GCn20

But this is how ER works. The most serious stuff gets looked at first and with a broken bone it's generally just a matter of dealing with the pain as opposed to anything being potentially life threatening. They will make people sit in pain if they're not likely to die on them while they prioritize people who might keel over if they have to wait. A broken bone in a child is completely different than an adult. It is not just pain management. Because a child is still growing irreparable damage can be done if a broken bone is not treated in a timely fashion. ER policy posted on the hospital wall states that a broken bone in a child under 12 years of age should be seen by a doctor within 2 hours.

You may be right. However, you can't tell me for one second that the RHAs don't make the issues even worse. The BRHA in Thompson is a prime example. Two fishermen from Norway House sit on that board strictly for political reasons. Nice guys, but they don't have a hot clue about medical or hospital management.

I think there are a great deal of horror stories like this. 2 years ago my 4 year old daughter fell off a trampoline at our cabin in Thompson. We took her to the ER at 10 pm. At 4:30 am she had still not been seen and fell asleep. She was in a great deal of pain prior so we asked the ER nurse how much longer we could expect to wait. She said that since our daughter was not considered critical it would be another 2-4 hours. We took her home and came back the next day. Next day at 10 am we arrived and waited until 4:30 pm before she was seen by a doctor. He sent her for an X-ray, though he insinuated that she might just be faking for attention. A 4 year old faking for a 24 hour span? At any rate, the X-rays came back and she had broken her leg and the break was right by her growth ring of her bone. Off to Winnipeg for emergency surgery where we were advised that had this gone any longer there would have been a real danger of her leg bone never growing correctly. The surgeon even suggested off the record that we file a lawsuit for malpractice as she should have been examined much earlier with a suspected broken bone. I didn't bother. However, I have decided to become active and vocal against the RHA's. Our medical care in Manitoba is in shambles so that the NDP can play politics with hospital care through the formation of the RHAs. Had my daughter been crippled for life so that NDP cronies can sit on boards, they are quite frankly completely unqualified for and fleece the taxpayers for per diems, I would have lost it. Egregious management by the NDP. It just goes on and on. Anyone sitting down and viewing the truth would see this but the NDP are masters of throttling thought by creating panic with their "boogeymen".

So you expect Durant to step right in his rookie year and make an impact as the starting X for the Bombers? Okay. I know the easy response to this is to point out that Kito Poblah didn't pan out, but Lemar Durant is probably the most solid REC prospect the CFL has seen since Kito Poblah. Shamawd Chambers is up there too. Durant is a very solid receiver and I definitely wouldn't write him off as a potential year one starter. There are going to be a few of them in this draft and I think he's got as good a shot as any. Sure Durant could eventually become a stud, but relying on him to be your starting X receiver in his rookie year is unreasonable. Who said anything about relying on him to be our X receiver. How about drafting him and letting him compete for the job. What is unreasonable about that?

So you expect Durant to step right in his rookie year and make an impact as the starting X for the Bombers? Okay. I would expect for him to compete for the job. If he doesn't win it in his first year does that mean he would be an unwise pick in your mind? Not really sure what you are getting at. So what if he doesn't win the job. Maybe he doesn't win the X receiver position but is good enough to push Kohlert out or he moves inside and replaces JFG and gives us a stretch receiver down the middle. He is the best receiving prospect in this draft. If we are going to go receiver why not draft him in hopes he can be our X receiver and know that if that doesn't pan out that he can compete with our other NI receivers for their jobs.

I really don't understand, whatsoever, why in the world people are against private clinics or hospitals for that matter. Would it create a 2 tier health system...yes it probably would....however, the top tier would be paid for by the people using it and it would undoubtedly lead to a vast improvement in public health care by reducing the load placed on it. Just throwing it out there, but anything has got to be better than 24 hour wait times and people dying in wait rooms. Instead the argument is that ALL Manitobans should be equally subjected to crappy health care. It makes no sense.....UNLESS, of course, you ask the unions...and there is the rub. To combat common sense, the NDP have erected yet another boogey man to scare Manitobans into believing that anything run by the private sector would be inherently evil. After all, if it's private the unions are not the puppet masters.

The thing with the unions and NDP is that they are one and the same. Unions have been running our province for the better part of the last 30 years. Anyone who thinks otherwise only needs to look at the shameful leadership convention we just witnessed. ONE union cut a deal and decided who our premier should be. SHAMEFUL, that on a party level the NDP functions this way, SHAMEFUL, if the people of Manitoba allow this to continue. My wife is a member of the MGEU, they are a year without a contract because both the government and the union have agreed to delay the proceedings because of the NDPs sagging poll numbers. Instead of cutting the fat, or Filmon Fridays, which would be responsible government. Let's delay the contract, and pay the union in the end for doing so. It's only taxpayer money. Thing is the new contract will be signed before the next election, and I will bet you dollars to donuts that it will see the civil service get a decent raise but will contain all kinds of other hidden goodies. Get ready for a no-layoff clause for the 2nd straight MGEU master agreement, that leaves the Tories without option to cut the fat for a few years. They will introduce all kinds of new "quality of life" goodies as well. What is really shameful is that right now the NDP have an unofficial hiring freeze throughout the civil service because they don't want to appear to be growing the civil service. HOWEVER, instead of hand picking which jobs to lose through attrition or simply eliminate due to a bloated mid management level, they are putting it on front line essential service workers. Therefore, for political optics, they are not filling a position but choosing to pay current staffing levels double time to fill the void in overtime because the shift still must be filled because it is a service position. Tax abuse at it's finest. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that this kind of financial management is to the detriment of ALL taxpayers. All so that the NDP can say that they are not growing the civil service AND keep the bureaucracy they have created, the cost of government is soaring AND so with it our deficit and rate of taxation..

