MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. We will begin the daily routine.
PRESENTING AND READING PETITIONS
PRESENTING REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
TABLING REPORTS, REGULATIONS AND OTHER PAPERS
STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS
GOVERNMENT NOTICES OF MOTION
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS
NOTICES OF MOTION
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. DARRELL DEXTER: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas on June 14th the Premier's office issued a release titled Focusing on the Future: The New Atlantic Revolution; and
Whereas the Premier's office got it wrong, the New Atlantic Revolution is not happening between Premiers but rather the real revolution is happening in our hospitals and clinics where fed-up health care workers and nurses are refusing to be treated like second-class citizens anymore; and
Whereas the government has chosen to cover its ears all the while screaming, I can't hear you, over the voices of our health care workers;
Therefore be it resolved that this government sit down with health care workers and nurses, listen to their concerns and address them rather than trying to legislate their problems away.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear several Noes.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Glace Bay.
MR. DAVID WILSON: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Glace Bay hospital is staffed by some of the best nurses in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out the nurses selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not care for nurses;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses of the Glace Bay hospital instead of disrespecting them.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear several Noes.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. DARRELL DEXTER: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the member for Sackville-Cobequid, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Tory blue book states, "A John Hamm government will restore stability in our health care system."; and
Whereas by threatening health care workers and nurses with draconian anti-strike legislation this Tory Government is in fact destabilizing an already fragile health care system; and
Whereas in typical Tory fashion workers are being attacked because this government considers them to be an expense as opposed to a valuable asset;
Therefore be it resolved that health care workers should not now or ever be viewed by this Hamm Government as expenses but as valuable contributors to a system that cannot funciton without them.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear several Noes.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Glace Bay.
MR. DAVID WILSON: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Roseway Hospital is staffed by some of the best nurses in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out the nurses selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not care for nurses;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses of the Roseway Hospital instead of disrespecting them.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear several Noes.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Halifax Needham.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas in 1999 John Hamm rolled out his blue book health care promises like Bobby Vinton crooning Blue Velvet; and
Whereas the Premier rose to the top of the hit parade but, as the promises turned out to be so much dust, his star has been in decline ever since; and
Whereas just like Vinton's saccharine song, the Premier's health care promises, especially those to health care workers, have proven to be less than the real thing;
Therefore be it resolved that the only thing blue right now coming out of this Premier's promises is the morale of front-line health care workers, who face the most anti-labour legislation ever proposed in this province.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I will be introducing this resolution in both languages.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Sacred Heart Hospital in Cheticamp is staffed by some of the best nurses in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out the nurses selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not care for nurses;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses of Sacred Heart Hospital in Cheticamp instead of disrespecting them.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital de Sacred Heart à Cheticamp est équipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmières par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nouvelle-Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect pas les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de cette Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital Sacred Heart à Cheticamp au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear several Noes.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.
MR. KEVIN DEVEAUX: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas this Tory Government is looking everywhere to blame someone for the financial disarray our province is in; and
Whereas Tories need look no further than to the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Transportation and Public Works who took part in the John Buchanan Government that caused most of our financial problems today in this province; and
Whereas the former Tory legacy of incompetent spending is now reflected in the inability of the Minister of Finance to provide enough money to the Minister of Health to operate our health care system in an effective manner;
Therefore be it resolved that this Tory Government appear to be nothing more than a bad rerun of old Tory missteps and miscues.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I will be introducing this resolution in both official languages.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Strait Richmond Hospital and the St. Ann's Nursing Centre is staffed by some of the best nurses in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out the nurses selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not care for nurses;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses of the Strait Richmond Hospital and the St. Ann's Nursing Centre instead of disrespecting them.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital de Strait Richmond et St. Ann's Nursing Centre est équipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmières par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nouvelle-Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect pas pour les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de cette Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital Strait Richmond et St. Ann's Nursing Centre au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear several Noes.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre.
MR. FRANK CORBETT: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas in 1975, nurses in this province went on strike; and
Whereas then-Premier Gerald Regan said "they can stay out until their pantyhose freeze"; and
Whereas these nurses showed their commitment and their true professionalism by providing services to the users of health care facilities such as the New Waterford Consolidated Hospital;
Therefore be it resolved that this government should not be as draconian or flippant as the Regan Government and allow health care workers to bargain freely for a new collective agreement.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear several Noes.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I will be introducing this resolution on behalf of my Leader, the MLA for Clare, in both official languages.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Digby General Hospital is staffed by some of the best nurses and health care workers in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out the nurses and health care workers selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not care for nurses or the health care workers;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses of the Digby General Hospital instead of disrespecting them.
[12:15 a.m.]
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital Digby General est équipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmières par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nouvelle Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect pas les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de cette Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital de Digby au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear several Noes.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MR. GRAHAM STEELE: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Parent 'n Tot Meeting Place was established 15 years ago under the auspices of Fairview United Church on Dutch Village Road in Halifax; and
Whereas the Parent 'n Tot Meeting Place provides a much-needed meeting place and learning resource for single parents in Fairview; and
Whereas the Parent 'n Tot Meeting Place has a wonderful and dedicated staff, namely Karla Firth-Tessier, program co-ordinator; Debbie Rawding, program assistant; Patsy Power, child care worker; and, Ruth Power-Byrne, child care worker;
Therefore be it resolved that this House congratulate the Parent 'n Tot Meeting Place, its host Fairview United Church, its sponsors Fairview United Church, the United Church of Canada and the provincial and federal governments and its wonderful dedicated staff for providing an important and necessary service to the people of Fairview.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
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 Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I will be introducing this resolution on behalf of my colleague, the Leader of our Party, the MLA for Clare in both official languages.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas Yarmouth Regional Hospital is staffed by some of the best nurses and health care workers in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out the nurses and health care workers selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not care for nurses or the health care workers;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses and health care workers of the Yarmouth Regional Hospital instead of disrespecting them.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital Yarmouth Regional est équipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmières par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimirent les citoyens de la Nouvelle-Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect pas les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de cette Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital de Yarmouth Regional au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
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 Minister of Health continues to blame others for his blundering of talks between nurses and health care workers; and
Whereas it is the Minister of Health's complete inability to see that his actions will cause irreparable damage to our health care system by driving nurses and health care workers out of this province; and
Whereas it appears Tory inability to deal with the workers of this province has led to labour upheaval and strife;
Therefore be it resolved that the Minister of Health do us all a favour, take a pill and calm down before he damages our health care system beyond repair.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I will be introducing this resolution in both languages on behalf of my colleague, the MLA for Cape Breton South.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas Inverness Consolidated Memorial Hospital is staffed by some of the best nurses and health care workers in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out the nurses and health care workers selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not care for nurses or the health care workers;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses and health care workers of the Inverness Consolidated Memorial Hospital instead of disrespecting them.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
Mr. Speaker, I am introducing this in both languages.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital Inverness Consolidated Memorial Hospital est équipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmières par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nouvelle-Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect pas les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de cette Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital Inverness Consolidated Memorial Hospital au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MR. GRAHAM STEELE: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague, the member for Halifax Chebucto, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas government advertisements scream "emergency room closures, early patient discharges, bed closures, increased waiting lists, restriction of services to life and limb situation"; and
Whereas this just seems to be a continuation of how Tories and Liberals have been managing our health care system for years; and
Whereas instead of doing something about the problem this Tory Government is now driving health care workers and nurses out of our province;
Therefore be it resolved that this government reconsider its ill-advised anti-strike legislation and start hiring desperately-needed nurses and paying them and other health care workers a wage that reflects their true value.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I will be introducing this resolution in both official languages on behalf of my colleague, the member for Cape Breton South.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Cape Breton Regional Hospital is staffed by some of the best nurses and health care workers in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out the nurses selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not care for nurses or the health care workers;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses and health care workers of the Cape Breton Regional Hospital instead of disrespecting them.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital Cape Breton Regional Hospital est équipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmières par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nouvelle-Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect pas les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de cette Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital Cape Breton Regional Hospital au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage on an introduction.
MR. KEVIN DEVEAUX: Mr. Speaker, I just wanted to take a moment to introduce someone who is in the, I always get these mixed up . . .
AN HON. MEMBER: East gallery.
MR. DEVEAUX: East gallery, I should know that coming from Eastern Passage. Darlene Pentz, P-e-n-t-z for Hansard's record. She is an RN at the QE II Health Sciences Centre. She is a nurse with 33 years of service. I guess, on her behalf, just to say that time to respect the caring profession who make the health care system really function, and please respect us, we totally respect our patients and will always provide care for them. I hope that Darlene can stand up and be recognized by the House. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. DARRELL DEXTER: Mr. Speaker, if I may, before I begin my resolution, I would like to make an introduction. I would like to introduce to you and to the House, in the east gallery, Janice Nicholson. She is a staff nurse at the cardiovascular intensive care unit, Bargaining Unit No. 97, with 17 years of service. If she would stand and be welcomed by the House. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. DARRELL DEXTER: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas yesterday Minister Muir told a news conference that the government is "acting responsibly and decisively to protect the health and safety of Nova Scotians"; and
Whereas Minister Russell told the same news conference that because "we have to protect the welfare of the people of Nova Scotia" the government plans to take away the right to strike of nearly 10,000 health care workers and give Cabinet the power to impose wage settlements; and
Whereas the union leader's response to the minister's statement was that "this is going to drive nurses out of the province", a sentiment being echoed by others afraid of a mass exodus of health care workers in the province;
Therefore be it resolved that this government put real efforts into protecting the health and safety of Nova Scotians by ensuring that the province has enough trained professional health care workers to provide the standard of health care Nova Scotians deserve rather than drive them to other provinces and beyond to be fairly compensated for their skills and dedication.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I will be introducing this resolution in both official languages on behalf of my colleague, the member for Cape Breton West.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Cobequid Multi-Service Centre is staffed by some of the best nurses and health care workers in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out the nurses and health care workers selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not care for our nurses or our health care workers;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses of the Cobequid Multi-Service Centre instead of disrespecting them.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital de Cobequid Multi-Service Centre est équipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmières par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nouvelle-Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect pas les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de cette Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital de Cobequid Multi-Service Centre au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. DARRELL DEXTER: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the member for Sackville-Cobequid, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Capital District Health Authority has begun to implement its contingency plan in the event of a labour dispute erupting in the near future; and
Whereas this contingency plan includes the closure of beds at various facilities throughout metro and a freeze on operating room procedures; and
Whereas each summer brings a reduction of services of 20 per cent to 30 per cent at metro health care facilities due to, among other things, staff vacations which means bed closures and reduced OR times, yet none of this is mentioned in the gloom and doom advertisements by the Capital District Health Authority and the Department of Health;
Therefore be it resolved that the Minister of Health stop this ungracious and misleading advertising about the perils of a strike by health care staff in metro Halifax and stop the Capital District Health Authority from cloaking its summer slowdown as a necessary response to an anticipated work stoppage.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Glace Bay.
MR. DAVID WILSON: If I may, Mr. Speaker, an introduction. It gives me a great deal of pleasure, being the brother of two nurses and also the brother of an inhalation technologist, but most importantly, the son of a nurse, to introduce in our gallery today Jill MacKenzie, who is an RN at the QE II Health Sciences Centre and has been there for 26 years. She wanted me to pass on that she is here this morning looking for a reasonable offer and a little bit of respect. If she would stand and the House would please welcome her. Thank you. (Applause)
[12:30 a.m.]
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I will be introducing this resolution in both official languages on behalf of my colleague, the member for Cape Breton West.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Soldiers Memorial Hospital is staffed by some of the best nurses and health care workers in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out the nurses and health care workers selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not show the same care for nurses or health care workers;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the Tory Government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses and health care workers of Soldiers Memorial Hospital instead of disrespecting them.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital Soldiers Memorial est equipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmières par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nouvelle-Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect pas les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de ce Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital Soldiers Memorial au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Halifax Needham.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Speaker, before I do my resolution I would like to take a moment to make an introduction, please, if I may. In our east gallery this morning, we have Diane Bentley, who is a charge nurse in the OR at the Halifax Infirmary site on the 3:00 to 11:00 shift. Diane is a member of the Nova Scotia Government Employees Union. She has 34 years working as a nurse. She has worked in four countries around the world, three provinces of Canada, many hospitals in Nova Scotia. Diane would like members in this House to know that she has spent many hours teaching the public CPR and first aid, free of charge. She has taken many courses at her own expense, so many that she couldn't count.
Diane Bentley says she loves her work and she would never allow patients to suffer, and she resents the suggestion that she would do so, made by the Minister of Health. I would ask Diane Bentley to stand and receive the warm welcome of the members of the House. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Needham.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas in a poem written by nurses it states "As I roll out of bed, this must be a dream, another twelve hour shift and it's now five-fifteen, my lunch is all packed and my uniform pressed, brush my teeth, grab a shower and lastly get dressed"; and
Whereas the poem continues on "By tired worn faces I don't ask how the night went, just look at the book and write down my assignment, they're crazy, I can't do all this in one day! I've only two hands, I must start right away; and
Whereas the poem continues "answer phones, restock charts - no ward clerk to boot, there's no way in this world that I make enough loot, with despair and frustration my heart goes Lub Dub, And how would I know? Can't read my pay stub";
Therefore be it resolved that all members of this House recognize the outstanding service and sacrifice nurses make for Nova Scotians each and every day.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I would question the format of the resolution, and I would rule it out of order.
The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: It sounded fine to me.
Mr. Speaker, I will be introducing this resolution in both official languages on behalf of my colleague, the member for Cape Breton Nova.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas St. Martha's Hospital in Antigonish is staffed by some of the best nurses and health care workers in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out these nurses and health care workers selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not show the same care for the nurses or the health care workers;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses and health care workers of St. Martha's Hospital in Antigonish instead of disrespecting them.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital St. Martha's à Antigonish est equipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmières par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nouvelle-Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect pas les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de ce Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de fair des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital St. Martha's à Antigonish au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
MR. DARRELL DEXTER: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. With respect to the notice of motion that was given by my colleague, the member for Halifax Needham, I wonder if the Speaker would be prepared to indicate to us what was wrong with the notice of motion. Certainly . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. As the honourable member is well aware, you can't challenge the ruling of the Speaker. I certainly will take it under advisement and report back to the House.
The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.
RESOLUTION NO. 1653
Whereas Private John Arsenault of Glace Bay was killed at Vimy Ridge in 1917 while serving with the 85th Overseas Battalion of the Nova Scotia Highlanders; and
Whereas the British war medal he received posthumously went missing, but was later found by Tom Currie, an advisor to the current Eastern Passage Education Centre's Call to Remembrance team, formed under sponsorship of the Royal Canadian Legion to foster students' knowledge of Canada's military history; and
Whereas the medal has been restored and the Eastern Passage Education Centre's Call to Remembrance team will present it to the family of the late John Arsenault at 2:00 p.m. today at a ceremony in the school library;
Therefore be it resolved that this House congratulate the Eastern Passage Education Centre's Call to Remembrance team and team advisor, Tom Currie, for their perseverance in finding the family of the late Private John Arsenault and returning his British war medal to its rightful heirs.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
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 Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I will be introducing this resolution in both official languages on behalf of the member for Cape Breton Nova.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital New Waterford Consolidated est equipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières an Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmiéres par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nouvelle-Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect pas les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de ce Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital New Waterford Consolidated au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolutions:
Whereas the New Waterford Consolidated Hospital is staffed by some of the best nurses in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out these nurses and health care workers selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not show the same care for the nurses or the health care workers;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses and health care workers of the New Waterford Consolidated Hospital instead of disrespecting them.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear several Noes.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre.
MR. FRANK CORBETT: Mr. Speaker, with the House's indulgement, I would like to do an introduction. I would like to introduce Carolann Corkum, a staff nurse co-ordinator of the intensive care unit, bargaining unit 97 and she has 11 years service. She is a bargaining
team member, a charge nurse at CDICU for two years. The majority of time spent in that role was coordinating staffing requirements. She is also a member of the Move Committee that assisted in the co-ordination and safe patient transfer from the VG site to the Halifax Infirmary site. These are all strictly volunteer positions that require large time commitments beyond the fulfilment of full-time shifts in the intensive care unit. "It didn't cross my mind", she says, "to renege on any of these positions during my term commitments because I cared about the quality of care of patients and families in the cardiovascular intensive care. I am appalled by the minister . . ."
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I am certainly going to allow members to make introductions in the House, but not read statements on behalf of people visiting the House. I would ask the honourable member, he has made the introduction, to move on to his resolution. I would ask the visitor, certainly, to rise and receive the warm welcome of the House. (Applause)
The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre.
MR. FRANK CORBETT: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas successive Tory and Liberal Governments have known since 1985 about the potential health risks faced by residents of Whitney Pier and area; and
Whereas instead of acting on warnings from the Bureau of Chemical Hazards, Tory and Liberal Governments waited a full 16 years before any action was taken on an organized testing of residents who live close to the coke ovens site; and
Whereas Liberal silence and Tory inactions have allowed pregnant women and children to be exposed to toxic chemicals for years rather than acting on repeated warnings;
Therefore be it resolved that this government commit today to moving residents living closest to the coke ovens site.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I will be introducing this resolution in both languages on behalf of my colleague, the member for Victoria.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I would suggest that the honourable member for Richmond is standing in the place of the honourable member for Victoria who is not bilingual, so I would suggest you read it in the language that the honourable member for Victoria would. The honourable member for Richmond has the floor. (Interruptions)
MR. SAMSON: Well, you know Mr. Speaker, I . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Yes, the honourable member for Victoria certainly could say it in Gaelic, so if the honourable member for Richmond can do that, he is welcome to.
The honourable member for Richmond has the floor.
MR. SAMSON: Well, Mr. Speaker, I guess on a point of personal privilege and I don't want to have to go down this road, but for you as Speaker of this Chamber, to sit here and to be able to say who can speak in both official languages in this House and who can't, I think it is a most dangerous thing. I am certainly willing to give the Speaker the opportunity to retract that statement because that is a . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I suggest the honourable member for Richmond is standing in the place of the honourable member for Victoria. And you are reading on behalf of the honourable member for Victoria in his language.
The honourable member for Richmond has the floor.
MR. SAMSON: As I said, Mr. Speaker, I will be - as you well know . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I will obviously take that ruling that I just made under advisement and report back to the House. I would ask the honourable member to please read the resolution in the honourable member for Victoria's language, which would be English.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Victoria County Memorial Hospital is staffed by some of the best nurses in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out the nurses selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not care for nurses;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses of the Victoria County Memorial Hospital instead of disrespecting them.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Did the honourable member request waiver?
MR. SAMSON: Not yet.
MR. SPEAKER: Are you going to?
MR. SAMSON: Yes.
MR. SPEAKER: Then request it.
MR. SAMSON: Okay, as soon as I am done.
MR. SPEAKER: No. Request it.
MR. SAMSON: Well . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Is the honourable member requesting waiver?
MR. SAMSON: On a point of personal privilege . . .
MR. SPEAKER: You already rose on that and I told you I would report back to the House. The honourable member will request waiver or I will move on to the next speaker.
MR. SAMSON: Well, Mr. Speaker, I . . .
MR. SPEAKER: I understand your point of privilege and I told you I would take it under advisement. I asked you to read it in English only. Are you requesting waiver?
MR. SAMSON: Well, I will ask waiver, I guess.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MR. GRAHAM STEELE: Mr. Speaker, if I might be permitted an introduction before I begin. Like the member for Glace Bay, I am the brother of a nurse and it is a useful reminder for all of us I think that the nurses who are being treated with such disrespect are our family, our friends and our neighbours. In the east gallery today is Mr. Brad Kennedy, a registered nurse with two years of service and a constituent of mine. It is unfortunate that Mr. Kennedy has to begin his nursing career in this kind of environment. I would ask Mr. Kennedy to rise and receive the warm welcome of the House. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MR. GRAHAM STEELE: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague, the honourable member for Timberlea-Prospect, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Cygnus Diving Club was formed to promote the sport of springboard and platform diving; and
Whereas this year the club has attended competitions in Halifax, Fredericton, Newfoundland and Quebec; and
Whereas 10 year old Kelly Gallagher of Shad Bay has qualified as a member of the Cygnus Diving Club to attend the nationals in Victoria, B.C. in July;
Therefore be it resolved that the Nova Scotia Legislature congratulate Kelly Gallagher on her accomplishments with the Cygnus Diving Club with wishes of good luck to Kelly and her teammates at the National Diving Championships in Victoria, B.C.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
[12:45 a.m.]
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
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 Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I will be introducing this resolution in both languages on behalf of my colleague, the member for Cape Breton The Lakes.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Again. Order, please. The honourable member is standing in the place of a member who is not bilingual and who could not recite that resolution in both languages. I would ask the honourable member, when he is standing in his place or in the place of a bilingual member, I certainly would allow it, but he is not allowed to stand in the place of another individual who couldn't repeat it in both languages. (Interruptions) As I indicated earlier to the honourable member for Richmond, I will review the decision at a later date and I will report back to the House. I would ask the honourable member for Richmond, when he is speaking on behalf of a member in this House who is not bilingual, that he recite the resolution in the language that the member he is replacing naturally would. (Interruptions)
Order, please. The honourable member for Richmond has the floor.
MR. SAMSON: Am I permitted to respond to that, Mr. Speaker?
MR. SPEAKER: Pardon me?
MR. SAMSON: Am I permitted to respond to what you just said?
MR. SPEAKER: Yes.
MR. SAMSON: Okay.
MR. SPEAKER: You can respond to it, but again . . .
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, all evening you have allowed this to take place and have not raised any objections when I did this for my colleague, the member for Cape Breton South . . .
MR. SPEAKER: You are absolutely right.
MR. SAMSON: . . . and my colleague, the member for Cape Breton West.
MR. SPEAKER: You are absolutely right, and at the time I was contemplating whether I should or not. So, I would ask the honourable member . . .
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, if I might, and I told you I don't want to go down this road. Mr. Boudreau, my colleague, whose father is a native of Petit de Grat, the community of Little Anse, is an Acadian. Mr. Boudreau himself is of Acadian heritage. For you to sit here, Mr. Speaker, and to determine . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The honourable member for Cape Breton The Lakes, if he is bilingual, then I will allow you to repeat that on his behalf, bilingually.
The honourable member for Richmond has the floor.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, as far as I am concerned, all of my colleagues in our caucus are bilingual, and therefore unless you are ruling they are not.
MR. SPEAKER: No. Order, please. I will not allow the honourable member to repeat (Interruptions) Order, please. No. Order, please. The honourable member for Richmond, as I indicated earlier, I will allow you to stand and repeat, in both languages, notices of motion on behalf of members who could do it themselves, but I will not allow the member to stand and take the place of those who could not repeat it in both languages to do it.
The honourable member for Richmond has the floor.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, as I said, on behalf of my colleague, the member for Cape Breton The Lakes, I will present this in both official languages. I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Northside General Hospital is staffed by some of the best nurses and health care workers in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out the nurses and health care workers selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not show the same care for nurses or the health care workers;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses and health care workers of the Northside General Hospital instead of disrespecting them.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital Northside General Hospital est equipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmières par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nouvelle-Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect pas les infirmierès;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de ce Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital de Northside General au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear several Noes.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MR. GRAHAM STEELE: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas Innis Christie is a nationally respected labour lawyer, arbitrator, mediator and legal scholar, as well as being a former Deputy Minister of Labour for the Province of Nova Scotia; and
Whereas Innis Christie served the Province of Nova Scotia, again, as Chairman of the Nova Scotia Workers Compensation Board from 1995 until May 31, 2001; and
Whereas the present government has seen fit not to offer Innis Christie the extension to his term that would normally be accorded to a person who has served with distinction;
Therefore be it resolved that this House thank Innis Christie for his service to the province as Chairman of the Workers' Compensation Board.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I will be introducing this resolution in both official languages on behalf of my colleague, the member for Cape Breton The Lakes.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Izaak Walton Killam Hospital is staffed by some of the best nurses and health care workers in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out, these nurses and health care workers selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not show the same care for the nurses or the health care workers;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses and health care workers of the Izaak Walton Killam Hospital, instead of disrespecting them.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital Izaak Walton Killam, est equipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmières par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nouvelle-Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de ce Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital Izaak Walton Killam au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. DARRELL DEXTER: Mr. Speaker, before I read this resolution on behalf of the member for Dartmouth North, I would like to make an introduction. I would like to introduce to the House, Carolin Read, who is a staff nurse at the Neurosurgery Unit of the QE II, with the NSGEU bargaining unit. She has 15 years of service. She is the Chairman of the Nurses Bargaining Committee, who are attempting to negotiate a fair collective agreement to stop the drain of experienced and new nurses from Nova Scotia. If Ms. Read would stand and receive the welcome of the House. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. DARRELL DEXTER: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the member for Dartmouth North, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the government placed a quarter-page public notice in Thursday's newspaper proclaiming their assurance to Nova Scotians that they will maintain the integrity of the health care system; and
Whereas the Canadian Oxford Dictionary definition of integrity reads as follows, "moral uprightness; honesty; wholeness; completeness . . . unimpaired or uncorrupted condition."; and
Whereas the Tory Government has been anything but moral, upright, honest, whole, complete or unimpaired in presenting information to Nova Scotians about preparation for emergency service in the event of a strike;
Therefore be it resolved that the Premier direct the Minister of Health and propaganda to cease and desist with this misleading advertisement that is causing much alarm and distress throughout our province.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I would like to take a look at the resolution before it is tabled.
The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: M. le Président, je lis cette résolution au nom de mon collègue, le député honourable pour Lunenburg Ouest.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital South Shore Regional est equipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et cheque nuit ses infirmiéres par altuisme traville de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nouvelle-Ecosse; et
Attenu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect pas les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de ce Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital South Shore Regional au lieu leur marque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the South Shore Regional Hospital is staffed by some of the best nurses and health care workers in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out the nurses and health care workers selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not show the same level of care for these nurses;
Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses and health care workers of the South Shore Regional Hospital instead of disrespecting them.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Halifax Needham.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Prior to reading a resolution on behalf of my colleague, the member for Timberlea-Prospect, I would like to do another introduction. We are joined this evening by many nurses who want to be respected and valued. One of the nurses who is here to observe the debate on Bill No. 68 is Catherine Keleher who is a community mental health nurse in bargaining unit 12 who has 23 years of nursing experience. I would invite members to extend a warm welcome to Catherine, if she would stand, please. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Needham.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the honourable member for Timberlea-Prospect, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Trans Canada Highway in northern Nova Scotia is in a deplorable state; and
Whereas this road from Amherst through to the Cobequid Pass is a major highway for travellers, truckers and tourists; and
Whereas this highway is an embarrassment to this province;
Therefore be it resolved that the Minister of Transportation and the Minister of Tourism and culture work together to erect a sign on the Tantramar Marshes apologizing to motorists on the condition of roads in the Province of Nova Scotia.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Glace Bay.
MR. DAVID WILSON: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the honourable member for Victoria, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Buchanan Memorial Hospital is staffed by some of the best nurses in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out the nurses selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not care for nurses;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses of Buchanan Memorial Hospital instead of disrespecting them.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Before I read a resolution, I would like to make an introduction. There is a nurse in the east gallery, I believe, her name is Cindy Ehler - hope I have the pronunciation correct. She is a staff nurse in the operating room at the QE II. She has been working as a nurse for 17 years and I know, myself, and I am sure other members here in this House, would gladly put our lives in Cindy's hands, as well as every other nurse in the Province of Nova Scotia. I would ask you and all members to note Cindy as she stands and give her the usual round of applause. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the honourable member for Hants East, a resolution from a little bit of a different direction. I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas clear-cutting as a harvesting method - it is what nurses feel like, I think, that the Minister of Health is clear-cutting them - has been very destructive of Nova Scotia forests; and
Whereas clear-cutting has been part and parcel of the unsustainable cut that has been depleting our forests for year upon year; and
Whereas banning clear-cutting except where it is the only viable harvest method for a particular stand would go a long way in showing Nova Scotians that this government is serious about sustainable forestry;
Therefore be it resolved that this government will immediately take all steps to implement Bill No. 66 and show its concern that sustainable forest practices be followed in the Nova Scotia forest industry.
[1:00 a.m.]
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to read this resolution on behalf of my colleague, the honourable member for Lunenburg West.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital Fishermen's Memorial est equipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmiéres par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nourvelle-Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect pas les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de cette Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital Fishermen's Memorial au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Fishermen's Memorial Hospital is staffed by some of the best nurses and health care workers in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out these nurses and health care workers selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not show the same care for our nurses or our health care workers;
Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses and the health care workers of the Fishermen's Memorial Hospital instead of disrespecting them.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.
MR. KEVIN DEVEAUX: On an introduction, Mr. Speaker. I believe it is in our east gallery - it could be in your gallery, but it believe it is the east gallery - we have Theresa Reece, who is a community mental health nurse and has 27 years of service to the Government of Nova Scotia and the people of Nova Scotia. She is here tonight to express her concern with the disrespect that is being shown to nurses and to herself and wants an opportunity to express a desire that they be treated with dignity and that she be treated with dignity. I ask that she stand and be recognized by the House for her efforts. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition introduced a notice of motion. It is in order and it is tabled.
The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. DARRELL DEXTER: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the honourable member for Dartmouth North, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas another famous quote from the Tory blue book attributed to the Premier states in regard to nurses "that they will not stay unless they have a rewarding, professional environment"; and
Whereas draconian legislation, low wages and poor working conditions will not do anything to provide a rewarding professional environment for nurses; and
Whereas if the Premier couldn't deliver, he should never have made these types of promises;
Therefore be it resolved that this Tory Government realize that their actions are contributing to poor morale for nurses and health care workers and if they really want to make a rewarding, professional environment for these workers, they should stop legislating and start listening. (Applause)
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to read this resolution on behalf of my colleague, the member for Dartmouth East.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre est equipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmiéres par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nouvells-Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement Conservateur ne respect pas les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de cette Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonne avec les infirmières de l'Hopital Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre is staffed by some of the best nurses and health care workers in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out, the nurses and health care workers selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not show the same care for these nurses or health care workers;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses and health care workers of the Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre instead of disrespecting them.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre.
MR. FRANK CORBETT: On an introduction, Mr. Speaker. I would like to introduce Lindsay May. She is an RN. She is a member of the Nova Scotia Nurses' Union and she works at the Ocean View Manor. She is here tonight to see the death of free collective bargaining. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MR. GRAHAM STEELE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin with an introduction, if I might, before I read my resolution. In the gallery with us today is another nurse, another constituent of mine, somebody who has been an operating nurse for 21 years, who has never broken her promise of full commitment to the people of Nova Scotia. I would like to introduce to the House and ask them to greet Carolyn Doucette. Carolyn, if you would rise. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourble member for Halifax Fairview.
MR. GRAHAM STEELE: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the honourable member for Halifax Chebucto, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas polling research undertaken for our Party shows that health, education and jobs are the budget priorities for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas 79 per cent of Nova Scotians polled feel investment in health, education or jobs are their top priorities, while only 18 per cent show deficit elimination or a tax cut as their top priority; and
Whereas Nova Scotians are sending a clear message to this government about what matters to them;
Therefore be it resolved that this government listen to the people of Nova Scotia, as opposed to their Tory friends, and make health, education and jobs a priority of this province.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: M. le Président, je lis cette résolution au nom de mon collègue, le député honorable pour Dartmouth Est.
M. le Président, par la présente, j'avise cette assemblée que je proposerai à une date ultérieure l'adoption de la résolution suivante:
Attendu que l'hopital Dartmouth General est equipé avec quelques-uns des meilleures infirmières en Amérique du Nord; et
Attendu que chaque jour et chaque nuit ses infirmiéres par altruisme travaille de longues heures parce qu'ils aimeient les citoyens de la Nouvelle-Ecosse; et
Attendu que cependent, ce gouvernement conservateur respect pas les infirmières;
Qu'il soit donc réésolu que les membres de ce Chambre encouragent ce gouvernement de faire des negotiations en bonne fonna faith avec les infirmières de l'Hopital Dartmouth General au lieu leur manque de respect.
Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Dartmouth General Hospital and the Nova Scotia Hospital are staffed by some of the best nurses and health care workers in North America; and
Whereas day in and day out, the nurses and health care workers selflessly work long hours because they care for Nova Scotians; and
Whereas this Tory Government, however, does not show the same care for our nurses and our health care workers;
Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House urge the government to negotiate in good faith with the nurses of the Dartmouth General Hospital and the Nova Scotia Hospital instead of continually disrespecting them.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
Is it agreed?
I hear a No.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, before I do my resolution, I would like to introduce to you and all members of the House, Mary Dares, a registered nurse. She has been working as a nurse for 29 years. She, like so many nurses in the province, has been suffering from wage freezes and rollbacks over the past 10 years. She tells me that she is now making $7.48 more every two weeks than she was in 1994. Shame on all governments for allowing that to happen. I would like to ask if Mary would stand and receive the warm welcome of the House. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: 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 Chebucto Boys and Girls Club, which lives by the adage that every kid has potential, opened its doors in Spryfield in 1997, meeting the long-term need of the community; and
Whereas community activist, Catherine Chambers has been selected as the new President of the Chebucto Boys and Girls Club; and
Whereas under Catherine's capable direction, the Chebucto Boys and Girls Club will become an even greater asset to the community of Spryfield;
Therefore be it resolved that this House give best wishes to new President, Catherine Chambers, and the new board, who in partnership with their Executive Director, Kristi Walker, will continue to reach out to the young people of Spryfield with recreational and self-esteem-building programming.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
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 Richmond.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, on an introduction. It gives me great pleasure to introduce to the members of this House Mr. Anthony McGraw who is with us this evening. He is a registered nurse and a staff nurse of bargaining unit 97. He has 16 years of service and - interesting for me - on June 13, 2001, Anthony worked from 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., returned to work that night at 11:00 p.m. until 7:00 a.m. due to the nursing shortage. He was then scheduled to return to work at 3:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. on the very following day which amounts to 24 hours within a 40 hour period. This is clearly unacceptable and on behalf of Anthony and all of the nurses and health care workers, they are simply requesting an offer from this government that will give them reasonable work time and reasonable time with their families. I would ask Anthony to please stand and receive the warm welcome of all members of the House. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. DARRELL DEXTER: Mr. Speaker, on an introduction. I would like to introduce to the House Louise Page who is a registered nurse, nursing bargaining unit. Louise has 27 years of service and I would ask her to stand and receive the warm welcome of the House. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I am going to do a resolution, but I would like to introduce a registered nurse in the east gallery, Donna Langille. She is a member of NSGEU. She has been working in mental health for 16 years, currently at the Abbie Lane;
she has been involved directly in bargaining and as she says, since she is quite used to shift work, she is going to stay here tonight and listen to the debate and try to answer the question, why is it this government is taking away her rights to bargain collectively and freely in the Province of Nova Scotia? I would like to ask Donna to stand and receive the warm welcome of the House. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the member for Hants East, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Department of Natural Resources hands out an annual award to the Woodlot Owner of the Year, recognizing owners with woodlots between 50 and 1,000 acres in size; and
Whereas Don and Katy Moore of Upper Kennetcook will receive the 2001 Woodlot Owner of the Year Award; and
Whereas the Moores have been honoured for managing their properties in an environmentally friendly and sustainable manner;
Therefore be it resolved that this House congratulate Don and Katy Moore of Upper Kennetcook on receiving the 2001 Woodlot Owner of the Year Award.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver.
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 Halifax Needham.
MS. MAUREEN MACDONALD: Mr. Speaker, if I could be permitted to make an introduction, please. Along with many of the people in our gallery tonight we are being visited by Laura Lee Kennedy. Laura Lee has 26 years of nursing experience. She is an LPN and she is in the health care bargaining unit. I would ask Laura Lee to stand and receive a
welcome from members of the House. (Applause)
[1:15 a.m.]
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.
MR. KEVIN DEVEAUX: Mr. Speaker, on an introduction. In the east gallery is Carol Allen, a constituent of mine, a member of the bargaining team, actually, for the Capital District Health Authority. Just so that people have an understanding of Carol's background, I remember in 1998, seeing Carol on the doorstep, and her particularly asking a lot of pointed questions about what will be happening in the election and what our position was on health care. She is clearly someone who is very committed to the health care issues. She is here tonight to listen to the debate in the hopes that maybe this government will begin to show some respect for health care workers and nurses. Maybe we can all give a warm applause to Ms. Allen. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre.
MR. FRANK CORBETT: Mr. Speaker, may I be permitted an introduction? In the gallery tonight is Denise MacDonald. Denise is a psychiatric nurse with over 10 years experience, and thanks to Bill No. 68 she has her home for sale and believes her prospects are better in Alberta or the U.S. than in this province. I would ask Denise to stand and receive the welcome of the House. (Applause)
ORDERS OF THE DAY
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Government House Leader.
HON. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call the order of business, Public Bills for Second Reading.
PUBLIC BILLS FOR SECOND READING
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Government House Leader.
HON. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call Bill No. 68.
Bill No. 68 - Healthcare Services Continuation (2001) Act.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Health.
HON. JAMES MUIR: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise and move second reading of Bill No. 68.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. DARRELL DEXTER: Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening to speak in response on Bill No. 68. I would have thought that the Minister of Health would have at least taken some opportunity at 17 minutes past 1:00 o'clock on this day to at least explain what it is that caused him to bring forward this legislation. I am disappointed that the Minister of Health did not take the opportunity under these circumstances to explain, not only to the members on this side of the House but to all the other people who are assembled here, the reason why this bill is before the Legislature. We are left only to make from it what we can.
What is clear is that the Legislature is gathered here tonight because a power-hungry government seems to think that they can make themselves look like heroes by taking a run at nurses and health care workers. We want to say unequivocally to the Premier that this is an unprecedented step, calling the House into emergency session to trample over collective bargaining, to take away the rights of health care workers all over this province because you see these workers as a threat to the health and to the safety of Nova Scotians.
Mr. Speaker, the government says that they believe these people, who work every day to maintain the health of Nova Scotians, can't be trusted to live up to the agreements they have made to provide services during a strike. This government says that when the chips are down that these workers will not come to the aid of the sick and the dying. This government wants to tell us that these workers are a threat to the health and safety of Nova Scotians. Well, if you want to know who the threat to the health and safety of Nova Scotians is you don't have to look far.
These hard-working Nova Scotians aren't a threat. They didn't promise to increase the number of acute care beds in this province but closed beds all over the province instead; they didn't increase the waiting times for surgery, Mr. Speaker, this government did. They didn't promise more long-term care beds, but failed to deliver while charging seniors $50 a night to stay in those hospital beds. The government did. They didn't promise to create a positive work environment, but instead drove nurses away with draconian measures like we are seeing here tonight. If you want to see the real threat, if the government wants to see the real threat to the health and safety of Nova Scotians, what they have to do is look in the mirror because that is where they are going to find the real threat to the health and safety of Nova Scotians.
Mr. Speaker, the Premier and the Minister of Health are the threat to the health and safety of Nova Scotians, not the health care workers. They have exacerbated a situation that is driving health care workers out of this province. This unprecedented legislation shows that Premier Hamm is not willing to treat health care workers as equals. He is not willing to bargain freely with them. He is not willing to go to the bargaining table and to give them the respect they deserve.
In fact, Mr. Speaker, the Premier and the Minister of Health have shown disrespect and mistrust of nurses and health care workers by saying they don't think they will live up to their commitment to protect people's lives. These are people who protect the lives of Nova Scotians, who protect the families of everyone in this Chamber, who recognize their responsibilities to those people who run this province, who make the engine of the economy go. They are the ones who have taken care of the veterans who fought in the great conflicts of this century. It is these workers who, every day when they go to work, protect the health of Nova Scotians.
The Premier promised to create a positive work environment and now, instead, he is driving health care workers out of the province by legislating away their rights. Mr. Speaker, it is about respecting what health care workers do in Nova Scotia, day in and day out. That is what this debate is about. How will this legislation fix the crisis in nursing? Only a long-term strategy that creates a positive work environment will keep nurses here. Health care workers have been playing by the rules. The Premier and the Minister of Health are playing games, changing the rules when it suits them, changing the rules when they are not getting what they want.
I want, Mr. Speaker, for a second to look at the circumstances under which this bill was introduced. Conciliation is underway for both groups of nurses, a procedure in collective bargaining that strives to find a solution. It is at least three weeks until a legal strike by nurses is possible and then of course, only if there is no settlement. The Minister of Health and the Premier owe it to these workers and owe it to the principle of collective bargaining to allow that procedure to go forward.
Government mediation is working in the Capital Health District with health care workers. Mr. Speaker, free collective bargaining is working. But instead of showing the respect that they ought to show for the procedure of collective bargaining, not to mention the respect that is deserved by the health care workers and nurses who are the subject of this legislation, the Conservative Government has decided that they want to give health care just one more kick.
Mr. Speaker, this is done in the atmosphere of a feeble, Cabinet-driven campaign to try to create a sense of urgency. It is a campaign carried out by the Minister of Health and by the Premier that is designed to whip up panic among the general population, to scare Nova Scotians, specifically those who are seniors in this province and those who are on the waiting
lists for procedures in our hospitals. The Conservatives, instead of respecting collective bargaining, allowing the procedures to go on so that a reasonable settlement might be negotiated, are trying to snatch failure from the jaws of success.
Mr. Speaker, in this legislation there is much to be lamented, there is much, as we have said earlier, that is draconian, that smacks of dictatorial policies that are more in tune with countries in other parts of this world where democracy does not stand. In particular, I want to mention these. This legislation bans the right to strike until the year 2004. That would be the end of the government's five year mandate for virtually all hospital workers. Now what could be the possible reason for that, unless it was simply that this government wants to ensure that they get past the next election without hospital workers and without nurses having the right to express their dissatisfaction with their contract?
If they think nurses and health care workers are going to forget what they are doing here tonight, I want to tell you that I have heard from a lot of them and I don't believe for one second they are going to forget or their families are going to forget or their friends are going to forget or their colleagues are going to forget why it is that the Conservative members are sitting in those seats tonight. They are going to remember when the next election is called.
This is far beyond the bounds of the current situation, which is nurses in conciliation. It is not just continuing on with a conciliation process during which no strike takes place. This removes the right to strike. If you can believe this, this legislation compels unions to direct workers to return to work in the event of a labour dispute. It doesn't compel the union or the union leadership to provide their membership with their best advice; it doesn't compel the union leadership to carry out their function and duties as representatives of those workers; it doesn't compel union leadership to represent those workers. What it does is it compels them to act on behalf of the government to direct workers to return to work in the event of a labour dispute. In fact, it takes away the role, the proper, democratic role of union leadership.
Mr. Speaker, it interferes with the basic freedom of speech and freedom of assembly by making illegal any conduct that may encourage the employees not to immediately continue or resume the duties of their employment. Can you imagine? This legislation tramples on something as basic as the freedom of speech and the right to free assembly. That is what this legislation does. It gives the Cabinet the right to impose entire collective agreements or to impose anything it wants into a collective agreement at any hospital in the province.
Mr. Speaker, you must agree, I think, that the word, agreement, is ironic in these circumstances, it is certainly misplaced. There can be no agreement when one side is forced to do what it would rather not. That is not an agreement, that is not a collective agreement. Collective agreements are bargained freely, when both the employer and the employees treat each other with respect. I can tell you, from my knowledge of what has gone on so far, it has
been the employees who have been more than willing to listen respectfully to the offers put forward to them by the government; it has been the government and the Department of Health and the employers who have been acting outside of the bounds of proper collective agreement.
[1:30 a.m.]
Mr. Speaker, in essence, the government here sits on both sides of the table and they can make a deal with themselves at any point they choose. They don't have to listen; they don't have to consult; they don't have to talk to nurses; they don't have to listen to the union leadership; they don't have to so much as open the door to nurses' concerns. This is completely unprecedented in this country. It abolishes free collective bargaining for hospital workers, period. That is what it does.
When one party has absolute power and the other has no recourse, not even binding arbitration, collective bargaining has been ended; worse than the freeze on collective bargaining imposed by the Cameron Conservatives or extended by the Savage Liberals. It is not just a freeze of a deal freely arrived at. This is a deal dictated by Cabinet.
Mr. Speaker, misleading statements are contained in this bill, like under Clause 7(1), and I want to read it. "Nothing in this Act shall be construed so as to limit or restrict a union and an employer from attempting to resolve any issues or make any agreements before the Governor in Council makes an order pursuant to Section 6."
Mr. Speaker, nothing except, perhaps, Clause 7(2), which makes it explicit that the Cabinet can override any agreement or any provision under Clause 6. What penalties are imposed in a piece of legislation like this? How is it that the government expects to enforce its will? How is it that the government says, you will either do this or we will make you do it? In this legislation, unions who were found to contravene the Act are liable to a penalty of $50,000 and $10,000 a day thereafter. What about workers? What about nurses? What about health care workers who say, we've had enough? We've had enough of the disrespect; we've had enough of the mistrust, we refuse to live up to the terms of this legislation. What happens if one of them should take that position?
Mr. Speaker, I will tell you. Workers who contravene Clause 5; workers who decide to go on strike anyway are liable for an initial penalty of $2,000 and $500 a day thereafter. You have to ask yourself, is it fair? Does it resemble anything like fairness? Well, of course not. Of course it isn't. The beauty is no one can do anything about it because Clause 13 sets out that, "No order or regulation made by the Governor in Council pursuant to this Act shall be questioned or reviewed in any court and no proceeding shall be taken or order made in any court to question, review, prohibit or quash any order or regulation made by the Governor in Council pursuant to this Act."
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice knows; surely there has been some interaction between the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Health before they introduced this. He knows full well there is a problem here, it is called Section 96, the constitutional provision that sets out the jurisdictions of the courts in this country. It can't be arbitrarily taken away by the government. It can't be done. In the effect that the legislation should stand, then what the courts will do is they will go through a process called reading down the legislation, because the courts will insist on ensuring that the rules of natural justice in this country are not trampled upon, not by this Legislature, not by this government, not by this Minister of Health and not by this Premier, under any circumstance. That's why there is a separation between the government and the court system in this country.
I think it is just a shame, it is absolutely scandalous that this government would attempt to make such a resolution, such a provision in this legislation. It is shameful, Mr. Speaker, absolutely shameful that they should take this kind of tactic to try to wipe out the recourse of the citizens of this province to the courts of the land. How could any reasonable government do that?
This is a government that is trying to set itself above the law, above the courts, above any individual or collective rights that Nova Scotians have or believe they enjoy. This government wants to be judge, jury and executioner, that is what this government is attempting in this legislation. The one clause this government has forgotten or overlooked is a notwithstanding clause to exempt these new dictatorial powers from the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The concept of this government is clear, they intend to take whatever action they deem necessary to see to it that this legislation carried the full weight of the law, whether it is fair or not, whether it lives up to the principles of natural justice or not, whether or not it is what we would expect as reasonable in a free and democratic society.
I believe the government is just starting to learn how nurses and other health care workers feels; they feel betrayed. I am going to tale a letter, but I intend first to read it into the record because I think it would be useful for the government to understand how some health care workers feel about what is happening to them. I received this today by fax at my office, from an individual by the name of Brian Tapper, who is known to me, and should be listened to.
"I am writing to you as the count down for job action by the Health Care bargaining unit of the Nova Scotia Government Employees Union is underway, as a vote by the NSNU draws closer and the NSGEU nurses continue in conciliation.
As a health care worker it seems that everyone was caught off guard by our decision to take a strike vote. One thing must be clear, the vote is the result of frustration and anger resulting form increased work loads, limited physical and human resources and a general feeling that our work is not valued by the hospital, the Capital District Health Authority or by government. Working conditions over the past decade have been seriously eroded. Our frustration is not with our patients. I believe during a strike members of our bargaining unit would jump to the assistance of a patient if safety was in question.
During the 1990's employees experienced wage cuts and roll backs as well as "Savage days". Our 1998 contract offered employees a 5.3 percent settlement over three years. This did not begin to replace our losses, nor did it come close to keeping up to the cost of living. The current contract offer which we turned down would have seen workers fall further behind in relationship to the cost of living. We are tired of seeing our resources and working conditions decline further. If our work is valued and seen to be important to producing excellence in health care and appropriate health outcomes it is time for our employer to provide an appropriate settlement. No more and no less!
I believe that it is fair to state that morale has never been at a lower point. There are few department in our health care facilities that are not experiencing staffing shortages. While nursing shortages are talked about daily, you must realize that other professions including diagnostic imaging, laboratory technology, orthotics, prothetics, and psychology to name but a few are experiencing shortages that impace on patient care and health outcomes. We see co-workers leaving for jobs in other parts of Canada which offer better pay, benefits and working conditions. You must find a way of making Nova Scotia competitive. The good living conditions we have in Nova Scotia do not pay our bills!
The Minister of Health has been quoted as saying that with the cost of the health budget exceeding one billion dollars annually that we must control our costs. No one seems to factor in the fact that Nova Scotian's experience heart attacks, strokes, cancer and respiratory illness at rates higher than the national average. No one seems to consider the fact that Nova Scotia has an aging population. No one seems to consider that we have sicker people surviving longer do [sic] to advances in care and technology. Would you dismantle our health care system in order to control budgets and continue to neglect and reduce staffing to the point where we have difficulty delivering care?
Much discussion has occurred related to the creation of two layers in our health care system, the socialized system and the system for those that pay. The current negotiations have the potential to create two layers within the service providers - those who are valued and compensated and those who are under valued and offered compensation which makes them second class workers in the provision of health care.
I'm sure the possibility of a strike is of concern to all Nova Scotian's [sic]. I am hopeful that our mediator will make progress in reaching a fair offer. I am profoundly concerned that a move by government to legislate an end to the current labour strife through the removal of our right to strike will do little to address the issues that compelled health care workers to reject the tentative contract offer. Legislation will do nothing to address the dismal level of moral [sic]. Nothing short of a fair settlement will do anything to address the staff shortages our hospitals are experiencing.
I urge you to have open and frank discussions with health care workers and their representatives. Legislation may provide your government with a quick fix but will not provide a long-term solution to issues troubling health care workers. We are not the problem with this system. We are assets, valued resources that this system needs to retain in order to provide quality patient care.
Think carefully as you consider the proposed legislation, the issues that lead to a strike vote go well beyond inequity in wages. The need for satisfactory working conditions, adequate resources for patient care, recruitment of staff as well as a satisfactory wage settlement are issues which have brought us . . . today.
As a health care worker and taxpayer I ask that you work toward more than a stop-gap solution."
Mr. Speaker, it is signed by Brian Tapper and I would like to table this letter, having read it into the record.
I would say the government is just starting to learn how nurses feel and I said that they felt betrayed. I think that was well represented in Mr. Tapper's letter. They also feel mistreated and I want to read into the record a letter that I received from a nurse who lives in Bedford. It will tell you something about what a day in her life is like.
"I start my work day by getting up at 5:10 in the morning. I leave my home at 5:40 to make the 15 minute walk, usually in the dark, to get the bus at 5:55 a.m. The reason that I do this is there is not enough parking space at the QEII
to accommodate the out-patients and the hospital staff. My shift starts at 6:45 a.m. My unit is Neurosurgery where the patients have very complex physical and mental Needs [sic]. Many of the patients weigh 200 plus pounds and I have to turn them every two hours. We also get all our patients out of bed 1 to 3 times a day. Believe me after 12 hours of this kind of heavy and demanding work every muscle in your body is aching. If I work in the intermediate care unit on my floor I have to work an extra unpaid 15 minutes to give a verbal report to the oncoming nurse. Then I take the bus back home and get to Bedford at 7:40 pm. After being away from my home for 14 hours I now have to walk uphill for 15 minutes to get home. When I arrive home I just have enough energy to have a bath and make my lunch for the next day. Bedtime is at 10:00 pm. Oh did I mention I have a husband and two children? Well for two to three days they don't get to see much of their wife or mother. Did I also mention that my husband was laid off from work for a year and I was the sole breadwinner for the family?
What do I do on my time off? Well, for the past eight years I have been studying to get my Bachelor of Science in Nursing. Why? Because I want to be the best possible nurse to my patients. I have also taken other courses and attended conferences to maintain my knowledge in my field.
Three years ago I was laid off from a nurse management position due to cutbacks. I had to work at casual shifts in several different units. I now have a permanent full-time position but I lost all my seniority of 18 years. So now I can't get a vacation in the summer but have to work all summer. But how much do I have to give? Because there is such a shortage of nurses I can't call in sick because I know I won't be replaced. I hate to leave my patients without care so I drag myself to work even when I am not well . . . I have been a nurse for 28 years. With all that experience and expertise and education I feel the government of Nova Scotia is getting an absolute bargain and I am sick of giving with nothing in return."
[1:45 a.m.]
Mr. Speaker, I would like to table, if I may, this letter which I think eloquently sets out how one nurse in this province believes she is being mistreated as a result of the legislation introduced here tonight. So the nurses feel betrayed and mistreated. They also feel they are being taken for granted. Again, I would like to read something I received just recently from a nurse to indicate how she feels.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I allowed the honourable member quite a substantial amount of leeway, particularly in reading letters and that. I would remind him that second reading of the bill is to be to the principle of this bill and I would ask him to bring his comments back to the principle of the bill, please, and not be reading letters.
The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. DEXTER: What better way to illustrate to the government the error in the principle of this bill than to clearly set out for the government how the people who are going to be most affected by the legislation they have brought in, how those people feel about the legislation that is going to affect their lives. What better illustration could there be to tell the government the need to respect the nurses; the people of this province who elected the government? What better way could there be to demonstrate the importance and the gravity of the decision they are here to make, than to listen to the voices of the very people who are being affected by the legislation?
Mr. Speaker, that is the reason why these letters are being introduced. I have tabled them so that all members of this House might have an opportunity to have a look at them, because this is the very principle on which this bill is founded. It is taking away the rights of these people to have a voice in the collective bargaining process. It is taking away their ability to have a voice in the agreements that are going to be made on their behalf with their employer. It is taking away their right to have a voice in this process. That is the reason why these letters are being read. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. While we welcome and respect the visitors to the gallery tonight, I would ask you to not respond either positively or negatively to what is happening on the floor of the House so as not to interrupt the proceedings. The honourable Leader of the Opposition, again, I would ask you bring your comments back to the principle of the bill at hand, please.
MR. DEXTER: Mr. Speaker, I am sure that direction was given on behalf of the House because if it was given on my behalf I would withdraw it. Those who are here this evening, the workers who are here, as I have said, feel they have been betrayed, mistreated,
taken for granted, the target of political games being played by the government; they feel like they are outcasts in their own province. Any relationship of trust with this government has been destroyed by this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I want to ask you, for a second, to have a look at this legislation and compare it, if you will, to the promises that were made by the government. Take an opportunity to cast your mind back in the review of the principles of this bill to what was said during the election of 1999. Just for example, perhaps you can recall what was said at the Aberdeen Hospital on June 28, 1999. The then-Leader of the Conservative Party on the campaign trail said about health administration and about the government, that, "It's not
good enough that people who are far removed from the community, make decisions without the input of the community." He said, "In our platform, Strong Leadership . . . a Clear Course, released on Friday, I identified the kind of practical, concrete and innovative steps needed not only to secure the nurses we need today, but to keep them here for tomorrow." Those aren't my words, those are the words of the Premier.
He also said, in that same campaign stop, "Most importantly, nurses want a positive, rewarding environment where they know they can properly care for their patients, where they know they are valued and where they know they will have a meaningful voice in shaping change." They said that nurses, among others, among the general population of the province - they said this, and it is ironic - Premier Hamm said, "You have the right to know what you are voting for . . .". Can you imagine? I don't think anyone in this House thought they were voting for legislation that would trample on the basic rights of freedom of assembly, of freedom of speech, of the right to bargain collectively. I don't think anybody here thought that they were voting for that in July 1999.
The Premier said, "I am convinced that with care givers, communities and volunteers helping us and guiding us every step of the way, we can deliver a responsive . . . health care system that will be there for Nova Scotians when they need it." Mr. Speaker, I ask you, has the government indicated who they consulted with? Can they indicate, if they would, which volunteers, which caregivers, which communities they consulted with when they set out the principles of this bill? I haven't heard of any of them. The Minister of Health, in introducing the bill, wouldn't even address the House to answer those simple questions.
This is legislation that makes a bad situation worse. I want you to imagine, Mr. Speaker, one of the great issues besides retention of nurses, which we know under this kind of legislation is going to be even harder, one of the other principal reasons why this government was elected was because they said they would be able to go out and recruit more nurses. This legislation is going to make it harder to recruit nurses, and it means that there are going to be higher costs associated with the recruitment of nurses because more money is going to have to be spent in recruitment efforts in order to get people to come to a province where the nurses are among the lowest paid in North America.
What about the price paid by people who can't get care because of the shortages of nurses and health care workers? What about that price that is paid? It is an intangible. What is the cost associated with longer wait lines? What is the cost associated with having surgery cancelled? What is the cost associated with patients who are put under additional stress as a result of those shortages? What is the price that is to be paid by all Nova Scotians for more government-created chaos in the health care system? We have seen it time and time again. This is a province in which the auxiliary for the Colchester Hospital can go out and buy a bone densitometer only to have it rejected by the Minister of Health because the Minister of Health doesn't want to pay the salary of the technician to operate it, despite the fact that there is a shortage of that service in the province.
There is no question that nurses are the first target of this bill and I want to have a look at that in some detail. There is a serious shortage of nurses in this province, that is no secret. Nurses continue to tell us about having to work long shifts, sometimes up to 24 hours straight. It is no question that they are exhausted by the tasks that they are asked to endure. There is no incentive, many of them report, for working overtime.
There has been a trend over the last five years or more to reduce the number of patients who are admitted to hospitals. As well, many beds and services in rural Nova Scotia have been closed. What is the result of this? The result is that this has led to added patients being admitted in metro facilities - patients with more serious conditions. Patients who would have traditionally been placed in an ICU are ending up on other units. This has resulted in an increased workload for nurses because the patients are sicker.
As well, there are more and more elderly patients who have multiple conditions which require increased attention. Nurses are working longer hours and they have an increased workload as well. Nurses have told me that they worry about the exhaustion and work stress and that it will lead to mistakes. I heard one nurse say just this afternoon that they are literally being asked to put their licences at risk. They worry about their patients and they worry about their careers.
Nurses are indirectly being forced to work overtime. For the most part they entered this career because they care about people and they have the desire to help people and, obviously, sick people. Nurses are well aware of the added workload that their colleagues are experiencing. When they get the call to go to work for overtime or on call, they do not feel that they can refuse because their refusal means that patients are not going to get the care they need and that their colleagues who are at work are going to be even more stressed.
I spoke with a nurse recently that told me that because of on-call and regularly scheduled shifts, she worked 10 days straight, with 20 hours just on the weekend, before she got a day off. She says it is getting to the point where she is afraid to answer the phone because all too often, it is the hospital asking her to come in and as I said before, she feels guilty if she says no.
Another thing about on-call is that they are supposed to get a six hour sleep break after 12 hours. The reality is that time includes travel to and from home and whatever must be done at home when you get there. So it would be rare for anyone actually to get 6 hours sleep. Understandably, nurses are concerned and worry about the mistakes that could happen as a result of sleep deprivation.
Regardless of the minister's nursing strategy, we are not gaining nurses as quickly as we are losing them. We have 450 fewer nurses in this province today than we had in 1994. The Minister of Heath says we are wrong - well, if we are wrong, then the Canadian Institute
for Health Information is also wrong because those aren't my statistics - they are the statistics of the Canadian (interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Even though it is not on the record, I am not going to stand for members calling each other names across the floor - particularly ones that are derogatory so I would ask the honourable members to please keep those comments to themselves. Again, I would remind the members in the gallery not to be responding or commenting to what is happening on the floor of the House. The honourable Leader of the Opposition has the floor.
[2:00 a.m.]
MR. DEXTER: The Minister of Health says I am wrong. It is not my information, I didn't make up the number. Unlike the minister, I try to have some facts before I speak. This is information which I tabled in this House that was put forward by the Canadian Institute for Health Information. It is they who say there are 450 fewer nurses in this province today than in 1994, not me. So if the Minister of Health has some other information, then I challenge him to table it. He can't and he won't because he doesn't have it, because he is wrong and he knows he is wrong.
Mr. Speaker, he likes to use information when it is convenient and ignore it when it becomes a problem. Well, we are here to tell him that he is not going to get away with it. We are here to tell him that this kind of legislation is wrong and we are here to speak up on behalf of those people who are going to be affected by this legislation. That is why I and the other members of the New Democratic Party are here and we are going to do our job, whether he wants to hear us or not.
Mr. Speaker, money is only partly the reason why nurses leave this province. It is part of the reason why this legislation is so regrettable. Young nurses are graduating with large students loans, sometimes between $20,000 and $60,000, depending on the degree and/or the speciality. In some cases, nurses who leave this province will receive a salary in another jurisdiction which is three times higher than what is received in this province. What that will allow them to do is to pay off those huge debts associated with their education much quicker and allow them to get on with a quality of life which they believe, and I think rightfully so, that they deserve. It means that they will be debt free much sooner than if they were to stay here in their own province.
It is not the whole story, Mr. Speaker. The working conditions here make nursing a very stressful position. Nurses are lured away to the United States with contracts that allow them to choose their own shifts and their own hours. What makes this legislation and the principles engendered in it so profound is - and I would ask any member of the government caucus to attend the nursing fair. I had the opportunity to go on one just a short time ago and there in the booth representing a health care corporation in New Orleans was a nurse from
Cape Breton who was there for the purpose of enticing other Nova Scotian nurses to come to New Orleans to work because the quality of life and the benefits were so much better than what they could receive here in their own province. They take the very nurses who are lured away first and bring them back to entice other nurses to go there. It is truly regrettable that the minister would see to it that this legislation will contribute to this erosion of the number of nurses in this province.
Mr. Speaker, nurses have families and family responsibilities too. They work 12-hour plus shifts and then they must go home and care for their families. They, like all of us, do housework and they take care of their children. They are frequently absent from many of the important events that go on in their families whether they are school concerts, trips or baseball games, ballet or piano recitals. They are absent because they are at work. When they do get a little time with their families they are frequently worn out from the shifts they have had to endure and work and they are stressed and they are unable to give to their families the quality time they deserve.
It is always the nurses, Mr. Speaker, and the health care workers who are asked to pickup the slack. They have been asked now for 10 years to pickup the slack when others are not there because the cuts to the other areas of the health care institutions like orderlies and maintenance and housekeeping mean that there is more work for the nurses to do. Nobody does their job when they aren't there. Also, nurses are becoming more and more technical, yet they are not receiving any compensation for that.
Mr. Speaker, I want to tell you that one of the big problems with this legislation and what it is going to do to the numbers of nurses who are going to need to be recruited in this province is that more and more new nurses, more and more graduating nurses are leaving, and this situation is only going to get worse. In about five years' time - and many of the nurses I have spoken to have said in the next 5 to 10 years - a large number of the nurses who are now working are going to be going into retirement. They tell us, and I think the statistics bear them out, that there is going to be a big gap when the bulk of nurses go into retirement within the next decade, and this government or whatever government is saddled with that problem in 10 years' time is going to be unable to recruit new nurses in the numbers that are going to be required in order to fill that gap.
There is nothing about Nova Scotia to draw nurses here from elsewhere. Virtually everywhere else can offer better remuneration, better benefits and a better lifestyle, in time off and shift selection, than we can. Though the number of nurses employed in this province - and the minister likes to point this out - there has been an increase in the number of nurses, well, what they have done is they have changed the designation from casual to full-time. That is a good thing, nurses wanted to have the benefits associated with full-time work, but not nearly enough have been recruited.
The problem is only going to be exacerbated over the years. I have pointed to the minister that there are 450 fewer nurses today than there were only a few years ago. Not only are nurses working longer shifts with larger workloads but it is not infrequent for them to have to work an entire shift without a break. Those are not working conditions that people find enticing.
Mr. Speaker, there are two key questions. The first one is, who is truly responsible for the delivery of health care in Nova Scotia, front-line health care workers or 12 people behind the closed doors of the Cabinet Room? Nova Scotians won't come to Province House in search of health care. They are going to go to their health care institutions. Yet, the people behind the Cabinet Room door have proven beyond a doubt that they could not and would not walk a mile in the shoes of a health care worker. Why should all the decisions, why should all the terms of employment be decided by those 12 people? This government needs to meet health care workers as equals at the bargaining table. They need to do the hard work to understand their concerns and achieve a meeting of the minds. The hands that heal are the hands of health care workers.
I want the Minister of Health to listen to another Health Minister, a former Health Minister who faced a much tougher challenge and who learned from her experience. She said, "The government that I am a part of must share a part of the blame. When we took office in 1991, we faced tremendous challenges . . . As a government, our attention was focussed on dealing with this crisis. However, while we were dealing with these vital issues, we made some mistakes. One mistake was being too busy to really listen, to really hear, all the legitimate concerns facing nurses and other health care workers. Some problems that should have been dealt with promptly were allowed to fester. I apologize." Too busy to listen; too busy to really hear.
Mr. Speaker, that statement was made in April 1999 by Pat Atkinson, the then-Minister of Health in Saskatchewan. She and her colleagues were eventually forced to listen and forced to address the concerns of health care workers. This government should heed that lesson and these false dramatics and pull back from the brink.
The second question, Mr. Speaker, is whether or not Nova Scotia will be governed as a democratic society. Over and over again the Minister of Health and the Premier say that their actions are justified because the offers they made were defeated in a democratic vote by nurses and health care workers. Wiser men would have gone back to improve their offer. Wiser people would have asked why workers were so angry and what they could do to fix health care. In fact, hospital management did listen, revised the offer and tried again with the health care workers, but this government was not so wise. They were insulted, offended and alarmed that anyone would dare to vote against an offer framed at the Cabinet Table. They thought they saw a political opportunity to look like heroes and they didn't think about the rights of citizens in a free and democratic country. They didn't think about the right to organize collectively. They didn't think about the right to seek justice in the courts. They
didn't think about the right to make their voice heard and to bargain for your wages and working conditions.
The only right left to health care workers of Nova Scotia by this legislation is the right to resign, Mr. Speaker. Think about that one. Think about that. Take my deal. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I will again warn the people in the gallery, and if I have to warn you again, I will clear the gallery. The honourable Leader of the Opposition has the floor.
MR. DEXTER: Mr. Speaker, this is the message from this government, take my deal on my terms or quit. In the midst of a profound demoralization, a deteriorating working condition, a growing shortage of health care workers, this government says swallow the Tory package or resign. That shows no respect for the vote taken by those workers, but it is why we are here. We are here to be the voice of thousands of health care workers, patients and families who have been betrayed by this government. We are here to offer good ideas to try and improve this province and this legislation.
I want to tell you, Mr. Speaker, that the two completely offensive and unacceptable sections of this bill are the Cabinet's right to unilaterally impose an agreement and the attempt to deny access to the courts. Even if you take away the right to strike from hospital workers and even if you thought it was sound public policy, which it is not, even if it was a Tory campaign promise, which it wasn't, even if it was the result of careful public consultation, and it is not, those two sections would have to go. Act in haste and repent in leisure. Nova Scotians are still living with the costly consequences of the Cameron and Savage Governments' denial of collective bargaining.
Surely, Mr. Speaker, it is time to break the cycle of failure. The government can stand up right now, or later today, and say that they are willing to let collective bargaining proceed. They can say that they are willing to moderate this unacceptable, undemocratic, dictatorial aspects of the bill and they can try to make a bad bill better. Our caucus will give voice to people's fundamental concerns about this legislation to the fullest extent possible. We will work for any improvement we can obtain. We will do everything in our power to make Nova Scotia a place where people want to work in health care to heal the sick, to restore the spirit, and to promote good health.
In order to do that, Mr. Speaker, to give this legislation the time necessary for due consideration, I move "That the motion be amended by removing all the words following 'that' and inserting therefor the words, Bill No. 68, the Healthcare Services Continuation (2001) Act, be not now read a second time but that it be read a second time this day six months' hence." I have copies of the motion. Rule whether or not the motion was in order, Mr. Speaker. (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.
The motion by the honourable Leader of the Opposition that "Bill No. 68, the Healthcare Services Continuation (2001) Act, be not now read a second time but that it be read a second time this day six months hence," is in order.
[2:15 a.m.]
The honourable member for Richmond on the amendment.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I would say it's a pleasure to rise or it's a privilege to rise and speak on the amendment to Bill No. 68, but it is absolutely disgraceful we are even here having to address this type of legislation here in the Province of Nova Scotia to start off with. What a day it must have been today for the nurses of this province to see where this government is going with our health care system.
Three bargaining units that were acting in good faith, following the process, doing what was set out in the normal collective bargaining process, to be told there is a contingency plan should there be a strike; to be working and negotiating with the government, saying how they will provide essential services should there be a strike, to make sure that the health and safety of Nova Scotians is protected, to be told that all of that is taking place, all of a sudden to hear a few days ago the Minister of Health say, I am not satisfied with the plan. Twenty-four hours before that he publicly admitted he had no idea what the plan was and hadn't looked at it.
Mr. Speaker, then they are told by the Minister of Health and by the Premier that there is legislation coming before this House to deal with the strike. What legislation is it? It wouldn't be this Tory Government if they came right out and told them what it is going to be. They say wait and you will see. Today, in Tory fashion, they forced them all to come down here to see exactly what the Tory Government is going to present to them. Is it going to take away their right to strike? Is it going to force binding arbitration? What is it going to do?
We had our own guesses as to what it probably would be. But I have to tell you, Mr. Speaker, I don't think anyone expected what we would see from this government and what they brought in Bill No. 68. Not only was it offensive enough for them to arrive here and to see that this government is proposing to take away all of their rights to collective bargaining and giving this Cabinet, this Tory Cabinet, the ability to impose a contract on them, but they came down to the House of Assembly, they are all taxpayers, they are Nova Scotians. They figure, oh, we are coming to the Chamber of democracy, then they walk in, and what do they see? Well, I counted six Halifax Regional Policemen. We saw the gates on the sidewalks here; gates along the sidewalks, that is a first. The nurses can at least say, that with all the other protests we have had, they are the ones who scared this government the most . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Order, please. I would just remind the honourable member for Richmond that he is speaking to the hoist amendment on Bill No. 68, please. I would ask the honourable member to bring his comments back to the reasons for the hoist amendment.
The honourable member for Richmond has the floor.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, the reason for the hoist amendment is to allow this government to reflect on what they have done today and what they are doing, not only to the nurses of this province but, as I have said, to all employees in this province. When they come to the House of Assembly they see armed police officers and they see gates, gates to herd them in to small areas and to keep them out of trouble. I liken the nurses to the paramedics. When the paramedics were here, I remember when they came into the gallery they were forced to take the scissors off of their uniforms because that was considered to be a weapon.
I can tell you I was really threatened, sitting on the floor of this House knowing paramedics were up in the gallery. I remember one of the NDP colleagues, I believe it was the member for Cape Breton Centre who said, maybe they can come down and check the Tories to see if they have a pulse. I remember at the time I told him you can't have a pulse if you don't have a heart, so we don't have to worry about the paramedics having to do that.
Mr. Speaker, today, I can tell you that having the nurses here, they can sit comfortably because I don't think they will have to be called to come and check for a pulse of this Tory Government either because they clearly have not changed. Where they have gone is even further to the right.
It was interesting, Mr. Speaker, before the gallery was open today - it is not bad enough that this is what we are doing to nurses but now we are telling them, if you want to hear the debates taking place in the province by the Opposition, by your elected officials, it is not as if you don't work long enough hours, we expect you to show up here at midnight and sit here throughout the night to be able to see democracy in action. That is democracy under the Tory Government, sitting at midnight. It is 2:20 a.m. and this is democracy in Nova Scotia? Police at the front gate greeting nurses as they come in, not knowing where their futures lie because the Tories won't even tell them what is in this legislation, so they come here honestly to find out how this is going to impact them, their employment, their families, their income and they are greeted by police; armed officers. They are greeted by barricades down here on Hollis Street, barricades along the sidewalks.
Six months might give this government the opportunity to look at where it is going. It was interesting when we started today - as if all of this wasn't offensive enough, as I am sure everyone here today, the nurses who have joined us can see, this is the oldest House of democracy in Canada and it is not very good at ventilation and it gets kind of warm in here, and sometimes there has been some additional hot air being produced within the Chamber
itself. You can see there are fans put up and before we started today I mentioned that while I was at a conference in Saskatchewan that members there had unanimously agreed to allow members to take their jackets off because of the long hours and hot days. It was interesting today to hear the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries and the Minister of Economic Development saying no to that, that it would show disrespect to the House of Assembly.
There is nothing more disrespectful than what has been shown to the House of Assembly, since I was elected in 1998, than Bill No. 68 and what this government is doing to the nurses of this province. (Applause) If those members, two Ministers of the Crown - I would expect it from the member for Preston because he is pitiful and we would expect that from him but for two Ministers of the Crown - to say it would be disrespectful, but to support Bill No. 68.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The honourable member for Richmond is being disrespectful to another member of this House. I would ask him to retract that statement he just made about the member for Preston.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, if you find that disrespectful, certainly, I will show respect to you and retract that statement.
MR. SPEAKER: Thank you.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I hear some catcalls from the Minister of Agriculture and clearly the nurses in his riding will answer him for what he is doing on this bill. Six months would clearly give this government the chance to go back to their ridings and look their nurses in the eye and say, this is good legislation and to go back and tell them, we had to do this because you weren't trustworthy enough that if an emergency happened that you would rather sit on a picket line with a picket sign and let someone die in a hospital bed. That is what we think of the nurses of this province, can you imagine? People whose entire career is based on curing people, healing people, helping them in their time of need, helping them in their time of medical pain and what they are going through, to say, no, we don't trust you that if someone is dying or coming in from a car crash that you are going to sit there and say, no, no, we are on strike, let them stay there; how incredible.
If there is one thing even more offensive than that, as if it could get more offensive, our head of state for this Province, the Premier of this province, has yet to even speak on Bill No. 68 in this Chamber and that is the most shameful thing yet. The head of state, he is the one who said he did not feel comfortable with the contingency plan, that he did not trust nurses, who stood behind his Minister of Health when he said he did not trust nurses, has yet to even speak on Bill No. 68. What is more shameful than that?
Remember the blue book? What was it called, Strong Leadership . . . . a clear course, strong and effective leadership, vote John Hamm. Well, now we see our leadership there today.
Mr. Speaker, the idea that, as I speak here today, the Premier still has not taken his place to speak on Bill No. 68 is absolutely shameful and six months would hopefully give us a chance to hear the Premier and to hear him try to justify to the nurses and to Nova Scotians as to why he thinks Bill No. 68 is right. When it comes to Bill No. 68, the nurses have a better chance of seeing Snuffelupagus than they have of seeing the Premier himself addressing Bill No. 68. That is why, as I said, amendments such as these brought forward by the Opposition are opportunities. They are pleas on behalf of the nurses, in this case, asking the government to take its time and to try to look at what it is doing.
Mr. Speaker, today I attended the bill briefing. I don't know if any of the nurses were here today. There were seven bureaucrats sitting at a table trying to justify Bill No. 68. I don't blame those bureaucrats. It is not their fault. I think they mean well, but today that is what this Tory Government tried to do, have seven of them try to justify what was in Bill No. 68. Do you know what, I don't think I have ever seen seven more sheepish looking people in my life because they, themselves, could not justify this. They knew they couldn't justify this. They knew it was wrong and they couldn't even give justification. The highest paid deputy in the history of this province, the Deputy Minister of Health, who looked glum, head down, speaking low, because he could not answer the questions being asked. He knew this was not justifiable.
Mr. Speaker, I pity the legal counsel who were there because I know who that lawyer is. She worked for the government while I was a member of Cabinet and I know how dedicated she is and how well-intentioned she is and how she has given dedication to this province. When asked if this bill was even constitutional, her answer was, I choose not to comment on that. She knew, herself, and how much it must have sickened her to stand there as a lawyer and to try to say that Bill No. 68 was good legislation.
