Members of Legislative Assembly
Salary Increase
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): My question is to the First Minister.
Madam Speaker, across this country today there are wage increases for senior executives and corporations that are ranging between 3 and 6 percent, whereas working people are receiving wage reductions and wage increases that go up on average to about 1 percent. In this Legislature we have a situation where MLAs have received a wage increase over the last two years while in fact wage earners in the public service have been required by government policy to take a 2 percent wage cut.
I would like to ask the Premier, does he think it is fair to have one standard for MLAs in this Legislature and have another standard for the people that are working for the public service?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, the member opposite may know that, for instance, the cabinet of the Province of Manitoba received no increase in their salaries for a period of 15 years and that the adjustment that was made after an independent third-party review of a commission that was appointed by all parties in this Legislature made some alterations that included the removal of a privilege that is enjoyed by every other Legislature, which is a portion of the salary as tax free, that removed the unfunded pension plan that had been available to MLAs leading up to that point and that made other adjustments in the package in recognition of, as I say, 15 years in which cabinet ministers' salaries were not adjusted. That places us in a position where the cabinet and the Premier, for instance, are either lowest or second lowest paid in the country.
That being the case, all of these things are relative and people make comparisons based on the circumstances that exist and those are the circumstances that people must take into consideration when they evaluate whether or not fairness and justice are being meted out.
Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, we certainly supported the Fox-Decent report, but since that report has been implemented there have been two automatic wage increases for members of this Legislature that have not been implemented for other members of the public service. I want to table a letter to the Legislative Review Committee that was prepared by the New Democratic Party which said that it is wrong for MLAs to take a wage increase when all the other workers in the public service are required to take a wage decrease.
Can the Premier tell the people of Manitoba, when was the last time a Premier of this province had one standard for members of this Legislature in terms of wage increases and another totally different standard for all the other workers in the public service?
Mr. Filmon: In fact, Madam Speaker, all previous Premiers for 15 years held that standard because they consistently gave increases to all the working members of government and did not take one for themselves.
Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, the Premier never answered the question. All Premiers in this province, Schreyer, Lyon, Pawley and, up to a certain point, Filmon, have taken the same wage decrease for MLAs that they have expected other people to take. How can this Premier justify a double standard for members of this Legislature when he is expecting other people in the public service to take a 2 percent wage cut? What kind of leadership, honesty and fairness are we getting from members opposite and this Conservative government?
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, we will not speak to the hypocrisy of members opposite who voted for the report and now, when it is in their cheap political interests, are attempting to disassociate themselves from it.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable First Minister is the only one who has been recognized to respond to the question.
Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, when members of the cabinet of this province, myself included, went for 15 years without taking an increase in their cabinet salaries, during that period of time they ended up going from the middle or upper range of the provincial governments in Canada all the way down to being the lowest or second lowest in Canada. During that same period of time raises were consistently given to all of the government employees over that period of time, which resulted in them rising up to the top three or four in the country. We make those comparisons.
I can recall in 1990 or '91, I guess it was '91, when we made a settlement with the nurses of this province for a 15 percent increase over two years, it was in recognition that they had gone down over time to being I think eighth out of 10 provinces, and we wanted to lift them up to being somewhere in the middle to upper range so they were given a significant increase that other public servants were not given.
One has to look at those kinds of comparisons. One has to look at the fairness of all aspects of the things that we do, and we have to be able to live with those judgments. That is precisely what prevails in this circumstance. It is not the cheap politics of the opposition.
* (1345)
1996 Summer Olympic Games
Premier's Travel Expenses
Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): A new question to the Premier. On July 25 the Premier told the people of Manitoba that his trip to the Olympic Games and Atlanta were being paid for by the Pan Am Games Society. Subsequently, on July 30, Frank McKenna informed us that the Premier in fact had been the guest of IBM for two nights and received hospitality from IBM for those two evenings.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Doer: Well, if members opposite do not think honesty and integrity is an important issue, I am sorry to hear that, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Leader of the official opposition to complete his question.
