Point of privilege, Mr. Kakfwi.

Mr. Kakfwi, under our rules it says "filed with us one hour before", he is well within the time limit. Proceed, please, Mr. Kakfwi.

Thank you, Mr. Kakfwi. First reading of bills. Item 17, second reading of bills. Item 18, consideration in committee of the whole of bills and other matters. Tabled Document 9-12(2), Strength at Two Levels; Tabled Document 10-12(2), Reshaping Northern Government; Tabled Document 62-12(2), Report on Northwest Territories Operations at Expo '92 as at May 31, 1992; Tabled Document 66-12(2), Working Toward a Common Future, Commission for Constitutional Development; Tabled Document 70-12(2), The Justice House, Report of the Special Advisor on Gender Equality; Motion 6, Discussion on Sobriety Clause in Contribution Agreement; committee report 10-12(2), Special Committee on Constitutional Reform Report on the Multilateral Conferences on the Constitution; Committee Report 17-12(2), Report on the Review of the 1992-93 Main Estimates; Committee Report 18-12(2), Multilateral Meetings on the Constitution and First Ministers'- Aboriginal Leaders' Conferences on the Constitution; Bill 9, An Act to Amend the Insurance Act; Bill 31, An Act to Amend the

Student Financial Assistance Act; Bill 32, An Act to Amend the Young Offenders Act, No. 2; Bill 33, Appropriation Act No. 2, 1992-93; Minister's Statement 82-12(2), Update on the National Constitutional Reform Negotiations, with Mr. Pudluk in the Chair.

Now this committee will come to order. Yesterday we were dealing with Committee Report 18-12(2), Committee Report 10-12(2) and also Minister's Statement 82-12(2). We were still on general comments yesterday. What does this committee wish to do this morning? Mr. Nerysoo.

Mr. Chairman, we would like to continue with the discussions that we were having yesterday.

Does this committee agree? Mr. Pollard.

Yes, we concur with that, Mr. Chairman. I would just like some clarification, if there will be any motions adopted, if Mr. Nerysoo could clarify that matter for us, please.

Thank you. Mr. Nerysoo.

Mr. Chairman, we are a long ways away from the motions, we are still on general comments, and we will deal with that when we get to it.

Thank you. Yes, we will deal with general comments at this time, and later on, if the committee wants to make a motion that is fine. Right now, we are on general comments. There were still two members who wanted to speak to general comments on my list. Mr. Kakfwi.

General Comments On Committee Reports 18-12(2) and 10-12(2), and Minister's Statement 82-12(2)

Thank you, Mr. Kakfwi. I apologize, I did not check the unedited transcript when we came into committee of the whole. Yes you were right, you had the floor yesterday when 7:00 p.m. arrived. General comments. Mr. Koe, you had the floor, I had your name since last night.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to make a few comments on the issues that were raised yesterday, as it relates to what I perceive as my role as an individual, and my role as a Northwest Territories M.L.A., in terms of the Canadian Constitution and the amendments that are being proposed.

Many of my colleagues, and many people across Canada and the north are concerned about the document that is being proposed relating to the information that is in it, and particularly the information that is not in it.

Members have mentioned and talked about the lack of details in the legal text of the agreement.

However, I feel that what has been negotiated, and what has been proposed, in terms of amendments to the Constitution, gives us, as a government and the aboriginal people, the right to negotiate and continue negotiations. It opens a door for us to continue negotiations on an equal footing as provincial and federal governments. I know how important that is, because I have been involved quite a while in negotiating a land claim, working with other native organizations in trying to achieve land claims settlements, and know how big a challenge it is to just achieve a status to sit at the table and discuss issues.

The one that I am particularly pleased with, and was very involved with, was the Gwich'in land claim. One of the chapters in that claim, was the framework, or the right to self-government. I know it is not complete, but what that gave the Gwich'in people was a right to negotiate over a period of time all the issues and concerns related to self-government.

