This is page numbers 977 - 1013 of the Hansard for the 12th Assembly, 7th Session. The original version can be accessed on the Legislative Assembly's website or by contacting the Legislative Assembly Library. The word of the day was chairman.

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

Mahsi, Mr. Morin. (Translation) Does anybody else want to speak to the motion? Mr. Zoe.

Henry Zoe

Henry Zoe North Slave

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. (Translation) I would like to say in my language that I don't agree with the way the motion is written.

When we met in Norman Wells, we spoke about this issue and about the people in the Northwest Territories, where only two languages were recognized: English and French. When we talked about it then, we want all our official languages from the Northwest Territories recognized; it is now recognized in the way we want it recognized.

Since there are a lot of cutbacks in the money that we get from the federal government, there are programs that are being cut. It is because of these cutbacks that the programs are cut.

I don't really agree with what's happening here. We're supposed to use any official languages that we have here. We have the right to use our language. But when I think about this, the way it is written, I don't agree with it, so when we vote on this motion, I will not support this motion.

Also, since the government has had all these cutbacks, how can we improve these programs for the people? That is what we are looking at right now. I don't agree with the way the motion is written, so when it comes to a vote on this motion, I will not support it. Thank you.

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

(Translation) Does anybody else want to speak to the motion? Mr. Patterson, would you like to conclude speaking to the motion?

Dennis Patterson Iqaluit

I am glad that Mr. Antoine and some other Members understood the thrust of my motion, which is that we should look at official languages programs in consultation with the organizations that care about them. We are not the only people who care about aboriginal and official languages in the territories. There are a lot of organizations which are involved, which are concerned. We should look at them all, and we should recognize that we have to start setting priorities because we don't have as much money as we used to have before.

That's what the motion is about, Mr. Speaker. It's not about official languages services in this Assembly. It's not about saying official languages should not be used in our Assembly. What it does say is we should have a thorough review of all official languages programs and we should not exempt the official languages programs that are used in this Assembly. Everything should be on the table. I think the official languages groups in the Northwest Territories would want to have input into all the programs and maybe, Mr. Speaker, just maybe, they can tell us ways in which we can make the services provided in this Assembly more accessible to people in the Northwest Territories and more effective in communicating what this government does. Maybe there are ways that the service even here can be improved.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind Members that I've been hammering away for a week, with support from other Members, about the legal interpreting program because I felt that it was unfair that cuts were made in this program in secret, by Ministers, without being accountable to the organizations and institutions served, without being accountable in this Legislature and without being accountable to the official languages organizations in the Northwest Territories. I don't think that's the way we should set our priorities, by having Ministers cherry pick, make cuts and make arbitrary decisions that we may or may not find out about at all in this Assembly.

The Premier said there was a review under way. All the motion does is recommend that this Assembly endorse the review and that it should cover all official languages programs. I do not like to see the debate characterized as being a debate about whether or not we provide simultaneous interpretation in this Assembly. The motion is about whether we review the programs, in light of the drastic cuts imposed on us by the federal government and whether we're prepared to participate and to allow the public to participate in setting priorities, in light of these dramatic funding cutbacks.

That's what the motion is about, Mr. Chairman, and I think we should look everywhere, including our own backyard. That's the simple thrust of this motion. If we don't support the motion and agree to a review, then we're surrendering authority to a few Ministers to make arbitrary cuts without looking at the total picture, and without accountability to the people who are interested in and concerned about these programs.

I think that would be retrogressive. I think Members have been frustrated, as I have, about trying to find out what's going on, wondering why cuts are made in advance of the review being completed, or wondering why cuts are being made in advance of a consultant's study that was supposed to decide how a program should be reorganized. Let's get it out in the open, let's involve the organizations that are concerned, that I know have good ideas, let's involve Members of this Assembly, and support the review that the Premier said she's already undergoing anyway. It's not a controversial motion. It's to support a review that's already under way. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

Thank you, Mr. Patterson. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion is carried.

---Carried

Item 17, first reading of bills. Item 18, second reading of bills.

