Good afternoon. Orders of the day for Thursday, February 20, 1992.

Item 2, Ministers' statements. Item 3, Members' statements. Mr. Pudluk.

(Translation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, today is the day we should be making decisions that involve our young people. For example, it seems that we, the leaders, have put our young people aside and have forgot about them. As leaders we must realize that they will be taking over our jobs in shaping the government, and they want to be involved now. We have to give them the opportunity of being involved in running their future government. We have to let them know that they should stay in school to finish their education, so that they can take over and do the jobs of leaders and politicians. When it is time to vote on the boundary plebiscite on May 4, we have to give our young people a chance to decide for themselves, because they are our future leaders and politicians.

There will come a time when those young people will come of age to be leaders and politicians. Let us give them this one-time chance to vote on the boundary plebiscite, and by giving them this chance we will gain their trust. I am sure that if we, as leaders, give them this chance, we will give them something to look forward to. Mr. Speaker, let us make good decision, today for the future of our young people. Thank you.

---Applause

Members' Statements. Mr. Lewis

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express a real concern that I have about the current Executive Council's version of consensus government. I find it unbecoming that people who are in a leadership role should be asking ordinary Members to propose changes to government which are really only, at this point in time, clearly in the government's interest. If you are an ordinary Member, you have your own agenda of the things you want to do, and if it is the wish of the government to get rid of the Housing Corporation's board, they should go ahead and do it. If they are convinced that is the thing to do and they can save money, and so on, that is the thing that you can do and you have the authority to do it because you are the government. If you want to get rid of the Denendeh Conservation Board because you think it is no good and it has no purpose, you should have the courage of your convictions to go ahead and do it and not ask ordinary Members to take the heat for things that you want to do yourself.

I can go on at great lengths on all the things that the government would like to do. It is a strange version of consensus government if the involvement that we are going to have is simply to be an instrument of somebody else's policy. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Shame, shame!

Members' statements. Mr. Koe.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to make some statements about the situation at the Inuvik Regional Hospital. In May of 1991, an article appeared in the Inuvik Drum dealing with the concerns of employees at the Inuvik Regional Hospital, and how staff were concerned that certain management practices were affecting staff morale and staff turnover.

In the same month there was a letter in the Inuvik Drum from the regional vice-president of the Union of Northern Workers, again addressing the issue of staff morale. A subsequent issue in the Inuvik Drum, again in May 1991, ran an article on how the chief executive officer of the Inuvik Regional Hospital had met with a committee of hospital workers to address their concerns. The staff were assured that these concerns would be looked after.

However, recent demonstrations by the hospital and Union of Northern Workers employees indicate that morale has not improved. It has, in fact, declined to the point where members of the community are getting concerned about the ability to receive proper health care and concern about the impact this morale problem will have on the level of care for themselves and their families. This decline in staff morale also has a ripple effect on the community as staff continue to change and are unhappy, and it has a serious social impact on the community. Employees are working in stressful environments and take this home with them, and it has a ripple effect at home.

Mr. Speaker, I have received over 80 letters and numerous phone calls from residents of Inuvik relating to this issue, and I will later today be tabling these letters in the House. Mahsi.

Members' statements. Mr. Pudlat.

(Translation) Mr. Speaker, I have a concern from Baffin South. You all know there are some concerns arising from Baffin. Their concern is the art shop and if it is going to go bankrupt, because this is income for the people in Baffin. Their main concern is that, for example, there is a new facility that will be built in Baker Lake sometime this winter. Their main concern is, is it going to be an improvement for the social life of the community? This is also

my concern. So I stand this afternoon to express my concern. My question is, is there going to be an improvement? Perhaps my next question is that I think it is going to involve the whole community. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Members' statements. Mr. Gargan.

Mr. Speaker, several years ago I was charged with spousal assault in which the circumstances were that I did not commit any physical harm or any bodily injury, but I did push my wife, and for that I was charged with assault. In the section under the Criminal Code on assault, the definition of assault varies from touching a person, brushing a person, to striking a person. The situation, Mr. Speaker, was that I did plead guilty to that. I did touch my wife.