Mr. Doer: Yes, subsequent to the contradiction by Frank McKenna of the Premier's statement to Manitobans, he has informed Manitobans that he is, quote, repaying IBM for the gift that he received.
I would like to ask the Premier, how much has he repaid IBM for the gift he received in Atlanta, which he did not share with Manitobans on July 25?
Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): I want to point out firstly that, once having made the decision to pay IBM for the expenditures which were made during my period of time there, that becomes a direct matter between me and IBM. It is no different than if I go to the grocery store and buy groceries, I am not using any public funds. I am paying completely out of my own pocket, and I paid in full the invoice that I was sent by them.
Mr. Doer: In light of the fact that the Premier said he received nothing from IBM on July 25, and in light of the fact that he did not come clean with Manitobans on the first chance to tell people the truth, I would like to ask the Premier, the person who is now telling everybody we need improved disclosure, we need to disclose all these things across the public service, which we support, would he now disclose how much was the gift from IBM and how much did he repay IBM for the gift that he received when he was at the Olympic Games, allegedly paid for by the Pan Am Games Society when we found out later it did not happen?
Mr. Filmon: I received no gift from IBM. Had I, I would have declared it on my conflict-of-interest form. Instead, Madam Speaker, I went to Atlanta with the Pan Am Games Society. While there we did a number of things, obviously in the interests of developing and promoting the Pan American Games, including co-hosting a luncheon with the federal government to which we invited all of the delegates from the Pan Am countries.
In my last two days of a nine-day trip I went into a hotel in which IBM were the hosts in the hotel, and I repaid in full the costs of my hotel and incidental expenses that they paid.
An Honourable Member: Not paid. Repaid.
Mr. Filmon: I repaid IBM in full. I received no gift from them. I repaid in full the entire costs that they billed me for the hotel and incidental expenses, Madam Speaker.
Mr. Doer: In light of the fact the Premier did not even tell Manitobans on July 25 that he was receiving a gift from IBM--he said all the expenses were paid by the Pan Am Games Society--in light of the fact that he mingles the words “pay” and “repaid” in his answer to the question of this Legislature, I would like to ask the Premier, when he checked out of the hotel, did IBM pay the bill, and when did he repay IBM and how much was it for, for a gift that he received from IBM that came out later?
* (1350)
Mr. Filmon: I said on the 25th of July that my trip to Atlanta was paid for by the Pan American Games Society and that is true, Madam Speaker. The fact is that IBM, as I understand it, booked two entire hotels for a period of the entire two and a half weeks of the Olympic Games, and they billed all of those things to their credit in making their arrangements with the hotel. They then had to sort out--when I asked for an individual bill, one individual bill for my two nights and the incidental costs--and they itemized those and sent me a bill, and I repaid them for what they had paid, as they did for thousands of other people who were their guests there--in full.
Lottery Employees Labour Dispute
Mediation
Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Madam Speaker, since June 25 lottery workers have been on strike in Manitoba. A number of weeks later the Minister of Labour appointed a conciliation officer who has met with the parties to the dispute. It is my understanding that the officer filed his report with the minister some time last week and that the minister has at minimum had at least five days to review the conciliation officer's report.
I want to ask the Minister of Labour, instead of finger pointing--and this same minister who has said that strikes are not a bad thing in Manitoba--now appoint a mediator that was requested on July 7 by one of the parties to the Lotteries dispute. Will this minister appoint a mediator to resolve this issue in Manitoba right now?
Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Labour): On September 9, the head of the MGEU wrote me requesting a mediator, and I wrote him back on September 11 indicating that I would be asking both the Lotteries Corporation and the conciliator for a report as to whether or not a mediator should be appointed. I received a conciliator's report late last week, and indeed I received a report from the Lotteries Corporation this morning. I will review that and I will discuss the issue with Mr. Olfert who wants to meet with me this afternoon, and I will hear from him why he feels a mediator should be appointed.