I think it is really clear that Walters is looking for an X receiver. I, also, think it is really clear that Durant could fit that role. Whether separated by a header or not connect the dots. The draft is one avenue we could both bolster our NI starters AND address a position of need if we drafted Durant. Two birds with one stone has me agreeing with Mike, don't really care if a header seperates the two thoughts or not.

I wonder how many folks setting up these churches share the same "to each their own" attitude as you? Call up a cowboy church and ask if they perform gay marriages? I have a pretty good idea what the answer will be... WTF does that have to do with anything? Call up a Chinese restaurant and ask them if they do fondue, if they don't should they be ridiculed on a football forum? Who's ridiculing? I think organized religion has done far more "evil" in the past 2000 years than it's done good. And the more extreme/peculiar the religion, the more hateful and intolerant they tend to be. That's my opinion, expressed respectfully on a football forum. Enjoy your Chinese food. I am a regular church goer and can readily concede that religions can do and have done wonderful things for humanity. That said, it has been reported that there have been more killing over religious differences (at least that was the excuse) than any other reason. About 20 years ago, the chief theologian for the Catholic church (Hans Kung) wondered out loud in an interview whether mankind would not have been better off without organized religion. Within 24 hours of the airing of the interview, he was demoted to a small parrish in France. Religion is not the problem. It happens when politics and religion get into bed together. QFT. Unfortunately since the dark ages that has almost exclusively been the case. Even in the recent history of Canada, atrocities such as Residential schools for natives are living proof that politics and religion are a terrible mix.

Here we go with the privatization boogey-man again. The good news for Manitoba is that Manitobans are not fooled by the NDPs scare tactics anymore. Only the very die-hard NDP supporters, which are a breed quickly becoming extinct, are willing to listen to this cock and bull anymore.

Never ceases to amaze me how the pro-NDP keep trying to perpetuate the myth of fired nurses, even though PUBLIC RECORD has shown that it is an outright LIE.

As opposed to Sterling Lyon who referred to Manitoba women as "good breeders" and Filmon with his vote-rigging scandal? Or premier-hopeful Brian Pallister who calls non-Christians "infidels"? One incident of idiot staffers doesn't ruin a great legacy of Filmon. Would take him back any day. The PC's campaign manager, a party bigwig (who didn't learn anything from it and tried to rig another election 4 years later in a relative's riding), Filmon's Chief of Staff and the Secretary to Treasury Board - those aren't just any staffers - they were all trusted advisors and friends of Filmon. What legacy does Filmon have? Firing nurses, privatizing MTS, making cuts to social services, etc, etc. Mods, maybe it's time to split off the non-IGF discussion from this thread. This has gone so off topic. Filmon's government had it's warts. All governments do over time. I would gladly take Filmon's record over Selinger's, any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Selinger is easlly the worst premier we have had in Manitoba since Pawley. His record is atrocious. Awful, awful mismanagement on every level.

You need to talk to smarter people.

Jacquie your statements are ALL factually incorrect.

Wonder if they were the best qualified for the job in the tendering process, or simply the best they could get with union affiliation.

There were conditions placed by the government of Manitoba on the project in order for them to loan the money. Did these conditions contribute to the situation that is now happening. This is what I would like to see answered. There is no question that at the end of the snowball's roll that corners were cut. Were they cut because of a flawed tendering process. Were they cut because of problems with the mandated build site. Did it create a situation that created an unwinnable situation all the way around. At the end of the day, Olsen should be left holding the bag. He took on the contract knowing what the conditions were. However, on future capital projects undertaken by Crown agencies or corporations we will not have a bag man.

Cowboy churches? What happens if you are not a cowboy and you know maybe just wanna go pray. Gotta buy chaps with sequins on them? I get that there are cowboys in Alberta and Saskatchewan....that's great. Making it a requirement for entry....that's absurd. It does sound silly even to a Westerner. I am a little surprised by Saskatchewan not embracing Hillbilly church though....mind you, I guess they just call that regular church.

I spent a year in Estevan called July and August in 1990. That town makes Honey Boo-Boo look like Stephen Hawking. I got a buddy who just moved there... Tattoo artist, of all careers.. I have to assume hes pretty much braindead by this point.. You should tell your buddy to really have some fun and mess with them. He can misspell every word on his tattoos on purpose and just sit back and laugh at the fact that nobody notices.