Item 19, consideration in committee of the whole of bills and other matters: Bill 1, Appropriation Act, No. 2, 1995-96; Bill 13, An Act to Amend the Fair Practices Act; Bill 16, An Act to Amend the Retirement Plan Beneficiaries Act; Bill 22, Forgiveness of Debts Act, 1994-95; Bill 23, Write-off of Debts Act, 1994-95; Bill 24, Community Employees' Benefits Act; Bill 26, An Act to Amend the Jury Act; Bill 27, An Act to Amend the Land Titles Act; Committee Report 2-12(7), Report on the Legislative Action Paper on the Office of Ombudsman for the Northwest Territories; Committee Report 3-12(7), Report on the Review of the Legislative Action Paper Proposing New Heritage Legislation for the Northwest Territories; Committee Report 4-12(7), Report on the Review of the 1995-96 Main Estimates; Committee Report 5-12(7), Report on the Review of Rewriting the Liquor Laws of the Northwest Territories: A Legislative Action Paper; Committee Report 6-12(7), Report on the Review of the Legislative Discussion Paper on the Draft of the New Education Act; and, Committee Report 7-12(7), Report on the Second Annual Report, 1993-94, of the Languages Commissioner of the NWT, with Mr. Lewis in the chair.

Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 995

The Chair Brian Lewis

I would like to call the committee to order. Yesterday, we completed item 12 of Bill 1, Executive offices. Mr. Dent, what is the wish of the committee?

Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 995

Charles Dent

Charles Dent Yellowknife Frame Lake

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to recommend that we continue consideration of Bill 1 and Committee Report 4-12(7), specifically to consider the budgets of the Financial Management Board Secretariat, Finance and Public Works and Services.

Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 995

The Chair Brian Lewis

Do Members agree with that order of business?

Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 995

Some Hon. Members

Agreed.

---Agreed

Bill 1: Appropriation Act, No. 2, 1995-96Committee Report 4-12(7): Report On The Review Of The 1995-96 Main Estimates
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 995

Some Hon. Members

Financial Management Board Secretariat

Bill 1: Appropriation Act, No. 2, 1995-96Committee Report 4-12(7): Report On The Review Of The 1995-96 Main Estimates
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 995

The Chair Brian Lewis

There is no dissent. With that proposal in mind, then, we'll go on to FMBS. It's Mr. Pollard's responsibility and is on page 02-25 of your books. Mr. Pollard, do you have any opening remarks?

Minister's Introductory Remarks

Bill 1: Appropriation Act, No. 2, 1995-96Committee Report 4-12(7): Report On The Review Of The 1995-96 Main Estimates
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 995

John Pollard Hay River

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the Financial Management Board Secretariat provides support and services to the Financial Management Board and to departments. The secretariat has been together in its current form for 21 months now, and its responsibilities include:

- internal audit and evaluation;

- comptrollership;

- human resource management;

- information management; and,

- operational and capital planning.

Mr. Chairman, the secretariat's 1995-96 budget requests a total of $41.197 million and 211.2 person years. This is a four per cent dollar reduction from the 1994-95 main estimates and a two per cent person year reduction.

The largest part of this reduction, Mr. Chairman, we anticipate to achieve through negotiated or awarded reductions in employee benefits. There have already been savings realized in the collective agreement signed with the NWT Teachers' Association last year, and other savings will result from the extension of similar changes to benefits for excluded and management employees announced last fall. Mr. Chairman, the negotiations with the Union of Northern Workers have proceeded to arbitration. We cannot be definitive with respect to the impact of the new agreement that will result through the arbitration process.

Mr. Chairman, there is some limited forced growth in the 1995-96 budget proposal for the secretariat. Additional funding is being requested to:

- deal proactively with the escalating number of arbitrations;

- handle growing numbers of special investigations;

- improve our ability to address new requirements in financial reporting; and,

- undertake some needed training in investigative techniques.

As we proceed through the budget, I can provide further explanation for these requirements. Mr. Chairman, that concludes my opening remarks and I would be pleased to try to respond to questions from the committee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Bill 1: Appropriation Act, No. 2, 1995-96Committee Report 4-12(7): Report On The Review Of The 1995-96 Main Estimates
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 995

The Chair Brian Lewis

Thank you very much, Mr. Pollard. Chairman of the Standing Committee on Finance, Mr. Antoine.