I know the Leader for the NDP has spoken about the constitutionality and I will certainly go through that, Mr. Speaker. As I have said, six months is an opportunity to give this government a chance to go back not only to review what they are doing, but within six months it would allow the collective bargaining process to work through the system and for it to go through and to see what can come out of it. The government appoints a mediator, within 24 hours or 48 hours the mediator comes out with a proposal that is suggested by the union to its membership. Yet while everyone is heralding that success and how great the system is working, this government turns around and says, well, we are going to introduce back-to-work legislation and anti-strike legislation because we are at an impasse. The process hasn't even finished yet, yet the Tories have decided we are at an impasse.
Absolutely incredible, Mr. Speaker, to see a government act this way. As our Leader has said before, don't feel you are the only ones because we were here before on this. Once again, it was with those very dangerous paramedics who they made them take their scissors off their uniform, those threatening paramedics who sat here with their uniforms, had their beepers on in case there was an emergency call while they were here. This is the same government that brought in back-to-work legislation for paramedics. Yet, as if it wasn't insulting enough what they did to the paramedics, what gall they didn't use against the paramedics they have saved for you and have decided we are just going to go full brunt on the nurses. We gave the paramedics a taste of Tory Government in this province and now the nurses are going to get the full BLT from John Hamm and the Tory Government. This is where labour is going in this province under this government?
Mr. Speaker, I don't think there are any nurses in this province, when they voted July 27, 1999, and heard what this Tory Government was proposing to them, who ever thought they would come to the day that they would see Bill No. 68 being proposed by that same Premier. They are unable to question the gentleman they saw on the front of that blue book, the smiling face, Strong Leadership . . . . a clear course, because as I said, he has yet to even speak on Bill No. 68. Six months would hopefully give him a chance to stand in front of the nurses and to be able to justify what they are doing.
Mr. Speaker, Bill No. 68 represents the demise of collective bargaining in Nova Scotia. This bill will allow the Tory Government to overrule any decision reached in labour
negotiations in this province. This government has turned back the clock on workers' rights in Nova Scotia by at least 100 years. This bill is nothing more than union-busting and shotgun bargaining. Not only does it disgust me, it disgusts the people I represent and it disgusts all members of the Liberal caucus.
[2:30 a.m.]
Mr. Speaker, you have been around the process long enough. Normally when there is a legislated solution to a strike - which we are not even sure that we have here, we still don't have a strike for this to be taking place - there is usually a trade-off. That is what we are wondering here, as I said before, when the Tories said we will bring in legislation, well, what is the trade-off? They don't want them to strike, what is going to be the trade-off? Usually, if a group is deemed to be essential service, then they are usually offered binding arbitration as an alternative to striking. Bill No. 68 has no such trade-off; there is no such trying even this or anything. The effect is that the government, the employer is taking no risk in this process, but at the end is saying that they will have the final decision.
Mr. Speaker, how hypocritical it is to hear the Minister of Health say, this is a fair deal, highest paid in Atlantic Canada, that is what we are offering. What have the nurses been saying? You heard them on the radio, your heard them on television, in the newspapers, Nova Scotia nurses aren't going to New Brunswick; they are not going to P.E.I.; they are not
going to Newfoundland; they are going down to the U.S.; they are going out West to Canadian provinces, because they want to? No. I don't think any native Nova Scotian ever wants to leave our wonderful province, but sometimes it becomes a matter of choice.
The minister says, best, highest-paid in Atlantic Canada. My God, this is the greatest offer, the nurses are being unreasonable, and any reasonable-thinking Nova Scotian would feel this is the best offer, this is a reasonable offer and they shouldn't expect more. Well, when that is the case, if the minister is really convinced of that; if all of his government backbenchers believe him when he says that, there is an easy way here, go to binding arbitration. Let an arbitrator decide, Mr. Minister, if that is the best deal for nurses, and that is what your government should be paying nurses in this province.
Mr. Speaker, by not doing that, the veil is lifted and the truth comes out. This is a weak-kneed government which is saying, we know we are putting the screws to nurses, we are willing to put propaganda out there. I am sure the nurses saw the ads in The Chronicle-Herald, The Daily News and I am not sure how many more. My understanding is these ads cost $5,000 each, per paper. So that is $10,000 a day, in these propaganda ads. But there is no more money for nurses, that is what the Health Minister said, that is what the Minister of Finance said. That is who the real villain is here. It is not the Minister of Health. The Minister of Health says infuriating statements and we have gotten used to him saying that, but at the end of the day who holds the purse strings for this government? Who is denying you the ability to have a better pay and a better salary? Look no further than the Minister of Finance himself, the would-be Premier of this province.
Six months may give time for the Minister of Health to plead with him to finally give him money. How ironic for this government to tell the nurses, look, we have told you there is no more money, and when we say there is no more money we mean there is no more money. Remember last year with the Education budget. There is no more money, then when the protests came and the school boards hollered and the parents hollered and the teachers hollered, she found what, $20 million. Wow, $20 million.
Then we figure well, that is a flash in the pan. It happened once, what is the chance that is going to happen again? Education budget this year. She found for one board, first she found them $900,000 and that was it. We had just put that aside, we said there was no more money. Then, a few weeks later she finds them another $120,000, and yet, to the nurses, there is no more money. Trust us; believe the Minister of Finance when he says, I don't have any more money.
Mr. Speaker, six months would give this government a chance to realize that during the last sitting the Liberal caucus, my colleague, the member for Lunenburg West, was able to show Nova Scotians how this government - through the federal income tax bracket creep and through user fees - is sitting on a windfall of money and, do you know what, they tell the nurses there is no money for you right now, but in two years, as if the magic tricks haven't
ended, there is another one. There is one more trick coming. So you can get your tickets for the show. The next trick is going to be an income tax cut for you all. Because we are such wonderful money managers we have mysteriously found this money.
Well, do you know what? That money is the money they won't give you today. That is where that money is. That is the money they are taking out of your pockets today and denying you a fair salary that they will come in two years and say, oh, you see, because we put the screws to the nurses, we can give you an income tax cut now. That is what they will say and no one will be fooled, but six months would give this government a chance to realize that every Nova Scotian knows that their proposed tax cut is a farce because we have already paid for it. He has taken the money literally out of our pockets today, he is banking it, he is putting it in a little account there, a little fat-cat account, putting it aside, and in two years he will come and say, wow, look at this, an income tax cut just as I promised you.
Mr. Speaker, Education twice found more money. Now to the nurses they say there is no more money and this is the best deal possible, it is fair. Well, you see the ads, you know, highest paid in Atlantic Canada. You will see the little graph and everything, a fair offer for nurses. Well, Mr. Health Minister, Mr. Minister of Finance, if you have the personal integrity to stand behind those statements, speak to your House Leader right now, withdraw Bill No. 68 and go immediately to binding arbitration with the nurses and the health care professionals of this province and see if you can convince an arbitrator that this is a fair deal and that this is the best deal that nurses in this province and health care workers deserve.
The fact that they will not do that, Mr. Speaker, really shows to you how much sincerity goes in this type of ad; $5,000, a PR scam to convince Nova Scotians that nurses are greedy people. They are being offered, look, all this money we are offering them and they want more. They want more because we pay them too much as it is. They only work a few hours. They are greedy. They want more. That is the Tory way and the sad part is, politics aside, these people believe that.
The backbenchers, I sympathize with the backbenchers, I really do, because I don't think there is one backbencher in that caucus who actually supports Bill No. 68. In fact, I would say that the majority on the front bench and the Cabinet of that government do not support Bill No. 68, but Nova Scotians are quickly realizing that this government is being run by a very small little clique and we have said it before, this government is being run by the Minister of Finance, the Government House Leader and the Minister of Justice.
If you want to see the Cabinet and you want to see who is running this government, there are only three people to look at and if you ask, well, where is the Premier, well, we have the same question, where is the Premier? Obviously the strong leadership we were told that we would have in this province from that Premier, we just don't see it. As I said, he is yet to stand in this House and speak on Bill No. 68 and I await and I challenge him now to
a debate on this, to stand and to answer our questions on behalf of the nurses and to answer on behalf of Nova Scotians why he feels Bill No. 68 is justifiable legislation.
Mr. Speaker, how interesting it is, at the press conference and through all of this, in the bill itself, the government says, well, you have to negotiate with the employer and even in the bill itself it makes mention that if the employer locks people out, they are going to fine the employer $50,000 a day, get tough with the employer. Who is the employer? It is them. It is the Cabinet. It is the government. They are going to fine themselves but, do you know what, that is another example, and I have said it many times in this House, when I hear today how the Minister of Health, the Government House Leader, when they talk, this government
is convinced that Nova Scotians lack intelligence, that Nova Scotians do not have the intelligence to realize when the Tories are snookering them or trying to pull the wool over their eyes, as the saying would be.
How else can it be that the House Leader says, no, no, this doesn't affect collective bargaining, this clause says this won't affect collective bargaining. I don't see why the unions and the members wouldn't want to sit at the table and negotiate and negotiate, and at the end of the day if there are any problems, the Cabinet will decide what they are going to get. Why would anyone be opposed to that, he said. What is wrong with that? If that is not someone who thinks every Nova Scotian out there is stupid, I don't know what is. That is pretty sad. It is pretty sad when you have a House Leader who has been in this House for so many years and a government that would try to convince Nova Scotians of that.
Mr. Speaker, six months would give the Minister of Justice an opportunity to try to explain what they are doing - so, no binding arbitration, that is out, you can't strike, and Cabinet can decide your agreements. As if that wasn't offensive enough, they have gone one step further and said no court in this land will question, not only review, question the decision made by Cabinet on a collective agreement. If you are a nurse, the collective bargaining process is out the window. The government is going to come in and decide what your contract is going to be.
Then you say to yourself, well, I don't feel that is fair, I don't feel that justice has been done, or what they have done doesn't respect my individual rights, I am going to appeal this. This government has the audacity to try to put a clause in this bill saying that you can't appeal. You can't go to court because the Tory Cabinet has spoken, and how dare any court in this land even consider questioning our judgement? You have to ask yourself, who in the government would even suggest such a thing?
Mr. Speaker, as I said before, the nurses and Nova Scotians need to look no further than the Minister of Finance, the Government House Leader and the Minister of Justice. They are the ones who would have that type of clause put in this bill; a clause which is clearly unconstitutional; a clause that will clearly not survive any court challenge. Yet, it just
shows you the audacity and how they believe that, well, I don't think Nova Scotians are smart enough to even realize that and maybe we can slip it through.
Mr. Speaker, what a sad day. To show you the real face of this government, this government even today considered trying to ram this bill through without any public debate on this, and publicly admitted, well, we considered it, we could have done it, but we didn't do it. The fact they even considered putting this type of legislation and ramming it through the House without public debate shows you how dangerous this government is, it shows you how anti-democratic this government has become when they say they are even willing to have considered that.
Again, who is responsible? Who would have considered that on the government side? Again, look no further than the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Justice, who say to themselves, ram it through, we will get out of here, let it all blow over and we will all go hide at home or go on our vacations and hide away. Leave those nurses out to dry. Hang them out to dry again. That is the type of government we have in this province. That is a sad state we are in.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, the employer here is not the district health authorities, it is the government, it is this Cabinet. They are ones who fund the district health authorities; they are the ones who provide the funding; they are the ones who tell them how much money they can offer nurses. At the end of the day, they are the ones who are the employer. Let no one be fooled that anyone else is the employer. It shows you how they are willing to take responsibility for their actions, because rather than saying, we are doing this and we are going to stand behind it, they are saying, no, God no, it is not us, it is the employer you are going to have to deal with, not us, we are not the employer, no, no, it is the district health authorities, they are the employers. Imagine. Once again, the charade they play.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, this government, with Bill No. 68, is clearly turning back the clock on labour relations by at least 100 years. Six months is the least we should expect this government to accept as an amendment when you consider the impact that this legislation will have on the labour movement inside this province.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health when asked today, how can you justify bringing in such a bill, are there any other jurisdictions that would do such a thing? Well, surprise, surprise, surprise. Who else is doing this? Look no further than New Brunswick. How far did they have to look than New Brunswick, Bernard Lord, the Tory wonder boy over in New Brunswick, that the Hamm Government is so pleased to follow in his footsteps. The Premier has lost direction himself so he is more than happy to follow the lead of Bernard Lord, but it gets even better than that, Mr. Speaker, because if what they did in New Brunswick wasn't offensive enough, I just want to give you an example of how much more draconian and severe this government is.
[2:45 a.m.]
As we see in Bill No. 68, when it refers to the penalty provision, when it talks about if employees - that means nurses or health care workers - go out and not continue to work, it says $2,000 and a penalty of $500 a day. So, imagine, nurses, $2,000 a day, fining them, and $500 the day after. What did they do in New Brunswick? I think six months would give them a chance to see what they did in New Brunswick, but we now know that they know what they did in New Brunswick because they say this bill is based on New Brunswick. So what did Bernard Lord say? Bernard Lord said in Section 8(6), "Every employee who violates or fails to comply with subsection (6)(1) commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine of $100 for each day during which the offence continues."
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I am going to ask the honourable member to bring his comments back to the six months' hoist and, as well, relevance. What is happening outside of this province I would suggest has nothing to do with the bill before this House now and particularly the amendment that is being discussed at this time. So I would ask the honourable member for Richmond to bring his comments back to the hoist amendment, please.
The honourable member for Richmond has the floor.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, maybe I didn't make myself clear enough, I guess, today the Government House Leader clearly said that this legislation mirrored legislation in New Brunswick, that that is where the precedent was for this. What I am trying to point out is that by him saying that, I am saying that this six months amendment would give them a chance to go look back at this legislation because, obviously, they missed a few parts because in New Brunswick, $100 a day for nurses, as offensive as that is, what do the Tories say here, we are going to really stick it to them, $2,000 a day and $500 for each day after that.
So don't let them blame Bernard Lord or say he set a precedent, Mr. Speaker. This government uses that as an excuse. The Minister of Justice himself, you know, feels $2,000 a day, now that is more appropriate; $100, they are weak-kneed in New Brunswick. Our fellow Tories in New Brunswick are very weak-kneed. We are going to teach them a lesson here in Nova Scotia. You go against us and we are going to fine you $2,000 a day and $500 after. Remember home invasions, the johns bill, you know, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the same Minister of Justice, the same logic, the same success, the same respect for Nova Scotians.
It is all a pattern, Mr. Speaker, and I will go even further than that. We see in the bill, six months would give them a chance to look at a few other parts because in the bill it talks of a union or a person of the union who contravenes this, the fine there, I am trying to see here, it talks about $50,000 for the union, but in New Brunswick, what do they say? It says, "Every officer or representative of the bargaining agent who violates or fails to comply with
Section 4 commits an offense and is liable on conviction to a fine of $300 a day." So it is $300 in New Brunswick, $50,000 in Nova Scotia. Imagine.
Yet the Minister of Health says, oh, my God, I cherish our health care workers so much, I love our nurses here. Thank God we have got them. What a terrible thing it would be if we lost them. I love them so much. Yet when I get the chance to stick it to them, oh, boy, I am going to stick it to them good. How more hypocritical yet, when I get the chance to stick it to them, oh boy, I am going to stick it to them good. How much more hypocritical can you be?
Six months. How interesting that we use the number six months for an amendment. To hear the minister today in his comments, he said, at no time is it more justifiable for us to act than when the health and safety of Nova Scotians is put at risk. All the members of this House know that this government and this Minister of Health, the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Justice and the House Leader are the ones responsible for putting the health and safety of the residents of the Strait area at risk by allowing the emergency room at the Strait-Richmond Hospital in my constituency to be closed for six months. In the end they say, well, if there is a nurses' strike there is going to be emergency room closures, early patient discharges, bed closures, increased waiting lists.
AN HON. MEMBER: It is already there.
MR. SAMSON: That is what is happening in the Strait since January of this year.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I am going to remind the honourable member for the last time that, first of all, you are using unparliamentary language again by calling the members hypocritical. The second issue is relevancy in regard to the hoist amendment. I would ask the member for the last time to bring his comments back to the six months' hoist amendment that is before the House at this time.
The honourable member for Richmond has the floor.
MR. SAMSON: M. le président, ça me fait plaisir ce soir de présenter et de dire quelques mots sur la loi numéro 68 de pouvoir parler, parler, aux noms des infirmières et des travaillants de notre système de santé dans cette province, et d'avoir l'occasion de pouvoir me présenter et de dire au gouvernement ce que les infirmières et les travaillants de notre système de santé ont à dire sur la loi 68.
C'est incroyable, c'est incroyable, ce que ce gouvernement-ci et prêt à faire aux infirmières. Ils disent: On vous aime! Vous êtes intégrales au système, vous êtes intégrales au système, on vous aime si tant, mais on est prêt, on est prêt à passer une loi qui va vous ôter tous vos droits, tous vos droits, dans cette province. Une loi 68 qui dit que le ministre des finances lui-même, et le ministre de justice vont vous dire qu'est-ce qui doit être votre
contrat. Le ministre, le chef des conservateurs dans la maison, lui, il dit: Bien non, ça va pas changer le processus, bien non, faudra encore aller à la table, faudra encore avoir des négociations, faudra tout faire ça, et bien, si à la fin de la journée, s'il y a encore quelque chose qu'on ne peut avoir, qu'on ne peut pas être d'accord dessus, bien non, c'est le cabinet qui va le décider. Bien non, je ne peux pas voir pourquoi personne dirait que ça va finir le système!
M. le président, six mois donnerait l'occasion à ce gouvernement-ci de retourner chez eux, à chaque circonscription qu'ils ont, et d'aller parler à leurs infirmières, et leurs personnes qui travaillent le système de santé et dire, pourquoi qu'ils pensent que la loi 68 est acceptable. C'est le ministre des finances et le ministre de la justice qui vous a dit aux infirmières: On n'a pas de confiance dans vous! S'il y a une grève dans cette province, et puis quelque chose se passe, un accident, si quelqu'un tombe malade, que vous allez vous assoir là, que vous allez être là à l'hôpital, avec vos dépliants, et vous allez dire: En grève, on ne va pas assister aux personnes qui meurent, qui meurent devant nous. Quelle chose terrible, quelle chose terrible, qu'un gouvernement aurait même l'audacité, l'audacité de présenter dans cette chambre.
Si ce n'est pas un affront, grand assez, là ils disent que la décision du cabinet ne peut pas être questionné. Questionné est le mot qu'ils disent dedans, pas juste reviser, mais la court, la court à travers de cette province, à travers de ce pays n'a pas même le droit de questionner la décision finale du cabinet de cette province. Imagine, imagine. En même temps, le ministre de la santé et le ministre des finances, ils vous disent aux infirmières: Écoute, c'est la meilleure offre qu'on peut vous faire. Bien tient, vous voyez les dépliants qu'on a mis dans les papiers, cinq mille piastres par dépliant, et ça dit, vous le voyez vous-même, ça dit que c'est "A Fair Offer for Nurses." On le voit tous, c'est pas en français alors je le dis en anglais, mais ça dit "Fair offer for nurses" et puis ils sont en train de dire à la média, à tous les journaux de la Nouvelle-Écosse, c'est la meilleure offre, c'est la meilleure offre qu'on peut présenter aux infirmières et les infirmières doivent être contents avec ça.
Si c'est ça le cas, monsieur le président, c'est très simple, six mois, ils auraient six mois de pouvoir aller et décider si c'est vrai que It's a fair offer, c'est la meilleure offre qu'ils peuvent faire qu'ils ont pas plus d'argent, que les infirmières et les travaillants dans le système de la santé doivent être contents avec ça. C'est très simple, ils ont juste à suivre le processus et aller avec les infirmières s'assoir et puis aller à binding arbitration. Là, ça serait décidé si l'offre présenté par ce gouvernement est la meilleure offre possible. Si, si l'arbitrator lui-même décide que le gouvernement n'a plus d'autre argent à employer sur le système pour les infirmières, monsieur le président, comme j'ai dit, ils ont même été jusqu'à dire que si une infirmière, ou un travailleur du système de santé allait en grève, ou ne se présentait pas pour travailler, qu'ils allaient les charger deux milles dollars la première journée et cinq cents dollars pour chaque journée après ça.
Comme j'ai dit, le chef du parti conservateur, l'a dit lui-même aujourd'hui à la presse, que la loi 68 vient du Nouveau-Brunswick, que de là qu'ils l'ont prit. Comme je l'ai déjà présenté en anglais, la loi du Nouveau-Brunswick dit que eux, s'il y a un employé, une infirmière ou un employé du système de santé qui ne se présentent pas, ou s'ils se présentent en grève, là, ils vont les charger cent dollars par jour. Cent dollars au Nouveau-Brunswick, deux milles ici en Nouvelle-Écosse. Plus important que ça, monsieur le président, ce qui me trouble le plus aujourd'hui, comme on a dit, je ne pense pas qu'il y a quelqu'un dans la province qui voudrait dire que la loi 68 n'est pas une loi très importante. C'est pas une loi où il faut faire très attention avec comment on va traiter la loi-même et ce que les effets conséquents seront.
Mais de voir aujourd'hui, que notre chef d'état, le premier ministre de la Nouvelle-Écosse, le chef du parti conservateur ne s'est même pas présenté aujourd'hui pour parler à propos de la loi 68. Incroyable qu'on attend tout ce temps-ci . . .
HON. NEIL LEBLANC: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Just for your edification, the member opposite is again stating that a member was absent from the House today. He knows very well that is unparliamentary and that he should not be doing that. I would bring that to your attention. (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Richmond knows full well that he is not to bring note to the fact that a member is present or absent from the House. I would ask him to refrain from those comments.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Obviously (Interruptions) Order, please. The honourable member for Glace Bay will, please, bring himself to order. The honourable member for Richmond, obviously his comments were made in French which I don't understand. I would ask the honourable member if he would please not make reference to the fact of members' presence or absence.
The honourable member for Richmond has the floor.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I guess what my colleague, the member for Glace Bay, is raising is that clearly you did not understand what was being said but you did take the interpretation from your colleague and then issued a warning to me without knowing, yourself, what was said. I am not challenging the Speaker in any way, I think in all fairness it is important that we proceed with caution.
Mr. Speaker, what I said, in French, que le premier ministre ne s'est pas présenté sur la loi 68, is what I said in English, that the Premier of this province has yet to speak on Bill No. 68. I said he has yet to speak. If the Minister of Finance wants to go further and indicate that the Premier was not here today, he is free to do that. (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I think we have spent enough time on that. I would ask the honourable member for Richmond to please bring his comments back to the hoist amendment that is before the House at this time. (Interruptions)
The honourable member for Richmond has the floor.
MR. SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, as I said, I would have known that what the Minister of Finance has declared unparliamentary I would never have done that, which is why I said the Premier has yet to speak on this bill, and we have yet to see him speak on this bill, when I referred to him as Snuffelupagus. If I were to say that in French, c'est que le premier ministre de cette province, ne s'est pas encore présenté sur la loi 68 et les gens de la province se demandent où est le premier ministre. Et pour les infirmières, ils ont meilleure chance de voir Snuffelupagus, que voir le premier ministre de cette province sur la loi 68.
[3:00 a.m.]
So I just wanted to provide the direct translation, Mr. Speaker, just for your own information.Comme j'ai dit, monsieur le président, comme j'ai dit, où le ministre des finances s'est choqué, il a voulu se mettre debout pour parler, et bien, il dit qu'il ne se choque jamais, bien c'est pas bien sur qu'il dit qu'il ne se choque jamais, mais j'esperait que lui peut se présenter dans cette maison, qu'il peut vous garder, vous, les infirmières dans cette province, et travaillants du système de santé, et vous dire lui-même qu'il n'y a plus d'argent, qu'il n'y a pas une cent de plus. J'aimerais qu'il pourrait se lever, et d'aller devant vous, les infirmières, et de vous dire qu'il n'y a plus d'argent. C'est lui-même qui le sait, il a les livres. C'est lui qui a le livre de chèques.
And in English, he is the one who controls the books, he has the chequebook for this province, he knows the state of our finances. Pour lui de se présenter dans cette maison et de dire à tous les infirmières qu'il n'y a plus d'argent et cette fois-ci je vais le dire, qu'il n'y a plus d'argent, parce que je vous ai dit qu'il n'y avait plus d'argent l'année passée, pour le budget d'éducation, mais là j'en ai trouvé. Je vous ai dit encore cette année qu'il n'y avait plus d'argent pour le budget d'éducation et j'en ai encore trouvé, mais cette fois-ci, la troisième fois, là c'est bien sérieux. Il n'y a plus d'argent, il n'y a plus d'argent, ne me demandez plus, il n'y en a plus!
Six mois lui donnera l'occasion de vérifier ses livres, et de vouloir présenter devant nous, dans cette chambre, aux gens de la Nouvelle-Écosse, et de nous dire si vraiment, c'est vrai qu'il n'y a plus d'argent.
To say in this province that he is prepared to risk nurses leaving this province because he doesn't have a cent left and that he is willing to stand behind, and if nurses leave in exodus, and still be able to say, I really didn't have any money, but we know in two years he is going to give us an income tax break based on the money that he is taking from us today.
M. le président, on voit chaque jour comment ce gouvernement-ci est déterminé d'attaquer les employés de cette province.
Mr. Speaker, even in today's, being the hour that it is, 3:00 o'clock in the morning, we are still debating in this Chamber, I shouldn't say still debating we have just begun.The government decided to bring us in at midnight. Even in the editorial today says, Dr. Hammer's House call, those are their words, it says, "But the government, absurdly, argues that its bill doesn't drastically curtail labour rights since bargaining is allowed to continue. In name, yes. But hog-tied unions have little to bargain with. And cabinet has the power to impose contracts when it is satisfied the parties are deadlocked. Health workers are entitled to a fairer process."
Mr. Speaker, you see, six months would give them the chance to review the fact that this failed. Your PR scam was just that, it was a scam and it didn't work. You tried to convince Nova Scotians to turn against nurses; your tried to convince them that Bill No. 68 wasn't really taking away their bargaining rights and was a good bill. Do you know what? It hasn't worked. That $5,000 you spent on each one of these ads could have been spent on a nurse here in this province, to keep that nurse from leaving this province and not be wasted on political PR by this Tory Government.
Mr. Speaker, if you want to see how serious this is, we all know, and I don't think anyone disputes how hard-working nurses are, I think even the Tory members will admit that, I can't think of any of them standing here and saying they don't think our nurses work hard in this province, and our health care workers are overworked and hard-working. To see, at 3:00 a.m. in the morning, after the shifts they have put in that they are sitting here in this gallery trying to emphasize to the government how wrong-headed Bill No. 68 is, they are still here, and I would guess they are probably going to be here throughout the night and more tomorrow, to try to show this government.Why are they turning their backs on the nurses of this province? Why are they passing legislation to prevent something which hasn't even happened yet, and in all likelihood may not even have to happen, if this government treats them in a fair way?
Mr. Speaker, six months would give them the chance to be able to look at the nurses and to say, I am sorry. I would expect the Premier himself, one would hope, he hasn't spoken on this bill yet, but I hope when he speaks that he says I, the Premier, who promised you strong leadership and a clear course am hereby announcing that I am withdrawing Bill No. 68 from this session and I want to apologize to each and every nurse and health care worker
in this province who we have offended and we are sorry and we are going to deal with you in a humane way, in a fair way and treat you as professionals.
I highly doubt that will happen. I hope he proves me wrong, but that is what he should say because in this bill, you know yourself, Mr. Speaker, the Tories say, well you know, it is not that bad. They can do the collective bargaining process, they can do negotiations and everything, but if there is something at the end of the day, a clause or one little provision they can't agree on, then Cabinet will come in and make the decision. That is offensive enough. That is unprecedented to see that, but that is not what is in the bill. The bill clearly states that the Cabinet will have the authority to impose either the provision of a collective agreement or a collective agreement itself. Imagine. So you can spend three months bargaining. You can spend a year bargaining and maybe there are two little things you can't reach an agreement on and the Tory Government under Bill No. 68 can say, well, no agreement, we are giving you a whole new agreement other than what you have been negotiating on.
That is what is in there, Mr. Speaker, and maybe the backbenchers don't know that. That is entirely possible and six months would give the backbenchers a chance to see what Bill No. 68 does. I really don't believe that members - like the member for Halifax Bedford Basin - really know what is in here and that is, in all honesty, no fault of her own. I don't even think when this bill was tabled the government members even saw it. In fact, I would bet money they didn't see it. When they walked in here today we all saw the Pages handing them all an envelope, an envelope that probably came from P & P to tell them what their talking points were and to tell them what to say and to tell them how to justify this. I would submit that some of the members over there have yet to even go through Bill No. 68. Six months would give them the chance to do that.
We saw yesterday, in the middle of Question Period, that once again, the Pages had the little notes for the backbenchers, the talking points. Be good little boys and girls, don't say anything here, you are going to see how upset the nurses are but at the end of the day we are going to trick Nova Scotians. We are going to pull the wool over their eyes. We have already spent money on these ad campaigns. Now we are going to tell them, no, if there is a little area of dispute Cabinet can come in and decide there but, you know, pay no attention to the fact that in the bill Cabinet can make an entire collective agreement on its own. That is why it is important to have an amendment such as the amendment that has been put forward on this floor to give this government six months.
It was interesting because the Government House Leader said, the hours are 12:01 a.m. to 11:59 p.m. Monday's hours will be 12:01 a.m. to 11:59 p.m. Mr. Speaker, on the Barrington bill, on other pieces of legislation and on Bill No. 68, the minister can say today we are going to sit 24 hours right through. Our caucus will be here. We will all be here. We will do our best to speak on behalf of Nova Scotians.
Mr. Speaker, the other thing I want to point out, why the importance of a six months' hoist? The thing I want to point out on behalf of our caucus is that in our debates here we have kept focus on the government. I am not going to spend my time standing here to criticize the NDP. Their Leader will continually stand up and will continue to refer to previous administrations, giving this government an excuse to justify what they are doing. We will not let the government off the hook. We will continue to represent Nova Scotians. Nurses aren't concerned about what happened 10 years ago or 5 years ago, they are concerned about the fact that today Bill No. 68 threatens to take away their collective bargaining rights in this province. That is the issue. It is not the issue of what the NDP will take us down and I won't speak any more on them. We will continue to be focused and Nova Scotians will see how misguided they are, but we will continue to be focused.
We will continue to represent the workers as much as we can, not only the nurses and not only the health care workers, Mr. Speaker, Bill No. 68 affects each and every Nova Scotian here. Anyone in this Chamber who doesn't realize that this impacts every single one of us is, once again, is an example of how this government has no idea what the impact of this legislation is and why a six months amendment would give them the opportunity, especially the backbenchers, the member for Halifax Bedford Basin, the member for Dartmouth South, the member for Cape Breton North, to go back and to be able to stand in their constituencies and say, I think this is great legislation. I agree when the Minister of Health said that he could not trust nurses enough in the case of a strike to provide essential emergency nurses. I agreed with that statement because, by sitting there silently, it is approval for what has been said. It is approval of the fact that their own Leader, their own Premier, has even yet to speak on Bill No. 68. I continue my challenge to him to stand in this House, to take his place now and to be able to speak on Bill No. 68 and to say why he thinks this government is doing the right thing.
Mr. Speaker, I would go so far today as to say - and I will let the Premier prove me wrong on this - I would stand in my place today and say that the Premier of the Province of Nova Scotia does not even know what is in Bill No. 68 and has not seen it himself. I will go so far as to say that. I challenge him to stand here and prove me wrong because, as I said before, we know who is running this government and who is running this province; it is the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Justice and the Government House Leader, nobody else. That is who is running this, not the Premier of this province. He is the one wearing it, because he is the one who said he would give us Strong Leadership . . . . a clear course. Six months would give him an opportunity to go back and try to work, to restore his image as a good country doctor, not the image of a hardened politician who is sticking it to nurses.
If that is not offensive enough, as I mentioned all the things that were offensive in this, there should be no other person in this province to better understand how valued and hard-working the nurses of this province are than the Premier, himself, a doctor, a man who has worked with these nurses throughout his entire career, and with these health care
professionals. Yet he is the one leading the government that is trying to bring forward Bill No. 68 which takes away the collective bargaining rights of nurses.
As I said before, we do not stand here in Opposition just to criticize, just to say bad, bad, bad and anything you bring forward we are going to say is bad. There was a way here for them to back up their statements. There was a way for them to say, we fear a strike, go through all their concerns and then say at the end of the day, we feel this is a fair deal and we believe that every Nova Scotian will agree with us; more importantly, we believe that any fair-minded arbitrator will agree with us. Had they said that, we would know, Mr. Speaker, whether this government is sincere when it tells the nurses today, we have no more money, this is the best deal you could expect and any fair and reasonable person would suggest that our deal that we have put to you is the best that you should expect to get.
Six months will give them the opportunity to revise their strategy and if the Minister of Health - how ironic, Mr. Speaker, I would welcome the Minister of Health to come to my riding and bring his ads about bed closures, long delays in emergency rooms, and to come down to the Strait and tell us why all of a sudden it was fine for us for six months, yet the threat of a nurses' strike now brings forward Bill No. 68. Why didn't we get that same concern from that minister in January when our emergency room closed?
Why has he allowed the health and safety of my constituents, the constituents of the minister from Inverness, the constituents of the member for Guysborough-Port Hawkesbury, the constituents of the member for Antigonish, why has he allowed their health and safety to be put at risk for six months yet that was okay? Yet now, a nurses' strike, they say they have to bring in Bill No. 68 and he says there is no better time to act. He says they are acting decisively and they are acting fairly. I agree it is decisively, but fairly, they ain't going to convince anyone of that and they certainly won't convince the residents in my area who today, as I stand here, we still do not have a doctor at the emergency room at the Strait-Richmond Hospital.
[3:15 a.m.]
When we talk about the six months amendment, one can only hope in that six months that they can do better than they have done in the last six months for my constituency and for the residents of my area for health and safety. How ironic to say how concerned they are about nurses. Well, go tell that to the nurses at the Strait-Richmond Hospital, who have been trying their best to work at a hospital with people coming in for emergencies and having to tell them, I am sorry, there is no doctor here, you have to go somewhere else. As if they are not hard-working enough, they have this additional stress placed on them each and every day with a minister who answered again today, I am hopeful. That is same answer he gave me in January, the same answer he gave me in February, March, April, May, and now, in June. Well, God help us all if this hope that he has is as successful for this province, for the nurses
and for the health care workers and for each and every Nova Scotian as it has been for the people of the Strait area.
At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, Bill No. 68 is bad legislation and it is unsupportable. As it is I am not even sure if any amendments would be able to save this bill, but clearly we can only hope the government will have the fortitude and . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The honourable member's time has expired.
The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre.
MR. FRANK CORBETT: Mr. Speaker, it gives me pleasure to speak on the hoist. It doesn't give me great pleasure to speak on Bill No. 68, but I am going to speak on the hoist. There has been much said since we have entered this Chamber at midnight about the lateness of the hour and I think around Bill No. 68 and the hoist about Bill No. 68 and what that very vital six months would do for that sober second thought. But I think of the hour and I think of the many health care workers who are manning the various hospitals, emergency rooms and homes for special care as we speak in this room tonight, and I think of what they are doing, how they are staying on the job, how they are caring for our loved ones and the loved ones of other Nova Scotians, and to have their own government who probably some of these workers voted for believing that the good doctor from Pictou County was going to treat them fairly, well, Mr. Speaker, those people were mistreated by this government.
Those people, and some of them may have even supported this government, and I would suspect that the next time this government goes to the polls, I don't think they can expect any kind of support from any health care worker whether it be from Yarmouth, or Glace Bay, or anywhere in between, because the reason we want a six months' hoist in this bill is to allow the government to really look and try, if you will, to digest this bill and see what is in there because it is using the big hammer here, and why are they using it? Why would this government do it?
Let's look at something, let's look in the context of the workers who recently got a tentative agreement through the mediator, Mr. Outhouse. Mr. Speaker, what is baffling about that is this government knows full well that those talks are going on and I am quite sure they also knew full well that they were moving forward. They also knew that there was a deadline on those talks. They knew there was a deadline on those talks, but this government wouldn't give those workers that respect and wait for that deadline to end to see what the response was. No, this government thought - and I can only think in a perverse-type way - that if we do this we are going to seem like we are expediting that tentative agreement.
Mr. Speaker, that was wrong on all accounts. What we had were earnest people trying to do the best with what they had, whether it is the people from the Capital Health District or whether it was the union people representing the workers in the Capital Health District,
or the mediator himself, working towards an agreement, but this government wouldn't allow that process another 12 hours to work itself out. No, what this government in its haste went and did was reconvene this House and introduce this bill, Bill No. 68, that is before us now, but we have in front of that, if you will, a hoist motion for six months and I am saying to the Minister of Health to allow this system to work.
Mr. Speaker, last Saturday members of the Nova Scotia Nurses' Union rejected, by approximately 75 per cent, the collective agreement put in front of them. As someone who was fortunate from time to time to represent workers in this province, not fortunate enough in the health care industry but in other areas, you know, when your membership rejects you by 75 per cent, they are sending you a strong message. They are telling you that this is not adequate, this will not do, and are we talking about splitting hairs here, are we talking about 5 per cent versus 4.5 per cent?
No, Mr. Speaker, these collective agreements, I believe at the root of them is more than just money. It is more than just time off. It is more than just having to know your schedule. It is more than just vacation periods. It is what every Nova Scotian wants, whether you are a health care worker, whether you pick up the garbage, whether you are a check-out person at Sobeys, whether you sell coffee at Tim Hortons, all you want from your employer is respect for the work that you do and this government has failed these workers. It is a very, very prime thing that workers want in and around the shop floor, respect. This government and this minister, in particular, doing what I would suspect is the Premier's dirty work here, will not show these nurses and the other health care providers the respect that they deserve as workers in Nova Scotia.
This is not a matter of who is paying the bills, Mr. Speaker, and I will get on to that a bit later, but it is about a minister who will go out in public and say to people, say to the media, if you will, well, I don't agree with their contingency plan, I don't trust them, is what you are saying, Mr. Minister. You are telling me that there were not provisions there. You said that in Question Period yesterday. That was totally wrong and you know that, Mr. Minister. There is a provision in the NSGEU collective agreement and you know that. You know there was a position on the table that would send any disputes to a 24 hour binding arbitration limit. You knew that, but you are not telling Nova Scotians that. You are not telling the workers that. So don't try to hoodwink us, Mr. Minister. You are not being open to us. You are not being open to the workers. You are not being open to the media. So, Mr. Minister, if you were in education, you would have failing grades all around. This minister and this government has not only failed these workers, they have failed Nova Scotians.
Where the proverbial buck stops is with the Premier, Mr. Speaker. The Premier, who was not answering questions today about this, the very Premier who brought us back here to this House to debate this draconian legislation, couldn't see fit to answer questions today.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I just want to remind the honourable member he is speaking to the six months' hoist and not the bill itself or the principles of the bill, or the bill before the House. The hoist amendment is before the House now so I would ask the honourable member to bring his comments back to the hoist amendment, please.
MR. CORBETT: With pleasure, Mr. Speaker. The erstwhile Minister of Health says concentrate. Well you know, Mr. Speaker, I think he should once in a while concentrate. We would give him six months to concentrate on this bill, to see how the process is going to develop. I mean, we saw the same government sit by and when talking about mediating the custodial staff of the school board here in Halifax, they dragged their feet on it when there was mediation there. This government then wants to just jump over all those steps before conciliation is even completed, indeed, in some instances, when there hasn't even been a strike vote taken yet. They want to use the big hammer here. This government is putting the fear in Nova Scotians of all these things that could happen. A six months' hoist would clear the way for that. It would allow all these bargaining units to bargain and try to get a collective agreement. Six months, six short months.
Now, Mr. Speaker, in six months' time, if this bill were to pass without this hoist motion, at what time does Cabinet come in and say okay, that's it, all bets are off, we are going to invoke an agreement. We don't know what that agreement is. Nobody knows what's on the table, what one party wants or the other party wants, or just what the Cabinet wants. So, one could assume then, if I am sitting on the management side of that table, I'm saying, well, look, they are really the ones with the money, the government has all the money, they are the ones who are going to pay the bill at the end of this, so let it go back, I'm not going to negotiate, I'm just going to sit there and let the clock run out and Cabinet is going to do my work for me because then I can go, as the CEO of a district health authority and say well you picked this number, you have to live with it. They are your numbers; but if they would give this bill a hoist for six months that would allow these parties to freely negotiate.
It is hard enough in this province, and we have talked about it many times, the disastrous shape the Trade Union Act is in this province. It is shameful when compared to other provinces, Mr. Speaker. But what they have done is they have taken what is primarily a bad Act and just kicked that out the window and made it worse. What they are telling us now is, look, it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter any more. We want to have an agreement that we need. It is not what is going to retain nurses in this province, that has nothing to do with this bill. If they would allow the six months' hoist it would be to the advantage of everybody because we could see how things would unfold.
Mr. Speaker, I had the occasion to meet with four nurses earlier yesterday. They told me something like 53 graduates from this year's class, this upcoming year at St. F.X. University, 53 in the nursing graduation program there had signed on to work outside of this province; 53 had signed to leave this province. Now if there are more than 53 in that class I bet they are looking to work outside this province, too, because this legislation does nothing
to entice these people to stay here. So maybe if we let cooler heads prevail and gave them six months maybe we could see some appropriate change. This government isn't willing to do that. This government is bent on forcing an agreement down the workers' throats. So how is that going to bring stability to the workplace? I would suggest to you if this bill isn't hoisted and if it becomes law, you are going to see massive resignations in this province and you are going to see an exodus of the health care workers of this province.
[3:30 a.m.]
I know too well, in my own family my young niece used to live next door. She worked casual work for three years within the Cape Breton Health Care Complex - three years. A dedicated young nurse who wanted to stay and live in Cape Breton, and where is she now? She left and spent about six months in North Carolina and she is now living in Portland, Maine, she and four others from her graduating class. Think about that because we are not only losing our youth here, what we are losing is the investment, the dollars Nova Scotians have invested in their education. They have been educated in these schools from Primary to Grade 12 and they went on to get their degrees in Nova Scotian universities, all subsidized by taxpayers. When the time comes to get money from that investment what do we do? We cast them aside, we get them to go and they end up working in North Carolina, Texas, Maine, Massachusetts and so on; we lose them. That is not wise planning, Mr. Speaker.
If this government would only take six months and do a de-cleansing or something and go and rejuvenate itself and find out the waywardness of its position, we would find that what they are doing here is morally wrong. Not only are we going to lose - as I said a few moments ago - the youngest and brightest, we are going to lose nurses from one end of the spectrum to the other. We are not talking about losing a new graduate only, we are talking about people in their late 40s and early 50s who are talking about going elsewhere.
I talked to another nurse today who is looking at options in Saudi Arabia. These aren't just figments of Frank Corbett's imagination, these are people telling you, real Nova Scotians. Many of these people probably didn't even vote Liberal, they may have voted for this government under the guise that life was going to be better for them but it isn't and it is not fair. It is not fair when you do not treat - and you are responsible, this government, you are the boss when the sun sets - your employees fairly.
What does this cause when we have this government causing people to work excessive overtime? We put a bill in front of this House to talk about excessive overtime and the Minister of Labour laughed at us. These are things that have to be protected. These are people working excessive overtime just to make ends meet. Don't you think they would want to be home with their families? Someone asked me coming here today, wouldn't you like to be home? Well certainly I would like to be home, but imagine the inconvenience to me - for
however long it takes to drag this bill down and have it defeated - is minuscule compared to the work these men and women have to do day in and day out. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: I know some of the members in the gallery may have come in late and maybe some didn't, but it is very unfair for the ones sitting here who want to listen and are being quiet for the other ones to be disruptive. The Rules of the House are that if you want to be in the gallery you sit and listen with no disruption. I would ask you please to abide by the rules; if not I will have to take other measures and I don't want to that because I know most people are here being quiet and wanting to listen. There are some who continue to disrupt the House and I ask you please not to do that.
MR. CORBETT: Mr. Speaker, that is part of the emotion. While the Rules of the House are the Rules of the House, and while I may from time to time disagree with the Rules
of the House that is part of the emotion of it.
Mr. Speaker, as you know, it is not always easy to keep them in check. I talked about the stress of working long hours. Everyone likes to portray - the Minister of Tourism and Culture does this in tourism advertisement, lays out this pristine, quaint province, and that is nice. In some ways that is an accurate picture. It is like taking the lid off a boiling pot, when you see it bubbling up inside what you see is that other surface. The idea that you have workers here who are highly-trained but being undervalued, that is what you have. The government has to be a government for everybody.
I have said many times, this government, while it has a majority of seats only got about 35 per cent of the popular vote. That should make a few alarms go off, about its own popularity. Yet, they take these large measures and they try to jam them through with their majority because they have more seats. The EMT strike less than a year and a half or so ago, they don't realize the human factor here. I don't know if you would call it heartlessness or just not wanting to put a human face on anything.
These are Nova Scotians who pay taxes, who buy groceries, who buy homes, who raise families, yet this government wants to punish them. This government is saying, look, you are an untrustworthy Nova Scotian . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I would remind the honourable member for Cape Breton Centre, again, that he is to bring his comments back to the hoist amendment that is before the House at this time.
The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre has the floor.
MR. CORBETT: Mr. Speaker, I was just going to take six months to do that. I didn't feel I was treading that far away, but your rule is your rule. You have the big seat.
Mr. Speaker, this bill, and one of the reasons I believe it should be hoisted for six months is because of its effect on many workers throughout this province. What we have had primarily in these Chambers the last few hours were workers represented by the Nova Scotia Nurses' Union and the Nova Scotia Government Employees Union, but a look through a document I received from the Department of Environment and Labour just yesterday shows collective agreements in the health care industry that are expiring or have expired are many, but it is not just these key two units here. The Cape Breton Health Care Complex has some of its employees represented by the Canadian Union of Public Employees. That has been expired since March 31st of this year; the Central Regional Health Board, CAW, has been expired since March 31st of this year; Northumberland Regional Health Board has been expired since March 31st of this year.
Mr. Speaker, this bill is affecting a lot of people from one end of this province to the other. I don't know if the government is really seeing the gravity of this bill. That is why I think six months would go a long way. I want to read from a document that is less than six months old, well, no, it is more than six months old, January 1, 1999. This is quoting a budget background, nursing shortage addressed, Department of Finance, the good Finance Minister. I will just quote a paragraph, "Just as the province embarked on a successful program to recruit and retain doctors, we will recruit and retain nurses."
AN HON. MEMBER: When was that dated?
MR. CORBETT: That was June 1, 1999. That is two years ago. That's a fairy tale. (Interruptions) Yes, Liberals - anyway, so six months would allow the Minister of Finance to bring some clarity to that and show us how he and his good friend, the Minister of Health are going to recruit and retain nurses for this province. They are not going to recruit and retain nurses for this province, Mr. Speaker, by this type of legislation. I would tell you, in six months time, with this type of legislation, you will see fewer nurses here, who will want to work here.
We talk about - and I have heard it today - that if nurses had accepted the collective agreement put in front of them, they would have been the highest paid nurses in Atlantic Canada. Now the workers, Mr. Speaker - and this doesn't take six months to figure it out - realize that their competition isn't New Brunswick, isn't P.E.I., isn't Newfoundland, and the minister knows that full well, that the real market place is nationally and internationally. I have laid out states that have been hiring Nova Scotia nurses, provinces that are hiring Nova Scotia nurses, indeed countries in the Gulf that are hiring Nova Scotia nurses. So this flies in the face of probably this government's own mentality, if you will.
The minister will tell us that we can't negotiate against the kind of monetary capacity of Alberta or Ontario, but it is the same government that runs us headlong into some kind of globalization from time to time and tells us we can compete on a world market. Well, we can't compete with our own provinces if you listen to him. So let's sit back and hoist this bill
for six months and see really where we are at. Can we compete within our own borders? This is not a case of getting someone a little po'd at this. This is a case of having your whole industry turned upside down if this government will not listen to them. Six months would allow some sober second thought, if you will, Mr. Speaker, to come into this process to try to allow the minister - the minister should probably come in and sit at the table. I know he had his spies, if you will, around the table at the NSNU negotiations. I don't know about the NSGEU, but NSNU sent an envoy over and from both sides of that table, I was told, that that fellow did more harm than good because he came in in the middle of a negotiating process, and he didn't know if he was punched or bored and then started firing questions around and almost derailed the stuff.
Mr. Speaker, that is what this government is doing. If it walked away for six months and allowed what is on the table being negotiated, let that process take place. The minister hasn't talked in any substantive way about why the nurses rejected the contract last Saturday, why there was such a resounding defeat. I talked to both parties and when I talked to them, the first thing they wanted to do was get back to the table. In talking to people around there,
the good side of this, the good side of such a sound rejection is now we are not looking at a 53/47 split and we are kind of wondering are there just a few little things wrong, we got a tweak here or a tweak there, no, it is obviously a large issue. It is usually one large issue. But, no, the minister couldn't wait for that group to get together later on this week or next. So if he would just sit and wait, give us six months, let these bright women and men hammer out their own collective agreement, negotiated without the infringement of having Big Brother over your shoulder. It is not too much to ask.
[3:45 a.m.]
I tell the minister that these workers haven't let you down. They have done everything by the book. I go back to the strike of 1975, Mr. Speaker. Nurses did go out, but you know what? They manned those hospitals, they stayed on the job, the ones who they said would stay there, stayed there. What was peculiar about that, too, as opposed to today, you had complexes, I know in my area, like New Waterford Consolidated Hospital but also the two hospitals that were then functioning in Glace Bay, and you had the Harbourview and the Northside General, all those facilities were what you would call full facilities. They had OB and they had outpatient, they had surgical, they had pediatrics and those nurses said, look, we are staying on the job. Do you know what? They stayed on the job for no money. They got strike pay and that was it. They went on and stayed on the job. That's the type of commitment of the women and men in the health care profession of this province, that's the type of dedication they have.
Mr. Speaker, that's what I think six months would allow us. This seems to be a bill put before us in haste. It has no real merit, if you will.
AN HON. MEMBER: What would six months do?
MR. CORBETT: Well, six months would certainly allow this government to bring some vision to it. The bill, itself, I think it would be an understatement to say that it is heavy-handed. I have heard talks that there are unions looking at sending this bill to the ILO to have it reviewed for its legality. Now, Mr. Speaker, that's pretty heady stuff. That is not something that a union or anybody affected by a large piece of legislation does lightly. I have never heard it done before, as bad as some of our labour laws are in this province.
Mr. Speaker, why wouldn't the government take six months and let a group like the ILO look at it and see about the fairness of the document, see if it would work. We always like to portray ourselves, and I mean Canadians, as a people who really respect human rights and human dignity and so on. So don't be afraid to go out to an international body to see if this is fair and if it treats people with the dignity or does it infringe on their human rights. That would be a novel approach and you could do that in six months.
I don't know, again, what the minister's urgency here is, Mr. Speaker. We are talking about a short hoist of six months, yet this government certainly sees wanting to mandate a collective agreement that would go beyond their mandate, so that they don't have any messy little problems with these trade unions again until their term is up.
AN HON. MEMBER; Silence them.
MR. CORBETT: Well that may very well be a fact but I think they would hear from these workers in a whole other way if they don't treat them fairly today and by imposing a collective agreement on them that they don't really wish to have is not the way of doing it.
If this government would sit back and give it the six months' hoist, which my Leader has put forward today, it would go a long way to solving these problems. We are quite a ways down the road now, and these people have been without a collective agreement for quite some time. If the difference was for them to get a good collective agreement in six months or to be forced to take one now through this legislation, I would say they would take the option of six months. That is just me talking, but the problem here is this government wants to fence these workers in. As I said earlier about the employer, there is no onus now on the employer to bargain in good faith. The various DHAs will just sit there and let the clock tick until Cabinet moves in and says here is your deal. It will do it to all the DHAs right across the province.
What is really interesting, too, is the minister has no problem granting six months or more before we see the budgets of the DHAs. Has anybody in this province seen those budgets? They should have been done some time ago, certainly before now. Nova Scotians haven't seen them. If he is thinking of maybe giving them six months, why not give this bill six months? What are these DHAs working on? If they don't have their budget, they are not supposed to be able to operate without an approved budget, so where is that coming from?
Mr. Speaker, maybe if we had the six months' hoist in effect, by the time the hoist motion was finished we would see the budgets for the various DHAs. That could be another novel approach I would suggest to the minister that he could look at and possibly do. But no, this government would rather put the heavy hand of what they say as a "there, there, now" approach. What is interesting is this same government, from time to time, says - and this was their red tape commission - we have to get out of the way of Nova Scotians, we have to allow Nova Scotians to do this and do that. Darn it, you know, if you let those pesky unions try to negotiate a fair collective agreement, oh no, that isn't democracy, that isn't, and we have to squash that.
Mr. Speaker, this government can't have it both ways. They can't talk about the red tape commission on one hand and freeing up Nova Scotians and giving them rights, while taking away rights from other Nova Scotians. It just doesn't work, the door has to swing both ways. It has been well over six months since we have seen the red tape commission. I think it was a make-work project for last summer for them, and I don't know what little project the Premier is going to send his band of merry men on this summer, but . . .
AN HON. MEMBER: Fire safety.
MR. CORBETT: Well, fire safety my colleague, the member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage, says, and that may very well be it. I am sorry to say I may be saddled with that lot.
Six months to help right a lot of wrongs in the health care system. I would think this government would welcome that. We know the largest portion of the provincial budget goes to health care, and wouldn't taking six months to help cure one of the biggest ailments of the health care system is its workforce. I would think that would be a bonus and I would think you could go a long way. If this minister would stand up, and he has that right to stand up and talk and say, look, we will agree to your hoist because we think it has merit and workers in this province, we respect them and we are going to see what we can accomplish in six months.
Mr. Speaker, that is not much to ask if you think overall what could be done in the health care system. (Interruption) You hear the prattling from the member, wherever he is from, outer space somewhere.
AN HON. MEMBER: Come on now, you know where I am from.
MR. CORBETT: No, I don't know if his parents know where he is from, from time to time, proverbially speaking, Mr. Speaker. He is going over there and he is saying a few words and he will not get up and debate the issue. He will sit there and he will walk in and out, but yet he will not participate in a meaningful way. He won't go up into the gallery.
Mr. Speaker, I find his little push and shove a bit juvenile to say the least. From time to time I wonder about the poor people he purports to represent because he doesn't do a very good job with the prattling back there and not getting up on his haunches and doing what he should be doing. No doubt, there are health care workers who live in his constituency and they would like to hear what he has to say about this bill, what a six months' hoist would be. He doesn't want to participate in that debate.
I want to go back, and much has been said about the minister and this, but, Mr. Speaker, I still believe the driving force behind this legislation is the Premier, plain and simple. He has a vision for health care and I can say he needs new glasses because this is not a vision enjoyed by most Nova Scotians, a vision of forcing collective agreements down the throats of workers. It is making a very untenable position in the workplace even more difficult. So I would ask the Premier if he would consent to the six months' hoist and let the people of Nova Scotia decide.
The Premier does not want to engage us in this debate, Mr. Speaker. I don't know where he is coming from. He has been quiet on it and I think he was quite vociferous, I guess you could say, yesterday in talking about what should be done. But when the rubber hits the road in this House he falls mute all of a sudden. So one can only assume that he is the driving force behind this bill, that he has a vision. Maybe if we had a hoist for six months he could spend six months cluing in all Nova Scotians to what his vision of health care is.
Mr. Speaker, I don't know how long it has been since the Premier has practised medicine in this province on a full-time daily basis. I wonder if he doesn't realize what is going on in the nursing homes, the homes for special care, and the various hospitals and so on throughout this province. Maybe, while the six months' hoist is in effect, it would give him the time to go and tour the province and find out what really the workers are doing. This bill, as I said earlier - we say the word nurses a lot here, but it is more than just nurses. It is everybody in the health care profession and if you look at Bill No. 68 it certainly would fall - anybody from whatever chain of command you want to come up with that is in a bargaining unit who works in a hospital in this province and certain other institutions. So maybe he should take this six months himself and go and tour the province and find out just what is on the minds of these nurses.
[4:00 a.m.]
I don't know if he has talked to those health care workers one-on-one, Mr. Speaker. If he took six months to do that, to talk to them. I know most times, when he entertains them in debate, they kind of buttonhole him, and it is not an even flow of information. I mean roll out your plan. If there is a plan, you have six months to roll it out and let all Nova Scotians see it. I think Nova Scotians are reasonable people. If they were allowed to see what plan this government and this Premier have for the health care system in this province, they would like
to know and if it was doable I am sure they would support him, but this game of peekaboo with the health care system in this province isn't working. It is getting worse.
You know, a document I read from earlier, and the Finance Minister talked about, a program to recruit and retain physicians, well, that is not working, Mr. Speaker. We still have doctor shortages right across this province and what is even more galling is that when the government talks about how it is recruiting doctors - and I know in the industrial Cape Breton area it is basically Dr. Naqvi who is doing all that, the chief of staff in that area - the provincial recruiter does very little. He does very little to help recruit and retain doctors in that area, so that is money coming out of that DHA, but we don't know how much is coming out of that DHA because we haven't seen the budget yet. Right, Mr. Minister? Do you have the budget for the Cape Breton area DHA?
AN HON. MEMBER: He has already signed off on it.
MR. CORBETT: Have you signed off on it? (Interruption) You think it is this week? Well, we may get it this week. I think we are going to keep you around then if we are going to see that.
Mr. Speaker, this bill, if hoisted for six months, would give us a marvellous opportunity to allow the workers real input, to allow Nova Scotians to see what the budgets for the DHAs are, to find out where we are, to articulate to the government, the workers could articulate to the government what issues are really important to them. Whether you work in a hospital, you work at Michelin Tire, you work at Sobeys - I was going to say Devco or Sysco, but you guys did that in, so we can't say those - those various jobs, it is all about quality of the workplace. This government is not accepting the fact that the quality of life on the floors of most of these hospitals, from a worker's perspective, is not very nice. They are being asked to do more with less and for less.
We have talked many times, Mr. Speaker, and we have read some introductions today about various health care providers who range I think from about 10 years, from the junior aspect, to 37, I think one had, and these people are committed to helping this province get ahead in rectifying and fixing what is wrong with the health care system, but for some unknown reason, and I don't even know if it is known to the Premier or his minister, they believe that this is going to go a long way in fixing a broken health care system, by forcing workers into a collective agreement that they don't necessarily agree with.
That is wrong-headed. So I believe our position with a six months' hoist would rectify that. It would allow this to open up. I mean I would challenge the minister to go with the Premier, we will say, start in Yarmouth and stop in Glace Bay and every health care location in between and talk to workers, talk to them about what they want. We are not talking, I believe, just in dollars and cents here where the government will say, again, we
can't pay Alberta dollars. Mr. Speaker, if somebody is working 80 to 90 hours a week, isn't that a problem? Doesn't that tell you that working that many hours, that's two jobs?
Now there goes the member for Preston. He is yabbering on again. He is sitting there like Jabba the Hut and he is not making any sense at all, per usual. He will not engage in a debate. He will not go and talk to health care providers, but he will sit there and do his little giggles and his little rants over there. He has very little respect for the workers upstairs, so I won't bother with him anymore. Mr. Speaker, maybe in six months that member could go and talk to them, instead of sitting back there giggling like a little schoolgirl, and could go and find out what is really going on with these workers. But he would rather sit there, get red-faced and be silly, than worry about what is going on in this province.
Mr. Speaker, maybe six months, but I doubt very much if six months would work on that member but (Interruptions) Isn't this great? Now before the collective agreement is finished, yahoos like that, yahoos like that are saying there is going to be a strike. You are responsible for some of the hysteria around health care. There is going to be a strike. These people are negotiating, they are not legislating. They are not going on strike, they want to negotiate. Don't you say they are going on strike, you don't know.
AN HON. MEMBER: You don't know that either.
MR. CORBETT: I know a heck of a lot more than you do, and I will stand up here and debate it.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. If the honourable members want to have an argument back and forth, or they want to screech, take it out in the parking lot, take it out of here, it is not going to happen in here.
The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre has the floor. You have about eight minutes.
MR. CORBETT: I will accept the parking lot challenge, Mr. Speaker, any day because . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. There are going to be some people with you out there I think.
MR. CORBETT: . . . that's right. You won't have to worry about three minute rounds, I'll tell you that much.
But, Mr. Speaker, what that member is blabbering on about is exactly what is wrong, this whole idea of not respecting the workers. When your conclusion is that the only thing that these workers want to do is strike, it is totally wrong. These people, that's the last thing
they want to do. What person in their right mind - and that probably answers the question about why he says what he says - would think that's your best option? Your best option is to sit down and bargain fairly and get a collective agreement. That's what they want; they don't want to be walking outside with a picket sign, they want to go and get paid a decent wage, work decent hours and help heal the sick in this province.
Silly me, I think that's a noble idea, but yet this government doesn't think that, Mr. Speaker. This government, in its wisdom, thinks the best thing to do is to use this big hammer it has in Bill No. 68 and squash any initiative these workers have. So that's why I think the hoist motion for six months on Bill No. 68 would go a long way, would let cooler heads prevail and would allow these workers to negotiate an unencumbered free collective agreement. Is that too much to ask? Have we no respect for these members or their leadership? It's democracy at work, Mr. Speaker.
Clearly, last Saturday the membership of the NSNU said, we are not happy. Clearly, that was the message. How did they arrive at that? Did they arrive at it by 4 people or 12 people locked in a room? No, they arrived at that by allowing each and every individual member in good standing in that union to vote. It wasn't decided by 12 people cloistered in a room on Hollis Street, deciding what is best for workers in this province. They democratically went out and said that this isn't good enough, this isn't going to make it work for us, and sent their leadership back for more.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, what did the leadership do? Did the leadership come running to government? No, they went running back to the AHO and said we want to talk, we want to get back to the table. We were given a clear message by our membership that this deal won't do it. To the AHO's good grace, they said, yes, let's get back to the table, let's talk. Does the government agree with that? Obviously not. Does the government agree with the position from Wednesday night, when they said we are going to bang out a mediated settlement, and they did? I would wonder after what this government pulled off around the mediation process, would they ever get a reputable person such as Mr. Outhouse back to do any more agreements for them.
One thing about this whole process is trust. You have to trust the people you are dealing with. When one party does something like this government does, like in the midst of mediation, pull away and say, look, we are calling the House back, no matter what the settlement is, or if there is a settlement or if there isn't a settlement. Where is the trust? Why would anybody in this process trust this government anymore?
Mr. Speaker, we have some choices in front of us here tonight. We can continue to debate Bill No. 68 for the next however long it takes, or we can seriously look at this hoist motion. Some may say to us, well, the hoist motion is primarily a pipe dream, you are not going to get it to pass, but I look over across the way and I see members over there. I am sure there is a member or two who have either spouses or family members who are in the health
care professions. Wouldn't you think that a sober six months' look at what is going on here would be much more beneficial? For all those people, it would calm the fears of the other people who are out there that I think this government is stirring up, or are saying, if they go on strike I can't get my chemo or I can't get my cardio stuff and what about the veterans and so on.
[4:15 a.m.]
The unions have answered all those questions. They put their contingency plan out here. They have done everything that was asked of them. The only weak link here has been the government's position. It took a heavy-handed position when it came to negotiations. The same government panicked with the EMTs, as they are panicking today. It is an unnecessary panic. Governments, if they weren't so gun-shy around collective bargaining - when the Premier's good friend, John Chisholm goes with a payloader and almost strikes a couple of workers that isn't a problem in this House. But let nurses and health care workers try to bargain a collective agreement and that is cause for great consternation from that group over there. Holy jumpin' what do you do?
So let's look at the six months, if they would just give this bill six months. If this government defeats this hoist motion, it tells you what they are all about. They are about beating down trade unions. They're not about helping workers in the workplace, it is about beating down trade unions and making sure that they balance their books on the backs of the workers of this province. That is fundamentally wrong, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The honourable member's time has expired.
The honourable member for Glace Bay.
MR. DAVID WILSON: Mr. Speaker, I don't know where to start. This is absolutely unbelievable that we are even here at this hour of the day, absolutely unbelievable why we are here and absolutely unbelievable the subject we are dealing with.
The amendment is to hoist this bill for six months and it might be a good idea if the Health Minister and the rest of his colleagues used that six month period, starting today, to pick up a copy of today's The Chronicle-Herald. The first thing you will find in The Chronicle-Herald is another $5,000 that has been spent on an ad to promote, put across the PR view of the government; so that is more money that possibly could have gone to nurses' increases. The ad that says, "The Health and Safety of Nova Scotians . . . A Responsible Act" that "The health and safety of Nova Scotians must be protected." according to the government.
You will also find in today's The Chronicle-Herald an editorial, and I am told, Mr. Speaker, that the Health Minister and seven of his PR flacks made a trip to the editorial board yesterday at The Chronicle-Herald, seven of them; seven along with the Health Minister, to try and put a positive spin on this bill.
AN HON. MEMBER: Did it work?
MR. WILSON: Well, Mr. Speaker, it didn't work. Now, I don't know how the Health Minister happened to get a very quick, convenient meeting with the editorial board at The Chronicle-Herald, I don't know what the connection would be over there with The Chronicle-Herald, perhaps he knows someone who used to work at The Chronicle-Herald, I am not sure. Anyway, it is possible he might be seated by someone who used to work at The Chronicle-Herald, but that special meeting was arranged so the Health Minister could try and put a spin on this bill.
The editorial board at The Chronicle-Herald decided to sum up that visit by the Health Minister and seven of his PR flacks by saying that, ". . . the government argues, absurdly, that its bill doesn't drastically curtail labour rights since bargaining is allowed to continue. In name, yes." But the bottom line is that the editorial board, after hearing the Health Minister and his seven cronies said that this is absurd, Mr. Minister, absolutely absurd that you are going through with this legislation.
If you take the same newspaper from today and you look further, you will find an article that is headlined "HEALTH CARE UNDER SIEGE" and two words that say, "'DRACONIAN,'" "'OUTRAGEOUS'".
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I would remind the honourable member for Glace Bay that he should be speaking on the hoist amendment and we will all have a chance to read the paper later on this morning, I am sure. The honourable member for Glace Bay will bring his comments back to the hoist amendment, please.
MR. WILSON: Mr. Speaker, six months will give the minister the time to read the paper and see what people are writing about he and his government today and read it, "Constitutional, labour experts lambaste Tories, say part of bill may be illegal."
AN HON. MEMBER: What's the Attorney General saying on that?
MR. WILSON: The Minister of Justice doesn't even know enough that a bill, that part of it could be unconstitutional, should be shoved through this Legislature. Shame on the Minister of Justice, Mr. Speaker, absolute shame on him. Perhaps it would be appropriate later on if we even took the designation QC away from the Minister of Justice, if he doesn't know that much about the justice system and about constitutional law that he would try and push this through the Legislature.
Mr. Speaker, the reason we will all stand here and talk about this bill and on the amendment, the six months that we are proposing you to take to rethink this option is because there is no other way, I don't know if it is parliamentary or not but the only way I know to sum up a bill like this is that it stinks. It absolutely stinks.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I am sure with his background, the honourable member for Glace Bay could choose his words a little more wisely. I'm sure he has a wide variety of words that he has used in his past life that he could make the same suggestion without using those types of words. I would ask the member to choose his words a little more carefully, please.
MR. WILSON: Mr. Speaker, I agree, but if you have a suggestion perhaps of what is parliamentary language for stinks I will use it, but I agree to withdraw that term right now.
Mr. Speaker, I am here because of a nurse; that is the reason I am here. My mother was a nurse. I have two sisters who are nurses and another sister who is an inhalation therapist, so I come from a family of nurses, and let me tell you I have been told many, many times what a nurse goes through and what a nurse does. Many, many times. I say it with a great deal of pride because my mother, the nurse, raised 10 children on a nurses' salary. After my father passed away, Mr. Speaker, my mother was left with still five small children to care for as a nurse and let me tell you - and the nurses who happen to be in the gallery today will identify with this - my mom missed a lot of personal time with her children because she was a nurse; a lot of personal time. My mum, the nurse, went to work through blizzards, not to pick up her paycheque but because she was a nurse, she was a professional, and she cared about what she did. She was so proud to be a nurse and my sisters are the same way.
Mr. Speaker, I am extremely proud of my family's history in the nursing profession, but I am absolutely ashamed to stand here today before a government that would propose the legislation that it is proposing for health care workers and nurses in this province, absolutely ashamed. I know that on the government side there are backbenchers who feel the same way as I do, I know it. I know some of the members of the Tory caucus do not agree with this bill. Most of the members of the Tory caucus have probably heard now from health care workers and nurses in their ridings and those health care workers and nurses in their ridings have been telling us the same things that they've been telling us, the exact same things. They do not agree with what is going on here today.
Mr. Speaker, earlier - and again this is another example of why the government should take six months and think this over - earlier yesterday in Question Period I asked the Minister of Health to explain to me why, when this government is always crying poor, as it is now, they don't have any money for nurses, then how is it that they can find the money when they really need it? Already my colleague, the member for Richmond, has explained tonight, or this morning rather, that indeed they found it, for instance in education. As I mentioned in Question Period, Statistics Canada showed that this government took in $51
million more than it spent last year - $51 million more - but they don't have any more money for nurses and health care workers in the province.
So what we did in Question Period yesterday, we tabled a response to a freedom of information request, that we received. You see in that freedom of information request, which has already been tabled in this House, you will see that under a recent contract re-negotiation, the senior aide to the Health Minister has received a rather sizable raise, again.
Mr. Speaker, that senior aide to the Health Minister now makes over $77,000 a year, plus change, and basically that senior aide's job is to hold the minister's hand when he is in trouble and tell him what to say. My question to the Minister of Health at the time, in Question Period, was how could he justify that to Nova Scotians and to nurses and to health care workers when he is saying that there is no money to give them a raise but he can top up a raise already given to his top advisor, a decent raise.
Mr. Speaker, I also pointed out at the time that the Minister of Health has the highest-paid deputy minister in the history of the province. The Minister of Health has an assistant deputy minister; the Minister of Health has an associate deputy minister; the Minister of Health has a chief information officer; and he has an executive assistant. And on top of that, a dedicated policy advisor. If you add that all up, it would come to a considerable amount of money, I am sure, to pay for all of those people but, again, there is no money for nurses, absolutely no more money for nurses, and the Finance Minister is the one who put that forward. He controls the purse strings in this province and passes it on to the Minister of Health.
Mr. Speaker, on top of Bill No. 68, that is almost as absurd as Bill No. 68 itself. What happens here, with Bill No. 68, and it has been proposed, in the amendment, to take six months to think about what incentive is there is for an employer to bargain with the unions. What is going to be left? What incentive is there for unions to sit down and negotiate, or for the employer to sit down and negotiate with the union if you put the hammer down? You put the hammer down on collective bargaining in this province. What you have said is that if you don't like it, then we will impose a contract for you.
It certainly did not, as others have pointed out, do anything along the lines of saying, okay, well, if we can't reach an agreement then we will go to binding arbitration which has been the case in other provinces, in other health care situations. That is not even considered. That wasn't a part of this deal, a part of this bill. What they have said is, if you don't like it, too bad, we will put the hammer down and you are going to take what we give you. If you don't like that, that is too bad.
Mr. Speaker, let me get back, before I continue on that subject, to the fact of what happens to nurses on a daily basis, within the hospitals and within the health care facilities in this province. I made reference to the fact that I come from a family that is involved in the
nursing profession. I have seen them come home from their shifts, practically dead on their feet, and still have to do whatever is required of them in their family life, looking after children and whatever else is required.
Mr. Speaker, I mention again, as well, one of my sisters, who is an intensive care unit nurse in Glace Bay, and I would say with no prejudice whatsoever, perhaps one of the best intensive care nurses you would ever find in this province. In order to become a better intensive care unit nurse, she had to travel to Halifax to take a special course. After having done that and returning to the intensive care unit, what was her reward? She gets paid 10 cents more an hour, or in her words, 10 cents more an hour to save somebody's life. That is exactly what she does. Sometimes it could be on a daily basis, you don't know, but if you are in an intensive care unit you want to be where the professionals are and where the best-trained people are because your life is at stake.
How do we reward them? How do we pay these people? How do we show respect to the nurses and other health care professionals who are involved in intensive care units and emergency wards and everyday nursing duties? Well, how this government treats them and how this government shows respect is by introducing bills like Bill No. 68 and ramming it through the Legislature regardless of what anyone says, what nurses are saying, what we are saying and full steam ahead, put the hammer down and never mind anybody else, forget about it.
[4:30 a.m.]
Mr. Speaker, what's happening, and it has been the case in many other instances, this government is not listening to the people of Nova Scotia. This government is not paying attention to health care professionals in this particular instance. We all know that nurses are highly-skilled professionals, as I mentioned, they undergo specialized training. I mentioned critical care, coronary care, there is ICU and many other specialities. Well, for an example, in the United States, critical care nurses are making on average about $7,000 U.S. more, that is in U.S. funds, per year because they are in high demand. In Washington State, for example, critical care nurses there make between $40 and $45 per hour. What this government does is attempt to take away any special unit pay from Nova Scotia nurses.
Again, I refer to my sister who is in a special unit and gets special unit pay, they were told they would be getting more, but in the second year of their contract - my sister explained it to me - that would disappear. Now, Mr. Speaker, my sister told me a lot more that she wanted to say to the government, but I can't say it right here in this Legislature because if stinks is unparliamentary, what my sister had to say about this bill and about this government is as unparliamentary as you could ever get. Let me tell you that. I won't repeat it but her words will stay with me for quite some time.
Mr. Speaker, this bill, Bill No. 68, and why the amendment has been moved for a six months' hoist, why we are here talking about it, and talking about nurses and health care professionals, but the bill that we are talking about is not one that supports or protects our health care workers. It doesn't even protect Nova Scotians for that matter. What this bill is about is pure and simple disrespect for Nova Scotians and health care professionals in this province.
Mr. Speaker, I have been here for almost two years and I don't think, not in my knowledge anyway, from previous governments, never before has a government such as this shown so little respect for an individual group of professionals, absolute disrespect. I think that the health care workers and the nurses in this province right now should be very, very proud of the way they are conducting themselves, very proud, because it is not nurses and it is not health care professionals who are abandoning their patients, even when things are coming down to the wire now. That has not been the case. There has never been any proof from the Health Minister that anybody's life was going to be put at risk, absolutely no proof of that whatsoever. The Minister of Health, himself, as my colleague, the member for Richmond said, didn't even know what the emergency plan was when this bill was introduced in the Legislature. It was the government that blinked first in this case.
Then, what they did after they blinked first was, they acted in haste. Now the Health Minister knows that, Mr. Speaker, and a lot of other people over on that side know that too, that this was done in haste. A mistake was made here. Then comes what was the ultimate slap in the face for nurses and health care professionals, they are blaming nurses and other
professionals in the health care industry for their own incompetency. That's what it is. This is an incompetent government that likes to blame it on other people. They have tried on other instances. They tried to blame it on the paramedics. They introduced back-to-work legislation and as draconian as that was, it pales by comparison to Bill No. 68.
Mr. Speaker, the true voice on health care issues is not being listened to. The true voice in this province on health care issues are nurses, professionals, people who are involved and the voice of the public is not being listened to in this case. Again, today's The Chronicle-Herald has a little feature in there called, "We Asked" and they went out and they interviewed nine people that they selected, the way we used to do it in the media, we selected people at random. The Minister of Education would know this, they used to call them streeters and they still do or we used to call them, and this was a long time ago and it is not politically correct now but we used to call them "The Man on the Street", but streeters anyway. So they select people at random. Nine people in today's The Chronicle-Herald and not one of the nine people that they talked to said that this was a good idea. As a matter of fact, all nine people said that this is the wrong thing to be doing.
So, obviously, the first lesson that should be learned from that by the Minister of Health is that all your money that you are spending on ads in trying to convince the public that this is the right thing, you are wasting the money. But another ad is there today. These
are people, ordinary, everyday Nova Scotians that they pick at random and say, is the government doing the right thing? Nope, they're not. Some of the quotes, Mr. Speaker, is that everybody should have the right to express their opinion and another person says that they are showing health care workers what they really feel about them and another person said they should have the right to strike as well as anybody else does in this province and another person went on to say that I was in the hospital and the nurses were definitely a great help. I think they should have the right to strike.
AN HON. MEMBER: Or binding arbitration, at least.
MR. WILSON: Or at least, yes, something like binding arbitration. Mr. Speaker, those are, as I said, everyday, ordinary Nova Scotians who were interviewed by The Chronicle-Herald and that is what they are telling this government. But as we have seen time and time and time again, this government doesn't listen to ordinary, everyday Nova Scotians.
Mr. Speaker, again, more thought for the six months that is being proposed to talk about this amendment for the government. More thought is the fact that one of the most outrageous facts in this whole matter is that we have a doctor as Premier, a person who above anyone else should understand the health care system and should understand the value of people like nurses and health care professionals. A doctor should understand that. A doctor relies on them, on a daily basis. My mother, the nurse, told me this on many occasions, doctors don't know everything, they are very intelligent people, very smart people, well-trained people, but they don't know everything. Sometimes they require the help of others, sometimes they require the help of nurses or lab technicians or X-ray technicians or inhalation therapists or whatever the case may be in a hospital. So the doctor would be part of a team, a health care team. That team, together, provides the best care that they possibly could provide for the patients.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I don't think that the doctor, in this case, has been provided with the right information from the rest of the team. As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, I don't even know if the doctor in this case knows anything about what is going on with the patient because the patient in this case would be the Nurses' Union, the health care system itself, and other professionals and their unions. The patient in this case would also be Nova Scotians at large; everyone is involved here.
What has happened in this case is that the doctor, part of the team, is getting some bad advice, some really bad advice. Now we know where he gets his advice. He doesn't get his advice from anybody over there who is sitting against the wall; he doesn't get his advice from even some of his Cabinet Ministers. He gets his advice from two or three key people in the Cabinet. He gets his advice from the Minister of Finance; he gets his advice from the Minister of Justice; and he gets his advice, certainly not from the member for Preston, he gets it from the Government House Leader.
If you take a look at two out of those three, you know, Mr. Speaker, where their training came from. Their training came from a guy by the name of John Buchanan and we all know where that leads us. It leads us to trouble with a capital T, because we know what he has done in the past.
Mr. Speaker, I would suggest in this case - and I firmly believe this and I know that some of the Tory caucus members will agree with me - that not everybody, including maybe the Premier in this case, agrees with the advice they were getting; maybe some of even the trio who advise him didn't agree that this was the right way to go. Maybe there was some nagging doubt on behalf of at least one person in that trio who said look, this may not be the right thing to do politically, this may not be the right thing. Never mind, I am not talking ethically or morally, because there is no question about that. Ethically and morally this is wrong, absolutely wrong. It smells. It doesn't stink, but it smells. What I am saying is for six months perhaps it would give the government the opportunity to take the smell off everything here, to take the edge off it, and they could review it.
What happens here, Mr. Speaker, is that the public is not buying it, nurses are not buying it, health care professionals are not buying it, and in this case some of the backbenchers, who know what it is like to think on their own, know that they don't like it either. Now this would be a great chance, a perfect opportunity for one of the promises in the blue book. This would be a great chance to have a free vote, absolutely. If there was a free vote on this issue, then some of the backbenchers would have that chance to say I am not listening to that trio who advises the Premier all the time, I don't agree with the Health Minister on this one, and what I am going to do on behalf of my constituents and on behalf of nurses and health care professionals in my riding is stand up whenever the day comes and I am going to vote against it. Vote against it. (Applause)
Mr. Speaker, it has been allowed before. It has been done before in this Legislature and I would suggest to the backbenchers who would do that that maybe you would get re-elected - maybe - but this, if not, is going to come back to haunt you. Remember the old saying, what goes around comes around? People will remember this for a very long time. This bill is nothing more than a campaign of intimidation and manipulation. It is the intimidation and the manipulation of nurses and health care workers and what is going to happen, what will come out of this is that the nurses and health care workers are not going to waiver; they will keep their values; they will keep their caring; they will keep their compassion; they will keep doing the job that they are going to do because they are professional people. I have seen it time after time after time.
[4:45 a.m.]
That is for the people who will stay in this province, Mr. Speaker. This province will lose nurses over this bill and that is a crying shame, not just a shame. This province will lose young nurses and young health care professionals who they will need in the future. This bill
will drive those people from this province. The Minister of Health has the nerve, the audacity to talk about a nursing and health care strategy for this province and he tables Bill No. 68. That is shameful, absolutely shameful.
Mr. Speaker, this is a government that has really, unbelievably so, gone to great lengths to do nothing but to disappoint Nova Scotians. You have alienated Nova Scotians at every turn on every issue. It is almost unbelievable, politically, to think that a government would be that stupid they would think that that is the way to go, when at every turn they are faced with the same thing, people against them, people up against them. The government has difficulty, you know, they can't distinguish between the notions of justice and truth and what hurts people. They have failed to act in good faith. They have failed to negotiate in good faith in this instance. They don't even negotiate in good faith anymore and, most of all, time after time, they have failed to be honest with Nova Scotians; absolutely a miserable failure when it comes to honesty with people in this province.
Mr. Speaker, the introduction of Bill No. 68 will go down in history as this government's darkest days, the darkest days of this government for what it has done. We know, and that government knows that the people of Nova Scotia support health care professionals and they support nurses. We know that. I have given you an example already, just a small sampling in The Chronicle-Herald that I mentioned today. If you took a larger sampling, you would see the same results, that the vast majority of people in this province, an overwhelming majority of people in this province support health care professionals and nurses and what they are going through right now.
If Nova Scotians stand behind, and they will and we will, nurses and health care professionals - and who can condemn them, Mr. Speaker, I don't know of anybody except this government who could possibly condemn what they do and say that they don't trust them. How can you condemn nurses, how can you condemn health care professionals, how can you condemn paramedics? You say to them that you don't trust them, or you don't trust their unions to sit down and use the collective bargaining process to reach an agreement, and then you have the audacity to say to them if you don't like it we will impose one for you. It simply does not make any sense. It does not make any sense whatsoever.
Mr. Speaker, this government has done this before and what they are doing here, they condemn nurses, they condemn health care professionals and somehow they try to separate those values that I mentioned, right, the values of caring and compassion and commitment from those professionals, but the public knows the difference. Everyone knows the difference, but they view this as a game. This is all a game to the government, nothing more than a game. It's a contest. It's not, this is not a contest. This is not a political game. This is not a matter of trying to trick the Opposition, as the Government House Leader did earlier today. It is not a matter of trying to pull a fast one over on us and trying to ram legislation through.
You know, amazingly so, Mr. Speaker, that was tried today, that was contemplated today that it was going to be done. At the last minute - and the government members know this over there - they decided we won't do that because politically that wouldn't look good. That wouldn't look good to ram this through in one day and they held onto the reins and said whoa, don't go there. We don't want to go there right now but they will put down the hammer pretty soon, we will get there. It didn't come today and we will wait for it and we know it will come. Not before we are heard on the subject, not before you hear from nurses, not before you hear from other health care professionals and not before you hear from the people of Nova Scotia.
As I mentioned, this is not a game, it is not a contest, this is about health care in this province, it is an issue of faith and respect and trust between an employer and an employee and if you don't have those ingredients you have absolutely nothing. Nothing left to bargain with. What has happened in this case is that the employee has kept their end of the bargain but the employer has not. What they have done is they have broken faith, it is gone, gone. I would suggest that from this day forward whether it be LPNs or nurses or lab technicians or whatever kind of health care professionals, they will continue to care for their patients, they will continue to look after their families and themselves; but never again should those professionals follow the dictates of a government that has bargained in bad faith. They can't negotiate in good faith, you should not listen to a Minister of Health who is practically bankrupt of ideas.
Is this the best that the Minister of Health could come up with? Is this it? Was it the Minister of Health or was it someone else who came up with this great idea to introduce Bill No. 68 the day after one collective bargaining process had a mediator appointed, reached a deal, reached an agreement and then the day after they bring this in. As I said earlier, what incentive, give me the incentive that is going to be there for the employees and their unions to sit down and negotiate when they know no matter what they negotiate at the end of the day, the government will impose an agreement on them whether they like it or not. Unbelievable, totally unbelievable.
What will happen is that in this Legislature, no matter how long it takes, no matter how long we have, no matter how long they use the little legislative tricks, the parliamentary tricks that they will pull out of their hat from time to time and try to put one over on us, no matter how many times that happens, we stand up on behalf of nurses and lab techs and health professionals. We know the true story about the health care system and we know that the workers in the health care system are the heart and soul of that system. No matter what this government does, you won't be able to take that heart and soul away from anybody in the health care system.
Mr. Speaker, again the reason we are here talking on the amendment for a six months' hoist is to give the government time to rethink, just in particular, this bill. (Applause) I certainly know that applause wasn't for me, but I guess it is great to have a good
laugh at five to five in the morning, especially when you're not even paying attention to what is going on. If that is the case, so be it. They will be judged later on by that, not only by nurses but by many others in this province. As I mentioned, this is about a lot more than Bill No. 68, because as the ads in the newspapers are saying and trying to get across to the public, that a health care strike, the risk is too great. They went on, as my colleague, the member for Richmond, said earlier, that a strike would dramatically impact every hospital, every clinic, every community across Nova Scotia. It would mean emergency room closures, early patient discharges, bed closures, increased waiting lists, and restriction of services to life and limb situations.
Mr. Speaker, the sad fact is that those things that the government decided to list in its ad that was in The Chronicle-Herald are the very things that exist in the health care industry today. The very things. People struggle every day with waiting lists. People struggle with bed closures, emergency room closures and many other things that affect the health care industry but this government hasn't done anything to cure those. They haven't done anything to try to help in those situations before bringing in Bill No. 68. It hasn't been there. Why would anybody believe for a minute that it is going to change because of Bill No. 68? That is not the purpose of Bill No. 68, to improve the health care industry. You are not going to improve the health care industry by imposing a settlement on nurses and health care professionals who are only asking, please let us sit down and negotiate; let's talk.
They have said, and I know I've heard from nurses and other professionals who have told me that it's there, it's in place, emergencies will be taken care of, the plan is in place, they have talked among themselves and they have said they will put people in there who have to deal with emergencies, nobody will be at risk in a hospital because nurses are on strike, because health care professionals are on strike, because they are professionals and they wouldn't let it happen. It's not what they do, it's not what they are about, and that's what they have been trying to get across to this government, but they are not listening.
Further in that ad in The Chronicle-Herald it went on to state that we - we, as in the government - simply can't afford a strike. We can't afford it. Mr. Speaker, we know that's not true; the government knows that's not true; the Minister of Finance knows that's not true; and the Premier, the head of this government, knows that's not true.
MR. MICHEL SAMSON: Has he spoken on this yet?
MR. WILSON: As my colleague, the member for Richmond, pointed out earlier, and is telling me right now, and a good point - the member for Richmond has nothing but good points when he gets up to speak, whether it be in French or in English - the member for Richmond advises me the Premier has yet to speak on this bill.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I don't know how I am going to get around this but I feel it is something that has to be said. I know that you are not allowed to refer to whether or not a member is in this House, I understand that and I have a great deal of respect for the Speaker's Chair, and the Speaker himself, but Nova Scotians have to know that the Premier of this province was in this city yesterday. The Premier of this province was in this very city while we spoke about Bill No. 68 in Question Period. The Premier of this province was not in Question Period yesterday.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Now the honourable member knows full well that he can't bring the attention of the House to whether a member was or was not or is or is not here. I would ask the honourable member for Glace Bay to bring his comments back to the hoist amendment, please.
MR. WILSON: Mr. Speaker, I will. Back to the amendment that has been put before us, to hoist the bill for six months. But again I wanted to reiterate that I want nurses and health care professionals in this province to know and the people of this province to know that the Premier of this province was in the metropolitan area today. He was here, yesterday. If the members who are saying it is not today, you are right, it was yesterday and I will correct myself. He was not out of town.
[5:00 a.m.]
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The honourable member for Glace Bay, I would ask you to bring your comments back to the hoist amendment that is before the House, if not I am going to have to call upon the next speaker.
The honourable member for Glace Bay has the floor.
MR. WILSON: Mr. Speaker, I will bring myself to the hoist amendment that we are talking about. It is at times like this that I slap myself on the wrist for not learning the French language at an earlier point in my life. Perhaps one would be well advised to take that up at this point in my life. It can be a very useful tool. But, seriously, I have tried to get my point across, I hope I have, the fact that this bill is offensive to a lot of people. It is offensive to health care workers; it is offensive to professionals and nurses in the industry; it is just totally offensive to anyone who looks at it, constitutional experts who are now looking at and will be picking over it.
They will be going through this with a fine-tooth comb, but they didn't have to look too far, just one quick glance at it yesterday showed constitutional experts in this province that there is a part of this bill where there are a lot of problems. The fact that this government would put that forward, perhaps even knowing that, leads one to believe that, again, this government is out of control in terms of what it is doing in this Legislature. The government
is not even sure of what it is putting in its legislation. They have no idea. Or, maybe they do. Maybe they do know. Maybe this is a conspiracy or a plot.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. It must be the hour. Again, I would ask the honourable member, if he is not going to bring his comments back to the hoist amendment, I am going to move on to the next speaker for the NDP.
The honourable member for Glace Bay has the floor.
MR. WILSON: Mr. Speaker, I don't know if you asked me to retract those words or not, I didn't hear. I certainly will, I can't believe I said them myself. It must be the lateness of the hour, it would have to be.
Mr. Speaker, how we feel right now, and we have only been here for about five hours, well, we were here earlier in the afternoon, but I would suggest that how we feel right now is not even close to a typical day for a nurse. (Applause) All I have to do is stand here and talk. I don't have to look after somebody who needs medication or just had a heart attack or is dying. I don't have to do that.
It is unbelievable. In six months' time, as this hoist amendment is proposing, perhaps the Minister of Health and the Cabinet or certain selected people out of this Cabinet or some of the caucus members, the Tory backbenchers who have nothing better to do during the summer, take six months, and I will tell you what, visit hospitals in this province. Pay a visit to them, and spend about 8 or 10 hours a day in a hospital with the nurses, with the professionals and see what they are talking about. If they did that over this six month period, perhaps they would have a better understanding of what we are talking about today and about what these people are going through. Perhaps that would finally open their eyes to what is going on here, and perhaps after those visits to the hospitals across this province, where it is absolutely incredible, some of the work that does go on in hospitals across this province.
I know in my constituency, in Glace Bay, the Glace Bay General Hospital is one of the finest hospitals you will find in this province. The professionals who work in it are the finest that you will ever find. If the Minister of Health, if the Premier, if other Cabinet colleagues would appoint a committee - not long ago they had the red tape task force, where the boys of summer went across the province, I can't for the life of me understand what they did, anyway, it was a task force - appoint a task force for six months, to travel across this province and see what health care workers are talking about, see what they are doing, take a first-hand look at it, and then come back here and tell this Legislature that this is the right kind of legislation to put through this House; then come back and tell this Legislature that it is a fair offer for nurses, that the offer made would move them from the lowest-paid to the highest-paid nurses in Atlantic Canada, and we believe that is fair.
Mr. Speaker, if that is the case, if this is a fair offer, and this has been suggested already this morning, I would ask the Health Minister, if it is that fair, then why wouldn't you be prepared to submit it to something like binding arbitration? It is a great offer, according to the government and the Health Minister, so any mediator or arbitrator or whatever worth his salt would simply say, I have made some easy money, because the government is asking me to take a look at a fair offer already, and I can't come up with anything more fair so I will just agree with that. Please cut me my cheque, I am going home.
AN HON. MEMBER: What are they afraid of?
MR. WILSON: What are you afraid of? Why be afraid to put that offer before an arbitrator, a mediator, why? If you believe in it that strongly, if it is that fair an offer, if you are sincere about this offer, why would you not put it before an arbitrator, a mediator, in this dispute? Why would you be afraid to do that?
Mr. Speaker, I will give you the answer, because you know it is not a fair offer. It is not reasonable. You know that any arbitrator or mediator worth his salt would take a look at that and say, you have got to be kidding. You have got to be kidding. You would have to put more money in it to make it a fair offer, which is exactly what the nurses and health care professionals in this province are asking you. But, again, back to the point, we don't have the money. We don't have any more money. We have lots more money, lots more money to pay for the minister's deputy ministers and his special advisers and his EAs, we have all sorts of money for that, pay them nice big salaries to give the minister advice. I am not saying anything against these professionals, I am not, in any way, shape or form.
I am sure, as we all know, anything that comes across the minister's desk has to be approved by the minister. If his advisers are advising him that this was the right way to go and this was the right thing to do, well, I think it might be time that he had a little chat with them. I don't believe for a minute that that is what they have advised him. As a matter of fact, I think they probably told him differently. We saw evidence of that yesterday at a bill briefing in the Red Room.
I usually have a pretty good read on people, from the expressions on their faces. Let me tell you something, the Deputy Minister of Health, today, at that bill briefing was having a pretty tough time trying to justify this bill.
AN HON. MEMBER: What about legal counsel?
MR. WILSON: So was the legal counsel for the Health Department. Certainly, that is not disparaging remarks against those people. As a matter of fact, that is sort of showing that these people are having a lot of trouble with this bill in the first place, and that they are professional enough and intelligent enough to know that this is a troublesome bill. This is
not, and I firmly believe this, that those professionals don't think, deep in their hearts, that this is where the government should be going in the health care industry or with this bill.
Mr. Speaker, if you had been there, you would have seen it in their faces. You would have heard it in their answers. We have some very loyal civil servants in this province, and when they believe in a cause, when they believe in what their government is doing, they will defend it, they will have the answers. But that was not the case yesterday.
AN HON. MEMBER: How many were there?
MR. WILSON: Six or seven, however many were there. Perhaps they haven't been convinced by the Minister of Health or the Minister of Finance or the Government House Leader or the Premier that this is the right thing to do. Perhaps they know that, indeed, this was the wrong thing to do, that we just shouldn't be going that way.
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, in the United States and other places - and that's why we have a problem with the fact that nurses and other health care professionals are leaving our province - they can get paid more and they know that in places like the United States and out West. That's a problem, that's a big problem for this government and for this Health Minister to tackle, but here was a start, it wasn't necessarily a solution but here was a chance to make a start and heal those wounds and make some progress on stopping that bleeding that's happening from our health care industry. Here was a chance. But instead of doing that, what the minister decided to do was pour salt on the wounds. That's what the minister decided to do.
This is a bill that, as I said before, is about this government's bottom line and if the government was really committed to the health and safety of Nova Scotians, for instance, okay, let me give you an example, from when we were here not too long ago. Take a bill, for instance, like the bill that the member for Dartmouth East introduced, the scooter bill, do you remember that? Take that bill, it was so fewer children would end up in emergency rooms. It was a bill that required helmets for children on scooters. This government wouldn't pass that bill. They didn't agree with it. Do you know why? It wasn't their idea. They didn't like the idea because it came from an Opposition caucus, but they will introduce it themselves eventually because they know it is the right thing to do. Tied into the health care industry, Mr. Speaker, tied into what we are talking about here, about why we should take six months and rethink Bill No. 68.
This is bad, bad legislation. It is not going to do anything for anybody. It is not going to show anybody anything except the incompetency of this government. We have said it before in many instances, this is government by disaster. Government by disaster. They have proven it time and time again. They react sometimes too quickly, they put the hammer down, in this case with nurses and health care professionals. Mr. Speaker, they are not doing this for the health and safety of Nova Scotians. There was absolutely no evidence - that's what
you would call a red herring - that the public was at risk, absolutely none. Bed closures, as I said, that had nothing to do with a potential strike.
The inability of this government to provide a package, to properly plan human resources, we have seen it time and time again, heaven forbid that this government provide a package that would encourage nurses to come to Nova Scotia; a package that would say, yes, we need more nurses; yes, we want our nurses to stay, there are not enough of them. Come up with a package like that, Mr. Speaker. Come up with ideas that will not see emergency departments close in areas such as Richmond for six months. Come up with a plan that you don't have to see emergency departments threatened in areas such as North Sydney, when you have to go at the last minute rounding up a doctor from Halifax to go down there. Come up with a plan that will take care of the health care industry in this province. That's what is needed from this government, not this legislation, not Bill No. 68. This bill is not what we are looking for as Nova Scotians, as professionals, as health care workers in this province.
[5:15 a.m.]
We need something better from this government and assume if they continue to fail to do that, to provide Nova Scotians with what they are asking for, this government will eventually pay the ultimate price. They will disappear, hopefully off the face of the Earth, never to be seen again, because people will remember for a very long time what is happening in the case of Bill No. 68, what is happening to the health care professionals and nurses in this province. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.
MR. KEVIN DEVEAUX: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, and a good morning to you.
MR. SPEAKER: Good morning.
MR. DEVEAUX: What is that old song from school? Good Morning, Good Morning, Good Morning To You. Well, the sun is coming up, it is 5:16 a.m. and I am glad to have an opportunity to get up and talk about this legislation, Bill No. 68. I remember asking the (Interruptions) Government House Leader.
AN HON. MEMBER: It is on the hoist.
MR. DEVEAUX: Yes, six months. Well, the Minister of Tourism, thank you for reminding me.
Mr. Speaker, I was asking the Government House Leader earlier - I guess it was yesterday - about the issue of when was the last time we sat for 24 hours. He recalls back to the Michelin Bill, in 1978 I believe was the last time. So it must be something about draconian labour legislation, that this government has a desire to ram it through as soon as possible and 24-hour sittings I guess is the way to do it. Well, I guess it is the style, that minister was there then, they did it then and they are doing it now.
I want to take us back a few more years before that. If we are going to talk about the six months that is necessary for us to have an opportunity to review this legislation, I think we need to look back at a very similar circumstance in which similar legislation was introduced, in similar circumstances with the same professionals, nurses and other health care workers, and look at how a delay in time in that case was able to ensure that our health care system was preserved at least to some extent, although we can see what happened to the Liberal Government of the day. I am talking about the 1975 nurses strike. I am going to refer fairly liberally if you don't mind, because this is directly with regard to the hoist. This is with regard to a very, almost eerily, similar circumstance in 1975 where the government had and did delay its legislation in order to ensure that a settlement could be reached. We moved this amendment because we believe that it is necessary for this government to do the same thing.
I will be referring to Chapter 4 of a book called "Strikes, Industrial Relations in Nova Scotia 1957-1987" and the fourth chapter is called "The Nurses Strike 1975." I want to take us for a few minutes to some of the issues as to why this situation today is so similar to 1975. I am going to table this, but I am going to refer to a couple of quotes from it. It says here, in the first page, "The major concern of the nurses was salaries. Their average monthly starting rate was $651 per month or $3.76 per hour, almost $300 less than the earnings of Ontario nurses. Nurses in Alberta and British Columbia were making even more." Now does that sound familiar? How the nurses in other parts of Canada were making more than the nurses here and how there were issues of parity and issues of our nurses not making as much as they were making in other parts of the country?
It goes on to say, on that same page, "The nurses' last contract provided for an 8 per cent increase in 1974 but with inflation that year running at 12.5 percent, they were already losing ground." We see that again today, that this is a 3 per cent inflation rate, even going higher I believe more recently; in Canada and Nova Scotia and in Halifax it is probably increasing at a greater rate. This government is proposing wage increases that are, in real dollars, not really providing any form of wage increase for nurses in this province, or other health care workers. It goes on to say, "There were continual nursing shortages brought about, in part, by what was being called the 'nurse drain' - nurses trained in Nova Scotia universities and hospitals were being actively recruited by hospitals in central and western Canada, which offered better salaries and benefits than anything they could get in their home province."
Again, doesn't that sound eerily like what is happening here today? You know we had this Minister of Health get up during Question Period and say to this House that we are creating all these new seats at the universities for nurses. Well, you know the irony is he is creating new nurses for North Carolina, for Texas, and now we even hear about Saudi Arabia, and Alberta, British Columbia, and Ontario, because these nurses that we are training here are finding work in other provinces. That is why we need six months in order for us to go back and take a look at whether this legislation is going to address the issues of a nursing shortage in this province, a nursing shortage which I say is very eerily like what created a strike in 1975 amongst nurses. The fourth similarity which I noted on Page 2, and there were other significant bargaining demands that nurses had as well, ". . . maintenance of staffing levels of care . . ." Now, doesn't that sound familiar to what we have trouble with today? ". . . recognition of professional attainment . . ." again, another issue that we have today, ". . . differentials for greater responsibility, and portability of benefits between the hospitals."
These are all issues that I have heard brought up amongst nurses over the last few years, Mr. Speaker, but wage was one of the important issues. I think what sort of tied it all together so eerily as to why this situation is so similar to 1975, the nurses went on strike on June 12, 1975, which would have been the same day, it would have been the 26th anniversary of that event that this government announced that they were calling this House back and introducing legislation. On June 13, 1975, the Liberal Government, the Gerald Regan Government of the day, introduced back-to-work legislation and almost to the day, 26 years later this government introduces draconian back-to-work legislation at the same time.
AN HON. MEMBER: Who was the Minister of Labour?
MR. DEVEAUX: I believe it was Walter Fitzgerald at the time. Mr. Speaker, putting all of these circumstances together really provides us with a very interesting juxtaposition between 1975 and a nurses strike and what has been happening in the last few days and weeks in Nova Scotia, and a government that is unable to address the problems in our health care system and tries to download them and tries to push them onto the nurses and health care professionals in our province.
It is almost exactly the same circumstances, the same time of year as 1975, Mr. Speaker, and by the end of my talk here today I will be able to point out that maybe the same political ramifications are going to occur for this government as occurred for Gerald Regan in 1978. I am sure the member for Hants West, the Government House Leader, can tell us exactly what impact the nurses strike may have had on him being elected in the Windsor area in 1978.
Mr. Speaker, what is important to remember here is that six months is necessary for us to talk about the health care system in this province, to talk about how we can improve our health care system and how the nurses and the health care professionals and workers in
our system are a vital component. They cannot be the scapegoats. They cannot be the ones on which our government tries to pin the blame on. They are the foundation on which our health care system will be built and yet this government continues to chisel away and chip away at their morale, at their desire to stay in this province, and that will only result in the destruction of our health care system, not the improvement of it. I know many members across the way have wives or spouses or partners who are in the nursing profession and they should know full well exactly the type of work these people do and exactly what it means to our health care system.
Mr. Speaker, I want to tap into a little more about the 1975 strike, just to talk a bit. On Page 81 of the text, and I will just quote from this, "The initial statements of the government emphasized the supposed threat to public safety and welfare posed by the strike. According to Premier Gerald Regan, "'It is important for the government to react to the strike because of the disruptions which would result from picket lines being set up around the hospital.' Health Minister William MacEachern said the government had been forced to act, faced with the walkout and the critical emergencies which would develop over the weekend. They had tried to achieve a 'reasonable, realistic and civilized . . .'"
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Just to remind the honourable member that there is a hoist amendment before the House, not the bill and not the history of the House but the hoist amendment. I would ask the honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage to bring his comments back to the hoist amendment that is presently before the House, please.
The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage has the floor.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Speaker, maybe I will go back and mention again the fact that what I said was that if you look at the history of what happened in 1975 and the fact that there was a delay at that time, it is a very good historic example of why we need a delay this time. I am asking the indulgence of the House to at least give me some opportunity to explain the history in order to understand why a hoist is needed right now. I appreciate the Speaker's comments, but I would also hope there is an opportunity for us to be able to build a foundation upon history. It is six months, Mr. Speaker, six months that is needed to talk about this.
Anyway, the point is that the Premier at the time, used idle threats of fear-mongering or public safety. The Health Minister at the time, William MacEachern, used the same threats, talking about the fact that they had made a reasonable, realistic and civilized negotiated approach to this process and at the same time we had a government that clearly was willing to bring in back-to-work legislation. It is all too eerily familiar.
Mr. Speaker, also at the same time Finance Minister Nicholson cautioned that it would be hard for the government to bear the increased wage costs, especially given that the nurses' contract would set the pattern for thousands of other hospital workers. Now, does that
sound familiar to our own Minister of Finance saying the exact same thing today? Twenty-six years almost to the day, we have a government making the exact same mistakes that were made by the Liberal Government under Gerald Regan in the mid-1970's. That's the problem.
Mr. Speaker, you have to learn by history or you will be condemned to repeat it, I think, is the old saying. That's what is important here because in the end, there are two lessons that can be learned and that is why we need six months to talk about this. There are two lessons to be learned with regard to the 1975 strike. First of all, that legislation was never passed because the Liberal Government of the day recognized that the people of Nova Scotia were very upset about this kind of draconian measure and were willing to stop it. The government of the day said that they wanted to ensure that they had something negotiated and they delayed the implementation and proclamation of the legislation.
That kind of delay of the House today, if we pass this hoist motion - give us six months for the health care system to negotiate a settlement and not have Cabinet impose one - would go a long way in building our health care system. Because in the end, in 1975, the nurses almost, if not, came close to getting parity with Ontario. It went a long way towards nurses in this province, stopped the nurse drain, nurses were willing to stay here, and they built a system that for years continued to be a good health care system until in the late 1980's, early 1990's it was again being chipped away by another government, Mr. Speaker.
The other obvious lesson to be learned from this, Mr. Speaker, is any government that attempts to legislate nurses back to work or to force or impose their understanding of a fair wage deal on nurses that are being stressed by wage problems and stressed by working conditions, will pay a political price at the polls. Maybe this government wants six months, through a hoist, to begin to think about exactly what they are doing here. From time to time you hear the gusto of some of the members across the way, when their mikes aren't on, saying we've got to move ahead, we've got to keep going, we can't turn back now. Well, those are the words of political fools.
Mr. Speaker, this is exactly the situation that happened in the 1970's and this can be the downfall of a government. (Interruption) Hey, fill your boots, I'll tell you, it's your choice, but let's be clear, that's why we need six months to talk about this. I remember just looking in The Chronicle-Herald today, when a big issue comes up, The Chronicle-Herald will do a streeter, where they ask 9 or 10 people. Sometimes there will be mixed results with regard to it, some will agree, some will not agree. In this case, all the people asked by The Chronicle-Herald said they thought this government was making an absolute mistake. That is why we need six months and that is why this government needs six months in order to ensure that it has an opportunity to listen to the people of Nova Scotia, to listen to the nurses, to listen to the health care professionals, the health care workers, the support staff so they can begin to hear that what they are doing is going to destroy our health care system.
Maybe they are blinded by that. Maybe they are getting bad advice, Mr. Speaker. Six months will given them an opportunity to listen to the people of Nova Scotia, to allow the health care system to negotiate a settlement so that the nurses and the health care professionals and health care workers will begin to believe that this system can be turned around, that it is not being forced upon them, that they are not having a gun held to their head, but that this system can work for them and that they can stay here, they can build a life here, they can retire here. That's all they want. They love Nova Scotia, they want to stay here, but this government continues to put roadblocks up to a better health care system, to nurses' ability to continue to serve and provide the professional care that they want in this province. Mr. Speaker, that is why we need six months for this government to see the error of its ways, to give an opportunity for nurses to negotiate a settlement and to give an opportunity for the people of Nova Scotia to again talk about our health care system and why the workers in our health care system are the foundation of why we need to provide them with the support they need and not provide them with roadblocks. That's the real problem here. That's why we need six months. That is why this government isn't learning from the 1975 strike. This is why this government will make the same political mistakes and they will pay the price at the polls.
[5:30 a.m.]
I want to take an opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to also talk about some of the issues around - I am not a nurse but . . .
MR. JOHN HOLM: You can tell.
MR. DEVEAUX: Thank you, the member for Sackville-Cobequid pointed out he could tell I am not a nurse. Well, Mr. Speaker, many of the other testimonies in the House today have talked about relatives who are nurses so I will add to that by saying my mother was a nurse, graduated from New Waterford General and my sister graduated from the Infirmary in the 1970's and they were committed to the profession of nursing. I was talking to a member, I introduced earlier, Carol Allen, who is on the negotiating committee and we were talking up in the gallery and we were sort of saying that it is almost a vocation, because you have to wonder why people go into this profession sometimes, given how they are treated by the government, given how they are treated in the workplace and the conditions they have to endure. It really is almost a vocation to want to do that work, to try to serve the people of Nova Scotia and the people of Canada.
Mr. Speaker, I have had some experiences with nurses and I wanted to sort of take a moment or two to talk about some of those. When I had an opportunity to be a worker's adviser, I represented a lot of nurses. I worked as their adviser, I represented injured workers who had workers' compensation claims and there were many nurses who came through our doors. That's what this hoist is all about, giving this government a six months opportunity to learn about the real stories of nurses, about what they have to endure, about their working
conditions and why we need to have a negotiated settlement that they have a democratic right to negotiate and to vote on.
These nurses that would come through our door mainly had one of two issues: bad backs or environmental illness. This is a province that has had a lot of both of those, given what type of workplace we have. It used to be, years ago, Mr. Speaker, that they had orderlies that would do a lot of the lifting in hospitals but because of cutbacks and changes those orderlies aren't there anymore. The nurses, and I can remember some of them were very petite people and they would come through the door and they were lifting 200 pound people, having to move them around in their beds, whether it be in a nursing home or an acute care facility or a hospital. We had serious situations of bad backs and these nurses would continue to go back to work, they would continue to want to return to work because they loved the profession, because they needed the money, because they wanted the things that their family wanted and for all those reasons and more, they would continue to go back to work with a bad back, a back that would continue to deteriorate over the years. I would see time after time women who would continue to try to return to work to make those attempts when it wasn't the best thing for them.
We had a system that was preventing them from being able to have a career without also damaging their backs, Mr. Speaker. I saw that. That's one of the working conditions that the nurses had to endure and still endure. Again, if we had six months through a hoist, maybe this government could have an opportunity to listen to the nurses, those ones who have back injuries, those ones who can talk about other working conditions, whether it is extremely long hours or being called in on their days off on a regular basis or forced overtime or maybe they're casual who aren't able to get full-time work, all of those and many other conditions are problems in our workplaces in the hospitals and problems for our nurses, they are problems for our health care workers and maybe six months will give an opportunity for this government to begin to address these.
The other group we would hear from were nurses with environmental illness. These people, they are in a very difficult situation. Many of them were at the Veterans' Memorial Building or some of the other buildings in what is now the QE II or what is affectionately known sometimes as the Queasy II, and then there were some at the new IWK-Grace complex. They had what we would call environmental illness, a disease that the Workers' Compensation Board refuses to recognize, that many doctors refuse to recognize. In fact, here is the irony, I remember times when there were those in the medical field and those in the sort of compensation field, whether it be workers' compensation or other areas, who would specifically say that environmental illness was nothing more than women over the age of 40 who are depressed and aren't happy with their lives, aren't happy with their profession, and they had contracted something which they considered a psychosomatic disorder.
I was shocked by that, they are basically saying that these women, these professionals were prone to this kind of illness because they weren't happy, because they weren't happy
with their lives. That is just an incredible accusation that says how much people in authority in this province really don't understand the nursing profession. Maybe that is why we need six months, to give people in authority, whether it be the Minister of Health, the Premier, the Minister of Transportation and Public Works, the Government House Leader, the backbenchers, the bureaucrats in the Department of Health or in the district health authorities an opportunity to learn about the real working conditions and not try to dismiss their illnesses, not try to dismiss their problems as psychosomatic, as depression, but really legitimately look at them as problems with the system.
The irony is, with the Veterans' Memorial building, it was a badly built building. Instead of trying to admit that and compensate the workers appropriately, they tried to blame the victim. That is the problem, not only with people with environmental illness but with our health care system generally. Blame the victims, and the victims in this case are the workers, who continually give 110 per cent, 120 per cent, 130 per cent in order to ensure our health care system can be held together.
This government continues to beat on them; continues to try to squish them under their boots in order to prevent them from actually getting what they deserve so their morale can improve, so that their working conditions can improve, and so that the people of Nova Scotia can again begin to believe they can have faith in our health care system. It starts with the workers, and that is why we need six months, for the workers of this province, for the nurses, for the health care professionals of this province, to talk to the government, for the government to, for once, listen to them and begin to build a system that will work for them.
Mr. Speaker, recently my wife and I had our second baby. We were in the hospital and one of the first things I ended up talking to the nurses about, there were two on that particular day just because of certain circumstances, but they were more than eager to talk about - this was at the IWK Health Care Centre - their working conditions, probably because they knew what I did, but also just generally. They are not happy. They talk about the fact that they are supposed to work four days on, four days off, but those four days off are rarely four days off, they are always being called back.
You have nurses who are not answering their phones for fear that they are being called back to work, when all they want is a break, when they have given so much and when it is their time off, they want their time off, and they are not being given those breaks, because we have such a shortage of nurses, because our health care system is, quite frankly, falling apart, and because this government has no plan and has no ability to address this other than to try to blame the nurses, blame the health care workers. That is why we need a hoist, because we need six months for this government to talk to the people of Nova Scotia and to begin to try and allow a negotiated settlement amongst the health care workers and the district health authorities. That is what we need.
It is that simple. If this government comes down with the heavy hammer or as the Herald said in its editorial today, Dr. Hammer, because he is using a big sledge hammer here, and he is going to destroy a lot with it. As I said, these were nurses who did a fantastic job in helping my wife and I with the birth. They were there. They do this on a daily basis. I can't imagine the type of pressures but also the joy of watching so many children being born, it must be an incredible experience.
Mr. Speaker, yet, we treat these people not with dignity but with disrespect. This government does not provide them with what they need, the tools, in order to ensure our health care system can survive. That is a problem. It is a problem that this government is unwilling to admit, let allow address. It is not just at the IWK, I remember on the campaign trail, talking and meeting with various nurses, and I still meet them and run into them, I have a lot of them who live in my riding. I mentioned Carol Allen earlier, there is Denise MacDonald - I don't know if she is still here. She isn't - another member of my riding who does a lot of work beyond the work that she does as a nurse.
I remember meeting one woman, Mr. Speaker, and again, she would probably want six months, she would want this hoist passed because she would want an opportunity to talk to this government about how this system is working for them. I remember running into her, and her husband was a padre or a minister in the Navy and she was an OR nurse, and they came from Ontario and she was talking about the conditions, that was two years ago, that was during the 1999 election - we had a very good conversation. Normally, everyone knows in here, on the doorstep you don't take very long, but in those certain cases maybe there is an opportunity to talk to people about their real stories and you take that extra time to talk to them and I did. It might also help that it was a rainy day and I needed to get out of the rain, but we had a really good conversation about OR nursing and about the problems in the nursing profession.
At the time I told her look, you know we don't have all the answers but we are going to work toward a plan that will get the health care system on its feet. I don't know how she voted in the end, but in the end a Tory Government was elected, a Tory Government, Mr. Speaker, that, you know, needs six months . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Again I will remind the honourable member that he is to be speaking to the hoist. I would ask him to bring his comments back to the hoist amendment that is presently before the House.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Speaker, as I was about to say, we need six months maybe for her to have an opportunity to talk to this government about why two years ago they promised so much for the health care system and now they are delivering so little. I am sure that woman, given her situation two years ago, would love an opportunity to talk to this government about it, and yet this government seems more bent on driving home legislation that would destroy the democratic rights of the nurses when what they really need to do is
pass this hoist motion which will give six months for the people of Nova Scotia, for the health care professionals to negotiate an agreement and to talk to this government about our health care system.
That is what is needed. It is that simple, yet this government doesn't see that for some reason. They seem more interested in attempting to try to stifle debate, to shut down any form of free and open collective bargaining because they have to blame someone for the health care woes. It is not working; the people of Nova Scotia don't believe it and maybe six months would give an opportunity for this government to listen to the people of Nova Scotia. Go home for the summer, maybe listen to the people, go to the barbeques, out to the summer festivals, and in that six months the MLAs, the backbenchers, the Cabinet Ministers, would have an opportunity to hear exactly what Nova Scotians are thinking about their health care system and that the backbone of that system is our nursing professionals and our health care professionals and that is why we need a six months' hoist.
Mr. Speaker, I have a couple of facilities in my riding where RNs work and LPNs work and other health care professionals. Let's be clear, this legislation just doesn't apply to RNs or X-ray technicians and so on. It applies to all health care professionals and workers, whether they be support staff or they be technical staff or they be nursing professions. They would all love an opportunity to debate and to talk to the government about this legislation, and this hoist would give that opportunity.
In my riding we have Ocean View Manor, we have the Halifax County Regional Rehabilitation Centre and both of these facilities have nurses. They have other health professionals and, Mr. Speaker, there is an opportunity in this hoist to give this government an opportunity to come out to my riding and talk to the people in these facilities, to listen to what they are saying about the health care system. That is what is necessary and I would hope this government would do that.
Mr. Speaker, I have gone to these facilities and I have seen the nature of the work they are doing and the county home as I know it, the Halifax County Regional Rehabilitation Centre, is scheduled for closing. It has been scheduled for closing for years and they keep delaying it and delaying it and delaying it. Well, do you know what? If the government continues to delay the closing of that facility, why don't they delay this bill to talk to the health care providers in my community about why the health care system needs improvement, what they are doing to help it and why the professionals in that system need the government's help, not the government's disrespect.
[5:45 a.m.]
Mr. Speaker, these are facilities that provide an important component of our health care system. Many of them live in my riding. Many of them live in other ridings. They live in the riding of the member for the Eastern Shore. I am sure he has people who work in those
facilities who live in his riding. He might want an opportunity to talk to them over the summer about why the system isn't working and why nurses and health professionals need the government to work with them to improve the system, and not try to make them the scapegoats for the problems. We saw in the paper in the last day or two, ads where the government keeps talking about this strike will cause these problems or cause longer waiting lists, will cause cancelled surgery. We had a bit of joke in our caucus office; they took the word strike out of that particular ad, and put in the word cuts, government cuts. It fit perfectly.
Mr. Speaker, that is the problem, isn't it? This government is more interested in blaming people and saying the strike is causing our health care woes when, in fact, the people of Nova Scotia are not having the wool pulled over their eyes. They know it is this government's lack of vision, this government's lack of a plan and this government's continued cuts to our health care system that are truly the reason why their surgeries are being cancelled, why their waiting lists are longer. It is not the nurses' fault, everyone knows that. This government is playing a game with them, a game they cannot win.
Mr. Speaker, that is why we need a hoist, for this government to finally listen to the people of Nova Scotia, to finally hear what they are saying. They will say to this government, stop blaming the nurses, stop blaming the health professionals, stop blaming the support workers in our hospitals and our nursing homes and our health care facilities, and start planning and showing us that you are going to keep your promise with regard to health care.
Mr. Speaker, that was a promise in 1999, they talked about the fact that the government I believe, for $40 million would fix our health care system. That is what all these people across the way went around knocking on doors saying. At the time they probably - I can imagine the words - would have said, ah, this Liberal Government is $600 million, they are bankrupting the province, we can do it for $40 million. It is like name that tune. I can name that tune in two notes. Well, this government said, we can fix the health care system in $40 million.
Well, here we are two years later. I think the budget of the Health Department has gone up more than $40 million in the last few years. Still, the health care system deteriorates. It doesn't improve. We need six months for the nurses and the health professionals in this province to sit down and negotiate a settlement, a fair settlement that all can agree on, that is democratically voted on by the workers, and that they can begin to talk about how we can resuscitate our health care system. Yet, this government doesn't want that. This government doesn't want a hoist, doesn't want a delay. They are only interested in stomping on the rights of workers; stomping on Nova Scotians' right to a legitimate universal health care system, instead what they are trying to do is impose Cabinet-directed, bunker-mentality collective agreements.
Mr. Speaker, we saw this a few years ago. We saw it in the early 1990's under Donnie Cameron where they froze the collective agreements; we saw the Liberal Government under John Savage do the same thing. That is what is necessary. We need a government that is not going to take the same stance as Donnie Cameron or John Savage, but is really going to try to do things differently. That is what they voted for 1999. If they wanted John Savage again they would have continued to elect Liberals; if they liked what Donnie Cameron was doing in 1993 they would have continued to elect Donnie Cameron in 1993. Clearly, the people of Nova Scotia have given mandates to government to do things differently and clearly, the governments of Nova Scotia are not listening.
This is just a really clear strong point, an example of why this government is not listening and why this government is going to pay the political price for it. The people of Nova Scotia are tired of governments that don't listen, and that is why we need to pass this hoist, so this government will begin to listen, begin to hear what Nova Scotians are saying. They are going to go home for the weekend, the members across the way, and they are going to get an earful from nurses. They are going to get an earful from the husbands and the wives and the spouses and the children and the parents of nurses. God knows, maybe in their own houses if they happen to live with nurses.
They are going to hear why nurses are so upset about this legislation. Not just nurses, why their families are, why their community members are, and why this government is making a drastic mistake. Maybe they will come back on Monday and say maybe we should delay this bill. Much like the Gerald Regan Government tried to do, they learned that they made a mistake, they tried to delay it. In the end it was too little too late and they paid the political price a few years later, but at the time they felt they had a mandate to do things and they learned that politically they cannot and should not attempt to take on nurses.
Mr. Speaker, nurses are the backbone of our health care system, they are the backbone of our communities, they are our mothers, they are our spouses, they are our children and the people of Nova Scotia all believe that they are underpaid and overworked. This government for some reason doesn't see that and maybe a six months' hoist would give them an opportunity to listen. You know, about a month and a half ago while the House was sitting I got a call one day, I've talked about this before but I just wanted to touch on it again, there was a poll. I got a call from a pollster company, I don't know if it was CROP or Ominifacts, asking questions about the nursing profession and how do you feel about the nursing profession, how do you feel about your politicians, similar questions on physicians, did you trust them. The minister, I thought at the time, had commissioned the poll, he claimed that they didn't, maybe someone else did. (Interruption) No, there was no mention of lawyers, or lawyer-politicians, I guess that would be a worse combination maybe.
Mr. Speaker, it was interesting because the poll was clearly trying to find out who did you trust more, who did you believe deserved the dignity of a decent wage and decent working conditions more, and who is not getting it, nurses, physicians or politicians. Well,
I don't think I need to see the results because I think I know what they are but it would be curious if they are published someday on who actually did commission the poll. Maybe the government could take the next six months, if this hoist is passed, to do that similar thing, maybe not through polling, God knows we've had enough of that, but actually going out in their communities and listening to the people in their ridings and hearing from them, hearing what they are doing wrong about our health care system and what they are doing wrong to our nurses. They will get an earful but it is pretty clear that the people of Nova Scotia are not happy about this legislation. They are not happy about this government's disrespect for our health care professionals and they will pay the political price.
Mr. Speaker, I want to talk for a minute about the issue of the 1999 election, I talked about it for a bit. The real problem here is that the people of Nova Scotia in 1999 made a clear decision for change. This government, I believe, would have said at the time that was what they were doing, making a change, a conscious change. People voted Tory, 39 per cent, not an overwhelming majority but it was enough to get them the majority of seats.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. I just wanted the honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage not to forget the hoist amendment and I would ask that you bring your comments back to that. It is probably about the fourth time that I have asked.
The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage has the floor.
MR. DEVEAUX: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe that only a minute ago I mentioned that this was why we needed a six months' hoist and I would hope that the Speaker would allow me more than one minute between mentioning six months in order to reflect on the need for this legislation and why we need this amendment. I appreciate it has been a long night and the hoist is the important component of this legislation. I will continue to talk about the hoist but from time to time I will need an opportunity more than one minute to actually reflect why we need this hoist with a bit of background information.
Mr. Speaker, I was talking about the election in 1999 and this government was elected to address the issue of our health care system. The people of Nova Scotia - this is the middle of their term - they need time to talk to Nova Scotians, they need six months in order to talk to Nova Scotians about why this system isn't working. This government promised a health care system that works. It is not working and this government needs time to talk to the people of Nova Scotia about that. That can't happen overnight but maybe it can happen in six months. If they don't, this government is treading on the path of Gerald Regan in 1975 of making the same political mistakes. The people of Nova Scotia are going to have to make a decision in a couple of years when they go back to the polls. Maybe in the next six months this government can talk to Nova Scotians before it is too late for them? Maybe.
Mr. Speaker, in the next election this government is going to have to answer the question, are the people of Nova Scotia better off on election day than they were on the last
election day. That is a simple question. Maybe in the next six months this government will begin to reflect on if what they have done in the last two years is actually going to answer that question in the positive or in the negative. It is pretty clear, with legislation like Bill No. 68, I think I know what Nova Scotians are going to say and I think the government could use the next six months to talk to Nova Scotians about how this legislation is going to make Nova Scotians say, our health care system isn't better, my life isn't better, my system isn't working for me and I am not going to vote Tory next time.
Mr. Speaker, that is what happened in 1978. It will happen again in 2002 or 2003 or 2004, whenever this government has the gumption to go back to the polls because it is watershed moments like this, when this government tries to impose with a heavy foot its belief that the system needs to have a scapegoat, that the nurses must have an agreement imposed upon them. These are the watershed moments in a government's mandate. They are in the middle of their term. A few weeks ago they were thinking they were going to get out of this Legislature . . .
AN HON. MEMBER: Let's have an early election.
MR. DEVEAUX: Yes, an early election and oh, the books are looking good. Look, you know, they didn't really touch us with much of a glove in the last session, we are looking good.
AN HON. MEMBER: Is Stockwell Day their Leader?
ANOTHER HON. MEMBER: Is that your impression?
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Speaker, the point is, no, I think that is the impression of the government. A couple of things happened in the last little bit. First of all, I think they are probably surprised by the poll that came out the other day. Maybe they could use the next six months to understand why polls like that are still - their numbers have not gone up. They are still under 30 per cent in support and maybe in the next six months they can find out why. I will tell you, I will give you a hint. It is because our health care system is in disarray, our education system is in disarray.
AN HON. MEMBER: Our government is in disarray.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Speaker, now to top it all off, we have this government trying to put the boots to our health care professionals, our nurses, our health care support workers and that is a problem. It is a problem that all Nova Scotians know that this government cannot keep blaming others for its own incompetence. That is what this is. The government can't and will not develop a plan to resolve our health care system. It can't and it will not ensure that there is proper funding and investment, not necessarily over the next couple of years but over the next 10 years to ensure our health care system is viable.
Do you know what, Mr. Speaker? In the next six months, maybe this government can go out and talk to the people of Nova Scotia, to the nurses, to the health professionals, to the general public and say, do you know what? I was talking to some of the nurses about this earlier today. We need to see a light at the end of the tunnel. The people in this province and in this country are willing to swallow an awfully big pill if they know that this is going to result in them having a better health care system or if they work in the system, their jobs are going to be better, that they are going to have better working conditions. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not next week, but they will begin to see in a year or two or three or five or 10, that the system is beginning to work better for them. We have to see that light at the end of the tunnel and this government isn't showing that.
Mr. Speaker, they have no plan for how we are going to begin to see that light at the end of the tunnel. In the next six months, this government could use this hoist, if they adopted it, in order to talk to Nova Scotians about how they can develop a plan to get that light at the end of the tunnel, to listen to Nova Scotians so that the health care system will begin to turn around. A plan, a simple plan. We don't have that and the nurses don't see that. They get up every day, like my colleague, the member for Halifax Needham, reading that poem tonight, they get up every day knowing that they go back to work, never really knowing if the system is ever going to improve and fearing that it is only going to get worse.
So, Mr. Speaker, this government has an opportunity to change all that. As I said, nurses and other professionals in the health care system, it's a vocation. They love their work, they feel they are doing something that is good, that is honourable. All they ask is a decent wage and a sense of working conditions that are going to improve and continue to improve and this government can't even do that. Instead, it turns around and imposes legislation, or tries to impose legislation, that does the opposite.
[6:00 a.m.]
Well, Mr. Speaker, the people of Nova Scotia don't like it. They won't accept it and in the next six months this government could take the opportunity to talk to Nova Scotians about why its lack of a plan, its lack of a vision, its lack of answers with regard to fixing our health care system, are what Nova Scotians need to talk about, not about pointing the finger at our health care workers, about making scapegoats out of nurses. These aren't what Nova Scotians want. They want a government that is going to take a leadership role, that is going to act decisively, not draconian, not undemocratically, but act in a way that will ensure through leadership, through vision, that we can build our health care system once again, our universal health care system.
I see none of that. Nova Scotians see none of that. Nurses, health professionals, are seeing none of that and in return, when they try to negotiate a settlement that maybe they can begin to take a little control over their own health care system, they can begin to improve their working conditions just a little, but that hope that they can stay in this province, Mr.
Speaker, this government turns around and imposes legislation that takes that all away. It takes away hope. It takes away a sense that this system can be turned around. It destroys any last iota of morale, of passion for the job, and in the next six months, if this hoist passed, this government could begin to talk to Nova Scotians, begin to talk to health care professionals about how we can turn this system around, but instead they show no leadership. They show no desire to admit their mistakes and start fresh. Instead they continue to try to blame others, whether it be district health authorities, whether it be nurses, whether it be nursing unions, whether it be health care professionals and support staff, blame anyone, but God forbid you admit that you have a role to play to improve our health care system.
As I said, if you don't take the next six months, Mr. Speaker, through this hoist motion to truly talk to Nova Scotians about why our system is failing and what your role is in improving it, they will pay the price in the polls because Nova Scotians will ask, is my health care system better today than it was four years ago, are the waiting lists shorter, is elective surgery being cancelled less than it was before? Given today's statistics, I will tell you that the answers are no and the people of Nova Scotia will remember that. They won't blame the nurses; they won't blame the health care support staff; they won't blame the unions; they won't blame the district health authorities or the deputy minister, or the associate deputy minister, or the assistant deputy minister, they will blame the government and when you go back on those doorsteps where you said you would fix it for $40 million, this government is going to have to have a lot of answers as to why the system isn't fixed.
Mr. Speaker, maybe in the next six months through this hoist motion the government can begin to admit its mistakes, to say I am sorry to Nova Scotians. Maybe this government can begin to tell Nova Scotians how they are going to improve their health care system, working hand in hand with the workers in the system, bettering their working conditions. I started this by saying that the workers are the foundation of a strong health care system. If they are not confident the system is working, if they are overworked, if they are stressed, many of them are out on sick leave because of being overworked, if there is a shortage of workers, if they are underpaid and overworked, the system won't work. It is that simple. All the technical equipment in the world isn't going to make the system better. Everyone knows that. It is the bedside manner, it is the individual human beings who make the system work, and if this government isn't willing to admit that, then quite frankly, they will pay the price.
They don't seem to see that, Mr. Speaker. They don't seem to think that is a problem. Well, maybe if they took six months to talk to Nova Scotians instead of burying their heads in the sand, they would begin to see that it is a problem. Many of those members over there got elected by very short margins. For one of them it was a tie; another, it was 18 votes. (Interruption) More than that. The member for Preston asked how many I won by, 182, but I can assure you it is going to be a lot easier for me to go back to those doorsteps than it will be . . .
AN HON. MEMBER: Because you stood up for Nova Scotians.
MR. DEVEAUX: That's right, than it will be for the Tory backbenchers to go back. The member for Preston, he has a lot of nurses in his riding, Mr. Speaker, and when he goes to the door and he says to them - I saw him outside picking fights with nurses, and if he is going to have that same attitude when he is on the doorstep, I will assure you that he is going to have a lot of problems.
Mr. Speaker, that is the key to this hoist motion. Let's give the member for Preston, or the member for Yarmouth, or the member for Chester-St. Margaret's, or the Minister or Tourism, an opportunity to go back to their ridings and talk to the nurses, talk to the health professionals in their ridings. Listen to them. Talk about why this is important and why the system isn't working. It is not the strike, or the threat of a strike, it is not the workers. It is the cuts, it is the lack of a vision, it is blaming all our problems on the financial woes, when in fact this government should be investing in a way to ensure that we can build a prosperous province, to build a have province.
Mr. Speaker, that is what we need to do in the next six months. That is what this government must be doing, and that is why we need this hoist motion. I just want to touch on, in my last few minutes, an issue around constitutionality. I am not going to get into specifics here, but there is a section in this bill that talks about the fact that this bill is unconstitutional. Incredible powers, a privative clause is what it is called that tries to completely eliminate the ability of anyone to appeal the government's regulations with regard to a collective agreement. No review by any court.
Mr. Speaker, maybe in the next six months, through this hoist, this government will have an opportunity to talk to the people of Nova Scotia, talk to some constitutional experts. Maybe they will go outside the province, maybe they will go to places like Osgood Hall, a very good law school, I might note. Maybe they can go and talk to some experts across this country, and maybe they can learn from other provinces that this kind of draconian clause is unconstitutional, it is immoral and it prevents, again, democratic rights.
This government has a long history of this in two short years, of taking away rights, of taking away the ability of a government, of a Legislature, of workers to be able to use the rule of law to ensure that they are going to make sure that what this government imposes is not unrealistic. This government continues to try to do it and, quite frankly, over the next six months, if this hoist motion is passed, this government would have an opportunity to talk to Nova Scotians and see that unconstitutional, draconian measures aren't going to help them sell themselves to Nova Scotians; it is not going to help them improve our health care system by slamming the door on anyone actually being able to review their regulations, being able to go for a writ of mandamus or certiorari.
These are things that could done, these are things that should be able to be done, and under our Constitution are allowed. Under Section 96, the Superior Court always has the right to review what governments do, and this government is trying to slam the door on that.
What I am being told is even their own lawyers are saying they are not sure if it is constitutional.
Mr. Speaker, I would hope we would have a government that would actually not try to create unconstitutional legislation. We had enough of that when I first came into this House. Over the next six months we need an opportunity for the Government of Nova Scotia to talk to the people of Nova Scotia about how we can have an open and accountable process for determining our collective agreements, where there are the opportunities for the rule of law to be preserved. Let's not take it away; let's not take away the rights of workers; let's not take away the rights of people to have the government's decisions reviewed by a court. But that is exactly what this government is trying to do. That is exactly what they are trying to do, they are trying to ram this through and prevent anyone from reviewing their decisions.
Mr. Speaker, that isn't going to fly in Nova Scotia and it is not going to fly in a country as democratic and with a Charter of Rights and Freedoms like Canada. Over the next six months, this government will learn that, if they took the opportunity to talk. Instead, they are imposing unconstitutional provisions that will prevent Nova Scotians from having an opportunity to indeed talk and review. The government can go into Cabinet and approve a collective agreement, and they are saying that no one can review that, no court, it doesn't matter what they do. They could put in place things that are incredibly unconstitutional, they could take away rights - I am not saying they are going to do this - they could do things that are a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, various parts of it.
Mr. Speaker, that is a problem. It could be a problem. This government says no court can review that, no court can turn around and stop them from doing that. In our system, a democratic system, the court always has the right to review government's decisions to ensure they meet minimum standards, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the rule of law, natural justice. When those things aren't being dealt with, that is what the courts are for, the checks and balances our system has. Until we have that, this system isn't going to work, this clause doesn't work, and this government needs six months to go back and rethink this unconstitutional, immoral, unethical clause that tries to eliminate any dissension from anything it decides down in that bunker. That is wrong, it is pig-headed and I would hope this government would rethink it through a hoist motion.
So where does this leave us? I am voting for the hoist motion, as are probably many of my other colleagues on this side. I would hope that those members who may be opposed to this hoist, who believe this thing needs to be rammed through as fast as possible, that is why we are sitting at 6:10 in the morning, Mr. Speaker, maybe they will get up and tell us. It doesn't have to be long, 5, 10 minutes. Let's put on the record the member for Pictou West or the member for Pictou East or the member for Kings West. Maybe they could stand up for 5 or 10 minutes and tell their constituents why they think that this hoist motion shouldn't pass, why they think they need to ram through legislation that takes away the rights of
workers, that takes away the dignity of nurses to be able to develop and build working conditions that they have been given the right to have. They are taking it all away.
Mr. Speaker, they are doing it under the cover of night, as quick as possible, in hopes that no one will notice. People are noticing. People know what is going to happen but I would hope these people would be able to stand up. If they believe this hoist is wrong, if they believe this legislation is so good that Nova Scotians will love them for what they are doing, then stand up and tell us why this hoist should be defeated. I encourage you to do that. That is what is necessary, otherwise all we have are people sitting in seats, remaining silent and yet voting for their own political destruction, quite frankly.
Mr. Speaker, I would hope that members across the way would think long and hard before they would not delay this legislation. Six months would give them an opportunity to reflect on our health care system, on the workers in that system and the dignity that they deserve. This government owes that to the people of Nova Scotia. They have broken the promises they made in 1999 but they have a couple of years left before the next election to try to turn around and say we actually kept those promises. There is still an opportunity. Take the next six months to use this legislation as a way to talk to people about our health care system. You failed them so far. You have blamed everyone else. It hasn't worked.
Nova Scotians know you are the root cause of all the problems in our health care system and they want an opportunity to talk to you about it. The nurses want an opportunity to talk to you about it. The health care professionals, the technologists, the support staff want an opportunity to talk to you about it and the next six months of this hoist would give you that opportunity. Stop blaming others. Mr. Speaker, this government has to begin to reflect on itself, admit it has made mistakes. People will accept that and they will say, let's take the next two years to talk about how we can build the system up, how we can eliminate waiting lists, how we can begin to address elective surgeries that aren't being cancelled, how we can begin to ensure that our system is working effectively so that when I or my grandchildren or my children or my parents are ill, that we can go to the hospital and know the system will be there for us, not have to wait six hours in an emergency room, not have to wait six months for elective surgery or, God knows, even important surgery, non-elective surgery, I should say.
Mr. Speaker, that kind of information, that kind of discussion needs to be had. This government isn't willing to do it. This government has not done it. It is not even willing to admit that it is not doing what it said. It is not even willing to admit that it broke its promise but maybe if they approve this hoist, they can take six months to talk to Nova Scotians about why they have broken their promise to Nova Scotians. It is not only health care, it is education, it is downloading on municipalities, it is jacking up income taxes by $120 million a year. Let's use this legislation, let's use this hoist to talk about the health care system because that is the number one priority of Nova Scotians and here is an opportunity for this
government to wash its hands, to say we are sorry for what we did, let's begin to talk and rebuild our health care system.
AN HON. MEMBER: They would feel better in the morning.
MR. DEVEAUX: They would.
AN HON. MEMBER: Yup, they would feel better.
MR. DEVEAUX: Mr. Speaker, that is not what we are going to get. We are going to get a government that is probably going to vote against the hoist, it is going to ram this legislation through, it is going to destroy the morale of our nurses and our health care workers, it is going to destroy the foundation of our health care system even more. There are plenty of cracks in our health care system. This government is about to, maybe through the Dr. Hamm or sledgehammer approach, create a very large crack in the foundation of our health care system. Is it reparable? I don't know. Maybe it will take many years to fix. Maybe it cannot be fixed. Maybe we will have such an onslaught of nurses leaving this province that our system will fall apart, worse than it is now. This government doesn't seem to care. It seems more interested in the fact that it needs a scapegoat, it needs to blame someone and the nurses are who they want to blame.
[6:15 a.m.]
Mr. Speaker, that is unfortunate. I would hope this government would take an opportunity to talk to Nova Scotians, to listen to Nova Scotians, to listen to what they have been saying about our health care system and about the foundation of that system. That is what is necessary. That is what this government should do. I would hope that this government would take that opportunity to do it. Nurses deserve dignity. Don't forget 1975. The Gerald Regan Government paid the political price of defeat in 1978 because of what they did to nurses then. You are going to do the same thing, and I would hope this government would learn from the mistakes of other governments.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Cape Breton The Lakes.
MR. BRIAN BOUDREAU: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. Isn't it a bright, cheery morning? What a great morning to be in Nova Scotia, unless you are a Tory, of course. I certainly wouldn't be too proud to stand here today being a Tory member of this government, I can assure you of that. It is a privilege for me to rise this early morning and speak on this bill. The first thing I would like to say is that it is disgusting that we have to be here. Unfortunately, because of the mismanagement of this government that is basically why we are all here. I think they are getting a little paranoid over there because that is why we are here.
Mr. Speaker, six months is a good idea for the minister to go about out into Nova Scotia and hold some meetings, some consultation meetings. Remember that, all the promises of consulting with Nova Scotians before they made any changes? Remember the promises the Premier made, where he was going to fix health care with $46 million? Imagine, $46 million, he was going to repair health care and everything will be okay. He was going to cut administration. That was where the problems were.
Mr. Speaker, I would just like to verify some of the increases this government went about and imported their advisors. They went outside the province and obtained people from British Columbia and other parts of the country to come and tell us here in Nova Scotia how to run health care. So I think the six months' hoist is an excellent opportunity for the Health Minister and his high-paid salaried staff of outlaws to go out into Nova Scotia and explain what the problems are in health care and what the heck is really going on.
Mr. Speaker, this is all about the salaries of nurses and they have no money for nurses. They have no money. That is obvious. They say that. Do we believe them? Well, no, I don't believe them, I don't, not after sitting in my seat here for the past two years and watching this government perform, I don't think, really, in all fairness, there are too many Nova Scotians who are prepared to believe this government any longer. These are some of the results; some of the salaries the minister has approved, new salaries in his department. Just for the record I would like to indicate just exactly how much these salaries are and what he has done to the Health Department.
The Deputy Minister of Health earns $188,000 per year; the Associate Deputy Minister of Health earns $100,000 per year; the assistant deputy minister, $100,000; the chief information officer, another $100,000; the CEO of the Capital Health District, $350,000; the Vice-President of Human Resources in the Capital Health District earns $145,000 per year; the Vice-President of System Development and Performance in the Capital Health District earns $145,000 per year; the Vice-President of Public Affairs, Capital Health District, $145,000 per year; the Vice-President, Administration, Capital Health District, $165,000 per year; the Vice-President, Diagnostic and Support Services, Capital Health District, $165,000 per year; the Vice-President of Health, Capital Health District, $200,000 per year . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Honourable member, this is all very interesting but could the honourable member get to the correlation between these salaries and hoist amendment, please?
MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, yes, this would provide an opportunity, as I indicated before, for the minister to take his high-salaried staff out into the Province of Nova Scotia and explain to nurses, first-hand, why he has no money. That is a fair question. With these salaries - and I have three pages full, $260,000, $80,500, $80,500, $80,500, $80,500. This minister has no money. This is what he is telling Nova Scotians and, in particular, he is telling nurses he has no money. Why would the minister not agree to the six month
amendment in which he could take his high-priced team out into the general population and tell Nova Scotians why he has no money for health care workers? That sounds reasonable. It's a reasonable request.
These salaries are scary. This comes from a government that promised they were going to repair health care in this province for a mere $46 million. So, Mr. Speaker, six months would provide the minister an opportunity to go out into Nova Scotia and explain to Nova Scotians why he has spent over $300 million. Yet, health care is still in shambles in this province. Now why wouldn't that be a good idea for the minister to accept? This minister and this government couldn't run a vacant farm, simply put.
Health care has been in turmoil since this government took over two years ago. We can look at various hospitals, Strait-Richmond Hospital for instance, no emergency room yet, which leads me to ask, what are these high-salaried individuals doing? It is simply that the nurses in this province - even I can figure that out - they are the front-line workers, Mr. Speaker. They are the people who need to be supported in this system. Now, we know that doctors play a very important role in our medical system in this province and, indeed, right across the province, right across the country. However, I believe Nova Scotians deserve an opportunity for this minister to go before them, in public, and explain why he has no money for health care. Is it because he already spent all of it? Is that why he has no money, or is it because the Minister of Finance won't let him access the slush fund they have? The slush fund is rapidly increasing. The old blue Tory machine, the re-election fund, why doesn't he just say to the Minister of Finance, look, let's recognize . . .
HON. RODNEY MACDONALD: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, the honourable member is not talking to the six months' hoist. (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Order, please. That is not a point of order. I would advise the honourable member again from Cape Breton The Lakes that (Interruptions)
The honourable member for Cape Breton The Lakes has strayed considerably from the hoist. I would ask him to bring himself back to the amendment before the House.
MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, I am referring to the six months' hoist. Regardless of what the good minister has indicated, I did indicate that the six months' hoist would be an excellent opportunity for this minister, this government, the whole gang of them over there, to go out into the province and explain to nurses why they do not have any money. I don't understand why they don't have any money and I'm a member of this House. Why do we just stand here and sit here and assume ordinary Nova Scotians out there understand the issue because even I don't. Many of the members over here, none of us do. We don't understand why this minister doesn't have any funding. Now, the six months' hoist would allow an ideal opportunity for this minister and this government to go forth and meet with the nurses. Are they afraid of the nurses? Well, there will be a chance and there will be a day
coming when they will not fear nurses because as we grow old, we will be using health care sooner or later if we haven't already done so. If they really fear nurses, think about the future.
The six months would provide an opportunity for that honourable minister to go down and tell the good people in Richmond, his sister constituency, why they have no emergency ward. What is wrong with that? Is the good minister afraid of that opportunity? It seems to me that all this government does is confront, confrontation is what they excel in. We have seen it with the paramedics last year, another front-line health care workers. Attack them, that is what they did, that is what they are doing with nurses. The Minister of Finance has the funding. Six months would provide an opportunity for this government, provide an opportunity for the Premier to go out into Nova Scotia and explain to Nova Scotians exactly why they have no money.
I am sure that people will understand the comment that I am about to make. John Buchanan's graduates over there, they have money, they have funding and they have it in a slush fund and they give it out, we have seen it with education, with eduction they did the same just last month, create stress, all the stress they can. Conquer, divide and conquer, that is the approach that this government takes. This minister, and I am not standing here trying to assassinate his character because I will come right out and say, I think the minister is an honourable gentleman, I don't have a problem with that. He just can't manage health care in Nova Scotia, that is simple. Simply put, he is out of touch with his own system that he is trying to manage. He doesn't know any of the plans, he doesn't have any idea whatsoever. Now he is trying to tell Nova Scotians out there that this bill is to protect Nova Scotians.
[6:30 a.m.]
Mr. Speaker, he doesn't have to worry about protecting Nova Scotians because nurses will be on the front lines today and every day, seven days a week. They provide the protection, not him. He doesn't have to worry about that, and as far as the nurses going on strike and not caring about the people in the hospitals who are in there, or the people who would arrive there in an emergency state, nurses would be there. They are on record as saying that.
They have a plan, Mr. Speaker, but that minister doesn't trust those nurses. That is what this is all about. He doesn't trust those people because he doesn't trust his own administrators he imported into this province. So a six months' hoist is an excellent opportunity for that minister to go and tell the people of Nova Scotia why he is doing what he is doing and why he is treating nurses as second-class citizens, particularly in the health system in this province. If he has money for these salaries, then why hasn't he got money for nurses?
The record shows, Mr. Speaker, this government had a surplus of $52 million last year. Statistics Canada is not wrong. This caucus is not wrong; it wasn't wrong on bracket
creep. The honourable member for Lunenburg West was not wrong when he approached the Minister of Finance over there in regard to bracket creep and he was not wrong when he told the Premier in this House that the debt would increase for the next six years, every year, and the Premier wasn't even aware of it.
Mr. Speaker, this government simply cannot manage the affairs of Nova Scotia. It is simple. Two years to go, at least, before the people have another say. They will judge this government, not I. I won't be judging this government and it will be the people on the doorsteps, they have to return and many of those people, when they knock on their doors, they can explain then. The backbenchers over there will explain, not the minister. The minister has an opportunity right now to go out and explain with the six months' hoist, and explain on behalf of the backbenchers, on behalf of his colleagues, to go out and defend what he is doing in this House, but he hasn't got the courage because he knows what he is doing is wrong, but he won't admit it. He knows that his department is full of inaccurate, high-salaried positions, some of them shouldn't even be in existence. That is why he won't go out to the population and explain why he has gotten health care in a turmoil in this province.
That minister has spent $300 million in health care already and if he continues on that pace, Mr. Speaker, by the end of his term he would have spent in excess of $900 million. The blue book and that Premier boasted that he could fix health care with a mere $46 million and he was going to burst the bubble of all administrators in this province who were ripping off the taxpayers. How did he deal with that when he became Premier and the people gave him the confidence to run a government in this province? His reply was to bring in these high-salaried imports from outside the province. That is how he answered and then he approves of the Minister of Health spending well in excess of $300 million to date in the department.
Mr. Speaker, I wouldn't criticize the minister for spending $300 million if it had been spent in a responsible manner and in a manner in which we could see results but there are no results. I will challenge any member on that floor over there to stand on his feet right now and tell us the positive changes that have come the health care in this province since they took over.
Now many of those backbenchers, Mr. Speaker, and I have said this before in this House, they were former colleagues of mine as municipal councillors. Those were the days when we bragged we were closest to the people. Elect me, I know your issues. I can help with those issues. Well, all of a sudden, they are relying on that gang up there in the front row. If I were them, I would be supporting this six month amendment, this hoist amendment, because it would take the heat off them. These high-paid administrators could accompany the minister out into the community and meet with the nurses and the general population out there and explain why they have no money for nurses. It is no wonder he has no money for nurses with these type of salaries. It is a disgrace, a Canadian disgrace is what it is. The minister should hang his head in shame along with his colleagues in that Cabinet over there.
Front-line health care nurses in this province deserve the respect that they have already earned in the past. We are losing some of our best nurses to other provinces because they are treated with dignity. It is not just the money, Mr. Speaker. People in the United States, they care about nurses. There is a shortage there from what I understand. As a result, they know how to treat people. They want to keep them employed. They need them to deliver a service, an essential service. Those circumstances are the same in Nova Scotia. We need front-line health care workers. They are vital to the well-being of our general population in this province.
Did you ever witness a car accident, Mr. Speaker? Were you ever at a hospital when an ambulance pulled in? Nurses are there first, right on the money. They are there when they are needed and they are there because they are well-trained and they care about you, about me. My children, who are home in Cape Breton, they care about their children. They care about everybody. What is wrong with these guys, these honourable gentleman across the road? Those backbenchers over there should start standing up and telling those ministers, what you are doing to nurses is wrong.
Mr. Speaker, the Premier, he could go out with the minister, since he is a good doctor - good, country doctor I think is what he sold himself on. He sold himself, oh, I am a doctor, I can fix health care. Yes, give me $46 million and let me slash all administration throughout the province and I am going to solve all the problems in health care. That is what he told Nova Scotians. So a six months' hoist would provide the minister and the Premier an opportunity to go out and tell Nova Scotians and explain first-hand to the nurses so that they are not getting misinformation from members like me. He can do it himself and he can go out into Nova Scotia and explain why he has no money for health care workers in this province. It is no wonder he has no money in the budget for health care because it is all in high salaries being paid to administrators. The direct opposite of what that Premier said he was going to do.
Another promise down the chute, Mr. Speaker. If you have the confidence in the abilities then why would you be afraid of the six months? Set some hearings throughout the province. Sit down, discuss first-hand with the nurses, never mind meeting them in the hallway here and, you know, a tug of war. I mean this is about health care in our province. This is not fun and games. It's not Nintendo. It is real. This is a real issue that affects real people each and every day of their lives. It is something that should be taken very seriously. As I indicated before, the good minister could take the six months' hoist and go out and explain to Nova Scotians why the Buchanan graduate won't give them the money out of the slush fund. Unless, of course, they are afraid that if they keep tapping into the slush fund they won't have their re-election money, it will be all gone.
This government is nothing short of an embarrassment, Mr. Speaker, nothing short of an embarrassment. I know the good Minister of Transportation and Public Works will remember during the month of April when the storm hit and it was a blizzard. Six months
would provide an opportunity for this minister to go down there and explain to the health care workers why health care is in the shambles that it is in. As I indicated before, the good minister will recall that during the April storm I was on his case pretty heavy over that storm because of the snow plowing and various issues. That is not what this is about so I am not going to get into that, but I received more calls yesterday from nurses in my constituency office and at my house and more than that, what really hits home, is that non-nurses are calling my office, residents of my community, expressing their support for the nurses and the health care in this province.
