Home Care Program
Privatization--Public Hearings
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, my question is to the First Minister.
People from across this province came before the Legislature today to talk about their desire for the government to put on hold their plans to privatize and have profit in the home care system here in Manitoba. They spoke very strongly about their beliefs in the existing home care system, the home care system that has been built in Manitoba by Manitobans. They talked about the dignity of home care, the independence in our community that home care provides and they talked about the fact, Madam Speaker, that they were not involved in the original decision of the government opposite to proceed with the privatization plan. They very clearly want to be involved in a decision that affects them so directly, and clients from across this province want the government to put their plans of privatization on hold. In fact, they said that Jim McCrae and We Care is on one side and, to quote correctly, the rest of Manitobans are on the other side.
Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier to involve the clients of home care in the decisions that government is proceeding with, put on hold their plans to privatize and introduce profit in our home care system and call on public hearings as asked for by the many, many clients who were in front of the Legislature here today.
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, the issue here is that we must be able to assure that services will be provided when services are required and to the best possible standards that the people expect of us in home care. That is why we have more than doubled the budget for home care since we have been in office; that is why we continue to add funding so that we can provide for all of the needs of all of the people who depend upon home care.
We only need to look at the current circumstances to know that if we are in a position of having a monopoly deliverance of service, people who want to get into an argument over all sorts of issues will arbitrarily withdraw their services from the people who need them most, and we cannot tolerate that situation. We need a system that provides the services on an absolutely guaranteed basis, on an assurance for their needs, not in the way in which it is done today so that people who require the most, the people who are most vulnerable are put at risk, are made to feel vulnerable because some people for their own purposes, union bosses, will arbitrarily withdraw the services and put them at risk.
* (1420)
Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, for 22 years we had a system that had no disruptions until this government proceeded with profit and privatization. There is the person responsible for this dispute, right there, across the way. Those are not my words. Those were the clients that were speaking today at that rally at noon.
I want to table a letter from the Manitoba seniors organization, a letter sent to the Premier (Mr. Filmon) and Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) today. Again it amplifies the position that Manitoba seniors have taken all along, in their earlier letter where they asked this government to put on hold their plans and have public meetings. They have asked this government to put on hold plans that will affect their daily lives. They have said to the government, stop the betrayal of your election promises to the people who built this province. They go on to say in their letter, we need continuity of care in our system and the private profit system being proposed by the government would not give us that continuity of care.
Will this Premier now put on hold what speakers called today the revolving-door model of home care, as proposed by the Filmon government with this profit ideology? Put it on hold and have public hearings. Let the people speak out about what their vision is for profit or nonprofit in home care.
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the preamble of that question was spoken like a true union boss, which is exactly what the Leader of the Opposition is. He does not know that he has a responsibility to the people who are in need. He does not know that he has a responsibility to all Manitobans. He only has a responsibility to his union boss friends because he still thinks he is one. That is his problem.
Madam Speaker, we are with the people who need the services. We are with the people who want to get an essential services agreement, not with the members opposite who want to deny them their services, who want to use them as pawns in an ideological struggle where they stand shoulder to shoulder with their union boss friends.
Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, a supplementary question.
This letter came from the Manitoba seniors. This Premier had the gall to say in the election campaign that we must respect the people that built this province. Madam Speaker, some respect from some Premier who is breaking every promise he made.
Now the Manitoba seniors, one of four groups that use home care, clients that were there today--the Premier can foam at the mouth and try to create blame where blame does not exist, but these are the people that use home care. The Manitoba seniors today said that they want the government to put their ideological privatization profit plans on hold and have public hearings. The seniors today said they want the government to stop the radical ideology and listen to the seniors.
I am just asking the Premier a very simple question: Will he put his ideology on hold, involve the clients and stop the privatization plan until we have had public hearings across this province? Listen to the people.
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the only people who are being blinded by ideology are the Leader of the Opposition and his colleagues and their union boss friends. They are the only ones who have said that this is pure ideology. From our perspective, it is pure service to the people who need it most, when they need it, how they need it, in the best possible delivery mechanism, with alternatives and with competition in the system to ensure that never again will they be held hostage to the Leader of the Opposition and his ideologically bound union boss friends to ensure that they have their needs met.
