Mr. Speaker, I would like to apologize, because in the work that I was doing, I thought we were in committee of the whole.

Thank you. Replies to opening address. Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker I am going to be, I think, a little shorter than my colleague who spoke just a few minutes earlier.

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to raise a number of concerns, and a number of issues, but before that I want to put on record, Mr. Speaker, my appreciation to two individuals in my constituency, Hazel Nerysoo from Fort McPherson, and Roxanne John from Aklavik.

Earlier today, I made mention of the fact that I had sent a letter, and requested that contributions be made to a trust fund. These are the two individuals that are working in my constituency to seek contributions to the trust fund, and I thank them for the work they have done so far. I also wanted to thank, Mr. Speaker, and those constituents that have taken their money, and have been generous enough to have contributed to the families, and to the children of those miners who have suffered the loss that they did.

I say this, particularly, because in my constituency, as much as 60-70 percent, probably even higher than that, are unemployed right now, and are probably looking to find jobs in the near future. I think that it shows that there is generosity among the people, like all aboriginal people, they have the tendency of coming to the aid of those who need support most, and I just wanted to make mention of that.

There are, Mr. Speaker, a number of issues that I wanted to raise. Again, I want to go back to this matter of the Charlottetown Consensus Report, the referendum that we are embarking upon, and going to vote for, or against, I should include, on October 26.

I wanted to raise a number of concerns. Mr. Speaker, I will be tabling all the questions that I wanted to ask, or have the committee ask. They are legitimate questions and they need some answers. I also wanted to raise a number of issues.

It is with regard, Mr. Speaker, to the matter that is raising a great deal of concern in the minds of aboriginal women, and women generally across Canada. I know that the Minister of Aboriginal Rights and Constitutional Development, and the Government Leader, or the Premier, have indicated to Members that fear should not be a factor in the decision making and voting. I guess I should say, the Minister said that there should be no fear in supporting the Consensus Report. I think that I must remind Members here that the concerns that have been raised by women, generally across the country, are important for us to consider.

They are important, because they have raised the issues they themselves think that the concerns they have raised are important for us either to address of resolve. I think that the fears they have, particularly, as they apply to the matter of the notwithstanding clause, are because of our experience with the application of the notwithstanding clause used in circumstances where it has created a storm of controversy about the fact that it has allowed the interest of the majority to trample on the rights of the minority groups.

That has been the historical evidence. I think that where aboriginal women are concerned, the notwithstanding clause could be used by First Nation governments to deny aboriginal women's rights, that are protected for non-native women by the charter.

Now it is important for us to not overlook these things concerns. It may be that in our own minds, and our own assessments, that these fears can be addressed. We must address them. We cannot ignore them, and I think for us to get the support of the women across this country, and aboriginal women, then it is incumbent upon us to respond to their concerns positively, and with a certain amount of commitment, that justice will be served in terms of responding to their concerns. I think it is only fair that we deal with those issues.

Mr. Speaker, I want to also deal with one other matter that I think is important for us to deal with. A few days ago, I rose in this House, Mr. Speaker, to deny the consideration of a report of a committee, and I did not do it simply to be a stumbling block in the process of the proceedings of this House. I think there is a principle that has to be acknowledged, and that principle is, in fact, the Speaker ruled at one time in fact in 1989, in a session in the Assembly in Norman Wells, that one of the fundamental rights that Members have, is to be understood in the language that they speak, or in the language that they best understand.

I think that principle is important no matter what we do, and I would encourage our Members to respect that right no matter what situation we are in, and I ask all Members here to be vigilant about that principle in this House, because we, in this House, have argued long and hard about the protection of aboriginal languages. We have argued against the unilateral implementation of bilingualism in the north, because we wanted to protect our aboriginal languages, and I think that we must ensure that we do not retract from the commitment that we made to our own aboriginal languages. The remarks made by Mr. Gargan, a few minutes ago, that he wanted to ensure that our culture was respected and that the cultural education was a matter that should be improved upon. I agree with that. I think the responsibility of that commitment also has to be applied here in our Legislature.

