MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I would like to call the House back into session, to welcome everyone back and wish you all a very happy new year.
The first item on the agenda, the daily routine. Before we begin the daily routine, are there any introductions of visitors?
PRESENTING AND READING PETITIONS
PRESENTING REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
TABLING REPORTS, REGULATIONS AND OTHER PAPERS
STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS
GOVERNMENT NOTICES OF MOTION
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS
Bill No. 140 - Entitled an Act to Amend Chapter 4 of the Acts of 1991. The Members and Public Employees Disclosure Act. (Mr. Terence Donahoe)
MR. SPEAKER: Ordered that this bill be read a second time on a future day.
NOTICES OF MOTION
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas in December this Liberal Premier purged his communications and office staff only days before Christmas in the name of better communications with the people of Nova Scotia, especially Liberals; and
Whereas this Premier is still under the impression that the people of this province are there to financially support his future as Leader of the Liberal Party of Nova Scotia; and
Whereas even as we start fresh in 1995, the Premier continues to say, ". . . it's up to us to do a better selling job with the public, not to mention Liberals";
Therefore be it resolved that this Premier, with the help of his new communicators, adopt a New Year's resolution, that is, to start governing this province in the interests of all Nova Scotians and not just Liberals.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.
MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Premier has declared that, over the holidays, he discovered that Nova Scotians' message for his Liberal Government is "slow down"; and
Whereas the Conflict of Interest Commissioner has, once again, publicly identified major gaps in legislation which prevent him from dealing with behaviour by ministers and senior public servants that undermines public confidence; and
Whereas the Liberal election platform promised tough new ethical standards and stronger conflict of interest enforcement no later than November 1993;
Therefore be it resolved that the Premier should not try to use a Liberal slow-down to justify keeping Nova Scotia's conflict of interest law in the Dark Ages, and thus further undermine people's trust in their own government.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Kings West.
MR. GEORGE MOODY: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas Premier Savage has promised his new S.O.S. campaign team will bring responsiveness and competence to his embattled administration; and
Whereas for the last 10 months, the Savage Liberals have been rushing headlong into the establishment of casinos in Nova Scotia without consultation and independent socio-economic evaluation; and
Whereas so far the government has ignored advice from Nova Scotians who oppose casinos in Nova Scotia;
Therefore be it resolved that the Savage Liberals listen to their new advice and slow down on the introduction of casinos to give Nova Scotians an opportunity to be heard and for the government to respond to these public concerns.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Cape Breton West.
MR. RUSSELL MACKINNON: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas nearly $100 million was expended to develop the Donkin Mine; and
Whereas 10 years later, this coal mine has not been put into production despite available foreign markets; and
Whereas growing concerns persist over the safety and life expectancy of the Phalen Mine;
Therefore be it resolved that in the opinion of this House Devco proceed with the opening of the Donkin Mine.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Pictou Centre.
DR. JOHN HAMM: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas Alzheimer's Disease is a degenerative, fatal disease of the brain affecting approximately 10,000 Nova Scotians and 300,000 individuals across Canada; and
Whereas the Alzheimer Society of Nova Scotia is committed to providing support to the families and friends of individuals with Alzheimer's Disease, through family support programs, education, advocacy and by funding research on behalf of individuals with Alzheimer's Disease; and
Whereas the month of January is one month set aside from the year to raise awareness and funds in the fight against Alzheimer's Disease;
Therefore be it resolved that all members of this House support the research efforts of the Alzheimer Society this month, and year-round, and applaud the society and the RCMP for their announcement yesterday of the creation of a nation-wide registry to assist those already suffering from the disease and their families.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver.
MR. SPEAKER: Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Sackville-Beaverbank.
MR. WILLIAM MACDONALD: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas St. John Ambulance provides outstanding community service as a result of the work of dedicated volunteers; and
Whereas Joe MacKenzie of Lower Sackville is one such volunteer, devoting over 15 years in the service of the people; and
Whereas Mr. MacKenzie was invested last month into the Order of Saint John and received the Maltese Cross in recognition of his work with emergency services;
Therefore be it resolved that the members of the House of Assembly of the Province of Nova Scotia recognize Joe MacKenzie's valuable contribution to emergency services while working with the St. John Ambulance.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There is a request for waiver of notice.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Hants West.
MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Town of Hantsport is steeped in rich heritage and will mark 1995 as a year of centennial celebrations commemorating its 100th Anniversary as a town; and
Whereas the Town of Hantsport has struck a number of committees designed to enhance 1995 centennial celebrations throughout the town by organizing a wide array of events; and
Whereas these committees are made up of numerous volunteers that will recognize Hantsport's tremendous accomplishments over the past 100 years by organizing numerous historical, social and sporting events;
Therefore be it resolved that all members of this Legislature commend Mayor Wayne Folker, Town Council, businesses and the residents of Hantsport for their very diligent efforts designed at showcasing Hantsport's 1995 Centennial Year.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: Is it agreed that notice be waived on that motion?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Premier has declared that, over the holidays, he discovered that Nova Scotians' message for his Liberal Government is slow down; and
Whereas the Premier had previously declared that his government faced a communications problem, and had to make sure their actions were well known throughout the province; and
Whereas it is real progress if the Liberals recognize that Nova Scotians know what this government is doing, and Nova Scotians don't like it;
Therefore be it resolved that instead of slow down the Liberals should try telling the truth, honestly implementing their platform and genuinely consulting Nova Scotians.
MR. SPEAKER: Let me see that notice of motion, please.
It would seem to me that in the Therefore be it resolved portion of the motion, the idea that honourable members of this House should "try telling the truth" imputes that they perhaps are not telling the truth. However, as an expression of opinion, I suppose, it is admissible.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Premier has declared, over the holidays, he discovered that Nova Scotians' message for his Liberal Government is "slow down"; and
Whereas this sounds more like an after the fact rationalization for broken promises of one-tiered social assistance, implementation of the child care round table targets and other steps to alleviate poverty and inequality; and
Whereas regulation of small options homes is one Liberal commitment already enduring a long slow-down despite many warnings of danger in the present situation;
Therefore be it resolved that this would be one popular government if the Liberals had truly rushed forward to implement the reforms and improvements they promised for Nova Scotia's economy and society.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.
MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Premier has declared that, over the holidays, he discovered that Nova Scotians' message for his Liberal Government is slow down; and
Whereas the government is nevertheless plowing ahead to introduce casino gambling much more quickly than any other province, without the prior local approval that was a direct prerequisite for every other casino in Canada, despite three consultations that found Nova Scotians oppose casinos; and
[12:15 p.m.]
Whereas Nova Scotians can conclude their message to the Liberals was received and ignored;
Therefore be it resolved that if the Liberals are truly hearing and responding to a slow down message, they will stop trying to hastily impose casino gambling.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Premier has declared that, over the holidays, he discovered that Nova Scotians' message for his Liberal Government is "slow down"; and
Whereas this Liberal Government has already been going very slow indeed by dropping the job strategy that was promised as a first priority despite massive unemployment and continuing recession; and
Whereas the Liberals have gone even more slowly on conditions for part-time workers, equal pay for work of equal value, no decrease in WCB benefits and other urgent issues that once preoccupied them;
Therefore be it resolved that the Premier should consider whether it is the Tory agenda, crafted by Donald Cameron, that Nova Scotians want slowed down, not the jobs, jobs, jobs platform that put him in the Premier's office.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.
MR. DENNIS RICHARDS: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas throughout the year, 1994, this government has worked with business and industry to stimulate economic growth by fostering a healthy economic climate for Nova Scotia; and
Whereas 1994 marked a turning point in the economic growth and stability of Nova Scotia, bringing about 13,000 new jobs; and
Whereas the growth of business and industry continues to require the positive support of a government committed to the economic well-being of this province;
Therefore be it resolved that in this new year of 1995, this government continues to pursue policies that encourage a positive economic climate resulting in more jobs and economic growth for all Nova Scotians.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Premier has declared that, over the holidays, he discovered that Nova Scotians' message for his Liberal Government is "slow down"; and
Whereas communities struck by arbitrary hospital closures, health care and providers and most Nova Scotians have been suffering cutbacks but waiting in vain for this government's health reform plan; and
Whereas comprehensive home care, other community-based health care, physician resource planning, the new ambulance system, tertiary facility plans and labour adjustment are among the long overdue reforms;
Therefore be it resolved that this House urges real health reform, not just slower arbitrary cutbacks, because health reform will have come to a premature end if it slows down any further.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
Are there further notices of motion? Is there any additional business to come before the House under the heading of the daily routine? If not, the Clerk has conducted a draw for the Adjournment motion at 6:00 p.m. this afternoon, the successful winner this afternoon is the honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley. He has submitted a motion reading as follows:
Therefore be it resolved that the government issue and communicate its health reform plan immediately.
So we will hear on that matter at 6:00 p.m. The time now being 12:19 p.m. the Oral Question Period today will run for one hour that is until 1:19 p.m.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
ORAL QUESTIONS PUT BY MEMBERS
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Health and it has to do with the so-called Dobbin Affair. I ask questions by reason of the fact that I am now in receipt, as I am sure he is, of a decision by Mr. Justice MacIntosh. In this very interesting decision attached to it more to the point, is an affidavit sworn by Lucy Dobbin. Lucy Dobbin says in part in this affidavit, "At the beginning of the meeting on Sunday, one of those present again asked about a facilitator to keep us on track. I indicated that it had been suggested on Friday that Patrick [the husband] could do it, if nobody had any objection.". She goes on to say in her affidavit, "No one, including the Minister and his Policy advisor, had any objection.". Further, in Paragraph 14, Ms. Dobbin says in her affidavit, "Carrick Consulting Services was dormant as it had been since the previous year. Patrick was an experienced health administrator and facilitator. Everyone participating in the meeting understood his presence and agreed with it.".
Now against that backdrop, and I will do this as quickly as I can, I want to refer you, Mr. Speaker, and the minister to answers given to us on this issue here in this House and recorded in Hansard, in this case on Page 3821 of Hansard because at that time, the Minister of Health said the following, "First of all, I did not know, at any time, that Mr. Dobbin was or intended to be a consultant. Now let us put that on the record and make it straight. Secondly, I did not invite this person into any confines or into any conclaves that the Department of Health had. So let us also make that clear.".
Then later, the Minister of Health, on Page 3881 of Hansard said, in response to a question from me, "There was no invitation issued to Mr. Dobbin, Mr. Speaker. He was there as a resident of the home in which we were meeting.". So we now have . . .
MR. SPEAKER: All right, a question, please.
MR. DONAHOE: Yes, indeed. We now have Mrs. Dobbin under oath saying that Mr. Dobbin was a part of the meeting as a facilitator and that all present at the meeting, including the Minister of Health, agreed that Mr. Patrick Dobbin functioned as a facilitator. I would ask the Minister of Health if he would tell me whether his recollection of the events is correct or whether Mrs. Dobbin is mis-stating the circumstances under oath in her affidavit?
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable minister may reply. (Laughter)
HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, the honourable member is taking quotes and bits and pieces and piecing together a question which I will paraphrase and say, did I invite Mr. Dobbin, as a facilitator, to the meeting in the May? The answer is, as I have given, no, I did not invite him into any conclave. He was there as a member of the household. He was there at the time of the meeting as a participant. I have said in Hansard, if he reads further in Hansard, that he participated in the meetings and I certainly did not object to that simply because he was an unemployed person who was not, in any way, consulting at the time. Mrs. Dobbin, in her statement confirms that fact that I did not know of any consultation until I was given a brochure in August of that year.
MR. DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, with respect, the minister has not come within light years of answering the question that I put. I want to ask the Minister of Health to listen to these words. It is Lucy Dobbin, under oath, saying, "At the beginning of the meeting on Sunday, one of those present again asked about a facilitator to keep us on track. I . . .", referring to herself, ". . . indicated that it had been suggested on Friday that Patrick . . .", the husband, Mr. Dobbin, ". . . could do it, if nobody had any objection. No one, including the Minister and his Policy advisor,", whom I understand is Sharon Davis-Murdock, ". . . had any objection.". Later, Mrs. Dobbin says, "Patrick was an experienced health administrator and facilitator. Everyone participating in the meeting understood his presence and agreed with it.".
I say to the minister, through you, Mr. Speaker, that that description from Lucy Dobbin does not jibe at all with the description of events offered to this House earlier by the minister as to what Patrick Dobbin was doing at that meeting. I ask the minister to explain, if he can, the apparent conflict between what Mrs. Dobbin has said under oath and what he has earlier said here in this House as to what Mr. Patrick Dobbin was doing at those meetings?
DR. STEWART: Again, Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Dobbin very clearly states that someone suggested that Mr. Dobbin be part of the meeting and no one objected. I cannot recall specifically anyone suggesting that. I may have been at the meeting at the time, I may not have been at the meeting at the time. The fact is that Mr. Dobbin was there. I have said that. I said that he participated in the meeting. It was not at my previous invitation, that was made clear as well. The fact is that there is not a discrepancy in what I have said in the past. In addition, in retrospect, I would not have considered it unusual since he was not at the time consulting or in any way participating in the health care system of Nova Scotia.
MR. DONAHOE: Well, perhaps I will try it this way. Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Health, this Minister of Health knew, at the relevant time on Sunday, as the meeting was convening, that there was such a person as Patrick Dobbin. He was the husband of Lucy Dobbin, he was a health care consultant. (Interruption)
Well, he says, that is not . . .
MR. SPEAKER: This is a final supplementary. That is the question and the answer, then.
MR. DONAHOE: Well, the final supplementary, then, is simply this, does the Minister of Health say that Mrs. Dobbin is lying when she says under oath, when he says (Interruptions)
Mr. Speaker, do I have the right to put the question or do I not?
MR. SPEAKER: I could not accept that question because it requests an opinion of a minister as to whether someone outside the House has done something that is punishable at law, namely to lie under oath, perjury. That is not a proper question in Question Period.
AN HON. MEMBER: Well, it must be the minister, then . . .
MR. DONAHOE: Well, perhaps it must be the minister who has some failing recollection.
Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Dobbin has said under oath that the Minister of Health, (Interruption) could I have a little order, please, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Is there a question?
MR. DONAHOE: Yes, there is. If I had some order, with your help, Mr. Speaker, there would be a question.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.
MR. DONAHOE: The Minister of Health, Mr. Speaker, was at the Sunday meeting. Mrs. Dobbin says under oath that, with the minister present, a discussion took place. The discussion was to the effect that Mrs. Dobbin's husband, Patrick, was to be the facilitator of this meeting. Mrs. Dobbin further under oath says, everybody at the meeting, the minister included, agreed and concurred that Patrick Dobbin be the facilitator of the meeting. Is that true? That is my question to the Minister of Health.
DR. STEWART: Again, Mr. Speaker, I have never said that Mr. Dobbin did not participate in the meeting nor was he there. I have made that clear in Hansard, after repeated questioning, and I examined that very carefully in this place.
The fact is that if that - and it was not a discussion and Mrs. Dobbin does not say discussion at all, she says that someone suggested it - I do not recall anyone suggesting him as participating. He was there and he participated and I have said that. The fact is that there was no inconsistency in what I have said in the past and my recollection is on record and I will stand by those recollections.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.
MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to go to the Minister of Health on the same topic. After listening to the answers given, I am not sure if I understand the situation any better than I did before.
In the sworn statement, Lucy Dobbin said, regarding the Friday meeting, that everyone, including the minister, agreed that since Patrick was there, was not working in the system and had experience, he could do it if he agreed. That was referring to not only attending the infamous meeting but also to act as a facilitator. That was also stated in Paragraph 13 because it was raised again at the start of the Sunday meeting.
My question to the minister is quite simply this. Is that correct? Will the minister acknowledge that, in fact, he had agreed prior to that meeting that not only Patrick Dobbin would be present but that he would act as facilitator, as Lucy Dobbin states in her sworn affidavit? (Interruption) For those who say she doesn't state that, Mr. Speaker, I would invite them to read it.
HON. RONALD STEWART: Yes, the question is whether I invited Mr. Dobbin to be a facilitator, in advance of the meeting and so on. I did not do that. I have stated in this place that I was at the meeting on Sunday, that he participated in the meeting in a way that I have described and in the way the honourable Leader of the Opposition refers to it. I have said that, that is quite correct.
He was there, I saw no objection to him being there in that he was not, in any way, participating in the health care system of the province. It would be difficult to get anyone at that stage who was not participating in the health care system. Mrs. Dobbin makes that clear in her deposition that he did, in fact, not receive any employment until August of that year. I recall that I was informed of that on the 29th.
[12:30 p.m.]
