Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Oral questions. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Education. I have been advised that the Department of Education or the school, particularly in Fort Smith, P.W. Kaeser High School, is developing a progressive discipline policy which will allow the school to arbitrarily dismiss children from the school system. I am concerned about the development of that policy, and I would like to ask the Minister if he would be able to provide that particular policy, which is in its draft format currently, to this House.

Minister of Education, Mr. Allooloo.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will ask

my department to see if they could obtain the draft policy from the local education authority or the divisional board from South Slave. Thank you.

Oral questions. Mr. Antoine.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister responsible for Economic Development and Tourism. Mr. Speaker, I am still interested in that Japan trip. Yesterday the Minister responsible stated that the Japanese approached Mr. Mulroney and Mr. Patterson, and I could see now why there is a strong Inuit art influence there if that was the case. But you also indicated, Mr. Minister, that there was a strategy to market products in your department. You sat down with your department, and Japan showed an interest in Inuit art, so you tried to supply that demand. I would like to ask the Minister if the department has a strategy or a policy of some sort regarding Japan's interest in the Northwest Territories. Is there a policy that is in place within your department in dealing with Japan? Thank you.

Minister of Economic Development and Tourism, Mr. Pollard.

Mr. Speaker, there is no policy, but there has been considerable interest expressed by Japanese people in the Northwest Territories, particularly in coming here and going out on the lake and looking at the aurora borealis. We have assisted companies to go to Japan and further promote their hospitality here in Yellowknife, so that those Japanese people can come here, but there is no formal policy with regard to how to promote in the Japanese markets. I think what happens is that there is an interest expressed, and you try and fulfill the need that the Japanese are expressing to us. If some other country comes forward with some other interest, then obviously we will pursue that, as well.

I might also add, Mr. Speaker, that if I said the Japanese approached Mr. Mulroney and Mr. Patterson, then I was incorrect. The Prime Minister and Mr. Patterson were there, and there was an exhibit of Inuit art put on by Amway, so I would apologize for misleading the House in that regard. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The time for question period has expired. Item 6, written questions. Written questions.

Item 7, returns to written questions. Returns to written questions. Item 8, replies to Opening Address.

Item 9, petitions. Item 10, reports of standing and special committees. Mr. Lewis.

Committee Report 7-12(2), Report Of Special Committee On Constitutional Reform

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to report on behalf of the special committee on constitutional reform. Specifically, Mr. Kakfwi is the chairman of that committee but is now in Ottawa. The special committee on constitutional reform is pleased to present this interim report to inform the public as well as all Members of this Assembly about the activities the committee has undertaken over the past four months. The process of constitutional change is a constant challenge, and events that occur in other parts of Canada affect us in many ways. Your committee has endeavoured to participate where needed and to keep abreast of the everchanging events. We would like to report on our activities to date and indicate some of the conclusions we have reached and to comment on the future activities of the special committee.

Report On Activities To Date

Presentation To Special Joint Parliamentary Committee On A Renewed Canada

The NWT committee made a presentation to the Joint Parliamentary Committee, Dobbie-Beaudoin committee, on January 23, 1992. The presentation was delivered by our committee chairperson, Stephen Kakfwi, with all other committee members in attendance. The presentation included a preliminary set of responses to the 28 federal proposals contained in the federal government's document entitled "Shaping Canada's Future Together." Reaction to the presentation from the Dobbie-Beaudoin committee was positive.

Constitutional Conferences On A Renewed Canada

Five conferences were held between January 17th and February 16th, with members of the special committee attending all conferences with the exception of the Montreal conference on the economy. Staff members of the special committee attended all conferences.

A sixth conference on aboriginal issues is scheduled for March 13 to 15 in Ottawa. Only one delegate from each of the provinces and territories has been invited. The recent constitutional conference process which concluded in Vancouver on February 16th was a major success from Ottawa's perspective:

a) The conferences were represented by the media and the conference organizers as revealing a wide degree of tolerance and latitude to solve Quebec's demands;

b) the conferences were interpreted by some as giving the federal government a mandate to deal with Quebec's demands;

c) they were interpreted as allowing special/different treatment of Quebec in the Constitution in such areas as division of powers, application of the Charter, and perhaps a veto over constitutional amendments in some areas for Quebec alone.

