Good afternoon. Before I proceed with the orders of the day, I would like to provide the House with my ruling on the point of order raised by the Member for Thebacha, Mrs. Marie-Jewell, on February 22, 1993.

Speaker's Ruling

I have taken some time to provide my ruling on this matter as I feel it is important that this ruling, as with all rulings, are well reviewed as they become precedent on which future rulings are based. Often times rulings are more complex than they originally appear.

I would like to advise the House that the Speaker's responsibility in ruling on a point of order is to base his decision on the facts as presented in the House and recorded in Hansard. The chair should not take into account any influences that may or may not take place inside or outside the House except when hearing debate on a point of order.

I feel it is important that I lay out the events that led up to the point of order. Upon my review, the matter was initiated with the Member for Thebacha's Member's statement on Friday, February 19, 1993, and recorded on pages 1430 to 1432 of the unedited Hansard. The Member's statement was regarding the Housing Corporation Minister's handling of a complaint. As the events unfolded before the House on Monday, February 22, 1993, the Minister responsible for the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation, the Honourable Don Morin, under the item Minister's statements, made a statement in response to the Member for Thebacha's Member's statement. These comments are recorded on pages 1491 to 1492 of the unedited Hansard. I will make comments on the content of these speeches in due course.

On the same day, the Member for Thebacha, Mrs. Marie-Jewell, under the item Member's statements, made a statement on the Minister's statement regarding his handling of the complaint. This is recorded on pages 1495 to 1497 of the unedited Hansard. Later the same day, the Member for Thebacha, during oral questions, raised a point of order which is recorded on page 1507 of the unedited Hansard. The point of order raised by Mrs. Marie-Jewell was that the Member for Tu Nedhe had called her irresponsible. The Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Morin, also raised a point of order that the Member for Thebacha had called him ignorant. Mr. Morin's point of order was resolved, as the Member for Thebacha apologized for using the word "ignorant."

To the point of order raised by Mrs. Marie-Jewell on the use of the word "irresponsible" being unparliamentary, I would like to put it into context and indicate how the word was used by Mr. Morin. I quote from page 1492 of the unedited Hansard, "I welcome constructive criticism from Members of the House, but I will not allow myself to be abused in an irresponsible manner by a Member who, on one hand, expects to be dealt with in a courteous and professional manner but, on the other hand, is not willing to act that way herself." There are a number of parliamentary authorities that I reviewed on this matter. Comments made by both Mr. Morin and Mrs. Marie-Jewell certainly provoked the exchange that occurred. I would like to provide the House with some of the citations that I took into consideration in preparing this ruling.

From Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms, 6th edition, "Citation 481 - It has been sanctioned by usage that a Member, while speaking, must not: impute bad motives or motives different from those acknowledged by a Member; make a personal charge against a Member."

Under the matter of referring to Members in debate, I quote Beauchesne's 484(3), "In the House of Commons a Member will not be permitted by the Speaker to indulge in any reflections on the House itself as a political institution; or to impute to any Member or Members unworthy motives for their actions in a particular case; or to use any profane or indecent language; or to question the acknowledged and undoubted powers of the House in a matter of privilege; or to reflect upon, argue against or in any manner call in question the past acts and proceedings of the House, or to speak in abusive and disrespectful terms of an act of parliament."

I feel these citations could be applied to the matter before us. To put the matter in context, I would like to quote from Mrs. Marie-Jewell's Member's statement contained on pages 1430 to 1432 of the unedited Hansard, and I quote, firstly, "I had faith that the Minister would take the issue seriously and would take responsibility to find an appropriate resolution;" secondly, "I am so disappointed and concerned with the cavalier manner in which he dealt with my constituent's concern;" and thirdly, "I believed that he would take a professional approach and attempt to resolve the matter, however, he did not." I would like to quote the comments of Mr. Morin as contained in his Minister's statement, "She claims that I am not taking my job seriously, I am cavalier, unprofessional, forgetful, unhelpful, lazy, irresponsible and unconscientious."

