Thank you, Mr. Chair. I was just wondering: With respect to the residency and the agreement in trade, does this essentially mean that if we have a local dentist in a community that’s barely big enough to support a dentist, but through good fortune we’ve managed to capture one and have him reside there, that now another dentist can come in and undercut this dentist by avoiding the steep costs of maintaining infrastructure locally and employees locally? Is that in fact what this is doing? Is it enabling non-resident dentists to do this under the agreement in trade?
Bob Bromley on Committee Motion 95-17(4): Concurrence Of Tabled Document 137-17(4), Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 3, 2013, 2014, Carried
In the Legislative Assembly on October 28th, 2013. See this statement in context.
Committee Motion 95-17(4): Concurrence Of Tabled Document 137-17(4), Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 3, 2013, 2014, Carried
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters
October 27th, 2013
See context to find out what was said next.