Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to speak to the issue of the supplementary health care coverage. Tommy Douglas was voted the greatest Canadian of all time by the CBC contest back in 2004. Why? Because he is considered to be the father of medicare for all Canadians.
I might vote for my mother as being the greatest Canadian. Why? Because she told me something that broke my heart when I was a young man. She told me how as a mother with eight kids she once had to go without food for herself for two days so she could feed us and still buy the medical care she needed for one of my brothers. We perhaps forgot today just how recently such decisions had to be made in Canada and in the North. The medicine chest in some treaties is still important today, but it does not cover all aboriginal people. So they rely on the government’s extended health care too, just like half of our population that is non-aboriginal. Universal medical care is a Godsend.
Extended health care is of critical importance. We are told that 2,299 in the Northwest Territories go without access to the extended health care and that our Minister’s new plan will cover. That makes a lot of sense to me. I want to make sure no other mother faces that terrible decision like my mother, and no doubt that many others will have to make, to buy food or buy medicine. So for those 2,300 people, I support the Health Minister.
But I hear so many contrary arguments from both my fellow MLA and from the public that I have concerns, concerns that may impact my region in the future regarding health care.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister, if her current proposed plan is good policy, then please explain it to me. Help me understand it. What are the stakes here? We owe it to the 2,300 people who we are told will benefit and we owe it to those who may have to change the use of the current system. It’s about a basic principle, Mr. Speaker. It’s about bringing the 2,300 people into our health care coverage, plain and simple. First things first, Mr. Speaker, let’s get it right. Thank you.
The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
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 understand how making only some residents pay for their medical costs can be called equality.
Mr. Speaker, policy can be one of two things: good or bad. This Supplementary Health Benefits Policy is all bad. It is divisive and we’re seeing its effects already. NWT residents are breaking into camps and animosity is building.
For a very long time we in the NWT have all been Northerners, and by that I mean residents who happily lived, worked and played together, appreciative of our differences and respectful of each other no matter our ethnic origin. This policy threatens to totally destroy that. Should we not be a Territory of many peoples living, working and playing together as equals? Certainly that is my vision. But I am hard pressed to believe that it will endure if this policy comes into effect.
I found a phrase yesterday that I want to share with you. It says our country is blessed by a very diverse cultural mosaic. That can easily be applied to our Territory, Mr. Speaker, but does the Cabinet across the House from me believe the NWT’s diverse cultural mosaic is a blessing? Their actions in relation to the Supp Health Benefits Policy force me to answer no.
In my conversations with constituents I’m often asked why is this policy being implemented, and I cannot answer them. I cannot determine the rationale for this divisive policy. My constituents ask me, why now? What is so pressing that this divisive policy must be put in place right now or even put in place at all? Why is this Cabinet adamant that this policy is so right? I cannot answer those questions, either. I can only conclude that our Executive Council has some nefarious purpose in mind and ask what are they trying to achieve. Is this the start of a regime of new taxes and fees called co-payments? I believe, as do many of my constituents, that the Minister and the Cabinet are solving one problem, the problem of the hard-done-by, desperately struggling families, as the Minister would say, who are currently left out.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted
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.
The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, yesterday I tabled a process convention that was fully agreed upon by Caucus in Fort Smith last summer on the standing committee review of proposed policy initiatives and implementation plans. This process convention outlines the roles of Cabinet, Ministers and committees, when it comes to establishing new policies or making substantive amendments to or rescinding of existing policies. This process convention does not apply to minor administrative amendments which will not significantly impact established policy commitments.
I suggest that the proposed changes to the Extended Health Benefits Program being implemented by the Minister of Health and Social Services are not minor administrative amendments and that the changes will significantly impact all residents of the Northwest Territories. As such, I believe the Minister is responsible for ensuring that all of the proposed changes and implementation tools must go through appropriate standing committee for review prior to implementation. Not just a presentation of the information, but a discussion, a debate and actual consultation.
The Premier of the Northwest Territories is responsible for ensuring that his Cabinet follows all of the terms and conditions contained within the approved process convention. Later this afternoon I’ll be asking the Premier some questions on how it’s possible that one of his Ministers could stray so far from the approved conventions. Specifically, given that the new plan is proposed for development in June 2010, after the close of this session, with implementation on September 30, 2010, prior to the fall session in October, I wonder how this Minister can possibly adhere to the agreed upon process convention. Specifically with respect to paragraph 8 which states, “when Cabinet decides to establish a new policy review, the application of an existing policy or substantively amend an existing policy in accordance with this convention, the Minister responsible for the implementing policy will provide both Cabinet and the appropriate standing committee with briefings on the relevant implementation and communications plans, as well as any significant implementation tools” -- example: ministerial policies, eligibility criteria, program guidelines – “in advance of the policy’s application or implementation in any substantive public communications.” To date, we have seen no program guidelines.