MR. HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I didn't ask the minister if he directly had been the one who had invited Mr. Dobbin to participate but I am asking about knowledge about the decision to invite. And here Ms. Dobbin clearly states that and I will read this one short section so that we are absolutely clear about that which we are saying, "While we were discussing our plans for the weekend meeting in my office on Friday evening, one of the members of senior staff suggested using Patrick as a facilitator to assist us in this meeting. Everyone, including the Minister, agreed that since Patrick was there, was not working in the system and had experience, he could do it, if he agreed.". My question to the minister is quite simply this, did the minister agree at that meeting that Patrick Dobbin could serve as the facilitator for the meeting that was to be held in the Dobbin home on that Sunday?
DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I had asked for a meeting to be set up by my senior staff with the aid of the deputy minister, who headed it up. I had asked for it to be in Halifax and we had made preparations for it to be in Halifax, that was later changed, I was informed of the change. I was going down to Lunenburg and said yes, that would be quite convenient, I would be happy to do that but I did not have pre-approval of anyone acting as a facilitator, to my recollection. I have again gone over and over these facts and I have tried my best to recall details which at the time did not appear in any way, obviously to me, to be important. It was an organizational thing with a meeting, I do not organize meetings in my department, I attend them when directed by my deputy in some cases and I did so in this case. So, it is not inconsistent that I would not recall any kind of a meeting, I was not present at an organizational meeting, to my mind it was headed up by the staff and the deputy. I can only be as candid and frank as I can recall.
MR. HOLM: Mr. Speaker, what we are being asked to rely upon of course is the minister's recollection. Well, being present at that Sunday meeting there was a whole list of those who were present as outlined in Paragraph 12 of Ms. Dobbin's sworn statement. My question to the minister quite simply then is this, since we are obviously having to rely on the minister's statement, has the minister addressed and spoken to the others who were in attendance at that meeting and therefore would have been knowledgable about what was discussed when the minister was present at that time? Has he discussed this matter with them and is the minister saying that after having had those discussions that the statement that was issued by his former deputy minister is untruthful, that it is false?
DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I won't be drawn into responding to that allegation except to say I have discussed these issues with my staff on an ongoing basis since this was raised in the public domain and I have been satisfied that they have been as eager to recollect events as I have and we have not come to any conclusions other than what I have stated consistently in this House, consistently in the press and I will continue to state that. I must depend on my recollection and my notes of events that occurred over a period of months which have indeed occupied the press and this House for some time and I stand by those recollections. There is no evidence and no attempt in any way to convert or subvert anything. I have been open and I will continue to be open and I welcome these questions. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, my question is also to the Minister of Health. I wonder if I might ask his help in responding to this inquiry? He stands here in this place today and says he is relying on his recollection and notes. I am standing in this House in possession of a sworn statement from Ms. Lucy Dobbin which she swore under oath. She made a number of statements, among them that at the beginning of that meeting on Sunday one of those present asked again about the facilitator to keep the meeting on track. She, Lucy Dobbin, indicated that it had been suggested on a Friday meeting, a meeting which the minister attended, ". . . that Patrick could do it . . .", the husband could do it, ". . . if nobody had any objection. No one, including the Minister and his Policy advisor, had any objection.". Then later, Lucy Dobbin, under oath, says, Patrick, referring to the husband, was an experienced health administrator and facilitator. Everyone participating in the meeting understood his presence and agreed with it.
Then, in Hansard, we have the minister saying a number of things. Among them the minister said, on Page 3881, in response to a question from me, "There was no invitation issued to Mr. Dobbin, Mr. Speaker. He was there as a resident of the home in which we were meeting.". Well, Lucy Dobbin says he was there as the facilitator of the meeting which was taking place in the home.
MR. SPEAKER: Question, please, question.
MR. DONAHOE: My question to the Minister of Health is, can he explain to this House and to the people of Nova Scotia who are concerned about this issue, how there can be an almost total dichotomy between the two stories, Lucy Dobbin under oath and this minister's recollection and doubts. Can he explain that dichotomy, please?
HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I have replied again, previous to this, to this question in terms of whether or not, first of all, I issued any invitation. I did not issue any invitation except one and we covered that, when we invited Dr. Rick Lemoine, as President of the Medical Society to come to the meeting.
The organization of the meeting was the responsibility of the deputy and my senior staff. I agreed to go to the meeting, obviously; I had requested it. I had gone down to Lunenburg. I have said in Hansard, in addition to what the honourable gentleman opposite is quoting, that, indeed, Mr. Dobbin did participate in the meeting. The recollection by Mrs. Dobbin was that he was the facilitator and that someone had suggested he be that. She did not say I invited him. She did not say that I suggested he be any kind of a facilitator or participate in the meeting. However, I saw no objection to this in that he was not an employee of the health care system, was not a consultant, nor was he connected with the health care system in Nova Scotia. So I saw no objection to that and it is true, I had no objection to that.
MR. DONAHOE: If that is the case, Mr. Speaker, and we are to take at face value what the minister has just now said, may I ask the minister why he responded to me as he did on November 3, 1994? I asked the minister at that time if he could indicate to this House who it was that extended an invitation to Mr. Patrick Dobbin to participate in meetings with the minister and senior staff on this occasion. He now, here today, says, and I think has said consistently, that he, the Minister of Health, did not extend the invitation, but it is clear that Patrick Dobbin was there.
But here is the language from Dr. Stewart, which I think is problematic. Dr. Stewart, in response to the question which I just read, which I put to him on November 3rd, this is his answer, Mr. Speaker. "There was no invitation issued to Mr. Dobbin, Mr. Speaker. He was there as a resident of the home in which we were meeting.". But the fact of the matter is that he was not there as a resident of the home, he was there as the facilitator of the meeting, husband of the Deputy Minister of Health, and his work as facilitator was endorsed and approved by the Minister of Health, as evidenced by Lucy Dobbin's affidavit.
I ask the minister if he can please explain why it is that his answer was, on an earlier day, that Mr. Dobbin was simply there as a resident of the home and he makes no mention of the fact that he was there with the minister's approval as a facilitator?
DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, that answer was given to a question implying that Mr. Dobbin had previously been invited. He was there as a resident of the home. I said that. I went on in Hansard, in answer to a question by the honourable gentleman opposite, perhaps one or two, that he also participated in the meeting and that I saw no indiscretion in that in that he was not at all connected with the health care system. I would make that same decision were the same circumstances to exist. The same thing applies. He was there, he was participant in the meeting. He was, as Mrs. Dobbin recalls it, made the facilitator in writing upon the blackboard or whatever, and he did, as I have said, he participated in the meeting, but he was not in any way a consultant or in any way connected with the health care system. I will continue to repeat that. That is what I recall.
MR. DONAHOE: Well, I ask the Minister of Health then if that is the case and the Minister of Health did say that on November 2, 1994, as reported on Page 3821 of Hansard, the Minister of Health at that time, Mr. Speaker, said: "First of all, I did not know, at any time, that Mr. Dobbin was or intended to be a consultant. Now let us put that on the record and make it straight.".
Well, let's assume that is on the record and make it straight. If, in fact, the minister didn't know that Mr. Dobbin was a consultant and he was just there and around, how does he square that with the sworn statement that Mr. Dobbin was to perform as a facilitator? If the Minister of Health didn't know he was a consultant, what possible explanation can there be for this minister to agree that this husband of the deputy should function as he did, as facilitator to this meeting?
DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I am trying to allow this line of questioning. First of all, I have never denied that Mr. Dobbin participated in the meeting and had a part in that. That was said outright. The consultant role, to which the honourable gentleman refers, was not taken up, according to the sworn statement by Mrs. Dobbin, until August 1994. I had no knowledge of him consulting until I was given a brochure that stated he was going to do consulting. There was no consulting done. He was an experienced hospital administrator, unemployed and unconnected with the health care system of Nova Scotia. Do not try in this event to connect the consulting services which he had offered later on that year to the meeting in May of that year; there is no connection with that. I have stated that clearly in this House and Mrs. Dobbin, indeed, makes it very clear in her deposition that that was the case. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North.
MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, through you to the honourable Minister of Human Resources. Has the Province of Nova Scotia hired Betsy Chambers to work in the Priorities and Planning Secretariat and, if so, was there a competition for that job?
HON. ELEANOR NORRIE: Mr. Speaker, I will refer that question to the Chairman of the Priorities and Planning Committee.
HON. BERNARD BOUDREAU: The answer to that is, yes, Mr. Speaker, there was a committee set up by the Priorities and Planning department. In fact, a number of people were interviewed and rated and Ms. Chambers was the recommendation of the committee.
MR. ARCHIBALD: I should say at the outset, I went to the Minister of Human Resources because this was a hiring position and I felt that part of the Human Resources Department was to do some hiring; however, we will go to the minister in charge. Could you make the information available to this House, today, now, at the present time or after Question Period, of how many people were considered for the position and who was specifically doing the interviewing for that position?
