Sandy Lee

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The expected cost to the government over the next four years is $8,539,702 next year, $8,824,108 the year after, $9,341,402 the year after, and about $9,893,970 for the year of 2013-14, understanding that when you’re talking about health care costs, you’re talking about estimates because it’s demand driven, it’s whoever walks in the door. But, Mr. Speaker, we expect that the new program would cost around $8.5 to $9.8 million every year.

Thank you. The fact of the matter is we are, and the Members know that I have made a presentation to the planning committee. We have a process in place where we work on policies like this together. Mr. Speaker, I don’t know if there is any forum more public than the Legislative Assembly. This is a work in progress and I have a proposal before the Members and I look forward to hearing what Members have to say. Thank you.

I think one thing we should not lose sight of, because it keeps getting repeated, is that this proposal is taking away benefits from seniors in order to pay for benefits for those who are excluded, because that is totally not true. Most people… Mr. Speaker, what this program is doing, is doing what the government has to do. The government has an obligation to help those who need help from us. There are people, low-income families who are excluded from most essential benefits such as eye care and dental. So for some people that might seem small, but that’s important and government has a role to...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Anybody who declines to take on that extension, they could renew it at any time. Within 90 days of application, it will be reinstated. Second thing is, Mr. Speaker, I have unfairly attributed that HR staff tells people that; it is a hearsay. People said that they were given the option of not renewing and they told us to do that because we have a built-in incentive in our Supplementary Health Program to drop these insurance programs. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, the policy says if the Minister wants to make revisions, the Minister has to make specific recommendations on that. We incorporated the feedback that we had heard and if we were to decide that income test will not be used or the major items of the policy was to be changed, that would have had to go back to Cabinet.

The fact of the matter is, we did the analysis. We as a government feel that this cannot be universal. The Minister of Finance did a round of consultation on revenue options and taxation. We heard soundly from everyone that raising tax is not an option that we should...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The purpose of overhauling the Supplementary Heath Benefits Program is, one, there is a group of our citizens who need supplementary health benefits that are excluded from the current program; two, the way it is designed now is administratively cumbersome and Member...(inaudible)...talked about the administrative difficulties, specified conditions is run by exceptions; and, third, there is no appeal mechanisms for people who are not happy with the system we have now, so we needed to clear out those issues; and, fourth, the program as it exists now is not fair or...

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Member said people are not stupid. They are not going to... Why get an insurance or work on a job if you are on the threshold? If you make $51,000, you have to pay a whole bunch of money. If you are $49,000, you are not going to. Of course, people are going to drop those as it is happening right now. We have lots of people that are dropping it. It isn’t only because when you are retiring, the government and HR employees say, well, you don’t have to keep that. People are not stupid. I’m sorry. People do what works for them. So that is why we are suggesting in this...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don’t have any more to add to the point of order. I just want to withdraw my very last word, which is that it was a lie. I didn’t mean to say that. I withdraw and apologize. I wouldn’t call any Member here to say that they are lying. I apologize. I withdraw and apologize. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, there are teeth in the legislation to take actions, including suspending the licence while the investigation is going on. The key part in this is that anybody who has a concern about any physician should come forward and lodge their complaint. If they have some concern about criminal conduct, they should go to the RCMP. The most important thing is the evidence that the complainant brings forward in this process, because without the evidence, the process may not have the impact that some people might be looking for or the Member would like to see. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Whether by the definition that I read or the definition that the Member read, I believe to say that someone is doing that in this House is in violation of Section 23(j). Mr. Speaker, I ask you to rely on a ruling in the House on February 21, 2003, pages 231 to 260, in which a former Member for Monfwi, which then at the time was North Slave which is now Monfwi, accused former Premier Joe Handley of travelling on a separate road from the truth. He didn’t say that the Premier lied. He just said that he was travelling separate from the truth and that was found to be in...