Home Care Program
Privatization
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): From the Premier’s comments, it is pretty evident what is wrong in this debate. This government and this Premier is not willing to listen to anybody and is prepared to blame everybody but himself with regard to this problem.
Madam Speaker, my question is for the Premier, who talked about monopoly. Can the Premier explain how dividing up the city of Winnipeg into four areas and giving monopolies to four private companies is somehow going to improve the quality of care and home care delivery in the city of Winnipeg?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, this government has demonstrated its commitment to the people who need home care services in this province. Over the last eight years we have increased funding for that program by more than 100 percent, way, way more than anything the honourable member’s colleagues ever dreamed that they would put into a home care program for the seniors and others in our province who need those services.
I will tell the honourable member, Madam Speaker, that what he and his Leader are doing today is reflecting the mentality of those union leaders who first conduct a strike vote and then do not even show up for good-faith negotiations on how to get services provided to the people who need it in this province.
Mr. Chomiak: My supplementary to the Minister of Health: Can the Minister of Health explain something that he has never been able to explain? He has talked about documents that say “all” or “out” and that there is confusion about the government’s privatization. Why does the minister’s plan, his Treasury Board document, the document he signed off, the document the Premier approved, say, divestiture of all service delivery? It does not say some. It does not say part. It says divestiture of all service delivery.
Why did you propose the proposal, privatization of all services?
Mr. McCrae: The honourable member has to acknowledge that nothing that he has brought forward is at odds in any way with the position taken by his friends at the leadership levels of the Manitoba Government Employees’ Union.
If there is one thing the honourable member is consistent about, it is his slavish support for the senior levels of the union movement in this province, Madam Speaker.
The honourable member refers to privatization, which has been in existence since the beginning of the government’s involvement in the Home Care program.
Madam Speaker, the Victorian Order of Nurses is a private, non-profit organization that has been doing work under the Home Care program without tender for years. It is time for some competition, very simply, in order to make sure that we are getting the right price, the right effectiveness, the right efficiency, the right scheduling for home care services. The honourable member is against all that. He has made that clear.
In their approach, which is to say that they reject a report that they must have paid millions of dollars for, Madam Speaker, their position becomes very, very shallow indeed.
* (1430)
Mr. Chomiak: My final supplementary to the minister: Can the Minister of Health and the Premier, or perhaps the Premier, who are unable to respond to the seniors or anyone in Manitoba, can they finally answer for the people of Manitoba why they have proposed, not only for monopolies to be set up in the city of Winnipeg and that VON lose the contract, but that all the nursing service has to be privatized by this government, with respect to privatization policy? Why will you not defend your own policy?
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, the honourable member has just defeated his own argument. He talks about four monopolies in the city of Winnipeg. Well, the last time I checked, when you have to tender and compete for the work, that is not a monopoly, and the honourable member wants to talk about four of them. It is outright nonsense what he is talking today and does not help his case one bit.
Home Care Program
Canada Health Act
Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Madam Speaker, the Manitoba Society of Seniors and the representatives of the network of retirees are not union bosses. They are retired citizens who have built this province. They met with the Minister of Health to express their concern about privatization, and they write, no evidence that the present home care system is not effective has been submitted. Quite to the contrary, they write, experts in the field have praised Manitoba’s home care system as the best model in North America, and they say that privatization is the thin edge of the wedge in the destruction of medicare.
Madam Speaker, my question for the Minister of Health is, will the government acknowledge that home care, which is not covered under the Canada Health Act, can be completely deinsured, become a user-pay system without breaking that Canada Health Act? Will you acknowledge that?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, if you look at the Price Waterhouse report, which was commissioned by the NDP, it seems rather apparent that those things are possible. The NDP-commissioned report suggests user fees and cuts in services. Does the honourable member need anything else for an answer?
Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, will the government acknowledge that it is privatizing home care precisely because they know that home care is outside the Canada Health Act? They can further offload costs on the consumers, on vulnerable senior Manitobans. Is that why they are privatizing?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, all you have to do is read the NDP-commissioned Price Waterhouse report to know that if they had not been thrown out of office in 1988, seniors would likely be paying user fees today and having their services cut.
Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, will the minister, who absolutely refuses to answer this question, then finally table legislation to bring home care under the Canada Health Act as a fully funded service, so that Manitobans can be sure that user-pay will not become the order of the day under his government?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, one of the reasons the New Democrats under Pawley and Doer were thrown out of government in this province was that they had no sense of the reality of that day, nor do they have any sense of the reality of today.
One of the realities is that under all of the difficult circumstances governments everywhere in this country are facing, in Manitoba the budget for home care has more than doubled in the last eight years. Honourable members opposite have not embraced one idea in the last eight years this government has been in office that we have brought forward.
They are opposed to living within our means. Madam Speaker, that says it all. That tells us the whole difference between the New Democrats and anybody else in existence today; most of the people in this world recognize that living within your means is something you might want to consider. We are committed to it, but at the same time, funding for home care doubles in eight years. Does that not say something about the priorities of this government which far outshadow the priorities of the honourable members opposite?
Home Care Program
Privatization
Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): This minister better not lecture us on being thrown out of office because that is exactly what will happen to this government if they do not stop their attacks on home care and health care.
I would like to ask a question to the Premier (Mr. Filmon). I am reminded of the fable about the emperor who has no clothes, because everybody in this province knows that the government is making a mistake by privatizing home care except the government itself.
I would like to ask the Premier one very simple question: Will he not listen to the people of Manitoba and particularly the clients of home care, admit he made a mistake and withdraw the disastrous plans to privatize home care?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I can assure the member opposite that we will continually learn from their mistakes because they continue to make many, many mistakes by backing people who will not provide essential services for the most vulnerable in society who need their assistance, who need their service through home care. They of course will not see those services provided. In fact, they cheer them on in keeping the services away from them because they do not believe in serving the needs of the people. All of their rhetoric--we will continue to learn from their mistakes.
Madam Speaker, we are here to provide the assurance to the people who need home care that they will always get it, that they will never have that home care withdrawn arbitrarily because they have put some people in a monopoly position who will use it for their own political purposes. We will assure people that they will always be served when they need it, how they need it and to the standards that they expect.
Mr. Ashton: I will try once again. Will the First Minister admit today that there are no objective studies, no objective reports, no recommendations pointing to any advantages for the privatization of home care?
Will he not, in the face of all the response that we are getting from the people of Manitoba, admit this government made a mistake and stop the privatization of home care?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, when I see the tactics to which honourable members opposite will stoop to in a situation like this, I am more than convinced that there is absolutely nothing in any argument they make. They have absolutely no case to make for the patients and the clients of the home care system in Manitoba when they turn their backs on people who have Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, severe arthritis, multiple sclerosis, and refuse to agree that they should get essential services. These honourable members have nothing to say about home care.
* (1440)
Home Care Program
Privatization
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Premier or the Minister of Health, whomever chooses to answer the question, I guess. The question quite simply is that over the last number of days as an opposition party we have attempted to get specific information from the government. The question put quite simply is: In thinking of the clients, could either the Minister of Health or the Premier indicate to us what specific recommendation or specific report suggests or hints that the privatization of home care services is going to be in the best interests of the client?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, last year when the best interests of the client required that there be some backup service available when regular staff were on vacation or when regular staff called in sick, it was felt that to let a contract for that backup service would be the thing to do, and I did not hear anything from the honourable member for Inkster at that time. Tenders were let and a private company was the successful bidder, and now we are able to provide better services for our clients.
An Honourable Member: They botched it the first few weeks.
Mr. McCrae: The honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) talks about something having been botched. He should go and have a little head to head with Peter Olfert, who is the head of the Manitoba Government Employees’ Union who spoke very highly of that particular program. Even though it is contracted out--it is a private for-profit company that got the contract--Peter Olfert, as reported in the pages of the Winnipeg Free Press, spoke very highly of that particular program. Later on, it was felt that intravenous therapy, expansion of that service at St. Boniface Hospital, would be appropriate. That was tendered out and, in this case, the Victorian Order of Nurses won that particular contract.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I would appeal to the Premier (Mr. Filmon) to answer this question: Specifically, what recommendation did this government, did this Premier and cabinet, take into consideration in deciding to privatize home care services?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, there are numerous recommendations, numerous studies, reports, most of which, if not all, have now been made available to honourable members. The honourable member for Inkster has acknowledged himself that he has not read them all. There is so much information for the honourable member, he has only to read it.