MR. BOUDREAU: I would be more than happy to get the honourable member that information. Whether I can do it today or not, my bill is going to be called shortly but I will provide that information to him.
MR. ARCHIBALD: Could the minister tell us what the duration, through you, Mr. Speaker, of the contract or the term is?
MR. BOUDREAU: I understand it is a term contract for three months.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question through you to the honourable Premier. It is on the matter of the former Deputy Minister of Health. I think it is important to return ourselves to some of the real facts of this case, and that is that the Premier fired Lucy Dobbin for having her husband at a Health Department meeting, which took place at the Dobbin's residence, back on the Victoria Day weekend. It was, in fact, termed poor judgment. It is evidenced in her sworn statement that, in fact, her husband was there with the prior knowledge and approval of the minister.
My question to the Premier is, did he have the version of the facts as provided by the affidavit provided to the Conflict of Interest Commissioner, before he made the decision to fire the former deputy minister?
[12:45 p.m.]
HON. JOHN SAVAGE (The Premier): No, Mr. Speaker, that was not made until December 7th if my memory is correct.
MR. CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, certainly the Premier has the opportunity to evade any question he likes but I think it is clear that the question that is being presented is, did he have this version of the facts before he made his decision, he says no. My first supplementary to the Premier, did he learn these details then after he fired her and before he agreed to pay her $100,000 for firing her without just cause?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, the information that I had was primarily based on three issues which have been related in this House. One is the question of a phone message at their house, one is the issue of the brochure and the other was the issue of the meeting on Victoria Day. As a result of that combination of factors, I assumed that this was what I called poor judgment and I therefore released Mrs. Dobbin.
MR. CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, my final supplementary to the Premier then is that if, in fact, it is the case that a deputy minister can be fired for using poor judgment, in this case hosting a meeting at her home with her husband as the facilitator in a Health Department meeting, with the minister's prior knowledge, approval and participation if, in fact, a deputy minister can be fired for showing that kind of poor judgment, would it not be fair if the minister himself was fired for showing the same lack of judgment?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, the premises on which he bases his question are not true and he knows that. That is quite true, I have stated the three issues, the three issues were quite clear and I stand by my decision.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North.
MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Chairman of the Priorities and Planning Committee. Would the minister tell us please in short what are Ms. Chamber's duties and what is her salary?
HON. BERNARD BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, I will undertake to provide that information to the honourable member with the other information he has already asked for. Quite frankly, I don't know off the top of my head what the salary was, I didn't involve myself in the process.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley.
MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the honourable Minister of Health. When ministerial appointee to the Central Regional Health Board, Chairman James Cowan, resigned back on or about December 12th, the Minister of Health indicated that the process to replace Mr. Cowan would start immediately or at least within 24 hours. In this House last December 13th, I asked the minister who the new chairman was and the Minister of Health indicated at that time he would name Mr. Cowan's replacement within a week. Again on December 20th, I asked the Minister of Health who that replacement was and he indicated he would be naming the chairperson soon. I ask the minister today, who is the new chairperson of the Central Regional Health Board?
HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I believe if that has not been sent out by press release it was Ms. Barbara Hall who has agreed to chair the board and I believe that was released. I will double-check on that but I believe it was.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for his response. Was it Barbara Hall? That would be correct. Again, I go to the Minister of Health and I would like to ask him if the successful chairperson is presently working for the Department of Health, if she is an employee of the Department of Health?
DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I would have to double-check that before answering that question. I would seek counsel of my staff to see whether she is currently employed.
MR. TAYLOR: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I believe she is currently employed with the Department of Health. I am also wondering, according to, and at different times the minister encourages me to read the recommendations of the Blueprint Committee on Health. I understand one of the recommendations of the Blueprint Committee is that board members, at least board members who were appointed by the board itself should come from outside the Department of Health. Is the minister aware of any such recommendation?
DR. STEWART: Not specifically, Mr. Speaker, the blueprint refers to ensuring that there be a proper blend of professionals and non-professionals; they quote two-thirds lay people and so on and one-third but that is all that they give us guidance on.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou West.
MR. DONALD MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, my question also is to the Minister of Health. Over the weekend I had a number of calls in regard to ambulance service in Pictou. Dort's Ambulance Service has served Pictou very well for many years. The story and/or rumour is that Dort's will not be providing service in Pictou after January 31, 1995. Since the Sutherland-Harris hospital has had a reduced number of acute care beds, I think it is very important that we do have ambulance service out of Pictou.
I would ask the minister, would he please advise the House, and also the people of Pictou West who are very concerned about it, as to what the plans are for the ambulance service in Pictou?
HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, to the honourable gentleman opposite, I appreciate his concern and his question. I am not aware of the specific date or the specific problem to which he refers but I certainly will look at that and promptly get back to him.
MR. MCINNES: I appreciate that the minister has - we have all - been off for a couple of weeks but I think it is a very important issue. I hope that the minister will look at this matter and address it at his earliest convenience.
Last June the minister introduced a bill to, hopefully, improve the ambulance service across this province. Has the minister met with the ambulance people to tell them what his plans are for this service?
DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I assume by "ambulance people" you would mean the ambulance operators or the ambulance association of Nova Scotia? I am not sure to what organization you are referring but we have certainly had ongoing contact not only with specific ambulance providers, because of certain needs, among which is the area to which he refers in Pictou, but also we have been discussing with individuals and organizations. We have, of course, hired our Director of Emergency Health Services, who is currently taking up the task to continue discussions. They will be ongoing.
Again, other aspects of Bill No. 96 are coming into play, particularly in terms of the developments of the commissioner's position and other things.
MR. MCINNES: Back to the Minister of Health again. I am told that a lot of ambulance people in this province are very concerned that they are not getting any direction as to what is happening in regard to the ambulance service across this province. It has been almost seven months since that bill was introduced. The ambulance equipment, like any equipment, is deteriorating and a lot of the ambulance people don't know whether or not to buy equipment or what to do and so they are waiting to see. Would the minister please get on with it and have this plan put in place so the ambulance operators, the people who have been serving the people of Nova Scotia well for many years, will know what is going to happen to their positions and what is going to happen in general?
DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I certainly will take the honourable gentleman's admonition under advisement. Suffice to say that we must maintain the present system, we must make sure the current level of service is upgraded as best we can and then, of course, make sure the new system is introduced.
I assure you that we have a competent manager in Miss Golden, who is the Director of EHS Services, to carry on with that very important work.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the honourable Premier. During the 1993 election campaign John Savage, then Liberal Leader, promised priority action in introducing a new, strict code of conduct and conflict of interest amendments for elected officials and senior public officials. These changes were to deal with the prospect of personal gains and the appearance of conflict of interest.
A specific promise made on April 19th was that these changes would be introduced within 90 days of forming government.
My question to the honourable Premier is simply this, why has the Premier put this reform item on such a slow track that 576 days later the commitment has still not been kept and the Conflict of Interest Commissioner is unable to enforce the high standards of ethical conduct that were promised to Nova Scotians on April 19, 1993?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, this is an important issue to us. It is an issue that has gone to at least three departments. It is currently in Justice. It has gone to Human Resources. It is an item that is receiving a fair bit of consideration. I would point out to all fair-minded members, and I am sure the member opposite would like to include herself in that, that we have had one of the busiest legislative agendas that this House has seen in many years. It looks as if we will be here for at least a few weeks now. The issue, primarily, is one of time. We believe that this is an important issue and it is getting consideration. (Applause)
MS. MCDONOUGH: When the Premier promised these changes within 90 days, he must have been expecting not to have a busy three months when the government took office.
Mr. Speaker, during that election campaign in 1993, John Savage stated that his speedy conflict of interest amendments would provide for the Conflict of Interest Commissioner to be aggressively proactive, I quote directly, "with the added authority to institute investigations, seek evidence from government and the private sector and compel attendance and testimony from any MLA or civil servant.".
Well, Mr. Speaker, he stated further that new conflict of interest amendments would be based on recommendations of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner himself. Rather than be able to aggressively enforce the higher standards of conduct practiced, we have a Conflict of Interest Commissioner that is operating virtually blindfolded and with his hands tied behind his back.
How can the Premier justify having back pedalled from this commitment to enforce higher standards of ethical conduct and leave the commissioner unable to find conflict of interest in the Dobbin case, in the Cramm case and who knows how many others, because of the failure of this government to introduce appropriate amendments to the legislation?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows that I have already answered this. I have answered in the public, in the press. I have said that we were prepared, when the Conflict of Interest Commissioner made his presentation before Christmas, I said that we would be preparing to meet with him in the new year. I am prepared to meet with him in the new year. I am prepared to take his recommendations and to discuss them. I have stated this, quite clearly.