It’s possible that the Premier will respond consistently with the Minister’s remarks that committee has been consulted all along.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted
Mr. Speaker, it’s possible that the Premier will respond consistently with the Minister’s remarks, that the committee has been consulted all along. I’m a member of the committee and I agree that I have been informed and/or told what the Minister’s plans are, but, frankly, I don’t feel consulted or that any advice I have provided has been remotely considered by the Minister or by Cabinet. Many of the public feel the same way. Given that the 16th Assembly’s very own process conventions are being ignored by the Minister of Health and Social Services, I don’t see how the Premier and Cabinet could possibly support these changes at this time.
Mr. Premier, let’s take the initiative back to the drawing board and work on the real problem. Let’s find a way to provide coverage to low income families without insurance. Let’s do the right thing. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Within the last year I raised the subject of the John Tsetso Memorial Library in Fort Simpson a number of times. Since the relocation of the library from the Deh Cho Hall, the community has had its much used facility reduced to a resource centre. In short, there is no library. I spoke about the value of the community’s library as a place to pick up reading materials and for many literacy and educational programs it has offered over the years.
Last month the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Jackson Lafferty, and a few days later, the chair, Mr. Tom Beaulieu, and some members of the Standing Committee on Social Programs were visiting Fort Simpson. They saw for themselves how inadequate our library is. The facility is too small and because of foundation issues, it cannot even support the library’s collection of books.
John Tsetso Memorial Library is designated a public library and the residents of Fort Simpson deserve to have it back. Not only that, but a region of our size, about 4,200 residents, should have a regional library located centrally in Fort Simpson. This library would serve the needs of Fort Simpson and outlying communities. Books and programming could be circulated to our smaller communities.
Later today, Mr. Speaker, I will be submitting a petition from the residents of the community of Fort Simpson and constituents of Nahendeh, to call upon the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment to provide funding towards a new John Tsetso Memorial Library. There was a lot of interest in this petition and also a number of children drew pictures and wrote about how they felt about enjoying the library. I will table these pictures in the House later and send the Minister a copy as well.
Mr. Speaker, the government has made a firm commitment to promoting and fostering literacy. A library that provides a welcoming space and a good selection of books in Fort Simpson will contribute to this literacy. I support a regional library that will provide this valuable service throughout Nahendeh. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to follow up again today in my Member’s statement about the topic I spoke of yesterday, and that is the protection in place for people in our Territory who require the services of a medical professional. Mr. Speaker, although this case I speak of may be isolated in that these things do not occur very often, it is still unchecked and has the potential of impacting and touching on very many lives. Because one physician doesn’t just see one patient, they see a group of patients.
But, Mr. Speaker, you would think that our government might have learned a valuable lesson. When there were questions raised in the past about the conduct of certain educators that were operating here in the Northwest Territories whose irregular circumstances occurred and these situations continued to exist and no intervention was made, for whatever reason, and this government and Nunavut government ended up being sued successfully by the people who were abused at the hand of that educator and had to pay millions of dollars in compensation. I use that as a parallel to this.
There are processes in place to allow people who come in contact with the medical system and who feel that their rights and the conduct of the physician has violated them in some way. There is a process in place. When I asked the Minister of Health and Social Services about this yesterday, she did not seem very aware of her duty and her responsibility as a Minister.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister, and only the Minister, has the ability to revoke the licence of a practising medical practitioner in the Northwest Territories. No one else can do that. No College of Physicians and Surgeons, no board of inquiry. The Minister and the Minister alone has that authority.
Mr. Speaker, there is a provision, as well, that once an inquiry is struck and allegations have been laid, there is a provision for the Minister to temporarily revoke that licence to practise until that matter is finished with and disposed of in some manner. In the case that I speak of, that was not done either.
