|
Oral
Questions
December 15, 2008
Home
| In the House | Question
Period
MS
JONES:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My questions are for the
Minister of Health and Community Services.
Mr. Speaker, back on
November 25, I asked the minister questions in this
House about services available to mentally ill youth in
our Province at the Janeway, and he answered by saying
there was an array of services there. Well, the minister
would be aware that the ward did shut down on Saturday
and the children were moved to the Waterford Hospital in
St. John’s. The parents and the administration at the
Janeway are telling the parents that they are not sure
when their children will be moved back to the Janeway
and when care will be provided under the children’s
health facility.
I ask the minister today:
Can he give us some indication
first of all when these children are going to be moved
back into the Janeway hospital and their care be
provided for there?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN:
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This past weekend, very
unfortunately, we had two young children who had to be
moved from the psychiatric unit at the Janeway to the
Waterford Hospital. It is a very unfortunate event that
came about as a result of nursing staff phoning in sick
for the Saturday evening shift.
The other unfortunate
thing about this, Mr. Speaker, is, firstly, these
children find themselves in the situation that they are
in and the circumstance that they are in and feeling as
desperate as they feel, and for the families. I have had
an opportunity to meet with the two mothers involved a
couple of weeks back and we will be meeting again on
Wednesday coming. It is unfortunate that these children
find themselves in this circumstance and it was very
unfortunate the manner in which they had to be moved
this weekend, and were moved this weekend, in a police
car with shackles on them. That is a very unfortunate
event that should never have happened, and I want to
acknowledge that here today in the House. When young
children find themselves in that desperate situation, it
is our hope as a Province that we are going to be able
to respond and provide the services that they need.
The question with respect
to the Janeway itself, Mr. Speaker, I have been advised
by officials at Eastern Health, as recent as a half hour
ago, that they are now working on the continued
treatment of these two young children and also trying to
deal with the staffing issues to allow that unit at the
Janeway to reopen.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, I am glad the minister acknowledges today that
that is unacceptable treatment. These children are
emotionally ill. They are not criminals in our society,
nor should they be treated as such. Minister, it is
quite obvious that the nursing shortage is trickling
down to have a significant impact on health care
services in this Province.
Are
you telling me today that there is no call-in list at
the Janeway Hospital for children on the ward that
suffer from mental illness or no backup nursing staff to
be called in, in a case where someone gets sick?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
This past weekend there
was a very unusual event at the Janeway, this particular
unit itself. In three of the four nurses who work on
that unit in the evenings, three of them were not
available on Friday evening. Then on Saturday evening,
the Eastern Health received a call on Saturday morning
from all four of the nurses who were due to work that
evening and they were not able to come into work due to
illness. It is an unusual occurrence. The issue about
having staff to call in, there are staff in relief in
that area. There is a complement of staff because there
are rotations of individuals through twenty-hour hours a
day, seven days a week. That was a very unusual event to
find that number of people with that specialized
training.
One of the things we need
to be very careful of, is this is a very specialized
unit. The people who work there have specialized
training. So it is not a matter of having a nurse come
in and be a part of that unit. This person needs to have
some very specialized training. Given the circumstance
of the two young children who are in that unit, just
putting a body in there for the sake of having a nurse
was not appropriate. The safety of the children was the
first thing in the minds of the physicians who were
treating these people. It was their clinical assessment
that it was in their best interest as children, and
their safety would be better served if they were moved
to the Waterford because there was not an adequate staff
there to be able to provide the supports that would be
necessary at the Janeway.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
From what I understand,
the children were committed under the Mental Health Act
in order to be transported to the Waterford Hospital,
which, in essence, meant that the parents had no longer
any parental right or decision-making power over their
child.
I ask the minister: Why
was that the case, and why was it necessary in this
instance?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: This
is a very delicate position, Mr. Speaker. I find myself
in a very precarious position because we are in the
public Legislature, in a televised discussion. The
member opposite is raising questions around the
treatment of two children at the Janeway this weekend. I
appreciate and understand this, and I appreciate and
understand the challenges that the family is trying to
deal with. I am sensitive also to some privacy issues
here, so talking about the clinical judgements and the
assessments that would have been done by the
psychiatrists and other treating clinicians on that
weekend would have made that call and that determination
in the best interests and the safety of the children.
