Spika Key Replacement

[Caterina Haggins]

MrIvan Spika is an Auckland orthopaedic surgeon, specialising in surgery of the knee and hip. His areas of special interest include robotic knee replacements, ACL reconstruction, knee arthroscopy, meniscal repair, hip replacements, revision knee and hip joint replacement, knee ligaments reconstruction and patella (kneecap) realignment including stabilisation of recurrent patellar dislocation. He also provides his opinion and treatment for sport knee injuries and other knee disorders including arthritis.

He has completed the National New Zealand Advanced Orthopaedic Training Programme. He is a member of the New Zealand Orthopaedic Association and a Fellow of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.

After graduating as an Orthopaedic surgeon (FRACS), he went on to complete a Fellowship training in joint replacement at Middlemore Hospital. He also went on to complete a Fellowship in knee arthroscopic, reconstructive and joint replacement surgery, as a Fellow of the prestigious John Bartlett Melbourne Knee Fellowship in Australia where he worked with Mr John Bartlett and Mr Hayden Morris.

Currently, he is appointed at Ascot, Mercy and Southern Cross Hospitals and has been consulting at White Cross Accident and Medical Clinics. His private consulting rooms are at Ascot Office Park by the Ascot Hospital.

Mr Spika is a member of the NZOA Knee Society, affiliated provider for Southern Cross Health Society and NIB Health Insurance First Choice provider. Mr Spika is also fluent in Croatian and speaks some French.

Mr. Ivan Spika is an orthopedic surgeon in Auckland specializing in knee and hip surgery. His areas of special interest include ACL reconstruction, knee arthroscopy, meniscal repair, knee replacement, hip replacement, revision knee and hip replacement, ligament reconstruction, patellar realignment. He offers comprehensive care for a wide range of conditions including arthritis and sports injuries.

Mr Ivan Spika is an Auckland orthopaedic surgeon, specialising in the surgery of the knee and hip.

His area of special interest include robotic knee replacements, hip replacements, ACL reconstructions, knee arthroscopy and meniscal repairs, patellar stabilisation. He also provides his opinion and treatment for sport knee injuries and other knee disorders including arthritis.

The most feared complication for any total knee replacement (TKR) surgeon and for their patient is deep infection. The treatment often results in prolonged hospitalisation, a period of marked limitation of mobility for the patient and the prospect of a major reconstructive procedure with a compromised outcome. The infection rate after primary TKR is usually reported to range from 0.5 to 2 percent [1, 34]. This is a serious problem despite modern technology and rigorous prophylaxis. Peersman et al. [28] reported recently a 0.43 % rate of deep infection in a consecutive series of 6439 total knee replacements performed with vertical laminar airflow and body-exhaust suits. This is encouraging, however, considering the increasing number of patients with TKR, infection is still a complication of major concern [2, 3, 29, 30, 38, 41].

Another organization I really want to highlight because of the great work it does is Cornerstone. Cornerstone is geared towards providing housing for women, especially women who are escaping domestic violence. They have quite a few housing units in my riding of Ottawa Centre and are an incredible organization. They have a couple of really good projects on the go which I will speak of in a moment.

This time when I went into that building, seniors were smiling. I got only two complaints while I was knocking on doors. And what were those complaints? The lid on the garbage chute was brand new, so it was too hard for seniors to open. That was the biggest complaint I received. I was very happy to receive that complaint. It was legitimate, and I did check it. It was too hard to open and needed some WD-40 to make it easier. But you could just see the positive impact that the dollars that were invested in that particular community had created, where people were happy and comfortable and involved in their building. You could see the changes that were taking place.

Another recommendation was on rent adjustments and calculations, specifically suggesting increasing the asset exemption and increasing income limits dealing with rent geared to income. Through this long-term affordable housing strategy, the government is simplifying the current RGI calculation process, reducing and eliminating more than 60 criteria now used to calculate income and reducing the administrative burden for tenants, housing providers and service managers, another positive step and recommendation that was made by the consultation that took place in Ottawa Centre.