Conciliator's Report--Release
Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Madam Speaker, to the same minister: In an effort to resolve this dispute that has been going on now for some 86 days, will the minister, if his government has nothing to hide and in the spirit of co-operation and openness, be willing to release the report of the conciliation officer to the parties involved in the dispute so they can see what work in progress the conciliation officer has made in resolving this dispute and lead towards the appointment of a mediator to further resolve this dispute so it does not have to drag on any longer than the 86 days that it has to this point in time? Will the minister release that report and take those steps?
Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Labour): Madam Speaker, I will examine the legality of that request. As the member opposite knows, there are certain restrictions on the use of conciliators' reports specifically set out in The Labour Relations Act. I will review the response of the Lotteries Corporation and I will speak to Mr. Olfert of the MGEU, and after I have considered those matters I will give him my response.
Mediation
Mr. Daryl Reid (Transcona): Madam Speaker, Section 67 of The Labour Relations Act allows the minister to release the report to the parties and that is why we called on him to do it today.
I want to ask the minister, in my final supplementary, why this minister has a double labour relations standard where he independently appoints a conciliation officer to deal with the lockout at Inco in Thompson and at the same time he will not appoint a mediator to deal with the lottery workers' strike in the province here, something that has been requested by one of the parties in the dispute. Why does he have a double labour relations standard in his department?
Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Labour): Madam Speaker, there is quite a substantive difference between the two situations. I mean, if a union is asking for 10 percent increase for its employees and the employer's position is zero, there is a big difference and we need to put a conciliator in there. Mr. Olfert indicated in his letter that there was absolutely no progress reached by the conciliator and I have to examine why that is. If in fact the union is still requesting 10 percent for an increase when nurses, teachers and social workers took zero or less, I do not think the public--
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
* (1355)
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Labour to complete your response.
Mr. Toews: Thank you, Madam Speaker. When casino workers or their union is requesting 10 percent and teachers, social workers and nurses receive zero or less, there is a serious question of whether even mediation will work in those circumstances. If you look at the member for Transcona's comments from last year, he indicated that a 3 percent raise was excessive and set a double standard when the Lotteries Corporation gave that last year to the casino workers. Now the casino workers are still asking for more than that. Does he want us to set another double standard?
Inco Limited Labour Dispute
Conciliator's Report--Workplace Safety
Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, the Minister of Labour is again today writing a new chapter in his version of labour relations, indicating the key factor in the Lotteries dispute seems to be the issues as he determines in particular whether wage requests that are at the bargaining table are important enough to appoint a mediator in this case.
I have a question about the situation at Inco. Thirteen hundred workers in my community were locked out by Inco, Sunday at midnight. The minister has appointed a conciliator. One of the key issues at stake is the proposal by Inco to move to a 12-hour shift, something that has caused a great deal of concern in terms of potential safety implications. I would like to ask the Minister of Labour, given the fact that we have had a number of mining deaths and that mining safety obviously is his significant concern, whether he has requested the conciliator to look not only at the collective bargaining aspects but also to look at the safety implications of moving to those 12-hour shifts.
Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Labour): Madam Speaker, during the NDP years, during the 1970s and the '80s, there were 13, 14, 17 deaths a year in our mines. We, through a very aggressive management program in terms of Workplace Safety and Health, have been able to reduce that--unfortunately there are still deaths--but have been able to reduce that to one or two. This government cares about those workers. We care about workplace safety and health. We do not have to manufacture issues. We know what the problems are and we are working to resolve those.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Thompson with a supplementary question.
Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, it was the NDP government that brought in the right to refuse and other innovations to workplace safety and health that have led to safer workplaces.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. I would remind the honourable member for Thompson this is not a time for debate. The honourable member was recognized for a supplementary question.
Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker, I was only responding to the minister's political comments. I asked a question about a dispute in Thompson, a lockout that affects my community very directly and very significant safety concerns. I asked the minister one very simple question and that is, since he has appointed a conciliator, will he request that the conciliator, Mr. Fleury, also look at the workplace safety and health implications of moving to the 12-hour shifts, one of the major issues at dispute in the lockout?
