Statements in Debates
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to draw attention to the plight of a constituent who is falling through the cracks of our system. This woman is suffering from a debilitating illness and, in her doctor’s opinion, requires round-the-clock care. However, she is entitled to home care services for up to 10 hours a week. The only alternative beyond that is she has been offered to be hospitalized. In order for her to be able to stay at home, her partner had to quit work to provide the care she needs. As a result, the couple now relies on income support. This couple owns their own home...
Thank you. There is just one other area I wouldn’t mind highlighting while I have the floor here, which is there was some mention made earlier about some training and wanting to make sure our employees are up to speed on the return to the original program, and if the Minister has some highlights he can point out in this particular area I think that will just sort of end the areas of questioning I have at this time. I just want to make sure that our employees have the proper training to the new PeopleSoft if that’s the case or if we’re going back to the old version, the new old version...
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to put on record I raised the PeopleSoft issue last week and it’s easy to sort of get all wound up and excited about a process and a problem, but when the Minister replied, it was Minister Dent at the time, that they were going back to the original platform sometimes referred to as vanilla, well I wish we would just clearly state for the record the original platform rather than mixing it up with all these odds and sod names.
I got some feedback from a constituent who actually is a government employee who was listening in and I want to say for the record…
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Minister is correct; a number of people have talked about this situation, but nothing has been put forward to solve the problem. The problem is that this lady in the wheelchair cannot be left alone. Her doctor says she cannot be left alone. We can do all the fancy designs, schematics, and make some adjustments in their house, but it doesn’t change the fact that she requires full-time care. So does the Minister want to state today that we are going to give her 10 hours and that is it and we will let the family fall apart, or is he going to say today...
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will make it simple for the Minister because that sort of preamble didn’t work. Will he send a message to his department to increase the home care services provided to this family so we can allow them to go to work, save their home so they don’t lose their shirt and we end up having to take care of them through the income support process and this other person who is disabled in the hospital, so it is going to cost us a lot more? Will he increase the home care support? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, the Minister keeps pointing at September 1st that everything is going to be okay, but the fact is this family is in jeopardy of losing their house. I will tell you for a fact today, Mr. Speaker, that if they sold this house to a brother, sister or close relative for $1, we could rent it from income support and pay the full cost of the mortgage through a rental program. But yet we can’t seem to find a balance between getting help and solving this problem. So, Mr. Speaker, I want to hear a commitment today. Will the Minister go look at this whole situation and...
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, fortunately I was prepared in case the Health Minister didn’t want to answer the questions. I was ready for the income support Minister. Mr. Speaker, my next question will be for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment. Will he look at addressing the shortfall that is created by this Income Support Program? The Income Support Program only allows the person up to $1,200 a year as little extra money that they can declare without it being clawed back. Mr. Speaker, my constituent’s mortgage is way more than that and has to be paid 12 times a year. So...
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In this case I don’t mind being scooped by Mr. Braden by recognizing our fine visitors, but I, too, wish to recognize Mr. Ed Jeske, Mrs. Esther Braden, and I will also recognize the other Mrs. Braden and a friend of mine in the gallery above me, Mr. Glen Abernethy. Thank you.
---Applause
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am going to be voting against the motion. As far as I am concerned, if the communication plan didn’t work out in this particular case, I don’t want to put the whole plan at risk. We should write maybe a strongly worded letter, but the bottom line is if we put our industries at risk, take our aurora industry, they are barely surviving as it is and here they are trying to open up new markets. For over three and a half years, I have been saying let’s find new opportunities and try to expand it. Yet, here we are saying no when they are looking at a new opportunity and...
Wait until I make the statement. It’s a good news statement in the sense that there’s some satisfaction that the government is dealing with it and I think our employees are the ones that feel the integrity was not there for some time, but yet the response being the government has chosen to go back to the original program, the one that obviously works. So there is a satisfaction out there that it’s being dealt with. I think that also needs to be highlighted here.
Now there are other questions Members are raising and I don’t want to underscore the validity of those. They’re very important...