Sandy Lee

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Without having had a chance to look at the letter I don’t know how final it was, but listening to Mr. Premier I think that there might be a wee little tiny bit of room open there. So could I ask the Premier, could I take his answer to mean that he’s encouraging his department to work with this group to see if there are any other avenues and perhaps he could commit to asking the MACA department to look at that further? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I read that subsection 2(2) and it says, “they shall seek the opinion of another medical professional who specializes in the area of the conflict.” It says they shall seek but it’s not clear to me whether the medical advisor or the worker will have the same say on who that third medical opinion should be. Is that the correct way to do that? Is that the sound medical opinion to say that both parties have equal power? It doesn’t say they have to agree.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, today my questions are in following up to the Member’s statement I made about the proposal being put forward by the SideDoor in support of a program that would, I think, create another opportunity for the youth in the community to spend their time productively. Mr. Speaker, I have to say that in my time as an MLA, I’ve had the good fortune of meeting and working with a lot of young people who are doing great things, a lot of positive things, taking full advantage of all the financial assistance and everything available to reach their potential, but we all...

Thank you. I do understand that and I approve that interpretation. I think that’s what we meant to do. I think it’s the difference between medical opinion and medical evidence. I just wanted to make sure that we put it on record, so that people out there could feel comfort in how this legislation will be interpreted. In the remaining seconds, I just want to ask the panel on subsection (4). It states there that much of how this will be implemented will be written out in the policies and procedures. First of all, would the Minister and Governance Council be willing to set up some sort of...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have supported two programs in particular; one is the SideDoor program and the other is the COPs program. Mr. Speaker, I believe strongly the real work and real difference can only be made by governments working and supporting the grassroots organizations and programs like these from the bottom up, rather than introducing a solution from top to bottom. In my opinion, the government has not done enough to support these initiatives and I urge the Minister of Justice and the Minister responsible for Youth to work with its partners and put some real money and support...

Thank you. I want to reserve my question about subsection (4) again, but just following up on what Mr. Wright said, what assurance do workers have in listening to this explanation of subsection (3) that the new medical evidence will only be about something that was unknown, something totally new that would change your resolution, but it would not be another third opinion that would just reverse your decision? Do you know what I mean? That’s what the workers are concerned about…or maybe WCB side, too. That there is some standard on what that new medical evidence should be that would put the...

Thank you. What sort of input do the workers and his or her medical advisor or health care provider have in choosing who that third person, opinion, might be?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just need some assistance here. I have a question on the section on conflicting medical opinion and we're going by lumps of clauses, so could I just get some advice as to when I could raise that question? Thank you.

Thank you. Just a short one. Could I get the Minister to ask the, refer the matter, or however you want to put it, could I get the Minister to commit to having the government’s counsel look at section 92(2)(b) in the context of section 1.1, as Mr. Wright just stated? Thank you.

Right. Trivial. I never use the word trivial. But let me try this again because I'd like to get more clarification. Say if somebody has carpel tunnel syndrome, as an example, and say if he could prove that…I mean I think from a layperson's point of view -- you don't have to be a doctor -- as I understand it, carpel tunnel syndrome could come from repeated use of a computer keyboard. But in modern days, a lot of us use computer keyboards at work and at home. Say if it was under proof of…I mean if the standard proof was something like dominant cause or something else, you would have to...