On second look, Mr. Speaker, my motion is acceptable and does not require an amendment. I put this motion forward because of the fact that over the years I have noticed and I have recognized that the abuse of alcohol in our society has affected, as I stated in my motion, many families; and I strongly believe it is the stem of many of the social problems we face in the North. I am concerned that elected officials, as leaders, always want to talk about, always want to indicate, that alcohol abuse is a problem, but I also want to say that they are reluctant to take concrete action in respect to addressing this concern.
I believe that in order to address this as elected leaders of the NWT, we should set an example; and set an example by not allowing any types of functions that will provide liquor free of charge to individuals. I want to make it perfectly clear that I am not taking the opportunity away from individuals at government functions to have alcohol. They can certainly serve alcohol, but I believe they should pay for it and we should not be using public funds to provide alcohol at functions on behalf of the government.
Licences Issued Recently For Government Functions
Mr. Speaker, I requested some research in respect to the numbers of licences that were issued for government functions in the past couple of years. The NWT Liquor Licensing Board issues two types of special occasion licences. One is called a "resale" licence, which allows for any organization to purchase alcohol beverages and sell them, like a cash bar. Another one is called the "ordinary" licence, which allows an organization to serve alcoholic beverages without having to sell it. When I asked the Liquor Licensing Board the number of each type of special occasion licence sponsored by any government department, hospital board, power corporation, or boards of education, there were 44 ordinary special licences issued since December 1989. Now 44 may not seem to be a lot, but there were 44 functions that we allowed government agencies, boards, the Assembly, to provide alcohol free of charge to individuals.
In regard to special licences, it was substantially lower; it was 28. So if people had to pay for the alcohol, the licences issued were a lot lower. I do not think that is right.
Mr. Speaker, I was somewhat concerned, when you look at the community breakdown for the issuance of special occasion licences, which is a type of licence which is issued to any government department, hospital board, for special occasions, Yellowknife in itself had 18 ordinary licences issued with which they sponsored functions that people did not have to pay for alcohol. There were 18 different functions, and they had 15 where they allowed the sale of alcohol at these functions, a cash bar. Fort Smith had three ordinary licences, where they provided alcohol free of charge, and they are so generous there that they did not have any licences for resale. But in Iqaluit they had 16 ordinary licences, 16 free functions where alcohol was given free to individuals, and five resale licences. Hay River had one function with three resale licences. They must not believe in giving anything away free. But Rankin Inlet had four functions that they provided alcohol free of charge and four functions where the alcohol was purchased. Inuvik had one licence where the alcohol was provided free of charge, and they sold alcohol at one function. Fort Simpson had one function where they provided alcohol free of charge, and they did not get any resale licences.
Most government receptions, suppers and meetings in Yellowknife and in regional administrative centres would likely be held in a hotel or a restaurant, where generally wine is provided, and they would likely be held in a dining atmosphere. They do not need a licence because the hotel already has one. So it is very difficult to track how many functions like that were held, but I can imagine there was quite a high number of them. I would not even be surprised if they came into the hundreds.
Government Sending Out Two Messages Re Alcohol
Mr. Speaker, my point is the fact that we send two messages out to the communities of the Territories. We sent one message by basically stating that as a Department of Social Services we request them to provide funds to deliver alcohol programs to address the abuse of alcohol in the North. We are basically saying that we can give you money to address the problem, but at the same time it is okay for us as government or as a Legislative Assembly to hold functions where we can serve alcohol, and I believe that is wrong.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly believe that if we want to seriously address some of the social problems in the North, and if we want, particularly, to attempt to address the problems of alcohol abuse in the Territories, that we as a government and as a Legislative Assembly have to firmly believe that because of the problems we face in the North with respect to alcohol, if we want to have any functions that are sponsored with public funds, alcohol cannot be provided free of charge. People should have to pay for alcohol.
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, it is my hope that Members of this Assembly are willing to take concrete action on addressing alcohol abuse in our society and to lead the way by setting an example and support this motion to discontinue the provision of public funds to be spent on the purchase of alcohol at government functions. With that, thank you, Mr. Speaker.