Mr. Speaker, I will begin with that paragraph again. Thank you, my honourable colleagues. When Ms. Cournoyea was the Minister of Health, she was asked by Mr. Arlooktoo, who was the Member for the Legislative Assembly for Baffin south, on November 7, 1988, to confirm radio reports that two cases of A.I.D.S. had been reported in the Baffin region.
Mr. Speaker, she refused to do so and stated, "I cannot report that information. We have general policies, and guidelines, which were carried over from Health and Welfare Canada, including their established practice of only reporting A.I.D.S. statistics on a territorial-wide level." Mr. Speaker, the Health and Welfare standards in this area have not changed.
In response to further questioning on the subject, she indicated that it was important to ensure complete confidentiality in order to encourage infected individuals to come forward and seek treatment. She elaborated on the reason for the policy by stating, "I believe that, given the fact that the N.W.T. is a small community, and people generally find out things, confidentiality is mainly for the protection of the individuals who are seeking treatment. We feel that we must have the ability to have an open and honest approach, to make people feel that their particular problem will be treated confidentially when they are seeking medical treatment".
On September 7, 1992, News/North ran a third page article titled Cournoyea backs A.I.D.S. disclosure. The story under Ronna Bremer's by-line, concerned an incident that had reportedly occurred during the spring of 1992, in which an H.I.V. positive male from Vancouver, was alleged to have travelled to Tuktoyaktuk, and engaged in unprotected sexual activity with females in the community.
The comments attributed to Ms. Cournoyea without quotations. The newspaper included the following statement: that people of Tuktoyaktuk should have been told that a man, who was carrying the A.I.D.S. virus, was returning to their community, says Nunakput M.L.A. Nellie Cournoyea.
Also, Cournoyea understands the issue of patient confidentiality, and protocol, but said if the community had been informed, it could have alleviated much of the distress. Also, Ms. Cournoyea said Health Minister, Dennis Patterson, is aware of the situation, and is reviewing the issue of protocol. Now quotations included in the newspaper article also included a number of direct quotes of statements reportedly made by Ms. Cournoyea, including "they did not need to know the name, but if they had told, we have an individual returning to your community, they could have been asked what is the best way to deal with it?" said Cournoyea. Ms. Cournoyea was also quoted as saying, "the problems in town with the A.I.D.S. infected man would probably never have existed if the community had been informed."
Mr. Speaker, I want to know, whether or not the position stated publicly by Ms. Cournoyea, directly contradicts the established policy of the Department of Health for which she is responsible as the senior ministry in the Executive Council. This raises questions as to whether she is planning to alter the policy in the way that makes exposure criteria inconsistent with the Canadian standards used in the rest of the country.
Her comments on September 7, also represent a reversal from the stand she took in November, 1988, when the 11th Assembly M.L.A.s from Baffin South, Aivilik and Mackenzie Delta asked her to confirm the incidents of reported A.I.D.S. cases by community or even by region. This raises concerns whether the Government Leader has established a "double standard" in which decisions made about the disclosure of A.I.D.S. incidents in Nunakput are going to be made differently in other territorial constituencies.
Ms. Cournoyea indicated in the newspaper article that the current Minister of Health, the Honourable Dennis Patterson, will be reviewing the issue of protocol. Recognizing that Ms. Cournoyea's 1988 statement, that public disclosure may discourage A.I.D.S. victims, is still valid today, one might question, why is it suddenly become imperative for the Minister to review the protocol now?
Further if the Minister has determined that such a review is necessary, it should proceed objectively and in the absence of any prior opinions expressed by the Government Leader to whom he reports. Now the comments reportedly made by the Government Leader on this subject, following the incident in her home community could be seen as a senior political interfere in policy development within the Department of Health.
Mr. Speaker, I will be pursuing this particular matter with questions.