Wendy Bisaro

Thank you. Thanks to the Minister for her view. I have to agree to disagree. Again, this is a divisive policy, because it targets only a certain portion of our residents. I asked in my statement, as well, why does this policy have to be implemented now and what is so pressing that it has to be done at this particular moment, and many people have expressed concerns with the policy, have expressed concerns that the implementation that’s being put forward is not the right way to go. I don’t think the Minister has heard from anybody on this side of the House, that the people who are currently...

We are solving one problem but we are creating another problem by solving the first one. By implementing this policy, we will establish a class of residents who are medically bankrupted, a new class of working poor, except they’re only poor because their government believes in unfairness and inequality. What policy will Cabinet put in place, then, to help those families and individuals who are desperately struggling financially? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to add a little bit to this debate. I think what I heard Mr. Ramsay expressing, certainly in terms of the description of the Minister, was, it might have been a little out of line, but he was suggesting that he was describing her actions. Again, that’s up to you to determine whether or not that was correct.

As to the statement about the government being fair and equitable and the division of people along racial lines, I have to say that I don’t believe that’s impugning the motive of the government. I think that’s an interpretation of a policy which is before us...

Thank you. I’m not sure I heard an answer to my question. I agree that the people who are currently uncovered do need to be covered and, again, I don’t think there’s anybody that disagrees with that. My question had to do with the implementation that is currently being proposed, and that was my question. Why does the policy, in its current format, have to be implemented now? I don’t believe I heard an answer to that. Absolutely we need to cover people, but I think there have been at least eight or 10 suggestions from the general public, from Members, that could cover the costs of the people...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I asked an awful lot of questions in my statement and I’d like to go back to some of those questions and ask some of them of the Minister of Health and Social Services, to try and get some answers to some of those questions.

In order to try and, again, get some clarity for my constituents, I’d like to ask the Minister why such a divisive Supplementary Health Benefits Policy, dated September 2007, is being implemented. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I want to follow up today on my questions from yesterday. I want to speak to the unfair Supplementary Health Benefits Policy being implemented by the Minister of Health and Social Services.

The Minister has often mentioned the words “fair and equal” in relation to this policy, and no one disputes the need to put in place benefits for those who are currently left out. That we must do to make things fair. But I fail to understand how eliminating access to benefits for only some of our residents, which this policy will do, can be called fair. I fail to...

I would like to thank everybody that helped us out and I hope our report, the product of our consultations, meets your expectations, responds to your concerns and improves the lives of you and your families. Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I give notice that on Thursday, May 13th, 2010, I will move the following motion: now therefore I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Thebacha, that Tabled Document 30-16(5), 2010 Review of Members’ Compensation and Benefits, be referred to Committee of the Whole for consideration. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the Minister I agree with that philosophy and I said that. But there are other alternatives. There are other alternatives which are out there that are not being considered. That’s because the policy is not being opened to change. That’s what’s required.

As to the fairness if what is being implemented applies to all residents of the NWT, this policy implementation will not be inclusive, it will not be fair, it will not be equitable, because it does not apply to all of our residents. It applies to a portion of our residents.

I want to ask the Minister why she is not...

I find it hard to believe that after three years in Cabinet the Minister didn’t realize that policies could be publicized. But there we are. It is what it is. I did note that the Minister mentioned fair and equitable two or three times in her response. I’d like to mention to the Minister that on March 24th of this year the Minister stated in a statement that the existing program is exclusive, unfair and inequitable. I’d like to know from the Minister how she considers that the proposed changes, which will put financial hardship on only some of our NWT residents, is going to make the new...