I find that the comment of Mrs. Marie-Jewell provoked Mr. Morin's Minister's statement and his interpretation of the comments made by Mrs. Marie-Jewell. On the use of unparliamentary language, I would like to offer citation 486(1) of Beauchesne's 6th edition, which is also relevant to the matter under consideration, "It is impossible to lay down specific rules in regard to injurious reflections uttered in debate against particular Members, or to declare before hand what expressions are or are not contrary to order; much depends upon the tone and manner, and intention, of the person speaking; sometimes upon the person to whom the words are addressed, as, whether the person is a public officer, or a private Member not in office, or whether the words are meant to be applied to public conduct or to private character; and sometimes upon the degree of provocation, which the Member speaking had received from the person alluded to; and all these considerations must be attended to at the moment, as they are infinitely various and cannot possibly be foreseen in such a manner that precise rules can be adopted with respect to them."

In making my ruling, I was guided also by the following citation 494, from Beauchesne's, which is an important principle, "It has been formally ruled by Speakers that statements by Members respecting themselves and particularly within their own knowledge must be accepted. It is not unparliamentary temperately to criticize statements made by Members as being contrary to the facts; but no imputation of intentional falsehood is permissible. On rare occasions this may result in the House having to accept two contradictory accounts of the same incident."

Prior to providing my ruling, I would like to convey to the House that it is the right and responsibility of ordinary Members to question the actions of Ministers as they carry out the responsibilities they have been charged with. Mrs. Marie-Jewell was exercising her rights as a Member by making her Member's statement. The Minister, Mr. Morin, was well within his rights to defend his actions in undertaking the most fundamental aspect of government policy, that is how government Ministers respond to the requests of MLAs. However, both Members must use language appropriate to this House when doing so. As indicated earlier, it is impossible to lay down any specific rules in regard to injurious reflections uttered in debate against particular Members or to declare before hand what expressions are or are not contrary to order.

Much depends on the tone and manner and, more importantly, the intention of the person speaking and, sometimes, upon the person to whom the words are addressed. I feel that Members' responses are sometimes influenced by the degree of perceived provocation in other Members' comments. It is not unparliamentary to criticize statements made by Members as being contrary to the facts, but no imputation of intentional falsehoods are permissible. As outlined in citation 494, "on rare occasions, this may result in the House having to accept two contradictory accounts of the same incident." I feel that this may be the case in the exchanges between Mrs. Marie-Jewell and Mr. Morin. I would caution Members that the process both Members used were within parliamentary procedure, but the tone and words used by both Members caused the matter to escalate to a point unacceptable to this House.

To the point of order on the use of the word "irresponsible" by the Minister, Mr. Morin. Even though the Minister did not directly refer to the Member as irresponsible, he referred to the "irresponsible manner" of the Member. The words "irresponsible Member" were ruled unparliamentary on May 8, 1969 in the House of Commons. Taking into consideration the authorities I have reviewed, I rule that the use of the word "irresponsible" by Mr. Morin in this incident is unparliamentary and will request the honourable Member to withdraw that word. Mrs. Marie-Jewell has apologized for her use of an unparliamentary word. Mrs. Marie-Jewell has apologized to the Speaker and, at the appropriate time today, I will table the letter to the Speaker from Mrs. Marie-Jewell. I feel it would be appropriate if the Minister also apologized.

I would hope that all Members will take my words to heart and conduct themselves in a constructive manner that is in the best interests of the people of the Northwest Territories. With this ruling, this matter is now closed. The House can return to its business and the chair will not entertain further comments on this matter. Mr. Morin.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to withdraw the words "irresponsible Member." Mr. Speaker, in my statement on Monday, February 22, 1993, I in no way intended to insult this House by suggesting that one of its Members was irresponsible regarding their general duties in this House. If it was taken otherwise, Mr. Speaker, I apologize. I will continue to work closely with Members of this House to resolve the many outstanding and serious challenges facing the north. I hope we can all rise above personal conflicts to meet these challenges. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause

Thank you. The matter is now concluded. Orders of the day. Item 2, Ministers' statements. Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Later today I will table the review of Workers' Compensation in the Northwest Territories. The review was prepared by Mr. Garnet Garven, former chairperson and chief executive officer of the Saskatchewan Workers' Compensation Board and presently a research fellow at the National Centre for Management, Research and Development at the Western Business School, University of Western Ontario. The review was initiated by the former Minister responsible for the Workers' Compensation Board, the Honourable Dennis Patterson, on the recommendation of the Standing Committee on Agencies, Boards and Commissions. In their interim report under workers' compensation, the committee recommended "that the Minister responsible for the Workers' Compensation Board prepare a legislative action paper outlining proposed areas for amending the Workers' Compensation Act..."

