Debates of October 15, 2004 (day 21)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just want to follow up on some of the issues that honourable Member Bill Braden has been raising with the Income Support program. I believe the Minister was talking about the program itself. I think that the program, the low income and the Income Support program today has to start focusing on what people need instead of what the government currently has to offer.

Just to follow up on the point I was making in yesterday's session, Mr. Speaker, about the option where the households all get to lose their eligibility for income support, when one member of the household or the head of the household reaches the ineligibility threshold, this policy basically works against anybody who wants to get out of income support. If a member of the household suddenly goes out and makes a productive choice, carries through with some education, goes out and gets a job and goes beyond the income threshold, that would make them ineligible for income support. Now everybody that is on income support or receives income support in that household is suddenly ineligible, because of this policy that says that the government is saying that families have to start relying on family members for support. I don’t think that that policy stands too well with anybody who wants to go out and get a job and then come home and all of a sudden they are the breadwinner of the family.

I just want to ask the Minister if he would commit to reviewing and clearing up the many inconsistencies between the current Income Support program, and target more support to meet the individual needs in the communities. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. The honourable Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Dent.

Return To Question 226-15(3): Addressing Income Support Inconsistencies

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this House helps me set the policies for Income Support, and I would have to work with Members in this House to review the policy if that is the will. I am quite prepared to embark on that initiative. I have, in fact, started some of that work with the standing committee; it started some time ago. The Standing Committee on Social Programs and I have met several times to talk about the policies, the underpinnings for the program and how it is delivered.

I think one of the things we have to first of all decide is, is this program an entitlement? Right now, our government's philosophy is that you are not entitled to income support. It is a program of last resort, only provided to make sure people are not going to freeze to death or starve to death. It is not an entitlement program where people are guaranteed a minimum income. That is the basic philosophy that underpins the program right now. If that is the type of program, then all of the income that is available to an individual is assessed before this government then tops up what else is available, or tops up what is available to them to bring them up to the absolute minimum. That is all the program has been designed to do right now. If Members want to talk about the philosophy of the program and whether it should be a guaranteed minimum income, or the kind of program we have now, I'm quite prepared to embark on that discussion. We have to remember, of course, that every time we change the philosophy of the program, we're also going to change the cost of the program, and perhaps significantly. So that all has to be worked into our discussions, as well. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Supplementary, Mr. Villeneuve.

Supplementary To Question 226-15(3): Addressing Income Support Inconsistencies

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank the Minister for his response. Talking about costs of the program; Income Support beneficiaries and Income Support dollars have been going out to the recipients and beneficiaries and clients in the Tu Nedhe region. Actually, from 1999 to 2003 it has gone up by $50,000, Mr. Speaker. I don't think the program is designed to spend more money for income support, as the Minister has stated. Since 1999, there has been a lot of economic development in the Tu Nedhe region and in the surrounding regions in the NWT, and it seems like there's more Income Support money going out to the communities now than there was in 1999 since all this activity began. I want to ask the Minister if the policy is really to top up everybody's income, then there must be more people unemployed. In the current economic situation that we're in, I don't see how that could happen. I just wanted to ask the Minister if he will put something on the record that says we should revisit the whole Income Support program and maybe split it up into separate programs for disabled people with permanent disabilities, for instance, and…

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. There was a question there; I'll put it to the Minister. Thank you. The honourable Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 226-15(3): Addressing Income Support Inconsistencies

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Member talked about the increase in payments in income support in the region. One of the things that have driven up the payments is that benefit levels have substantially increased since 1999. The amount that is paid for food, the amount that is paid for accommodation, all of those payments have gone up substantially since 1999. We have a very rich program in comparison to the rest of Canada. Is it rich to people who have to try and get by on it? No. It is a program of last resort. But, yes, the costs have gone up in some regions because the benefits have increased substantially.

The issue of whether or not we would separate it into a number of different programs; in fact, one of the issues that I will be talking to the Standing Committee on Social Programs about is reducing the numbers of programs that we have, because as a policy the government should have a consistent approach to how benefits are provided to people in the Northwest Territories. Therefore, in fact, the policy framework that I mentioned to Mr. Braden that I will be presenting to the standing committee will propose that there be fewer categories, not more. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Supplementary, Mr. Villeneuve.

Supplementary To Question 226-15(3): Addressing Income Support Inconsistencies

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm glad to hear that the Minister is looking forward to making some changes in the program. I just wanted to ask the Minister about some of the client information that trickles down to the grassroots level from the policies that are in the Income Support program. A lot of the income support officers in the communities don't have the information available to them to present to clients to make a lot of productive choices. They don't have information on human resource capacity building programs with the federal government; therefore, they can't pass them on to the clients to make some productive choices, and they don't have information on the jobs available in the mines, training programs and such. So a lot of these officers basically are being blamed by their clients for the lack of information they receive and the lack of support and reassessment in the whole program that they're delivering. I just want to ask the Minister if he would be willing to provide some direction to the Income Support program management that information for human resource capacity building, job creation, education and all that, that he makes sure that all this information does get down to the grassroots where the people really need it. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 226-15(3): Addressing Income Support Inconsistencies

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, our income support workers undergo regular training, they have a number of occasions a year in which they are provided with information to make sure that they can pass this on to their clients. If the Member has a concern about a particular community, I hope that he will come and talk to me about it and we will address that as quickly as we can. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Your final supplementary, Mr. Villeneuve.

Supplementary To Question 226-15(3): Addressing Income Support Inconsistencies

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would be glad to meet with the Minister sometime to talk about some new policy initiatives that I would have in mind on how we could better support individuals' needs, as opposed to just offering people what the government has to offer. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.