Madam Speaker: Prior to Oral Questions, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the public gallery where we have this afternoon 19 visitors from the Teens Against Drunk Driving Program under the direction of Mrs. Dorothy Streamer and Mr. Bob Davis. This group is located in the constituencies of the honourable members for Flin Flon (Mr. Jennissen), Interlake (Mr. Clif Evans), Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson) and Thompson (Mr. Ashton).
On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon.
Breast Care Services
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, yesterday we asked the government about its closure of the comprehensive breast care program at the Misericordia Hospital. We asked questions of whether the government had consulted with patients. We have since heard from people that have been patients and are patients of the Misericordia Hospital comprehensive breast care program. A person named Shirley Gering yesterday stated that we have something great here, please leave our services where they are--as a statement to the provincial government.
I would like to ask the Premier: will he override his Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) in terms of his final decision on the Misericordia that is contained in the minister's letter to the Misericordia Hospital? Will he override that decision of the Minister of Health and order that his Minister of Health begin a consultative process on what decisions the government is making including the patients that rely on these very, very lifesaving and important services that we have here at the Misericordia Hospital?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I want to make a number of points. Firstly, the reorganization of hospitals and health care in Manitoba under regional health authorities is a very comprehensive process that requires a great deal of consultation and a great deal of input from people, stakeholders throughout the system. That is something that has occupied a great deal of time of the Minister of Health, many members of our government and certainly all of the various people within the Department of Health and indeed within health care in the province. That has resulted in many areas that have become obvious and areas that required us to take action to ensure that we could improve the availability of services. Throughout the past decade, that has certainly been an objective of our government, particularly as it relates to providing more comprehensive services and spreading them more widely throughout the province, which is why breast screening, for instance, something which it was available perhaps for a few thousand people a year back at the time we took office, is now available in three different cities in the province: in Brandon, in Thompson, in Winnipeg.
We have a very comprehensive unit in Misericordia that does provide extensive opportunities for various breast cancer and breast health initiatives. We have gone from a period of time in which we did less than a few thousand to where over the last two and a half years we did 35,000 breast screenings in this province.
We now are moving with two additional mobile breast screening units to expand that to where we will have over 35,000 breast screenings this year alone. Comprehensive service is being developed and many things that have to be dealt with, and our government is committed to ensuring that we provide the best possible service to the people of the province, the women of the province. We have made that commitment not only with available facilities but with the money available to expand these comprehensive services to them.
Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, I am very disappointed that the Premier will not consult and have his minister consult with the patients that are directly affected, that want a voice in the future of health care and want a voice before this government destroys the comprehensive breast care program here in Winnipeg at the Misericordia Hospital. I want to table a letter today from a surgeon at the breast surgery program at the Misericordia Hospital, and I want to quote this surgeon who states: it makes no sense to have any kind of postoperative care in acute care if there is no surgical access.
Will this government consult with the medical experts who are also saying do not destroy the comprehensive breast care services program located at the Misericordia Hospital?
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I know that the minister will be listening to people from all areas of the health care field and experts in the field of dealing with breast screening, breast cancer and all of the various services and supports that go into that. That is why our government has gone into this area to such a great extent; that is why it has expanded this area dramatically, and we will continue to do what we can to ensure that we make the system as good as possible for the people who use the system.
Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, the doctor goes on to talk about the need to connect the surgery and the program of surgery for breast cancer with all the other presurgical programs and postsurgical programs and counselling. He says that the decision to make this radical change does not make any sense, and it belies the issue of understanding the whole program in terms of a comprehensive breast care program.
So the government is not listening to patients. It is not listening to medical advice. Every time this government destroys a very positive program, whether it is home care or whether it is a comprehensive program for breast care services, they do not listen to patients. They do not listen to medical advice. They just go ahead. They build up a program over four years. It is a good program, and then they try to destroy it without any cost-benefit analysis, without any review of the patients and without any review of the medical staff.
Will the Premier perform a cost-benefit analysis? Will he agree to have his minister meet with patients, and will they listen to medical advice that says that this government is making the wrong decision?
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, we are not going to destroy this program. We are the government that created this program and that has built up this program over the last four years. So the members opposite can take no credit for that.
