I am not sure I understand the question. How did I receive notification that they cancelled the meeting in Saskatoon?

(Microphone turned off)

Mr. Chairman, the Official Languages Commissioner said she was travelling back and presumably she didn't receive any messages until she was on the ground or settled into the hotel in Edmonton. At what point in time was the cancellation made or did you actually miss your appointment?

I wasn't notified until the Friday, which was November 12, that the meeting was cancelled for the following Monday. I called the university on Friday to ask them about the arrangements for the meeting and that is when I was told that it was cancelled.

Then you did receive a letter on November 15 confirming that?

I didn't receive a letter until after I came back to Yellowknife. So I didn't receive a letter on November 15, no.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before I begin, I would like to move we extend hours to conclude this item.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I guess I have to say I am participating in this session this afternoon with somewhat of a heavy heart. I think the great expectations and hopes we had and put together this whole regime of aboriginal languages and a Official Languages Commissioner, are somehow not working out. I am not quite sure why. But I sense a real frustration on many counts. I know there has been good cooperation in some respects which I am pleased with. It is also obvious that some departments of government are not being cooperative with the Official Languages Commissioner and her office. It doesn't take much understanding to note a sense of frustration on the part of some MLAs. I suspect that this is also difficult for the Official Languages Commissioner herself.

Mr. Chairman, I think we all very much want this to work. Maybe we should be patient because it is new and we are breaking new ground. I think the time we have taken on these issues is a demonstration for our support for official languages and our great interest in finding out what is going on. But I think we have some problems that have to be dealt with. I would have hoped, for example, that the Official Languages Commissioner would be able to meet regularly with the Premier, not with one of her staff and would perhaps be better respected by some departments. I am not sure why that is not happening.

I also have an alarming feeling, and I know I have been satisfied from Ms. Harnum that legalistic approaches are to be avoided at all costs -- I have heard her say that when I have asked questions initially -- but it seems to be coming up all the time that the lawyers are taking over. Legal opinions are going to be relied on to determine issues. Frankly, I think this is a very human issue, it very much involves people who work in a small government and a small legislature. I really would have hoped that problems that arose could be solved by people with goodwill and open communication, rather than making lawyers rich no matter how good they are. One thing that has alarmed me about the tone of this discussion is that it has been very legalistic. I guess I'm not one to talk, I mean I've been part of that profession and I don't mean to condemn my own kind, but I don't think this is the place for legal analysis. I think language and culture is a very human, emotional, passionate, spiritual issue. I hate to see the lawyers getting more involved than is necessary.

Mr. Chairman, we obviously have another serious problem with the method of accountability and the method of reporting on the part of the Languages Commissioner. This is something that she has obviously addressed in her report. This format of committee of the whole, however effective it is for some things, is clearly not the way to do it. It's an awful, painful, formal process and clearly we've go to do something about that. I think there's been some thought given to that.

I think that part of what we're wanting to do is what every senior officer of the territorial government should welcome and I'm sure this includes the Languages Commissioner, is kind of a performance review. Now I know she doesn't work -- the office is independent and she doesn't work for an employer in that sense -- but I think that there should be some method of saying you're on track on this and you're not on track on this. Every manager and every senior functionary welcomes a chance to get constructive criticism. This forum isn't working. It's too formal and maybe there's an attitude of defensiveness. I think it's not the kind of place where we can expect someone to say, "I made an error in judgement, I've learned and it won't happen again." It hasn't happened here and I don't think it's going to happen. It may be the forum that has resulted in a tense atmosphere. We want an atmosphere of constructive criticism and openness on all accounts.

My concluding comments, Mr. Chairman, are that -- and I'm not going to invite a response as these are just comments -- what we certainly need to first of all do is tackle the reporting relationship that we all agree needs to be addressed and probably was overlooked by those of us who participated in drafting the bill. It has clearly taken on an importance of its own in light of all the questions that have arisen. I want to say that I'm just a little bit disappointed that we're not talking about the fundamental questions of the future of aboriginal languages in the Northwest Territories; we've been sidetracked from that discussion by and large. That has to be fixed up. Once we deal with the reporting relationship, and maybe I shouldn't be calling it a reporting relationship as it implies a lack of independence, but the relationship between the Languages Commissioner and the legislature. Once we've tackled that issue, then perhaps we can move forward and continue the real issues we all care about. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I agree with Mr. Patterson, my colleague, that any new initiative requires some planning, some very, very hard work, dedication, and also talking with different people, especially those who have been there before and who know the area. I think that's what the Languages Commissioner has done according to the information she provided to the Members of this committee.