I feel, and compare what is in the constitutional document, that it is very similar to that. It gives us a right, over time, to negotiate all the technical details and the issues that people have raised and I guess the challenge then for us, and all people across Canada, is to put their best negotiators forward, their best foot forward, and work out those details.

I was just in Inuvik on the weekend, and mentioned this at a constituency meeting and talked to people on the street. I have asked people what they thought of the referendum that is coming up, and a big concern obviously, is a lack of information.

We, around this table, and many of the leaders that were here yesterday, are quite privileged in that we have advisors, we have researchers, lawyers, all kinds of opinion papers that are readily available to us to explain and clear a lot of the issues that are in the referendum document. The people who are on the streets, the grass roots people in the communities, do not have that privilege, they do not have the availability of people like we do. They just cannot pick up the phone, and call a researcher, or call a lawyer, to get clearer information as to what all these big and fancy words and fancy accords mean. I think it is incumbent on all of us, everyone involved in this process, and that is all of us, to try to get as much information and clarity out to the communities, out to the grass roots people.

Also, I was very concerned when meeting with some of my constituents in Inuvik, as to who do I represent when I am talking about voting, the national referendum, our Canadian Constitution, because not everyone, as I mentioned earlier in Inuvik agrees that this is a good document. Not everyone may vote "yes", and not everyone may vote "no". I, in sitting in this Assembly, and I am supposed to be the conscience of, and speak for, the people of my constituency. In this instance, I am going to make it clear that I speak for myself, personally, and feel very uncomfortable in speaking for the masses, or all the people in Inuvik on this issue.

On October 26, there is going to be a vote, and each individual across Canada is going to get to express their opinion and hopefully exercise their democratic right by voting. That in turn is their expression on how they feel on the document.

I urge everyone in the north, and in Canada, to get out and vote, and express their opinion on the referendum. Regardless of what happens, regardless of the outcome of that vote, we here around this table, in this Assembly, and people in the Northwest Territories still have many challenges. We have to get our own house in order, in terms of types of government that we wish to have and we have to work very hard in assisting our communities, our tribal councils and whatever forum that people wish to achieve for our own self-government mechanisms.

Those are some of the comments that I wish to make, thank you for the time and opportunity.

Thank you. Further general comments? Mr. Pudlat.

(Translation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also have some comments to make in regard to yesterday's discussions. I was not able to comment on my appreciation on the things that were discussed yesterday.

I also want to thank Nellie Cournoyea, and the aboriginal politicians that were here. I would like to thank them for their work, and we would like to see more rights given to northerners.

In regard to the referendum on October 26, I am very thankful for your hard work and I am glad to see a document in regards to the Constitution. It is hard to say whether there will be a "yes" vote, but I am very happy that I am able to bring out my comments today.

Some of the people that live in the communities that I represent do not understand what this referendum is. When I talk to them about the Constitution, a lot of the people that I represent do not understand what is being done. In regards to this referendum, I think, the people in the communities should be more informed, and I will have to approach them and make it more clear to them as to what will be happening. I understand that a lot of the people that I represent do not understand what the Constitution is all about.

I will be encouraging them to go and vote, also I would just like to say that the voting days are very close, and I think there should be a large turn out during those days. Also, during the referendum, I am encouraging our people to work together and encourage other people to go and vote. I hope that people will understand what they are voting for.

Yesterday, Silas Arngna'naaq asked a question, and there was a response given to him that I heard. Of what I understand, there is a lot of work being done in the communities, but in regards to the referendum the voting days have to be announced to the communities.

The election will be at the end of October, because of this on October 26, there will be an election, or a referendum throughout Canada. I think that the communities are being informed. There are people working in the communities, and they are telling the people the dates that will be open for voting.

I think everybody would like to go, and go further, to encourage people to vote, but working with the M.L.A.s, I have been informed very well as to what is expected of me, but as we know, we hardly had any power as aboriginals, and now our rights will be recognized in this Constitution. We will have more power as native people, because we have come a long way. There are other things that will be going on, other than the referendum, so we are going to have to make sure that our people can tell from these different things going on.

