Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Todd, for allowing me to speak. I just want to make a couple of comments with regard to some of the statements that were made by Mrs. Marie-Jewell.
I want to say that I support the position that she stated earlier about the idea of rationalizing Arctic College and its programs. I think there is a need to decide, not only the programs that you are considering offering, but the direction you want to take Arctic College and whether or not you are going to consider rationalizing the campuses or whether or not you are going to offer programs in the regions, and what those programs are going to be.
I want to say that despite the fact that I may have argued previously for more decentralized programs, I still believe that those decentralized programs have to be based on the capacity of our government to pay for those particular programs.
The other point I wanted to raise is that we have to have the capacity to deliver quality programs to our college students. If the idea of decentralizing programs causes a reduction in the quality of programs that we offer, then I do not think it is in our interest, and I do not think it is in the interest of the students.
There have been a number of concerns previously expressed, and I would ask our government, in particular the implementation review group, to consider what they intend to do with adult education. I do not think that we have been totally successful in the delivery of those adult programs, and I think that we should reassess where they should be delivered from. I know that the Arctic College, the board, and all those involved in that particular structure have had to deal with significant problems, not only in terms of the delivery mechanism, but financing of the programs as well. In that context we have to be certain that if we are going to run those programs and offer adult programs, they should be funded appropriately. I do not know if, under the present financial circumstances, we can afford to do that. The question I have is, if we do it, then how do we deliver those programs properly?
The other point I wanted to raise is with the health services and the facilities. I do think that before we embark on major restructuring or major downsizing, or consider downsizing of regional hospitals, we should determine whether it is really in the interest of the regions that downsizing occurs. In the long run, if you do not offer proper quality service in the regions, you are still going to have to pay for those services to be delivered. Whether or not you bring people to Yellowknife or whether or not you take them to southern institutions, you are still going to have to pay that cost. You could be taking away services that could be better offered at the regions. I just ask you to consider that.
Continuing Arguments For Better Medical Services
I also want you to be aware that the nursing stations, in many cases, are the first point of contact for medical services, and I still think that we should consider how we are going to offer services in those communities and whether or not there is a need to improve them. I know in some cases there have been continuous arguments for better medical services. I recall the arguments that were made by Mr. Kakfwi, for instance, concerning the need for a doctor in his particular region, and the former government responded to that because there was a need in that particular region. I would hope that if there was a requirement in other small areas or regions, that same thing would occur, obviously recognizing the cost of delivering that service. I would not want to impress upon our government that there is a need, but I do not want the rationalization or restructuring in any way to diminish those services.
On the matter of the motion that we just passed, there were a couple of points that I wanted to make, and I will make them now. I supported the motion, but I still do not think that is the only way in which the Government Leader can receive the loyalty of her colleagues in cabinet or those who are participating. We are going a long way, in many respects, to articulate and to define the powers of the Leader. I still do think that the most important authority that one receives is the mandate that they receive from the people. If you are talking about mandates, there is none other more important than the ability of people to give government, the Leader included, a mandate to implement certain policies. At the moment it is still in the hands of 24 Members, 24 people in the Northwest Territories, to determine the mandate in the direction of government. I think that we have to rethink that particular issue and we have to look seriously at how we continue to evolve so that the people themselves give to our government a certain mandate.
I just wanted you to be aware of the concern that I have, and I think the Government Leader knows now the feelings of people on this side. We may have some personal differences at times, but she knows that we understand and are concerned about how she can retain and maintain a certain amount of authority. We were all concerned about that, but I think that we cannot stop just at this motion. It has to go beyond this, and hopefully over the next four years we can discuss those kinds of options and those kinds of considerations. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.