Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd just like to clarify, for the record, that this case has been concluded. As far as we're concerned, it's been addressed and I will not comment on that case. But more importantly, it's not unique in the context of cases going to the Supreme Court. I think because of the issue, like I say, it is a national issue which is not unique to ourselves. There are other cases in Canada that have dealt with this issue and now we are trying to find clarity to change the policies that we have so that people that do fall in the category of chronic pain, we'll be able to diagnose those individuals using a method that hopefully will bring conclusion to these cases so we don't have long, drawn-out cases that go on for 10 or 15 years. So again, by making these changes, we are addressing the need for these long outstanding cases. But again, we may not be able to conclude all of these cases because of the status of those cases in context of the evidence that is presented. Thank you.
David Krutko on Question 441-15(5): Implications Of Chronic Pain Policy Settlement
In the Legislative Assembly on March 7th, 2007. See this statement in context.
Further Return To Question 441-15(5): Implications Of Chronic Pain Policy Settlement
Question 441-15(5): Implications Of Chronic Pain Policy Settlement
Item 6: Oral Questions
March 6th, 2007
Page 1282
See context to find out what was said next.