Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, in April of this year, the Minister of Safety and Public Services introduced Bill 5, the Mine Health and Safety Act, and after second reading it was referred to the Standing Committee on Legislation for public review.

As Members are aware, the development of this bill has been a controversial issue for some time now. The need for new and effective mine safety legislation that puts the health and safety of mine workers first has long been recognized by all parties.

Between August 29th and September 10, 1994, the committee held public hearings in Yellowknife on several bills, including Bill 5. The committee received presentations on the proposed Mine Health and Safety Act from local representatives of the St. John Ambulance of Canada, the Northwest Territories Chamber of Mines, Nanisivik, Cominco, the Dene Nation, and organized labour representatives from the Northwest Territories Federation of Labour, the Canadian Auto Workers, the United Steelworkers of America and the Northwest Territories Area Council of Steelworkers. In addition to hearing presentations from witnesses, the committee took advantage of the opportunity to tour two mine sites, Royal Oak in Yellowknife and Echo Bay's Lupin Mine, to become more familiar with mining operations on surface and underground.

During the public hearings, there were several issues raised by the witnesses concerning various aspects of the proposed bill. These issues dealt with the statutory responsibilities of owners to communicate with the chief inspector rather than the Minister, the authority of the chief inspector to rule on appeals under the act, the absence of health and safety provisions for staking and other preliminary exploration activities, the right to refuse unsafe work and the establishment of a Mine Occupational Health and Safety Legislation Committee to conduct periodic legislative reviews.

In addition, it was suggested that the process for developing this important legislation include input from labour, management and government in an interactive setting with all parties present. The committee felt, based on the issues raised, that such a process was warranted, and recommended on September 10th that the Minister of Safety and Public Services consider "convening the Mine Occupational Health and Safety Board" established under section 39(1) of the current Mining Safety Act "for the purpose of reviewing Bill 5 in conjunction with the public transcripts of the standing committee's review."

On October 6, 1994, the committee was pleased to receive a report of the board's findings from the Minister, which outlined the issues addressed and proposed several amendments to the bill which were consistent with suggestions made by witnesses during the public review. In effect, there were four main areas of contention that the board examined, three of which have resulted in amendments to the bill.

The bill before you was amended upon recommendation of the Mine Occupational Health and Safety Board and the Standing Committee on Legislation to provide mine owners with direct contact with the Minister, in addition to the chief inspector, in matters respecting notifications and submissions required under the act.

Bill 5 formerly contained a "right to refuse" unsafe work which stated that the employee shall refuse such work. It was pointed out by labour representatives that such a statutory duty to refuse rendered it no longer a right, but made it an obligation. Both the board and the standing committee agreed with this view and the bill has been amended to say that an employee may refuse unsafe work.

On the issue of appeals to the chief inspector where the chief inspector would be required to fulfil administrative, technical and judicial roles, particularly with respect to appeals of orders of his own office or incidents of alleged discrimination, the board felt that establishing other avenues of appeal and adjudication would prove cumbersome. Instead, it was recommended, and the committee agreed, that an internal procedure be developed for appeals and instituted as policy.

During the public hearings it was brought to the committee's attention that Bill 5 only provided for the establishment of a Mine Occupational Health and Safety Legislation Committee by the Minister "from time to time." Labour representatives felt strongly that continued participation and education involving labour, management and government is essential to ensure effective mine health and safety legislation and, therefore, the establishment of this committee should be mandatory, not discretionary. The board agreed with this assessment and recommended further than the bill be amended to reflect the need for the Mine Occupational Health and Safety Legislation Committee to review the legislation within one year after proclamation and every 18 months to two years thereafter. Bill 5 was amended accordingly.

At this point, I would like to point out, on behalf of the Standing Committee on Legislation, that our review of the proposed Mine Health and Safety Act has proved to be a learning experience. It is very rewarding to see all parties come together in the spirit of cooperation to reach a common goal -- ensuring the health and safety of our citizens engaged in the mining industry.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the people who appeared before the committee in the interests of improving the mine safety legislation. I would also like to acknowledge the outstanding efforts and dedication of the Minister of Safety and Public Services and his staff. Their cooperation and speedy attention to the numerous requests of the standing committee during the public review process contributed greatly to the timely completion of this report and, ultimately, to the development of a Mine Health and Safety Act our people can live with.

I am pleased to inform you that the committee supports Bill 5 as the successful result of the hard work, careful deliberations and unwavering commitment of all parties. Therefore, on Wednesday, October 19, 1994, the Standing Committee on Legislation passed a motion that Bill 5 was ready for consideration in committee of the whole as amended and reprinted.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes the standing committee's report on Bill 5, the proposed Mine Health and Safety Act.

Yes, Mr. Chairman. If they're not here, we can begin immediately.

I guess I'll start on my far left with Mark Aitken and Dave Turner. On my right, Mr. John Quirke, deputy minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really am delighted that we're finally at the stage where this bill can be presented in the Assembly for passage. I would just like to reflect a bit on the tortured history that has gotten us to the point we are at today. I believe it extends to the previous Assembly and the previous government and previous Ministers.

