Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With regard to the docking of the ferries, is it also a judgement call for them to put the ferry back into the water as the conditions are suitable?

Mr. Whitford.

Oral Questions. Item 6, Written Questions. Mr. Lewis.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Personnel. The questions concerns Norman Meek, former pension and insurance specialist, Government of the Northwest Territories.

1. Why has no back pay or benefits been paid to Mr. Meek in accordance with Supreme Court ruling of December 13, 1991?

2. Why has the full solicitor client cost not been paid in accordance with Supreme Court order of February 4, 1992? Why did it take until July to pay only part of these costs?

3. Why has the Government of the Northwest Territories not paid the full $13,179 of approved travel expenses to Mr. Meek?

4. Why did it take until August 11, 1992 to partially reimburse Mr. Meek for his expenses, and when will the balance be paid on this claim, which is now overdue by 15 months?

Item 6, Written Questions. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Personnel. Would the Minister of Personnel please advise this House as to:

1. the status of the treatment coordinator position at the Trailcross facility in Fort Smith;

2. why the Treatment Coordinators position was recently advertised for competition; and

3. whether or not the Collective Agreement between the U.N.W. and the G.N.W.T. was contravened? Thank you.

Item 6, Written Questions. We will take a short break.

---SHORT BREAK

Order please. Order. Now has the House come back to order? Item 6, Written Questions. Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My written question will be to the Minister of Justice, to please provide this House with a listing showing:

a) individuals receiving funds from the Government of the Northwest Territories;

b) topics;

c) dates;

d) location;

e) tuition fees; and

f) all other related expenditures.

For all training initiatives undertaken by any and all judges of the Territorial Court during the 1990/91, 91/92 and, to date during the 92/93 fiscal year? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Item 6, Written Questions. Item 7, Returns to Written Questions. Item 8, Replies to Opening Address. Item 9, Replies to Budget Address. Item 10, Petitions. Item 11, Reports of Standing and Special Committees. Mr. Arngna'naaq.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a report on Tabled Document 100-12(2) from the Standing Committee on Legislation.

During the Second Session of the 12th Assembly, Mr. Brian Lewis, M.L.A. for Yellowknife Centre, introduced Bill 26, a private Member's bill, that would have amended the Liquor Act to allow the establishment of commercial breweries in the Northwest Territories.

At public hearings held on May 26, 1992, the Standing Committee on Legislation identified a number of problems with the Bill. A revised version was received late in the 2nd Session. At a subsequent meeting in September of 1992, the standing committee encouraged responses to re-introduce the revised bill at the November sitting.

In order to allow the standing committee to conduct a public review of the proposed legislative content prior to November, Mr. Lewis drafted, or tabled a draft of the revised bill on September 29, 1992. This was referred to the Standing Committee on Legislation by a formal motion of the House on October 1, 1992.

The Standing Committee on Legislation held public hearings on Tabled Document 100-12(2) on October 22, 1992. The standing committee would like to thank the following individuals for appearing as witnesses at the public hearings; Mr. Brian Lewis, Ms. Virginia Schuler, Mr. Paul Craig, Ms. Emerald Murphy from the Department of Safety and Public Services, Mr. John Donihee, Department of Justice, Mr. Victor MacIntosh and Mr. Doug Strater of the Pilot's Monumental Historic Arctic Brewing Company.

The Standing Committee on Legislation raised a number of points with the bill's sponsor and the other witnesses during the October 22 review. While most of the concerns raised by the standing committee in May had been addressed, there were a number of significant issues which the committee considered as outstanding.

A clearer definition of the affected community. The proposed legislation includes a local option procedure which would make it necessary for the Liquor Licensing Board to ascertain the views of the community most closely affected by the Brewery Permit Application.

In order for a permit to be issued, the local government would have to pass a resolution supporting the application. The standing committee asked the sponsor to review this proposed section and to ensure that procedures are in place which allow the board to ascertain the views of both the band council and the municipal council in communities where they co-exist.

Also to address the case in which neighbouring communities exist which may be closely affected by the establishment of a brewery.

The coming into force provisions, the standing committee noted that the proposed bill presented in Tabled Document 100-12(2) contained no provision as to when it should come into force. As such, the bill would come into force upon ascent. Recognizing that some time would be necessary for government departments to develop regulations and guidelines, the committee suggested that the sponsor should include a specific coming into force provision when he introduces his private Member's bill.

The clarification of a brew pub concept:

1. The proposed legislation would allow a holder of a brewery permit to apply to the Liquor Licensing Board for a licence to operate a brew pub in which products from the brewery could be sold. The standing committee asked the sponsor to provide additional clarification in its proposed legislation with regard to whether holders of brew pub licences would be able to also apply for other classes of licences for the same premises;

For instance, would a brew pub also be licensed as a cocktail lounge which would enable the licensee to sell products other than those manufactured under the licensee's brewery permit;

2. How a brew pub would be classified with respect to the statutory hierarchy of privileges deemed to exist under subsection 43.(2) of the Liquor Act. This could have particular significance with respect to the operation of local options including the holding of plebiscites.

For public information, the standing committee was concerned that there might be some potential for this amendment to be misconstrued in certain quarters as carrying implications for the illegal manufacture of home brewed alcohol.

The sponsor and the relevant government departments or agencies would be encouraged to ensure that any public information about the proposed legislation should draw a clear distinction between the manufacture of beer under brewery permits and the unlawful preparation of beverage alcohol.

A brief comment about further stages in the consideration of this legislation may be helpful. With this report, the Standing Committee on Legislation has concluded its review of Tabled Document 100-12(2).

Should the sponsor now wish to proceed with this legislative initiative, the next step would be to introduce it as a private member's public bill. The bill would be considered at first and second reading according to the rules of the Legislative Assembly.

If the bill receives second reading, it would be automatically referred back to the Standing Committee on Legislation for review. Given that the standing committee has already considered the content in some detail in its current form as a tabled document, it might be anticipated that committee review would not be prolonged. However, at that time, Members of the standing committee will be interested in examining whether matters outlined in this report have been adequately addressed.

Upon completion of its review process, the standing committee would then refer the bill for consideration by the House in the Committee of the Whole. Subsequent stages of passage would be third reading, and assent by the Commissioner of the Northwest Territories. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Item 12, Reports of Committees on the Review of Bills. Item 13, Tabling of Documents. Item 14, Notices of Motion. Item 15, Notices of Motions for First Reading of Bills. Mr. Lewis.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I give notice that on Wednesday, November 25, 1992 I will move that Bill 9, An Act to Amend the Liquor Act be read for the first time.

Thank you. Item 15, Notices of Motions for First Reading of Bills. Item 16, Motions. Motion 1-12(3) will still be on the order paper for tomorrow. Item 17, First Reading of Bills. Mr. Kakfwi.

Thank you. Your motion is in order. To the motion.

Question.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion has been carried.

---Carried

Bill 6 has had first reading. Item 17, First Reading of Bills. Mr. Whitford.

Thank you. Your motion is in order. To the motion.

Question.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion is carried.

---Carried

Bill 7 has had first reading. Item 18, Second Reading of Bills. Item 19, Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters: Committee Report 1-12(3), Standing Committee on Finance Report on the Review of the 1993-94 Capital Estimates; and, Bill 1, Appropriation Act, No. 1, 1993-94 with Mr. Nerysoo in the Chair.

I would like to call the committee to order. Members will recall that Friday we concluded with five recommendations and we were dealing with Bill 1, Appropriation Act, No. 1, 1993-94 and Committee Report 1-12(3). What is the wish of the committee? Mr. Todd.