Mr. Speaker, I fully recognize that there are quasi judicial processes in which we as politicians do not interfere. However, at some point, our responsibility needs to intersect with that process. I still do not understand why the results of this particular inquiry were not reported to this Minister and the findings in that inquiry acted upon. I will have further questions for the Minister of Health and Social Services on this again today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to use my Member’s statement today to further talk about the transplant policy I raised before. The reason I want to talk about it is because certainly things aren’t going very well. I think our Territory, I believe in it very strongly and I believe in the passion people have who work here and develop policy, but as I talked about it before, we need respite for mothers or perhaps fathers that are sitting by their child’s side through these horrible processes, but we don’t have a policy that occasionally unites the family through those special visits.
I can tell you many times over, that when this particular family had the father flying down and the children in tow, that the little boy there sparkled in a way that the fire was back. I also talked about the time, at the time about a month or two months ago, about how we need a policy that, if dark days happen, when that phone call comes in the middle of the night, that we have a government that shows the empathy for the particular situation and unites the family if that flicker goes out for the final time.
Mr. Speaker, I am speaking today because the call did come this morning. Of course, they scurried as quickly as possible to put their affairs in order to get to Edmonton. It is a very difficult statement to talk about. This little boy is a wonderful little boy. I can tell you the last 10 weeks have been a significant blessing to have every extra minute with him around with his mother and his brother and sister and certainly his father. Many people in this community have come together through a fundraiser last night, on Saturday, to raise money. Even McDonald’s through the Ronald McDonald House, which is the pin I’m wearing right now... Sorry; local McDonald’s has raised money for the Edmonton Ronald McDonald House to donate so they can make sure that they can have families together through these trying times, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, every moment has been a gift. I will certainly be asking the Minister during question period today that although we know we can’t have broad, sweeping policy change just here and there, some days I really wish we could, but I will be asking the Minister, would she be willing to at least take a look at this to see if we can create a strategy over the long haul, if this is something we can do to make sure we can have families together as often as possible during these difficult times. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my pleasure today to welcome grade 5 and 6 students of the Ecole Boreale in Hay River here today with their teacher, Patrick Poisson, and their chaperone, Marie-Mathilde Tessier. Mr. Speaker, if I could have the Assembly’s indulgence, I would just like to quickly recognize the students, and if they could give a wave, their mom and dad might see them on TV. Jake Danielsen, Georgia Dawson, Jonathan Frise, William Frise, Cordell Gagnier, Ksydaig Henry, Lochlan Munro, Billy-Jack Warrington, Sherisse Bouchard, Brooklyn Harrison, Angela Roy, Nicholas Stainbrook, Kateryna Staszuk, Celina Carmen and Graham St. John.
I would like to take this opportunity to recognize two constituents in the gallery from my riding. My constituents are Liz Wright and also with her is Roxanne Koe who is chaperoning a few Pages here from my riding. Welcome to the House. I thank you for procedures and for the other people.
In front of the other people in the gallery that haven’t been recognized, welcome to the House and watching the procedures. Welcome.
Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. Earlier today I spoke on the issue of housing programs for seniors in Tu Nedhe. I would like to follow up my statement with questions to the Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister tell me if there is a plan in place to inspect and upgrade seniors’ homeownership units in Lutselk’e and Fort Resolution? Thank you.
The Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation, Mr. Robert McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. All these programs are application based and we have decided that those that are applying for homeownership repairs, especially the seniors, we are willing to go to their units and do an inspection. That is all part of the application process. Also, if interpreters are required, we would be willing to provide interpreters so they’re understanding all the parts of the application and the information that is required. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, in his response to my first question, the Minister indicated that they would be conducting a door-to-door approach in the delivery of housing programs to seniors in Tu Nedhe. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we will go to the units of those that express an interest in applying for one of the homeownership programs, especially the seniors. We will go to their units and do the inspection. That’s all part of the process, and also, as I mentioned to the Member earlier, we would be willing to provide translation so they’re understanding. So those that are interested in going through the application process would let our district office know and then they would make a point of making it to their units. Thank you.
Many of the elders have land lease and land tax arrears. Does the Housing Corporation have some sort of plan to work with the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs or even maybe the municipality, to deal with this issue and still be able to assist the elders with their housing issues? Is there a number in which, or an amount that can be provided to seniors if they have land lease issues, land lease arrears or tax arrears, for an example? Thank you.