Process

1) After the failure of the Meech Lake Accord, Premier Bourassa refused to negotiate with other provinces on constitutional issues. Although he has had some informal discussions with other premiers, he continues to hold the position that he will only deal directly with Ottawa on a constitutional reform package.

2) In 1991 the Quebec government passed Bill 150 following the recommendations of the Belanger-Campeau Commission on Quebec's Future. This act established two committees of the National Assembly, one to examine the impacts of sovereignty for Quebec, the other to examine "binding offers" from Canada for constitutional reform. The act requires a referendum in Quebec on sovereignty in June or October, 1992. October is the generally accepted time frame.

3) While Ottawa has insisted that they will not follow any process dictated by one province, they have so far followed Quebec's timetable and process very closely: The federal proposals were tabled in September 1991: the Joint Parliamentary Committee, Dobbie-Beaudoin committee, examining these proposals was required to report by February 28, 1992. Its final report was released on March 1st; the constitutional conference process was designed, originally, to follow the timetable of the Dobbie-Beaudoin committee. Under pressure, a conference on aboriginal issues was added for March 13 to 15, 1992; the federal government intends to release revised proposals by April 15, 1992; Quebec will develop, between May and August, a question, or questions, for its referendum. A federal package was required in April so that Mr. Bourassa would have sufficient time to develop the Quebec position and amend Bill 150 if such amendments were considered necessary for whatever strategy Quebec/Ottawa are following. A Quebec Liberal party congress will be held in the spring or early summer to consider a revised federal package.

4) Officials from the other nine provinces have not been closely involved in determining this timetable. All provinces have expressed serious concern with Ottawa setting itself up as a broker/mediator between Quebec and other provinces. Provinces are particularly concerned about Ottawa constructing a new package for April, based only on brief consultations with nine provinces.

5) A number of provinces, including Ontario and British Columbia, are putting pressure on Ottawa to define the process it intends to follow after the release of the Dobbie-Beaudoin report. The Prime Minister has called a meeting of federal, provincial, territorial and aboriginal representatives for March 12th in Ottawa. The Hon. Stephen Kakfwi and Mr. Ernie Bernhardt will attend this meeting on behalf of this Assembly's special committee on constitutional reform.

6) The federal proposals tried to avoid constitutional amendments that would require unanimous consent. They want to avoid the Meech Lake situation where one province could stop the amendments. Most of the federal package would require the so-called "seven and 50" formula.

7) It is not yet clear how the negotiation of the constitutional amendments will proceed. There is some speculation that there will not be a single package, but rather several packages with related matters in them. For example, a core package might contain distinct society clauses, inherent aboriginal self-government, division of powers and a process for Senate reform. A second package might include the social charter and economic union proposals, and so on.

8) The aboriginal parallel process has not yet completed its work. There is no clear process for integrating aboriginal demands into a final package.

Substance

1) The 28 federal proposals for constitutional reform released in September, 1991 were very general in nature. Only the "distinct society clause" to be inserted in the Charter and two "economic union" clauses were in draft legal language. Therefore, it was very difficult to determine the substantive effects of the proposals. The wording and placement of clauses in the Constitution will have significant implications.

2) The five constitutional conferences recently held to review the 28 federal proposals did not deal with the important subtleties involved in drafting complex new constitutional arrangements. The conferences mainly created a mood of more tolerance and helped to give the Dobbie-Beaudoin committee some preview of the potential reactions to their report if they were to make wide-ranging recommendations to deal with Quebec.

3) Premier Bourassa encouraged the Dobbie-Beaudoin committee to supply "fine print" in its recommendations. The Dobbie-Beaudoin committee provided the draft legal text for many of its recommendations. The report is 130 pages long and contains over 40 recommendations. A summary of the recommendations is attached in Appendix C.

4) The process used to draft the text of constitutional amendments is crucial to the provinces. Provinces are unlikely to support a package they did not help draft. Numerous officials meetings and some ministerial meetings are likely before the federal government will risk a First Ministers' Conference.

