Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for the Minister of Health and Social Services. In March 2009, this side of the House passed a motion unanimously for you to go back and review the changes or, rather, go back to the drawing board on the changes that you are proposing on supplementary health at that time. In discussions following that, the Minister said that she would go back to the drawing board, that she would develop a stakeholders group and she would listen to them for options and alternatives and do some research around that.
Since that time it has become clear that she had been working off a policy that was approved by Cabinet on September 30, 2007, which indicates that there is only one option. It is an income test model. Given that, at the time, there was a significant amount of public outcry about what was being proposed by the Minister. The motion was clear: go back to the drawing board. I saw letters; I heard people on the streets; there were rallies out there. The Minister couldn’t have missed all that. Given that she must have heard all that and given that, in the policy itself, under Section 5, paragraphs 2(b)4, there is actually a clause that says that the Minister may recommend revision to this policy to the Executive Council. Given that all that information was out there and all that concern exists, can the Minister tell me when she went back to Cabinet seeking possible revisions of the policy which would allow her to actually consider other options and alternatives rather than just relying on the income test model that we are now faced with today?
The Minister of Health and Social Services, Ms. Lee.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Member is right; there is a provision there that would allow me to go back to the Cabinet for revision. We heard and analyzed and reviewed the feedback that we got from the public, and based on the analysis we had, we did not conclude that we had to go back to Cabinet for revision, but we did go to the Cabinet with options on what we have heard. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to know which public she was listening to. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is, the Minister and this Cabinet and this Legislature has to consider supplementary health benefits in the context. As the Member for Sahtu has mentioned, and others, the government is responsible for insured benefits as well as non-insured. Supplementary health is non-insured. The government has a priority to use its money on insured services. For non-insured services, it is to come up with a program that is as fair and as equitable as possible. We have to realize that there is some personal investment that has to be made into this program. We are asking the people to do that in this context. Thank you.
I still didn’t hear an answer to my question. I’m not sure which public she is listening to. Clearly, there’s a significant amount of people out there who have concerns.
I want to go back to the policy for just a second. The statement of the policy is that the Government of the Northwest Territories will provide certain supplementary health benefits to non-aboriginal residents and their families who are not eligible for either -- and it’s an or question -- either supplementary health benefits available to aboriginal people or for supplemental health benefits available through employer programs. Aboriginal people are entitled to top-up for things such as specified medical conditions, the catastrophic conditions. Under this new program that she’s proposing, people with insurance who have catastrophic conditions are completely out of luck. I’m curious how we can ignore those people with catastrophic conditions who happen to have insurance, given that the statement of the policy actually would cover those individuals. Thank you.
Thank you. The proposal that we have, that’s under discussion and we will continue to have that discussion to hear out what the Members have to say. This policy has a suggestion for a cap, and also we are working on a catastrophic drug coverage and other programs, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.
Final supplementary, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am listening, but I’m not really hearing any responses. So I’m just going to ask a related question slightly different.
Consistently the Minister talks about a program that is generous and equitable. Clearly, there are people excluded from this. Anybody with insurance in the Northwest Territories is excluded completely from any top-up. In some cases, most people, if costs aren’t high, that might be alright, except in some cases people do have catastrophic conditions where the costs are clearly high, and I think those numbers are larger than the Minister is accepting. I’m curious if she could explain to me in detail how a system that clearly excludes people who have insurance and catastrophic conditions is in any way, shape or form, generous or equitable? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Because, Mr. Speaker, I think that the one thing that we need to remember is that all governments try to have a program that supports the residents on low income, or seniors, or a person with disabilities, those people who need the government for non-insured health benefits. So in that way, this program that we have designed is very generous and much more comprehensive than any that is available in the rest of the country.
The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, we have to put this in the context of other obligations that the Department of Health and Social Services and the government has to provide health care services to the people across this Territory. Thank you.
The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