Thank you. The land tax arrears and any arrears in general are always a detriment to those that are applying for assistance. It slows up the process. A lot of folks out there have been able to clear off their arrears, knowing that this would help their application for the housing programs. So it would be awfully difficult for us to get into giving out the programs, administering the programs with people carrying arrears. So we try and encourage all those that are applying, to take care of their land and tax arrears, especially, and any other arrears they may have because it would slow down their application process. Thank you.
Final supplementary, Mr. Beaulieu.
Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. This is a rather serious issue. In communities where we have access by winter road or access by barge, an issue such as land tax, mortgage arrears, lease arrears on the land or anything, holds up the process and it goes beyond the point where they’re able to send materials in to assist the elder. So can the Minister commit to me today that if these issues are something that can be set aside or can be dealt with in another light, that they could proceed with assisting the seniors? I don’t think seniors have huge arrears. If they could proceed with assisting the seniors and deal with any of these land tax, land lease arrears at a later date. Thank you.
Thank you. We’re always willing to do what we can to help seniors. I have to speak again on the arrears, the tax arrears. We do like to try to get those cleared up before we proceed. Our intake this year is going to be in August and September. So that will give us more time to have all these issues dealt with before the barges, and some of it may be because the municipal governments are not getting back to them quick enough or the band governments may not be giving them a letter quick enough. So all these issues we have to deal with, but we’re always open to doing whatever we can to make the process a little easier for seniors. Thank you.
The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
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.
The honourable Minister of Health and Social Services, Ms. Lee.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I have explained in our presentations and in answers to questions, Mr. Speaker, I believe this policy will enable access to those people who are excluded from the policy right now. We have a group of non-aboriginal people who are excluded from having basic coverage of dental and eye care, and, Mr. Speaker, I don’t believe this is divisive in any way. It is a Supplementary Extended Health Benefits Program to those who need it. Thank you.
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 uncovered should not be covered. We all agree that that should happen, but the method that is currently being proposed to cover that is incorrect. So why is this policy, in this format, so pressing that it has to be implemented now? Thank you.
Thank you. Why? Why do we have to do that? If the question is why, then the answer to why is because we have a group of people who need us and that is the working poor. What I’m hearing is everybody says help the working poor, cover them, what’s taking you so long. Mr. Ramsay said you’ve known for three years 2,200 people are not covered, why don’t you include them? That’s not my problem, include them, spend the money, get it from somewhere else, tax the people. Mr. Speaker, that’s easy to do and what people are telling me is you can cover the poor as long as you cover everybody else, as long as you don’t touch me, you cover the poor as long as it doesn’t impact me, it covers the poor. You keep the benefits for the rich and then cover the poor. It seems to me, Mr. Speaker, everybody out there is saying you know what, cover the poor, but don’t let that affect me.
Mr. Speaker, I remind the House and the people, we’re talking non-insured benefits, we’re talking taking money out of insured benefits, we’re talking people saying unless you do everything for everybody else, you’re not going to cover the poor. Mr. Speaker, my question to you and everybody is how long do the poor people have to wait?
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 who are currently uncovered and I haven’t heard that information from the Minister that they were considered.
We have presented suggestions over the last period of a number of months, and what keeps coming back to us as a committee and to the general public is that Cabinet is entrenched in their position. So I would like to ask the Minister to tell me why she and the Cabinet believe that such a divisive policy is right for our Territory. Thank you.
Thank you. This policy is not divisive. It’s divisive to those who believe that it’s divisive, Mr. Speaker. This is covering a group of people who are not covered. We have listened to everybody who gave us input over the last three years. We have responded, we are coming out with a proposal that will be as good or better than any government employee package. That is generous, that’s going far, that’s taking into consideration what everybody has told us, and, Mr. Speaker, we’ll have to agree to disagree, but, Mr. Speaker, we have done our best to come up with the best package. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Lee. Final supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think our best package is a long way from what we currently have in front of us. The Minister has said that she is covering some. I agree. We are covering some, but we are uncovering others and that is not the right way to go. I mentioned in my statement that my vision is an NWT where all people live, work and play as equals. What is the Minister’s vision for our Territory?
On that, I agree with the Member. I need to tell the Member that this new package excludes no one.
Thank you, Ms. Lee. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to ask the Minister, regarding my Member’s statement, if she would agree that the program that she is proposing could be better explained to the people. I understand that some people in my riding were approached in terms of signing a petition, but they didn’t know what they were signing for in terms of the supplementary health benefit. That’s the question I have for the department. Can this proposed program be better explained to the people in my riding or in Yellowknife?
