Home Care Program
Privatization
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Premier (Mr. Filmon).
Over the last week we have been asking the government to provide independent evidence on the merit of their decision to privatize home care here in the province of Manitoba. We have cited the Kane and Kane report . We have cited other documents indicating the government was heading in the wrong direction. We have asked the Premier for independent studies or advice that led to the government’s making what we consider to be a very wrong decision on the home care services here in Manitoba.
Last evening, Dr. Evelyn Shapiro appeared before a number of clients and a number of citizens of the province and provided a considerable amount of evidence of why the government's policy and ideology to privatize home care would in her opinion cost more and provide less service, particularly less service in the area of continuity of care with the workers, with the people and clients who require this very vital health care service.
I would like to ask the Premier, will he put his minister's decision and his government's decision on hold, and will he meet with people with expertise in these areas like Dr. Evelyn Shapiro, and make a decision based on health care merit, not on the ideology of the government?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the honourable member should be consistent. If he is going to refer to opinions placed before the public by people like Evelyn Shapiro, then he should not stick to just the one opinion. There are other opinions that have been made available by Evelyn Shapiro and others. But certainly with respect to her work with the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation, when it comes to other health issues honourable members opposite choose to say, well, there is no credibility. I think they call it a Tory-funded Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation. So let not the honourable member play that sort of selective game with the people of this province. What we are trying to do is improve services for our home care recipients in Manitoba and to do it for many, many years to come.
Mr. Doer: I would like to table a document presented to the minister yesterday by Mr. David Martin who is the provincial co-ordinator for the Manitoba league of persons with disabilities. I would like to table that for the Premier’s attention.
Madam Speaker, it is the Premier who is making the decision to privatize home care. It is the Premier’s staff who are directing some of these decisions in health care. It is the Premier’s former chief of staff or chief communicator who is involved in some of the communication strategies about these ill-thought-out decisions.
I would like to quote from Mr. David Martin, who is in fact a person who deals with many clients, who says that many disabled people are worried about their future with home care and he has not found one person, one client who has been in favour of the government’s policy to privatize this very vital service, this very vital home care service.
I would like to ask the Premier, would he put this decision on hold? I am asking the Premier, the head of the government, the person where the buck stops, will he put on hold the decision to privatize home care and meet with David Martin and other clients of home care service who are begging this government to stop privatizing home care and listen to them?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, I have met with Mr. Martin on many occasions. I know colleagues of mine have done the same. Mr. Martin’s contribution to our self-managed Home Care program is very, very much appreciated.
Honourable members opposite had to be dragged kicking and screaming to agree with giving some people some autonomy and allowing them to make choices and decisions for themselves. The honourable members opposite ought to be scorned and criticized a lot for that particular position they have taken with respect to self-management for people and independence. Honourable members opposite only like to whisper their support for that in case their union boss friends hear that they support it.
Privatization--Consultation
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): The minister has just indicated to this House that he has met with Mr. Martin about this issue. In Mr. Martin’s brief--and I would ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon) to read this because I think the minister is misleading the people of Manitoba--he says he has never, ever been consulted by the provincial Conservative government about the privatization of home care.
He goes on to say, Madam Speaker--and I address this to the Premier--that the government is making such a large decision about something that impacts on their lifestyle, on their independence. The government is making this major decision which they were never, ever consulted on.
I would ask the Premier now, in light of the contradiction from the Minister of Health, in light of this contradiction to the people of this province, to listen to David Martin and other clients who have never been consulted, contrary to what the Minister of Health has said, and put this decision on hold.
Will the Premier now himself consult with health care economists and health care clients about a very wrong decision on the service and cost to people who rely on home care here in the province of Manitoba?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): The honourable member should understand something. David Martin and many others have followed very carefully developments in health care in Manitoba. It was way back in 1994, I think it was, that the Seven Oaks Hospital project was undertaken and a report prepared and produced. At that time, I remember a front page news headline talking about these being possibilities for the future. This was long before the election. The honourable member--all the petitions that he has written up refer to things that were said before and after. This sort of thing that we are talking about, the use of competition to provide better services for people, was discussed way back when, and never the subject of anything but openness on my part with David Martin or with whomever I happened to be talking.