Mr. Chairman, as I mentioned earlier, I think the languages issue is the responsibility of each and every Member of this House. It's first for those with a native descent. We have not, in the past, really utilized the language that we speak. I'm one of those people who should have used the language more, especially when the program is televised throughout the territories when young people are watching. Elders are watching. Elders are the proponents of the usage of the native language which is very important to all the people. When we put the Languages Commissioner in the position where she's not doing enough for the language, I think we of all people should be the ones to practice it, try to promote it and retain it for the benefit of our own people.

Mr. Chairman, we've hired the Languages Commissioner for a number of years now. Although it may not be the choice of each and every Member of the legislature, I think we have to live with it. If we are not satisfied, give her time maybe and then perhaps the third time she appears before the committee, we'll have more concrete facts. If we are not satisfied, then we can try to do something about it. I'm sure that each and every Member of the House committee has many things they want to talk to her about, but I'm sure the legislature is not the only forum we can talk to her about our concern. If each individual Member wants to talk to her then I'm sure she would be more than happy to comply. I have taken the time to really talk to her. I know where she works, I know the phone number. I'll have time to talk to her about my concerns and concerns of the people that I serve. I think the report she compiled, given the time frame that she had to put it together, is quite remarkable, Mr. Chairman. I wish that she could do more for the people. Like Mr. Gargan and other Members, I would like to see the languages survive.

As a legislature, the highest form of government in the system, if we do not try to help the people that we serve and the Languages Commissioner to try to ensure the languages survive in the next few years then we're really going to have problems. In my own area, a Nunavut organization is working very, very hard in this area. I know the Inuit Cultural Institute is working equally hard and I know each and every community education council is putting information together, they have materials in your community. That's not enough, however I think it's also the responsibility of the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment and also the responsibility of each and every Member of this House. I am hopeful that next time we have the Languages Commissioner up here before the committee that at least she'll be able to satisfy some of the Members who have some concerns. Like Mr. Patterson suggested, this is pretty new ground. Give her time to try to put it together and by the next meeting we have with the Languages Commissioner, we'll know if, in fact, the Languages Commissioner has done what she was hired to do. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. There were a couple of remarks made and I want to conclude by making a statement about the presentations that have been made. The Commissioner indicated to us that a lot of the information that had been requested by Members of this Assembly was confidential. I read the legislation but I do want to read one thing about this particular forum here because I think many of us don't realize the extent of the power of this committee, or for that matter, committees of the House.

While I agree, and have read the legislation on confidentiality, I want to say that in Erskine and May, it indicates to us that, "A witness is bound to answer all questions which the committee sees fit to put him, and cannot excuse himself, for example: on the grounds that he may thereby subject himself to a civil action; or because he has taken an oath not to disclose the matter about which he is required to testify; or because the matter was a privileged communication to him; or where a solicitor is called upon to disclose the secrets of his client; or on the grounds that he is advised by counsel that he can not do so without incurring the risk of incriminating himself; or exposing himself to a civil suit; or that it would prejudice him as defendant in litigation which is pending, some of which would be sufficient grounds to excuse him in a court of law. Nor can a witness refuse to produce any documents in his possession on the grounds that, though in his possession, they are under the control of a client who has given him instructions not to disclose them without his express authority."

That, in my view, gives this House very significant authority, in spite of the law and the section that the Commissioner has been reading. I think she should have her legal advisors, if they're giving her advice, review that section and ensure that in future, when there are appearances before this committee, the appropriate information that is requested is, in fact, provided to Members of this House. The Assembly has very significant power and I would just caution Members when confidentiality is used, that it be used carefully. I would suggest, as well, that this power I've read be used carefully. But, I just wanted to point it out.

I tried to check to see if there was any other Member who wanted to make comments of a general nature and I didn't see a hand go up, Mr. Chairman. I would like to respond to the whole issue of process, especially to Mr. Patterson's comments about the forum, when much of the work that we need to do could be best done.

In the interest of progress, Mr. Chairman, I would like to withdraw the motion. I believe we are close to concluding this item.

---Withdrawn