But a situation this morning which I was quite disturbed to hear was when an individual that is a leader in his community and in his area was also convicted of touching a girl, I believe, and for that he did get charged, was found guilty, but had an absolute discharge. I think the difference between those two cases, Mr. Speaker, is that when I touch my wife I touch her in the right place and not in the wrong place. I do not see the situation to be any different in this case. It happened about eight years ago, but it was not cause at that time, nor should it be the cause today. Leaders are expected to get away with doing things with the knowledge of the public. The judge says this person is guilty but he could go free. I do not believe in this kind of justice system, and I think we should get this point across to the public. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause

Members' statements. Mr. Kakfwi.

Unanimous consent has been requested to return to Item 2, Ministers' statements. Are there any nays? There are no nays. Proceed, Mr. Kakfwi.

Ministers' statements. Mr. Patterson.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, several years ago, the Legislative Assembly wanted to provide some form of special insurance coverage under the Workers' Compensation Board for those people who were full-time hunters and trappers. It was never intended to provide coverage for those people who only occasionally hunted, but the program would be designed for those who spent most of their working time hunting and trapping "professionally."

Mr. Speaker, copies of various original Hansard debates are now being distributed to all Members. These will show the discussions that took place at that time and the reasons for the coverage.

As a result of those debates, a program was developed in late 1987. The total cost of providing this insurance coverage was paid for by the government through the Department of Renewable Resources.

There were some problems in determining who would be eligible for the program. Normally, the salary of the worker is used to determine the level of coverage that the worker could receive. There is always a maximum level of benefits that can be received, and this is based on the YMIR, yearly maximum insurable remuneration. In 1988 the YMIR level was set at $40,000 and remains the same today.

Early in 1990 the WCB reviewed the program, and many meetings were held on all aspects of the program. The Department of Renewable Resources, among others, was involved in these discussions.

Since there was no such thing as a "salary level" for hunters and trappers, it was necessary to develop some criteria to determine who would be eligible for the program and to determine the level of benefits that a hunter would receive. It was obvious that new guidelines were needed that would be clear and fair to all. The WCB recognized that the guidelines would have to include not only the value of the furs taken but also the value of the country foods that were used to feed the hunter and his or her family members.

Following direction from cabinet, the WCB established policy guidelines in August of 1990 which took these values into account, and it was determined that in order to determine eligibility, the value of the furs harvested would be added to the value of the food used. The minimum level to be eligible for the program was set at $10,000 for a full-time harvester.

When a claim is received, the WCB will seek proof from the hunter or trapper that they meet or exceed the $10,000 level to be eligible for benefits. The benefits will not be based on the $10,000 but at 90 per cent of the YMIR in place at that time, less some reductions, such as income tax and Canada Pension Plan. Today a hunter would receive compensation or pension benefits based on the present YMIR of $40,000.

Information on the new guidelines was distributed across the Territories for the information of all full-time hunters and trappers. The WCB can also provide coverage for those persons who are not eligible for this coverage. Persons who have other sources of employment and pursue hunting and trapping only occasionally can purchase "personal optional protection coverage." At present this coverage costs four dollars per $100 of coverage. To purchase the full coverage of $40,000 would therefore cost $1600 per year.

Mr. Speaker, since we do not have staff in every region, it is difficult for the WCB alone to administer this type of coverage across the Territories. This is why it has been very helpful to have the active involvement of the Department of Renewable Resources in programs such as this.

We are also trying our best to develop policies and procedures that are fair to all, and thus the board continually reviews all of these policies and procedures with affected groups. At present, the WCB is continuing their reviews of the hunters' and trappers' program with the Department of Renewable Resources and other interested parties. Any suggestions from Members of this Assembly will be welcomed.