The issue is not who delivers the service but that the services are delivered, and that there are quality issues properly dealt with, that standards are observed or met or exceeded. Those are the kinds of things that all the studies talk about. In fact, all of the reports do not really come out specifically one way or another in terms of service delivery, because as honourable members know, including the honourable member for Inkster, without tender, the Victorian Order of Nurses has been providing on a contracted basis for a long, long time nursing services under the Home Care program.
So the honourable member for Inkster who is a Liberal--usually Liberals can go one way or the other and on this one they have chosen to throw in their lot with the NDP. They will regret that one, I can tell you.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, the Minister of Health is wrong. We are behind the clients, not the New Democrats, quite frankly.
Will the Minister of Health then indicate to the Chamber, is the Minister of Health in his full-speed-ahead privatization of home care services prepared to give consideration to establishing in the criteria a minimum salary wage for home care service workers?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, it is one thing to say you are behind the clients, and it is another thing to be behind the clients. If the honourable member is behind the clients, why has he not stood to his feet to demand that if the union bosses and their NDP friends insist on being on strike, why will they not provide essential services to certain Manitobans who desperately need them?
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Point of Order
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, on a point of order, Beauchesne's is fairly clear and indicates that answers to the questions should be somewhat relevant. If the minister does not want to answer the question, he does not have to answer the question. He could follow the lead that the Premier (Mr. Filmon) took in refusing to answer a question that I posed.
Madam Speaker, I would request the Minister of Health to answer the specific question that was posed to him, and if he did not want to answer the question, then do not bother standing up.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order, the honourable member for Inkster does have a point of order. I would remind the honourable minister that his response should be relevant to the question.
Business Advisory Board
Appointments
Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, recently the Minister of Education established a business advisory group to, quote: play a pivotal role in forging dynamic partnerships between education and business.
Could the minister explain the reasons for the selection of Bev McMaster of We Care home care for a committee whose role is to ensure that, I quote: business interests are reflected in the implementation of educational renewal in Manitoba?
Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, we are attempting, in establishing a business advisory committee, to make sure that as we look at emerging sectors in society, we look at the areas of society that are requiring increased emphasis because society is moving in a certain way.
We know the home care field, for example, as we move from high-cost, acute-care hospital institutional care to personal care or to home care, that we require advice on the types of situations people are facing and the type of training then that educational institutions will have to put in place to provide workers trained in those areas in a wide variety of sectors.
Ms. Friesen: Could the minister explain why this committee has no representation from strategic economic sectors such as agribusiness, telecommunications, the energy sector, mining, and transport, and yet the minister points to this as an emerging sector of Manitoba education?
Mrs. McIntosh: Madam Speaker, we do have on that committee a wide variety of organizations and groups that represent skills and talents that are transferable or that have expertise in certain kinds of businesses. We have, for example, the Manitoba Federation of Independent Business. We also have people who are involved in working in very large complex businesses that use certain kinds of technology and computerization that are applicable not just in one industry but many.
We also seek to ensure that we have high-quality people and good gender representation. The person she spoke of earlier, Bev McMaster, is recognized right across the country. She is an award-winning entrepreneur who, after a few years in business, has been recognized and given awards of distinction for quality care, one business award that she won. Entrepreneur of the Year is another award that she won. She was nominated for the Women of Distinction Award and a wide variety of other things. So she has a very high reputation for credibility with the YWCA, YMCA, those types of people who recognize and applaud publicly her distinctions in the marketplace.
Lottery Revenues
Child Daycare Centres
Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister responsible for Lotteries.
The minister should know that Manitoba nonprofit community daycares have been excluded from receiving any lottery funds, including activities such as fundraising bingos. Daycares received lottery funding starting in ’88 under the NDP government and continued up to ’92, reaching as high as $1.1 million in 1990 and averaging $750,000 during that time. Since then, daycares have received just $16,000 in the past three years, two years with no grant at all.
My question to the Minister responsible for Lotteries: Will the minister tell Manitobans if his government will reinstate funding for the nonprofit, community-run daycares from his ever-increasing lottery revenues?
Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Lotteries Corporation Act): Madam Speaker, without accepting any of the preamble, I know there are opportunities for daycare associations through our community council program, through our Community Places Program and other vehicles that do provide funding. There is a process that all organizations go through in terms of requesting whether it is bingo events or other licences in terms of charitable undertakings, and certainly they have the opportunity to go through that process as well with the Manitoba Lotteries Corporation.
* (1450)
Ms. Mihychuk: Madam Speaker, I would be glad to provide the annual statement--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for St. James was recognized to pose a supplementary question.
Ms. Mihychuk: Will the minister review the practice of excluding nonprofit daycares from fundraising opportunities like bingos, in the name of fairness?
Mr. Stefanson: Madam Speaker, I believe our support for daycares here in Manitoba is literally second to none right across Canada. We have already outlined very clearly for the member that there is a series of vehicles and avenues available for daycare organizations and there are opportunities to apply through the Manitoba Lotteries Corporation.
Gambling Facilities
Local Entertainment
Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, rumour has it that the Minister responsible for Lotteries--
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Ms. McGifford: I will rephrase my question. It has been reported that the Minister responsible for Lotteries, not satisfied with the stupefying effects of VLTs, now plans to import robotic music into casinos. Decisions like these insult Manitoba culture and local musicians and deprive local Manitoba musicians of gainful employment. This idea is bad cultural policy and crazy economics.
I would like to ask the Minister for Lotteries to explain to the House and to local musicians his preference for prepackaged mechanical mindlessness over real music and real jobs for real Manitobans.
Hon. Eric Stefanson (Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Lotteries Corporation Act): Madam Speaker, the member for Osborne may be an expert in terms of marketing of what is required at our entertainment facilities. I certainly am not. I think she is fully aware that there is an independent board of our various Crown corporations as there is with the Manitoba Lotteries Corporation. There is a management structure that makes decisions on an ongoing basis in terms of what they need to do to continue to attract individuals and make the facilities an entertaining place for individuals to attend at.
But I do want to assure her that we do share the concern about live entertainment and opportunities for Manitoban musicians. I think if the NDP looked back at the nine budgets that they have now voted against, they would find that our support for the arts and cultural community and the entertainment industry, again, has been second to none, Madam Speaker. There are continuing opportunities, and there will be continuing opportunities for Manitoba artists, musicians and entertainment at these facilities.
Ms. McGifford: Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister for Culture, Heritage and Citizenship if he will intercede with his colleague the Minister of Lotteries (Mr. Stefanson) and work to reverse this doubly damaging decision which would favour robotic music over real music and would deprive local musicians of employment opportunities.
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Madam Speaker, I truly look forward to getting into the Estimates process so we can go into a lot of detail about how our cultural budget supports individuals in this province. In fact, I was on the same platform as the member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans) on Saturday, and he knows full well that the Brandon community applauded the government for the amount of money spent on the juried art show. I did note, though, that the member for Brandon East said, we should spend more, but that particular group was quite happy.
I would refer honourable members to an item in the Toronto Globe and Mail that said, Manitoba should have a standing ovation for its tremendous support of the arts community.
Domtar Site
Cleanup Proposal
Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Environment.
This government has yet another proposal from Domtar to clean up its contaminated site in Transcona. It has come full circle, and they are again proposing on-site capping and storage. A Department of Environment contaminated sites expert, in response to the company’s proposal, has written: All of the highly impacted soils must be excavated and removed from the Transcona site to remove all of the future concerns of potential risks and liabilities.
He goes on to recommend that they not provide a level of support for this proposal.
I want to ask the minister how the government is responding to this proposal, given the recommendation of its own contaminated sites expert.
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Madam Speaker, obviously the member would like to negotiate in this Chamber how remediation of this long-contaminated site should be handled.
