4th-36th Vol. 50-Oral Questions

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 10 students from Shaughnessy Park School from the CEDA Taking Charge! program under the direction of Mrs. Doreen Szor. This school is located in the constituency of the honourable member for Inkster (Mr. Lamoureux).

On behalf of all honourable members, I welcome you this afternoon.

Madam Speaker, the government announced, as one of their so-called top priorities in the budget just presented in this House two months ago, that they would expand as a, quote, top priority the neurosurgery program at St. Boniface Hospital.

Today, Madam Speaker, the government announced they were going to cancel the same program at the same hospital. I would like to ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon): did he involve his Minister of Health in the preparation of the budget presented by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Stefanson), or is it just another example of health care flip-flops by this government?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, it is a sad day for the people of Manitoba when the Leader of the Opposition comes to this House and so blatantly attempts to misrepresent what is happening. The member came here to say a program is being cancelled. Two things have happened here today. With respect to neurosurgery, it is being consolidated at Health Sciences Centre, being transferred to that particular facility. But what is really interesting is this whole design plan was not done by the cabinet, it was not done by planners in the Ministry of Health, by officials, it was done by physicians, by nurses, by allied health care workers and their administrators. For the first time, we have a plan that is being devised by front-line health care workers, and the Leader of the Opposition opposes it.

Mr. Doer: I think we had the answer that it was another flip-flop.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): In August of 1990, the government promised major capital expenditures to refurbish, renovate and upgrade the Health Sciences Centre's operating rooms. They put those capital promises on hold for four years, and then they dusted them off in March of 1995, before the last election, and promised to spend major amounts of money on capital for the Health Sciences Centre. They again froze that capital, and in questions we raised year after year after the broken promise, again, from the Filmon government, the government said we are very concerned about the situation at the Health Sciences Centre, and we do not want to see a so-called super hospital.

Given the fact that the government is now transferring surgery from St. Boniface to the Health Sciences Centre, closing down the Misericordia Hospital as an acute care hospital and transferring surgery to the Health Sciences Centre, why should anybody believe this government when just a year ago we had fruit flies in the operating rooms at the Health Sciences Centre? I want to ask the Premier (Mr. Filmon): when will the capital promise made in 1990 be completed at the Health Sciences Centre to deal with the long waiting lists that his government has created through his broken promises?

* (1340)

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): The Leader of the Opposition is wrong in what he brings to this House. First of all, let me tell him that the capital redevelopment at the Health Sciences Centre is on track. It is well over estimate, well over $70 million, and that planning and detail is well underway and will be going to tender in due course. It is in the control of those who are doing the planning; the authorities to spend the money are in place.

But secondly, the member for Concordia, the Leader of the Opposition, has said that we are moving surgery into the Health Sciences Centre. The plan that was unveiled this morning actually has a net decrease of some 1,200 procedures at the Health Sciences Centre as we expand the role of our community hospitals and move general surgery and surgery from the Misericordia out into those community hospitals, so I am not sure he knows what he is talking about.

Mr. Doer: The minister never answered the question. When will the promise be completed? That is what we asked. He never answered the question again.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): The minister has distributed copies of his briefing notes, and his briefing notes state that in Manitoba, waiting lists for ultrasound, CT and MIR are significantly longer than any other Canadian city; a fact that we have made to the Premier (Mr. Filmon) time and time again, which he has denied, and now is contained within the Minister of Health's own briefing notes. The waiting list for ultrasound is 8,000; CT scans, 4,500 people, according to the minister's briefing notes, are on those waiting lists, Madam Speaker.

I would like to ask the Premier: is he satisfied with the fact that our waiting lists are significantly higher than every other city in Canada? Is he satisfied with that standard, and is he satisfied with the announcements made today to deal with these unconscionable waiting lists in our health care system?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, with all due respect to the Leader of the Opposition, I do not know where he has been in our public statements or followed them over the last number of months. We have not denied those particular numbers. In fact, last winter we approved the first tranche of I think it was $1.5 million for the Winnipeg Hospital Authority to develop a plan to bring those down to much lower levels. That plan is in the process of implementation. In fact, I understand today that waiting lists for a number of those diagnostic areas have already declined significantly.

