Home Care Program
Privatization--Cost-Effectiveness
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, my question is to the First Minister.
Dr. Evelyn Shapiro, a member of one of the government’s committees on home care dealing with the demonstration project on cost-effectiveness on home care, has compared the costs and quality of services in communities such as Quebec City, Toronto, Vancouver and Winnipeg. Her studies have concluded that the current system in Manitoba is cheaper than all the other systems across the country and also has the advantage of providing better quality home care services in our province for our people.
In light of the fact the Premier has made a number of statements about how much money we may or may not save, and in light of the fact the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) said he would not save any money with his contracting-out privatization-profit plan, I would like to ask the Premier: What numbers does he have to justify his decision to proceed with privatization and profit in home care?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, without in any way entering into debate about all of the various issues that are involved, nobody is suggesting that our home care system--despite the fact that the appeals panel has received, since its inception, hundreds of complaints and has had to deal with them, we still believe that it is an excellent system, but like anything else, we also believe that it can be improved upon.
It is a very important part of the proposal, that we should not allow those who depend upon home care to be able to be used as pawns in a process whereby a monopoly group, which currently delivers the service, can have such total control over it that they can deny service to those in need. That is a very important part of our desire, to ensure that we provide for the needs of those who depend upon home care, that we provide the services when they need it, as they need it, and to the highest standards that we can afford.
I would not begin to compare the system against that in British Columbia in which user fees are charged for home care. User fees that, I might say, were recommended in a study that was conducted for the New Democrats in 1987 by Price Waterhouse. It recommended that we introduce user fees. That was what the New Democrats’ study recommended. They also recommended that certain services be, in a sense, deinsured in home care. That was a recommendation by the New Democrat-commissioned study as well.
Those are not things that we would consider. What we do want to do is ensure that we can provide the services with the flexibility and the opportunity to have as broad as possible a choice within the system to ensure that at all times we can meet the needs of those who depend upon the system, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, the Premier never answered the question of where the $10-million so-called savings was going to appear from his ideological decision for profit in home care.
I would like to ask a further question in light of the fact that Dr. Shapiro’s cost studies were quite remarkable in terms of the advantages of the existing system. I would like to ask the Premier, in the Home Care Demonstration Project documents tabled in this Legislature last week there is an evaluation grid that compares seven criteria on cost, availability of service, flexibility--some of the things the Premier was just talking about in terms of the advantages of this system--can the Premier indicate on that grid what system was evaluated to have the most cost-effective components to it? Was it the existing system or was it the privatization profit system as being proposed by the existing government under Appendix 1? I will table that for the Premier’s attention.
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the member opposite continues to refer to profit in the system and that is what seems to drive his ideological difficulty with this move. This is an opportunity to provide competition in the system. It will provide an opportunity--
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. This is not a time for debate between members.
Mr. Filmon: It will provide an opportunity for organizations like VON, who have served the system well for two decades, to continue to bid on their aspects of the system that they have done so well and to continue to provide the kinds of services that are external to government, so that it is not just a monopoly government bureaucracy that can decide whether or not it wants to provide the service, or when the union leaders decide they want to withdraw the service they leave those most vulnerable with no other alternatives. That, Madam Speaker, is inexcusable. That is something that we want to correct so that the system will always provide for the needs of those who require the services when they need them, as they need them and to the highest standards possible.
* (1350)
Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, the Premier did not answer the question again about cost-effectiveness and criteria and studies.
I would like to then ask the minister responsible for the Treasury Board and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson) a question. In his budget he says: We estimate that the changes and the privatization of home care might save in the medium term close to $10 million.
Of course, we have had the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae) say it would not save anything. We have had the Premier say it will save $10 million. We have the Minister of Finance saying it might save $10 million.
Did the Minister of Finance have available to him the Dr. Shapiro documents on cost and effectiveness? Did the Minister of Finance have available to him the qualitative studies and any other studies when he put that number in the budget, and can the Minister of Finance table today the numbers that would allow us to arrive at a figure in his budget or did he just take this out of the thin air like the Premier obviously has done in terms of the answers to questions?
