QUESTION PERIOD AT THE NEW BRUNSWICK LEGISLATURE!! < Mardi >

STA_0582, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

ORAL QUESTIONS 15 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 11, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 11 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\21 2006-04-11 BL\21 2006-04-11 BL.wpd 1/10
014 14:00
Health Care
Mr. S. Graham: My first question is for the Acting Premier. It is no secret that this government is
in survival mode. In fact, the top priority of this government is to travel the province as fast as it can,
to have as many photo opportunities as it can, handing out tax dollars in an attempt to curry favour.
What is really troubling is when real work needs to be done pertaining to how we can fix our health
care system. On Friday, this government made public, after 11 weeks, a comprehensive report
clearly outlining shortfalls within our trauma care system. Let me be very clear from the outset: This
is not the doctors’ fault, this is a system failure.
Mr. Deputy Premier, my question to you is this: After 11 weeks of having this report, why did you
not immediately inform the frontline service workers, the New Brunswick Medical Society, and the
Nurses Association of New Brunswick? As of Friday, the representative of the New Brunswick
Medical Society had not been informed of this report, and eight weeks ago, when the representative
of the New Brunswick Nurses’ Union made their presentation before the union, they had not been
informed of the report at that time, either.
Hon. Mr. Green: The report in question was completed by an individual by the name of Dr. Isser
Dubinsky, who was brought in by the department as someone with expertise in trauma care, to look
at the case of an individual involved in a high-speed, head-on collision near Tracadie-Sheila in
November of last year. In late January, we received the doctor’s report. It was immediately taken
up by senior officials in our department. In the month of March, I asked the committee on patient
safety and collaborative care in the province to take up the specific mandate of recommending a new
trauma care system or model for the province. We made a specific commitment, as well, to the
patient involved that he would see the report first. That happened last week. It was not easy to
facilitate that. That individual is not in the province at the present time. The meeting took place
outside the province. This week, we are meeting with the individual health care professionals who
were named in the report, so that they have an opportunity to see it, as well.
Mr. S. Graham: I see the Deputy Premier did not answer the question, because the question was
very specific. Eleven weeks after your government had been presented with this report, your
government was preoccupied with photo opportunities and with being seen handing out taxpayers’
dollars, rather than with dealing with a trauma care system that has failed the people of New
Brunswick. This was your priority in going out in a preelection campaign. Well, the people of New
Brunswick deserve better. My question, very clearly, is this: You waited until 11 weeks later to
bring the frontline service personnel to the table. Why did you wait over 11 weeks? I can tell you
today that if I were the Premier of the province, they would have been informed the day after this
report was available, to help the people of New Brunswick.
ORAL QUESTIONS 15 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 11, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 11 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\21 2006-04-11 BL\21 2006-04-11 BL.wpd 2/10
Hon. Mr. Green: What the people of this province deserve is more than cheap theatrics on the floor
of this House. What they deserve and, in fact, receive is quality health care, and 90% of the people
in this province say that they do feel they receive quality health care.
This specific case is an exception. It is not the rule. The report itself speaks of what Dr. Dubinsky
believes would be approximately 1 500 trauma cases a year. This is one case in which the system
did not work well. I happen to agree. That is why we are doing something about it, and do something
about it, we shall.
015 14:05
Mr. S. Graham: Yes, the government members have been more preoccupied, as I said, in a
preelection campaign, to be seen in every corner of the province, handing out taxpayers’ dollars,
when they should have been sitting down with the frontline workers to improve a system that had
failed the people of New Brunswick. The Minister of Health has had 11 weeks to move on this
report. He is saying now, after 11 weeks: Let’s put together a committee to study. What we are
saying is that there are specific recommendations that could be moved upon immediately, the first
being that emergency departments have a second call roster to ensure availability of a second
physician in a timely manner. This means that if a patient arrives at a hospital in a trauma situation,
such as following a car accident, and the trauma unit is currently in action, a second trauma unit is
on staff. Has that situation been addressed in every RHA?
