Robert Hawkins

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will make it simple for the Minister because that sort of preamble didn’t work. Will he send a message to his department to increase the home care services provided to this family so we can allow them to go to work, save their home so they don’t lose their shirt and we end up having to take care of them through the income support process and this other person who is disabled in the hospital, so it is going to cost us a lot more? Will he increase the home care support? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, the Minister keeps pointing at September 1st that everything is going to be okay, but the fact is this family is in jeopardy of losing their house. I will tell you for a fact today, Mr. Speaker, that if they sold this house to a brother, sister or close relative for $1, we could rent it from income support and pay the full cost of the mortgage through a rental program. But yet we can’t seem to find a balance between getting help and solving this problem. So, Mr. Speaker, I want to hear a commitment today. Will the Minister go look at this whole situation and...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, fortunately I was prepared in case the Health Minister didn’t want to answer the questions. I was ready for the income support Minister. Mr. Speaker, my next question will be for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment. Will he look at addressing the shortfall that is created by this Income Support Program? The Income Support Program only allows the person up to $1,200 a year as little extra money that they can declare without it being clawed back. Mr. Speaker, my constituent’s mortgage is way more than that and has to be paid 12 times a year. So...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In this case I don’t mind being scooped by Mr. Braden by recognizing our fine visitors, but I, too, wish to recognize Mr. Ed Jeske, Mrs. Esther Braden, and I will also recognize the other Mrs. Braden and a friend of mine in the gallery above me, Mr. Glen Abernethy. Thank you.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am going to be voting against the motion. As far as I am concerned, if the communication plan didn’t work out in this particular case, I don’t want to put the whole plan at risk. We should write maybe a strongly worded letter, but the bottom line is if we put our industries at risk, take our aurora industry, they are barely surviving as it is and here they are trying to open up new markets. For over three and a half years, I have been saying let’s find new opportunities and try to expand it. Yet, here we are saying no when they are looking at a new opportunity and...

Wait until I make the statement. It’s a good news statement in the sense that there’s some satisfaction that the government is dealing with it and I think our employees are the ones that feel the integrity was not there for some time, but yet the response being the government has chosen to go back to the original program, the one that obviously works. So there is a satisfaction out there that it’s being dealt with. I think that also needs to be highlighted here.

Now there are other questions Members are raising and I don’t want to underscore the validity of those. They’re very important...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a number of documents to table today. Application for federal Crown land dated July 6, 1970; a letter to Mr. Bill Malloch, February 12, 2000; a letter to the lands department of MACA, May 15, 2003; a letter to Randy Look from the Department of MACA dated June 10, 2003; a letter from the Member for Great Slave to Vince Steen dated July 17, 2003; a letter to Mr. Andy Tereposkey dated October 23, 2006; an application for Commissioner’s land made out July 11, 2007; a letter to Andy Tereposkey dated July 11, 2007; a letter to the Morin family from MACA dated...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, I have to admit that was a mirthless answer but yet I was intrigued because there sounded like something there. But, Mr. Speaker, the fact is this Minister could say today, yes, we will look into this and, yes, we will make something happen. That is all that we are asking for, because this family is about to lose everything. It is going to cost us a heck of a lot more if we mop up the mess later. So let’s do something today. Let’s be proactive and let’s not see this family destroyed. Yes. That is all the Minister has to say. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

--...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wish to continue along my line of questioning I had earlier today about my constituents who are being pulled down into poverty because our government doesn’t seem to want to help them.

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious the Minister of Education wishes to protect the bureaucratic approach when there is a special circumstance here that is required. So I am going to hopefully look towards the Minister of Health to maybe see some sensitivity in addressing this serious issue. Mr. Speaker, extra home care will help this family get on their feet. Would the Minister of Health and...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If the Minister would take time to look at this scenario and this specific case he would realize that this family is going to lose their home by these fair rules designed by the system. Mr. Speaker, because we do not exempt the mortgage that a family member is paying and this government doesn’t pay the mortgage and fact that a doctor tells them that they need full-time care at home, that leaves no one left to go to work to pay the mortgage, Mr. Speaker. So when the father helps, they get it all clawed back so they lose any net gain they would have gotten from income...