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the fact of the matter is that we rely on the officials of the Department of Health to develop the estimates that are provided to Treasury Board and, ultimately, to cabinet and this Legislature. I want to make the point that the member deliberately does not wish to understand what has been said. What has been said is, there is $8 million more in the budget because despite achieving savings within the system by reducing the unit costs of provision of services, we know that this is the most rapidly growing area of our population, and that the demand for services in home care is growing more rapidly than the demand for any other services in our health care system.
The numbers of units of demand for service will continue to increase year upon year, which means that in and of itself would deem that we have to spend more money to provide the service. However, if we can continue to find ways of doing it more effectively to meet the needs of those who depend upon those services, we can reduce the unit cost and it would not increase as rapidly as it would had we not introduced those better measures into the system.
Home Care Program
Privatization--Patient Exploitation
Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, Dr. Evelyn Shapiro, last week, indicated that one of the very worst aspects of the government’s privatization plan is that private companies will be encouraged to sell unneeded services to the vulnerable and the sick.
Can the minister indicate today, if this privatization plan should go forward, what mechanisms and regulations will he put in place to protect the sick and vulnerable from exploitation?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, Dr. Shapiro also raised questions about user fees. Maybe Dr. Shapiro read the Price Waterhouse report that the NDP commissioned.
If the honourable member is worried about overservicing then I would like to refer him to a report commissioned by his colleagues in the Doer-Pawley government called the Price Waterhouse--
An Honourable Member: Last week, it was Pawley-Doer.
Mr. McCrae: Pawley-Doer, Doer-Pawley--I am not sure who was really in charge there. In any event, it is a moot point because the people of Manitoba threw them all out of office.
I would refer the honourable member for Kildonan to the Price Waterhouse report commissioned by the New Democrats which calls for user fees and cuts in services. In that report, it draws attention to overservicing, which the honourable member seems to be talking about here today.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, is the Minister of Health aware that some We Care employees get paid a commission to sell more services to patients when they visit them? What is the Minister of Health going to do about that?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, we have a set of services that are provided which are decided upon after appropriate assessment by professionals working for the Department of Health. If people want more services than that under the present system, they can access that by, for example, paying the Victorian Order of Nurses extra dollars for those services. There is nothing going to be different in the future.
The honourable member and his colleagues talk a lot about these changes as if there had never been purchase-of-service arrangements in the past. The VON, their services have been purchased for all these years, the nursing services. Recently, the VON accessed--was a successful bidder for a home I.V. contract; Central Health Services is a provider of service under a purchase-of-service arrangement; FOKUS, Ten Ten Sinclair, same idea; Community Therapy Services; the H.I.D.I. Qu’Appelle Project.
* (1355)
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, my final supplementary to the Premier, since the minister is unable to answer the question. What is this government going to do to prevent the exploitation of the sick and the vulnerable since companies like We Care pay a commission to their employees to sell extra services? What are they going to do about that, Madam Speaker?
Mr. McCrae: Madam Speaker, we are not about to learn too many lessons in exploitation from honourable members opposite. Right now, as we speak, all of the people they claim to be working for, the union bosses and their people, are presently exploiting the people of Manitoba who are clients of the Home Care program. They are using them as pawns. In fact, they are being used as hostages in this whole discussion. So I am not going to take too many lessons on exploitation from the honourable member for Kildonan.
Independent Schools
Funding Formula
Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Education.
According to the Winnipeg Free Press, in 1985 the present Minister of Education claimed that rapid increases in funding to private schools have a serious effect on the public schools. She opposed this, a policy which she claimed drained students from a public system already suffering from declining enrollment.
Could the minister tell us today why she has changed her mind on what is a fundamental issue of public policy?
Hon. Linda McIntosh (Minister of Education and Training): Madam Speaker, I do not have the 11-year-old Free Press in front of me, but I will say this: I have always maintained--I maintained then--I believe that was the year I was president of MAST and speaking as MAST president it must be MAST position, and the member I hope would do that. But I also say that it is also a consistent thread of thought that I held then that I hold to this day, and that is that if independent schools accept funding from the public, they must become more like public schools, and indeed that is what we have done. We have nonfunded schools, completely nonfunded, not a penny of government money, and they then are truly independent because they accept no government funding.