MS. MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, people are looking not for statements, but for action. My question pertains to the unresolved matter of apparent conflict of interest. In the Dobbin decision, Judge MacIntosh stated that this proposed amendment has been one of numerous submissions concerning this Act that I have made to government officials, and which I trust will be given serious consideration.
Will the Premier, today, in the interests of making progress, agree to table in this Legislature, the recommendations that the Conflict of Interest Commissioner has made for reform of the conflict of interest legislation?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I have answered this. I have conveyed my concern about the matter. It is an important issue for us and we will treat it as an important issue. We will not be ridden into anything by somebody in the Opposition.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Hants West.
MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. Approximately six or eight weeks ago, the Minister of Health suspended the board of the Hants Community Hospital and appointed an interim administrator to carry out the CEO functions for that hospital. I was wondering if the minister would be so kind to inform the House, and more importantly the people of Hants County, what is the present status of that ongoing investigation or whatever it is that is going on at the present time?
[1:00 p.m.]
HON. RONALD STEWART: Yes, Mr. Speaker, we are awaiting the report of the special administrator placed in Hants Community to review the status of the administration and the report should be received by myself shortly and I would be, of course, studying that and taking whatever action is recommended by the special administrator after due consideration.
MR. RUSSELL: It was my understanding that the interim administrator would be reporting to the minister some time around mid-December but that is acceptable in that I suppose mid-December was just a short while ago anyway when you take into consideration the Christmas-New Year period. Would the minister confirm that there is also an ongoing RCMP investigation in coordination with the review that is taking place with the interim coordinator?
DR. STEWART: I cannot confirm that, Mr. Speaker, definitively. However, I certainly would look at the current status of the investigation. I must be very careful as the honourable gentleman opposite would realize in making comment on what is current and what may have gone on prior to this or in the future.
MR. RUSSELL: I wonder if the minister could tell us what the status is of the board then at the present time. It is my understanding that the board is still meeting, however, they have no mandate, no jurisdiction. Will the board be reinstated very shortly so that the management of the Hants Community Hospital can get back to something approaching normal?
DR. STEWART: Yes, I would suggest that that would be a priority after the perusal of the report.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Queens.
MR. JOHN LEEFE: My question is to the Premier. The Bluenose II Preservation Trust has been established by a private sector group in Nova Scotia to resuscitate Bluenose II and among other things to use her for promoting Nova Scotia when the G-7 meets here in June. It presumably is operating under some legal instrument with respect to its relationship with the Department of Tourism or at least with the tourism section of the Economic Renewal Agency and therefore is not a Crown Corporation. On the 20th of December the honourable Premier named a new Chief of Staff, Heather Robertson. Heather Robertson, at least as of December 28th, was a director of Bluenose II Preservation Trust. I would ask the Premier if he has yet received her resignation as a director of Bluenose II Preservation Trust in light of the fact that her appointment became effective January 1, 1995 and I will table the information from the Registry of Joint Stock Companies?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, it has been discussed and I understand it will be given.
MR. LEEFE: I take it then that the Premier will be accepting that resignation very shortly. Also, Mr. Speaker, with respect to the same person, Mrs. Robertson has also been acting as the Chairman of the Nova Scotia Police Commission. My understanding of the Police Commission's function is that it provides an arm's length relationship between the police forces in Nova Scotia and the government. In view of the fact that it would be difficult to maintain the arm's length relationship with Ms. Robertson serving both as chairman of that commission and as the chief of staff of the Premier, will he also be accepting her resignation in her capacity as chairman of the commission?
THE PREMIER: The person concerned, Ms. Robertson, has already spoken to the Minister of Justice at my recommendation and I understand that that will be taking place too.
MR. LEEFE: Can the Premier give an indication to the House within what timeframe he anticipates that resignation will be tendered?
THE PREMIER: Not really, Mr. Speaker. It is one of those details that will be attended to as soon as possible.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings West.
MR. GEORGE MOODY: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Education. The Minister of Education will remember last spring he visited West Kings High School in Auburn and met with the parents. The situation at West Kings is now getting worse because of the illness of students and staff adverse to environmental working conditions. I think the minister understands some of the problems that are at West Kings High School. I would ask the minister if he knows when there might be some provincial help for the kind of renovations that are needed at West Kings High School in Auburn?
HON. JOHN MACEACHERN: Mr. Speaker, I thank the honourable member for the question. I was informed of the difficulties and have a copy of a letter that was sent to him and not to our department. So I took the copy, it came from the principal of the high school, referred it to my staff and I am waiting for a response to it. As soon as I get the response, I will provide it to the honourable member.
MR. MOODY: Mr. Speaker, I am sure this letter was not to circumvent the minister. I know the minister's staff has had correspondence with the Kings District School Board with regard to West Kings High School in the past. If I understand the minister correctly, and I thank him for his answer, then after staff review it and it is demonstrated that there is a health risk at the school, that this school would be given some serious consideration for funds to correct those problems?
MR. MACEACHERN: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the honourable member that my staff have been working since last year with this. This is the first new news that we had that there was a new problem as described in the letter. I simply asked the staff to update me on where they were because I have no evidence of the statements contained in the letter except for what is in the letter. So, as soon as I get the information it will be referred to the committee that is involved with the Department of Health, Department of the Environment, my department and the Department of Supply and Services and they will go to the situation and make recommendations to both myself and to the Capital Construction Committee and they will be responding.
As the honourable member knows, that committee was set up some time ago to make sure that the minister doesn't step in and use his whim to make the decisions but they would be made on the basis of evidence. That evidence will be evaluated and I will act according to the recommendations as I have done in every case of that committee.
MR. MOODY: Mr. Speaker, I am not indicating that the minister at whim can make these things happen and I understand clearly the process. I guess my question for the minister then is, will he insure that there are enough funds available for this kind of emergency capital work that needs to be done across the province so that schools like Kings West High School can obviously take advantage when recommended? If the funds are not there, his committee can only recommend according to the amount of funds that are available. Will the minister assure us that there will be funds available to address serious situations like West Kings across this province when they arise?
MR. MACEACHERN: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the honourable member that there are no students in the Province of Nova Scotia whose health will be allowed to be at risk. As to stating in the House that monies will be made available from some place, the honourable member knows, as he sat on this side of the House, that within the confines of the monies that we have had we will deal with the situations that we face.
What happens, of course, as the honourable member knows, is that the priorities will change the moment we find that there are people whose health is at risk. There are no students, up to this point, that we have allowed to sit in situations of health risks according to the advice that we have gotten from that committee and we will continue to do so.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.
MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question through you to the Premier. Before Christmas the Premier held a press conference to announce that he was appointing a new command centre squad in the Premier's office, a new Deputy Minister, Mr. Robert MacKay; a Chief of Staff, Heather Robertson; and a Communications Director, Mr. David Harrigan. At that time the Premier was asked how much these individuals were to be paid. The Premier was unaware at that time other than to say it was top dollars. My question to the Premier is, will the Premier now tell us how much these new staff in his office are to be paid?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, we discussed in some detail the contracts which I understand will be on the desk of the Minister of Human Resources tomorrow morning.
MR. HOLM: So here we have the Premier saying that they are going to be on the desk of the Minister of Human Resources tomorrow morning, their contracts. Well, my question to the Premier is, how much they are to be paid? Certainly the minister or the Premier or staff would have had some discussions and there would have been a figure talked about before these individuals agreed to come to work for the province.
My question for the Premier is quite simply this, how much are each of those individuals to be paid for their new work, working in the Premier's Office?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, the details will be released tomorrow and I have said that once - after all, we haven't had much chance, with the holidays, to sit down with people who started work yesterday. It is quite reasonable to assume that a couple of days grace is allowed.
MR. HOLM: I am a little bit puzzled because normally one would expect that the normal way things are done is that you come to an agreement before somebody starts to work for the government. I don't know if this government goes out and hires people.
MR. SPEAKER: . . . supplementary question has to be an interrogatory.
MR. HOLM: Well, there is an interrogatory at the start of that, Mr. Speaker, intended.
Now my question to the Premier is quite simply this, as my final supplementary, is it then the practice of this government to negotiate with those whom it is going to hire, their level of compensation, after they have agreed to work for the government and start to sign the contact, Mr. Speaker? Is it the policy, then, to negotiate the terms of employment after they have agreed to work for the government, rather than working out those details and signing the contracts before they accept employment with the government?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what that question was. I totally lost the drift of it. It is our practice to hire the best people, it is our practice to pay top dollar for the best people.