Hon. Mr. Green: The volume of the questions does not improve their quality at all, and that is
something that the Leader of the Opposition might want to think about. What the report from Dr.
Dubinsky recommends, in part, is that there should perhaps be two trauma care centres in New
Brunswick—not one in every regional health authority, not one in every hospital, but two trauma
care centres for the province.
I am not creating a committee. There is a committee already in place, one that the Leader of the
Opposition should be aware of. It is part of the provincial health plan. The committee on patient
safety and collaborative care has been mandated by myself to retain an outside expert in trauma care,
to work with that expert to propose a model for improvements to the system, to do that by the end
of June of this year, and to report back to me as soon as possible thereafter with specific
recommendations. It is not a new committee, it is an existing committee, which includes all the
stakeholders in the system.
Mr. S. Graham: To take the minister at his word, the sad part about this comment is the fact that
if he truly wanted to work with this committee, why did he not sit down with the committee the day
after he received this report 11 weeks ago? That is the question that this government has not
answered. The government is saying that 11 weeks after receiving the report that shows that a
trauma care situation failed a New Brunswicker . . . Twenty-nine recommendations were given to
this government 11 weeks ago and you, Mr. Minister, were more preoccupied with a preelection
ORAL QUESTIONS 15 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 11, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 11 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\21 2006-04-11 BL\21 2006-04-11 BL.wpd 3/10
campaign spending spree than in saving the lives of New Brunswickers. That is the fact that remains
today. No, it is not a new committee. The committee was in place. Eleven weeks after the fact, you
now wake up and say: We have to consult the committee. The recommendations of Dr. Dubinsky’s
report also state that until such time as the comprehensive review that you are proposing is
conducted, and possible realignment of services occurs, clear expectations should be established
immediately in order to ensure that patients do not experience untoward delays or suboptimal care.
Have you at least taken that step?
Hon. Mr. Green: The Leader of the Opposition keeps repeating the same erroneous comments. We
did not wait 11 weeks. As soon as the report was received, we began work on it within the
department—at the senior level within the department. It was not after 11 weeks that the committee
on patient safety and collaborative care was mandated to look at trauma care service in New
Brunswick, it was in the month of March.
As I have already said, but I am happy to repeat, we made a commitment to the patient involved that
he would have the first opportunity to sit down and see the report and its recommendations. That
occurred last week. The health care professionals who are involved in this incident are being met
with face-to-face this week. The work is ongoing. There are specific recommendations in the report
of Dr. Dubinsky that we have already been active on, such as enhancements to the ambulance
service in this province, and a diagnostic imaging archive for the province, which is already under
way.
Mr. S. Graham: The government is on very shaky ground here. The point remains that we have a
Premier who is more preoccupied with traveling the province and handing out cheques than with
bringing forward comprehensive recommendations on how to deal with this report. What this
minister is now saying is: We sat on the report for 11 weeks, we were forced to make it public, but
now we are going to act.
The question remains: Why did you not act 11 weeks ago when you received this report? The people
of New Brunswick should have very clearly seen action from this government. Instead, they saw
delay.
016 14:10
The minister could have immediately put in place the committee that he is talking about, or he
should have informed the New Brunswick Medical Society or the Nurses Association of New
Brunswick of the contents of this report. Clearly, two recommendations have not been acted upon,
because the minister is refusing to answer. The first recommendation is to put in place the call roster,
and the second is to set out the clear expectations while the committee is doing its work to make sure
that this situation is not repeated.
ORAL QUESTIONS 15 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 11, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 11 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\21 2006-04-11 BL\21 2006-04-11 BL.wpd 4/10
Hon. Mr. Green: Once again, it does not matter how many times the Leader of the Opposition
stands up in this House and says that nothing happened for 11 weeks. That is not true. We began
work on this report as soon as it was received in the department. I have already outlined what some
of those steps are. Again, it is not a new committee. It was put in place as part of the provincial
health plan, which includes representatives of the New Brunswick Medical Society, the Nurses
Association, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of New Brunswick, and the regional health
authorities in this province—precisely the stakeholders that need to give us their recommendations
on improving trauma care service in this province. That is exactly what is happening.
