Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think this whole issue really boils down to something very simple as saying this: We don’t want to cause any further strain to this family’s economic situation, and furthermore, we don’t want to provide any extensive financial hardships to the person who has volunteered or, in some cases, doesn’t really have a choice. They have to go as the medical escort. If you weigh and balance the great strain being a medical escort can cause – and I’m talking about the pocketbook or the financial hardship that can be created by this situation – it causes one to say, well, we don’t want to find ways to discourage them for being there in a time that they need to be there. In a short version, what type of ripple effects have we caused or difficult challenges have we created for these people who have made the choice to step in? When people need to be there for their family or loved ones or their friends in a time of circumstances, we don’t want to be thinking about the tough choices they need to make, which is do they have to quit their job, can they afford to go, will going for one day, two days, one week, one month, who knows what type of impact this will have on those families. If you happen to be the person who draws the short straw and has to go, do you have pay and benefits programming that will help and support you? If you’re in between jobs, what kind of circumstance does that put you in?

I think where I can support this is, I’m going to, well, before I say that, where I can support this, really, ultimately it has to balance out what is reasonable, what our government can afford and what makes sense. When MLA Dolynny talks about financial

compensation, how far and where does it go, it does make sense to consider that, but by the same token, when I hear Member Yakeleya or Member Menicoche talk about this in the sense of the hardship that this creates, it causes me to be really concerned about the impact on the individual who is trying to do the right thing.

I will support a review of this. I will support an assessment of some recommendations brought forward to a committee and I want us to cost them out to understand what we are agreeing or not necessarily agreeing to. Before we make any step forward, I think the first important thing is to understand what problem are we grappling with, and I think that’s a reasonable expectation. The department has all the numbers of people who have gone out on medical travel. They know how long they’ve gone out, and we can do a simple assessment through that. Now, I don’t think that that’s 10 minutes worth of work. I know that. Actually, I probably think it’s an extensive amount of work to sit down and calculate this, but I think it’s time we have this conversation, because this is a conversation we’ve been having behind closed doors since I was elected in 2003. People have stepped up and they find it really hurts them. They say, geez, I shouldn’t have gone with my relative. I shouldn’t have been there because I can’t afford it. That’s the type of conversation I think we need to have. We need to have the right information and it’s timely.

I think this is a good step forward on the discussion, the conversation, and I certainly welcome the evaluation of what this really means. As such, I think it stands to say there’s no problem in supporting the motion the way it’s crafted, and once we have that review and evaluation and those recommendations, then we can take our next steps forward as they make sense for our financial ability, because we just can’t afford everything, but let’s at least know what we’re talking about with that detail.