Mr. Speaker, do you mean to tell me that I am the only member in this House getting those calls? I don't believe that. Those members on that side of the House have to be receiving phone calls. The backbenchers are getting all the unnecessary pressure placed on them by their Cabinet colleagues. The six months' hoist would provide an avenue, an opportunity for the whole gang of them to get together, if it was necessary, to go out an explain to the nurses and tell the nurses there is no money. We don't have any money. They had money when the Minister of Finance went to New York last year and paid $900 for one night in a motel. They had money for that. They got money for this. They find little pockets of money everywhere they can, anywhere they can, only when the pressure is on. That is when they find the money. They find the money when all else fails and, you know, people don't back down. They take a big stick and they whack you with it and they think you are supposed to run away and if you run away, well then they keep their little slush fund intact. If you don't run away and you get the pressure on them, all of a sudden they come up with more money.
[6:45 a.m.]
Health care in Nova Scotia in 1999 was advancing; it was advancing slowly, but at least our minister was involved in the system. He was in contact with the nurses; he talked to doctors; he talked to the administrators; he talked to the residents in Cape Breton The Lakes; he talked to residents in Richmond, and he talked to the residents down in the Valley and he was aware of the issues. There was a money issue, he would have much preferred to do things quicker, he'll tell you that.
At least he knew and understood his department. This minister shows no interest. I can't believe it. This honourable gentleman has spent over $300 million. They borrowed, they added to the debt. This government has added at a pace of $3.5 million per day, $70-80 million per year more we are paying the banks because of their mismanagement. Then I hear the minister blame the Liberals for the deficit that was left. They had better wake up and smell the roses because the deficit was left to them in 1993 from their school of learning guys over there.
Mr. Speaker, the six months would provide an opportunity for that minister, those backbenchers, that Premier, the minister's colleagues, to go out into the facilities themselves
and talk to the patients. In fact, I had a call last night on the voice mail from one of those patients in Northside General Hospital very much concerned about the way nurses were being treated in this province. (Interruption) No, I didn't call the individual back yet. I intend to do that today because it was kind of a late hour when I did take the voice mail off and I will apologize to the resident for that when I return the call this morning.
Nurses have the support of Nova Scotians, they do have the support of Nova Scotians. It is very obvious that this government does not support nurses. They would prefer to hold nurses back, hold them back, keep them down in trouble. Some of us we even notice that they have two of the unions bickering and snickering. Divide and conquer, isn't that the game plan? That is their game plan; that is how we treat health care workers in this province.
Mr. Speaker, there is one thing about the clock on the wall, it is ticking. I had one phone call last night from a health care worker, the individual is not a nurse, she is a secretary or administrator, she is a single parent who could easily be on social assistance - and thank heavens she isn't, with that minister in charge of Community Services - but she easily could be home and she has a young son, she works hard. She is dedicated, in storms and blizzards, in all types of weather, and she indicated to me last night, she gets a lot of her inspiration because many of her co-workers are nurses. Nurses are underpaid, overworked and certainly ill-respected by that minister.
Mr. Speaker, he is not going to listen. We know that. We wouldn't be in this House this morning at 7:00 a.m. if that minister would listen. We wouldn't be here if that entire government would listen on all the various issues. They won't listen. They pretended, during the election campaign, that they would listen. They told Nova Scotians they were going to listen. I would like to ask any of those members over there how many doors they banged on since they got elected. I am almost sure there are not too many of them who go out into the community anymore.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the member for Glace Bay, indicated that he has some sisters who are nurses and in fact his mother was a nurse. He indicated when he was on his feet that one of his sisters, when he had a conversation he couldn't repeat what she said because it was unparliamentary. What a legacy to leave behind for that minister. Those opinions are shared throughout the province. The six months' hoist would provide that minister an opportunity to go to Antigonish, sit down at the hospital with the nurses. He could go to the QE II, he could go to the Northside General Hospital, the Cape Breton Regional Hospital. He could visit all he hospital facilities in the province and he could do it relatively quickly. It perhaps wouldn't even take six months but he could sit down and explain to nurses - not the doctors, not the administrators, not the paramedics, because that struggle is over for them - the nurses. He could meet, sit at the table and he could hear the nurses first-hand and what their concerns are. In my opinion, the minister should welcome that opportunity.
I would like to know how a Deputy Minister of Health who earns $188,000 a year and the last time I checked he came from British Columbia, what does he know about health care in Nova Scotia? This guy educated himself pretty quick on the health care of the province. Now he might have been familiar with the B.C. health care system and all you have to do is read the newspaper, it is quite obvious what is going on with health care in B.C. We go out and we attract this guy to come down here and what is he doing? I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, that health care has been in shambles ever since he arrived, ever since he got here. So what is he doing? The minister, in a six months' hoist, could take him with him, sit down with the nurses and explain to the nurses why they have no money. He could justify why he is paying all these administrators such high salaries and tell the nurses why they are not worth any money. What is wrong with that?
He could even explain why the Minister of Finance won't let him access the slush fund. He could tell them first-hand, look, whatever the reason, the minister wants that money for re-election. We are going to buy our votes in a couple of years. We need that money. We haven't got that money for you guys, you ladies and you gentlemen who work as nurses in this province. No, we are not giving it to you. No, we want our backbenchers to be safe when they visit doors the next time they are banging on them. So we are just going to dump that money in the various little vote-buying projects.
A six months' hoist is an excellent opportunity. He could take the Minister of Tourism with him down into Richmond, as I indicated before, his sister constituency. That hospital, to my knowledge, does serve some area in his area, and he could explain to those nurses and the general public why there is no doctor in the emergency ward, why there is no emergency ward in that hospital. Why they cut the position, because they did cut the position, in my opinion. I mean, if we look at the history of the Northside General, it took five days to put an emergency doctor into that department, but in his, you know, none; months now, not even any effort.
Mr. Speaker, it is obvious, at least in my opinion, that they cut the position and they are only pretending they are looking for somebody to fill in. It is babble. That is all it is, babble. This Minister of Health has successfully spent more money than any other minister that I am aware of, in his department in one fiscal year and has no results for all that money he has spent, none. There are beds closing. There are doctors leaving. He has even toyed with the idea of closing hospitals. Six months would provide the good minister an opportunity as to why this chaos is going on in his department, he could explain this to everybody.
I am interested in learning the answers to those questions, really. So I can go back to my constituency and explain to my residents why health care is in shambles and why that minister has no money to pay the nurses to deliver the service that is essential to every Nova Scotian in this province. Regardless if that service is going to be required by me either today or next week, next year. It is a service that I must ensure is protected because, Mr. Speaker,
the law of averages indicates very clearly that sooner or later I am going to require health care.
I have been a very fortunate Nova Scotian, to date, because I have had relatively good health, but I can tell you that I have had the opportunity to visit hospitals and, do you know what, Mr. Speaker, nurses were there for me. The nurses were there for me. I remember one time when I had a hot spark go in my eye from a cutting torch. Those nurses were there for me. They were there for me, and I am very confident in saying that if I need them today or tomorrow or next week, they will be there. So why shouldn't we pay these individuals the money they are worth?
When I look at this disgraceful activity with these - like a deputy minister, $188,000 a year; an associate deputy minister at $100,000 a year; an assistant deputy minister at $100,000; a chief information officer, $100,000 a year. Mr. Speaker, the last time I visited the hospital I didn't see any of these individuals. If the deputy minister is sick today or sick for a week, it doesn't impact health care, but let a nurse be off today. If a nurse is sick or home with the flu, what is the impact?
[7:00 a.m.]
That minister doesn't understand. He doesn't realize and he has no knowledge and he has no initiative whatsoever to even learn about health care in this province. In fact, I think his head is in the mud somewhere and he wants to bring it out and start smelling roses. Wake up, pinch yourself. It is reality time. He is the Minister of Health and he runs the most vital system in this province. Doesn't he understand this? Don't his colleagues, that gang over there, his colleagues in the Cabinet, they didn't change the name on them yet, I don't think. The last time I looked, they were still called the Cabinet, Executive Council. It is unbelievable, really. It really is. I can look over there and see there are no doctors and no nurses, which is fair, really.
Mr. Speaker, if I have a problem in my house with plumbing and I am not sure what to do with it, I go talk to a plumber. If my furnace breaks down, I go talk to the furnace repair man, especially if I can't fix it myself. This government, this minister, they can't fix health care themselves. They can't fix health care by treating front-line health care workers in the manner that they are. Wake up and smell the coffee, gentlemen. Go talk to the nurses. Let them help you fix health care. What is so wrong with that? I cannot believe that this minister, this government, is as stubborn as it is.
Where do they find these ideas? Who in their right mind would wave a whole fistful of money in somebody's face in British Columbia to come on down here to be my deputy minister. Yet, the people that are in this province, live, reside, contribute to their communities each and every day, raise children and, yes, contribute to the provincial tax system each and every day they work. Why wouldn't they be worth what they are asking for?
Ask the nurses if they trust this government? Ask the civil servants in this province if they trust this government? Ask the doctors if they trust this government? Ask the teachers if they trust this government?
Mr. Speaker, why would a good, well-intentioned government refuse to talk to nurses in this province, because that is what this bill is all about? They don't want to talk to the nurses. They want to hold a shotgun to their head and negotiate. Six months would provide that window of opportunity for these ministers and this minister, in particular, to go out into Nova Scotia and explain to Nova Scotians why he is failing, why his high-salaried individuals are not having the impact that he had intended on health care in Nova Scotia.
Mr. Speaker, it is disgusting when I look at this. It is a very serious matter. We are losing nurses to Ontario, New Brunswick, the United States, not only just for the money. I know they are making more money but it is the way they treat their employees because they need nurses, they respect nurses and they know that if they treat them fairly and professionally, they will keep them there. What is wrong with doing that in Nova Scotia, honourable ladies and gentlemen?
I remember, Mr. Speaker, a few months ago when the Premier indicated they were turtles one day at a speaking arrangement that he had. So then I came to the House and I called them honourable turtles. Now at that time, I thought of turtles, the little fish, the animals. Well, I think what the Premier really was indicating was these guys are Turtles that you buy in a box and you get gook all over your hands, you know. Have you ever tried to get it off and you didn't have a paper towel or a Kleenex or you weren't around a tap, water? That is what this government is like, they are stuck to your fingers and you can't get rid of them because democracy dictates that they are there for a five year term.
Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that if that minister has this opportunity for six months, he should take it because when the next election is called, and the clock is ticking, we are here 24 months now gentlemen, 23 actually, 600-some days. The clock is ticking and Nova Scotians are going to get rid of that gook. It is up to that minister and that government over there to do something now because if they don't, Nova Scotians will do it for them and it will be like ridding themselves of the gook after eating Turtles on a warm day. With $46 million, I am going to fix health care. Well, what a joke. What a sham.
Those honourable members over there should be embarrassed to walk down the street, $300 million spent on health care in this province to date and the shambles is getting larger. The pile is just larger all the time, the pile of rubble that they are creating. Go talk to the nurses, Mr. Minister. Go speak to the front-line health care workers in this province. Go listen to their concerns. Do you want to fix health care? Go get the advice, the proper advice, the proper direction on how to fix health care in this province if you are serious.
It is almost like in 1999 they were playing football over there and there was a minority Liberal Government and at that time they were Third Party I believe, and it was like a football game and there was a fumble and these guys have the ball and they don't know what to do with it now and they can't get rid of it. To me they just want to pass the ball, but they can't.
Mr. Speaker, six months would provide that minister, is it the minister is afraid of this stuff? Really, is he afraid to talk to the nurses? You know, really. The political football, they don't have to worry about it for two years. There is no doubt that this bill will pass, we know that, all residents of Nova Scotia know that. The six months that we are proposing here, they are not going to take that. They are going to go and do what they want. It is almost like they are promoting mismanagement just so they can take that football and toss it back because they don't know what to do over there. There is every issue, there are issues here now, the list is that long, these guys are getting that irresponsible over there, it is unbelievable. That is why I am almost ashamed of my fellow colleagues over there, my fellow municipal representative colleagues. Really, it is their doing, it really is.
I used to meet these guys at the USNM meetings and stuff like that. We're the closest to the people and we know what the issues are, we have to get the provincial government to listen to us, we can have an impact here and we can have a positive input, but now look at them, now listen to them. Do you hear them? They are pretty quiet; they are pretty quiet. The rumblings are gone, they have surrendered, it is obvious. They left the farm. No, they didn't sell the farm, the farm is vacant and that is why I said earlier when I rose to speak that they couldn't run a vacant farm. To begin with, they emptied the farm of any opportunity and now they can't manage the farm. It is almost like, I don't know, some of them I think would even haunt the house at times.
Nova Scotians are very frustrated and disgusted with this government. The only hope we have on this side of the House - and I say this with all honesty - if those backbenchers out there are going to wake up, smell the coffee, pinch themselves, this is reality time gentlemen and ladies, it is reality time, these are real issues that affect real people, not just nurses either. This affects your children, your parents, your neighbours, your aunts, your uncles, and yes it does affect health care workers. They are the people who deliver the service that is required by all of the above.
What are you honourable gentlemen doing over there to support these people? Nothing. You have a minister who is out of control, he's got a cheque book over there and he signs his name and passes it along for his administrative staff, but the people delivering the service, this is how you treat them? Do you think they will forget? Come on, Mr. Minister. Nova Scotians will not forget, gentlemen; Nova Scotians will hold you accountable, and sooner or later, Mr. Speaker, the day will come when bells will ring, but it is not going to be the bells in this House that you are hearing, it is going to be the knock-out
bell and the knock-out bell is going to come from the voters in this province who realize what a sham is going on over there.
[7:15 a.m.]
I know I am almost out of time, Mr. Speaker, and all I can do is plead with that minister on behalf of the people I represent . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The honourable member is out of time. His time has expired.
The honourable member for Timberlea-Prospect.
MR. WILLIAM ESTABROOKS: Mr. Speaker, as I rise in my place this pleasant morning on, I guess, a test of our endurance and strength, it is also a test for the opportunity for us, as members of the Opposition, to bring to members opposite, to bring to Nova Scotians who are watching and, of course, to make sure that Nova Scotians across this province are aware of the fact that we have, as members of the Opposition, major concerns about this legislation, how it has been brought forward and some of the results.
You know, Mr. Speaker, this is another interesting test for this government and I think it is important that during my comments over the next few moments we look at some of the examples that we could benefit from over the next six months when the opportunity comes to make sure this legislation sees the full light of day by health care workers, by nurses, by Nova Scotians about their concerns about the health care system because the concern always comes back to - and we saw some of them here yesterday - who is listening to the people right out there in front-line health care? Who is listening to them? Is the Health Minister listening to them? Is this deputy minister who we hear about but never see - it never ceases to amaze me that this Deputy Minister of Health does not come in this House during budget estimates.
I don't know, Mr. Speaker, whether you noticed that or not, but the Deputy Minister of Health, when other deputy ministers are allowed to come into the House and sit next to the minister during budget estimates and have the opportunity to give them assistance and advice - now maybe this Minister of Health believes he doesn't need the deputy minister here - I would like to see for once this revered Deputy Minister of Health come into the House during estimates. I would love to see this Deputy Minister of Health for the next six months have the opportunity to listen to real front-line health care workers, but there are some lessons which we have to learn and these lessons I would like to bring to your attention.
I know it is a little early in the day for me to revert to being a history teacher, but I am going to refer back to a very important - and I am going to quote from it in a couple of places and if it is necessary, I guess I will table this, but then I will have to get the excerpts
photocopied for you, Mr. Speaker. This is Strikes in Nova Scotia, 1970-1985, and it was edited by a C.H.J. Gilson. This is good reading. I want you to know in preparation for my comments today, I took the opportunity to look that book over and there is one particular section in it that 26 years ago, June 15 and June 16, 1975, there was a very eerily striking comparison to what we are going through at this very moment.
I am going to refer to that book. I am also going to refer to a wonderful poem. I don't know if you have heard this poem, Mr. Speaker, but this poem, parts of it were quoted earlier, I heard in the debate, not that I was up listening last night but, you know, I had the privilege of teaching this young woman who wrote this poem. The poem is called This Hour Has Twenty-Two Dollars. It is written by a young nurse named Melissa Cavicchi and that poem I want you to know has much to say about what Ms. Cavicchi puts up with, the stress, the wear and tear on her family. I see you, hearing that name, Cavicchi, and you are thinking, I know that name. Well, they are residents of Tantallon. Melissa Ryan Cavicchi actually is from the beautiful Village of Prospect and when I get to that poem I will quote a couple of excerpts from it and I will table it as you will expect me to do, Mr. Speaker, and I hope members opposite read that poem because stanza after stanza of it really says that it would be a wonderful opportunity for any of those members over the next six months to be able to look and to listen to young people such as Melissa Cavicchi. I say young, because as a student of mine, I know that makes me older.
I want you to know that this woman is a front-line health care worker who is frustrated. She is overworked and she is overstressed and she was in our gallery yesterday. She was in our gallery. I haven't had an opportunity to speak to her but I am sure over the weekend I will drop by and we will have a chance to talk again and listen to Melissa Cavicchi, but members opposite and members of the Third Party also would benefit from hearing from a young nurse such as Melissa Cavicchi.
Then I am going to refer, as I often do during these debates, to various health care workers who I have heard from. As I know, you, Mr. [Deputy] Speaker, being the good constituency person that you are, I am sure over the last 24 hours you have a phone message bank that is full and I am sure that the light is blinking on that phone out there in the beautiful Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley, in Stewiacke. I am sure there are messages there from health care workers all across this province and from your constituency, in particular.
I want you to know one of the grave concerns I heard was from a woman by the name of Cynthia Driskill. Now Cynthia Driskill is the Editor of the Masthead News. Ms. Driskill has been going through some recurring health problems. Cynthia called me the other night very upset. She is undergoing chemo. I know Cynthia quite well and she has allowed me the opportunity to bring forward this concern. The concern that Ms. Driskill has is, what if this strike goes ahead. She says to me, Bill, what if this strike goes ahead, will I be able to receive my chemo? After all, there is a very serious issue that over the next two weeks - not over the next six months but over the next two weeks - will Cynthia Driskill, if we have a labour
interruption, will this be allowed? The answer, of course, is yes. ICUs, veterans care, chemotherapy, those essential services will be maintained. I am confident, I have the trust, I have the respect for health care workers that obviously members opposite do not have because of some of the fear-mongering, because of some of the scare tactics that have been brought forward with advertisements; essential services will be maintained.
From my understanding, now maybe the Minister of Health can correct me if I am wrong, there was and is a plan in effect so people such as Cynthia Driskill, so other seniors, would not have to fear the fact that essential services will be maintained.
We have seen this before, Mr. Speaker, it was June 1975. You know, some of the terms in June 1975, there was a nurses drain, they called it. They wanted - are you ready for this - a 54 per cent increase in wages. In 1975, the initial request was for a 54 per cent increase in wages. There were nurses making less in this province than retail clerks. That matter had to be addressed. I was a young teacher at that time and I can tell you that nurses have grown immeasurably because of their involvement in the 1975 strike. I had the opportunity yesterday to meet with a veteran of that strike - I think I can call her that, although we didn't get into her age - a woman, a health care worker who, incidentally, is from the beautiful Town of New Waterford that is so well served by the member for Cape Breton Centre. That woman, she worked through that strike and, as a Cape Breton nurse, she said it was one of the most important experiences of her life in the development of her professional career. Here she was again, yesterday, in Halifax taking on another government with some of the same ridiculous ideas.
So, Mr. Speaker, it would be a wonderful opportunity over the next six months for this government and members present to look closely at the parallels with the June 1975 nurses strike. Let's look at some of the personalities that were involved. The Premier at the time was Gerald Regan. The Minister of Labour was the past Mayor of the Halifax Regional Municipality, Walter Fitzgerald. Now I am sure the member for Preston can reassure us of the good working relationship he had when he was a councillor with Walter Fitzgerald. The Leader of the Opposition was John Buchanan. Now there is a name that members opposite sometimes in this House hold up for ridicule.
I know the members of the Third Party point to Senator John Buchanan constantly as the reason for their problems. I can remember meeting John Buchanan as he bounded up the steps to Sir John A. Macdonald High School, drove his own car out to the parking lot and, incidently, parked it in the wrong place, gave his keys to one of my students and said, move this car out of the parking lot. That was the Leader of the Opposition at the time in 1975, John Buchanan. Who was the Speaker? None other than Vince MacLean. So you consider this cast of characters and if you remember June 1975, it was that cast of characters that are going to have a role to play as we go through this history lesson.
I see the Minister of Tourism and Culture paying attention and I am glad he is because I am going to ask him questions later. I am going to ask him questions later about this important history parallel 26 years ago, June 15th and 16th, 1975. So let's remember those characters as we look at this parallel because it would take six months to fully be able to appreciate the difficulties of understanding the parallel between 1975 and . . .
HON. MICHAEL BAKER: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I am a student of history and have always been very interested in history, but I am also very interested in the hoist motion. Unfortunately, the wonders of 1975, as fascinating as I am sure they are, don't seem to be quite germane to the discussion about the hoist motion. I would perhaps ask the honourable member if he could just en passant, if he might just be able to talk about why a six month delay would have any connection to the events of 1975. I was a high school student at the time and it seems a little bit - no offence intended to the honourable member - dated relative to the strike.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Well, that is a fair concern that has been raised by the honourable Minister of Justice. Possibly, before the honourable member for Timberlea-Prospect does make the correlation for the House relative to his comments and the hoist, I should perhaps read the amendment into the record. I am sure it has been a few hours since the amendment was introduced. "Amendment, Second Reading, Bill No. 58, Healthcare Services Continuation (2001) Act. That the motion be amended by removing all the words following 'that' and inserting therefor the words: Bill No. 68, the Healthcare Services Continuation (2001) Act, be not now read a second time but that it be read a second time this day six months hence."
That amendment was submitted by the honourable Leader of the Opposition. The honourable member for Timberlea-Prospect has been straying somewhat and I would ask him to be a little more germane to the amendment.
[7:30 a.m.]
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Speaker, I thank you for your guidance and I thank you for reminding us of the excellent motion brought forward by the Leader of the Opposition. I hope that the member for Lunenburg benefited from having a good, thorough, history, political science lesson in 1975 because he is going to get one here again as I look at the parallels and the importance of looking at the parallels over the next six months. In June 1975, I want to turn to Page 41, when we look at the fact this is what the author says - the author of this section, incidentally, is a Judith MacLean and I hope the Minister of Justice looks forward to looking to this particular chapter - Ms. MacLean writes that there was a clear consensus that if nurses walked off their jobs they would want to maintain essential services so no patients would be adversely affected by their action. Now, there is an issue that would take over the next six months to clearly point out that when and if a labour interruption does take place, essential services would be maintained.
If you look at what The Halifax Chronicle-Herald said, later on, because of course the nurses did go out and the nurses provided essential services, let's just see what The Halifax Herald says, from Page 44 of this same article, The Halifax Herald reported that hospitals continue to operate on a reduced scale with little sign of a major deterioration in health care. So my question is - and it comes back to the Minister of Health - why would you question the professionalism of these health care workers by saying that - if and when this labour interruption does take place - essential services could not be maintained? The lessons of history should not be forgotten. Over the next six months, it would be a wonderful opportunity for members opposite to look at the lessons of that June 1975 strike.
Who wanted this bill delayed? There is a key point. Who wanted to delay it? Because there was back-to-work legislation introduced by the Liberal Government of the day. In his place, as the Leader of the Opposition, stood John Buchanan, the good Tory godfather to those members opposite, and he said that this legislation was unfair, that it treated health care workers with no respect and that health care workers deserved a better wage. John Buchanan, as the Leader of the Opposition, asked the Speaker, Vince MacLean, to allow an emergency debate. And, Mr. Speaker, unlike you, without the fairness and the expertise of that, that emergency debate was turned down. The Liberals of that day were intent upon getting the nurses back to work. The Liberals were doing that, the Tories were fighting it.
Now we have it reversed. Thank God we have some New Democrats in here who are going to point out the lessons of history that have to be learned from this. To the credit of the Minister of Labour - and this is important and the Minister of Labour opposite perhaps could learn from this - this is my last excerpt from this book, the Minister of Labour, Walter Fitzgerald, he admits . . .
AN HON. MEMBER: Goog.
MR. ESTABROOKS: The good Goog that he is, and that is a term of endearment, incidentally, here in the HRM. Walter Fitzgerald says from Page 55, one Cabinet Minister publicly expressed his regret, Walter Fitzgerald admitted that he had never believed in the back-to-work legislation.
Good for Walter. In fact, there were demands that he should resign. Eventually, of course, the Liberals backed off on the legislation, negotiation continued and that is what would be allowed to continue over the next six months. Negotiations continue, collective bargaining is a democratic right in this province, or it used to be. Collective bargaining, over the next six months, where the people involved would be allowed to sit down and continue to bargain. That, after all, would be a perfect settlement to this labour dispute.
That is one of the lessons of history, but isn't it ironic that over the next six months, all members present here could look at the irony of having John Buchanan as the Leader of
the Opposition standing up to this back-to-work legislation and the Liberals trying to shove it down the throats of nurses?
Nurses came out of that strike very, very different. I want to point out to the members opposite that over the next six months they should consider some of the conclusions that came out of that 1975 strike. First of all, nurses never forgot. My friend, the member for Cape Breton Centre, his nursing friend who was here visiting yesterday, she said to us - the member for Cape Breton Centre and other members of our caucus - that was the event in her early career as a nurse that confirmed that she was going to be a card-carrying union member of whatever union, the NSNU, the NSGEU, that represented nurses. Nurses came out of that 1975 strike more united, more professional, willing, after all, to no longer take it from government. They weren't going to take it from the Liberals then, they are not going to take it from the Tories now.
Out of that, however, comes a certain bitterness and suspicion with politicians and I am one of those, Mr. Speaker, whether it is Liberal or Tory over the next six months, it would be a wonderful opportunity for this government opposite to have the opportunity to sit down and listen to this nurse from New Waterford so that she could have her say about the comparisons between 1975 and 1991.
Now I know the Minister of Justice is dying to hear about this poem because maybe he didn't have much of a history teacher. I hope he had an English teacher who taught him the appreciation of poetry. Now let's look at this. Melissa Cavicchi, a young nurse who lives in Tantallon Woods, . . .
HON. MICHAEL BAKER: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. One thing that I wouldn't permit to continue would be the libel of my high school history teacher who was one of the finest teachers I have ever had and who, for the record, was one of the people who led to my tremendous interest in history. So just for the record, I would ask the honourable member to withdraw the slander that he unintentionally made of my very wonderful high school history teacher.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. It seems to be more of a dispute between two honourable members but the honourable Minister of Justice certainly does want his former history teacher to be shed in a most appropriate light so I would ask the honourable member for Timberlea-Prospect if he would want to make some comment relative to the concern that has been raised.
MR. ESTABROOKS: Mr. Speaker, I certainly, under no circumstances, would make a reflection on the fact that that particular teacher in that particular school, with obviously that outstanding young student at the time - it is no reflection on the fact that probably that young student would have benefited much more immeasurably if he had been a student at Sir John A. Macdonald High School and his history teacher had been this particular member
and perhaps he would have seen the error of his ways, would have read the Profit and Politics from J.S. Woodsworth and would have turned out a good social democrat like his history teacher was. Certainly I am not reflecting on the fact that the Minister of Justice didn't receive a proper education at the high school that he attended.
Let's talk about the fact that there has to be an appreciation for poetry at this stage. Now members opposite know, and there are members in the gallery and, of course, members of the public are aware that there was a fantastic member of this House who took great pride in her poetry. So it is with no reflection that I refer to Eileen O'Connell, our dear departed friend. As I was going to read this into the record, Eileen, of course, in her poetry, which she often wrote, not just read. I want you to know that this poem, written by this nurse, would be the very thing that Eileen would appreciate so much, a poem that comes from the heart, a poem that reflects the true concerns and stress of being a health care worker in Nova Scotia and it would be a wonderful opportunity over the next six months for members opposite to look and listen to what a young nurse such as Melissa Cavicchi says.
Now there are three pages to this and I am not going to read it all but I am going to table it, Mr. Speaker, when I finish a couple of excerpts. Actually, what Ms. Cavicchi does, is she writes two parts to the poem. She writes about the day shift and then later on, she writes about the night shift. You know there are many nurses in the health care facilities across this province who have seen this poem from this nurse and, you know, the amazing thing is some of the things that have happened here actually happen to nurses.
I know, Mr. Speaker, you are looking forward to seeing this poem and hearing parts of it and I know the Minister of Justice, with his appreciation of poetry, will also look at it, but this is a serious issue. This is a poem written by a nurse and maybe the Minister of Justice could take this poem home because I believe there is someone in his home who might be able to do a critique on this poem and say to the Minister of Justice, you know, that young nurse from Upper Tantallon, who is the member for Timberlea-Prospect's constituent, she has a lot to say about the stress and over the next six months what a wonderful opportunity to be able to appreciate this poetry.
Now, Mr. Speaker, if you will stick with me, I want to talk about the day shift:
"By tired worn faces I don't ask how the night went
Just look at the book and write down my assignment
'They're crazy, I can't do this all in one day!
Iv'e only two hands, I must start right away!' . . .
And a minute for break is all I can wrangle
One more buzzer, look out, I'll need someone to strangle
It can't be that bad, I go through in my head
As the post-op in ten falls out of her bed.
My nerves are rubbed raw, my hair is a mess
Need some help, call the doctor and ask him I guess
'Please order some haldol for bed eight whose confused.
We are desperate! You know it's three days since he snoozed!'."
The stress and the work that this woman goes through day in, day out, and besides that, manages a home with two young people, two outstanding young children and, of course, has to make sure of all the other things that are going right in her life aside from her professional career. Let's turn to the night shift:
"Now my patient's awake. Thank God he's so sweet
So I search for a flannel and I cover his feet
Good food at the grill? We all are in doubt
Find out who wants in, make a list, order out.
Now my lids are so heavy, my stomach so ill
All I want is my pillow and just one zantac pill
Four a.m., the phone's ringing, oh, what can this mean?
More sick calls to deal with. I just want to scream!
Lifting and turning, my back is so sore
We can manage till seven, after that we need more
Now three less to work with, must get on the horn
To find their replacements before it is morn."
Miss Cavicchi now is looking for someone to come in because she has had a short on her shift and she begins with this, she says to her fellow nurse:
"Sorry to wake you, can you come to work?
We're short staffed today and the floor is berserk!
'I'm scheduled for nights, can you call next in line?'
'But you're my last hope, and you'll get overtime!'"
The issue for the Melissa Cavicchis is not the overtime, the issue is stress; the issue is working conditions. The issue is after all, does this government have respect and understanding for a young woman such as Melissa Cavicchi and the final concluding stanza:
"So to work here you truly must think I'm a jerk
But the fact is my friend, I do love my work
So when things go as planned or a patient goes sour
Just remember the title of how much an hour!" This Hour Has Twenty-Two Dollars.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to table that for members opposite. That, after all, is some reading that all members in this House would benefit from immeasurably. I again thank and congratulate Melissa Cavicchi for that poem. That, after all, is what could happen over the next six months when members opposite could have a firsthand experience to sit in the kitchen, to sit on the back lawn and listen to a young nurse such as Melissa Cavicchi and understand some of the problems that she has to endure and over the next six months, if this hoist goes through, it would be a wonderful opportunity for all members of this House to learn from some of the experiences of these nurses.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to turn to some other nurses if I may, other health care workers, and I want to share some of their concerns with you because as we are all in the business of hearing from health care workers and I know that you are too, Mr. Speaker, I want to refer to a couple of my constituents. One of them is Bruce Flemming and, incidentally, Bruce Flemming passed some comments on to me; I know Mr. Flemming quite well and I want you to know that he made some comments to me over the phone that I certainly wouldn't use in this House. They are very appropriate, the description of the Premier, but they are very unparliamentary in my opinion and I pointed that out to Bruce.
[7:45 a.m.]
I wanted him to know that I appreciated hearing from him in his usual candid, direct way with the frustrations and the comparisons of the dictatorial way this legislation was brought in. There have been great dictators - I don't know if you call them great dictators, let's call them some poor democrats over the years - and these great dictators have brought in legislation and shoved it down the throats of their people. Bruce Flemming, he compared the Premier to one of those prominent dictators. I don't want to get into the reference of the dictator because it could get very personal and there could be all kinds of comparisons and I know the members for Pictou will be upset with me but let's just know that Mr. Flemming's comparison is one that I agree with.
I want also to turn to Jean MacDonald, Jean MacDonald is a veteran nurse, she lives in Timberlea; in fact, she has a number of Dalhousie University students that she is responsible for this year. She was telling me yesterday that of the nine Dalhousie University third year students, third year students in the nursing program that she has, eight of them are looking to jobs outside of this province. Eight of the nine of the third year students that Jean MacDonald is working so closely with as a veteran nurse, passing on her expertise to these younger people, eight of those nine are looking forward to leaving this province. There is an issue that over the next six months would be of real concern. Jean MacDonald's concern, Jean told me her age and I guess I can pass it on to you, Jean is 43, 43 years of age. She is concerned that in the Halifax Regional Municipality this is the average age of nurses according to Ms. MacDonald. These young people are leaving this province.
The question that members opposite have to ask, the question that health care workers want answered is, why? Why are these young people leaving? That is a rhetorical question, because if you think about it, why would a young person stay here with the stress and the working conditions. I know the member for Shelburne brought in a controversial bill and I heard the members of the Third Party go over the edge about the fact that there were signing bonuses and golf carts promised to lure doctors to certain communities, there would be a bidding war. Well, there is already a bidding war going on for nurses. I have a daughter who recently graduated from journalism, she had a friend who graduated from nursing. That young nurse was offered more enticements to go to Texas, to go to Virginia, to go to Maine. If you are a Dallas Cowboys fan and you're a nurse, I'm telling you, season tickets are available, you go to Dallas-Fort Worth.
Now young nurses are leaving, there would be an issue over the next six months that we could look at and that nurses could say, why stay? After all, do we want to work in a health care system where we do not have the respect of the government, where we do not have the respect of the Minister of Health? That is the message that is out there, whether that is true for the Minister of Health or not. I hope not because, of course, as members know and as members of the nursing profession know, health care workers know, I knew the Minister of Health prior to politics and it does disappoint me that it becomes so personal and that the Minister of Health now is looked upon as not respecting the very health care workers that he is ultimately responsible for. That is an issue that will have to be addressed by that minister and perhaps by the Premier.
I want, however, to turn to another nurse, if I may. Her name is Sherry Rose and she sent me this e-mail and I talked to her on the phone about this because I was interested in certain sections of the e-mail and I will table this. Maybe the Minister of Health should have a look at this because it is very personal and it concerns the interview that the Minister of Health had with CBC Radio. She says, in the e-mail: I believe he - that is, the Minister of Health - is trying to scare the public into thinking there will be no emergency service and make the public think we are putting their lives at risk.
Here is the key sentence, not to mention the complete lack of respect he showed health care workers. There is the word that stings - and it must sting the Minister of Health - I mean, we can disagree with each other, we can have idea differences. They can be for and against when it comes to ideas, but we must respect each other. The key item here is, these health care workers do not believe the Minister of Health respects them.
And she goes on: As a medical laboratory technologist, I am overworked, underpaid and extremely undervalued. We are taking a stand to try to get what we deserve and Mr. Muir - excuse me for using his name, the Minister of Health - and the Capital District Health Authority are making us out to be the bad guys. I just want fair and equal treatment.
There is a health care worker who has big-time concerns. She says - and, final quote and then I will ask the Page to table this - Ms. Rose says: I came back to Nova Scotia to make $10 an hour less than previously, poorer working conditions and get absolutely no respect from the government. There is that word again and I want the Minister of Health to look at this e-mail and perhaps get a member of his staff to contact Sherry Rose, perhaps himself, to respond to that e-mail.
This morning I had the opportunity to meet with another nurse who came here to the House on her way to work. Her name is Frances Earl. Ms. Earl graduated from St. Rita's Hospital Nursing School in Sydney, Cape Breton, August 1978. Here is another issue of an older nurse who has worked in other places across this province and across this country. She brought with her, her September, 1993 pay stub from British Columbia. Very interesting. I am going to table it so the Minister of Health can have a look at it. This nurse, her pay in 1993 from British Columbia, was $26.96 an hour - 1993. There is, after all, an important document brought to our attention by a nurse who decided for personal and family reasons to return to Nova Scotia. It is not an issue for Frances Earl about just money, however. It is an issue about working conditions.
I want to share with you, the commitment of this nurse. Let's look at exactly what happened on Christmas day and Christmas holidays this past year. During that time, this nurse worked 16 hour days. She came in for overtime. The surgeons at the time were still scheduling work and she said: I was never so tired and my Christmas was ruined. I saw very little of my family. When I called to let my family know that I would not be able to attend Christmas Eve Mass with them, my six year old daughter said, Mommy, don't they know it's Christmas and you are supposed to be at home with us? I told her, Nurse Earl goes on, I told her there were many people sick and I was helping them to get home to their families. There is the concern of a nurse that continues to go out of her way to provide first-class, front-line health care. She doesn't believe she is listened to.
In fact, earlier this morning, Mr. Speaker, that was the nurse who sat there and became upset with some of those members over there because they were not paying attention to some of the comments that we are making. I want to thank Frances Earle for her thoughts and I encourage other nurses to continue to bring forth those concerns to us because over the next six months, there would be ample opportunity to be able to visit with members. There would be ample opportunity to make sure that nurses and health care workers, whether lab technologists, pharmacists, of course, nurses, it would be a perfect opportunity for them to be able to express their opinion to health care workers.
I want those health care workers to know, we want to continue to hear from you. The members of the New Democratic Party want to continue to bring your concerns to this government. Hopefully, there are members opposite that in their heart of hearts know this is bad legislation, that the June 1975 example is something that could be listened to and
studied again over the next six months and that this would be a perfect opportunity not to make the mistakes of June 1975 in June 2001.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Page for photo enhancing this, and I am going to table this one too. This comes from this morning's paper. It comes from The Chronicle-Herald. I am going to take a few minutes to read this, so the Page doesn't have to come over right now. Members opposite, perhaps, I know they are in their places there and hopefully not doing crossword puzzles, but instead are looking at the VOICE OF THE PEOPLE. Perhaps they are looking at the voice of the people when you look at these headlines: Offer an insult; Quality of life issue; Unfair treatment, Absurd suggestion; Just imagine; Won't stoop so low; Fair and just package; What's left to protect?
