SOMBA K'E/YELLOWKNIFE - Health is an issue close to people's hearts and they're passionate about keeping it out of seniors and sick people's pocketbooks, if a public meeting on Wednesday in Yellowknife was any indication.

More than 120 people, mostly seniors, packed into the Northern United Place auditorium for a four-hour-long meeting. The resounding chorus was criticism from people who said they would be negatively affected by proposed changes to the extended health benefits program.

"Call it a co-payment. We know it's a tax. It's a tax on the sick and elderly. Disgusting," said David Wind, making a presentation on behalf of the Yellowknife Seniors Society. He wants the territorial government to consider offering non-aboriginal Northerners the same type of coverage Metis people receive, without making them pay a portion by funding it through the tax system.

The Department of Health and Social Services wants to change the existing extended health benefits plan for non-aboriginal Northerners, which now only covers seniors, people with specified conditions and people on income support. The department is proposing shifting to an income-based system where everyone, regardless of age, would be covered for all health benefits, including prescriptions, medical equipment and limited eye care and dental coverage, up until a certain income level. People making more than $30,000 or $50,000 would have to pay a portion of the cost, depending how many children they have.

Dana Heide, assistant deputy minister of Health and Social Services, made an hour-long presentation and fielded questions during the sometimes tense debate.

Despite jeers from the crowd, Heide said he wasn't there to defend the proposal and said it wasn't about money, but creating a fair program.

Some disparaged the consultation process, saying the department was rushing into implementing a program without incorporating people's feedback into their plan.

"It's not possible any of this is meant to be meaningful," said Barb Barnet.

Others asked why the department wasn't offering solutions beyond an income-based program.

Debra Bruser said she'd happily pay more tax but she wasn't interested in making a co-payment.

"Perhaps we need to go back to the drawing board," she said, drawing cheers from the crowd.

Several people who rely on the existing program to pay for specified conditions said they were worried they couldn't shoulder a percentage of the cost. Some said paying a portion of their prescriptions and medical equipment would amount to hundreds of dollars or more per month, enough to strain even a middle-class income, they said.

Sharon Oldford brought her son, Riley, 5, who qualifies for extended health benefits because he has cerebral palsy and chronic lung disease.

"It's important that there's a face to the choice that you make," she told representatives of the health department. "If you put a dollar figure on the quality of life of a child, of an adult, anyone one of us, anyone of you, could be in a position, five years from now, ten years from now, that you could need those extended health care benefits."

Oldford said when health care is a necessity of life, it should be available to everyone

James Clark echoed Wind's comments, saying he was worried making seniors pay a portion of their health care would lead them to taking medication improperly to avoid going in for a refill or deter them from seeking treatment.

"This legislation will kill," he said.

Arlene Hache, executive director of the Centre for Northern Families, was one of the few voices who said they were in favour of the program.

Speaking on behalf of the people who "don't get their teeth fixed, don't get glasses, don't get their drugs," she said, "Under the current system, tons of people are disadvantaged," she said. "This is the first time I would applaud the government, I would applaud Sandy Lee, for however they may do it, trying to make a fair system."

But even Hache had reservations. She called the proposal a "good possibility" but said she wanted a catastrophic drug program and higher income thresholds.

Lee, the Health and Social Services minister, was noticeably absent from the debate.

Minutes into Heide's presentation, Ruth Spence called out from the upper gallery: "The minister that called this meeting, is she here to listen to us?" to a chorus of applause.

In an interview Thursday morning, Lee said she had listened to the debates and would take all the concerns people raised into perspective.

She said it was normal practice for ministers not to attend public consultation meeting but said given last night's debate, she was considering a catastrophic drug plan for exceptionally expensive drugs, separate from the income cut-offs.

In response to criticism the new plan was the same as the one she put forward last winter, the plan that was scrapped due to intense public outcry, Lee said the new proposal offered an appeal process and a more graduated income cut-offs to give people better coverage.

"There is a group of working poor who are falling through the cracks. They're not covered. They make too much money to be covered by income security," she said.

Lee said the original direction approved by former premier Joe Handley's government in 2007 asked for an income-based system and said after her department did the research, it also found income, not family size or health conditions was "the most objective way to say this is your ability to pay."

She said the reality in Canada is that there isn't universal coverage for extended health benefits and many governments are struggling to pay for them.

"Our proposal is still better than many others because it's available to everybody, and it leaves no one behind," she said.

Though Heide conceded Wednesday night that the department was on a "pretty ridiculous time line," Lee said though the "program is not ready for implementation," they're still on track to bring a proposal to the legislative assembly in one month's time.