I just want to reflect that, to my knowledge, we are at the stage we're at today as a result of a lot of hard work on the part of at least four Ministers who were previously involved; Mr. Whitford, myself, Mr. Todd and Mr. Nerysoo. We should recognize that we've come a long way to get here today.

I just want to recall a few of the hiccoughs that have occurred. Maybe "hiccup" is too mild a word to describe some of the gyrations we had to go through to get to where we're at today. But Members of this Assembly will recall a great consternation over the constitution of the mine review committee, the composition of that committee. Those were difficult times that resulted in lots of problems. Then the Royal Oak strike intervened and really stopped the work, stopped progress on the bill because of the gravity of that situation.

Then Mr. Todd became Minister and boldly tried to change the composition of the committee, and met with some mixed success. In fact, I think the committee derailed, once again, despite his good efforts.

Recently, to Mr. Nerysoo's credit, the committee has been revived again, there's new blood. And we've achieved miraculous agreement from the various interests to recommend this bill. I think that, without knowing a lot about the details of this bill, the fact that there has been consensus reached satisfies me that we have a good piece of legislation.

I just want to say, Mr. Chairman, that not only the Ministers deserve credit. I know that Mr. Quirke has worked extremely hard on this and has suffered, as we have seen progress stopped, blocked, even stepped backward. So I would like to mention his dedication to getting us to where we're at today.

Another unsung person who I think should be acknowledged is Mr. Terry Vaughan-Thomas. Mr. Vaughan-Thomas came out of retirement in British Columbia. I think initially he thought he would have a short task. I know, because the arrangements were initiated when I was Minister that Mr. Vaughan-Thomas agreed to work at a very modest cost and in very modest circumstances, and I think that he deserves some recognition today for having had the necessary personal qualities to bring management and labour together, seek compromise and, most importantly, keep going with this piece of legislation.

So, Mr. Chairman, I would just like to reflect that the committee has managed to rise like a phoenix over and over. Finally, we have a bill that we can approve in this House. I think it's noteworthy today as we start to go through this clause by clause, that we reflect on what a long road it's been to get here.

So, I congratulate all concerned; the people who gave their time to sit on the committee and slog through the detailed clause by clause considerations, fight out the issues and come to the compromise that has resulted in the present bill. I want to congratulate everybody and say that this is a major achievement, and I think we now have a modern piece of legislation. I look forward to the clause by clause consideration of Bill 5.

Thank you. I just wanted to say a few brief words. I offer my congratulations to the Minister, to the deputy and to the chief mining inspector on one side and to Mr. Gargan and the committee on the other side. This actually went back even before the last four Ministers; there were

probably six Ministers who were involved, one way or another, with this process.

It is not just a matter of politics. One of the sad realities is that there has been, in the nature of the relationship between the mine management and labour, historic separation in the way each side views the industry and views each other. Probably the only element that management and labour truly have in common is that both of them blame government for all their ills.

A good Minister of mine safety, one who has truly done their job, will be equally criticized by both sides. That is probably the best you could ever expect. Mr. Nerysoo picked up the ball and, a lot of people have worked on this over the years. It was a very difficult thing to do. It was over ten years ago, the last time there was a meeting of minds. I think people have to recognize that the reality is the mining industry is a tough industry. The mine management side and the ownership side really have to work very, very hard to raise the capital they need to run profitable mines.

The mine workers, on the other hand, work very, very hard and they are very proud of the work they do and are very independent in their thinking. It is the natural progression that there are going to be some differences between the two. The government has to act as the referee, and sometimes does a good job, and other times not quite as good a job. At the end of the day, though, we have a responsibility to make sure there is proper legislation so that mine workers can work in a safe environment. I think Mr. Nerysoo brought together the last element, putting together a group who could actually put together this package that is before us.

So, I think now that the dust has settled on the battles of the last decade, it is time for all of us to congratulate everybody, in government, in unions, representatives of non-union workers, and the mining industry. At the end of the day, they have come together for mutual benefit and in mutual interest, to put forward this compromised bill.

I'm sure nobody is 100 per cent happy with the bill. That's the nature of doing business in Canada in the 1990s. I, for one, will be quite happy to support this bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

---Applause

Yes, it's Friday, Mr. Chairman and I know Members want to get on with it, but I've been with the Legislation committee for three years and I know that when the committee asked the Minister to go back for one more last chance, to make this an even better bill than what it was, and to overcome the objections, it was very difficult. When you have worked with something for so long, you get so tired and so bogged down, it is hard to get enthusiastic to go back over the same ground.

I think it's a tribute to the Minister and the staff that they recognized there was still something that could be done. I know I saw a lot of wry faces, kind of pinched faces, when they realized this was not yet over. The people who worked on this bill to bring it to this stage have to be congratulated for going back once more and doing the job we have all been asked to do. Thank you.

---Applause

Agreed.

---Agreed

Clause By Clause

Agreed.

---Agreed

Agreed.

---Agreed

Agreed.

---Agreed

Agreed.

---Agreed

Agreed.

---Agreed