Debates of October 29, 2010 (day 26)
QUESTION 298-16(5): PROPOSED CHANGES TO SUPPLEMENTARY HEALTH BENEFITS POLICY
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, too, would like to have a stab at the Minister’s statement. I’m coming at it from the aboriginal perspective. It seems like you are also going to look at the extended health benefits, but also Metis health benefits. The same thing applies to the aboriginal benefits by way of non-insured health benefits. It’s a federal program. What are we doing to consult those organizations, those aboriginal groups, Metis locals, band councils and memberships of those particular programs to ensure they are engaged in whatever we are doing here? If we are going to claw back and allow people to get third-party insurance or look at some means testing, I’d like to know what we are doing to consult those organizations that have these benefits.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The honourable Minister of Health and Social Services, Ms. Lee.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Where they are impacted, one of the things in the statement is to look at all of the extended health benefits programs, Metis Health and NIHB, to find some sort of parity. Now, that would take some analysis and work and where it’s possible and appropriate, we will work with other governments to keep them in the loop. Thank you.
One of the concerns I have about the rollback is what we’re finding statistically is an aboriginal income in the Northwest Territories is around $18,000. We’re expecting them to pay anything more. It’s a question of affordability and I don’t think a lot of aboriginal people can afford to pay for coverage. There was the issue around income testing, looking at that opportunity and people getting third-party insurance. I’d like to ask, are those options still on the table and also looking at using the format that it would be some sort of wage parity in regards to how this program is going to be implemented?
The Member knows that NIHB is not part of this program and although NIHB encourages people to have third-party options and when they do, they are asked to go to that first. One of the suggestions made that we want to look at is to require all Metis health and supp health... Well, it’s no longer supp health, it’s now extended health benefits which is what’s in place. We will look at how we can implement requiring third-party insurance and allowing or encouraging people to go through that process first. So that will be part of the work that we’ll be doing moving forward.
The other issue I know that has been bounced around, and we can agree to disagree, but one of the areas that we have to look at is in regard to income testing. We have to ensure that those who can’t afford pay a little bit, those who can afford, use their coverage. So is income testing still part of the review process that’s going forward and will that also be considered in these changes?
The recommendation that we have that we need to look at it is to encourage people to get third-party insurance and use it first. So we need to look at that. We will be coming back with a work plan on how long we need to take to look at those. We hope to be able to do that sooner than later and what best way there is to encourage people to do that. We will be making those proposals. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Lee. Final supplementary, Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. One of the areas that I have issues with is with regard to when people are sick. I’ll use NIHB. There are specific things listed on NIHB that you aren’t covered for. If those things are not on the NIHB, you can’t get it. So basically if you have an illness such as cancer and you require certain vitamins or certain types of liquids, regardless of whether it’s insured, you have to pay for that under NIHB. Are we going to find ways to enhance the Catastrophic Health Program to expand so we can help those people that don’t have the financial means to get the medications or supplements they need to sustain them during their illness? Thank you.
The programs that we have for the NWT residents, whether it be NIHB, the federal government’s NIHB, Metis Health Benefits and Supp Health, that makes it so there is no need for catastrophic drug coverage. So what the Member is talking about is other things like people in low income, people can’t afford. So if you are talking about how to compare between the three programs and finding equity, that is part of the recommendation of the Joint Working Group and we need to look at those and look at the proposal. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Lee. The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Abernethy.