To debate what kind of
considerations the clinicians may have given during that
discussion, it would be inappropriate to do that in the
public domain because it is difficult to do it without
betraying the trust and the confidence of these two
children and their families.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
We are not asking the
minister to betray anyone’s confidences here, or to
get into privacy information, but this is a serious
problem in this Province and we can no longer brush it
under the rug. It needs to be dealt with publicly,
openly, and fixed.
My next question,
Minister, is: Now that these children are committed
under the Mental Health Act, and their parents do not
have the parental responsibility that they do, it seems
that their visiting rights are also being limited at the
Waterford Hospital. Normally, at the Janeway, they would
have the opportunity to visit and spend an extraordinary
amount of time with the children as permitted throughout
the day. At the Waterford, they are restricted to
visiting hours. I ask if there
is a way that can be changed, at least until they are
moved back into the Janeway Hospital.
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: If
the member opposite is suggesting something that she has
factual knowledge of, I am not really certain what the
protocol would be around visiting hours. I would,
however, comment, as a parent myself, that I would
expect and would want to be a part of my child’s
treatment. If, in fact, having these children at the
Waterford changes the parents’ access to that, then
that is something I will have some discussion with
Eastern Health in and around.
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: I
certainly appreciate that; because these parents were
informed just before I came to the Legislature, by
Eastern Health, that they were sticking to a certain
visiting policy in a certain time frame and they were
not prepared to be flexible.
Mr. Speaker, three weeks
ago the minister committed to reviewing the 2003 Youth
Mental Health Services Report that had been in the
department for five years without any action.
I ask the minister today:
Now that your department and
your officials have had an opportunity to complete this
review, what actions will you be taking to effectively
address this issue in the short term and also in the
long term?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Mr.
Speaker, in response to a question along those lines a
couple of weeks ago, I had indicated to members opposite
that I had instructed officials to do a review and
evaluation of that report, to look at the current-day
data and circumstance and what the best practices would
be today. On Wednesday morning of this week, I can
report, Mr. Speaker, I will be meeting with those same
officials and I will be review their recommendations and
the analysis they have done, and any new information
they can bring to bear as we look at what we are going
to do in the long-term interest of children and their
families who are living with mental illness in this
Province.
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I do not claim to be any
expert, because I am not - I have very limited knowledge
of this issue – but last weekend I did visit a youth
mental health treatment facility in Ontario, and it was
a facility that was providing for treatment not just for
youth in that area but for youth in different parts of
Canada, and I did have an opportunity to speak to some
children who were in that program, and the people who
run the program.
I would like to ask the
minister today: As a short-term
measure, something that we can do immediately, is it
possible to put in place some kind of program and
service to allow for some of these youth to be able to
attend a treatment facility there and have the parental
and family supports accompany it, so that they can
participate in a program like that until we have
something more permanent?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Mr.
Speaker, the option of having children go out of the
Province has always been available. That is something
that you have raised in this House many times, and
suggesting that we should do it ourselves here, because
we have been doing it out of the Province.
Mr. Speaker, that option
has always been there. If she is raising it with respect
to the two children in question here now, I understand
from this morning’s conversation that the people who
are providing treatment and services to these two
children today are looking at their options, which might
include some out-of-Province treatment as a short-term
measure, but I say, Mr. Speaker, that option is
something we have always been doing.
What we are now looking
at and will be talking a bit further on, on Wednesday,
is whether that option would be available and whether or
not we, as a Province, should move towards establishing
that kind of program within our own Province rather than
continue to have it available outside; but, as a
short-term measure, we will continue to do as we have
always done and make those services available to the
children who need them outside of the Province.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Obviously we want to see
a treatment facility in Newfoundland and Labrador, and
we have never made any bones about that, but right now
we are in a desperate situation. Two of those youth were
scheduled to go out of the Province for treatment and it
went off the rails over the last couple of weeks. Right
now there is nothing in place to treat these young
people, other than to keep them confined to the
Waterford Hospital in St. John’s. That is
unacceptable.
I ask today, Minister, in
light of this: Can you at least
call together the team of experts in this Province to
look at these particular cases and see if something can
be done immediately, in the short term, to address the
problem so that at least it is not continuing to
escalate at the level that it is now?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Mr.
Speaker, clearly the level of service and the range of
service and the kind of services that these two children
need, I will leave that to clinical people who are
better able to make that judgement. As a government, as
a Department of Health and Community Services and as a
minister, my commitment on behalf of government is that
those services will be made available if the clinicians
deem that it is appropriate that is the kind of
treatment they need. That is consistent with what we
have done in the past. We always want to make sure - and
this is to be said for many services, sometimes we find
ourselves as a Province not having a level of service
that people may need. Whenever that has happened, we
have made available to those people in the Province
those services in some other jurisdiction.