Home Care Program
Privatization
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, the most needed services by home care clients is the home support program. Home support costs in Manitoba according to Professor Shapiro are the lowest in the country. In Manitoba, the costs for this service are $10 per hour, whereas in other jurisdictions such as B.C. they are $17 an hour and Quebec, $16 an hour.
Can the Premier explain to us in this House today why the government is taking the most cost-efficient program in the country and privatizing it when it already is demonstrated to be cost-effective and efficient?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Again, Madam Speaker, there is a selectiveness here that does not bear out all of the facts. What Dr. Shapiro forgot to mention, or did not mention in any event, was that in most provinces in Canada the concept of contracting out these services is underway. But when we are talking about costs, Dr. Shapiro forgot to mention that in most provinces of this country, with the exception of Quebec and Manitoba, there are user fees charged.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, can the minister, therefore, when we are talking about cost and user fees that he still has not refuted from his original document, can he explain why Professor Shapiro also said yesterday, why is she hearing rumours in the system about things like core costs, core plus costs, core--[interjection] The minister laughs--
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
* (1420)
Mr. Chomiak: Can the minister explain why his document has wording to the effect and why Professor Shapiro said she is hearing in the system about things like core, core plus and core plus plus payments? Can the minister explain what that is?
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, I am sorry if I am amused by the--I am not sorry. I am amused by the honourable member’s question because he talks about rumours and Dr. Shapiro asking about rumours, and he wants me to confirm or explain why Dr. Shapiro is concerned about these rumours.
He is the person who is passing the rumours around. He and his union boss friends are putting out stories about user fees and cuts to services. Maybe that is where Dr. Shapiro got it, because she certainly did not get it from me.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, I will let perhaps the bemused minister--
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Chomiak: Perhaps the First Minister (Mr. Filmon) will answer this question, if the bemused minister will not.
Can the Premier explain why and where savings are going to be made in the program since the Premier has said there will be $10-million savings in the privatization? His own minister has said there will be no savings in the privatization, and the associate deputy minister says she thinks there might be $10-million savings, but they are not sure. Can the Premier explain that?
Mr. McCrae: The honourable member has already made this case for me. He has, by putting--with the use of incorrect information, I might add--by trying to make the point that there is no increase in spending in home care, which any review of the budgets of this province will demonstrate there have been repeated increases year after year, but I cannot demonstrate that we can show you that we have value received for all of those millions of increased spending.
We are up to about 113 percent here in the city of Winnipeg alone in terms of increased expenditures in home care for the past eight years, and yet I cannot show you that we have increases in service to clients to that particular extent. We know, by improvements in efficiency of scheduling services and other improvements brought about by allowing competition to be brought in, that there will be savings. At the same time we are adding $8 million, finding savings. These are ways that we are going to be able to provide service to people for many years to come.
If we depended only on honourable members opposite, they would be out borrowing money and so on, but they cannot do that anymore because the bankers of this world see New Democrats coming and say, stay away from my door.
Health Care Facilities
Closures
Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, in December the Minister of Health indicated that Seven Oaks Hospital and Misericordia Hospital would be closed; Seven Oaks would be closed and turned into a geriatric centre, Misericordia into a walk-in clinic. When asked about savings, he could not answer. He said that the costing would be done before February. In February we were told the costing study still was not ready. We are losing skilled doctors, nurses and other staff, putting patients and their families under great and unnecessary stress and holding up real reform of the hospital system.
Will the minister tonight tell the patients and staff of Misericordia Hospital, at their vigil at which he is going to speak, that he is now going to abandon this ill-advised, ill-considered, unplanned plan?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I hope that I will be able to have an opportunity to tell those who are there that the plans brought forward by the design teams are the subject of cost-benefit evaluations at the present time. If the honourable member thinks we should not undertake those things, let him say so.