I think Ontario has taken the right step in terms of having a long-term housing strategy. It is time that the federal government also comes to the table so that the kind of positive changes I was talking about that are being made in Ottawa Centre, in my community, can also be made across the province and across the country.

The issue to me, however, is, where are we at when it comes to not-for-profit housing in the province of Ontario today compared to what it was eight years ago or what it was even 20 years ago? Ontario is no longer in the not-for-profit housing business in the way that it used to be. We had a very proud history in the province dating back into the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s, where massive investments were made in order to build not-for-profit housing projects across this province. Why? Because the private sector, as far as the market itself, did not provide the units necessary in order for many families to find a home.

I understand there is a want on the part of this government to measure what the expectations are as far as the 10,000 units per year, but at least they should be able to meet their own targets that they had set when they ran back in the early election that led to their first mandate.

That brings us to the not-for-profit side. The reason the province of Ontario got into the not-for-profit business was very simple: It was to allow those people on pensions, such as seniors; people with disabilities; people who are on ODSP; or people with a lower income who are working minimum-wage jobs to be able to afford to find a one-, two- or three-bedroom apartment and pay rent geared to income. A percentage of the income would be calculated as the rent, and then the rest of it would be paid by the rents collected overall in the unit as well as the subsidy that you got when you initially built the building.

I also appreciate the finding of the Ombudsman that our government acted with the best of intentions. When we were approached by the police with a particular request, we acted on the basis of that request. We said clearly that we could have and should have done more with respect to adequately communicating this change to Ontarians. But again, I want to thank the Ombudsman for his recommendations and assure Ontarians that we intend to act on every one of those.

I want to, once again, take this opportunity to thank the Ombudsman for his work, to assure Ontarians that we take responsibility for failing to properly communicate the change we had made. It was significant and deserved greater effort on our part. I also want to thank the Ombudsman for his finding that we acted with the best of intentions.

I go back to the fact that it is very difficult for many people in this province to understand that your party, if it were to be elected as the next government of Ontario, is committed to abolishing the Ontario Human Rights Commission, and that this same party in the province of Ontario would be that which wishes to stand now before the people of this province and say that they are going to save civil liberties.

This party has consistently not been supportive of transit. We need them onside, supporting transit across the GTHA and across the province. They need to talk to city council. City council needs to work with the mayor. We want to build transit in the GTHA.

Oakville families want to know that high-quality emergency health care is there when they need it, and in order to make that real in Ontario we need to be able to measure that progress. My question this morning to the minister is, can you please speak to the work Ontario has done to address wait times in my community and throughout the province?

Ontario was the first province to start measuring wait times in our emergency departments, and we are already starting to see the results. Oakville is a good example of that. At the Oakville Trafalgar Memorial Hospital, our investments in ERs mean that 96% of people are being seen within the target time, a 30% reduction in wait times since we started measuring in 2008. These are significant and meaningful results for the people in Oakville.

A report that was released on Monday from the Fraser Institute said that unfortunately, wait times for surgeries are growing across Canada. Can the minister please inform the House whether or not this is the case for the province of Ontario?

You will know the context of the situation. Your federal friends insisted that the G20 be in downtown Toronto, against the advice of the city of Toronto, against the advice of the Ontario government. As a result, 20 of the top terrorist targets in the world were assembled in downtown Toronto, with all kinds of threats being made to those individuals and to that conference.

Had something untoward happened to any one of those people who was in downtown Toronto, where the federal government insisted on having this, I suspect that the questions that would be coming to me today would be far different from those which are being asked now.

To the allegations with regard to the MNR officials benefiting from planning decisions: I have had staff look into the matter, and we have yet to confirm a specific case of conflict-of-interest violation. But as I said, if anyone knows of a specific case, I would encourage them to bring it to my attention. My door is always open.

3a8082e126