I do hope that the information session held today has assisted Members to better understand the operation of the Workers' Compensation Board. I would also point out that Members who are approached by constituents for information or assistance are welcome to raise their concerns with myself, my staff, or staff of the WCB itself. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Ministers' statements. I wonder if I could ask that if Ministers have a statement to be made on a given date, if at all possible, that they could try to be here when the Ministers' statements are called. Otherwise the flow of the order of the House is disrupted. Thank you. Item 3, Members' statements. Mr. Antoine.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have concerns about the Mackenzie and Liard Rivers. My constituency is in the middle of the confluence of the Liard River and the Mackenzie River. I was raised along the river and am very concerned about the river. About three years ago there were a lot of fish floating down the river in the middle of summer. There were fish such as suckers, arctic grayling, et cetera. Over the last couple of summers, we have not been able to catch arctic grayling. We call them bluefish. Last summer, I went to all the traditional fishing spots; however, I was not able to catch arctic grayling. We, in my area, are all concerned that something is going wrong with our river.

I spoke about this in December with regard to clear-cutting in British Columbia, and the possibility of environmental damage in that area. Recently, members of the Fort Simpson Dene Band travelled to northern Saskatchewan. They found out that there is an environmental process going on for the development of five more uranium mines. Presently, there are three uranium mines operating there. I am told that the rivers in that part of the country eventually flow into our part of the country. We are concerned that any type of pollution that may be dumped into the river eventually makes its way into the Liard River or the Mackenzie River. I think everybody in the North should be concerned about this, especially the government.

Let it be known that we are concerned about it. I will be asking more questions later on in question period. Mahsi.

Members' statements. Item 4, returns to oral questions. Mr. Patterson.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is a return to a question asked by Mrs. Marie-Jewell on February 19, 1992, on federal grants in lieu of property taxes. As of February 19, 1992, the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs estimated $4,503,517 of federal grants in lieu of property taxes as outstanding to the tax-based municipalities. The 1991 outstanding grants in lieu have been included in the above total. As all interim payments have not been received for 1990-91, the current total outstanding grants will be reduced substantially.

Mr. Speaker, I also have the outstanding grants in lieu of property taxes broken down by municipality. For Fort Simpson, the total outstanding is $324,221; Fort Smith, $451,232; Hay River, $229,282; Inuvik, $934,797; Iqaluit, $969,795; Norman Wells, total outstanding, $100,314; Yellowknife, $1,493,876; for a total outstanding of $4,503,517.

Returns to oral questions. I would like to welcome Mr. Gary Bohnet, President of the Metis Nation, to the Assembly today.

---Applause

Item 5, oral questions. Mr. Gargan.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Finance with regard to a process which was developed back in 1982 with regard to obtaining an egg quota for the Northwest Territories. Right now we have an illegal operation, as you know, in Hay River, in which eggs are being produced and transported down south with no licence or permits of any kind to allow that to happen. I would like to ask the Minister -- I think it is the Minister of Justice, Mr. Speaker, I am not too sure -- but I would like to ask the Minister of Justice if he is aware of this illegal operation that is happening in Hay River, which is allowing the export of eggs from the Territories, and if there is any action that is going to be taken by this government on it.

Who would like to handle this one in the government? The Minister of Finance.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance or the Minister of Economic Development -- I do not believe the Minister of Justice knows about any illegal operations, sir. We realize that there are two egg operations in Hay River, and it has been rumoured that some of those eggs are walking across the line into Alberta, sir, but I could not prove that.

With regard to the quota, we are not making very much progress in that area as well, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am sure that if there are some irregularities, that they would be merely unintentional, Mr. Speaker, because as everybody knows there is a discussion going on right now with regard to GATT, General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, talks. There is talk of eliminating the system that controls egg marketing in Canada, so I would imagine that like Nelson, CEMA, Canadian Egg Marketing Association, would put their telescope to their blind eye in this regard. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If I just could caution Members that right now, to the knowledge of this House, it is hypothetical; so unless this House becomes privy to some definitive facts, then I would caution the Member to be careful about asking a hypothetical question. Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Justice. I would like to ask the Minister whether or not he is aware that there is an egg operation in Hay River, and whether or not he is aware whether or not the operation is according to the laws of the Northwest Territories.

