Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, I want to commend Mr. Lewis for the work he has done on this bill. I don't think anyone can argue with the basic philosophy; that the voters have the right to set any procedure into place that they want to, to hold their politicians accountable. I know Mr. Lewis has worked long and hard on this bill.
So the philosophy is not one I can disagree with. But the mechanics of this bill cause me considerable concern because I am not convinced this bill is accomplishing exactly what Mr. Lewis intends it to accomplish. It seems to me that over the last few years, we have brought in, or are in the process of bringing in, mechanisms to deal with errant MLAs. We have conflict of interest provisions which could, theoretically, cause an MLA to lose their seat. Mr. Dent is bringing forward a bill which means that any MLA who is convicted of acts of violence will automatically lose their seat. So much of the public demand for new mechanisms really has been dealt with. The fact is we now have, and we will have, mechanisms to ensure that MLAs who transgress against acceptable standards will no
longer be MLAs. So the problem is not the same as it was when Mr. Lewis started his hard work on this particular bill.
Another area of this bill that people should think about and discuss, and that our constituents should consider, is what does it mean that an MLA can be recalled. Right away, what comes to people's minds is someone who has committed some offence against someone else or some MLA who has behaved in an absolutely inappropriate way will be recalled. But I see nothing in this bill which limits the reasons for which someone can be recalled. Mr. Lewis has talked about consensus government and has used the fact that we have consensus government as a reason for this mechanism. Just for the sake of an argument, I will put across an opposite reason.
Right off the top of my head, I can think of issues that could bring that sort of an emotional reaction from constituents. One is the abortion issue. The abortion issue, however an MLA with their conscience vote, could have a very strong emotional reaction against that particular vote.
The area of gun control is another area which brings out very strong emotions in every constituency and with these types of controversial issues, it's impossible to gain a consensus in your constituency. I want to remind Members, as well as members of the public who are looking at this, that the next four years are going to be very, very difficult years for this Legislative Assembly and for MLAs in this Legislative Assembly. MLAs in this Assembly are going to have to make very tough, very unpopular decisions in order to save the very viability of the Northwest Territories. I am sure that there will have to be decisions made in this Assembly over the next four years which could severely cut back programs which might impact on the number of civil servants we're able to sustain here in the Northwest Territories. All of those decisions will be very tough. All of them will be very unpopular, but I think everybody in the Northwest Territories must understand that those decisions will have to be made or there won't be any Northwest Territories.
The danger I see with the legislation, as Mr. Lewis has drafted it, is that MLAs are going to be very vulnerable in making tough decisions. Mr. Lewis himself has stated eloquently many times in this Legislative Assembly that one of the flaws of the consensus system is that it is impossible to make tough decisions. Well, I put it to Mr. Lewis with this particular bill in place, if it's tough now, it will be impossible then. No MLA will dare to make the tough decisions that will have to be made.
Mr. Lewis has said again that in other jurisdictions this hasn't been the case. He's stated the case that abortion hasn't been the issue. He's stated that issues such as gun control or budget reductions haven't been an issue. I put to Mr. Lewis and I put to everybody in this House that it's too early to say that. We don't know how this particular bill will play here in the Northwest Territories. I worry very much about that. I worry very much about the very public who would support the concept of recall. If they had an idea of some of the possible negative results of recall, they too may look at it again. I know the public gets very, very upset with politicians who stray from the straight and narrow, who aren't good examples to our children.
On the other hand, we have real work to do here in the Northwest Territories. We have difficult work to do here in the Northwest Territories. We have to have, I think, enough confidence as MLAs that we can make tough decisions without fear of punitive action and I fundamentally believe in the basic principle of participatory democracy. That is, I'm elected by my constituents to use my judgement and hard work to investigate issues, to be privy to information which because of their busy lives they are not privy to and in consultation with them but also on behalf of them, to make decisions. Every MLA in this room, if they really have any kind of strength of character or beliefs, have made decisions from time to time which a good percentage of their constituents may not agree with.
The beauty of a general election every four years is by the nature of it, the people of the Northwest Territories are engaged in a real debate on a whole range of issues. They get to see in every campaign a range of options; a range of alternatives on all these issues. It's very difficult in a normal general election for one issue to totally dominate the agenda at the expense of all other issues. What we have here is a possibility of a campaign dominated by one issue. We have a campaign with no rules that I see, no rules whatsoever. We have a situation where that MLA will be functionally useless to their constituents for the duration of that particular campaign and maybe afterwards because once you're in the paper long enough people start to believe there must be something wrong or somebody wouldn't have brought a complaint against you.
Mr. Lewis, though I respect very much the work you've done, I respect very much the philosophy that you espouse, I, in good conscience, cannot support this bill and I will vote against. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
---Applause