Motion presented.
Madam Speaker: Before recognizing the honourable member for Kildonan, I believe I should remind all members that under our subrule 31.(2), the mover of a motion on a matter of urgent public importance and one member from the other parties in the House are allowed a maximum of five minutes to explain the urgency of debating the matter immediately.
Urgency in this context means the urgency of immediate debate, not of the subject matter of the motion. In their remarks, members should focus exclusively on whether or not there is urgency of immediate debate and whether or not the ordinary opportunities for debate will enable the House to consider the matter early enough to ensure that the public interest will not suffer.
Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, at the onset I want to indicate, because of prearrangements, we do not intend--by leave we are prepared to discuss this matter after the budget is delivered by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson), because we know there are many individuals here who wish to hear the budget, so we are not prepared to do that. But we are requesting an emergency debate because of the sorry and deplorable state of health care in the city of Winnipeg and the province of Manitoba.
Madam Speaker, I might add that other jurisdictions have done so. In fact, the Speaker in the Legislature of Alberta recognized that there was a problem there as well, and he recognized that in fact the debate should take place, but I daresay the situation in Manitoba is even worse than it is in Alberta. In fact, the situation in Manitoba is probably the worst in the entire country.
Madam Speaker, there are three reasons why we need this debate today. First, this government will not even recognize or admit that there is a problem. The Premier (Mr. Filmon) seems unaware, blissfully unaware of the problem in the health care system. The Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) finds excuse after excuse after excuse to deny that there is a major crisis in our health care system.
Madam Speaker, we need to have a debate to at least alert the only people in Manitoba who do not seem to be cognizant of this problem, that is, members opposite. By way of example, I want to mention something. They denied it last session when we stood up and we raised issues about waiting lists. On December 23, we wrote to the Premier and we said you have a crisis; please do something. That afternoon, the Premier and the Minister of Health announced the opening of 83 beds. Unfortunately, they still have not been able to open the 83 beds because of incompetence on their part. We need a debate to alert members of the problem.
Madam Speaker, several weeks ago when the emergency rooms were crowded, the Minister of Health said: We would open more beds, we will open more beds. There is no space. There is no space in the health care system, and I challenge members opposite to find space in the health care system.
Madam Speaker, we went next day. We found empty floors at Misericordia. We found empty wings at St. Boniface. We found rooms at Seven Oaks Hospital, and what did the Minister of Health say then? Oops, we do not have beds. We do not have nurses. It is the management's fault. It is the federal government's fault. It is Howard Pawley's fault.
Madam Speaker we need a debate to at least acknowledge, let the members opposite recognize there is a problem, but there is a more important reason why we need a debate. Someone has to advocate for those people lying on the gurneys, lying in the hallways, waiting at home, phoning ambulance services to see if they can get into a hospital. Someone has to be an advocate for those people, because there is no one to advocate for them. The nurses are run off their feet. The doctors are run off their feet. The hospital administrators are throwing up their hands because of budgetary cutbacks, and the Premier sits and the Premier says: What problem; no problem.
Who is going to advocate?
Madam Speaker, this week there was a young child who could not get surgery and was faced with potential brain damage because of the lack of surgery. The doctor and the family and we all tried to get the surgery. Letters went to the Minister of Health. There were no surgery beds. When that doctor and that patient went to the media and went and had a TV report, miraculously, the next day a bed appeared and the surgery took place. It took a doctor and a patient to go to the TV station to get surgery. That is deplorable. The minister is right. We should not have to go to the minister's office to get surgery, but if you do not acknowledge there is a problem, then you are not going to solve it.
We must be advocates for people who need that kind of surgery. We have to be advocates for the public that are lying in the hallway. We have to be advocates for the nurses that are run off their feet and are not listened to and are being let go. If we do not have this debate in this Legislature, where will it take place? Nowhere, Madam Speaker.
We are anticipating a budget. Madam Speaker, we had a budget in 1995 that promised personal care home beds, that promised the Health Sciences Centre would be redesigned, that promised the cancer institute would take place, that promised numerous hospitals, and after the election, after that budget the members cancelled those projects. We are four years behind in those projects and today we are going to hear another budget announce more projects. Most will not see the light of the day until after the next election. Do we have, anymore, faith in this government?
So we need a debate, Madam Speaker. We need a debate, because frankly Manitobans need a forum for someone to advocate for them. We need to let members opposite realize and recognize there is a problem, and we do not believe they will live up to their budget in any regard because they have not in the past. Thank you.
Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, our rules under this section call for a debate if it is a matter of urgent public importance, and implicit in that procedure is the lack of any other opportunity to discuss matters of urgent importance. Now the Legislature has been returned today to hear the budget of the Minister of Finance and will be into a daily diet of Question Period, which gives honourable members on all sides of the House opportunities to raise matters of importance.
Obviously, there can be no matter more important than the health of Manitobans, but honourable members know, too, that debate on the budget is a wide-ranging debate. I have been here for 12 years almost, and I do not remember anybody ever being brought to order on the issue of relevance during the Budget Debate. The fact is there could hardly be anything more relevant than health because 34 percent of all of the spending of this government being on health and that being at the highest level anywhere in Canada. Those are the kinds of things that honourable members on this side of the House are quite willing to discuss and make known to our fellow Manitobans, and we look forward to that opportunity during the Budget Debate.
Madam Speaker, in recent years, spending on health has increased by some $600 million on an annual basis here in Manitoba. That also exhibits the priority this government places on that most important matter to us, that being the health of our fellow citizens.
So the fact is opportunities do exist for honourable members on all sides of the House to debate the matter of the health of our health system, and I am sure the Minister of Health (Mr. Praznik) would be very interested in participating in such a discussion, but the tool, the instrument the honourable member suggests we use today is inappropriate for that purpose, and in any event, with the budget coming down, we will have plenty of things to talk about, especially spending taking place in the health system and the major improvements that have been taken and continue to be taken in Manitoba to look out for Manitobans in the next millennium.
Madam Speaker: I thank all honourable members for their advice to the Chair on whether the motion proposed by the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak) should be debated today. The notice required by Rule 31.(1) was provided. Rule 31 and Beauchesne Citations 389 and 390 provide two tests for a matter of urgent public importance to meet in order for debate to proceed: first, is the subject matter so pressing that the ordinary opportunities for debate will not allow it to be brought out early enough, and second, has it been shown that the public interest will suffer if this matter is not given immediate attention.
Manitoba precedent from past rulings of Speakers shows that the scope of the budget speech debate, which is underway today, is wide enough to encompass the discussion of most subjects. The issue raised by the honourable member for Kildonan (Mr. Chomiak), in my opinion, can be discussed during the Budget Debate.
Respecting the second test for a matter of urgent public importance to proceed, that is, will the public interest suffer if the matter is not given immediate attention, although this undoubtedly is a very serious issue that the member has brought forward, I do not believe the public interest will be harmed if the business of the House is not set aside to debate the motion today.
Therefore, I must rule that the matter does not meet the criteria set out by our rules and precedents.
* (1100)
Madam Speaker: Prior to recognizing the honourable government House leader, I would like to draw the attention of all honourable members to the loge to my left where we have with us this morning, John Angus, current city councillor and former member for St. Norbert.
On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this morning.
Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Madam Speaker, in order that the business of the House might be conducted in an orderly way, might I suggest the House recess for some five minutes or so and be returned upon the call of the buzzer.
Madam Speaker: Is it the will of the House to have a five-minute recess, followed by the presentation of the budget by the honourable Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson)? [agreed]