Mr. Speaker, I normally have not, over the past few years, gotten up to speak in this particular area, because I always thought that it was necessary for me, if I had questions and concerns, to address them with the Ministers through questions, or written questions. I think at times we get up just to speak to hear our own voices being heard.

On one matter of policy, Mr. Speaker, I want to make this point. I do not have a problem at any time defending policies of this government. As long as they are fairly applied to all people. I will even go to my constituency and tell people that they cannot get funding for a particular area, if all people are told that same thing.

It makes it very difficult for me to justify the application of policies and programs, if in one constituency they hear that dollars are being expended, and in another it is not. I think, that it is important that we get rid of these kind of rumours, if they are rumours, or for that matter unfair application of policy. I think it is necessary in order for us to be a successful government.

I say that, because I do not always agree with some of the decisions that are made by the government, but if they can be justified, I think that it is only reasonable that they be made. Having served in the government, I can understand that when there is time to make a decision, then there is a time when the responsibility rests with Cabinet and with the Executive Members.

I think that it is important that nonetheless, that you listen to what we have to say on this side of the House. We do not have a monopoly on solutions and we do not have a monopoly on ideas. The one advantage of a consensus government, is the ability for all of us, at least at this particular juncture, to get up and speak and voice what might be solutions to some of the problems that we are encountering. That is not the case in other jurisdictions.

I must say to Mr. Lewis, Mr. Speaker, that I have to agree with the remarks that he made yesterday, with regard to the idea of partisan politics. I think that we cannot ignore, on an ongoing basis, the ability of people to associate in the political process. I do not necessarily agree that I will join a particular party, but nonetheless, we should not be taking that right away. I think it is a fundamental right that has been guaranteed by our own Constitution and I think we must change our rules to ensure that, that is reflected.

On a more positive note, I do not know if I have said anything major, or negative so far, but maybe I should say one thing, and it is this, that I am not certain, Mr. Speaker, if I can agree with everything that Mr. Trudeau has to say about the constitution. I just wanted to make mention of that. I do respect the man, I have always respected Mr. Trudeau. I was only in high school, I was not even in high school when Mr. Trudeau became the leader, and had a great deal of respect for him. I respect his intelligence and respect his ability to articulate his concerns with regard to the constitution. I do not necessarily agree with those remarks.

Mr. Speaker, I do not have much more to say, and I do not want to take much more time. Except this, I want to continue to thank our translators and the staff that work for us, the Clerk, Clerk Assistants, and the staff that are never recognized. The Hansard staff, who provide an opportunity for us to be placed in historical documents that many others will read about us, maybe a 100 years from now, they may wonder what in the world we were talking about at the time, but nonetheless we will be recognized. Perhaps for things we should not have said, but we did say them.

I want to say in conclusion, Mr. Speaker, that I do still have some major concerns about the constitutional issues. I would like further explanation, but I hope that I can get that from our Ministers and from the staff as we embark upon trying to find solutions to some of the concerns that the people across the country have, so that we can alleviate their fears, and concerns. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you. Replies to opening address. Item 9, petitions. Item 10, reports of standing and special committees. Item 11, reports of committees on the review of bills. Item 12, tabling of documents. Mr. Kakfwi.

Thank you. Tabling of documents. Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to table, Tabled Document 123-12(2), a letter that I received from the Status of Women's Council of the N.W.T.; Tabled Document 124-12(2), a press statement titled "Talking Back on the Senate"; Tabled Document 125-12(2), a document titled "Debunking the Myths", and, Tabled Document 126-12(2), a document titled "People and Communities".

Further, Mr. Speaker, I would like to table, Tabled Document 127-12(2), a letter that I wrote as M.L.A., to all leaders, and constituents, in the Mackenzie Delta constituency, regarding contributions to the trust fund for families of the Royal Oak Mine disaster.

Thank you. Tabling of documents. Mr. Patterson.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wish to table, Tabled Document 128-12(2), an Implementation Plan for Recommendations of the Abortion Services Review Committee. Qujannamiik.