But the member knows that as the independent schools have accepted public money, we have insisted that they hire certified Manitoba teachers, follow Manitoba curricula, take Manitoba standards exams, and save the system $8 million a year by virtue of paying a user fee for the privilege of religious rights.
So I am consistent, Madam Speaker, then and now.
Ms. Friesen: What the minister missed of course was the selection--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Wolseley was recognized for a supplementary question which requires no postamble or preamble.
Ms. Friesen: Does the minister intend to expand private schools in Manitoba at the same rate as they have been expanding in the last five years, and that is 16 percent over the last five years? Is that her policy for the next few years?
Mrs. McIntosh: Again the member credits me with a tremendous amount of power and I thank her for it, but I do not start up private schools, Madam Speaker.
The member knows that over time it used to be that in all schools, for example, religious exercises were common at the beginning of the day. There are a number of changes that have occurred in schools, such as the elimination of that right, unless there is some very intense petitioning that goes on and certain percentages and all kinds of red tape to go through. As those kinds of things have increased, many people--and 85 percent, to be specific, of our private schools are religious-based schools where people who can no longer get in the public system those kinds of scripture readings, Bible readings, the Lord’s Prayer, those kinds of things--are starting up their own schools so that they can have a value-based system. Eighty-five percent of our independent schools are in that category.
We believe in choice for parents. We believe that if they accept public funding, they must abide by our rules but they will be allowed to have those components. In the other 15 percent, Madam Speaker, we have all-girls schools, all-boys schools, gender-specific schools. I am sorry they do not want those people to have that choice. They pay for that choice, they abide by our rules.
Ms. Friesen: Madam Speaker, would the minister explain why she continues in this House to refuse to table the new agreement that she has made with private schools which will increase their funding by 15 percent this year at the same time as the public schools have received a minus 2?
Mrs. McIntosh: Madam Speaker, I will be very happy to provide that agreement for the member. She knows all the content of it because I have been quite open about it. If she wants the papers themselves, I can give her the papers themselves, but they will just confirm what I have already told her, that we will be moving to 50 percent of the cost per pupil of public schools. When that 50 percent is reached it will remain forever there. It will go up or down as the cost per public-school student comes down, and she assumes they will not but I know boards are trying valiantly to have those costs contained. Through new efficiencies we are hoping to introduce in the system, we hope with them those costs will come down.
That 50 percent, Madam Speaker, of those funded schools--and I continue to stress that we have many nonfunded schools as well--of those people who accept partial funding of their schools in return for complying with all our rules and regulation, except for being allowed their particular religious freedom or gender bias, whatever it is, we save the people of Manitoba $8 million a year. That is a substantial saving that if we had to take from the public system, we would not have enough to go around.
* (1400)
Winnipeg Adult Education Centre
ESL Funding Reduction
Mr. George Hickes (Point Douglas): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship.
Recently, staff at the Winnipeg Adult Education Centre were told that there had been a significant cut in their English as a Second Language budget. The impact of the cuts by both the federal and provincial governments will likely result in the layoff of 10 to 12 staff and the loss of English as a Second Language programs that will have an impact on 1,200 to 1,500 students.
Will the minister tell the House why he cut the funding for English as a Second Language programs by $141,000?
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Madam Speaker, the program that the member refers to of course is funded by both the federal government and the provincial government. I can confirm that there has been a reduction of $215,000 from the federal government going into this program, but I would also point out that there are no waiting lists for the ESL program at the present time.
Mr. Hickes: Can the minister explain how this cut and past cuts will improve the access ability and quality of service to new citizens who want to come to Manitoba?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Madam Speaker, as I indicated, there has been a downsizing of the contribution made by the federal government, but I would also point out again that there is no waiting list in the ESL program with Winnipeg No. 1 School Division. Also, there are other institutions at the same time who are offering programs.
Mr. Hickes: Madam Speaker, can the minister explain how he expects to attract more immigration when he is cutting services to those immigrants who wish to come here, when we read in the paper that Manitoba needs immigration for the garment industry and other work in Manitoba?
Mr. Gilleshammer: Madam Speaker, again I would say that he should be talking to the federal government and perhaps his Liberal friends sitting next to him there, that the major cut in funding was by the federal government.