We are taking all information and using it to the best advantage of the cleanup of the site, and we want to make sure that we involve the local community in the decision-making process. I hope that her objective is to proceed in that manner because it is my understanding that the local citizens may have, or should in fact have, a great deal to say about the type of remediation that is put in place.
Ms. Cerilli: I would like to ask a supplementary question, get in with the innuendo in a moment.
Is it the opinion or the position of the government that this on-site remediation would trigger legislation on hazardous waste disposal grounds which would disqualify this proposal only on the grounds of the proximity to housing--not only on those grounds but on many others?
Mr. Cummings: Madam Speaker, the member says she wants to avoid the innuendo. Perhaps she should respond directly to the question then, in her next question, about what her thoughts are about whether or not the people in the community should have something to do, or does she want to make this settled politically?
Ms. Cerilli: Madam Speaker, my third question for the minister is: What is his position, what is the government’s position, with regard to this proposal and legislation and regulation on hazardous waste disposal? This facility will be too close--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Mr. Cummings: Madam Speaker, this speaks volumes to how it is so difficult in this House to provide information to genuinely concerned members and then have it stuffed back in your ear in Question Period.
Madam Speaker, I want to indicate very clearly that it is my intention to do everything possible to make sure that that community is adequately protected.
Point of Order
Ms. Cerilli: On a point of order, I would ask you to call the minister to order, Madam Speaker. If he is making reference to the material or the information or the questions I ask in the House, I am doing my job in representing the constituents of Radisson who have elected me.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Radisson does not have a point of order. It is clearly a dispute over the facts.
* (1500)
Manitoba Junior Hockey League
Championships
Mr. Gerry McAlpine (Sturgeon Creek): I have a question for the Minister of Environment. Madam Speaker, I know the Minister of Environment has no control over the weather which we have been having over the last little while, but I do recognize on this side of the House how popular and how proud we are of the constituencies and the communities that we represent.
I would like to ask the Minister of Environment for what reason he wears the sweater in the Chamber today and how he came by achieving that sweater and why he wears it so proudly in the House today. I would like to have the minister share that with the House today.
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Madam Speaker, in my enthusiasm for the support of the Manitoba Junior Hockey League, I said that I would wear the sweater of the winning team and that team is proudly supported by my colleague from Sturgeon Creek. I would like to add my congratulations to the St. James Canadians in their outstanding victory and wish them well in the competition where they are presently engaging the champions to the west.
BFI Landfill Site
Minister’s Position
Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Last week the city began a campaign to have Winnipeg residents call the government urging the Minister of Environment not to give Browning Ferris Industries a licence to build an environmentally unfriendly, economically unnecessary landfill site in Rosser.
Will the Minister of Environment please explain his comments in the Free Press several days ago, how the city and its residents are “inviting political interference” by sharing their legitimate concerns with the minister.
Point of Order
Hon. Jim Ernst (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, on a point of order, any member of the House should not be called upon to answer questions on their statements made outside the House or statements referred to in a newspaper report, of all things. That question is clearly out of order.
Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): On the same point of order, Madam Speaker, it is quite common for members of the House to use a variety of sources, including media reports, but the question was, in itself, most definitely in order in asking about the question of political interference, and I suggest that you not only rule in order but ask the minister to respond to it.
Madam Speaker: The honourable government House leader, on the same point of order.
Mr. Ernst: When I was on my feet earlier, I did not have the direct quote from Beauchesne, but I could provide it to you now: Beauchesne's Citation 409.(10): “A question ought not to refer to a statement made outside the House by a Minister.” Quite clear, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order, I would draw to the attention of the honourable government House leader that Beauchesne Citation 410.(2) supersedes Citation 409. (10). It reads, "While some previous guidelines remain valid, others have fallen into disuse, e.g. that it is out of order to ask about matters reported in the media or statements by Ministers outside the House or ‘certain questions regarding government policy.’”
* * *
Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister of Environment, to respond to the question.
Hon. Glen Cummings (Minister of Environment): Madam Speaker, very clearly, any licence that this organization is seeking as a director’s licence, as Minister of Environment I am the appeal to that licence. It is certainly my intention not to be defending in advance of the director having made a decision of what that decision might be.
Madam Speaker: The time for Oral Questions has expired.