Mr. Sale: I would have done the studies first, Madam Speaker.
Will the minister finally acknowledge that the real savings in closing these hospitals, whose combined budget is over $96 million a year, will not likely even reach 10 percent of this total and may well be less? Will he finally admit that he has no plan and virtually no costing data at all at this time?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, if the honourable member is so interested in savings, let him track down his good friend Bob Rae and find out how much the closure of 10,000 acute hospital beds in Ontario saved that particular government. Let the honourable member ask his friends in Saskatchewan how much they saved by closing down 52 rural hospitals in the NDP province of Saskatchewan.
If the honourable member is suggesting that we should be proceeding with either abandoning or accepting recommendations without the benefit of a cost-benefit analysis, let him say so.
Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, will the minister then commit today to releasing the costing data before any decision is made so that Manitobans can judge for themselves the merits of closing and changing these hospitals in Winnipeg?
Mr. McCrae: Until the cost-benefit analysis is completed, I do not have anything to make available to the honourable member, but like everything else in this process, it has been an extremely open process, and I am--[interjection] Well, the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) was invited and took part to some extent in the discussions in the forum put on by KPMG, which is all part and parcel of this process. The honourable member for Kildonan himself was involved in that. The member for Crescentwood (Mr. Sale), I do not know. Did you show up? I forget. But the honourable member may have been there as well, so do not tell me that it is not an open process. That is exactly what it is, and that is why there is so much debate about it--because it is a very open process.
Home Care Program
Privatization--Rural Manitoba
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, even though this government has no studies or reports to prove that home care will improve under privatization, they are continuing on this path, and they are misleading people in rural Manitoba by saying that there will be no changes to the delivery of home care in the rural area. In fact, all direct service workers in rural Manitoba have received a letter saying there will be no changes in how home care will be delivered in rural Manitoba.
I want to ask the minister how he can make statements like that when his own cabinet document says that the rural health authorities will take over all delivery services, including home care services, by April 1997.
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): I thank the honourable member for that question because I do not want there to be any confusion about the announcements that have been made and the initiatives proposed. Honourable members know that there are some people who have been misled into thinking that there would be changes like user fees and changes like cuts in services. This is the reason that I wrote to home care clients. And I will do it again, Madam Speaker, and again and again if it is necessary, to counter the misinformation that is put out by honourable members opposite and some of their friends in the union movement.
In rural Manitoba the rural health associations will indeed be responsible for the delivery of the whole range of health services, including home care, in the future. So I am not able to say that forever and ever there will be no changes because I do not know what approach the rural health associations will take. No doubt those associations will be watching the performance of the home care system here in the city of Winnipeg. If they find that it meets the expectations we expect that it will, they may indeed move in that direction. But that is for them to decide and not me. As long as standards are maintained at levels that are satisfactory to the government of Manitoba, the regional health associations will be in charge of the delivery of services.
Ms. Wowchuk: Why then did the minister send a letter directly to its workers saying there is going to be no change when he is saying right now that it is open to change? What kind of image are you trying to create in rural Manitoba, saying that there is not going to be a change?
Madam Speaker: Order, please. I would remind all honourable members that questions are to be a single question, not multiple-part questions, and they are to contain one carefully drafted sentence.
Mr. McCrae: I hope the honourable member is not attempting to split hairs here. What I am talking about with respect to changes with the clients of our home care system is to counter the allegations, untruthful, malicious and mischievous allegations made by certain people in our province with respect to user fees which we are not bringing in with this initiative, with respect to cuts in services which are not part of this initiative. Indeed, the only place that there are no user fees in this whole country are Quebec and Manitoba.
* (1430)
Ms. Wowchuk: I would like to ask the minister if he can tell this House whether the regional health authorities will have the opportunity to continue to offer not-for-profit home care service, as is in place right now, or whether they will have to contract out services as is being proposed here in Winnipeg. What are the options for people of rural Manitoba?