We will continue to make
that kind of commitment for any program and service that
we cannot provide here ourselves.
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
My next questions are for
the Minister of Finance.
I am aware that he did
meet with some of the skilled trades people over lunch
on the steps and has agreed to meet with them on Friday.
Mr. Speaker, I had an opportunity to meet with this
group last week, and it is quite obvious that they are
employees with Eastern Health who feel that their wages
are significantly less compared to their counterparts in
other public sector organizations such as Memorial
University and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.
I ask the minister: Why
are these employees being paid less for equal work and
equal services than those in other government agencies?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Yes, I did have a meeting
earlier today with the individuals, the trades workers,
and had a discussion with them, heard their concerns,
and agreed to meet with them on Friday, at which time we
will have further discussions; however, Mr. Speaker, I
must emphasize that what we have here is a 20 per cent
wage offer that is currently on the table, which
compounds to 21.5 per cent. I think I would be remiss if
I did not state that, that offer was already accepted by
the Association of Allied Health Professionals on
Friday, CUPE group homes, and today by the Newfoundland
and Labrador Teachers’ Association – over 6,000
teachers who today have reached a tentative agreement.
So I would suggest, Mr.
Speaker, that what we have done here, we are being fair
to our workers and, in fairness to this particular
group, I will meet with them on Friday and hear their
discussions, but we are doing everything we can and,
again, I will emphasize that this wage offer, this wage
package, is more than generous.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Mr.
Speaker, this is not an issue about voting to accept a
wage offer that government has on the table. It is an
issue about having people employed within government
services doing the same job with the same qualifications
but yet being paid at different levels.
Mr. Speaker, we raised
this issue in the House of Assembly last spring and,
after some negotiation between the group and government,
this group was told that their union should put it on
the top of the list for collective bargaining. It was on
the top of the list. It then got removed to deal with
all the other issues.
I ask the government
today: Why did it not get
addressed before the collective bargaining process was
complete?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Although I know that Ms
Furlong does not need me to pick up for her, the
insinuation seems to be made by the Leader of the
Opposition that the President of NAPE is not doing her
job. That is really, truly, an unfortunate allegation
being made.
As for these workers, Mr.
Speaker, what we have is a situation where they are
represented by a union. There is a bargaining unit
within that union. Discussions have been ongoing. I do
not know every detail, Mr. Speaker, of every bargaining
unit, what has gone on. I do know, however, that one of
the complaints being made by this group of workers is
that they are not paid in comparison – I think their
sign said fair market value or fair market treatment –
and we have situations where I understand workers at
Memorial University and also at Newfoundland and
Labrador Hydro are making more money. Well, those are
separate employers, Mr. Speaker; they are separate. They
set their rates and they deal with them. The union is
there and are looking after these workers’ interests
and, as I have indicated, I will meet with them on
Friday and we will take it from there.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Government likes to talk
about pattern bargaining, and prides itself on paying
people right across the board the same wage for the same
work and so on.
Mr. Speaker, I would like
to clarify first of all with the minister that it is not
my insinuation that the union is not doing their job. It
is obviously his assumption.
Let me ask him this: Are
you prepared to do a fair market analysis for all the
skilled tradespeople at Eastern Health comparing them
with the university and with the Hydro to ensure that
they are all being paid at the same levels for the same
work and the same service?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, first, in
relation to the comment that government likes to talk
about pattern bargaining, what we are talking about is a
fair and generous wage offer in economic times where
prudent, fiscal management demands that we look after
the finances of this Province. What we are doing, Mr.
Speaker, is we are being fair to our employees, our
public sector employees. We are offering them a wage
package that is unprecedented in this country right now.
What I have indicated,
Mr. Speaker, despite the union representation here of
the Leader of the Opposition, I have indicated to these
workers that I will meet with them, I will hear their
concerns and we will take it from there on Friday.
Now, I do not know what
else I can say, Mr. Speaker. I have said it three times.
These people today, these gentlemen on the steps, I do
not know if there were any ladies there, they were very
polite and co-operative and I gave them my assurance
that I would meet with them and hear from them, and I
will do that.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Public provincial
employees working in the Sheriff’s Office, the
provincial court, Crown prosecutions, the Legal Aid
Commission and the probation office downtown are
expected to park in private accommodations and parking
garages. They have been notified, Mr. Speaker, that
their fees will increase by $600 this year. We know that
the minister and the Minister of Justice have received
correspondence from these workers.