Thank you. Tabling of documents. Ms. Mike.

Qujannamiik, Mr. Speaker. I wish to table today, Tabled Document 129-12(2), a report by a Detroit diesel technician on Chicago Lake Original Cause of Failure.

Thank you. Tabling of documents. Item 13, notices of motion. Item 14, notices of motions for first reading of bills. Item 15, motions. Item 16, first reading of bills. Item 17, second reading of bills. Item 18, consideration in committee of the whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 9-12(2), Strength at Two Levels; Tabled Document 10-12(2), Reshaping Northern Government; tabled document 62-12(2), Report on Northwest Territories Operations at Expo '92 as at May 31, 1992; Tabled Document 66-12(2), "Working Towards a Common Future" Commission for Constitutional Development; Tabled Document 70-12(2), "The Justice House" Report of the Special Advisor on Gender Equality; Motion 6, Discussion on Sobriety Clause in Contribution Agreements; Committee Report 17-12(2), Report on the Review of the 1992-93 Main Estimates; Committee Report 20-12(2), Special Committee on Health and Social Services Interim Report No. 2; Bill 33, Appropriation Act, No. 2, 1992-93, with Mr. Ningark in the Chair.

The committee will now come to order. When we concluded yesterday, the Minister of Social Services just finished his remarks. What is the wish of the committee? Mr. Dent.

The committee will now recess until 1:30 p.m., precisely 1:30 p.m.

--LUNCH BREAK

The committee will come to order. Yesterday, when we concluded, the Minister of Social Services had just finished his statement, and I believe the Standing Committee on Finance will have some comments. Who is making the comments on behalf of the standing committee? Mr. Dent.

Sergeant-at-Arms, would you escort the witnesses, please? Mr. Minister, for the record would you please introduce your witnesses?

Department Of Social Services

Mr. Chairman, thank you. I am pleased to introduce Mr. Dave Tyler, Director of Finance; and Ms. Maureen Cochrane, Acting Deputy Minister, ordinarily an Assistant Deputy Minister. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Dent, you have a presentation for us.

Thank you. General comments on Social Services. General comments? Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will not take up too much time. I just want to deal with one particular matter that deals with the policy initiative. I probably could raise it under the alcohol and drug area, but I would rather raise it here, as a matter of policy.

I know that Members in this Assembly have not, I might say, debated the matter of the Sobriety Clause and contribution agreements, and it is a matter that is going to arise, probably during the next session. I do want to raise a concern about where that particular requirement is being made. It has always been my view that the communities have an employee/employer requirement, and what concerns me is this notion that you are tying public dollars and, in fact, in some cases, dollars that were originally identified to deal with aboriginal people, and requiring them to abide by a policy initiative on the part of this government, that they themselves cannot apply to their own staff.

In other words, you are telling the communities that they must apply to their employees, but you cannot do it here as a matter of policy on alcohol and drug workers in the public service. Now, I think that is wrong. The fact is, the former Minister made it quite clear that there were some legal impediments, and negotiated agreements that would not allow them to do it. Now, it would have been a lot easier had I seen the communities being able to apply that policy. I think it is a policy that probably should be supported generally, but it concerns me that we are requiring it as part of our financial agreements, or contribution agreements, with the community.

Now, I hope that the Minister will review this particular matter. I do not expect him to say "yes" or "no" I will support it today, or he probably does, but I would ask him to review it, and look into whether or not there are potential legal situations that could arise if someone, in fact, challenged and really refused to sign an agreement with the community boards. My view is that you are really putting their programs in jeopardy. We are not putting our programs in jeopardy in terms of our employee arrangements, but we are putting the programs in jeopardy. I would ask that you review that situation, so that we do not create a situation where programs in the communities suffer because of what we consider a policy initiative on our part.

So, I just wanted to raise that, have the Minister review that with his colleagues, and with his legal advisors, as to how we might be able to best deal with that situation.

Thank you. Any further general comments? Mr. Minister.