Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is the largest part of the Department of Health and Social Services; this is the part of the budget that actually flows all the money to all the different authorities. Just in comment to the actual budget document itself, I know the Main Estimates are prepared in a certain way, but it would be nice to actually see the breakdown of the authorities in this document. I know that’s probably not going to happen, but as far as digging in and trying to get details, there’s nothing in here on the authorities, which is really too bad considering it’s where most of the money is going.

This leads me, obviously, into my line of questioning. We know the vast majority of the money is going to the authorities, which is probably where it should be going — the front-hand delivery, the delivery part of the department. But I understand, in looking at this, that we see only about a 3 per cent increase, and we know the national average for growth in healthcare is 6, 7, 8 per cent, depending on where you’re going. It’s certainly a lot higher than 3 per cent. I understand the need to turn around and rein in our spending and cap our growth, but I wonder if such a radical switch in health is going to be healthy for the health

system. It’s like driving down the highway at 100 kilometres per hour and turning 90 degrees without skidding. It might be better to take a bit more of a gradual turn on this one and get to our 3 per cent growth over the next couple of years rather than trying to nail it all in the first year and causing a whole lot of difficulties.

Having said that, you’re doing it; you’re going to do what you’re going to do. You’re going to cap it at 3 per cent, and we’re going to see where the chips land. There’s no detail in here. Can you tell me — let’s pick Stanton as an example — as a result of forcing them to maintain growth at 3 per cent, what programs and services are expected to be cut within Stanton Territorial Health Authority?