Robert Hawkins

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate my colleagues as well for this extra second. What would it take to bring it down to a -- say, a two-week standard as opposed to a 30-day standard? Again, recognizing that some of this is a lot of money, is there a way to practically do that just because of how much money can be outstanding for some people given -- well, I don't have to go at length, Mr. Chairman. That's only my question is, what would it take for the department to do that? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And, again, perhaps it's a bad question in the sense of I'm not focusing in enough because what I'm finding is the income support workers -- at least we agree that they're not social workers. But, you know, it's not a system that encourages in a manner of making it part of the program to get them to seek counselling, get them to go to job fairs, get them to show productive choices. It's literally show up, drop your paperwork, and then you qualify. I'm saying let's turn that around by making it part of the income support or income assistance program that they must be...

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First I'll say I appreciate what sounds like an offer. I would say no, I don't want every detail, I want ranges, and I will leave it up to the competent people in Finance who can come up with some reasonable dates for ranges. I don't want every day as in this -- ten people waited one day, 200 people waited three days; that's a lot of work. But I would like to see, we'll call it responsible responses, and I'll leave it up to the department to say -- define days and define numbers. So that's two different separate pieces of information so I can look at it that way. So I...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I noted in my Member's statement today about the income support program and how it provides the basic programs support and it does just very that, like exactly that, the basics. But I also cited concerns about the fact that it's not designed to empower individuals to not only stabilize but to get ahead and get back on their feet and back being productive members in their own way, whatever that's defined as, as productive members back into society.

Mr. Speaker, what can the Minister do to help change that attitude, perspective, and I'd say modus operandi, of...

I would hope that there would be an offer somewhere to provide me the most current stats. I would ask that first question.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Has there been any movement or indication that something's actually going to be done on that property; and if so, can the Minister update the House? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I want to talk about the Denmark innovation towards public health care. Mr. Speaker, they do something really original. They put the patient before the system.

Mr. Speaker, did you know that in Denmark, the state assigns doctors to its people, Mr. Speaker. Can you imagine that? People being served by the state in a manner that's helpful and useful? They actually put their people ahead of the system, Mr. Speaker. It's quite innovative to think about it.

You know, they do other interesting things. No matter what, if you have a young person, a child who is sick, they...

Seeing my time is ticking away, what I'd do is I'll point into two areas. The first is that it does seem risky that we're almost -- almost, I know not exactly so I'm not trying to give you that impression, but almost doubling our current debt with the addition. That does sound scary by any means. Risky, if not. The other thing is is the other aspect of concern that if we're not borrowing it based on principles of us becoming active partners in our business case, I'm surprised we're asking for so much. And the last piece I'll say, Mr. Chairman, is that while memory doesn't serve me very well on...

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just to reaffirm around the $1.3 billion further request, I'm wondering is there -- again, just for clarity, is there any project built into this number; so in other words, is the number $1.3 billion predicated on saying this is our contribution towards the Taltson Expansion; this number is being used for furthering the Mackenzie Valley Highway; this number is based on us continuing or building a foothold into the infrastructure that will start the Slave Geological Province Road up toward the Bathurst -- our side of the Bathurst direction? So curious on that. Thank you...

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a couple of things I wanted to pick up where my colleague for Range Lake had left off.

With respect to the $1.3 billion request, because essentially that's the package of request if we're -- if I understood it correctly, the debt wall is at $1.8 billion and I believe the finance Minister wishes to get us to the $3.1 billion level, which in their about way, the math must be $1.3 billion. Can you explain on what the pitch is on that? And I'm not looking for the 20-hour presentation, I'm literally looking for it as what are you asking for? Is it a one-sentence email...