Bill 1: Appropriation Act, No. 2, 1995-96Committee Report 4-12(7): Report On The Review Of The 1995-96 Main Estimates
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 995

Jim Antoine Nahendeh

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Standing Committee On Finance Comments

Bill 1: Appropriation Act, No. 2, 1995-96Committee Report 4-12(7): Report On The Review Of The 1995-96 Main Estimates
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 995

Jim Antoine Nahendeh

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Setting Priorities

As part of the 1994-95 O and M review, the committee raised a concern regarding the large number of initiatives proposed by the Financial Management Board Secretariat and its ability to effectively carry out all of those objectives. In reviewing this year's estimates, it is apparent that the FMBS needed to more clearly define priorities.

For example, one year ago, the secretariat was very forceful in its presentation regarding the need for a strong program evaluation unit within the government. Developing an evaluation capacity was highlighted as a priority. The committee agreed that this type of evaluation would ensure an effective use of the limited funds available for government programs and accepted the person years and other funding allocated to this area. However, in this year's budget, the secretariat is reducing the funding committed to evaluation and indicated very slow progress in this area.

The committee is disappointed at this reduction. A thorough evaluation of departmental programs would very likely result in savings and efficiencies far greater than the cost of an adequately-funded evaluation unit. Committee Members strongly suggest that the government reconsider this decision.

Another area identified as being of high priority was the new informatics strategy. This strategy would provide government-wide standards for data processing, storage, and management. However, despite a costly study which consumed a great deal of government staff time, the informatics strategy seems to have lost its initial emphasis. Departments are seeing little or no benefit or improvement from the initial efforts made by FMBS in this area.

While the FMBS tries to carry out a wide range of priorities, it is difficult to see which are more important. As a result, crucial areas, such as collective bargaining, have not received the focused attention from the organization that it should have. Instead, people have been tied up dealing with the many small issues.

Committee Members also urge the secretariat to reduce the number of planned initiatives, and to concentrate on a few priorities which will be of significant benefit to the government as a whole. The secretariat's unique position as a central "super-department" means that its influence is very strongly felt, for better or worse, throughout all government departments.

The government should review the role of the Financial Management Board Secretariat which seems to be overcentralized with too many responsibilities. The results of this review should be available when the new government takes office.

Front-Line Workers Support Program

The committee was pleased to hear that initial work had begun on an assistance program for employees. The need for this type of program was recommended by the Special Committee on Health and Social Services and this committee supports that recommendation. Members believe employee assistance programs are crucial, particularly for front-line workers who deal with the stress of serving our communities. If our teachers, social workers, nurses and other program delivery people are not strong and healthy, they are unable to work with the community.

The committee is concerned that this initiative should be made a priority with front-line workers.

Committee Motion 40-12(7): To Adopt Recommendation 13, Carried
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

April 11th, 1995

Page 995

Jim Antoine Nahendeh

Therefore, Mr. Chairman I move that this committee recommends that the government proceed with a pilot project for a front-line workers support program during 1995-96 and provide a report on the success of this project during the review of the 1996-97 O and M budget.

Committee Motion 40-12(7): To Adopt Recommendation 13, Carried
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 996

The Chair Brian Lewis

Thanks, Mr. Antoine. The recommendation is part of the report and normally we go back to the motions after the report has been read. But since you made the motion, then I'll rule it in order. So, to the motion.

Committee Motion 40-12(7): To Adopt Recommendation 13, Carried
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 996

An Hon. Member

Seconded.

Committee Motion 40-12(7): To Adopt Recommendation 13, Carried
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 996

The Chair Brian Lewis

To the motion.

Committee Motion 40-12(7): To Adopt Recommendation 13, Carried
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 996

An Hon. Member

Question.

Committee Motion 40-12(7): To Adopt Recommendation 13, Carried
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 996

The Chair Brian Lewis

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion is carried.

---Carried

Proceed, Mr. Antoine.

Mortgage Investment Corporation

Committee Motion 40-12(7): To Adopt Recommendation 13, Carried
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 996

Jim Antoine Nahendeh

Mr. Chairman, during the 1994-95 O and M review, the committee again recommended that the government consider creating a mortgage investment corporation. Although there is still no mortgage investment corporation in place, the government is preparing a prospectus to help assess the viability of such a corporation. The committee urges the government to proceed with this project in a timely manner.

Separation Of The Capital And O And M Budgets

Beginning with the 1992-93 budget, the capital estimates were separated from the main O and M estimates, and considered separately by the standing committee and by the Legislative Assembly. The rationale was that, by approving the capital budget in late autumn, there would be sufficient time for contracts to be tendered or negotiated, materials to be ordered, and shipments to be made during the brief shipping and building season applicable to many communities.