M. V. Boudreau : Mes questions s’adressent aussi au ministre de la Santé et concernent aussi le
rapport du D Dubinsky. Les recommandations du rapport ont r été rendues publiques dans un couloir
de l’Assemblée législative un vendredi après-midi. Nous n’avons pas le rapport complet et nous
n’avons pas la version bilingue de ces recommandations qui ont été rendues publiques de façon
officielle par le ministre de la Santé. Le ministre peut-il nous confirmer aujourd’hui quand nous
aurons une copie complète du rapport dans les deux langues officielles?
Hon. Mr. Green: The member opposite knows full well why the full report has not been released,
as should the editorial board of the Times-Transcript. The report is full of highly confidential
personal information about both the patient involved and a number of health care professionals. I
would think that, if nothing else over the course of last year, people in this Chamber and in the
media would be a bit more sensitized about releasing personal and private information.
However, I can tell you that we have released the recommendations, and we have given a copy of
the report to the patient involved. He has chosen to make that public. That is his prerogative. He is
fully within his rights to do so. As for the fact that it was distributed in a hallway, it was distributed
prior to a scrum, the same type of scrum that happens each and every day that this House sits.
Finally, on the matter of the report being in English only, the report has already been translated. It
is in the hands of Dr. Dubinsky, who wants to be fully satisfied that all the nuances of his report in
English are reflected in French. As soon as he signs off on it, it will be released.
M. V. Boudreau : J’ai une autre question pour le ministre de la Santé. Je peux accepter jusqu’à un
certain point l’explication que le ministre vient de donner, mais c’est son personnel qui a distribué
les copies des recommandations aux médias et au public en anglais seulement. C’est un point que
je veux rapporter.
Ma deuxième question est que nous avons eu, il y a quelques semaines, le dépôt d’un nouveau
budget pour l’année 2006-2007. Il n’y a aucune mention dans ce budget des centres de traumatologie
au Nouveau-Brunswick. Le ministre peut-il nous indiquer si des fonds sont mis de côté dans son
budget de 2006-2007 pour spécifiquement traiter des recommandations produites par le rapport
Dubinsky?
ORAL QUESTIONS 15 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 11, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 11 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\21 2006-04-11 BL\21 2006-04-11 BL.wpd 5/10
Hon. Mr. Green: On the first point raised by the member opposite, when he rose with a
supplementary question, I have already indicated that the recommendations have been translated.
As soon as they have been signed off by Dr. Dubinsky, they will be released. Finally, oddly enough,
in a provincial health budget at a record level of $1.9 billion, we have not had a chance to talk about
everything that is in it. I look forward to doing that as soon as the estimates start.
M. V. Boudreau : Je ne peux faire autrement que de faire un certain parallèle entre le rapport
Dubinsky et le rapport MacKay. Le ministre de l’Éducation a-t-il déposé une série de
recommandations sans nous montrer le reste du rapport, soit l’analyse, le contexte et l’évaluation?
Non. Pour une raison ou pour une autre, le ministre de la Santé a décidé de rendre publiques
seulement les recommandations et non le reste du rapport. Cela n’a aucun bon sens.
017 14:15
Le ministre nous dit qu’il a soumis le rapport au Comité de collaboration sur la sécurité des patients
et les soins cliniques. Ce comité existe depuis l’élaboration du plan provincial de la santé, en juin
2004, et il avait pour mandat d’élaborer et de mettre en oeuvre un nouveau programme de gestion
de l’accès aux soins chirurgicaux, pour faire en sorte que les cas de chirurgie les plus urgents,
comme dans les situations de traumatisme, soient traités rapidement et que les périodes d’attente
soient diminuées. Que fait ce comité depuis deux ans, si ce n’est pas traiter des questions comme
celles que contiennent les recommandations du rapport du Dr Dubinsky?
Hon. Mr. Green: As I indicated earlier, Dr. Dubinsky himself estimates that there are
approximately 1 500 trauma care cases in New Brunswick a year. Most of the time, the system
works well. In the case of this particular patient on a particular night in November of last year near
Tracadie, the system did not work well. That gives us an opportunity to do better, and that is
precisely what we are doing.