Mr. McCrae: I have answered that question already. The regional health authorities will be responsible for the delivery of home care services in the regions. It is their decision as to how it is done. The point is that certain levels of service and standards have to be reached or else there will be problems for those associations.
Home Care Program
Privatization--Rural Manitoba
Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): Madam Speaker, this government, and its contingency plan for a possible home care worker strike, has instructed the local hospital in Winkler to make 10 acute care beds available. Yet, in this area, of the 165 home care patients, 65 are heavy-need patients.
Will the Minister of Health tell the House what will happen to the 55 heavy-care patients who will not be able to get into Winkler hospital?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, I certainly do not wish to see people left without services because their care providers make a decision to withdraw services. Let us say that I feel very strongly about that. I hope the honourable member does too and does everything that he can, and maybe persuade our friends in the New Democratic Party, to work with their friends in the union movement to ensure that people do not withdraw services from their patients. But a responsible government has to be prepared for such eventualities. Just in case the New Democrats decide that they do not want to put the patients first, we are going to have to have a contingency plan, and we do.
Labour Dispute
Mr. Gary Kowalski (The Maples): Will the minister be providing additional funding to the hospitals to compensate for extra demands made upon them, even if he has to use lottery revenues to make up for the shortfall in funding?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): With due respect to the honourable member, it is not my intention to discuss all of the aspects of the contingency plan because, Madam Speaker, I hope we do not need one, frankly. But, we have clients who need services and we are not going to turn our backs on them.
Mr. Kowalski: Have the extra demands that will be placed on the Manitoba hospitals in the event of a spring flooding been taken into account in the contingency plans for the home care strike?
Mr. McCrae: Well, the Minister of Natural Resources (Mr. Driedger) has warned us that that is a potential and a possibility and a probability in a lot of areas, so obviously it is something that you have to have a contingency for.
Independent Schools
Funding Formula
Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Education.
In 1990 when the Filmon government made its agreement with private schools to increase the funding to 80 percent of the provincial public school grant, the private schools naturally anticipated considerably increased funding, but by 1996 it was clear that the government was intent on systematic reductions of public school grants; consequently, the funding for private schools would also be less.
Could the minister confirm that private schools requested a new funding formula based on the total cost of educating a child in the public system, a formula which holds out for them now the prospect of increases?
Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, the member, of course, presumes that funding for education continues to go down. She presumes that the expenditure per pupil will continue to rise. I tell her that boards across this province are working hard to contain the expenditure cost per pupil to reduce it if they can and that her assumptions that funding decreases will continue if we can get to our debt concern and if we can get to our federal counterparts are both erroneous assumptions.
I can indicate to the member that the funding for independent schools will rise in a few years to 50 percent of the cost per pupil of educating a child in Manitoba, which equates in dollar terms to the same amount as the earlier descriptive of 80 percent of the funding. Six of one, half a dozen of another, whether it is an advantage or a disadvantage.
Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, did the minister tell school trustees across Manitoba, as they faced a $15-million provincial cut, that when they voted yes this year to tax increases, as some of them did, they were automatically voting yes to a proportionate increase to private schools?
Mrs. McIntosh: Madam Speaker, having been a trustee, I could indicate that when trustees are voting for tax increases, they do so based upon all the things in front of them that affect them, and they work very hard to make sure that they do not have tax increases. In every instance, trustees work for that.
Madam Speaker, as I indicated before, the member’s assumptions that education funding will continue to decrease and that per-pupil cost will continue to increase are assumptions and speculation. In terms of whether it is based on cost or on funding, there are advantages and disadvantages either way. I am saying to her that funding equates in dollar terms to the same.
Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, could the minister tell us why she continues to refuse to place that agreement on the table? Let us look at the numbers. Let us look at the figures--
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mrs. McIntosh: Madam Speaker, the question has been asked many times and answered many times. You know, we could just rehearse this and rehearse this until we are finally ready to put on our show, but I think we have been through the subject over and over again, and I do not think there is--
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
* (1440)
Social Assistance
Food/Clothing Allowance
Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, last year when we asked questions about families on social allowance having to use their food budget to pay their rent, this government said that those are choices that people have to make. It seems that with the budget, the government is now making that choice for people by cutting some $10 million from social allowance entirely from the food and clothing allowance for recipients who are tenants.