MR. SPEAKER: On a new question, the honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier. I wonder if the Premier could please tell me, and perhaps describe it as he does, if, in fact, it exists, does the Premier have in place to represent the interests of the Nova Scotia Government and the people of Nova Scotia, a committee, an organization, a group, call it what you will, which is addressing the myriad of questions that have to be resolved relative to the G-7 coming to Halifax in a few months' time? Is there a committee, a group, functioning?
THE PREMIER: Yes, Mr. Speaker.
MR. DONAHOE: Could the Premier help me a little bit by perhaps describing who is in charge of that group and perhaps provide me here now with a representative sample of names of men and women who are a part of that group?
THE PREMIER: With great pleasure, Mr. Speaker. The two co-chairs are the Minister of the Environment, the Honourable Robert Harrison, and the Minister of Labour, the Honourable Jay Abbass. This has been out in the public domain, I suspect, since the middle of December. I am surprised that it escaped the eyes of the Leader of the Opposition. They have been meeting regularly and it might be advisable to ask the questions of them if you want further information.
MR. DONAHOE: Well, when one phones the number that we were provided to make contact with G-7, you don't hear a lot about Ministers Harrison and Abbass, hence, my question.
Could the Premier, would the Premier, through you, Mr. Speaker, or, if he would prefer to refer this question to one or other of the ministers he has just now named, assist me in making arrangements that would ensure that the provincial government G-7 organization would commit itself now to an opportunity to have a briefing session with my caucus, so that my caucus could come to an understanding of just what has been done to this point and what is planned the rest of the way?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, we are not being secretive about this at all. I think maybe the Minister of the Environment should take this question.
HON. ROBERT HARRISON: Mr. Speaker, we take great pleasure in responding to this question. We would be more than happy to inform the honourable Leader of the Opposition of details to date. As you know, there are three offices involved in the planning of G-7. This is a moment in time for Nova Scotia that is second to none, in terms of its opportunity for broadcasting to the world the wonderful place in which we live and the economic opportunities that are here in this province.
[1:15 p.m.]
We have a provincial initiative that will, I believe, be quite transparent and seamless with the federal counterparts and with the Halifax and larger area people who are involved and, ultimately, with almost everyone in the province that has a willingness to volunteer. We would be more than happy to explain the detail of the committees that are already up and functioning, and those that are about to form, with the Opposition Leader at any time.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou Centre.
DR. JOHN HAMM: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Health. The minister has stated that health boards will eventually administer hospitals in the province. Many hospitals are floundering, as their mandate is not clear. The indecision is forcing many specialist staff to look at their career development in view of the fact that their positions are not guaranteed in their hospitals, as they cannot receive any guarantee that those services will continue to be required. The reason seems to be that those decisions will be made by the health boards.
Would the minister describe the administrative set-up which will allow the health boards to hands-on administer the hospitals in their regions? Will it by a subcommittee or a separate committee or what will be the structure which will allow a health board to administer a hospital?
HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, the Blueprint Committee speaks to a substructure of the regional health board that would, in fact, do the governance of those facilities.
DR. HAMM: I believe what the minister said was a substructure. Would the minister, Mr. Speaker, describe for us the relationship between the central health board and the Queen Elizabeth II Board, bearing in mind that many metro residents receive community hospital care in those major institutions?
DR. STEWART: Again, the Blueprint Committee speaks to this, Mr. Speaker, and recommends, of course, that the facilities respond to a regional board but, in terms of tertiary care and provincial programs, there be a structure in place. So they have tentatively termed it a provincial program advisory council that would, in fact, add governance to the provincial or tertiary care programs. That would be in keeping with the mandate of the Blueprint Committee.
DR. HAMM: Mr. Speaker, finally, to the Minister of Health, in recent weeks the minister has stated that he would be making new appointments to the Northern Health Board. My question to the minister is simply, when will the minister be announcing the new appointments?
DR. STEWART: Again, Mr. Speaker, those appointments would be going through the process of approval under the committee. The regional health board chair would be informed and the announcements would be made by release and I would suspect that that would occur within the next week or so, whenever the committee meets.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley.
MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, after looking in the Nova Scotia Government telephone directory, I see where the new chairperson of the Central Regional Health Board, Ms. Barbara Hall, is listed . . .
HON. RONALD STEWART: Hart.
MR. TAYLOR: Hart? I apologize, Mr. Speaker, and I will withdraw my question.
MR. SPEAKER: The time allotted, in any event, has expired.
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Government House Leader.
HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, I move that you do now leave the Chair and the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole House on Bills.
MR. SPEAKER: Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
[1:19 p.m. The House resolved itself into a CWH on Bills with Deputy Speaker Mr. Gerald O'Malley in the Chair.]
[6:00 p.m. CWH on Bills rose and the House reconvened. Mr. Speaker, Hon. Paul MacEwan, resumed the Chair.]
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The draw for the Adjournment debate was won by the honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley. The motion he submitted reads as follows:
Therefore be it resolved that the government issue and communicate its health reform plan immediately.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION UNDER RULE 5(5)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley.
MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I would like to read my resolution which states: Therefore be it resolved that this government issue and communicate its health reform plan immediately. I found the results of a recent comprehensive survey on health reform conducted by a Winnipeg company for the Daily News very interesting. It reaffirmed a lot of what I have heard from constituents over the past year.
The year 1994 was not a very good year for our health system. In May, several of our hospitals heard that they were closing and many others were downsized greatly. This, in itself, was a huge upheaval for hundreds and hundreds of employees and health professionals within those institutions who felt that there was little hope for their futures, at least not in their own communities. Several months later these same employees and communities started to hear rumour after rumour.
They heard rumours that possibly their hospital would close. They would receive other services to take the place of the current services offered within the walls of their hospitals but there would be, also, a number of layoffs. There would be new community-based services taking the place of hospitals that closed. But in the meantime, some of these rumours have been responded to by the minister, some questions answered and there have been some decisions reversed, Mr. Speaker. This, in itself, has caused great confusion and disruption within communities like Pugwash, Annapolis, Wolfville, Berwick and Inverness, just to name a few. Add to this confusion, the new but not yet empowered interim regional health boards and you have a great deal of confusion within this province relating to health and health care delivery.
It is not with the idea of health reform that Nova Scotians are having difficulty. In its release in this study, Mr. Speaker, the Daily News article, it indicates that within 19 key areas the public supports health reform. According to the research from the Daily News survey, 79 per cent of Nova Scotians support the notion of health reform. However, they feel the Savage Liberals are missing the mark. That is what we have been telling this government and this government's members and this government's minister, that the Savage Liberals are missing the mark, they are not being very clear, they are not being concise at all, people want to see a plan, they want to know that this government has a vision. Right now they are confused.
The survey revealed widespread and genuine distrust of the public authorities in charge of implementing health care reforms. It was the view of the survey respondents that health care reform has been promoted too much on the basis of knocking the present system.
It is the view of the Progressive Conservative caucus, and like many of those surveyed, that we have a very good health care system now which deserves to be made better still. This was confirmed by the survey as 63 per cent of the respondents approve of the present health care overhaul, they approve of health reform. The current Liberal members made promises to effect health reform and instead have broken more promises.
The Premier and the Minister of Health attack the elements of the health care system that the public trusts the most. Elements like their nurses, doctors, Medicare and the hospitals themselves. Their approach has succeeded in demoralizing both the public and those who work in the system. I cannot remember the nursing community being as angry as they presently are with this current government. The physician community usually dealing much more quietly and reasoned with this level of government have come out swinging against the minister and they have come out swinging against the Premier relating to health reform. They cannot understand why two members of the physician community do not have a greater appreciation of their concerns and their issues that they have taken to government. They are asking for the plan, the nurses are asking for the plan and Nova Scotians are asking to see the plan.
I have spoken on this issue before and the minister tells me each time, quite confidently, to take a look at the blueprint. That's his government's plan. But I have to take exception to the minister's suggestion. I, like many who have concerns over the minister's actions, have read the Blueprint for Health System Reform. There are some, even many, who helped to write the blueprint that still have some concerns with this minister's approach.
We have yet to see signs of what this government intends to do on promoting a healthy society so that people do not need the expensive services of our hospitals. The response will not come overnight, but the longer we wait for the minister to initiate more in the area of greater wellness promotions, the longer the educational process will take.