We have come a long way, and we will continue to go towards our future. These are the comments that I have today. Although I did not get an opportunity to voice my concerns yesterday. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Madam Premier. Mr. Koe.

Point Of Order

Point of order, I do not see a quorum.

Yes, we do not have a quorum. Mr. Clerk. Thank you, now we have a quorum. Madam Premier.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, I would like to say that I guess in this constitutional round, which was called a Canada round, many of us were privileged to represent our constituency of the Northwest Territories.

I know that it has not been all that easy, and the small gains that have been made, or some of the gains that have been made, have come with a great deal of energy and determination. Our changing society and its demands for relevancy, economic and social change, is a challenge to all of us. A great deal of concern has been expressed, that we are spending important priority time on the Constitution, when other issues of economic and social well being of our constituents are not being address adequately.

We are all well aware that there is a great deal of change taking place in the global society, not only here in Canada, but within our own territory. The pressure of change is affecting how Canada is able to maintain itself. This broader global adjustment is affecting Canada and our jurisdiction.

It is important for all of us, to be as clear as we can be, so we may proceed together. In the Constitution, the Constitution is a framework which society judges its actions. At a time this country seems to be going in so many directions, it is imperative not to take lightly the importance of this constitutional document. It is important that we do not point fingers, but also look at the positive points.

The decisions that are made in the next month will determine our future, and will be setting the framework where our children will grow up. It is time for all of us to do our best thinking. People have to decide what is the right thing to do. We can all agree, the package is not perfect, but really, whatever really is?

Mr. Chairman, if we put all the competing and balancing interests together, this is how the residents of Canada should make their decisions in looking at those two main points. It is not to say what is in it for me, but what is in it for all of us, and what is in it for the future generations.

We all know that the package has to stand the test of time, and we have a question on when it does not, how do we change it. These were all struggles we went through, every one of us who was involved in these constitutional discussions. I would like to say thank you to Sam Gargan, Ernie Bernhardt, Dennis Patterson, Brian Lewis, and Stephen Kakfwi, who spent a great deal of time weighing a lot of the proposals that were put forward. As well, I would like to take the opportunity to say that we did not do it alone, that in these discussions, certainly all the people who were involved, and I think other people were involved in land claims discussions. There is a multitude of legal people who are representing other governments, and the federal government, and I would like to say thank you to the people who are the main people, and who supported this constitutional process. Mr. Bob Overvold, Bernie Funston, Geoff Bickert, Christina Scattolin, George Braden, Liz Snider, and our political staff, Graeme Garson and Lynda Sorensen.

Most of all, I think these discussions we are having here are very important because we can weigh, as Mr. Koe says, the thoughts of what comes from the various constituencies. I look forward to the time that we can deal with the broader issues of economic concern, and I believe that certainly with the deliberations, some of our political leaders, the aboriginal leaders, were commendable. Certainly, I would say to all of you, I was proud to be sitting next to them, particularly at the pressure points when we felt that we were getting nowhere. They stood it, and they were patient, and they very seldom had a point where they did not maintain their cool, and that was very difficult.

So, Mr. Chairman, I would like to say to all those people, thank you for taking part. I hope that with this debate, we are able to examine the questions, and answer clearly, so that the constituencies outside of this room understand where we are going. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Are there any further general comments? Mr. Nerysoo.

Mr. Chairman, if I might begin comment, I think that I have to say that I am somewhat disappointed despite all the accolades that have been given to some of the responses. In fact, there have been some Members, and some Cabinet Members who have been critical of the fact that if we ask questions, we are nit-picking, and that the intention is to create a situation where people do not support the accord.

I want to state quite clearly right now that personally, Richard Nerysoo, I have no problem supporting the accord. What is important for the people here, and the leaders to understand, is that if we are going to sell this deal to the communities, details are important. They are the basis by which we can convince people in the communities to support the accord.