I would also point out that the member has indicated in his question he is aware of the fact that there is a reduced number of immigrants coming to Manitoba in the last couple of years, and I would repeat again, there is no waiting list for services for English as a Second Language.
Home Care Program
Privatization--Provincial Standards
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.
The privatization of home care services, quite simply, is going to see the profit factor brought into home care services and there will, in fact, be less money that is going to be going towards home care services. These profit-oriented companies such as We Care are in fact going to have to do one of two things, either cut back on services or decrease the wages significantly. Both will have a very negative impact on the client.
My question to the Minister of Health is, will the minister share with us what his department is doing to ensure a provincial standard for the delivery of home care services into the future, and table those appropriate documents that will ensure that standard is maintained?
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the standards expected of any care providers will be part of the tender documents that come forward so the honourable member will be assured that standards that exist in the program now will continue to exist. You cannot argue that the best system in North America has no standards, because it does.
Privatization--Minimum Wage
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, to that end then, I would ask the Minister of Health if he is prepared to incorporate into those standards some sort of a provincial-wide wage scale which will ensure a basic salary to those individuals providing that service.
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the honourable member has not yet taken a realistic view of this or a number of other important health care issues. I have asked him during the process of the Estimates, for example, when we were talking about changes in our hospitals here in the city of Winnipeg, for him to play that constructive role that he wants always to play and to tell me how many hospital beds, for example, too many do we have, and depending on which question he was asking or which answer he was giving, it was anywhere from 100 to 700 beds that he wants to close. Well, that is the kind of thinking we get from the honourable member. That is quite a spread and it says to me that ideas like the honourable member’s would need to be looked at extremely carefully before they became the policy of the government. This is the same honourable member that wants to have, for those bidding on contracts, a playing field which is not level.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, the construction industry is something which the Minister of Health could look at, and the question specifically to the minister is, why will he not consider allowing for some sort of provincial-wide salary for individuals who want to participate in health care services through his form of privatization of home care services, given that other industries such as the construction already do this? Why will he not consider that?
Mr. McCrae: Well, let the honourable member share with us what he thinks that floor or maximum or whatever it is, should be.
Indian Birch/Shoal River Communities
Meeting Request
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, on November 17 the communities of Indian Birch and Shoal River were shocked to learn of the death of their friend and relative, Darren James Mink. They were further shocked when the Crown attorney stayed the proceedings dealing with this case on April 4 without any explanation.
Madam Speaker, the communities of Indian Birch and Shoal River are very concerned with this. They have no answers and they are concerned--[interjection]
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): It is the idiot over here, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. Regrettably, the Speaker heard the remark, even though it may or may not be on the record. Those are the kinds of remarks that I have insistently implored the members to cease and desist from using because they are exactly what provokes debate and cause disturbance in the House. I wonder if I might request that the honourable member for Inkster withdraw that remark.
Mr. Lamoureux: Yes, Madam Speaker, I withdraw the remark.
Madam Speaker: I appreciate that. I thank the honourable member for Inkster. The honourable member for Swan River, to pose her question now.
Ms. Wowchuk: Madam Speaker, just as the authors of the AJI report concluded that the justice administration was not delivering justice to Manitoba’s aboriginal peoples and MKO has written a letter to the minister, which I will table, raising their concerns, I would like to ask the minister if she will, after Question Period, meet with the representatives of Indian Birch and Shoal River to discuss with the representatives of this band their concerns that they have with this case.
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, let me say, first of all, that I empathize with the family and with the community. I understand they have travelled quite a long way. However, I would like to tell them that this case is now under active investigation by the RCMP. They are continuing their work in relation to this case. As a result of the continuing police investigation, I am not able to meet with the community because I must avoid at all costs any appearance of political interference.
However, I understand earlier today they had a brief opportunity to speak with the Assistant Deputy Minister of Prosecutions and I extend that offer again. A meeting with the Assistant Deputy Minister of Prosecutions, to make sure that they are completely up to date on the status of the case and what is happening, is still open to them.