5) Positions being taken by provinces on substantive issues at this point are intended to ensure that the agenda is not reduced unilaterally by Ottawa, to establish opening negotiation positions and to remind Ottawa that provinces must very soon be included in designing the post-February 28th process if their votes in the amending formula are to be counted on. Substantive positions will obviously be dependent on the final agenda of issues and the complex political and economic implications of radical changes to federal institutions, division of powers, and so on. This process and package is far more complicated than the Meech Lake Accord.

Conclusions

1) Activity on the national constitutional front will accelerate in the next few weeks and months as a result of the tabling of the Dobbie-Beaudoin report on February 28th, so the GNWT must develop clear positions on both process and substance issues. Process issues will be very important in the next few weeks and might overshadow substance for the moment.

2) The pressures to succeed in the current constitutional round will be tremendous, and there are likely to be few opportunities for the GNWT to significantly shape the agenda. However, consistent and clear articulation on the GNWT positions on certain critical issues can build on significant public and provincial support developed during the Meech Lake process, particularly on matters of participation in negotiations and the amending formula.

3) There appears to be a willingness by Ottawa and the provinces to include the GNWT in all levels of intergovernmental discussions in the coming weeks. Building further creditability in this round will contribute to the longrange status of the Territories in intergovernmental affairs.

4) An issue of direct importance to the constitutional development of the Territories, namely the amending formula for the creation of new provinces, will likely put the GNWT in direct opposition to Quebec's demand. Quebec's Minister Remillard stated, in a speech at Whistler on February 24th, the following on Quebec's demand for a veto over the creation of new provinces: "'As for the matters dealt with in s.42 of the Constitution Act, 1982, (central institutions, the Senate and creation of provinces), Quebec, as one of the major partners in the federation, is entitled to demand that it have a say in any amendment concerning these matters since they are at the very heart of the federal compromises of 1867."

5) Aboriginal self-government is a central issue in this round; however, there is still an outstanding national conference on these issues scheduled for March 13 to 15, and the completion of the aboriginal parallel process that will have to be considered before aboriginal positions become clear. Minister Remillard, in his speech of February 24, has stated the Quebec position that aboriginal self-government cannot threaten the "territorial integrity' of Quebec. Self-government should not be a justiciable right in Quebec's view. In Quebec it would have to be worked out in negotiated agreements approved by Quebec.

The special committee on constitutional reform will continue to report as developments warrant. In addition, Members of the committee have expressed an interest in reviewing the committee's terms of reference, particularly in relation to obtaining public input as the current round of national constitutional talks progresses. Recommendations in relation to its terms of reference will be contained in a future report to this Assembly.

Motion To Adopt Committee Report 7-12(2), Carried

Mr. Speaker, that concludes our interim report. Therefore, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Deh Cho, that the interim report on the activities of the special committee on constitutional reform be received and approved. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Your motion is in order. All those in favour? Opposed, if any? The motion is carried.

--- Carried

We will take a short break.

--- SHORT RECESS

The House will come back to order. Before we move on to the next order of business I would like to, on behalf of all Members, welcome Mr. John Parker, the former Commissioner of the Northwest Territories.

--- Applause

Item 11, reports of committees on the review of bills. Mr. Arngna'naaq.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wish to report to the Assembly that the standing committee on legislation has reviewed Bill 15 and wishes to report that Bill 15 is now ready for committee of the whole. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Pollard.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 66(5) and have Bill 15, An Act to Amend the Official Languages Act, placed on the orders for committee of the whole today as the first order of business.

The honourable Member is seeking unanimous consent. Are there any nays? There are no nays. Pursuant to Rule 66(3), Bill 15 is ordered into committee of the whole for today. Item 12, tabling of documents. Mr. Dent.

Thank you. Tabling of documents. Mr. Ningark.

Mr. Speaker. I wish to table Tabled Document 27-12(2), Canada Forest Accord. Thank you.

Tabling of documents. Item 13, notices of motions. Mr. Koe.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Monday, March 16th, I will move the following motion: I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Aivilik that when the House adjourns on March 12, 1992, it shall stand adjourned until March 24, 1992. At the appropriate time I will seek unanimous consent to proceed with this motion today. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Dent.