Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was listening to the Minister of Health’s answers really closely and I think what she represents is the exact reason why people hate politicians. Because when you move something around, it’s called a change; and when you reduce something, it’s called a reduction. So, Mr. Speaker, that frustration is articulated out there by playing with semantics. So I’d like to ask the Minister again -- perhaps another way we’ll get the answer -- what work and analysis is done by the Department of Health and Social Services to make sure that they’re collecting all the fees and services that we are providing to clients out there so it does not have an impact on our revenue so we have to reduce services to our health and benefits program. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Honourable Minister responsible for Health and Social Services, Ms. Lee.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Member knows that we don’t have fee systems in our health care system. I don’t believe there is a co-payment for medical travel for those whose income is higher than a certain level. I could only think of that. In long-term care facilities, people pay minimal for staying there. But by and large, we have the most generous and open health care coverage compared to anywhere else in the country and probably around the world. Thank you.
I keep telling the Minister we’re leaving thousands of dollars on the table, whether it’s through WCB… We charge through WCB but we don’t charge through federal programs where they provide individual insurance. Mr. Speaker, I’m asking the Minister what do we do to make sure we’re collecting all the fees and services, and I’ve pointed out whether it’s insurance through, for example, auto insurance, like I said last week, whether it’s getting full payment from Nunavut on services we provide to them. Thank you.
I don’t know why he’s getting the impression that I don’t think that we should do that or we are not doing that. We are doing that. I said that in our Committee of the Whole discussion. Our health system as a whole, we bill for services that we need to bill, we collect money, we have people that do that, whether it’s a visitor or out-of-towner or it’s a physician-to-physician arrangement. That’s part of the health care system and delivery system. I just want to make sure that there’s not a linkage that we are somehow trying to reduce services in everything to make up for something that we’re not collecting. That is wrong and if the Member doesn’t understand that, I don’t understand why he thinks that’s somehow making politicians look bad. I’m just giving him the answer; he should hear that, Mr. Speaker.
I have said in the Foundation for Change and our collective challenge is that we have a fiduciary obligation to protect the health and social services system we have, and that we look at the long-term outlook at where we are heading and that we make sustainability a priority, and that is not a cost reduction, that’s just about protecting, and protecting what we value. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I’m not sure how the Health Minister can keep saying that there aren’t changes coming to the Supplementary Health Benefits Program when there are changes. What are we evaluating then? It doesn’t make sense. How can the Minister keep saying that there aren’t changes coming without it being reflected on the costs of the system? I’d like to understand that from the Minister’s point of view. Thank you.
If the Member read the public discussion -- perhaps he has, maybe wants to read it again -- there’s no mention there. I think anybody who’s had that presentation -- and we’ve had that presentation with the seniors, with Joint Leadership Council members -- it’s a good package of information to start a dialogue on.
I want to say it again, that we’re not proposing changes that take away benefits. What we are saying is we need to look at accessibility, who accesses that. And anybody who could afford to pay a co-payment or something, perhaps we should consider that. That is part of our discussion.
So I think the Members are jumping the gun in saying we’re ahead of this. This is a very important discussion and we need to have that, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Lee. Short supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Co-payment is a reduction in services. Mr. Speaker, when you grandfather people, that’s a reduction of services to the people who follow after them. Mr. Speaker, I’m trying to understand from the one-sided point of view of this full evaluation, as I’ve been trying to highlight, we can save money so we can make sure we don’t have to make these changes. I’m trying to understand how come the Minister keeps defending that there are no changes when we keep highlighting that there are. Thank you.
I want to say clearly that we are not looking at reducing costs. In health care services it’s about making sure that our system works well so that we plan for the future. The health care budget in this government continues to grow and we expect that it will continue to grow and that we will continue to spend the money that we need for the health and social services system.
The review of supplementary health benefits is different. It’s been around for a long time and we have very good information about who is using it and what the people’s backgrounds are, and that there is not as much fairness and equitability in that program as it is delivered now. So we are going out to the public with the information we know about the program and asking people for feedback. To say that we shouldn’t even do anything like this is I don’t think very future-oriented or responsible. I think we have a collective responsibility to see how we can make this better. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Lee. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