One of the key tools to make this happen has been to get centralized planning, centralized operation of our diagnostic equipment, and the New Democrats have opposed that. So you cannot have your cake and eat it too.

Madam Speaker, we are seeing the beginnings, I think, of one of the best delivery systems for hospital care in Canada, and I am very proud to be associated with it. I just wish the Leader of the Opposition would be more up to date in his information.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, the minister will have to forgive us for being a bit skeptical, because we have been this way before on many occasions. We had the Bell-Wade Report that spent--what?--a million dollars talking about how neurosurgery should be at St. B, cardiac surgery should be split between St. B and HSC, and now we are seeing a total shift. So we have been this way before.

One of our major concerns is one of the issues that came out of this morning's press briefing, the attempt by the government to indicate that there will be 165 additional beds available. That is not true, because the minister's own notes say that the net increase--given that we have the longest waiting lists in the country--of beds in the system will be 28 beds, 28 beds when you have people lying in the hallways as we speak.

How does the minister justify that?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, first of all, the reference was to the creation of the transition unit at Misericordia and what are now acute care beds. But it does allow for then acute care beds in all of the other hospitals to be able to decant people who are waiting for personal care home beds into the Misericordia unit, and that will be beginning I gather in a number of months as a few issues are worked out with Misericordia, which means that the remaining acute care facilities, the six in the city, will be able to better manage their acute care services.

Madam Speaker, the creation of the palliative care program that was announced today and should be in operation very, very shortly, as one of the first initiatives out of this plan will again take away some of the demand on our acute care beds. Dr. Postl, I think, went into fairly great detail about their planning. The use of swing beds between medicine and surgery, taking into account seasonal variations and use of beds, again, will free up more resources for meeting our acute care needs.

As I have said, this plan was developed by health care professionals in the system to deal with these issues. I think we should have some confidence in them.

* (1345)

Mr. Chomiak: Madam Speaker, can the minister of a government who by their own figures have closed 1,400 beds, 1,400 beds by government figures, explain how the opening of 28 beds and the reluctance of the minister to indicate any proposal to hire more nurses in the system today, how Manitobans can have confidence that we will not have waiting lists in this province the next six months, the next eight months, the next year, and the next year and a half?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, I am not sure where the member for Kildonan was this morning. I thought I saw him at the press briefing that we held. Dr. Brian Postl clearly indicated that the development of this plan will require additional nurses in that system, and I have indicated that this government is committed to ensuring the financial resources are there to do the job. So that is part of the plan.

If the member is proposing that we just take a chunk of money and say go and do this without a plan, without a rational basis, without a targeting of those resources, that is the kind of health planning we have seen in Canada for 30 years and it does not work.

Mr. Dave Chomiak (Kildonan): Madam Speaker, my final supplementary to the minister. Does the minister find it acceptable, with a waiting list of 8,000 people on ultrasound and 4,500 on CT scan, that his plan, as put out today, says that they are going to decrease those lists by 15 percent per year--that is the plan--whether that is acceptable to the Manitobans who have to wait months and years to get these tests? Does he accept the 15 percent per-year reduction that his plan, his grand scheme, envisions for patients who are on waiting lists of 8,000 and 4,500 respectively? That is not acceptable.

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, again I would ask--and I have offered to have a detailed briefing provided to the member for Kildonan, because what was said today, not that the lists would be brought down by 15 percent, but to reduce the lists. The number of procedures would be increased by 15 percent. The member is bringing information to this House that quite frankly is inaccurate.

Now I appreciate there was lots of information provided today in the course of the briefing, and it will take the member some time to digest it, but what Dr. McClarty was talking about was increasing the number of procedures by 15 percent to bring down the waiting lists, not reducing waiting lists by 15 percent. The member is inaccurate.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, for the last 10 years this government has treated the sisters, the board, the patients and the staff of the Misericordia in an unconscionable manner, facing them with daily uncertainty about their future and about the future of the hospital. In March, the government ordered the closure of the hospital, and now the Winnipeg Hospital Authority has added some of the details to that, or at least we have this month's proposals.