I can tell members opposite that, despite the fact that we have put a lot of resources and we have built up the program, there are still areas of concern and complaints that are made by people. I saw some in the paper within the last week that talked about having to move from one hospital to another with wires in them, and of course, the reason for that is that those who do breast cancer surgery do not always have admitting privileges at the same hospital in this particular system that exists today, which is why we have to bring it under a central health authority, the Winnipeg Health Authority, to try and overcome that problem so people do not have to move from getting one particular part of the treatment at one hospital to another and so on and so forth.
So we are having to deal with all of these issues to create a better system that will provide care on a more comprehensive basis to the people who need it. Indeed, in the process of doing all of that, the minister has been consulting, will continue to consult, and that is why we will, I am sure, arrive at the best solution for all concerned.
Breast Care Services
Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, the Minister of Health has consistently told this House that his government is committed to a comprehensive centralized one-stop breast care program, just like the one that he wants to dismantle at the Misericordia Hospital. Yet on CBC this morning the minister says that, and I quote: surgery does not have to be done at one particular place. Then we have Dr. Blake McClarty calling for a one-stop program.
Madam Speaker, I want to call on the Premier and ask him to stop this equivocation and tell this House whether his government favours comprehensive centralized service or fragmented services. Is there a plan? What is the plan?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): I know that it will be difficult for the member opposite to understand when we talk about having a central program administration with decentralized delivery, but she should know, for instance, that people can go for mammography even today in Brandon, in Thompson, in Winnipeg. So there is a decentralization that is good for women throughout the province. We are adding two mobile breast screening units so that it will become even more decentralized in part of its delivery.
In conjunction with all of those things, there are people throughout the province, and I hear from them regularly, who want to have as many of the different functions that are able to be performed in their area of the province done so. You can still have a central organizational unit, a central program unit, without having everything done in one location throughout all of this process. That is something that the minister is working on with the experts, and he is not just doing it on the basis of the kind of short-term politics that the member for Osborne is attempting to portray.
* (1410)
Ms. McGifford: Madam Speaker, the Premier certainly is gallant.
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Ms. McGifford: Since indications are that the Misericordia ophthalmology program will continue, or may continue, with all its components, I want to ask if this government, if this Premier will guarantee Manitoba's women that the Misericordia breast care program will also remain in place.
Mr. Filmon: This is not a question that I should be answering on behalf of the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik). I will take that question as notice on his behalf and suggest that as of the next time we will be sitting, the Minister of Health's Estimates will be up for debate and discussion, and I am sure that she will want to get into a very comprehensive discussion with him on that topic, and I would recommend that she do so.
Ms. McGifford: Madam Speaker, since the Premier seems unwilling to listen to us, I wonder if he will listen to consumers like Alison Bailes who says, and I quote: without a program, we are not getting totally holistic comprehensive care. Well, if he does not want to listen to the public, I will ask the question--
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Filmon: On a point of order, Madam Speaker, at no time did I say I was unwilling to listen to the member for Osborne; at no time did I say that. In fact, I encouraged her to get the information in detailed form from the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) who is the appropriate authority on this matter. Now how she could possibly misrepresent that is beyond me, and I would ask her to please withdraw that comment.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Thompson, on the same point of order.
Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Yes, on the same point of order, Madam Speaker. It is clearly not a point of order; in fact, the member is very specific in her question, and I find it quite noteworthy that what she was referring to was the fact that the Premier, who presumably is in charge--that is where the buck stops in this province, at his desk--refused to answer the question. So not only was the member not out of order, she was absolutely right on in asking that question on behalf of the people of Manitoba.
Madam Speaker: I will take the point of order under advisement and report back to the House.
Ms. McGifford: I want to ask the Premier if he will listen to consumers like Alison Bailes from Breast Cancer Action Manitoba and keep the Breast Care Clinic at the Misericordia Hospital open for Manitoba women.
Mr. Filmon: I will definitely listen to all women, all consumers and all citizens of Manitoba.
Breast Care Services
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, Misericordia has a lodge which provides low-cost housing for rural and northern women who are in need of breast cancer treatment, not breast screening but breast cancer treatment. They can stay there while they are getting treatment, and they can get supports. The hospice provides a secure and supportive environment for rural and northern women as they go through a very traumatic experience.