Mr. Toews: I view, Madam Speaker, mine safety very seriously. This is an issue, of course, where if the union and the employer are able to reach an agreement and I trust they will do so shortly, no matter what that agreement is, our laws, our workplace safety and health laws apply, and they will continue to apply. If there are any concerns in that respect, whether the union enters into an agreement with the employer that is illegal or not, we will still enforce our workplace safety and health laws in this province.
* (1400)
Mr. Ashton: As a final supplementary, Madam Speaker, can the minister confirm that there is nothing under our Manitoban legislation preventing the movement to these shifts and that therefore one of the major concerns, the dispute in this lockout, the question of safety, will be resolved largely in absence of legislation? Will he then at least ask the conciliator to raise these concerns with both sides and ensure that we do not end up with a situation where miners and other employees at Inco are at risk in the future?
Mr. Toews: The member for Thompson is wrong. Our Workplace Safety and Health Act clearly covers any type of dangerous situation. It does not need to be spelled out. There is a very powerful general statement protecting worker safety. I will, though, at his request, ask the conciliator to look at that issue and to ensure that, if the parties are moving forward close to a deal, they are mindful of all laws, including our Workplace Safety and Health Act. I do not want to see any sanctioning of dangerous practices through a collective agreement even if the union would agree to that.
Labour Disputes
Government Involvement
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, what has become abundantly clear is that this government does have a double standard when it comes to labour relations. We have the private sector, whether it is Boeing, whether it is Inco, where we have seen government wanting to take action, direct action. When it comes to the public service, whether it is the home care workers, whether it is the teachers, and now it is the casino workers, there is definitely a lack of respect for the people who are working for Manitobans directly.
My question to the Minister of Labour or the Premier (Mr. Filmon) is to explain how they justify having a double standard for private sector unions and public sector unions.
Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Labour): Madam Speaker, if I understand the question, he is asking how I justify a double standard, and the simple answer is I do not. I do not even admit that there is a double standard.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Inkster with a supplementary question.
Lottery Employees Labour Dispute
Mediation
Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, if that is the case, then why does the Minister of Labour not be as aggressive in terms of trying to resolve the casino strike and appoint a mediator today?
Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Labour): The union, from my understanding of the situation--and perhaps Mr. Olfert can clarify that for me this afternoon--is asking for a 10 percent increase. The government corporation has indicated that they are not prepared to move outside of the framework that has been established for other unions and other collective bargaining groups. The Liquor Control workers have accepted a contract just recently within the guidelines. So what we are saying is there is such a tremendous gap, mediation will simply aggravate the situation. Now I stand to be corrected if Mr. Olfert can demonstrate why a mediator should be brought in at this time. I have consistently said conciliation is appropriate, it should be utilized and we will continue to utilize conciliation.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Inkster with a final supplementary question.
Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, if the Minister of Labour is not prepared to call in a mediator today, will he explain to Manitobans what it is that is causing the fear in his mind? Why is he not prepared to try to at least attempt to resolve this particular strike? Why does this government feel that it is necessary to prolong it? Is it a form of union busting? Is that what the Minister of Labour is trying to do?
Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, clearly this is not a matter of union busting, as my colleague knows. My colleague knows that the MGEU has been statutorily recognized. Even the workers, if they voted against the MGEU to get rid of the MGEU, could not. Not even the government can bust the union. They are statutorily recognized. So this is not an issue of union busting. That union is here because that is what the law says, whether the workers want it or not.
But what we have to do is to ensure that there is a collective agreement between these parties. The workers have decided to go out on strike to back their demands, and that is their right to do that. I, for one, do not take away their right to strike. Let them strike. But I do feel that this government has an obligation to ensure that there are channels of communication that continue to be open and the best channel, given my information at this time, is conciliation, and I support that process.