I would like to ask the minister to tell us why in none of his press releases there was any reference to the ophthalmology department at the Misericordia. Will he confirm for us today in the House that ophthalmology will remain at the Misericordia?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, first of all, I think what we have done with the Misericordia board is provide that certainty as to the future of Misericordia, and it was a brave step for that facility to change its role, but it is because the Misericordia board was prepared to take on a new role in its future that many of the much-needed changes are able to happen.

With respect to ophthalmology, Madam Speaker, I can confirm that the plan for the WHA is to continue with ophthalmology at the Misericordia Hospital, and that accounts for about 50 percent of the surgeries performed there.

Ms. Friesen: Could the minister tell us how long that promise is good for? How long will Misericordia retain the ophthalmology services?

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, Misericordia will maintain ophthalmology as long as it makes common sense for it to be there. That is the guiding principle of what we are trying to build, is a system that is flexible to deal with the demands of change, much of which we cannot predict today.

If I took the advice of the member for Wolseley and the members of the New Democratic Party, we would carve everything in stone, everything would be stagnant and within a short period of time would be out of date. But the commitment that I do make on behalf of this administration is that it has been our commitment to get the best use out of the facilities we have in Winnipeg, and the announcement that was made today does that. It ensures a long-term future for every facility in this city, and the Misericordia--if she had been properly briefed by her colleague, she would know that Misericordia already is being identified for some additional ambulatory services, like dialysis, for example. It is an excellent location for those programs, and I am sure it will have a long and successful future.

* (1350)

Ms. Friesen: Well, I wish the minister would read his own press releases. The Misericordia is being identified for exploratory ideas for new programs, not for new programs.

I would like to ask the minister to explain why within the last year over a million dollars was spent on renovations at the Misericordia to enable it to cover plastic surgery. Could he explain to us why that money was spent in that way when now, less than 12 months later, we have another program and the loss of that plastic surgery program?

Mr. Praznik: You know, Madam Speaker, there is a very fundamental difference between these two sides of the House. On that side of the House, they look at every little piece in isolation and really do not care about what is best for the overall view of health care. On this side, we are attempting to take a much larger view.

Our operating theatres in virtually every other community hospital, which are much more modern, in much more modern facilities, have gone tremendously underutilized. This gives us the opportunity to get the best use out of what we have. I can tell the member, part of the problem at Misericordia has been that there has not been a clear decision being made because everybody keeps debating around it. We now have one in which their board is supportive as they move into a new age. I can tell the member that they did some renovations there out of their foundation without any approval, direct approval of Manitoba Health. But, at the end of the day, we are trying to build a good system for the city of Winnipeg where patient care is No. 1, not the small "p" political interests of any single facility.

Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Madam Speaker, I notice the minister has not made any announcement on hepatitis C.

The breast care clinic at Misericordia Hospital is nationally known for its comprehensive program, including screening, diagnosis, surgery, treatment, reconstructive surgery and physiotherapy, yet the minister announced today that this program would be fragmented. There will be a diagnostic centre to be announced in three surgical units, one at St. Boniface, one at Victoria and one at Grace. So I want to ask the minister: when consumer group after consumer group has come forward to speak about the advantages of a centralized breast care program, why has the minister chosen to fragment this program? Is this his idea of common sense?

Hon. Darren Praznik (Minister of Health): Madam Speaker, let us get some facts on the table in this discussion. First of all, in Winnipeg today, I understand there are four breast programs with surgery delivered in seven sites. In terms of breast health care for the women of our province and of our capital city, we have today a terribly fragmented program. Secondly, the design for this program was not done by the minister; it was done by health care professionals from an overall perspective of the city. If the member wants to debate with them, she can be my guest to do it. They designed it and make the recommendations. I am accepting the recommendation with my colleagues of front-line health care deliverers who have a mandate to deliver a program, one program for the entire city. What was announced today is that we will have, for the first time in the history of our province and of this city, one comprehensive breast care program with rapid diagnosis, which is what the women of Winnipeg and Manitoba want.

Ms. McGifford: Madam Speaker, since clearly many women have come forward to voice support for the Misericordia program, I would like to ask the minister: which consumer groups did he consult with when arriving at this decision?

