Mr. Speaker, it sure sounded like that is what she said on this side of the House. If Hansard proves that she didn’t in fact say that it is going to be a tax on the sick and the elderly, I do apologize for that. But I didn’t hear a response to my question. Basically, if you look at the list of conditions that are covered under the extended benefits, it covers pretty much every condition. I think the only one that I could figure out that is missing on here is high cholesterol, so these low income families that she is talking about, if they want coverage for drugs, they can get it. They can get it today if they just apply for the specified medical conditions. So what she is saying, that they are not covered, it is not completely true. It is doublespeak. She is saying one thing when really she is trying to say another, which concerns me. This is an important issue. Quite frankly, to suggest that we on this side of the House don’t care about the poor and the low income families is frankly quite insulting, because we all do and want that to happen. We want those people to be covered but we don’t want them to be covered at the expense of everybody else. We want to find a way to cover everybody universally. That is what we are talking about.

Mr. Speaker, to me the entire revision of the Extended Health Benefits Program seems to lack common sense. For example, the discussion paper lacks any projections which would help the reasonable person to make a reasonable decision. The department has not identified any alternative scenarios or made any potential outcomes available for discussion.

Mr. Speaker, could the Minister of Health and Social Services please tell me why no analysis was done outlining the effects of these proposed changes on the people that the changes affect, people affected both in a positive way because yes there are a couple of them, thank God, but also tell me how these changes are going to affect those people that are going to be affected negatively, like people with catastrophic conditions who have an insurance provider but are now going to be expected to come out of pocket $700 or $800 where today they are covered. Those people with catastrophic conditions who have insurance are the people that are going to be the most damaged by what you are proposing. What you are proposing for those people clearly is not fair. I would like the Minister to answer some of those questions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.