As for why the recommendations were released and not the report, I have already answered that
question but I am happy to do it again, because the report was full of highly confidential and
personal information about both the patient and a number of health care professionals. We know full
well—full well—that had I released that full report, every member opposite along, with the
provincial media, would be calling for the resignation of the Minister of Health. Why? Because he
had disclosed personal, private, confidential information. Not going to happen!
Unemployment
Mr. Targett: According to a report from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business dated
April 6 on long-term employment vacancies in small and medium-sized businesses, New Brunswick
ranks fourth worst in the country and worst in the Atlantic Provinces when it comes to long-term
employment vacancies. For the new Minister of Business New Brunswick, this means that the
inability for businesses to fill hiring needs is higher in New Brunswick than in any other Atlantic
ORAL QUESTIONS 15 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 11, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 11 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\21 2006-04-11 BL\21 2006-04-11 BL.wpd 6/10
Canadian province. Reading comments like this, particularly when we are experiencing industry
bankruptcies, pension plan deficits, and multiple mill closures, causes one to pause and ask: Why?
My question to the Minister of Business New Brunswick is simple: Standing still means losing
ground. Can he point out one concrete measure in this budget to deal with this employment
shortfall?
Hon. Mr. MacDonald: I welcome this question today, and it is about time. It is about time that
Liberals stood up and actually asked a question about business and about the economic development
prospects of this province. As far as concrete examples of what we are doing to grow and to
diversify the New Brunswick economy, I would cite examples like the Artizan Design Centre that
has just opened in Lawrence, Mass., and how 11 of the 15 companies represented there are from
New Brunswick, working diligently to grow the value-added sector in wood processing in this
province. We can cite similar examples like the trade mission to Alberta, where we are delivering
a key message that we want to export our products, not our people. We can talk about the Boston
seafood show where we are growing and developing new markets and new opportunities for the
people of New Brunswick.
Mr. Targett: I am glad that the minister got up and so adamantly talked about what he is trying to
attract for the province. This question is about the shortfalls and vacancies in employment for the
businesses within the province. It is wonderful to go out and tell everybody that we are going to do
this, but the businesses in this province cannot find the properly trained people they need to fill the
positions that they have. That was the question, and the answer is that there is nothing in this budget
for that.
According to the New Brunswick Department of Finance and Statistics Canada, the unemployment
rates for New Brunswick and Canada averaged 9.7% and 6.8%, respectively, for 2005. This is hardly
anything to brag about when there is almost a three-point difference between our provincial rate of
unemployment and the national average. This is like saying that we can run really fast, but we still
come in last in a race. The last time I checked, second place is the first . . .
(Interjections.)
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. Targett: My question to the Minister of Business New Brunswick is simple. Standing still,
again, means losing ground. How is this budget going to address this gap?
Hon. Mr. MacDonald: Is the question finished? I want to take this opportunity to thank my
negative little friend for his second question.
ORAL QUESTIONS 15 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 11, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 11 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\21 2006-04-11 BL\21 2006-04-11 BL.wpd 7/10
018 14:20
When he talks about what we are doing to grow the economy of New Brunswick and what we are
doing to make sure we have the people we need in the jobs and in the sectors where we need them,
I would cite the work that the Premier has done and the repatriation program that is taking place in
this province. The Premier has said on more than one occasion that New Brunswick will only be
strong when all the regions of New Brunswick are strong. That is why we see investments taking
place through the economic development funds in the Restigouche-Chaleur regions, the peninsula,
and in the Miramichi. That is what we are doing. We are working diligently to ensure that we grow
the province of New Brunswick in all sectors and in all regions of this province.
Programmes de formation
M. Albert : Ma question est pour le ministre de l’Éducation postsecondaire et de la Formation.
Chaque année, le gouvernement reçoit du fédéral plus ou moins 100 millions de dollars pour
s’occuper de la formation des travailleurs et travailleuses du Nouveau-Brunswick. Il s’agit d’une
entente signée et flexible. Vous pouvez modifier les programmes en fonction des besoins des clients
et des conditions du marché du travail. Vous pouvez très facilement identifier et mettre en oeuvre
des mesures visant à aider des clients à acquérir les compétences requises pour un emploi, que ce
soit des compétences de base ou avancées.
Ma question pour le ministre est la suivante : Plusieurs cours d’échafaudage ont été donnés au
Nouveau-Brunswick. De quel façon votre ministère participe-t-il à cette formation offerte par
l’union des charpentiers?
Hon. Mr. Carr: Very clearly, our government is very pleased and proud to work with our unions.
We are a government that is union-friendly and labour-friendly. We take that very seriously. With
respect to the specific question on scaffolding training, this is not the first time that the member
opposite has raised the issue. He knows full well that the government receives the strategic training
plan from the Carpenters Union, and the department is pleased to fund that training plan.
Certainly, the training plan calls for 18 courses, 4 of which are targeted at scaffolding training. In
terms of why the training is not delivered in the north, it would be more appropriate for the member
opposite to ask the union. Very clearly, the government responds to the strategic plans that are put
forward by the union.
We are very pleased to grow our economy. We are very pleased to increase our training
opportunities, and we are going to continue to do so. On Friday, 36 100 more New Brunswickers
were working. We know that New Brunswick is a great place to learn and an even better place to
work, and we are going to do more.
ORAL QUESTIONS 15 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 11, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 11 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\21 2006-04-11 BL\21 2006-04-11 BL.wpd 8/10
M. Albert : C’est le neuvième cours d’échafaudage offert au nord du Nouveau-Brunswick, à
Brantville, localité située entre Tracadie-Sheila et Neguac, pour les gens de la Péninsule acadienne.
Près de 190 personnes ont reçu un certificat. Le ministère de l’Éducation postsecondaire et de la
Formation accepte et approuve les personnes qui suivent ou qui ont suivi des cours de formation.
Toutefois, dans le Nord, le ministère ne paie aucune des dépenses des personnes qui suivent la
formation. En plus, les personnes paient 50 % du coût du cours, soit 1 282 $, lors de l’inscription.
Par contre, dans le Sud, les gens ne paient pas le montant de 1 282 $ et les dépenses sont payées.
Pouvez-vous me dire pourquoi?
Hon. Mr. Carr: I will not let the member opposite play the dividing game in this House. We have
come too far in this province in working in both our official languages in our communities. Let me
tell you that our government treats all of New Brunswick fairly, and we will continue to work with
the unions and the entire province to meet the needs of our training and skills development that we
require. I am proud that we are getting good results. We have more to do, and we are going to do
more.
M. Albert : La réalité, c’est que cette situation a été dénoncée au ministère lors de nombreuses
occasions. Des appels téléphoniques ont été faits au ministre et à différents parlementaires, et
l’union des charpentiers a aussi fait des pressions. L’union des charpentiers offre le neuvième cours
à Brantville, et 190 personnes ont été certifiées, et le ministère ne paie pas les dépenses des gens qui
suivent la formation dans le Nord et elles sont obligées de payer 1 282 $. Au sud, les gens ne paient
pas 1 282 $ et les dépenses sont payées, alors que c’est la même union qui donne le cours. Alors,
on vit tous au Nouveau-Brunswick et on paie tous des taxes. Est-ce que les gens du Nord sont des
gens de deuxième classe? Pourquoi pénaliser les gens de la Péninsule acadienne? Pourquoi les
dépenses sont-elles payées ailleurs, alors que, dans la Péninsule acadienne elles ne le sont pas?
019 14:25
Voilà ma question. Votre ministère est au courant de la situation, mais vous ne faites rien. Pourquoi?
La situation sera-t-elle réglée? Remboursera-t-on les gens qui ont suivi le cours?
Hon. Mr. Carr: I am going to ask the member to retract his statements, because, very clearly, this
government is not about getting involved in the language divide, as the opposition members do.
They are becoming negative. We have come too far in New Brunswick to go down that road—no
way.