All of those headlines come from this morning's VOICE OF THE PEOPLE from The Chronicle-Herald. But let's look at what these average Nova Scotians say about this issue. The headline reads, "The Government plans to take away the right to strike from 10,000 nurses and health-care workers and give cabinet the power to impose a contract. What do you think?"
Well, let's see what Judith Cox thinks. "They're showing health-care workers what they feel about them. . . . If we're so essential, pay us what we deserve . . . ." Obviously, Judith is a health care worker. "Who wants to go into a hospital full of disgruntled workers?" What did Mary-Anne Compagnon say? She said, in answer to this question, what do you think, "They should have the right to strike as well as anybody else."
What does Crystal Gerbert say? "Nobody should have that right taken away from them. . . ." Here is a key thing, "We are . . .", Crystal says in The Chronicle-Herald this morning, ". . . a so-called free country. If we don't agree with what's being said, then we have the right to stand up for it.". The right to collective bargaining, the right to withdraw your services. That is, after all, one of the rights that workers in this province and in this country have fought long and hard for.
I want, finally, to go to Elizabeth Levangie, who says, and this is a really key one and I hope members opposite realize that these are just people from the street. I would assume The Chronicle-Herald just went out and took some photos and said, would you comment on this piece of legislation that is here in front of the Legislature. Elizabeth Levangie says, "I believe the health-care profession is under-rated. The workers are not getting paid what they should be getting paid, but a lot of people suffer when they go on strike. . . . It's a difficult question.". That is the answer that we know we are facing here. That is the answer that Elizabeth and many other Nova Scotians are now trying to answer.
You have to balance the benefits, the pros, the cons and the necessity of a piece of legislation that basically is going to jam it down the throats of Nova Scotians. Over the next six months, if the opportunity was there, that wouldn't have to happen. Those members
opposite would not have to return to their constituencies this weekend and put up with some of the abuse that they are going to put up with. Instead, they could stay, let's look at this legislation over the next six months. Let's let collective bargaining go ahead. Let's, after all, allow the democratic process to take place and, finally and ultimately, let's make sure that health care workers are treated fairly and that they are paid fairly.
Under no circumstances can this government blame health care workers for the long lineups, for the delays. Under no circumstances can this government blame health care workers for the budget problems. We have heard and I have read some of the ridiculous salaries that certain members of the Department of Health, on the Minister of Health's staff are paid. That is after all an issue that is controlled by the Minister of Health, the expert from out of town, the expert from British Columbia, who was brought here to solve all the problems of the world. I thought that the Minister of Health, when he sat on this side, heard enough of that nonsense from the Third Party that is now sitting here. I thought that he would at least have learned something. We don't need any more experts from out of town. We have to listen to the very health care workers who, after all, know what is happening in the health care system.
The concern, after all, comes down to what is best for Nova Scotians, Mr. Speaker. Is it right to scare the seniors, to scare Cynthia Driskill, who I mentioned earlier, who is concerned about her chemotherapy treatment? Is it right to put them in those sorts of stressful situations? The health care workers I have spoken to and listened to have assured me and members of this caucus that they are not going to chain the front doors of the hospitals; that the emergency wards are still going to be open; that ambulances will still be received; that people with heart attacks and various other serious injuries will be taken care of; that people in ICUs, that veterans in the hospitals will not be neglected. Yes, there will be less staff available; yes, there will be fewer beds available. That is all part of the labour interruption and the process we are going through in this province.
[8:00 a.m.]
The other day I was quoted on the radio. Mr. [Deputy] Speaker, I haven't heard you on this show very often lately. I know that Rick Howe, a well-known local journalist, of course was on the morning shift for years on CJCH. Now, of course, he is on CFDR/KIXX Country. I wanted to hear you more often there, because it is an awkward time for us, it is between 1:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. I was asked by Mr. Howe to make a few comments on the problems that were going to transpire because of this legislation.
I made a comment, and as soon as I got off the phone I received a call on my cell phone from one of my constituents. Mr. Speaker, I did say this and under no circumstances am I apologizing for it. I think health care workers will understand the correlation. I said on the Rick Howe phone-in show yesterday that union is not a four-letter word.
Now four-letter words to me, Mr. Speaker, are words that when I was a school principal were things you dealt with - that is a four-letter word and you are not allowed to use it, I would say and would, for various reasons, have to discipline that young person or remove some privileges. Four-letter words, and there are some good four-letter words, but there are also some bad four-letter words. That constituent who called me was Reg Knight from Lower Prospect. He said to me, and he wants it passed on to this government - there would be a Nova Scotian this government would benefit hearing from. Reg Knight has strong opinions about the union movement in Nova Scotia.
Union is not a four-letter word. It is not a bad word, it is not something we want to eradicate from the dictionary, it is not something we want to eradicate from the legislation in this province. There are five letters in the word union, and it is not a bad five-letter word either.
There are members opposite who go out of their way to trash unions because for one reason or another they believe we should have more half-time, part-time, no-benefit workers. We should have more Sobeys' workers. We should have more half-times, where we-don't-have-to-pay-the-benefit sort of workers. Unionism is something we should be proud of in this province.
I know the member for Cape Breton North comes from an area that has a strong union tradition. Unions, after all, are part of the history of this province; they are part of Cape Breton, in particular. They are part of this Party; they are part of every Nova Scotian, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a union member. When you go through the union process and you join a union and when you allow your union membership, when you have the democratic right to go in there and vote for people to represent you or, ultimately, to make that final decision to lead to that other five-letter word, strike - that other word, strike - is a word that union members do not take lightly.
Everyone who says, well, you are going to be a union member, you are going to go on strike, there is not one health care worker, there is not one nurse, there is not one lab tech who wants to go on strike. They are professional, they are caring, they are involved in their work, and they don't want to have to go on strike but, if it comes down to it to send the message to this government, they are willing to do that. They are willing to do that because of the message that they have received, the lack of respect they have received, the lack of caring and concern that they have received from this government. That is an unfortunate message for all members of this Legislature. We have professional health care workers in this province, we have workers who are trained that other parts of this country, other parts of North America, want to come to Nova Scotia to recruit health care workers.
Mr. Speaker, last week was a beautiful Tuesday, I remember it, ah, what a great day it was. I was out knocking on some doors in Greenwood Heights. I had a few moments so I thought maybe it's an opportunity, there are lots of young families there, lots of young
children there and, lo and behold, I came to the door of a health care worker. That health care worker had two young children who were just arriving home from BLT Elementary, Beechville-Lakeside-Timberlea Elementary, and she was looking forward to going to work on her shift, waiting for her partner to arrive home, juggling all the commitments that she had at that time.
What a wonderful opportunity for members opposite, what a wonderful opportunity for all members of this Legislature, to go to Greenwood Heights with me over the next six months, to sit on the front porch as I did for 15 or 20 minutes and listen to that health care worker. That health care worker gave me her opinions, and they are strong opinions, and over the next six months it would be a wonderful opportunity if all members of this House had the opportunity to listen to front-line health care workers. That health care worker, Judith, does not want to go on strike, she does not want to lose the pay, let's face it. She has a mortgage, she has an important summer ahead of her when it comes to commitments to her children, she has expenses, she doesn't want to go on strike, but the message is she is willing to go out there on the line with that picket and she is willing to show this government she is not going to take it.
Health care workers are not going to continue to take the abuse that they have been faced with in this province, the lack of respect. They are not going to do that. It would be a wonderful opportunity over the next six months, the public relations, the positive public relations that would benefit those members opposite. Those members opposite would have a first-hand opportunity to sit and listen to health care workers, to listen to their point of view because I am sure that this weekend they are going to get an earful. They are going to hear it from the health care workers in their constituencies, and the best opportunity would be if you were able to say to them when you make the calls over the next two days, or Sunday or whatever time you're eventually going to get back to all these calls, you can say to them look, we're going to have a perfect opportunity over the next six months to be able to look at this legislation, to be able to talk to you about your concerns in health care.
This is, after all, what health care workers would love to hear and that would be some tremendous positive public relations for the government opposite, for the Minister of Health, for those health care workers who firmly believe that the Minister of Health has no respect for them. Now that truly questions a particular member of this Legislature, and that concerns me. That concerns me because the Minister of Health I know - I hope I know him well enough in a previous career - wants to have the respect of health care workers. He wants to make sure that health care workers are going to say that is the Minister of Health and he knows what goes on in the health care system. But how can the Minister of Health know that if he doesn't listen? Over the next six months would be a perfect opportunity for him to be able to go through that process and listen.
Let's look at a couple of really important facts as my time begins to wind down, and I know that time flies and I know that the Minister of Tourism and Culture is probably wanting to know about that trick question that I had there about the history lesson and Walter Fitzgerald's role. I think that would be a wonderful opportunity for that Minister of Tourism and Culture. There is a young minister, there is the MLA for Inverness who could say to the Minister of Health, he could say to the senior Cabinet Ministers, you know the Opposition has a point here. That MLA for Inverness, that Minister of Tourism and Culture, he could be - maybe I don't want to go too far with this comparison - but he could be the Walter Fitzgerald of 2001.
That member could be the member who is going to say to the other members of his Cabinet, I don't like this legislation, I don't think it is legislation that we should continue to push. After all, what was the lesson learned in 1975? Walter Fitzgerald had the courage of his convictions. Now the members of the time were very concerned about it, but Walter Fitzgerald has gone on to other political careers. He is, after all, in many ways a very respected municipal politician, and that would be after a long political career. Maybe the MLA for Inverness is looking for a long political career. The people in Inverness would say, good, our member stood up for us. Our member went to the Minister of Health, our member went to the Premier and said this isn't the sort of legislation that we should continue to force through.
Members in the gallery and friends and viewers at home should know that this bill is eventually going to go to Law Amendments. Law Amendments, as you well know is a unique and wonderful opportunity in this House. It is an opportunity for Nova Scotians to come into the Red Chamber, down the hallway here, and have their say on pieces of legislation. I encourage health care workers not to be intimidated by the process. I want them to come to Law Amendments, to call the Legislative Counsel's office to make appointments, to have your say about what you think is wrong with this legislation. When it goes to Law Amendments, those members who come forward at that time, there are five Conservative members - the committee, incidentally, is chaired by that very well-educated history student from Lunenburg, the Minister of Justice, and there are two members of the Liberal Party on the committee and there are two New Democrats - that is the opportunity for front-line health care workers to come forward at that time to sit at a table with us as legislators and to have your say.
It is not a big deal. We ask a few questions, we want your opinion. I hope health care workers across this province, health care workers in all lines of front-line health care take the opportunity to go to the Law Amendments Committee, to make your appointment - 15 minutes is usually what you are allowed and I know the Minister of Justice is very flexible with that. The Minister of Justice will want to hear from as many people as possible about Law Amendments and about the concerns that you have. That is the chance for us to show this government that this piece of legislation is flawed and it is wrong.
I want members opposite to be aware of the fact that when we go to Law Amendments - because inevitably this debate that we are going through in the hoist, they have the numbers, the government has the numbers, the hoist motion will be defeated and it will go over to Law Amendments - that is the opportunity, I want the members of front-line health care, I want them to come to Law Amendments to have their say, to point out their concerns, to make sure that at that time members there listen. It is very important for people who are listening or other viewers to know that health care workers, you are not going to have the Minister of Health there asking you questions, you are going to have backbenchers. Backbenchers who will sit there and hopefully will ask a question, or be allowed a question. I actually heard a question asked in Law Amendments here a couple of weeks ago. The member for Preston asked a question. It was an amazing event, because usually of course the questions are asked of the witnesses by the members of the Opposition.
Over the next six months it would be a wonderful opportunity for the member for Preston in particular, but the member for Queens, the member for Shelburne, that member who went out there on the limb about health care, who went out there to make sure that controversial piece of legislation was going to get through, that would be a wonderful opportunity for those backbench members of this government to listen to individual health care workers. That Law Amendments procedure is one that is valued in this province, it is one that we will benefit from continuously. This piece of legislation, hopefully, with the government's good wishes and the influence of the Minister of Tourism and Culture, will be withdrawn. It's wrong, it's unfair and it does not respect health care workers. I thank you for your time, Mr. Speaker.
[8:15 a.m.]
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Cape Breton South.
MR. MANNING MACDONALD: Mr. Speaker, I rise in my place to join this debate on the hoist of Bill No. 68. Perhaps at the outset I might refer to today's edition of The Halifax Chronicle-Herald, the editorial page. I think what is said in The Halifax Chronicle-Herald today probably sums up what is going on here in this House. I personally don't agree with very much that is said in an editorial comment in The Halifax Chronicle-Herald from time to time, but I agree with this particular remark. "But the government argues, absurdly, that its bill doesn't drastically curtail labour rights since bargaining is allowed to continue. In name, yes. But hog-tied unions have little to bargain with. And cabinet has the power to impose contracts when it is 'satisfied' the parties are deadlocked. Health workers are entitled to a fairer process."
This is not me saying this. This is not our Party saying this. This is not the NDP saying this. This is the editorial writers of the largest daily newspaper in this province saying this on the very day after this bill was introduced to the House.
Mr. Speaker, aside from all the other reasons why this bill should be hoisted, I believe this government has committed a grave error here, but not only that, a political error that they are not going to be able to recover from. I believe with all that has been going on with this government and all that is wrong with this government they have stepped over the line here because they have now taken on the professionals working in the health care field in this province and I think it is going to be to the detriment of this governing Party now and to the detriment of this governing Party well into the future, because these health care workers, these nurses, these technicians, these people who work in all phases of health care in this province are not going to forget Bill No. 68. They are not going to forget the kind of contempt that this crowd opposite has placed on them with this bill being introduced to the House.
Mr. Speaker, as I stand in my place here, maybe we should go back in time and revisit the same place here in perhaps the year 1925 when my grandfather stood in this House and filibustered a bill. In those days you were allowed to speak in this House as long as you wanted for 24 hours. My grandfather was a member of this House from the former Farm Labour Party in 1925 and spoke against the government of the day sending troops to Cape Breton to break a miner's strike. We all heard about Davis Day, and we all heard about the sacrifices that the miners have made.
My grandfather spoke here for 24 hours. He may have been in this very place, I don't know where he sat in this House, but there were four Farm Labour Party members. Three from Cape Breton and I believe one from the Guysborough area were elected to the House at that time. My grandfather being a union man was here representing miners and tried to tell this House that they were making a grave error by putting legislation through to send troops to Cape Breton to stop a strike by miners in Cape Breton who were simply out on a legal strike for human rights, actually, not only labour rights but basic human rights which the company was not providing them at the time.
So, Mr. Speaker, after 24 hours what happened was my grandfather sat down and they sent the troops to Cape Breton. So all was for not. He made his case in the House for 24 hours against what he called oppressive action by the government against labourers in Nova Scotia. The result of the troops going to Cape Breton at that time was that Bill Davis was killed as a result of that and, today, we still honour the memory of Bill Davis and honour the memory of the miners who fought so valiantly against an oppressive employer.
Mr. Speaker, if you want to fast-forward now to this time and place and to what is going on in this House, it is not unlike what happened back then, except that it is 75 or 76 years later. Here we have a group in government that is taking oppressive action against one of the most respected groups of professionals in Nova Scotia, the health care workers: nurses, health care workers, whatever their job is in the health care system.
This government has shown nothing but contempt for this group, for many, many reasons. One reason I will highlight right now is the fact that on a day earlier this week they appoint a mediator to sit down and try to hammer out an agreement and the next day they bring this bill into the House. So that question has not been asked, Mr. Speaker, why that course of action was taken when the government felt it necessary to put a mediator in place to deal with this issue.
Mr. Speaker, it is not the fact that we want to ensure there is no disruption in health care delivery in this province. If that was the only problem here we could have solved that issue easily by having compulsory arbitration between two groups. If you can't settle the issue, then compulsory arbitration is employed with a person agreed to by both parties to set any wage increases or working conditions or whatever is in the contract; in other words, both sides would be subject to an independent person instituting compulsory arbitration in any case.
I believe the health care professionals would accept compulsory arbitration. What they won't accept, and should not have to accept, is the Cabinet downstairs deciding that enough is enough in the negotiations and we are going to impose a settlement.
Now you have to look at who is doing what to whom here. The Cabinet of this province is the employer. Now they will tell you no, no, it is the health boards. Where do the health boards get their money? From the government. Who is the employer? The Cabinet, the Finance Minister, the Treasury benches. So when they get tired of a labour dispute, of negotiations not going anywhere, they simply go downstairs in the bunker and legislate a settlement, they say what they are going to earn.
Now, does anybody really believe the Cabinet is going to go against themselves in giving out raises, or are they going to protect their own purse? They are going to come down on the side of the employer every single time, in legislating a settlement to contracts. In other words, to put it simply, there is going to be no more collective bargaining with these groups.
This is only the tip of the iceberg, Mr. Speaker, because today it is the health care workers, tomorrow it will be other groups of workers in this province, and eventually every single public sector person in this province will be subject to the Cabinet dictating what they are going to earn in this province; collective bargaining will be a thing of the past. That is what is going to happen here, this is the Tory way. This is the right-wing agenda, this is the Mike Harris agenda which, by the way, will never work in Nova Scotia because they won't be around long enough to see it work.
It is interesting that this legislation only applies until the year 2004. I wonder why that is. There is a provincial election coming in the next couple of years, so there is not going to be any more collective bargaining until after the next provincial election. The government
is not going to run the risk of any more strikes or labour disruptions, they will simply legislate it so the health care workers can't take any action until after the next election.
Then they will come in with something else, if they survive, which I doubt, because it was pointed out to me yesterday that in this profession for every 50 people in this province there is a connection to a health care worker one way or the other. This has been a group of people who have been probably the least militant of any labour group that has demonstrated over the past number of years in this province, because they are professionals. They are more interested in doing their jobs in their workplace for your relatives and my relatives than they are about marching with picket signs and causing civil disobedience. They are not interested in that but I think this government has succeeded in pushing that button. I believe the tranquility of the workplace of those organizations are going to change now. I believe in the next few days you are going to see an indication that this government has pushed this group too far.
There is no need of this legislation. There is another agenda here, just like the agenda in Bill No. 20, just like the hidden agenda, Mr. Speaker, in the Barrington bill. This government is taking control of the entire public sector in this province, including municipal situations and provincial regulations by Cabinet decree. In other words, it is going so far in this province we won't need the Legislature anymore. That will be a rubber stamp. We will come in here for a couple of weeks every year, sign a proclamation authorizing the money to the government and go home because there will be no sense in negotiating any bills here anymore because the Cabinet will have the power to literally do whatever they want. Agressive power, yes; power that is not in the best interest of the people of this province.
The bill says nothing about support for workers or anything. The bill is all about disrespect for workers in this province, particularly health care workers. In talking to a nurse downstairs here yesterday, she reminded me that there are a number of nurses who live in pockets throughout the province, in different constituencies, and one nurse reminded me that in the constituency of Halifax Bedford Basin, for example, . . .
AN HON. MEMBER: Who is the MLA?
MR. MANNING MACDONALD: . . . there are over 500 nurses living in a particular area there. The MLA for Halifax Bedford Basin is going to have to explain to those nurses why she sat in this House and said nothing . . .
AN HON. MEMBER: And their families.
MR. MANNING MACDONALD: . . . and their families, while this bill was going through the House. I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, that the people who work in this profession are not going to forget this day in Nova Scotia to the point where in the next election they are not going to forget who sat by in the constituencies and said nothing
about this bill. The backbenchers who just sat there like lemmings never said a word about the bill, just let the Cabinet push it through. They have been told they had better toe the Party line here because if they have any chance of going anywhere with this Party, don't speak out for the wishes of the nurses who live in your constituency, don't speak out for the people of Nova Scotia this government is showing disrespect for. Sit silently and vote yes with the government.
That is going to come at a cost, Mr. Speaker, because those people won't be back here after the next election. As I said so many times in this House, some people go in and out of this place so fast you would never know they were here. Since 1993, there are only maybe 10 or 11 people at the most who are still here, most of them on this side of the House, by the way, not on that side. I am going to tell you that if you think you have a safe seat over there to bridge you to retirement, think again, because statistics will tell you that you are not going to be back and with legislation like this coming before the House it is guaranteed you won't be back in the next election.
So all you people who want to be one-termers are going to get your wish if you keep coming to the House with legislation like Bill No. 20, legislation like the Barrington bill and legislation against health care workers in this province to cut out the right for collective bargaining. That is what it is here.
[8:30 a.m.]
You have told the health care workers of this province that we are going to dictate what you are going to make. We are going to dictate your working conditions in the future and if you don't like it you can leave. That is what they are saying, the Health Minister, the Deputy Health Minister, the high-paid help in the Health Department and the Premier. The Premier, by the way, has yet to answer the nurses and yet to face this House on this particular issue. He has been absent and I think it is deplorable that the First Minister of this province would not sit in his place and answer questions in this House about this bill. He ducked the issue yesterday and he is ducking it again today.
AN HON. MEMBER: He probably has important business, like meeting with some big mucky-mucks, people with money in town.
MR. MANNING MACDONALD: Mr. Speaker, with the helpful interventions of my friend to my right here, I am trying to concentrate here, but I appreciate his interventions. I really do.
Mr. Speaker, the health care workers are the victims here. They are the victims and this government are the oppressors, the perpetrators and the villains. If you look at the bill it simply says, we don't trust you people to do any negotiation anymore. We think you are
looking for too much. We are going to decide what is best for you. As soon as we get tired of you people negotiating, Cabinet will decree an end to the negotiation.
Again, how is the Cabinet going to do that? Does anybody really believe that Cabinet is going to come down on the side of the workers? I mean, if you believe that then . . .
AN HON. MEMBER: Not even they believe it.
MR. MANNING MACDONALD: Not even they believe it, that is right. I noticed with great interest yesterday, when the Health Minister was left to defend the bill almost by himself during Question Period, and I had some empathy for that gentleman at the time because when he was trying to do his best to answer the questions, every time he sat down nobody clapped behind him over there, nobody clapped, one or two who were ordered to or were in the eyesight of the Minister of Finance, they clapped. There were more heads down over there, there were more people staring at the floor. There were people trying to get out the door to go out in the lobby. I didn't see any standing ovations here yesterday afternoon for the Minister of Health. I didn't see any for the Premier.
The man who should have been facing the questions here yesterday left the Health Minister out to hang on this one, after he injected himself into the process out in the hall when he said we are only protecting the people of Nova Scotia. That's what we are doing here. We can't trust the health care system to look after the people in a labour dispute. We don't believe that the nurses and the health care workers in the hospitals will look after the people in the case of a labour disruption.
How sad a situation is that, Mr. Speaker, when our professionals are held up to that kind of ridicule by the Premier who states, we are simply protecting the people of Nova Scotia. In other words what he is saying is, we can't trust the health professionals in this province to do their job in a labour disruption when, in fact, the health care system workers have guaranteed they would not see people suffer in a labour dispute and I believe them. Both Parties over here believe them and I believe the people in Nova Scotia believe them, as well.
But this government doesn't believe them. This government wants to ensure that they are going to dictate what nurses, what other people in the health care system, what people working in the public sector are going to make in the future. It is not going to be a matter of negotiation anymore, it is going to be a matter of Cabinet decree. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that's why we need this hoist here for a six month period because I believe this government has to explain to Nova Scotians why they don't trust the collective bargaining system anymore, why they are trying to politicize the Public Service to the point where this government is going to tell the Public Service what they are going to make in the future by Cabinet decree and never mind the scrutiny of the Legislature - just as they did with some other bill here in this session of the House - the Legislature is no longer relevant, you won't
be able to debate these issues on the floor of this place, the place of the people. That is what this place is, the place of the people, the place where the decisions should be ultimately arrived at, hopefully in the best interests of Nova Scotians.
No, that is not going to happen anymore with this crowd. The decisions are going to be made by Cabinet Ministers downstairs in the bunker and the backbenchers in that Party will be told at about the same time as we are, or at about the same time as the press find out about it in this province. The Treasury benches, the people who run the government, are going to be making the decisions on behalf of the people of Nova Scotia.
I don't believe this government can point to one, single incident in this province where health care workers have abandoned their responsibilities to the people they serve, the people who need health care, if the government can stand here and tell the people of Nova Scotia that they had to do this because of incidents that happened in the health care field with nurses, with technicians, with other health care workers, if they can stand in their place and say there is a reason we are doing this because of the failure in the system, the failure in the workplace by these individuals.
They can't do that, so it has to come down to what is the issue here. Is the government determined to force people to leave this province for employment elsewhere? Are they setting the stage where they are going to make a problem happen that is not yet there, cause a problem to happen? Are they going to ensure that there is so much disruption in the workplace as a result of this bill that we will have a less than functional system in the next few weeks in this province, that people will indeed be at risk because of the frustration of the health care providers? Rightfully so, these people are working under tremendous stress now and this government is only making it worse.
Imagine, Mr. Speaker, I believe that on Tuesday of this week they appointed a mediator and the very next day they announced they were bringing a bill to the House to cut out collective bargaining. Now you can dress it up any way you want but this bill here effectively severs collective bargaining for this group. Taking away the right to bargain, that is what is happening here. That is for this group, so the precedent is being set in the House; the bill before the House is going to take away the bargaining rights for a very large group of Public Service, a very dedicated Public Service.
What is next? The ones they don't privatize, they are going to bring in legislation so they are going to dictate what they are going to earn and what their working conditions are going to be. More draconian legislation will be coming before this House if this one goes through the House, and I can tell you this one is not going through the House easily. If nothing else, we have a responsibility to stay here as long as we possibly can, to make as many Nova Scotians aware of what is really happening here, the total abandonment of any sort of democracy in this province by a right-wing government who now feels they have a divine right to rule here and are going to rule with an iron fist. I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker,
that the voters of this province will have something to say about that in two years' time, or less. Nevertheless, the government has acted in haste here.
Do you know what, Mr. Speaker? In the last day or so here, we have been looking at the expressions on the faces of some of the backbenchers in that Party. We have been looking at what is happening outside; we have been looking at the editorials and they are in a dilemma, there is no question about that. There is no question they are in a dilemma, a moral dilemma, but you know, I think everybody in this province has a connection to the health care service, whether it be as a user, a provider, a relative of a user, a relative of a provider.
I can tell you that my own daughter is a nurse in this province. My daughter was up north in Baffin Island for seven years on a medevac team, so she earned her credentials in the far north, worked there for seven years and then came back to Nova Scotia three years ago to work. She came back to Sydney and is now working as a nurse professional in Sydney. She is already disillusioned, she's been back a couple of years after spending seven years in the north and she is weighing her options now. She wants to stay in Sydney, she wants to work there as a nurse professional, she is in a supervisory capacity right now, she got burnt out on the front lines. She got burnt out as a front-line nurse. You can imagine flying around the north on the medevac team for seven years and then coming back to Nova Scotia and telling me that the strain is worse in Nova Scotia than it is in Baffin Bay.
That is only one example. I am telling you this example because that is an example that hits me personally. I am sure if we look around this room and around this province, health care workers touch all our lives in one way or another. Health care workers will be around for many years to come; that is different from this government, they won't be around as long as the health care workers are going to be around this province. We would like for as many of them to stay as possible. (Interruption) The government members. (Interruption) Yeah, right. Well, if you believe that.
I believe that the hoist is not only necessary for reflection but it is necessary for this government to explain to Nova Scotians why they are abandoning the time-honoured tradition in this province of negotiating settlements and reporting to the Legislature. If you look at every single ministry in this province what has been happening here is that the ministries are setting themselves up for less accountability to this House, this place of the people. This is the case with the Health Minister as well, and his boss, the Premier.
If you look at the political hacks these ministers have surrounded themselves with, their only goal here is to do polling and to set up a slush fund for the next election and to try to con Nova Scotians into thinking they are providing responsible government. Well, I think that is going to be remained to be seen in the next election. I think the government is making a drastic error when it takes away collective bargaining rights in a process that was working.
All governments in this province have had difficulty signing contracts. In the case of the previous governments in this province, they stood with the process until it worked itself out. They didn't resort to sending a bill to the House to say we are tired of collective bargaining. We are just going to legislate this bill through here and then there will be no more collective bargaining. We will decide what you will be paid.
It is laughable when the government states that the Cabinet is going to make a decision based on some kind of fairness. The Cabinet is the employer here. The Cabinet is the employer dealing with public servants, and does anybody in their right mind expect that the Cabinet is going to come down in favour of the employees in any kind of a decision-making process? Even backbenchers surely can't believe that. If they do, then they have certainly been well trained to toe the Party line. I have seen some votes come down in this House in the past few weeks and I have seen members over there voting with their heads down, voting without even bothering to express any enthusiasm for the vote, just vote with the government.
[8:45 a.m.]
I believe that the government has succeeded in doing one thing here, though, pitting segments of this society against one another, the public sector against the private sector, the public sector against the public sector, union group against union group; the old theory, conquer and divide. Get everybody fighting among themselves and then they won't fight with us.
One thing I do know, Mr. Speaker, that this government has employed a number of political strategists who have one duty, to get this crowd re-elected and look after their friends while they are doing it over the next couple of years. Look at the appointments that are coming down. Look at the kinds of salaries that are being paid to the headhunters in those departments, particularly in Health and Education. My colleague, the member for Cape Breton The Lakes, earlier this morning, talked about the salaries of some of these people, obscene salaries of some of these people. They are not being legislated, they are being contracted and being paid huge salaries to come in here. They don't have to throw themselves at the mercy of anybody.
The government, Mr. Speaker, has failed to act in good faith, has failed miserably to act in good faith here. Then, the Government House Leader and his advisers, whoever they are, have said we are going to ram this through, we will sit 24 hours a day because if we catch everybody by surprise and get out of Dodge in three or four days with this bill, people will be left scratching their heads. What happened? How did this go through in the heat of the summer in this place? We know what is going on here. That is why the hoist should be employed, for this government to explain to Nova Scotians and to health care workers why this bill is necessary.
Has the collective bargaining system in this province failed us so badly that we need this kind of oppressive legislation, that we need to tell the bargaining units and the people, the professionals, that we no longer trust you, that we no longer trust the process, that we are going to tell you what is good for you and what isn't good for you? We are going to dictate your working conditions, we are going to dictate your salaries and if you don't like it, go down the road. Well, the people I talked to yesterday are going down the road and the quicker the better. Some of your young, bright people working in that system are not going to stay in Nova Scotia under these circumstances. They are simply not going to do it.
I don't know where the government thinks they are going to get support for this when they take on the health care workers. As I said earlier, Mr. Speaker, I have never seen a less militant group in all my years in public life than health care workers. They are professionals. They get on with doing the job that they are getting paid for, looking after the needs of their fellow citizens who need their service. They are not out there with placards in hand every second day for every run-of-the-mill issue that comes along, they are too busy doing their job and this is how they are treated for that, with mistrust that we can't come to an agreement with you people; we don't trust you. If there is a labour disruption, we don't trust you to look after the people you normally would look after. They are telling this government they will look after people, no matter what happened in negotiations.
Combine that stand of the government with the fact that they appoint a mediator one day and bring a bill in the next day. What a double-cross that was, Mr. Speaker. You know they talked about the great mediator that has been put into place here. They put him in place one day and then they bring a bill to the House the next day. Did somebody decide a quick deke in direction here, that we better get this bill in here because these people are going to walk and these people are going to leave people unprotected? What hogwash. What pure hogwash because this group in Nova Scotia is a dedicated group of individuals who are going to look after the people they are out there serving. That is more than I can say for this government.
As I said earlier, these people working in the health care field are the victims here. They have been treated very shabbily by this right-wing agenda that we see opposite. This kind of agenda would make Mike Harris look like a socialist.
MR. JOHN HOLM: It might.
MR. MANNING MACDONALD: My colleague to my right says - who is not ideologically necessarily to my right, but he is sitting to my right - he and Mike Harris are identical. But I have to say, Mr. Speaker, that in all serious situations that come before this House, I can't think of a worse one. I thought I had seen the ultimate in Bill No. 20, I really did, because Bill No. 20 and Bill No. 30, both of them, have cut out virtually any accountability to the Legislature in various departments.
For example, and I digress for a moment, the six months' hoist that we are talking about, the Minister of Tourism and Culture reminds me, if we had a six months' hoist, Mr. Speaker, for example, to let Nova Scotians know how their money is going to be dished out with lack of accountability by this Legislature, maybe they would reflect on this particular bill because it is too late to reflect on Bill No. 20 because that bill has gone through the House and is now law. All the departments are going to be loaded with Tory hacks and people distributing money willy-nilly throughout the province in Tory ridings, cherry-picking where they are going to have projects because they are no longer responsible to come to the Legislature.
That is the Tory way. Look after your buddies and to heck with the rest of Nova Scotians. To heck with the people who don't have an advocate, but that is different. The health care workers have all kinds of advocates - the people of Nova Scotia. That is why I don't understand why this government has gone this route, because if there is any group that is revered in this province, it is the health care workers because they have acted most responsibly in very tough times. They have done the job with very limited resources.
If you talk to some of the people in the system about the overtime they are required to work, about the working conditions they are required to work under, about the tight budget restraints they have been put under over the past number of years, the fact that these people are doing all of this and performing a great service for their fellow Nova Scotians, this is how they are treated. This is how they are treated by this right-wing agenda opposite.
What happened to respect between employer and employee? You know, you stand in this House day after day and you hear the Health Minister say, we are not the employer, the health boards are. But, suddenly, we are the employer now, after all of these weeks of saying that we are staying out of these negotiations, this is going to be done in a democratic way by the boards and the employees. That is all we heard for weeks and weeks when it came to health care issues.
Now what happens? The government decides to inject themselves in the process directly by taking control of it. The Cabinet has now become the employer here. Cut it anyway you want it, nothing else matters because the Cabinet has the final decision and, by the way, that decision is not debatable. That decision cannot even be taken before the courts. That decision can't be challenged. In other words, the Cabinet of this province has now become the lord and master when it comes to dealing with health care workers in this province, single-handed justice is going on here and it is the justice meted out by the Cabinet.
Who is the employer? Now, can you imagine, Mr. Speaker, that the collective bargaining process has failed and instead of putting a mediator or compulsory arbitrator in there, as some people are suggesting might be more fair to the nurses and the health care workers, if they don't want them to have the option to strike, compulsory arbitration might be the way to go but, no, that would be too democratic. Somebody might make a decision in
favour of the health care workers in terms of giving them better working conditions or better salaries. No, we can't let that happen. We are going to make the decision. Now, here you have the employer making a decision to settle a dispute. Which side do you think the decision is going to come down on every time? It is not going to come down on the side of the employee. If anybody believes that, then they are in the wrong place.
I don't think these professionals, Mr. Speaker, should have to wake up every day worrying about these kind of things. They should be able to wake up every day and go do their job of looking after the people they are employed to look after. I don't think they should be meeting about where they are going in the future, whether or not the Cabinet is going to make a decision that impacts negatively on them, that gives them that uncertainty week after week, month after month, year after year, about where they are going to sit. Whether the Cabinet is going to be gracious to them one week or treat them as victims the next week depending on their mood of the day, the Cabinet's mood of the day, depending on whether or not the Cabinet feels it necessary to put any money away in a slush fund for re-election.
You have the ridiculous situation where a hoist, like was suggested here, that we are now debating, could give the opportunity for the Finance Minister to explain to Nova Scotians why his own people have told him that the debt of this province is going up, the debt repayment costs are going up. Yet they had a surplus this year and they haven't got any money for health care workers to solve this problem. I don't think the Finance Minister can do that and that is why this government is not going out explaining anything to anybody. They are hiding behind the protection of the House here. They know they have a majority government. They can ram this through whether it takes two weeks or two months, but we are not naive enough over here to think that this bill is going to be stopped by me standing here or by my colleagues over here standing on the floor of this House and debating it, but we are doing it for a reason and that reason is to make Nova Scotians more aware of what is going on here than they already are.
I believe we have a responsibility to protect our health care professionals in this province, each and every one of them because they are too few and they are too valuable to let go. Mr. Speaker, of course, we didn't get an advance notice of this bill. We were all surprised yesterday with what was in it. We never thought it was going to be such a bill as it turned out to be. My own opinion was that it was probably going to take away the right to strike and impose compulsory arbitration which, by the way, I think a number of people would consider perhaps to be something they could live with if they were going to be faced with no-strike clauses in their contracts. At least then there would be a third party that would be independent of the employer and the health care professionals deciding a resolution to a collective bargaining problem.
I believe that would be a fairer process than the process that is going on here which is not fair at all because it is one-sided. It simply gives the Cabinet the ability to do anything it wants with these workers, have their way with these workers, that's what it does, but that
is not unique with this session of the Legislature. We have had that happen time and time again with different bills in this House. So we are moving down the road rapidly to a situation where this House is going to become more redundant and almost a place of afterthought. It will be something like a group of people who can sit and make decisions, but really can't enforce them because the decision has already been made for them and that's what I liken that to. We will be here to rubber-stamp decisions made by the Executive Council and I think that is terrible. Public accountability has gone out the window.
[9:00 a.m.]
At least we should have to stand on the floor of this House in our places and tell Nova Scotians why we support or do not support various pieces of legislation. We can't be continually taking that right and responsibility away from this place and putting it in the hands of the Executive Council who will make arbitrary decisions based on what they feel is best for them, best for the Tory Party of this province and best for the Executive Council to get on with their business of trying to get themselves re-elected. Make no mistake about it, Nova Scotians should know that this is the path this government is charting with their political hacks behind closed doors, some of them probably sitting here today monitoring what is going on here, some of them out doing polling as we are speaking to find out what the mood of the electorate is today.
Well, I am going to tell you something about the mood of the electorate. If you disrupt the health care system in this province by treating health care professionals with the kind of disdain this government is treating them with, you are going to find out what Nova Scotians think abou