I want to ask the Minister of Family Services to explain and justify taking the entire budget cut to the poorest families in Manitoba entirely from the food and clothing allowance, while guaranteeing some $50 million from provincial tax revenue to the landlords in Manitoba.
Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): Madam Speaker, I thank my honourable friend for that question because it does allow me again the opportunity to reannounce what we announced with our welfare reform package.
Within the Department of Family Services, the issues that we deal with and the people whom we deal with are some of the very most needy right across the province, people with mental disabilities that we have responsibility for support for. Those children who are a part of our child welfare system, we have to provide support for. We provide support for women who have been abused, women and their children who need refuge and some security in their lives. We provide support for daycare services, child care services throughout the province and also support for those who are not working and are on welfare.
Madam Speaker, we managed to maintain with this year's budget the support and the levels for those with disabilities, for seniors, for those single parents with young children, and for women and children who need the support of our shelters and abuse system. We have maintained the support where we feel it is most needed, and the most vulnerable have been protected.
Ms. Cerilli: Madam Speaker, I want to ask the Minister of Family Services or the minister responsible for residential tenancies or perhaps the Minister responsible for Housing to table one study or analysis to justify ensuring that landlords keep $50 million and that tenants on social allowance are going to have to lose 21 percent of their food and clothing allowance--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Mrs. Mitchelson: Madam Speaker, again, I thank my honourable friend for that question because it does allow me the opportunity to repeat that we believe, as a government, that the best form of social security is a job. The focus we are placing on our support is to look at employment first and provide the opportunities through new projects and new programs to try to help people train and enter the workforce. As we have said before, we do not want for the women and children in the province of Manitoba a lifetime of poverty on welfare. We want more from our system than a dependency on welfare as their only means of support. We are working very diligently to try to help those who are on social assistance become independent and build their self-esteem and provide support for their children through meaningful jobs.
Ms. Cerilli: Madam Speaker, with $98 million of taxpayers’ dollars going from the city and the provincial governments to landlords for often substantial housing for people on social allowance, I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services, who is on welfare, landlords or unemployed families?
Mrs. Mitchelson: Madam Speaker, I thank my honourable friend for that question because it does allow me again to look at where we have placed the priorities in the Department of Family Services, and our priorities are on those and providing support to those most in need. We have managed to maintain the support and our social allowance rates for those with young children, for those women who are in abuse shelters and for their children, for the elderly and for those with disabilities. We are, in many instances, putting in place support programs for those who are considered employable to help them find the opportunities and the job opportunities that will help them become independent and self-sufficient. We believe that the best form of social security is a job, and we are working towards that end with the decisions that we have made and the changes that we have made through welfare reform.
Goods and Services Tax
Harmonization
Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): I have a question for the Minister of Finance. Recent newspaper reports have stated that the Prime Minister and the federal Finance minister have been holding secret negotiations with provincial Premiers to gain support for harmonization of the GST with the PST. Atlantic provincial governments are now actively considering harmonizing based on a promise of transitional financial assistance.
My question to the minister--[interjection] If honourable members would give me a chance, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Leonard Evans: My question to the minister: Has the Premier (Mr. Filmon) or himself, the Minister of Finance, met with the Prime Minister or the federal Minister of Finance to discuss the possibility of harmonization of the GST with the PST?
Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): I am not aware of any meetings on this issue with the Prime Minister. I have had meetings with the federal Minister of Finance on this issue amongst many others over the course of the last couple of months. I am certainly prepared to, in more detail, provide our position on the issue.
We have had a series of concerns about harmonization that we discussed in this House on many occasions. One of them is the loss of revenue to our provincial Treasury. Another one is the shift from businesses to consumers. Another one is the broadening of the base to a whole range of items that the provincial sales tax currently does not apply to: books, children’s clothing, and so on.