Why does the Premier not recognize the importance of this service for rural and northern women, and will he ensure that that service that is there now will continue to be in place for women who have to face this kind of treatment?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): We do recognize the importance of that service; that is why we created it. I can assure her that we will continue to provide that service.
Ms. Wowchuk: I want assurances from the Premier that he will recognize the importance of that housing program that is there, and given that a nurse in the surgical unit says that she sees a great difference between women who come through with these supportive services and those that do not and that women who come through the program are more prepared than those who do not get the services and have a better outlook on life, will he ensure that the housing program that is there for rural and northern women who are taking cancer treatment, not screening, will have that service provided.
Mr. Filmon: I think I just answered that question.
Diagnostic Testing Waiting Lists
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): I would like to ask the minister how he can face people in rural Manitoba when, although he says the service will not be fragmented, we know from people that it will, but also, although they announced that diagnostic waiting list would be slashed, I have a constituent, Mrs. Vivian Toderash, who was told in January she has a possible brain tumour, it is three months--
Madam Speaker: Would the honourable member please pose the question now.
Ms. Wowchuk: I would like to ask the Premier how he can explain that diagnostic waiting lists are supposed to be shorter in Manitoba when I have a constituent, Mrs. Vivian Toderash, who was told in January that she had a possible brain tumour, she is just now being put on the waiting list and told she will have to wait seven months before she can have an MRI to diagnose whether or not she has a brain tumour. How can you face Manitobans with those kinds of stats?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): I know that the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) could probably give a better answer if he knew the circumstances of the case and could speak with the doctor involved to understand just exactly what the doctor is recommending and under what circumstances.
I do know this: that we announced both in December and again in the budget additional funding for reducing the waiting lists in all of these areas, and we are committed to do so.
Diagnostic Testing Waiting Lists
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Manitobans are waiting far too long for diagnostic tests, particularly MRIs in this province. I spoke with a physician whose waiting lists for MRIs is completely out of line with the designated clinical guidelines. I should note, for the Premier, and I am asking this of the Premier, that Ontario patients are getting their MRIs done at St. Boniface in March, while Manitoba patients, because they are not paying patients, have to wait till July and have to wait up to six months for MRI because they are only operating under a limited time period. Will the Premier do the right thing and expand the operation of the MRI so that people like Mrs. Toderash in Swan River and all those other Manitobans who are not paying clients like the Ontario residents or the MPIC claims and the Workers Compensation claims can get their MRIs done within clinical guidelines?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, this government announced that it was one of our highest priorities in health care to reduce those waiting lists, and therefore we put more money in to reduce these waiting lists in December and again in the budget that was just announced a couple of weeks ago, and that is our firm intention to reduce those waiting lists.
Mr. Chomiak: What does the Premier propose that we tell these individuals--we have all written to, we have all contacted the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik)--people like Mrs. Toderash who has to wait for her brain tumour to be looked at on the MRI; Ron Berry [phonetic] who has been waiting since November for an ultrasound; Ken Gilliam who must wait until June for an MRI; Brenda Camarat [phonetic] who must wait until the summertime to get her echocardiogram done for her valve problem? What are we supposed to tell these individuals to do while the Premier says they have promised, and they are not extending the operation and the hours of these machines to provide the service to Manitobans?
Mr. Filmon: That is precisely what we are doing. I heard the minister say that the additional funding will allow them to extend the time of use, and that involves hiring new staff so that they can expand to longer hours and more days of use of the equipment.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Kildonan, with a final supplementary question.
* (1420)
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, I go back to the Premier. How can he explain the fact that the MRI at St. Boniface Hospital presently is operating on limited hours to Manitoba residents, while paying customers like MPIC, Workers Comp and people from Ontario can get in sooner than Manitoba residents because you are not willing to extend those hours immediately?
Mr. Filmon: I have just told him that that is precisely what the minister plans to do with the additional money.
Administration
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): My question is also for the Premier. It is dealing with the on-again, off-again, if you like, will to try to have some sort of change in public education in terms of the way in which it is administered. In Alberta you have 480 school trustees for a half million students. In Ontario you have 700 school trustees for 2.1 million students. In Manitoba we have approximately 400 school trustees for 194,000 students. My question is: because the Premier has said in the past that this was a priority, when will the government make the issue of redistribution a priority and see some tangible action taken to resolve it?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, the member opposite knows that we identified this as an issue that should be dealt with back, I believe it was in 1990. We initiated there the Norrie commission that spent a couple of years going throughout the province, coming up with comprehensive recommendations as to change in our school boundaries, as well as in the administration of our school system, public school system. Many of his recommendations, I think some 21 recommendations, have been implemented. The implementation of boundary change is something that obviously was greeted with a great deal of opposition by people at the local community level.
Now members opposite would be the first to jump up--if we were to impose a new set of boundaries, they would be the first to jump up and say: why do you not listen to the people. In this case, we have listened to the people, and we have said: here are the benefits of school boundary changes, of amalgamations and reductions in the numbers of school boards, and we are prepared to put money in as an incentive for you to amalgamate school boards. It is up to you to get together now and co-operatively negotiate these new school boundaries and this ability to deliver more efficiently education through our public system in Manitoba.
That process is underway. Some are already committed to amalgamation, and others are looking at it on a co-operative basis. Those negotiations are underway in several other areas of the province. We believe that is ultimately the best way to go, because you need to have the support of the public when you are making such major changes. If the member opposite just wants us to bring down the hammer and do it from the provincial government, please have him stand up and say that and let him take the consequences of that statement, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, what I would like to see is some real tangible action. That has not been the case with respect to this government.
My question to the Premier is: if he is relying on public opinion on this, will the Premier then indicate that if the will of the public is to see this issue dealt with in a way in which there is some tangible action taken, will he then agree that he will be prepared to take some sort of action, not this over 10 years where we have seen one school board talking to another school board--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I would like to think that part of the reason why we continue to be in office 10 years after we were elected is because we do listen to people. We do work with people. We prefer a co-operative approach as opposed to a confrontative approach. We have tried to do that in everything we have done, and that includes, in this particular case, working with people throughout the province on the area of school board governance and school board boundaries and all of the things that impact on the education of our children.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, regional health boards would probably be a good case in point.
My question to the Premier is: will he then acknowledge that because of this government's approach at dealing with this issue, you have many Manitobans paying a disproportionate amount more of tax dollars to finance public education, because this Premier has failed in dealing with this issue?
Mr. Filmon: No, Madam Speaker.
Regional Health Authority
Mr. Eric Robinson (Rupertsland): Madam Speaker, my questions are for the First Minister as well. When the regional health authorities were set up, Manitobans were told that the results would be improved services and more accessible health care.
I would like to ask the Premier to explain: in the case of Churchill, in a period of one year under their appointed chair and board, they have lost a 25-year contract to supply doctors to the Keewatin region of the N.W.T., but the business that Churchill realizes, almost 80 percent of it comes from the Keewatin region.
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I am not sure I understand exactly what the member is after. If he is suggesting that somehow we are responsible for the decision that the Northwest Territories have made to not use to as great an extent the Churchill Health Centre, then I am prepared to answer that, but I am not quite sure I understood what he was getting at.
Mr. Robinson: I know the rules of this House, Madam Speaker, do not allow me to go with a lengthy preamble--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. With the indulgence of the House, the honourable member could quickly repeat his question.
Mr. Robinson: Thank you, Madam Speaker. When the RHAs were set up in the province of Manitoba, it was understood by people in Churchill and throughout Manitoba that it would result in better services, improved health care and so on. We have on this side of the House, in a spirit of co-operation, worked with--I have worked with the member for Turtle Mountain (Mr. Tweed) in trying to address the shortcomings of the regional health authority in Churchill, and obviously, we have not been able to do that. Simply, the board chair of Churchill has not done the negotiating jobs that are needed that go with the regional health authority.
I am asking the Premier if he will remove this chairperson from the regional health authority and make it much more effective where it will be representative of the community of Churchill.
Mr. Filmon: Again, I am not sure what it is that the chair has not done properly. If it is to do with the relationships with the Northwest Territories, Madam Speaker, I know that many members on this side of the House have been working with the people of the Northwest Territories. In their move to the new territory of Nunavut, there will be, obviously, a lot of changes that involve their taking responsibility for the delivery of services and their choice of where they get services, and I know that that is a concern.
I have spoken with the head of the Northwest Territorial government, Don Morin, on numerous occasions. He has a history with Manitoba, having lived and worked here. He is very familiar with relationships with Churchill, and he has been very supportive of us in terms of supply and also in terms of the accessing of medical services.
So, if I could understand better exactly what it is that the member thinks should be done that has not been done, then perhaps I could pursue it with him. I respect the member and his concerns and I would like to help him solve the problem, but just to suggest that we should fire the chair of the board of the regional health authority without having some greater understanding of how that would solve the problem is difficult for me to do.
* (1430)
Mr. Robinson: It is very simple, Madam Speaker. He could perhaps discuss with the MLA for Turtle Mountain, (Mr. Tweed), and I am sure the member for Turtle Mountain will agree with me that there is a definite problem in Churchill. The regional health authority is now losing their pharmacist, their accountant, head nurse. There has been a 98 percent turnover of nurses since the regional health authority took over. Simply, there is a problem that has to be addressed, and I want to ask the Premier what action he will take.
Mr. Filmon: I would be happy to ensure that when he returns from his meeting, the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) will respond to that issue and will get involved and make sure that the member for Rupertsland knows just exactly what is being done and what can be done to try and address the circumstances.
Arbitration Award
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the First Minister. The government is speaking in terms of dealing with the Cross Lake community, and the Minister of Northern Affairs is using terms like ethics and justice. I would like to ask the First Minister: why has the government failed to implement the arbitration award that was achieved and written by G. Campbell MacLean and issued on March 17, 1997, an award that was provided pursuant to the Northern Flood Agreement, an award that rules in favour of the Cross Lake community in dealing with roads and bridges pursuant to the Northern Flood Agreement? Why does the Premier not instruct his minister, who is also the Minister of Hydro, to take the highroad, be a statesperson and settle the arbitration award that has gone against the government twice, rather than appealing it on a third occasion?
Hon. David Newman (Minister of Northern Affairs): The process underway is the kind of process contemplated by the Northern Flood Agreement of 1977 and that is a claim-by-claim basis. Where there is a lack of clarification, or there is a dispute as to what something means or what the intention was of the agreement, or how to deal with a claim, or how to determine what the facts are and how to determine what the amounts of compensation are, you go to an arbitrator. When the arbitrator makes an award and the decision of the arbitrator is not clear enough or there is a jurisdictional question, you go to courts to have that resolved, and I might say that Premier Schreyer objected to the signing of the NFA agreement, as I understood it, in his day, because there was not an appeal procedure.
Mr. Doer: I was in Cross Lake last year, and they feel that they have used the rules of the Northern Flood Agreement on two occasions, and on two occasions they were able to succeed with an independent arbitrator. Now you are going on a third occasion to appeal it. I would ask this question of the Premier (Mr. Filmon): do you not think you should start taking the highroad when you have lost twice, implement the arbitration awards from Mr. MacLean? Why can you not live by the rules of their Northern Flood Agreement and start defusing the situation and concerns in the Cross Lake community instead of inflaming them? Live by the arbitration award instead of appealing it a third time. Come on, stand up.
Mr. Newman: Madam Speaker, the difficulty which is underlying that question is, of course, the official opposition through its Leader and through the different members that have spoken on the Cross Lake issue, in particular the member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin)--is that at the moment there are serious efforts being made by people of reason and goodwill in trying to come to grips with this.
I include in that my counterpart, the federal minister and the regional director, Loren Cochrane, Grand Chief Rod Bushie, Grand Chief Francis Flett and many people in the community who are very concerned about this situation. What the opposition party is doing here is simply stirring up trouble at a time when they need reason and good guidance for the members of the community and their sharing of facts.
Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): Madam Speaker, there he goes again. We are asking a question on the issue of Cross Lake. The question was very clear: will they live up to the award given by the arbitrator on two occasions.
Madam Speaker, for this member once again to use terms like "stirring up trouble" is not only not answering the question but I think it is showing a real contempt for Question Period. I would ask you to have him called to order and answer the very serious question being asked on behalf of the people of Cross Lake.
Madam Speaker: The honourable government House leader, on the same point of order.
Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Yes, Madam Speaker, it is sort of déjà vu all over again with honourable members opposite. Whenever they hear something they do not like, they raise a point of order about it. On this particular occasion, I do not even know if it could be construed as a dispute over the facts, but that would be the most it would be.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister of Northern and Native Affairs, on the same point of order?
