Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to speak yet again on the issue of developing new policies on supplementary health coverage in the NWT. I support the intent to begin delivering coverage to all people of the North. Unfortunately, I still do not know how many new people this involves or what the estimated costs are.
I support concerns raised about how the department is proceeding. First -- and on a point that is repeatedly being raised by public client groups, individuals, families, constituents, and committee -- is the expected expedited time frame that the Minister is insisting upon. We have an informed and experienced public on this issue and they need a full opportunity to contribute in an iterative fashion to the development of this important work. They have my support and I equally insist that the Minister recognize this call. New information was provided just yesterday. Consultation must proceed through the fall, not 10 years from now, as the Minister likes to say, but through this fall for implementation in January 2011; 10 months from now.
Philosophically I disagree with the main approach being taken. We have a tax system that could and may already provide, through federal transfers, the resources needed to cover supp health benefits. Government’s refusal to acknowledge and use this mechanism is leading to an ever more grossly deformed distribution of wealth and the rise of the super-rich. Continuing to ignore this responsibility contributes to the ongoing distortion and lack of resources for government to provide basic services that our public rightfully demands. Using the tax system to support the program simplifies administration, reduces costs and avoids the expensive and often justified difficulty of collecting payments.
The Minister proposes so-called net income thresholds, such as $30,000 or $50,000, used to define when those with supplementary health issues will have to pay for benefits. Let’s be clear, these thresholds are not net income in the common understanding of the term. They are really gross income. Net income is pre-tax income from which a few miscellaneous deductions are made, such as northern benefits. If the department insists on this approach, it requires a critical look at what proportion the payments will be of real take-home pay to estimate actual impacts on the well-being of people.
I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted.