Merci, M. Presidente. Mr. Speaker, I seconded the motion to introduce Bill 31, Recall Act, because I believe in political accountability. Since I've been a Member, I've heard much criticism about our system of government from both aboriginal and non-aboriginal people alike, yet I still defend and support the consensus model. I seconded this motion since I've heard many speeches on the issues of ethics, conduct, behaviour and trust, but I've seen little initiative to make them meaningful.

It is important that we re-establish any lost trust between ourselves and the electorate. The public can see very clearly how reluctant we are to impose discipline on ourselves or our colleagues. Mr. Speaker, I believe the public is frustrated because our system provides no mechanism for them to impose discipline on us. We've discussed the issue of recall in Caucus and in our two planning workshops held in Fort Smith and Cambridge Bay. In none of those meetings have Members advanced arguments against the principle of recall.

What is at stake in this bill is a simple principle. Should the electorate have a mechanism at their disposal to recall a Member from office prior to the expiration of his or her term of office? That is the only principle at stake here. Is accountability to the electorate ongoing or does it exist only at election time? Mr. Speaker, it is my position that accountability should be ongoing. Recall would accomplish this.

It would also encourage the public to take a deeper interest in political issues and political life. People would no longer have to shrug their shoulders or shake their heads in frustration because they are powerless. Recall would give meaning to the high standards we have set for public office in our ethics and conduct guidelines. Recall would help to restore the public trust in our elected officials.

I know that although Members have not expressed themselves publicly on the issue of recall, there has been some uncertainty. It seems to me the uncertainty has not been about whether the public should have the right to recall a Member. The uncertainty is about the process, itself. At this second reading stage, it's the principle of recall that's at stake. It is no longer a strange or novel idea. In fact, as my colleague, Mr. Lewis, pointed out, British Columbia's NDP government made an election promise to introduce recall and delivered on its promise by passing Bill 36, Recall And Initiative Act, on July 7, 1994. A 1991 referendum indicated that 80 per cent of the people in British Columbia favoured recall.

In the Northwest Territories, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business conducted a poll on recall. The results of this poll, which were released in February, showed that 63 per cent supported recall, so there should be no doubt about support for this principle. It seems to me no longer a question of whether we need recall or not, the public has indicated support for it.

If Members decide they're unsure what safeguards there are to advance good government, to protect Members and to balance those with that of the public interest, I urge them not to defeat this bill at second reading. The public will find it difficult to understand opposition to involving them more in the life of the government that is there now to serve them.

Defeat on the principle of this bill would send out a very onerous signal. It will signal that we don't trust the residents of the electorate. It will signal that we have no confidence in ourselves. It will signal that we don't want to hear from the electorate, except every four years. We have talked about accountability, and we have talked about it long enough, Mr. Speaker.

We have a unique system of government here in the Northwest Territories, where the accountability seems only to be to ourselves. We have struggled with the various ways of changing that over the years. Perhaps through discussion in this House we can force ourselves to come to grips with it publicly. I will be disappointed, and others will be disappointed, and the public will be further disillusioned if we don't come up with something concrete at this juncture. The public expects us to do something.

The bill before you is as complicated as the set of proposals contained in the legislative action paper that was widely distributed. In response to concerns raised by the Native Women's Association, for example, the process has been simplified. Despite this, the recall procedure still places a considerable burden of work on those promoting recall. It will be just as difficult to recall as it is to elect. Anyone deciding to promote recall would not do so lightly. I have faith in the wisdom of the public to judge wisely if a recall position is begun; a petition is begun. It is because I believe in the wisdom of the electorate and the need to make more use of it that I am pleased to support this bill. Thank you colleagues. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.