Nova Scotians like their hospitals, yet they recognize the need for hospitals to be more responsive to community needs. There is strong support for hospitals to help people stay well, not just to treat them when they are sick. The survey also indicates that the public have a role to play in supporting wellness and public education. The Blueprint Report speaks of changes which would take place before, and as, any services are taken from our institutions.
It speaks of home care, volumes of home-based care, wellness promotion. This is where many of our current, well-trained health professionals, such as nurses and CNAs would be able to use their talents. Unfortunately, they have heard little to nothing about possible alternatives in the year of 1994.
The major building block within the Blueprint Report to kick-start the reform process is for the minister to appoint interim regional health boards. This was done, and albeit there was considerable political patronage involved, with many of the individuals chosen on these boards. I guess that was just about some five months ago, Mr. Speaker, that those boards were appointed. These boards were to come together with the major force of setting up community health boards so that these individuals could make the major decisions within their communities with regard to the rationing and, if you will, the redistribution of health care.
Instead, I believe the minister has put the cart before the horse. As it now stands, even these interim regional boards will not be up and running, as I understand it, and the minister can correct me, these regional health boards will not be up and running and functioning until sometime around September - one year after they were rushed through the Human Resources Committee.
Well, I see the minister shaking his head and perhaps he will correct me on that presumption. They are not even to be functioning for no more than two years, according to the Blueprint Report, this is the interim regional health boards. How can these boards accomplish the tasks that lie ahead when there has been so much confusion in the meantime and a year will go by without the boards having the ability to move forward with the Blueprint Report plan.
The government's arm's length watchdog, the Provincial Health Council, at the press conference for the release of its annual report, said that most importantly, the government needed a plan. The executive director said that a comprehensive implementation strategy must be done or the plans could be derailed. The plans must also be communicated with Nova Scotians so that they know what is going on.
This was good advice from a group in place to offer constructive advice and comment to the government on their health policies. They have no political agenda, no political master and no reason to criticize where there is no basis for criticism. This minister must start to listen, as should his government.
According, again, to the Daily News survey, the Liberals barge ahead without recognizing the subtleties of the communities' needs accurately before redirecting resources. The current Minister of Health has been oblivious to public concerns and has set the process back many steps. He hires and fires and believes, like the Premier, that that is what will make the difference.
Lucy Dobbin is out and we do not want to get into Lucy Dobbin. Much has been said about Lucy Dobbin. Again, it was raised today in Question Period. But Lucy Dobbin is out at a cost to taxpayers to the tune of some $100,000.
Dan Reid, a physician, put in place to advise our minister, who is also a physician, at a cost of $115,000 a year. If the minister would talk and listen to the Medical Society and the voices of Nova Scotia's doctors, this $115,000 position might not be necessary at all. Some government members took exception when I suggested that the position that Mr. Reid is presently filling now is nothing more than a lion tamer among the medical fraternity. In fact, we had asked the minister if he would table the job description before we raised the concern in the House, Mr. Speaker, and we had no way of knowing what the position was, so what can we think, what are we to think.
MR. SPEAKER: Your time is up.
MR. TAYLOR: Hopefully, this Liberal Government will respect this wake-up call and will begin to work with, rather than against, Nova Scotians. It is time that the minister stopped using the excuse that he does not want to use a cookie cutter approach to health care reform in this province. His government has made promises to Nova Scotians with regard to health care and they should start sticking to them. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Health.
HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I rise to join in this debate with a good deal of pleasure, looking forward to a year of change and a year of renewal in the health care system in 1995 as we did in many respects in 1994. The comments by the honourable gentleman opposite who again mixes metaphors fairly obviously in this debate will serve as some basis upon which to comment on something that is, of course, at the basis of our change in this province, necessary change, managed change, if you would. It is remarkable that a member of a Party that for 15 years governed this province and placed us in a situation in which health care reform had to be enacted in the face of a crushing deficit of $471 million, would make some of the comments he has made.
Not only are we faced with that and we have done much in the last 18 months in our mandate to overcome that crushing load but we also have to make sure that our system which the honourable gentleman opposite properly describes as being a good system and indeed it is but it can be better as he suggests. We looked over the past 15 years in which 13 reports recommending change were tabled to the former government opposite, in which a 1972 report recommended almost exactly what the Royal Commission Report in 1989 recommended, regionalization, deinstitutionalization, community decision-making, all of that, all of that quite clear and yet nothing at all done in the three to four years after that, until we decided to act and not talk; to act on the recommendations not only of the Royal Commission but to bring together the reports that have been gathering dust over the past 15 years and to make sense of them in a blueprint plan that was given to us by a group of Nova Scotians who have indeed served their province well.
The honourable gentleman opposite talked about and I am sure we will hear more about the lack of a cohesive and coherent plan. Well, let me just review the last year in 1994, what did we do? Eight months ago we received the Blueprint Report. It was immediately urged upon me to act quickly and now we are seeing some rethinking on the part of some of the opposing forces that say, well, we are going too fast. Well, I might suggest that this Blueprint Report, we have had to set up an infrastructure to recondition and renovate the structure that we have but we still have to support it. We have had plans, we have done it in a step-wise fashion. We first attacked a major problem in which a program which had been neglected for years, the Pharmacare Program, developing into a program of $75 million which we all know was not sustainable, was examined, dissected and was very carefully planned out in terms of reform by a committee for the first time including seniors.
We looked at our next major issue that we had to face in terms of reform in order to put a safety net in place and we targeted the emergency health services. We looked and we said, we need a comprehensive plan to change that. Several months ago we enacted Bill No. 96 after a major plan was presented to us and again, we are continuing along that road. It is easy for us to look at health care reform, to adopt the jargon, to adopt the name itself, to adopt the words and to say we will change and we need change and everyone agrees with change and 75 per cent of x or 50 per cent of y or 69 per cent of the 16,000 or 17,000 people who received the questionnaire and responded to it said x or y. That is easy to do. It is another thing to carry it off. It is another thing to implement change.
[6:15 p.m.]
What the honourable gentleman is proposing in his resolution this evening is the point that is well taken, that we now need an implementation strategy. That is well accepted. We have laid an infrastructure in place in 1994 and in 1995 we will build upon that infrastructure.
We have received a plan for emergency health services and we have received a plan for Pharmacare reform, we have received a plan for home care. We have done those things and, not only that, we have acted. We have put in place demonstration projects which are now able to be cited as successful in home care, in managed home care, in palliative care.
Look at the communities in this province that have contributed in 1994 to the demonstration that true health care reform can work in this province and serve people better. Health care is not changing hospitals; health care is not building hospitals, which this province is notorious in this country for doing. Health care is not more physicians or more professionals. The single most important change in health care in this province was enacted in this Legislature when decentralization through community health boards and regionalization under regional health board took effect.
The honourable gentleman opposite dismisses them and says they are not going to be up and running for a year. They are already up and running. I would remind this House that these regional health boards are, indeed, up and running. What they will not do until September of 1995 is to be burdened by the management of facilities. I trust that the honourable gentleman opposite realizes the difference in what I am saying; to burden a regional health board with the operation and management of facilities would be a travesty on the process we have put in place, which is the community health board making decisions. That is what they will be doing before September, creating communities and community health boards. That is the difference and that is the most major change that we have and we will see it affecting very well our system.
The Provincial Health Council, read what they said. They said this is coming along, reform is working in this province. We have had, for the first time by the way, they said this, action, not just words, we have had action. Yes, we want to know more about it, yes, we want a better communicating job of it. Yes, they did say that and yes, that is our responsibility, as we go into 1995, truly. But they said that we now have, for the first time, action in health reform and they congratulated this government for doing it.
Well, I congratulate the people of Nova Scotia and the people who worked to do it. That is who will carry out health reform. It is this paternalistic approach that we have had in this province since Medicare was introduced, that we, as a centralized Department of Health or even this Legislature, know best what is good for the community and we are going to impose it. Those days are gone. It never worked, it never will work and that is the difference that we now have.
We will have action, we will have better communication, I assure the honourable members opposite, but we will not act in a knee-jerk fashion because a particular headline or a particular non-scientific survey tells one thing or the other. We will listen to the people in communities and put in place a structure that will reflect their needs and wishes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to briefly enter this debate concerning health reform. First of all, I want to agree with the Minister of Health, in fact congratulate the Minister of Health, in expressing alarm that some who feign support for meaningful health care reform would now start saying, we had better slow down because there is some concern out there, some resistance on the part of the communities affected and we don't want to cause a political uproar so we had better slow down.
