Sandy Lee

Range Lake

Statements in Debates

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 5)

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.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 5)

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.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 5)

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...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 5)

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.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 4)

Yes, we will be talking to all stakeholders, not just the seniors. I was just using that as an example. I say yes to the follow-up questions that the Member asked.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 4)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Since the announcement of this policy, I happened to have travelled to Fort Simpson, Inuvik, Sachs Harbour, Paulatuk, Ulukhaktok, and I have to say, when I explained that the changes are meant to expand the program so that we include a group of people that are excluded, people agree with that. When we say the senior cut-off is $55,000 net, and for most people that is a really good income on a retirement, because that means you have to make about $75,000 to $80,000. The gaps that we have found are that we need to revisit the income threshold itself, whether it’s too low...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 4)

Mr. Speaker, the policy section of the Department of Health and Social Services were responsible for designing and doing consultations between 2003 to 2007 on the implementation of the policy with the health insurance office in Inuvik and we have obtained Blue Cross, who is the provider of insurance programs for the government to implement this plan.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 4)

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.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 4)

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.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 4)

Mr. Speaker, Members have been provided with information on the consultation that took place between 2003 and 2007. I agree with the Member, I know how to agree to agree, and agree to disagree. I understand that Members feel those consultations were not the way they should have been. That’s not to say the consultations didn’t take place, because there was lots of discussions with the NGOs and seniors’ groups about how to change the Supplementary Health Benefits Program. Going forward, as I have stated in my Minister’s statement, in answer to Ms. Bisaro’s question and to other Members and to...