Sandy Lee

As I have already stated in my public statements, the income test threshold has been revealed to be too low; that a vast majority of our non-seniors are making a much higher income than that threshold. So we expect that if we were to implement the programs the way they’re outlined, we may be excluding about 5 percent of top earning seniors from the basic Supplementary Health Benefits Program. But we have introduced the Catastrophic Drug Cost Program as a safety net so that nobody in the North will have to pay more than 5 percent of their net income for the Catastrophic Drug Cost Program.

Mr. Speaker, it’s general knowledge that these program changes were consulted on, discussed, debated in this House and outside this House between 2003 and 2007. The policies were changed in September of 2007. I do not have all of the calculations on what came about to achieving that. I have been responsible for implementing those, but the policy objective was not a cost-cutting measure and it is not necessary to make sure that we stay within whatever is budgeted under the Supplementary Health Program. So it is wrong to say we are making these changes on the backs of the seniors. That is not...

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...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I had the opportunity to meet with the executive of the NWT Seniors’ Society at lunch hour and I’d like to just recognize…I know there are lots of seniors in the gallery and I am sure they will all be recognized in due course, but I don’t want to take up all the time. I’ll just say President Tom Wilson, Mr. Leon Peterson from Fort Smith, Ms. Barb Hood, executive director of the NWT Seniors’ Society, Esther Braden is sitting next to her, Ms. Eileen Collins from Hay River and Mrs. Bea Campbell from Fort Smith. I see other members sitting there next to them. Thank you, Mr...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I can advise you and the Members that that is in fact one of the main topics that were under discussion between myself and the executive of the NWT Seniors’ Society. As I stated in my Member’s statement, we are committed to doing consultation with the stakeholders. The Seniors’ Society has suggested that maybe we should have a workshop so there can be back-and-forth exchange.

I have learned since this program had been announced last December that the families and individuals in the North come in all kinds of shapes and sizes, with all kinds of unique health needs and...