I guess having congratulated the Minister of Health I would also be less than honest if I didn't express some surprise at the fact that his very own Leader, the Premier of this province, is the one that is most vocally expressing the view that it is absolutely imperative that the Liberal Government slow down with regard to its reform measures and, in fact, has made something of a virtue out of pronouncing that over the Christmas break that he has correctly heard from Liberals across this province that they want the reform agenda slowed down, that he believes that Nova Scotians want the reform agenda slowed down and so slow down is what Nova Scotians are going to get. That is why we introduced a resolution earlier here this afternoon to say, for Heaven's sakes, if this government is going to slow its health reform agenda down any further than it is already slowed down, in other words to a snail's pace and on a very slow track indeed, then we are not going to have any health care reform whatsoever because we have barely begun to implement the health reform agenda.
While the minister likes to point to the Provincial Health Council who did say in fairness and I don't object at all to the government grasping at whatever straws are available to it to congratulate itself, the Provincial Health Council did say at least we are seeing some action on some fronts that is long overdue and that the previous government failed to address in any way, shape or form over the last 15 years, so that is true, the Provincial Health Council has said that. But the Provincial Health Council has also said that they are extremely concerned that there are so many aspects of the Blueprint Report and its recommendations that this government has really failed to act upon that they feel that it is a very serious problem indeed and that is a concern that is very widely shared.
As the minister well knows and he can take some satisfaction in this, representatives of practically every stakeholder that one can specifically identify came together in that blueprint process and put forward what was an amazing feat really, a consensus document and said, this blueprint for health reform cannot be pulled apart, picked apart, you can't engage in cherry-picking to say we will do some of it but not the rest of it and end up with, once again, ad hoc-ery, fragmentation and a piecemeal approach.
Yet, as much as I believe that the minister understands that that is exactly what the Blueprint Committee said, that is what this government is doing. The government has to a very alarming degree wrapped itself in the Blueprint Report and recommendations when it suited it to do so and said, we are doing this because the blueprint says we should do it but has also distanced itself and in far too many cases, has refused to act on the recommendations of the blueprint with the result that the minister cannot in all honesty say we are implementing the blueprint. If they were implementing the blueprint there are a number of things that they would be doing differently, there are a number of things they would be doing with a greater sense of urgency and I think that is the point of this debate.
I want to say in fairness to the Minister of Health that I think he also is to be congratulated for resisting what may be an easy thing to try to push the government to do and that is engage in reform through polling, through reading what is popular and deciding, will we or won't we do it, will we back-pedal, will we go forward. I think that is what is concerning people a lot about the statements made by the Premier in the last week about its reform agenda, that I think he is responding more to polling than he is to the real issue of what is the reform agenda, what is it that needs to be done, not to make the government more popular but what is it that needs to be done to ensure that we can justly and proudly say that we have in this province and will continue to have the best possible, the most cost-effective health care system that we can possibly construct. I think in that sense it is very important that we be clear.
There is a difference between bringing in measures that are effective and measures that are necessarily popular because the fact of the matter is that as human beings we tend to resist change because we are unsettled by uncertainty. Surely the government can see that it is not just dealing with the kind of natural resistance that people have to change when people are in a near panic about the dismantling of existing programs and services, decisions to shut down institutional programs and facilities in the absence of having in place the community-based alternatives. Surely the government can understand why its own actions are undermining the health reform agenda and undermining the confidence that I think the overwhelming majority of Nova Scotians have in health reform and the commitment they have to see health reform implemented.
Secondly, it surely is not missed on the government that when the blueprint recommends that we make a dramatic shift of emphasis and resources to primary health care and the government instead starts backing out of some of its important primary health care initiatives, that people are understandably alarmed, people are confused, people look at the blueprint and they see that there is a very excellent outline of what primary health care really means in terms of preventive measures. Yet, what the government has done in the last six months, without explanation, without any rationale that it has ever been prepared to bring forward. Certainly, the Minister of Health has wrung his hands and expressed concern, but then failed to come back with any answers.
How can the government talk about a meaningful, preventive strategy, a shift to primary health care and then wipe out an important part of its children's dental program? How can the government say we are going to shift to prevention and then wipe out some of our seniors wellness programs and not expect that people are going to be both confused and resistant to what the government is doing?
The minister has asked us to express confidence in the plan for pre-hospital emergency care reform. Mr. Speaker, the problem with that is that legislation was brought in this House, supposedly as an urgent matter, seven months ago. We have seen practically no further initiatives taken. We still do not have a commissioner in place to oversee this process. We still have dangling out there, unkept commitments in terms of the transition process that is needed to move us into modern, pre-hospital care systems.
With respect to a labour adjustment strategy, absolutely critical, crucial, to the reform agenda. We have, first of all, no plan, no answers to questions about how this matter is to be dealt with, other than to have the minister say, well this is going to go to the regional health boards. But the minister said himself, here again this afternoon, yet again, that we do not want to burden the regional health boards with a lot of things that need to be done across the board in a uniform way, need to be done in a coordinated way and we do not want to wear them down before they even get on with working in the development of the community-based strategy.
Yet the nightmare that it conjures up to talk about dividing up the labour adjustment strategy among a number of different regional health boards is just mind boggling. It is hard to understand who can possibly be giving that kind of advice.
So, Mr. Speaker, I know that my time is running out. I think I just want, once again, to appeal to the minister to understand that it is not resistance to the health reform agenda that is out there, it is an increasing sense of frustration and despair that this government's entire health initiatives to date have had to do with cost-cutting, have had to do with deficit control and what they are saying is, don't slow down with the health reform agenda, but for Heaven's sakes, get on with the health reform agenda and do it quickly because he is quite right. It is very long overdue, having being completely ignored by the previous government for almost 15 years. Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The time allotted for the Adjournment debate has expired.
The House will now revert to the Committee of the Whole House on Bills.
[6:30 p.m. The House resolved itself into a CWH on Bills with Deputy Speaker Mr. Gerald O'Malley in the Chair.]
[7:59 p.m. CWH on Bills rose and the House reconvened. Mr. Speaker, Hon. Paul MacEwan, resumed the Chair.]
MR. SPEAKER: The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on Bills reports:
THE CLERK: That the committee has met and made considerable progress and begs leaves to sit again.
MR. SPEAKER: Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
The honourable Government House Leader.
HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, could we please revert to the order of business, Presenting Reports of Committees.
PRESENTING REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Government House Leader.
HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Chairman of the Committee on Law Amendments, I am directed to report that the committee has met and considered the following bill:
Bill No. 122 - Workers' Compensation Act.
and the committee recommends this bill to the favourable consideration of the House, with certain amendments.
MR. SPEAKER: Ordered that this bill be referred to the Committee of the Whole House on Bills.
The honourable Opposition House Leader.
MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, tomorrow, we will be calling Bill No. 140, that is the bill that was tabled today; followed by Resolution No. 979 and then House Orders.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Government House Leader.
HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, I move that we adjourn until 2:00 p.m. tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that the House do now rise to meet again tomorrow afternoon at the hour of 2:00 p.m.
The motion is carried.
[The House rose at 8:00 p.m.]
By: Mr. Ronald Russell (Hants West)
I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move that an order of this House do issue for a return showing, with respect to the Nova Scotia Liquor Commission:
(1) A copy of the financial/market evaluation report carried out by the Nova Scotia Liquor Commission in determining that renovations and not a new liquor store were required for the liquor store on Victoria Road in Whitney Pier;
(2) A copy of the sale agreement reached between the Nova Scotia Liquor Commission and the government with Lynway Investments Ltd. for the lot of land owned by the Liquor Commission on Victoria Road since 1977;
(3) The amount of funding that has been approved to carry out both interior and exterior renovations to the present Whitney Pier Liquor Store on Victoria Road; and
(4) Additional costs that may have been incurred by the Liquor Commission in moving the location of their K-Mart Plaza location in Sydney which opened just last spring to another location at the same site.
QUESTION NO. 123
By: Mr. Donald McInnes (Pictou West)
To: Hon. Guy Brown (Minister of Housing and Consumer Affairs)
(1) I want to know, as does Donald Babin of Digby County, why doesn't the government lift the building code by-laws completely? Mr. Babin believes that when living in the country, taxpayers do not have the luxury that larger cities have and that means that citizens are deprived completely of having pride and joy in their own home.
QUESTION NO. 124
By: Mr. Donald McInnes (Pictou West)
To: Hon. Guy Brown (Minister of Housing and Consumer Affairs)
(1) I want to know, as does Alan Higgins, Middleton, why was the Nova Scotia Housing Summer College Student Program discontinued for those with physical handicaps and seniors? Mr. Higgins believes that it would be advantageous to keep as many seniors living in their own homes, rather than creating a demand for additional senior citizens complexes.