Mr. Speaker, this review is not meant to serve as a legislative action paper. The time lines and scope of this review did not allow for the development of such a paper in the short two months that Mr. Garven was given to complete his work. Rather, it is intended to serve as a blueprint, identifying the broad policy considerations to be included in the legislative action paper. It is my intention to develop and present this paper to the Legislative Assembly prior to the end of this current sitting.

Although the primary focus of this review has been the interim and final reports of the Standing Committee on Agencies, Boards and Commissions, the chief commissioner also reviewed previous reports on the Workers' Compensation Board of the Northwest Territories. Meetings were also held with employer and labour organizations, past and current directors of the board, management and staff of the board and the Association of Workers' Compensation Boards of Canada. I will stress, Mr. Speaker, that this consultation process was not meant to be exhaustive. It is important that the amendments to this very important legislation be done in consultation with all stakeholder groups. These groups will have other opportunities to provide their views on the amendments to the Workers' Compensation Act during the review of the legislative action paper and the review of the proposed new bill. Thank you.

---Applause

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Between June and October, 1991, the Keewatin region experienced a devastating disease outbreak caused by E. coli 0157. This epidemic will go down in history as the largest incidence of gastro-enteritis caused by E. coli in the world. Mr. Speaker, a total of 521 cases were recorded, six settlements were affected, Arviat, Baker Lake, Rankin Inlet, Whale Cove, Chesterfield Inlet and Sanikiluaq.

Tragically, two little children died as a result of the disease, Mr. Speaker. Many more suffered painful symptoms and a disruption of community living that lasted through the entire summer. It was a dreadful experience, Mr. Speaker, one that reminded many Keewatin Inuit of the devastation our people have suffered through disease epidemics in the past. Now that the critical period has passed, it is vitally important that we learn everything we can about how these terrible things happen. We will never be able to bring back those two little children and we will never be able to replace those painful summer months but, hopefully, a careful review of the causes of the outbreak and the response of the health system will help us deal with similar threats which may face us in the future.

I am very pleased, Mr. Speaker, that the Keewatin regional health board has completed a major report which documents scientific findings related to E. coli outbreaks. As well, this report contains 20 recommendations which, in my view, must be implemented without delay. As you will note, Mr. Speaker, the report also singles out Obed Anoee, a community health representative in Arviat, for special praise. Noting that, "His hard work, good humour and willingness to be proactive was critical in helping to control the spread of the epidemic." I believe Mr. Anoee and all the staff of the Keewatin regional health board deserve special recognition for the work they did during those difficult times.

Excuse me, Mr. Arvaluk, your allotted time has elapsed. Mr. Arvaluk.

Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to continue.

The honourable Member is seeking unanimous consent. Are there any nays? There are no nays. Please proceed, Mr. Arvaluk.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I will be tabling this important report later today. Tomorrow I will be asking the Minister of Health for a status report on the recommendations that have been made. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Item 3, Members' statements. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe your ruling today will create an environment where this entire incident can be drawn to a conclusion.

Hear, hear.

I thank you very much for your ruling. However, Mr. Speaker, I want to take a few moments to apologize to my constituents who have been without public representation in this House for the past two days. Mr. Speaker, the circumstances that caused me to be absent certainly have been, indeed, regrettable. I believe, Mr. Speaker, one of the reasons the people of Thebacha have sent me here is they know I have strong principles and will not allow myself to be placed in situations where those principles are compromised. I would like to thank them very much for their support over the past two days. I certainly hope they accept my apology for not representing them in this House. Thank you.

---Applause

Thank you, Mrs. Marie-Jewell. Item 3, Members' statements. Mr. Koe.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to speak about an agreement which was made between the Government of the Northwest Territories and an aboriginal group. A memorandum of agreement was signed on November 7, 1991, between the Department of Economic Development and Tourism and the Gwich'in Tribal Council. The two groups agreed to establish a territorial park at Campbell Lake just a few kilometres south-east of Inuvik.