This is to a new Minister; therefore it poses a new question. Mr. Patterson.

Mr. Speaker, yes and no. Thank you.

Mr. Gargan.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister's response is "yes and no". Is it yes or no?

Mr. Patterson. Supplementary answer.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, yes, I am aware of egg operations in Hay River; no, I am not aware of illegal practices concerning those egg operations. Thank you.

Supplementary, Mr. Gargan.

I would like to thank the Minister for his response. Am I correct in saying that the operation that is happening in Hay River now is probably licensed to operate; they received an egg quota that was allocated to them from the Canadian Egg Marketing Board, and they also received export permits to ship eggs south?

That was really two questions. Perhaps the Minister would like to handle the first question and then, perhaps, as his last supplementary Mr. Gargan could pose a second question. Mr. Patterson.

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure who has the responsibility for licensing egg hatcheries, but I do not believe it falls within my responsibility.

There is an open question, the first part of a two-question series. Would the Minister of Economic Development like to handle this one?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, both operations in Hay River fall within the town boundaries of the municipality of Hay River. As far as I know, sir, they are both legally operating. The Northwest Territories does not have a quota with the Canadian Egg Marketing Association, CEMA, and, therefore, neither of those operations, to my knowledge, has quotas from CEMA. I would add, Mr. Speaker, that to my knowledge they do not have export permits. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Oral questions. Supplementary, Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Economic Development, if they do not have an export permit are they, then, selling the eggs only in the Northwest Territories?

Minister of Economic Development, Mr. Pollard.

Mr. Speaker, I know that you can buy those eggs pretty well anywhere in the Western Arctic. I assume they are selling the eggs into the Northwest Territories, Mr. Speaker, but I do not know for sure what their market area is. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

You have used up your supplementary allotment, Mr. Gargan. Oral questions. Mr. Todd.

Mr. Speaker, during the last session the Minister of Public Works reaffirmed his commitment to develop a business incentive policy that allows only northern-owned and operated companies to bid on all government contracts in the Northwest Territories. This commitment was consistent with the Minister's support for a motion passed in this House on April 11, 1990, that directed the Executive Council to draft and implement such a policy. My question to the Minister of Public Works is this: Is the Minister still committed to implementing a policy that will allow only northern-owned and operated companies to bid on Government of the Northwest Territories' contracts?

Minister responsible for the Department of Public Works, Mr. Morin.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am committed to developing a range of policies that will meet the

end of what we tried to achieve in the last Legislative Assembly; that is, to maximize local labour in contracts and help Northerners to develop businesses. I think we can accomplish that with training programs in the communities by increasing the business incentive policy that now exists and making sure that people follow the rules. Thank you.

Oral questions. Supplementary, Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Could the Minister inform the House when we can expect to see the implementation of the policy consistent with the principles of "buy North", and "tender North" only?

Mr. Morin.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. By this session.

Oral questions. Mr. Antoine.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Last December I talked about the concerns of the people who live in Liard along the Liard River just 20 miles from the BC border. My concern is, will there be any meetings that are going to take place between the BC government and the Government of the NWT in regard to environmental problems that are going to be arising from the type of logging that they do in BC, which is clear-cutting? This is probably directed toward the Government Leader.

Madam Government Leader.

Mr. Speaker, a communique has been sent to the appropriate government people in the provinces to ask to be recognized and set up a meeting. We have been rather busy during the session, but we hope to do that.

In terms of the additional issue on uranium development, we have not sent that communication out yet, but that is being constructed now and we will be happy to give a copy to the honourable Member. However, we are committed to meet his request to try to co-ordinate the relationship with the provinces and the NWT when they are proposing or doing major development that will affect the communities and the Mackenzie River and Liard River.

