Speech - April 19, 2000: Bill No. 3

BILL NO. 3 – THE HEALTH LABOUR RELATIONS REORGANIZATION AMENDMENT ACT, 1999

Mr. Wall: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It’s a privilege for me to be able to enter into the discussion and debate about The Health Labour Relations Reorganization Amendment Act. And, Mr. Deputy Speaker, you’ll forgive me if I’m a little bit concerned and other members on this side of the House are concerned whenever we’re dealing with an Act involving pretty much labour anything, bus especially labour reorganization, that’s been proposed by the members opposite, Mr. Speaker.

We’ve had plenty of experience in these matters. One need only look to the CCTA (Crown Construction Tendering Agreement), Mr. Deputy Speaker, and we understand now that . . . and it’s with a bit of a knot in our stomach frankly, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that we’re anticipating the son of CCTA which will soon be brought forward by members opposite. And it will plan probably, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to visit more destruction on the construction industry in our province than its predecessor did.

We’ve also seen labour changes in other areas that have been wrought by this government, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that are a cause for concern. And you need only to talk to the many entrepreneurs across the province, especially those involved in short-line manufacturing, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to have them confirm for you and for all of us in the Assembly that some of those changes to labour legislation in this province have done some damage, frankly, to those entrepreneurs and to those businesses. And to the potential for them to continue to create jobs and to grow the economy and to pay taxes to fund all of the things that we need, including of course, Mr. Deputy Speaker, including health care facilities which the Act speaks to as well.

Whenever we talk about the NDP government reorganizing labour legislation or bringing labour legislation, Mr. Deputy Speaker, frankly, it’s a little akin Colonel Sanders bringing in a health plan for chickens, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The only thing that we can be assured of is the destruction and the carnage that the chickens will face, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It’s the only, it’s the only certain thing.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, this Bill does extend the provisions of the health reorganization that was passed in 1996, and it seriously reduces the number of bargaining units in health care professions in the province. The reorganization was commonly known, Mr. Deputy Speaker, as the Dorsey commission and you will be familiar with that as many members of the Assembly will be. The number of bargaining units were reduced at that time from three hundred and . . . or 538 — I beg your pardon — to 45.

The change in part, Mr. Deputy Speaker, was supposed to make labour negotiations more manageable. It was supposed to make labour negotiations more manageable. And I think we, I think we all have some questions on this side of the House — and frankly members on that side I think do too — about whether or not labour negotiations in the health care sector have become more manageable since the introduction of this Act, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

I wonder what the nurses would say about that. I know what the nurses would say about that in Swift Current, Mr. Deputy Speaker. They would be stifling laughter, Mr. Deputy Speaker. They would be stifling laughter.

While reducing the number of bargaining units perhaps made some sense, some sense back in 1996, I think what we found is that working families had some problems with the heavy-handed approach that the government used in this regard. Really it’s the same type of approach, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that we saw with the creation of the health districts themselves, where they basically just forced regions together into these large health care districts.

And frankly, many people have been telling me in Swift Current — and I think people telling members across the province — that frankly, it hasn’t worked very well.

Mr. Wall: — Thank you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Similar to the amalgamation of the health care districts, or rather the health care unions; there will probably be very little consultation in this with this particular Bill. That certainly has been the case with the forced amalgamation talk that you continue to hear from the other side of the Assembly, Mr. Deputy Speaker. And, as is the case with municipal amalgamation, we were told at the time of the Dorsey report that these changes would make labour negotiations more smooth and make the system run better. They would make labour negotiations more smooth and make the system run better.

Well I think that the nurses’ strike last year certainly bears out the fact that labour negotiations in the health care sector are anything but smooth between that minister, between the Minister of Health and the health care unions in the province of Saskatchewan. In fact, they’re running so smooth that the health care unions, namely SUN (Saskatchewan Union of Nurses), didn’t even want the minister at their convention, at their annual convention, Mr. Deputy Speaker. They weren’t really interested in hearing from the minister any more, and I can hardly blame them frankly, Mr. Speaker.

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr. Wall: — When we were faced . . . when we were faced with the nurses’ strike last year, clearly amalgamation in the health care sector didn’t cure that problem, Mr. Speaker. Just like the government’s plan for forced amalgamation will do anything but improve the lives of people in rural or urban Saskatchewan.

Mr. Speaker, when the original Dorsey recommendations were put in place, not only were some union members angry, there were plenty of non-union workers who were angry to find themselves being forced to join a union — being forced to join the union, Mr. Speaker.

And this is typical of NDP labour policy. We see it in sector after sector. It’s heavy-handed, Mr. Speaker, and it’s destructive. It doesn’t do a service to health care. It doesn’t do a service to our economy. Mr. Speaker, it doesn’t do a service to the short-line manufacturing sector or the entrepreneurs across this province who try, in spite of this government, to create jobs and create wealth and pay taxes in this province. The kind of health care that we’re talking about today, Mr. Speaker.

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr. Wall: — If we are to attract health care professionals in the province of Saskatchewan — especially nurses, Mr. Speaker — we’re going to have to do a lot more than tinker with labour policy. We’re going to have to do a lot more than to bring in this kind of legislation.

We’ve heard over and over this government’s commitment to hire hundreds of new nurses in Saskatchewan, Mr. Speaker, and they are desperately needed. They’re needed in Swift Current; they’re needed across the province, Mr. Speaker. But we don’t seem to be making much progress. Instead, Mr. Speaker, we’re tinkering with health care labour regulations and legislation. That’s the answer of the government, Mr. Speaker.