Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The standing committee on agencies, boards and commissions spent some time considering the structure and function of the appeals tribunal established under part 1.1 of the Workers' Compensation Act. The standing committee recognized that the tribunal came into being on April 11, 1990, and in many ways is still establishing its niche within the workers' compensation infrastructure.
Because of that, a comprehensive evaluation of the process used by the appeals tribunal would have been somewhat premature. Members of the standing committee did note, however, that the number of appeals reaching the appeals tribunal during its first two years of operation has not been overwhelming. This may be due to a backlog at the review committee stage of the appeals process and the tribunal chairperson indicated during the public hearings that he would anticipate a larger number of appeals in the upcoming year. Should the number of appeals dealt with by the tribunal remain at its current level, the board and the Minister may wish to evaluate whether the current size and structure of the tribunal is necessary.
Although the standing committee on agencies, boards and commissions does not intend to recommend changes in the structure of the tribunal at the present time, Members did want to point out that some intriguing alternatives to the present format were raised during the public hearings. The Union of Northern Workers, for instance, recommended that the current composition of the appeals tribunal be revised to consist of one board member, one person chosen by the appellant and mutually agreeable chairperson. This format was suggested as an alternative to the existing structure of a standing appeals tribunal.
Further, the standing committee received a recommendation from the NWT Council for Disabled Persons that a more independent appeals process should be developed. Similarly, the injured, disabled and discarded workers group recommended consideration of a process through which an additional appeal could be made to cabinet, and referenced Alberta legislation as an example.
The standing committee considered the notion of an independent review process. Members felt that the current legislative action paper on access to government under review by the standing committee on legislation, may provide a potential for further discussion of this issue, in as much as it proposes the establishment of an ombudsman or access to government commissioner for the people of the Northwest Territories. Questions may be raised during future discussions about whether the final stage of appeal should lie with an ombudsman, or with cabinet upon the recommendation of an ombudsman, or within the existing infrastructure provided by the Workers' Compensation Act. At the present time, however, it is beyond the standing committee's current process to bring forward a recommendation.
That concludes my presentation, Mr. Chairman.