Oral questions. Mr. Todd.

Mr. Speaker, my question is to the current Minister of Finance. On April 11, 1990, a motion was passed by the 11th Legislative Assembly that directed the Executive Council to prepare a policy that would permit only northern companies to bid on government contracts. This motion was moved by the current Minister of Finance, seconded by the current Minister of Public Works. During the last session the Minister of Finance told this House that his department and the Department of Public Works were looking at the policy because it does meet the specifics of this motion. My question to the Minister of Finance is: Is the Minister still committed to implementing a policy consistent with the principles of that motion, that this policy should allow only companies resident in the NWT and who meet the government's business incentive policy to tender on all Government of the NWT contracts?

This question is directed to the Minister of Finance, but I caution Members that any question to the Minister of Finance has to deal with his present capacity as Minister of Finance, not taking into account what he might have done in his past life as an ordinary Member. Minister of Finance.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Morin, in his capacity as the Minister responsible for the business incentive policy, will be bringing to cabinet, tomorrow morning, information in that regard for cabinet perusal, and I will know what is in that document tomorrow.

As far as my commitment ,personally, to that end and to that motion, I still stand behind that motion, sir. Thank you.

Oral questions. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the Minister of DPW. My colleague from the Keewatin had basically asked the Minister of DPW if he still believes in the business incentive policy, recognizing that it will be used to maximize northern preference, train northern people. I would like to ask if the Minister believes this policy should be developed, and will be developed, to ensure that we utilize, as the Government of the NWT, absolute northern preference for tenders that are given and awarded to the territorial contractors. Thank you.

Minister responsible for Public Works, Mr. Morin.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The past business incentive policy was to equalize and bring up to par northern businesses that have to compete with southern businesses. The business incentive policy, as far as I was concerned, was never there for training northern people, and that was the problem with that policy. We have to address the training of northern people in a different way for the simple reason that the percentage was not great enough to make sure that our people were getting trained.

We have been doing capital projects in the Northwest Territories for many years, and still the majority of the people that are working on those projects are coming from the South or from outside the community, and as far as I am concerned that is unacceptable. So we do have a plan, and we will be talking about it in this Legislative Assembly during this session, for how we are going to maximize the training, how we are going to get our people trained, how our people can take care of those jobs, so that money does not go to Quebec, Alberta, Saskatchewan or Newfoundland, or wherever it is going now, and stays in the Northwest Territories.

In the past Legislative Assembly, the people that know me know that I was a strong pusher for that, and I will continue to do that. We have to train our people and we have to ensure that they do have the jobs, and any policy we put in place has to reflect that. I will do that as Minister of DPW. Thank you.

Oral questions. Supplementary, Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Mr. Speaker, in as much as I recognize what the Minister is saying, that he would like to make sure that this policy that encourages northern contractors to train northern people to take advantage of opportunities that are given by the government, and recognizing that the Province of Quebec has an absolute preference policy for only contractors of Quebec, I would like to know whether the Minister is going to ensure that any contracts that are given out to tender for northern people, or any tenders that are being awarded, will use the absolute northern preference, and that the policy will be developed with absolute northern preference only. Thank you.

Mr. Morin.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my understanding that in Quebec it is not an absolute policy to hire Quebec firms only. I will get that information and distribute it to Members. One thing we have to look at is what we are trying to achieve. It is always nice on paper to say "absolute northern contractors only," but will we be able to achieve it, and are we going to use our work force to police that and make sure that everybody does that, only tender in the Northwest Territories? Or should we use the work force we have to develop training programs and make sure our people are working? That is the question we all have to answer. We have only so many PYs, so what are we going to use them for? You know, either do something positive or just be a police force.

Supplementary, Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister is not answering my question. I am asking, with the new policy that is being developed, will the Minister ensure that northern preference, absolute northern preference, will be granted to people who tender on these contracts that are being awarded? Thank you.