We are
asking today if they are prepared to consider
implementing a parking rate for those employees that
would be on par with that of which every other public
sector employee pays?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am aware
of the situation that exists with the downtown parking.
I am aware of a lot of the people who work in provincial
court and the difficulties that they are having. Some of
these employees, Mr. Speaker, make considerably less
money, but if she is talking about Crown prosecutors and
legal aid lawyers who are making $100,000 a year, than I
certainly do not have the same sympathy I have for them
as we do for individuals who are working in the offices.
Again, Mr. Speaker, I
appreciate the bargaining of the Leader of the
Opposition today, but these people have unions. NAPE is
at the table with us as we speak. Ms Furlong has been
certainly very firm in putting forward her position for
it, as has Mr. Blundon. I am not aware if that issue is
at the bargaining table, but it is something we are
aware of, Mr. Speaker. My colleague, the Minister of
Justice, might know the numbers, but I think there were
hundreds of employees downtown in this situation, and it
is not simply a matter that we have a half dozen
employees, there are hundreds of employees in this
situation.
Thank you.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Leader of the Opposition.
MS JONES: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to remind
the minister that judges who are in the $100,000 salary
bracket do get free parking, Mr. Speaker.
Many of these employees -
and the minister will know if he has read his
correspondence - are at the bottom of the scale in the
public service. They are at clerk positions, they are
probation officers and they do not even escalate to a
very high salary, I say to the minister, but, Mr.
Speaker, they are in a different bracket than all other
public servants and that is the reason we raise the
issue today.
We
would like to ask that some consideration be given, that
if all other members of the public service are going to
pay a regular parking permit fee than why not those
employees that have to be housed outside of
Confederation Building?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury
Board.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. KENNEDY: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
Let me be clear on one
point, and I think I may be able to speak for the
Premier on this one. The judges would not be getting
their free parking if it was left to me. I have no
sympathy for individuals who are making as much money as
judges are making downtown getting free parking. First,
let’s be clear on that.
The second point, Mr.
Speaker, is that there is a situation where there are
hundreds of employees who are looking for parking. If
you chose to work downtown, if your job is downtown,
then it is unfortunate that there are costs that come
with that.
Mr. Speaker, I know a lot
of these people who are working in that provincial court
situation, in the Sheriff’s Office and Supreme Court,
and if there was a way to assist them in this situation,
we certainly would, but again, Mr. Speaker, there is a
union that represents these people. This union can bring
this matter forward to the bargaining table. I am not
sure if that matter has been brought forward, but as for
the employees who are making the salaries of Crown
prosecutors, legal aid lawyers or judges, I certainly do
not have any sympathy in that circumstance for them
paying their own parking.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR.
SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
This past summer a tender
was let for the removal of 30,000 tons of PCB
contaminated soil from the New Harbour landfill.
Can
the minister inform this House how many tons of
contaminated soil has been actually removed since that
tender was let, and to where has it been transported?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Acting Minister of Environment and
Conservation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Yes,
Mr. Speaker.
I do believe there has
been 20,000 tons that have been removed, and it has been
shipped to the treatment facility in Sunnyside.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Mr.
Speaker, I would like to advise the hon. minister that
since that tender was let, and this was only released
about a week-and-a-half ago, there has been 120,000 tons
removed from that site and it is still incomplete, I say
to the minister. I would say that he had better follow
up on his work on what is happening there.
Mr. Speaker, in July of
this year a meeting was held on the site which took
place with officials from government, Mr. Williams and
other interested parties, and the hon. Member for
Bellevue was invited but he had another function on.
This meeting took place on the site and the individuals
were promised a meeting with the residents of the area.
I ask the minister: When
will your department hold a public meeting and explain
to the people of those communities how your department
can assure their health and safety concerns are taken
care of?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Acting Minister of Environment and
Conservation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr.
Speaker, there is one thing that people need to be very
clear on here, is that from the outset there were a
number of concerns that were raised about the New
Harbour dump. There has been ongoing testing that has
gone on at that particular site.
Second to that, Mr.
Speaker, the officials recently met with the committee.
