Robert Hawkins

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The manifesto is crystal clear. The Health Minister’s ambition to trim health benefits is obvious. Raising the cost of living for our constituents is obvious. Creating consultation that appears more like shoehorning the public into a direction by their design is certainly clear.

Can the Minister of Health and Social Services explain to me how this does not look like a predetermined process that has a predetermined, scripted outcome?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I want to express my grave concerns about the actions of the Health Minister with her decision to release information to the public in the context of public consultation about the changes to supplementary health benefits.

Mr. Speaker, many of my constituents say it looks like it’s already a done deal. I have reviewed the material on the Health and Social Services website, and I’ve had feedback from my constituents. If anyone has read the documents, you would know there seems to be many assumptions and leading information that relates to the direction of the...

If we were talking about Rio Tinto or BHP, they have staff dedicated specifically to look at resources and how the system is being done to make sure they can do them in an efficient way. What proof does the Minister have that she can lay before this House that the Department of Health and Social Services examines the way it does business on a regular basis to ensure that we’re getting the best value for our dollars?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The particular issue I keep trying to raise here is linking the reduction of services to poor management. I’d ask the Minister of Health and Social Services what work is done from a waste buster point of view. With a department that has a budget of $326 million, do they have any staff or personnel dedicated to finding wasted resources within their organization?

Mr. Speaker, I’m not sure how the Health Minister can keep saying that there aren’t changes coming to the Supplementary Health Benefits Program when there are changes. What are we evaluating then? It doesn’t make sense. How can the Minister keep saying that there aren’t changes coming without it being reflected on the costs of the system? I’d like to understand that from the Minister’s point of view. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was listening to the Minister of Health’s answers really closely and I think what she represents is the exact reason why people hate politicians. Because when you move something around, it’s called a change; and when you reduce something, it’s called a reduction. So, Mr. Speaker, that frustration is articulated out there by playing with semantics. So I’d like to ask the Minister again -- perhaps another way we’ll get the answer -- what work and analysis is done by the Department of Health and Social Services to make sure that they’re collecting all the fees and...

The reality is we’re making doctors manage. Why aren’t we looking at those issues to save money in our system rather than cutting away at supplementary health benefits?

Mr. Speaker, streamlining access sounds like a reduction of services to me. I’m not sure where the Minister...how she understands it that way.

Mr. Speaker, when I referred to Nunavut services as a priority, we send our team professionals here, whether they’re physio or speech, to places in Nunavut and that makes their clients more of a priority when we have people here not getting full services. On top of that, it’s a billing issue.

But, Mr. Speaker, my question, as stated before, and I’ll ask it this way: Mr. Speaker, again, we’ll have a difference of opinion on reduced services or money, but...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to recognize Al Shortt, one of the YK No. 1 School trustees. He’s in the gallery today.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In my Member’s statement I highlighted the fact that we’ve got doctors acting like either summer students or clerks. In my statement I also pointed out that we’re not billing properly. So are we like a diamond mine? No, we’re not. But the strategy and process and thinking is exactly the same: wise resources and good use of them. Would the Minister re-examine the issue of establishing a position that looks at how we use our resources to make sure we’re using them in the most efficient way? It’s not about the question of providing resources, it’s how we spend the money...