Deputy Premier
Spousal Travel
Mr. Tim Sale (Crescentwood): Yesterday in the House, defending his decision to travel with his spouse at public expense, the Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey) stated seven times there was a spousal program. The Premier (Mr. Filmon) has stated that there is an unwritten policy covering spousal travel in that where there is a spousal program, ministers can decide whether to take their spouses along at public expense. But, in fact, Madam Speaker, there was no spousal program for two reasons: No one else on that whole delegation took a spouse along; secondly, this was a Manitoba trade mission. There was no conference that was attended at which there was a spousal program.
So my question to the Deputy Premier is: Could he explain how there could have been a spousal program when there was only one spouse to attend it?
Hon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Madam Speaker, it is interesting to note that the member opposite does not appreciate the fact that many business people in South America have spouses, and they are invited to events of which it is a very important part of doing business as far as they are concerned. I am sure if the member really wanted to get serious about this, he would take a total look at all the facts that are available. The results of the trip of which Mrs. Downey has presented and which are available--the media has received them--at least 15 tourism operators, women tourism operators coming to Manitoba next year because of the visit.
There was a spousal program. Invitations to the embassies to be involved in receptions at which we met with many business people were a part of the trip. Far greater than the member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans) on any of his trips to Mexico, and his wife, where there absolutely was not; it was an absolute misuse of taxpayers' money through McKenzie Seeds. If he were to do a full investigation, I think, as well, Madam Speaker, it is important that all the facts get out. I am prepared to present all the facts.
Point of Order
Mr. Leonard Evans (Brandon East): Madam Speaker, on a point of order. The member refers to a visit I took to Mexico City 23 years ago. I took my wife, and I paid her full way.
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Brandon East did not have a point of order.
* * *
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Crescentwood with a supplementary question.
Mr. Sale: Will the minister finally just admit the truth that three weeks before he made his trip, a government official contacted the Pan Am Games Committee and told them Mrs. Downey was going on the trip--the minister wanted to take his wife, and so he manufactured a role for her--that the initiative to do so was his, not his department's, not his office's, but his initiative? Will he admit the truth?
Mr. Downey: When the policy of the government is that there is a spousal program involved, of which there was, not unlike--it was referred to yesterday by Team Canada, of which the spouses of the--[interjection]
Well, the members laugh about it, Madam Speaker. They apparently do not want to hear the information. There was a spousal program. There were invitations to my wife to be participating in events in the ambassador's facilities. There were invitations for her to be involved in events that related to tourism and the Pan American Games. There were invitations and events to take place.
I am prepared, and I can table right at this particular time and will table some of the results of one of the meetings that Mrs. Downey attended as it related to the Pan American Games. In fact, if the member wants to take the time to read it, there is a request that they would like to have Mrs. Downey come back to do other events as it relates to the Pan American Games and tourism. If the member would take the opportunity to read the document, I think it would be helpful for Question Period.
* (1410)
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Crescentwood with a final supplementary question.
Mr. Sale: Madam Speaker, the issue is not the question of Mrs. Downey's competence or her ability to lobby on behalf of Manitoba or the Pan Am Games. That is not the issue. The issue is the minister misleading Manitobans about who initiated the request for her travel.
Will the minister finally do the right thing and admit that he misled the public and this House about who initiated this trip for his wife, and like our member, pay the costs of her travel, her meals and her incidental expenses?
Mr. Downey: Madam Speaker, I would expect the member for Brandon East (Mr. Leonard Evans) would provide evidence of the fact that he in fact paid for that trip. I would expect that he would do that. [interjection]
That he paid for it.
Madam Speaker, as it relates--
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism to quickly complete his response.
Mr. Downey: Madam Speaker, as it relates to the trip to South America, there was a spousal program. Mrs. Downey participated in that spousal program of which there were many events. In addition, she carried out work as it related to the promotion of the Pan American Games which was very successful. There are positive results that flow from the taxpayers who supported a trip that was legitimate, and I can assure you there is no misleading of this House or the public. That is as it was.