Mr. Praznik: What is very interesting is the member for Osborne has totally ignored the fact that breast care in the city of Winnipeg today is terribly fragmented with four programs and seven sites for surgery. She conveniently forgets that to concentrate on one piece, rather than thinking about care for all women in the city of Winnipeg. I can tell the member that, in the announcement that was made today, Dr. Brian Postl indicated very clearly, as the details are put around the development of one breast care program, all of the various groups and organizations that have an interest in Winnipeg health, or women's health will be involved in that process, and I look forward to them working with the WHA to build this new program.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Osborne, with a final supplementary question.

* (1355)

Ms. McGifford: So, Madam Speaker, I presume the answer was he has not consulted.

I want to ask the minister if he realizes that his wilful destruction of this program at the Misericordia Hospital is not only medically regressive but denies women the services which they tell us, which they know will promote their healing and health.

Mr. Praznik: Madam Speaker, first of all, I do not know how many times one has to say it for people to at least acknowledge it or have it sink in, but all of this work was not done by the Minister of Health. It was not done by officials in the Ministry of Health; it was not done by boards playing turf wars. It was done by physicians, by nurses, by allied health workers and their administrators to build a system-wide approach to have one breast care program in the city of Winnipeg. In that process, I am aware that they talked to a number of these groups. Some of my colleagues from within the city of Winnipeg were involved in those discussions and sat in them. There was a lot of work that has gone into them, and I am pleased to indicate that, as the new program is put into place, those same organizations and groups will be invited to be part of that consultation and discussion and planning. I prefer to have all of them at the table building this new breast care program, rather than having it dictated by myself and certainly not from the member for Osborne.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, my question is for the Minister responsible for Manitoba Hydro. In the city of Winnipeg, we have, depending on what side of the street or the river or whatever it might be--determines whether or not you are a customer of Winnipeg Hydro or if you are a customer of Manitoba Hydro. In a private situation for profit, there might be some sense to having two, but what does not make sense is to have two publicly owned Crown corporations administering hydro. My question to the minister responsible is: what has this government done in the last 10 years to deal with the issue of duplication and the justification of why, today, we are still being served by two public utilities serving one city?

Hon. Glen Findlay (Acting Minister charged with the administration of The Manitoba Hydro Act): I thank the member for the question. I will take it as notice for the minister responsible.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, will then the Premier make any sort of a commitment to any degree in terms of looking at the need for looking at our public utility of Winnipeg Hydro and Manitoba Hydro, and what sort of justification is there to allow both of those public Crown corporations to continue on?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I am sure the member opposite knows that that has been the subject of ongoing discussions for certainly this past decade, but it is a matter that has to be decided by the two utilities. They are utilities that are owned by two different levels of government, and obviously this is not something that can be done unilaterally by our government. If, as the member indicates, there are all of those synergies and advantages to be gained--and I am not necessarily arguing that he is right or wrong on it, but there has to be both partners who are persuaded of those synergies and those advantages.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, can the Premier then explain to Manitobans, in particular people who live in Winnipeg, how they benefit by having two publicly run hydro companies serving one city of the population base that Winnipeg currently has? How does the consumer actually benefit? Will he not concede that in fact they would benefit if it was one publicly owned company?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, I have certainly seen economic analyses that would suggest exactly the circumstances that the member opposite indicates. Winnipeg City Council and the people who run Winnipeg Hydro have a different point of view, and I have seen many letters to the editor and also analyses to the contrary. So, if he has that perspective, then he obviously should be taking it to Winnipeg City Council and to the people who run Winnipeg Hydro to make his point.

Mr. Doug Martindale (Burrows): Madam Speaker, since 1990 there have been 30 documented cases of shaken baby syndrome, and 25 percent of these tragically ended in death. In the last month, a six-week-old girl died, and a nine-month-old is on life support.

I would like to ask the Minister of Family Services what she is planning to do, what her government is planning to do by way of prevention so that in future there will be no more tragic deaths of this kind. Will her government appoint an independent commission of inquiry, as we recommended in October 1996, so that all of the causes and all of the remedies can be identified so there are no more future tragedies of this kind?