I would also say, Madam Speaker, that this government has made a very strong commitment to victims. We understand that there is concern about victims in this case, and make the commitment that the family and the community be kept up to date at all parts of this case.
Darren James Mink
RCMP Investigation
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): I would like to take the opportunity to thank the minister for giving that direction. I would hope that her deputy minister would also be able to meet.
I would ask the minister if she would request the police force, since they are making a further investigation, if this investigation can be made of urgent priority so that justice can be done and people in this community will not have to deal with the heartache that they are dealing with now.
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I have been informed from my department, again, that this case is under active investigation, that it is certainly receiving very significant attention from the RCMP at this time.
* (1410)
Release of Court Transcripts
Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Since the minister has been so co-operative, I would like to ask if the minister will follow up on the request of the Mink family and release the court transcripts of April 4 so that the family will know the details of why the charges have been stayed.
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, certainly I am happy to look at what is available to be released. I also understand and am fully up to speed on the case myself, but I believe that the assistant deputy minister in charge of Prosecutions will be able to provide the family with significant amounts of information and the community to their satisfaction and we will arrange for that after Question Period, if that is the time frame.
Domestic Violence
Sensitivity Training--Prosecutions
Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Madam Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Justice.
Last week the minister claimed some superior knowledge about domestic violence. I wonder if the minister would tell us whether superior knowledge about domestic violence issues has also been imparted to all her department’s prosecutors through special training, as recommended by the Pedlar report in 1991.
Hon. Rosemary Vodrey (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, we certainly do believe that training and information in the area of domestic violence is important, and it is certainly my understanding that there has been training offered in the area of prosecutions. If the member has any additional questions in that area, though, I know we can cover that in the Estimates process which will be coming up fairly shortly for Justice.
Mr. Mackintosh: Would the minister then, who has insisted on at least seven occasions in this Chamber that all her prosecutors receive training in domestic violence, tell us whom we are to believe, her or the two prosecutors assigned to the Roy Lavoie bail hearings who both under oath in answer to the question, have you had any special training in domestic violence, said no? I will table the testimony, Madam Speaker.
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Speaker, the member well knows that we do have a special court which deals with domestic violence issues and that there is special training for those prosecutors who are working in that area, and available to others as well. Now, whether or not those two individuals have in fact received it or received it lately or what the question was, I will have to look at. But it has certainly been a commitment on behalf of this government to deal with the issues of domestic violence with seriousness, and let us make no mistake, it was this government that set up the Domestic Violence Court. It was this government that introduced the zero tolerance policy. It is this government that continues to work with the community in the areas of domestic violence.
Mr. Mackintosh: Madam Speaker, would the minister tell us whom we are to believe, her or a total of three prosecutors, including the head of the Family Violence Court who confirmed under oath that even all the prosecutors in the Family Violence Court have not had special training in domestic violence issues? Who is not telling the truth?
Mrs. Vodrey: Madam Speaker, again, it is certainly my understanding that that training is available for our prosecutors in the Family Violence Court. The member is referring to conversation or testimony which I have not had the opportunity to look at in any context whatsoever. It is certainly not the first time that the member has tried to bring forward something suggested to be a fact and find that in fact it is not a fact at all.
Madam Speaker, I will certainly look at what the member has brought forward. I know we will have further opportunity. I also say, again, it was this government who set up the inquiry into the deaths of Rhonda and Roy Lavoie. It was this government who took all of these issues seriously. We have said there is still more to do, and we will continue to do it.
Mental Health Care
Housing
Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): Madam Speaker, I have raised in letters and in the House concerns about this government’s move to place mental health patients into elderly persons’ public housing--in the words of the staff with the Housing Authority--where the staff do not have the training or resources to support these tenants. I want to ask the Minister of Health or the Minister of Housing (Mr. Reimer) to explain how they have responded to these issues.
To quote the Winnipeg district officer who has said: It is acknowledged that these applicants have a need for safe and affordable housing, but unfortunately once housed with the Manitoba Housing Authority their problems become our problems. Staff involved can be--simply with the daily assurance--an extreme crisis intervention situation which may take staff hours to resolve and a large--
Madam Speaker: Order, please.
Hon. James McCrae (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, the honourable member raised this question before. I told her I would get the answer and make it available to her. I am in the process of doing that.