Huff saw a value in Shomari. Some people here dont. He also saw first-round value in Ameet Pall. Huff is far from infallible. Personally I'd have liked to see Shomari on teams to start with and work his way into the rotation like anyone else. Oh well. It all boils down to price tag. For the right price, Williams could have been a valuable contributor and depth for our club.

The general contractor, architect and engineering firm are all national companies. They are forced to hire unionized workers, regardless of who the best trade for the job may be. Funny, I always thought that whether you are unionized or not, you still had to pass the same standards to be qualified as a journeyman. Ooops. Sorry. More logic. Have to pass the same standards yes. Union labour is not unqualified labour. If you are going to make an argument against unionized labour it would be that it generally costs more and is less productive. If you are forced to hire unionized workers then you can only hire out of union shops. That takes many very good companies out of play as options for subcontracting. It narrows down and limits options and effects cost control. That's just straight up logic for you. When cost control is effected, so too will the final product. Your logic is flawed. You are positing that the lowest labour cost determines the best quality and the lowest overall cost- that is not a given under any circumstances. In most cases, the wages will be the same for a similarly qualified tradesman because a journeyman will take his/her talents elsewhere if inderpaid. You are also assuming (probably falsely) that the issues with the stadium are due to poor workmanship, and nowhere is that categorically stated- the issues appear to be poor design, and that comes out of the non-union offices of the architect and engineering firms. Moreover, the supervision on the site would have been the purview of the construction mangers, and I would bet they are also non-union. Being unionized is no guarantee of good results, but neither is is being non-unuon. Nope, not at all what I was saying. Not in any way shape or form. My point is simply that requiring the exclusive use of union shops limits the amount of companies that can tender and therefore waters down the pool of skilled labor. On a project with the scope and size of a stadium that will inevitably lead to cost overrun due to limited tendering, and will exclude in some cases some very good and possibly better qualified companies. Can you seriously defend the need to use only union labor? What possible argument could one have that it would improve a project. It was simply a requirement put in place by a government that is beholden to the unions. It made so sense, other than political gain, then and the proof is coming out in the pudding.

The general contractor, architect and engineering firm are all national companies. They are forced to hire unionized workers, regardless of who the best trade for the job may be. Funny, I always thought that whether you are unionized or not, you still had to pass the same standards to be qualified as a journeyman. Ooops. Sorry. More logic. Have to pass the same standards yes. Union labour is not unqualified labour. If you are going to make an argument against unionized labour it would be that it generally costs more and is less productive. If you are forced to hire unionized workers then you can only hire out of union shops. That takes many very good companies out of play as options for subcontracting. It narrows down and limits options and effects cost control. That's just straight up logic for you. When cost control is effected, so too will the final product. Your logic is flawed. You are positing that the lowest labour cost determines the best quality and the lowest overall cost- that is not a given under any circumstances. In most cases, the wages will be the same for a similarly qualified tradesman because a journeyman will take his/her talents elsewhere if inderpaid. You are also assuming (probably falsely) that the issues with the stadium are due to poor workmanship, and nowhere is that categorically stated- the issues appear to be poor design, and that comes out of the non-union offices of the architect and engineering firms. Moreover, the supervision on the site would have been the purview of the construction mangers, and I would bet they are also non-union. Being unionized is no guarantee of good results, but neither is is being non-unuon. Nope, not at all what I was saying. Not in any way shape or form. My point is simply that requiring the exclusive use of union shops limits the amount of companies that can tender and therefore waters down the pool of skilled labor. On a project with the scope and size of a stadium that will inevitably lead to cost overrun due to limited tendering, and will exclude in some cases some very good and possibly better qualified companies. Can you seriously defend the need to use only union labor? What possible argument could one have that it would improve a project.

Poor Alberta. Those Tories really screwed them up. LOL. Consider your audience when you want to go on a rant about poor Alberta. We would give our left nut in Manitoba to have the economy that has been crafted in Alberta under the Tories.

I agree. Anytime only union shops can be utilized the more danger there is for cost overrun and poor workmanship through decreased competition and lack of option.

The timeframe was aggressive. It had nothing to do with design flaws. It may have contributed to some of the shoddy workmanship though.

The general contractor, architect and engineering firm are all national companies. They are forced to hire unionized workers, regardless of who the best trade for the job may be. Funny, I always thought that whether you are unionized or not, you still had to pass the same standards to be qualified as a journeyman. Ooops. Sorry. More logic. Have to pass the same standards yes. Union labour is not unqualified labour. If you are going to make an argument against unionized labour it would be that it generally costs more and is less productive. If you are forced to hire unionized workers then you can only hire out of union shops. That takes many very good companies out of play as options for subcontracting. It narrows down and limits options and effects cost control. That's just straight up logic for you. When cost control is effected, so too will the final product.