeastern area.

Ms. Cerilli: Madam Speaker, will the minister further assure the House that, after this pilot study, the finances for this postcardiac treatment program will travel with the program to ensure that there are no user fees for the services of this program?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, obviously we always want to ensure that the program is effective in being able to assist people who are in that particular situation. Obviously the cost of the program is a factor that has to fit into that, but certainly program dollars associated with a program have to travel with it when it moves.

Ms. Cerilli: Can the minister explain why his committee on postcardiac rehab which was set up to study the need for planning and expansion in this area has not had a meeting since last fall?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, I certainly cannot answer that question. If there is a need for that committee to meet, then it should be meeting, and it is not a committee that I have had an opportunity yet to meet with.

Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, in early February of this year officials of the Grow Bond department and this government met with officials of Labour Canada, at which time Labour Canada shared with the department the amount of wages owing to Woodstone employees, both at the end of the previous bankruptcy and at the final end of the company in its final stages. Officials of Labour Canada made very clear to the government the scale of the wages well before the Grow Bond refunds were sent out to the directors of the company. The government could have made sure that employees got their wages.

My question to the minister: why did the minister not hold back the Grow Bond payments to the directors of Woodstone so that employees would have something to claim against, so they would have some justice out of this process instead of giving money back to their friends?

Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Development): Madam Speaker, I am not surprised to see the member for Crescentwood wrong again. As a matter of fact, he brings half-truths to this House and continually bases his question on that kind of information.

Madam Speaker, I indicated earlier to him, when he came up with this question before, that indeed we would follow the law and ensure that the law was enforced when we paid out the Grow Bonds, and that is exactly what has happened with Woodstone. We have had officials from my department check with legal services to ensure that indeed we were following the act in the law, and that is exactly how we will proceed.

* (1420)

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, there is nothing in The Grow Bond Act that specifies the period of time before which the payments have to be sent out.

Madam Speaker, why did the government not act to ensure that the Grow Bond payments went out to the directors subsequent to the ordering of payment of wages and payment of benefits to those workers under the labour Canada act? Why would they not act for justice for workers instead of doing favours simply for their friends? They had the opportunity; they did not use it.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Derkach: Madam Speaker, he is the last person in the world who would stand up for workers in rural Manitoba, because he was the member of this House who stood up and indicated that the jobs in Portage should cease and that Woodstone products should be moved to Winnipeg and the plant should be set up in Winnipeg.

Madam Speaker, that is not standing up for families in rural Manitoba. That is not standing up for workers in Manitoba. We will stand up for the people of Manitoba and for the people who work in the various enterprises in this province.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Crescentwood, with a final supplementary question.

Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, the question is very simple. Will the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gilleshammer), will the Minister of Rural Development, will they stand up for workers who are owed hundreds of thousands of dollars, whose mortgages are at risk, whose families do not have employment, or will they simply stand up for their friends, former bagmen of the Tory party, rich people who have always had benefits? Who are they going to stand for? That is the question.

Mr. Derkach: Madam Speaker, this government and I as minister will always stand up for workers in Manitoba.

Madam Speaker, during the difficulties at Woodstone products we ensured that we did everything possible to ensure that the families of the people who worked at Woodstone would be protected in every way and that those jobs could be protected as long as possible. We worked and the staff of my department worked day in, day out to try and preserve those jobs when that member, the member for Crescentwood, tried to close down that plant at the earliest convenience.

Madam Speaker, today, just in the House earlier today, we have another attack by this member on a rural company where families and workers are working at Rimer Alco in Morden. Why is he attacking the rural workers and the rural families of this province?

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.