Deputy Premier
Spousal Travel
Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Madam Speaker, my question is also for the Deputy Premier.
The Deputy Premier stated in the media last week that the Pan Am Games Committee initiated the request for his wife to undertake work for them on the trip to South America. Yet the Deputy Premier did not include her name in the press release listing the participants and did not talk about her duties and her events at that event until forced to by the media. What was the Deputy Premier trying to hide?
Hon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): Madam Speaker, I am not trying to hide anything. As I indicated and I will indicate again--in fact, I cannot understand the member because yesterday she said the issue is not who started or initiated the program. Today she has changed her tactic. Yesterday's Hansard said that that was not the issue.
Madam Speaker, as I have indicated, and I will say it again for the benefit of the members who apparently do not understand, there was a trade mission which was developed to support 11 businesses. Fourteen people participated on a trade mission which, by the way, was very successful. I am quite prepared and will be reporting the success of the mission, the numbers of contracts that have been signed and the jobs that will flow from that. In fact, one major company signed an agreement in which some product will be made here in Winnipeg, and that was the consummation of the deal.
As it relates to other activities, there were legitimate spousal programs which Mrs. Downey participated in, No. 1. Number two, there were discussions between the department and the Pan American Games of which those discussions ensued that they were having an Ambassador Program which Mrs. Downey could participate in, and she did in the interests of the people of Manitoba and the benefits that this province will achieve from the Pan American Games. I have absolutely nothing to hide on this issue.
Resignation Request
Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Given that the Deputy Premier stated in the House yesterday, and I quote: “The day that I am not able to tell the truth will be the day that you do not see me in this Legislature,” and given that the Deputy Premier has now changed his story about who initiated the trip request for his wife from his original comment in the media over a week ago, that it was initiated on the part of the Pan Am committee and now his statement yesterday in the House and outside in the media that, no, his department or he initiated it, that is a major, major change in your story.
I would like to ask the Deputy Premier, will you now honour the words that you stated in the House yesterday and do the honourable thing and resign?
Hon. James Downey (Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism): No, Madam Speaker, I will not resign, because I believe that I have told the absolute truth about how the events took place. I also want to indicate very clearly that the positive results of the trip that was taken to South America are absolutely quantifiable and will be continued to be reported upon as time goes on.
Members opposite may have a difficulty with the development of business internationally. They may like to get involved in the MTXs and send $29 million to Saudi Arabia. That is what we get from the New Democratic Party when they are in office: $29 million to Saudi Arabia, and who is answering for it over there? Nobody, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Wellington with a final supplementary question.
Ms. Barrett: I would like to ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon), how can the people of Manitoba have any confidence in your government when the Deputy Premier (Mr. Downey), the man who is a heartbeat away from being the leader of this government--
Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. Would the honourable member for Wellington please pose her question now.
Ms. Barrett: How can the people of Manitoba have any confidence in your government when the Deputy Premier has shown a complete lack of integrity by first trying to hide his wife's trip, then by changing his story to justify why she went along and now refusing to honour his own pledge in the House, which he stated yesterday, and resign?
Would you now do the honourable thing and demand his resignation?
Mr. Downey: Madam Speaker, I do have an apology to make and I was inaccurate, it was $27 million, not $29 million that they frittered in Saudi Arabia, so I withdraw that $29 million.
Madam Speaker, I also appreciate the confidence the member has in the fact that I am only a heartbeat away from--I am not sure what she said, but I do want us to take this very seriously, because it is an important matter. We had many Manitoba business people with us. We had discussions with the Pan American Games people, with myself and with Mrs. Downey, as it related to the speaking engagements that would be involved.
There is no attempt to hide anything. I am proud of being a Manitoban and being able to represent our province in South America. I am proud of being a Canadian, to tell the people of South America what a great country--and I am proud that my wife was with me to spread the message of how good things are in Manitoba. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Madam Speaker: Order, please. Time for Oral Questions has expired.