Mr. Newman: No, I will just quickly finish my response to the question, if I may. Sorry.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. On the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson (Mr. Ashton), I would appeal to all members in this House to use caution both in the tone and the words they use to address each other, both in asking questions and responding to questions, because it becomes very inflamed and does nothing to enhance the members as 57 leaders of this province.
I would also, on the point of order raised by the honourable member for Thompson, request that the honourable minister comply with the rules and respond to the question asked.
Madam Speaker: The honourable Minister of Northern and Native Affairs, to quickly complete his response.
Mr. Newman: The kind of issue that has been raised by the Leader of the official opposition is the kind of matter which can be resolved through discussion and agreement, the kind of discussion and agreement that we are seeking with the members of Cross Lake through their leadership, and that is the kind of issue which is inherent in the 1977 Flood Agreement. Those are the processes that go through. We are trying to achieve a process which is more advantageous for all concerned.
Mr. Doer: The government will know that the member for The Pas (Mr. Lathlin) and the member for Rupertsland (Mr. Robinson) took a very, very co-operative approach in dealing with the issue of flooding on the sacred burial ground of the Cross Lake community, but it is unacceptable for the government to lose once, appeal the decision, lose a second time by an independent arbitrator, and a year later they are still talking about good faith.
Madam Speaker, why will the Premier not instruct his Minister of Northern Affairs and Minister responsible for Hydro (Mr. Newman) to implement the arbitration award that was handed down by Mr. MacLean a year ago as a way of starting to take leadership and fulfilling our responsibilities as a province? Let us start working in partnership, let us start working together instead of in confrontation as the minister opposite is doing.
Mr. Newman: I have already answered the question. The answer is simply that a clarification is needed because you cannot implement something that cannot be understood, and that is what the court is there for, to give that guidance. Short of that or the alternative to that is to achieve an agreement through discussion.
Video Lottery Terminals--Reinstallation
Ms. MaryAnn Mihychuk (St. James): Reid Kelner, former Tory candidate, is back in the VLT business even though he allowed and encouraged known problem gamblers to play even if they had to, he had to, break the law by providing cash by allowing illegal withdrawals through debit cards, an illegal act as defined by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson). The government's response was remove the VLTs. Then it was, you can have them back in six months. Now, less than three months later, Kelner is back in business.
My question to the Minister responsible for the Gaming Commission: how does this minister justify giving back the VLTs to Kelner when only a month ago even the Finance minister, who we know is hooked on VLTs, openly believed that a severe punishment was needed? Was Kelner's politics a factor in this decision?
* (1440)
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Hon. Mike Radcliffe (Minister responsible for The Gaming Control Act): Madam Speaker, we have legislation in this House which has appointed an independent Gaming Commission, and this Gaming Commission was called for--
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Radcliffe: The member for St. James seems to find something funny in the answer which I am attempting to give to the House.
I feel this is a very serious issue today before this House. The Desjardins report that was called for by this House recommended an independent Gaming Commission, and in compliance with that suggestion in that report, this government instituted legislation which called for and created a Gaming Commission. We set up the Gaming Commission. The Gaming Commission has reviewed the facts, conducted an inquiry and they have made a conclusion which is independent of this government.
If my honourable colleague opposite is suggesting that we politically interfere with the conclusion of the Gaming Commission, I would reject that soundly. The member opposite may not like the answer given by the Gaming Commission. There may be members on this side that may not like the answer given by the Gaming Commission, but I think the important issue here is that there has been a process created. We have followed the process, and we have the answer which has been given to the community, and we must follow that.
Ms. Mihychuk: Is the minister trying to deny that members of that Gaming Commission made personal donations to the minister's own political campaign? Is this government--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.
Ms. Mihychuk: I did not quite finish my--this guy was a Tory candidate.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Radcliffe: Madam Speaker, I am not sure if the question was put to me in a facetious fashion or not, but I can tell the honourable member opposite that the two individuals who sat on this fact-finding commission was one Claudia Weselake and the second member was one Joan Montgomery. I can assure the honourable member opposite that these are both well-qualified and skilled members of our community that have the confidence of this government, have continued to retain the confidence of this government and they had nothing to do with my campaign.
Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.