Hon. Bonnie Mitchelson (Minister of Family Services): I thank my honourable friend for that question. I would love to be able to guarantee Manitobans that not another baby would lose its life as a result of shaken baby syndrome. I am not sure I can make that guarantee, but what I can do is indicate that I have asked the Children and Youth Secretariat to pull together all of those people that might be responsible for working with new moms, whether they be public health, whether they be babysitting courses, whether they be the programs that are run like Nobody's Perfect, ensuring that we try to have an overall strategy and ensure in every program dealing with the care of children that there is a component around the dangers of shaking babies.

Madam Speaker, I do know that the new programs that we have introduced like BabyFirst, new programs and strategies around adolescent pregnancy and working with young moms will certainly have a component that creates and specifically speaks to the issue of shaken baby syndrome.

* (1400)

Mr. Martindale: Will the Minister of Family Services acknowledge that experts in this field such as Dr. Debbie Lindsay, associate director of the Child Protection Centre, are saying there have not been a lot of programs which target these high-risk groups, although a two-hour program is not going to fix all these problems, and that what we need is for the government to act decisively in areas within their jurisdiction on areas that prevent these problems such as eliminating child poverty? We have the highest rate of child poverty in Canada. This is something that is a direct result of the policies of this government. What is she going to do to end this and prevent future deaths?

Mrs. Mitchelson: I know that in many of the instances where we have seen deaths as a result of shaken baby syndrome, they have been in fact young males that have been in charge of or caring for these infants.

Madam Speaker, again I have to say to you that everything that we are doing as a result of the National Child Benefit and our ability to reinvest dollars in families of high need have been focused towards reducing child poverty. We know that the best form of social security is a job, and if parents have jobs and are working in the system and have the additional support like the National Child Benefit and other programs that are available through government, it will break the cycle of poverty, and families will have more money and the ability to make better decisions for their lives and for their children.

Madam Speaker, as I indicated in my first answer, we will be working with all of those that are providing programs to ensure that there is a component around shaken baby syndrome and what the implications will be. We will continue to focus our energies and our efforts in reduction of child poverty around programs that will help to move people into a cycle of independence, not dependence.

Mr. Martindale: Will this minister acknowledge that the child tax benefit is being clawed back from the poorest of the poor? None is going to families on social assistance, and we know that poverty, poor education and a high rate of teen pregnancy, the highest rate of teen pregnancy per capita in Canada, are all contributing factors to this very serious problem. What is this minister and what is this government going to do about it?

Mrs. Mitchelson: All of the programs that we have announced over the last couple of months certainly are dealing with the issue of poverty and families in high risk trying to prevent neglect and abuse. Our BabyFirst program is one of those very specific projects that has intensive working with young moms, with single parents, to try to ensure that they understand what good parenting is all about, how to feed nutritious meals to their children and how to learn to parent. Obviously, shaken baby syndrome is one of those issues where parents do need some support and some tools to help them learn to parent in a better fashion.

Madam Speaker, our announcement around fetal alcohol syndrome and Stop FAS is exactly one of those initiatives that is working with high-risk families to try to help ensure that children are born healthy and that parents have the parenting skills to deal with those children when they are born.

Madam Speaker, our Earlystart program that we have just announced will deal with children in the child care system. And all of the additional money that we have put in through Taking Charge! and Making Welfare Work will ensure that people have the opportunity to work and break the cycle of poverty.

Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): Madam Speaker, on March 19 of this year, the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer) finally announced a task force to deal with the important issues facing the Capital Region, the names of which have not yet even been made public. Now, just as he did earlier with his bullying of Winnipeg over the sale of water to Headingley, the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) has subverted that process agreed to by the province, the City of Winnipeg and the other Capital Region communities to provide long-term planning for the development of the Capital Region.

I would like to ask the Premier: who is in charge of the Capital Region in that government, the Minister of Urban Affairs or the rampaging Minister of Rural Development?

