Sandy Lee

Mr. Speaker, I am going to have to ask the Member to re-ask that question because I am not sure if I understand it.

Mr. Speaker, given the level of interest and the communication that we’ve been receiving from the public on these changes, I have a feeling that we are going to be able to seek and get input from the public as well as stakeholders to these programs. The department plans to have information sessions in all of the regional centres. We are going to do a full and meaningful consultation. The end date is to have it done by September 1st, but as I stated before, the important part of this exercise is to do the right work and we are committed to do that.

Mr. Speaker, people in the gallery and ourselves should know that it is a regular practice in this Legislature that any policy changes go to the standing committee for review and consultation. That took place with the supplementary health benefits in December of 2008, and between 2003 and ’07 this proposal went to the standing committee at least five or six times. It is consulted with NGOs and with the NWT Seniors’ Society as well as the Yellowknife Seniors’ Society. So I understand that the depth and breadth of consultation is not as good as what people would like to have and I have...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to recognize a couple of constituents: Ms. Heidi-Ann Wild. Sorry, I hope I didn’t screw up the name. Sorry. I believe she’s here to represent the Public Service Alliance of Canada, and Mr. Guy Leblanc who has been my constituent for a long time. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated, September 1 is the target date, because it is helpful in any exercise to have the end date. We will strive to get the work done. We will strive to have most of the work done before the summer. We will make sure we do meaningful consultation with the public and the stakeholders.

I have asked the department to look at that process to see if we could borrow from that. I’m prepared to make a commitment to the Members here, that I will come back with an outline of how we propose to do the consultation and where the meetings will be and how they’re going to take place for the next little while. So consultation and consultative approach as we go forward to improve the changes are very much at the table and I’m prepared to work with the Members and the public to do that.

I think that is one of the misunderstandings out there, and that is that somehow these changes are being introduced as a cost-saving measure. It is not. It is not a cost-saving measure. We do not implement health programs that way. Our health programs for every government are demand driven. When somebody gets sick, we pay for their care. When somebody needs a prescription, we pay for them under supplementary health benefits. So this is not a cost-cutting measure. We wanted to include a segment of the population that was not included before.

I believe my statement was that we would keep the policy intent, which is to make this policy more fair and equitable. Income tests are a mechanism to achieve that, but obviously all the details are up for discussion. So we will go to the public with what we have learned, we will ask the public about what we need to consider, what we need to change. I have learned a lot in this process. I have made it clear from day one, December 19th, when I got the first e-mail, I learned new things and I responded to everybody, saying thank you for giving me that information, I will take that into...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. While we’re on the topic of Mr. Tommy Douglas, let me say that he happens to be one of my heroes because I was born in a country where there is no health care. I was born to a single mother who could not afford to keep me in an incubator, when I was born seven weeks too early, less than two pounds. I couldn’t drink breast milk. She had to feed me by spoon. The doctor told her you have to watch her to see if she’s going to make it. I value Canadian health care in Canada. Supplementary health care is not the same thing as the Canadian Health Plan. It is important that we...

The fact is we do not have universal coverage for supplementary health right now. We don’t. So we’re not moving away from universal coverage. The whole point is the impetus of changing this is the fact that we have a group of working poor, as we call them, or low-income families, or if you have a job that doesn’t have third-party insurance. So the self-employed. We have a group of people who are not covered under the existing system. So it is not accurate to say that we have a universal program. We have a universal program for those who are over 60. We have a universal program for those who...