The fact is, our government is working for all regions of New Brunswick. Look at the budget that
those members voted against—more money for the Acadian Peninsula fund, more money for
Chaleur, and more money for Miramichi. We are working hard to increase our trades in our
community colleges, whereas the other side closed the door on trades. We are doing more, and we
are proud to work with the union which put in a request to the department for a strategic plan on
ORAL QUESTIONS 15 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 11, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 11 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\21 2006-04-11 BL\21 2006-04-11 BL.wpd 9/10
training. If the member opposite has a question on which priorities the union has put forward, he
should contact the union.
Floods
Mr. McGinley: It has been almost a year now since the flood on the Saint John River and in other
areas, such as Grand Lake. People who were claimants, people who suffered damages, have been
making claims over the past year, and they are still delayed in getting any answers. Some have been
paid, but we learned, on March 16, in the public accounts committee, that 78 of 145 applications had
been denied and 6 were still with the adjusters.
On March 9, I submitted a request for information under the Right to Information Act, and we still
do not have answers from the minister as to the number of claims, what has been paid, and what is
going on. People want to know. My question is, When can we expect an answer to this request for
information, and why do we have this undue delay?
Hon. Mr. Steeves: I want to welcome the question from the member opposite, the member for
Grand Lake. At the present time, there are two outstanding claims, and we are waiting for more
information. Just as soon as those are finished, we will figure out the total that will be paid out.
Mr. McGinley: That hardly answers my question. I will ask the minister this question: Why, at this
time, are these claims being denied? It is such a large proportion of them; out of 145, 78 were
dismissed—just denied. The adjusters or the department seem to be coming up with additional
qualifications as to why a person would or would not qualify for assistance. I will give the minister
two specific examples, without naming individuals. I do know that in one case, a question of
citizenship came up. In another case, it was a question of the individual’s income. I did not
understand in the beginning that the claimant’s income made any difference in whether an individual
or company would qualify. That is another thing: Do companies qualify? Why are all these new
qualifications coming up? They are obstacles to people who should have had their answers months
ago.
Hon. Mr. Steeves: First of all, I, as minister, have the right to waive the deductible, and sometimes,
I ask for somebody’s income so that I can waive the deductible. I have done that, and I will continue
to do that. If you do not fit into the program, you do not fit into the program. I am not getting into
anyone’s personal file, and I will not talk about a personal file publicly in the Legislative Assembly.
I believe that my staff people are doing a very good job. I am sorry that the members opposite keep
questioning the civil service. Those people are doing a good job. They have an outline to go by, and
they go by it. It is not something new. It is something we have carried out over the years, and we
will continue to carry it out. We have to meet guidelines, also. As you know, the DFA is a program
put together by the provincial and federal governments, and there are certain rules. You have to fit
in, and that is what the civil service is carrying out.
ORAL QUESTIONS 15 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 11, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 11 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\21 2006-04-11 BL\21 2006-04-11 BL.wpd 10/10
020 14:30
Mr. McGinley: I was not asking the minister about his discretion to waive the deductible portion.
I was asking why, somewhere along the process, months after the applications were made, the
objection came up as to the income of the claimant. That has nothing to do with the income of the
claimant, apart from the deductible portion. You are talking apples, and I am talking oranges.
However, of the $2.8 million paid out as of March 9, 2006, $1.8 million of that, as was told to the
committee by your deputy minister, went to the Department of Transportation, presumably for the
repair of roads. That would be giving as much or more to the department, to the government, out of
the federal/provincial funds, as was given to individuals. I am asking you: Is that politics, or is
that . . .
Hon. Mr. Steeves: What I can say to the member opposite is that is a DFA program. It is not
something unusual. It is not unusual, when there is destruction to highways, that they fit into the
DFA program, as well as municipalities. When you talk about that, we have also paid $44 000 to
municipalities. I do not know whether you are against that, but that is part of it. They fit into the
DFA program. They fit into the program, and as long as they fit into the program, we will pay them.
If you do not fit into the program, all I can say is that I am sorry.