Mr. Morin.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If the Member is asking that only northern contractors with residence in the North are allowed to bid, the answer would be no. Thank you.

Oral questions. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Mr. Speaker, can the Minister, then, tell me, if he does not believe that absolute northern preference will be given in the new policy that is being developed for business incentive, then what is the purpose for the business incentive policy to be amended so that we can enhance and encourage, so businesses can take the opportunity to train northern people for these contracts that they are going to be awarded?

Mr. Morin.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The amendments to the business incentive policy I am putting forward to cabinet tomorrow may get through cabinet, or they may not be approved by cabinet. I will be in a better position to answer this tomorrow. Thank you.

Are you taking that as notice, Mr. Morin? Yes, he is. Oral questions. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Point of order, Mr. Speaker. You asked the Minister if he was taking it under notice, and he did not reply into the record. Thank you.

I will repeat the question for the record. Mr. Morin, are you taking the question as notice?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes.

Oral questions. Mr. Dent.

Minister responsible for mine safety, Mr. Patterson.

Mr. Speaker, I am still actively consulting, particularly with organized labour, in order to get this committee established. Those consultations are not quite concluded; but when they are, Mr. Speaker, and I expect that to happen shortly, I will give this House a statement on the results of the process to date, and I expect that very shortly. Thank you.

Oral questions. Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Health. On February 10, I attended a funeral in Fort Providence of an elderly person who died, in Edmonton, because of the surgery that was performed to remove gallstones. The person was 89 years old, and perhaps if there was a concern regarding prolonging his life, then maybe the surgery should not have been done. The point, Mr. Speaker, is that the old man did have that surgery, and as a result of that he hemorrhaged and did not regain consciousness.

I realize that transportation is a concern, but when people of that age are required to travel to Edmonton to have surgery, they should be informed as to whether or not it is in their best interest to have surgery that could have serious complications. I would like to know whether they are advised of that or if they are just told, "You need these gallstones removed, so you have to get them removed."

Minister of Health, Mr. Whitford.

Mr. Gargan, supplementary.

Mr. Speaker, the senior I am referring to is from my community. The concern that I have is that we do not have any qualified translators to convey the situation to the senior. The senior had his nephew, and he does not speak his language perfectly himself, but he accommodated him. I think in a situation like this, where a person loses his life, that we have to look at it seriously and see what it is that we could do to improve the situation. I do not know if he was given the right information or not. I am not questioning the fact of the confidentiality between the doctor and the patient; I am questioning the process that resulted in the loss of life.

I would like to ask the Minister if there is a process used in the communities when a patient is being referred south, or whether it is still a situation between a doctor and the patient, regardless of whether there is a lack of communication.

Mr. Whitford.

You are wasting our time.

Excuse me; this is argumentative. The question has been taken as notice. Oral questions. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to ask the Minister of Health what is the status of the Metis health benefits.

Minister of Health, Mr. Whitford.

Supplementary, Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Mr. Speaker, can the Minister give us some indication as to the time frame within which he anticipates the matter will be concluded and he can give a definite answer as to whether he can address the Metis health benefits, or is the government going to deny the Metis health benefits? Can he give this House a specific time frame that we are going to be looking at?

Mr. Whitford.

Supplementary, Mrs. Marie Jewell.

Mr. Speaker, can the Minister tell me the outstanding issues that still need to be addressed with respect to the Metis health benefits?

Mr. Whitford.

Supplementary, Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Mr. Speaker, is the Minister basically stating that the two specific items that are outstanding to date are the definition of a Metis, and also the cost impact to the government?

Mr. Whitford.

Oral questions. This is your last supplementary, Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Those being the only two outstanding items in respect to addressing the Metis health benefits, when does the Minister feel that he can make some announcement in this House as to when this government will be addressing the long outstanding issue of Metis health benefits, since the government of the Northwest Territories took responsibility for the health program?

Mr. Whitford.

Oral questions. Mr. Pudlat.