I do not like being told by anyone that by asking questions that somehow that infers that I am opposed to the accord. Now, people do not like that idea. Maybe it is an issue that people do not like answering detailed questions, but I will give you a good example. On the matter of aboriginal self-government, there is no doubt in my mind, and should not be in the minds of any of the Members here, that I support this particular issue. The simple fact is that since 1975, when I became the youngest Vice-President in the history of the Dene Nation, at 20 years old, I have supported aboriginal self-government. Now, I want to get that on record, and make it clear to people that, that is the case.

There are other issues in the agreement that concern me. For the first time this morning, I think Mr. Kakfwi, on the whole matter of the Senate answered the issue, and the ongoing process that had not been dealt with. I have no problem with the response given, but those are the kinds of answers the people in the communities are going to be asking those of us who are going to be supporting the agreement, and if we do not get the responses from those who are directly involved, knowing the details, then how is it that we, as Members, can go to our constituencies, and sell the deal? That is the issue that I was trying to raise yesterday. By raising it, it seems that people get a bit defensive about the fact that, for the first time, they themselves are going to have to answer the details, and that all of us are going to have to answer the details. I think that we have an opportunity, of course, to sell this issue based solely on the item of aboriginal self-government. That is unfair, because it is a greater package than that. It affects more people than just aboriginal people. It affects our future in terms of constitutional development as a province, other territories, and we have to convince people in Nunavut that their interests are not going to be given away in terms of representation either in the Senate, or the House of Commons, if we support the deal.

If we support it without those issues being dealt with, then I think we are wrong. We are wrong in trying to suggest that the deal is in our interest because we do not know that. I wanted to make those particular comments because yesterday I was getting disappointed that some of the answers that were being given, more so at some of the comments that were almost being directed at those who were supposedly raising concerns and questions.

Now, I said yesterday, that there were a great deal of questions that we wanted to ask, but on the matter, for instance, of aboriginal self-government, for those that do not like reading detail, I already have a copy of a legal opinion that was prepared for the Assembly of First Nations, that satisfies my concern about Treaty Six and Treaty Seven.

Now, that is what I am talking about when I say, let us get into some of the details. If the government says we have documentation on the legal interpretations of opinions that will be more helpful to Members, then we will provide it. I have not heard that yet, and for me to sell the deal and not know the details completely, I think we have to be, somehow crazy in our own views, to suggest, or even come to the conclusion, that people are not going to pay attention, because I think they will. In the end I think they will.

One of the problems that I can point out to my colleagues, those that want support for this particular document, all you have to do is watch the National, read the newspapers and one of the most important issues that has been absent from the "yes" campaign is detail.

Everyone who is saying "no", has analyzed the document and put on paper those issues that they do not agree with. You have to fight back with information. That is all I wanted to say to my colleagues again, because unless we answer these questions, you are sending us out to support a document that, right now, detailed information does not exist.

I think that Mr. Arngna'naaq, yesterday, said that he wants to see some of the legal text. Well, maybe some of the drafts could be made available, but that is not even available to us. We are not on the special committee, despite the fact that the special committee represents us. I do not want to be seen and placed in a position where I am speaking against my special committee. I want to be out there supporting the efforts of that special committee.

Mr. Chairman, I want to conclude by saying that I will be asking Mr. Kakfwi to review one of the recommendations that he has made, upon request of ordinary Members. I hope that we can resolve, what I think might be the first recommendation. One of the concerns that we do have with the recommendation is the idea of endorsement, and whether or not that extends the fact that we are pre-judging what might be the decision of the public, or whether or not it should be indicated that we support the document, but allowing the people to actually endorse those issues by a vote.

Now that issue, hopefully, will be resolved with Mr. Kakfwi as the Chair of the special committee. I also want to say that I support the comments that have been made by Mr. Koe. I think his remarks are extremely accurate. I think we still have to rely on the ability of our constituents to make their own judgements. If we are to convince them to support the document, then it has to be based on our ability to inform the people, and right now, that is not, in fact, happening.

We are generalizing on issues, and we are not giving them details, or at least, laying to rest their fears about the documentation and the agreement that has been reached. We have not done that yet. I am just asking my colleagues if you are going to promote the documentation, then the details and the issues and the answers on detail are going to be requested up here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.