Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have to concur with my colleague from Yellowknife south. I, too, have a difficulty with this particular bill, and I expressed a lot of my concerns in the Standing Committee on Finance. I want to indicate to the Minister, as I have indicated to the previous Minister, that I believe that this is a tax grab, in a very sly way, if I may use the term.
Mr. Chairman, I am just going through the actual department's budget very quickly to see, for this amount of funding that is going to be raised, how much it is costing the department in respect to this area. I do not believe that there was any increase that even justified the need for this percentage increase for premiums. I felt, and I still feel, that because of it being a revenue initiative, that it should go through the Department of Finance, through the budget, as part of the overall government's revenue initiative process, as opposed to wanting to amend one type of act just to increase funding.
Now, I am concerned that if we look at this particular amendment to this Insurance Act, what other types of acts will be amended accordingly, to look at bringing in revenue initiatives for the government overall. I have to just echo the concerns of some of my colleagues, that this particular act, the process used for this particular act, certainly was not appreciated. It is an initiative to raise revenue, and it is not looked at as an initiative like when the government wants to raise liquor tax, or whatever types of revenue initiatives that they take upon themselves.
I have unequivocally stated, in the Standing Committee on Finance, that I do not agree with this bill. I have not seen any significant changes that would allow me to agree with it, so therefore, I just want the committee to note that this amendment on the Insurance Act is not acceptable, and I will be voting against it. Thank you.