They looked at further testing that needed to be done
there. The consultants have been engaged and there is
going to be further testing done, and it has been
committed to the people that if there are contaminants
found there that need to be shipped out, they will be
shipped out, Mr. Speaker.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
On February 18, 2008, in
a notice of commencement of an environmental assessment,
Transport Canada proposed to remediate two areas of
contaminant soil at the Stephenville Airport. In a
response to a question on December 8, the minister
stated that the site at Barachois Brook was an approved
soil treatment facility. In a second question I asked
him, he wanted to make it very clear to the residents of
that area that this site does not accept toxic or
contaminated material. I have to say to the minister,
the material that is being taken there has petroleum
contaminants, PCBs and solvents.
Why
was this contaminant soil sent to another site for
remediation if it was not considered to be a toxic
material in the beginning?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Acting Minister of Environment and
Conservation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr.
Speaker, in speaking with officials from the department,
the soil that was transported to Barachois Brook was not
of a toxic nature where it had to be treated differently
than it would be at the other ten or twelve like
facilities in the Province. This group made an
application for this treatment facility. They met all
standards as were outlined by the Department of
Environment and Conservation, and as such, Mr. Speaker,
have met all the standards as laid out.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for the District of Port de Grave.
MR. BUTLER: Mr.
Speaker, I am not saying that the site that was approved
did not go through all the procedures. My question was
not answered and I cannot understand, for the life of me
- and the residents of Barachois Brook cannot understand
– if the material was not contaminated soil, why
was it sent to a remediation site in their area and
posed health problems that they believe, to them?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Acting Minister of Environment and
Conservation.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. JACKMAN: Mr.
Speaker, I cannot act on what the people of the area
believe. What we have here is a facility, a treatment
facility that made application to government. They met
all standards and, as such, I cannot say anything beyond
that. The material that came there was treated, carried
to a facility and treated, and then disposed of in a
landfill site. Any more than that, Mr. Speaker, I cannot
say. They met all standards.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill–Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
My questions are for the
Minister of Health and Community Services.
He has already spoken
earlier in Question Period with regard to the
unfortunate incident at the Janeway Hospital over the
weekend, and he has recognized that it was unfortunate
and hopefully would never happen again, but I would like
to know from the minister: Is there a protocol in place
for youth patient transfers? He has recognized that the
way in which the transfer happened was not acceptable.
Is there a protocol in place and, if so, what is it?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: There
are two aspects to this, I say, Mr. Speaker. Once an
individual has been committed under the Mental Health
Act then there is a protocol that is arranged between
the health authorities and either the RNC or the RCMP
for that transport. At other times, if they are not
committed under that particular piece of legislation,
the protocol would be by way of an ambulance transfer or
some other means of escorting the patient to another
facility; but, once committed, the protocol would rest
between the health authority and one of the police
forces.
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill–Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: I
want to get this clear. It is the understanding of the
minister that there is no difference in protocol for
adults and children, that it is the same protocol?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
The distinction, I say,
Mr. Speaker, is made whether or not the individual is
being committed under the Mental Health Act. That is the
distinguishing characteristic.
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Member for the District of Signal Hill–Quidi
Vidi.
MS MICHAEL: Thank
you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the minister. I
wanted to be clear on that because then I have a concern
that, because of - and if I am wrong he can say so, but
I think he has already confirmed this – because of an
emergency situation due to lack of adequate human health
resources these children had to be put under the Mental
Health Act, which is supposed to be there to preserve
their rights.
In this situation, would
the minister tell me: Does he think that a lack of human
health resources this weekend actually took away the
rights of these patients?
MR. SPEAKER: The
hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.
SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,
hear!
MR. WISEMAN: Mr.
Speaker, psychiatrists in this Province, other health
practitioners, will take this particular decision very
seriously, I suspect.
Any time anyone is
committed under that act, Mr. Speaker, as the member
opposite would know herself, any time that would happen
it is not done lightly. It is after very serious
consideration for the safety of the individual involved,
and it is with that that those clinicians make that
determination.
Trying to connect the
events of this weekend, and having these two children
committed under that act, to the issue of some human
resource issues as being a natural occurrence, I think
that is a bit of a stretch, Mr. Speaker. This is far too
serious an issue, and far too serious a decision, and
far too complex a decision; these clinicians would have
to give consideration to multiple factors in making that
determination.
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
I ask the hon. minister
to conclude his answer.
MR. WISEMAN: Thank
you, Mr. Speaker.
I would not want any
member of this House, or any of the public, to suggest
that these decisions are made frivolously, considering
only human resource issues. This is a very complex
issue, and there are very complex considerations when
someone makes that determination and a psychiatrist
makes that determination to have the person committed.
MR. SPEAKER: Order,
please!
The time for Oral
Questions has expired. |