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Wellington for her colourful question. The issue is that we need to provide services. We need to provide sewer and water services to what is the largest unserviced urban-type development in the entire province of Manitoba. Those of us who walked in Headingley in recent weeks, as I have, know that there is a significant requirement for water supply and sewage treatment.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the issue is not about the nature of future development in the ex-urban areas around the city of Winnipeg, which is the subject of the task force that has been announced, but it is about providing services for urban development that currently exists without the benefit of services in the way of sewer and water. That is an area of neglect that has existed for decades. It goes back to the time when Headingley was a part of the city of Winnipeg, and those services were not provided for--this is not about houses that have been built since Headingley seceded from the city of Winnipeg. This is about urban development that has existed for decades and in fact goes to the days when it was part of the city of Winnipeg. In the interests of a clean and sustainable environment, those services need to be provided today or in the near future, and that is not to be used as a bargaining chip; that is not to be used as a means of dealing with future development; that will be the subject of the review and study that has been announced. This is about what exists today and has existed for decades and definitely requires servicing by way of sewer and water.

Ms. Barrett: The issue definitely is that we need to look at a plan for the entire Capital Region rather than just ad hocking.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Wellington, to pose her question, please.

Ms. Barrett: Why should we even have a task force on the Capital Region if the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) can hijack an agreed-to process, apparently at will?

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, clearly there is a lack of understanding on the part of the member for Wellington, which is why a lot of people do not give them a great deal of credibility on that side of the House on issues of this nature. This is all about--

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Mr. Filmon: Madam Speaker, the planning is required for future development decisions. The servicing is required for those homes that exist today and have existed for decades in that area. I know that is a difficult concept for the member for Wellington and her colleagues to get their heads around, but even if there was no future development allowed as an outcome of the planning process that is going to be decided by virtue of the task force that has been announced, we would still have to deal with providing the servicing to all of that housing that was constructed while Headingley was a part of the city of Winnipeg for decades. That is the issue that has to be dealt with. That is the issue that is being dealt with by virtue of the announcement made yesterday.

* (1410)

Ms. Barrett: I would like to ask the Premier: why should the residents of Winnipeg trust this government when the latest takeover by the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) shows how planning issues vital to the city of Winnipeg and the rest of the Capital Region are trampled underfoot by an out-of-control Minister of Rural Development?

Mr. Filmon: I know that the member opposite has had the three questions written out for her and she feels obliged to ask them, but the fact of the matter is--

Madam Speaker: Order, please.

Ms. Barrett: I wrote the questions myself, unlike the members opposite who have their questions scripted. Madam Speaker, I would like to ask you to bring the Premier to order and ask him to answer the question that was put and not get involved in personal vendettas.

Madam Speaker: The honourable government House leader, on the same point of order.

Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): The honourable member makes the same specious point of order, I believe, that she made yesterday or the day before, and I make the same response.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Wellington did not have a point of order.

Mr. Filmon: I repeat that there are two separate issues here. One is the planning for future development, and a process has been announced, a process to which this government is committed, the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Reimer) is committed, the Minister of Rural Development (Mr. Derkach) is committed. The fact of the matter is decisions will be made as to whether or not there will be further expansion of ex-urban housing developments or not through that process. But it is intolerable, for what is an urban density development that exists today, that has existed for two decades, including during the period of time when Headingley was a part of the city of Winnipeg, that that should remain unserviced by way of sewage treatment and water supply, and that is a process which must be addressed and is being addressed by this government.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Madam Speaker, anyone who has had the pleasure of travelling in rural Manitoba in the last month can attest to the horrible conditions of the roads in the rural communities, and this is only going to get worse with rail line abandonment. We know that CN is planning to discontinue more services in rural Manitoba.

Since one of the answers to this is short-line railways, can I ask the Minister of Highways whether he is prepared to lobby to ensure that short-line railways can function properly, rather than be held at the mercy of the railway companies who are not co-operating with these short-line companies.

Hon. Glen Findlay (Minister of Highways and Transportation): Madam Speaker, I am sure it comes as no surprise to the member for Swan River that we strongly support the concept of economically viable short lines. In many instances, we have supported people who promote the concept of setting up a short line. Whether it is in the Interlake or whether in southern Manitoba or southwest Manitoba, we support the people who come forward and make presentations and proposals to CN and CP to take over those short lines.

So our Legislature supports it, and in principle and practice the department supports it in the actions we undertake on behalf of people who propose short lines, so we know the merit of keeping freight on rail as opposed to roads.

Madam Speaker: Time for Oral Questions has expired.