This process has not fulfilled its expectations. In Investing in our Future, the committee said:

"It became apparent during this last committee review that the separation of the budget into two parts is artificial and may even be counter-productive. It is impossible to examine capital expenditure requirements without considering the fiscal framework. The fiscal framework contains both capital and operating elements that require joint consideration.

"Soon after the two budget sessions were implemented, the Standing Committee on Finance recognized that it was unrealistic to review proposed capital expenditures without considering the associated direct and indirect incremental operating costs. Now the committee reviews incremental operating costs of capital projects outside of the context of departmental operating budgets. However, the picture still is not complete."

The committee understands the rationale for separating the budgets and reviewing them in two separate sessions in the Legislative Assembly. However, the reality is that tenders are not being let early. There appears to be real obstacles in the way of changing the tendering system to meet the established objectives. Even with an earlier approval process for the capital budget, government departments have not proven able to execute contracts in the manner expected when the dual budget process was introduced.

The departments put a tremendous amount of work into preparing for a full budget session in the fall. Committee Members are concerned that what little gains are realized through having two budget sessions are not worth the cost of the extra work needed by the departments to prepare for two budget sessions.

It appears, then, that the issue is not the timing of the approval of capital estimates, but the planning abilities of the departments. With better planning, there is no reason contracts could not be ready to go on April 1st of a new fiscal year.

Members of the committee are convinced that there should only be a single budget session each year. The time, effort and cost of split capital/operations and maintenance budgets outweighs the potential benefit originally anticipated. The next government may want to consider having only one budget session per year, while encouraging better capital planning in the departments. This concept should be developed further by the current government, and included in the transition plan they will be preparing.

The committee had recommended a review of the current process of separate reviews for the capital and O and M budgets. The review was to include an assessment of alternative methods for achieving early tendering of capital projects. The government is currently working on an analysis of this issue and the committee looks forward to reviewing the final results and recommendations. In the meantime, the committee will be looking for evidence of increased coordination between the Department of Public Works and Services and other departments to ensure the benefits of having a separate capital budget process are achieved.

Management And Delivery Of Capital Projects

In Investing in Our Future, the committee noted:

"Concerns arose throughout the committee's September 1994 review about the way in which capital projects are planned, designed and managed by the Department of Public Works and Services. Committee Members wonder if the means of coordinating and managing capital projects adopted by the Department of Public Works and Services, on behalf of the government as a whole, are as efficient and effective as they should be."

While recognizing the significance of the project management function, it is important to remember that it is an overhead expense. In times of tight financial resources, it is particularly important to ensure that capital spending brings about maximum benefit to communities and that overhead expenses are minimized. As a result, the committee recommended that the Financial Management Board assess the current project management process and report to the committee by the end of 1994.

The government has expanded the recommendation to include a review of the entire project management process and provided the committee with preliminary information on the review. The committee suggests that, while the review will be worthwhile, things can be done to improve the process in the short term. For example, the Department of Public Works and Services should enforce deadlines for tendering to ensure the maximum benefit and cost-effectiveness is achieved on all projects. Departments should give adequate priority to preparing a well-planned capital budget. The committee also encourages the government to assign the management of smaller projects, such as small garages, directly to the community where the project is to take place.

Labour Relations

Labour relations is, and will continue to be, a very important part of the government's agenda. Committee Members have noted a high number of grievances being referred to arbitration.

There appears to be a lack of utilization of the joint consultation process. Where possible, labour relations issues should be handled quickly, efficiently and as close to the location of the employee(s) affected as possible. Not only will this save the government from wasting time and money in extensive arbitrations, it will improve the morale and the productivity of all employees, including managers.

That's the report, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Committee Motion 40-12(7): To Adopt Recommendation 13, Carried
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 997

The Chair Brian Lewis

Thank you very much, Mr. Antoine. Mr. Pollard, if you would like to bring witnesses into the Chamber, I would have to ask my colleagues if that is okay. Do you want to bring people in to help you?

Committee Motion 40-12(7): To Adopt Recommendation 13, Carried
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 997

John Pollard Hay River

If I might, Mr. Chairman.

Committee Motion 40-12(7): To Adopt Recommendation 13, Carried
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters

Page 997

Some Hon. Members

Agreed.

---Agreed