Mr. Speaker, the planning and management of the park at Campbell Lake, originally named Gwich'in Territorial Park, offers some valuable opportunities for local employment and training. I believe this local involvement should begin immediately and should include making some budget allocation decisions for the upcoming fiscal year in both this government and the Gwich'in Tribal Council.

The memorandum of agreement between the two groups states, "The council shall be involved in the production of a park management plan." The agreement further states, "The council shall be responsible for developing and operating the park under contract to the Government of the Northwest Territories." This agreement specifically mentions the development of outdoor recreational activities, outdoor orientation and interpretive programs and a plan for the protection of the natural environment of the park. The Gwich'in Tribal Council is ready to begin this important work immediately. The council has invested in state-of-the-art satellite imagery of the Inuvik and Campbell Hills areas. The council is also acquiring computer equipment and the expertise to make use of other geographic data, including aerial photography, as a need for park planning, promotion and management. The Gwich'in Geographics, the geographic information system company, and the Gwich'in council are establishing and cost-effectively managing all of the GIS needs...

Mr. Koe, your allotted time has elapsed.

Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.

The honourable Member is seeking unanimous consent. Are there any nays? There are no nays. Please proceed, Mr. Koe.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker, and my colleagues. In meetings with the Department of Economic Development and Tourism, the council was informed that the government will allocate about $75,000 to the Gwich'in Territorial Park for the upcoming fiscal year. Among the planned work tasks are many which can best be performed by the new company, Gwich'in Geographics. However, Mr. Speaker, Economic Development and Tourism representatives stated that this work will be done by government employees from Yellowknife. This approach minimizes the opportunities for local people to directly benefit from this work. Furthermore, I do not believe this approach makes fiscal sense. On the contrary, we believe that awarding the geographic information systems work to Gwich'in Geographics will result in significant cost savings to this government.

In light of the above, the council believes that local involvement in park management must include decision-making power regarding next year's budget. We believe this level of involvement is in keeping with the intent of the memorandum of agreement. Mr. Speaker, I fully support the tribal council's initiatives, especially their attempts to create economic opportunities and jobs for their people. I also support this government's initiative to make these types of opportunities available and give the government support to do the things they wish to do. However, I believe this government should live and abide within the spirit, intent and the environment in which the agreement was signed. It seems that when agreements are made between senior departmental staff and other groups, the intent, the understanding or agreement is not communicated to the working staff, those officers in the department and especially the regional staff.

Thus when a group is trying to get the work done, they continually get caught up in bureaucratic red tape. Mr. Speaker, this has to stop. Mahsi.

I do not want to single out Mr. Koe on this next observation, because other Members have actually been doing it also, but it seems the trend of late is that a majority of Members' statements are going beyond the two and a half minutes. Even though that is allowed in the rules, by asking for unanimous consent, ultimately it begs the question that, if no one follows the rule, why do we have the rule? I would ask Members if they could try to consider that the rule does state two and a half minutes. Item 3, Members' statements. Mr. Lewis.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will obey your command. I will keep my comments to two and a half minutes or less. About a year and a half ago, I made a presentation to a national commission on peace and security. In my presentation to Iona Campinola and her colleagues, I pointed out there were not many people in the Northwest Territories who could remember the second world war. That is a vivid demonstration of how important it was to have some defence force.

Everywhere in this world, national governments assume the responsibility for defence. I also pointed out to the commission, Mr. Speaker, that in a rapidly changing world, we should be looking not only in our own narrow interest to defend our own country, but to keep the world a secure place. I am happy to see our own government now seems to be moving even further in the direction of ascertaining that. One of the things we do well in, and have a reputation throughout the world, is peace keeping, and as demonstrated last to early this week, when there was a presentation on the clean up of the DEW Line, the military is also playing a role in helping us preserve our environment, because that also is threatened and very much relates to the need to have peace and security. Mr. Speaker, I know there are some people who worry about the action of the military, but I believe they are on the right track in looking at our world role and the role of preserving the environment. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Lewis. Item 3, Members' statements. Mr. Whitford.