Ms. Cerilli: I would like to ask the Minister of Health or the Minister of Housing how their departments have responded to the concerns raised that--again, I quote: The concentration of individuals with mental health disabilities living independently within our buildings has--
Madam Speaker: Order, please. Would the honourable member quickly pose her question.
Ms. Cerilli: To answer the concern that these buildings for public housing are the potential to create many institutions as replacements for the major health facilities now in the process of downsizing or closure.
Hon. Jack Reimer (Minister of Housing): Madam Speaker, I can give assurances to the member for Radisson that I will be in contact with the Minister of Health (Mr. McCrae), as we all do from time to time, to make sure that we are giving the same answer to the member for Radisson and that the information that the Health minister is bringing forward should be brought forth. We will address that to the member for Radisson.
Ms. Cerilli: I would like to ask the Minister of Housing to explain how these mental health outpatients could have been transferred to the Manitoba Housing properties without having the proper supports there first, and how many people have been affected by this?
Mr. Reimer: I can give assurances to the member for Radisson that those concerns will be brought forth in correspondence and in conversations with the Minister of Health.
Manitoba Telephone System
Privatization
Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, across Manitoba thousands of Manitobans are speaking out urging the provincial government not to privatize MTS. Forty-seven councils ranging from R.M.s through to the City of Brandon are to pass resolutions opposing privatization, and the Manitoba Association of Urban Municipalities has now passed a resolution which has made it very clear that they oppose the privatization of MTS.
I would like to ask a question to the Minister of Rural Development and the minister responsible for municipal affairs, whether he has communicated to his colleague the Minister responsible for MTS the fact that many Manitobans, particularly in rural and northern Manitoba, want to keep MTS publicly owned.
Hon. Leonard Derkach (Minister of Rural Development): Madam Speaker, I can tell the member for Thompson that I converse with municipalities almost on a weekly basis, I guess. I meet with the executive of both MAUM and UMM on a monthly basis. In our conversations we deal with a lot of issues that relate to municipalities and a lot that have to do with other departments as well. At the same time, we encourage and there has been a door open to each and every minister. The executive of the municipalities has indeed met with many of our colleagues in cabinet and do so on a regular basis.
Mr. Ashton: I have a further question to the Minister responsible for MTS.
Since clearly so many Manitobans not only are opposed to privatization but want to make sure this government will give them a chance to have a say, I would like to ask the Minister responsible for MTS, will he now commit publicly to what many Manitobans, particularly in rural Manitoba, are asking for, and that is the chance to have a direct say in the future of their telephone company? Will he give that assurance today?
Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister responsible for the administration of The Manitoba Telephone Act): Madam Speaker, I can assure the member that those councils that passed the resolutions, who forwarded them to me, received a response from me in terms of the circumstances we face. I can also assure the member they never responded back again to say that there was anything wrong with the response we gave them. So the communication process continues to go on.
Winnipeg Art Gallery
Board Appointments
Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Recently the public has learned that the executive director and board of the Winnipeg Art Gallery made a decision to lay off several staff members, that many of the remaining staff members are dissatisfied with management and their working conditions, and that both the Manitoba Arts Council and community artists have unresolved disagreements with the gallery. Each year, particularly now that several capital projects are proceeding, the province gives millions of dollars in taxpayers’ money to the gallery.
I would like to ask the Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship to confirm that, despite these disruptions and despite the fact that government puts millions of dollars of public money into the gallery, he has appointed only one of a possible three board members and therefore compromised the process of public accountability.
Hon. Harold Gilleshammer (Minister of Culture, Heritage and Citizenship): Madam Speaker, I would point out to the honourable member that the board of the Winnipeg Art Gallery is comprised of people elected at their annual meetings, appointed by the city and also appointed by government. Certainly, arts groups from time to time have some financial issues to work their way through. I have tremendous confidence in the board and management that they will be able to do this.
As I indicated to her yesterday, she might want to take a broader look at the arts in Manitoba, and I would refer her to an article in The Globe and Mail which highlighted Manitoba as the jurisdiction in North America that had the most vibrant arts community and the most successful arts community in North America.
Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.