The federal government has offered some transitional funding as it relates to the loss of revenue for provincial governments, but that only addresses one of the concerns. So far those other concerns remain outstanding. As a result of that, we are not anywhere near any agreement on harmonization.
Mr. Leonard Evans: I thank the minister for that answer. This is a follow-up to that, Madam Speaker. Can the Minister of Finance assure Manitobans that they will not be enticed in any way by some type of short-term financial incentive by the federal government to harmonize our PST with the GST to help the Liberal government off the hook on their election promises regarding the GST?
Mr. Stefanson: As I responded to in the first part, the issue of loss of revenue to our Treasury is one of the concerns, and the federal government has put forward some offers in terms of transitional funding. But that is only one of the concerns, and even if that gap could be bridged, there are still these other concerns which have not been addressed, as I said in the previous answer. They have not been addressed to our satisfaction, and obviously there is no benefit to Manitobans to be harmonizing with the GST.
Elimination
Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): I thank the minister for that answer. Would the minister be prepared to advocate with the federal government a new, fairer tax, namely a financial transaction tax on stocks and bonds, which could be as little as one-tenth of 1 percent on such transactions and yet raise enough money to abolish the GST in Canada entirely?
Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister of Finance): If the member for Brandon East has any details on his proposed tax increase I would welcome assessing them and looking at them, but--
An Honourable Member: He is very experienced in that area.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. I know this has been a long afternoon, but I certainly would appreciate the co-operation of all honourable members in showing courtesy to each other, whether the opposition is posing a question or the government is responding.
The honourable Minister of Finance, to quickly complete his response.
Mr. Stefanson: Just concluding, Madam Speaker, we certainly recognize the expertise the NDP bring to tax increases, but Manitobans have told us consistently they feel they pay enough taxes to all levels of government--federal, provincial, municipal, school boards and so on. If he has some particulars he would like to share with me, I would be more than pleased to look at them.
* (1450)
Manitoba Hydro
Employment Reductions
Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Madam Speaker, this past February the Dominion Bond Rating Service, which I have a copy of here and I am sure that the minister does, stated that, and I quote: Manitoba Hydro, with its low variables, semivariable costs, helped by high hydro generation, is probably in the best competitive position of any of the Canadian electrical utilities, and it should be able to compete in any market east, west or south.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order. The honourable member for St. James, to complete her question.
Ms. Mihychuk: Madam Speaker, I would ask that side of the House allow us the opportunity to ask questions, which is our right.
Madam Speaker: Just ask them.
Ms. Mihychuk: Yesterday, in Question Period, the minister admitted that Manitoba Hydro, which has already cut 500 jobs and taken Filmon Fridays, is being restructured but declined to give any details. Can the minister now tell the House how many more jobs are going to be cut at a time when Hydro has record profits and contracts through Limestone that go to the year 2006?
Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister charged with administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): It is a very opportune moment that the member for St. James asked me this question because I happened to be going through a press release that she issued some time ago on the issue of map staking, where she indicated that the province was about to get into map staking with no public discussions or consultations, in her press release. The reality was absolutely opposite, and the member for St. James brings information and innuendo continually to public debate that is not true at all.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for St. James, for one very short question.
Privatization
Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Madam Speaker, I think the minister is confused. I am not talking about map staking, I am talking about Hydro.
Madam Speaker, can the minister, in all seriousness, assure this House and Manitobans that he or the Premier’s Office will not privatize any unit of Hydro or any service that Manitoba Hydro provides?
Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister responsible for Hydro, for a very short response.
Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): Madam Speaker, I certainly was aware the member was talking about Hydro. What I was talking about is the member’s accuracy in bringing forward information.
Let me just say to the honourable member, and she had a briefing this morning with Manitoba Hydro, that Manitoba Hydro is undergoing an internal reorganization which is designed to ensure that it continues to be one of the most competitive utilities in North America.
Madam Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired.