Thank you. The Minister for Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Member for Hay River, Madam Groenewegen. Second supplementary.

Thank you. The honourable Minister, Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Final supplementary, Madam Groenewegen.

Thank you. The honourable Minister, Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Oral questions. The honourable Member for Thebacha, Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you. Chairman of the Financial Management Board, Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the question by my honourable colleague. It is important to say right from the very beginning that the government, previous governments, do in fact support the principle of pay equity. However, in our opinion, and with our two issues that are under dispute. The Canadian Human Rights Commission feels that it has jurisdictional pursuant to the federal legislation. The GNWT's position is that the Canadian Human Rights Commission does not have jurisdiction over the GNWT public servants.

Our public servants have protection under the NWT legislation, namely, the NWT Fair Practice Act. The NWT Fair Practice Act applies to all residents. Everybody, not just civil servants. It would be unconscionable to have the NWT public servants fall under federal legislation and all other residents fall under territorial legislation. That is our position. The GNWT feels that the NWT Fair Practice Act applies to all NWT employees, including employees in the public service. That is the first fundamental issue and disagreement we have.

The matter of jurisdiction is of significant importance. No only to the people in the NWT, but also to the future government of Nunavut and the future government in the west. We believe it is significant enough that it warrants an application to the Supreme Court of Canada for a leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. It has been sought, and at this time, it is probably inappropriate for me to comment further on that, except to say that this is a question of law, as the chief commissioner suggested. However, the law in this case, in our opinion, is being misinterpreted by the Canadian Human Rights Commission and we certainly hope to have that clarified very soon in the Supreme Court of Canada.

The second issue under dispute is the pay equity complaint itself. The government's objectives, this one and previous ones, has and continues to be to resolve any pay equity problem in a reasonable and responsible manner and we have taken action as such.

One, we have developed and implemented a gender neutral job evaluation system and we will be sitting down with the union soon to negotiate rates of pay, supported by an objective of a gender neutral job evaluation system. We are going to sit down with the union and see what we can do there. I will say, Mr. Speaker, given the controversy attached to this, given the fact that it has been in the public eye for a long period of time, we are hoping we can move quickly to resolve that. Over the next few months, as we move towards implementation through negotiations, I will keep this House and my honourable colleague up to date on the results. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Todd. Supplementary, Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you. Mr. Todd.

Well frankly, I was disappointed to hear the comments made this morning by the commission and I do not think it is appropriate that we should be negotiating this in the media. There is an orderly process underway. There is a dispute, there is no doubt about that, the two parties see life differently, but there is a desire to resolve the issue in a negotiated manner. As I said, we are going to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada and we hope they will clarify it in the coming weeks and then we can move on with orderly negotiations with our colleagues in the union to seek some final result to this issue that is both equitable and affordable. Thank you.

Thank you. Second supplementary, Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you. Mr. Todd.

It is in my nature, if I can talk as the Finance Minister, to try to seek resolve to an issue. My personality does not lend itself well to delaying, and my desire is to negotiate an arrangement with our brothers in the union. The problem is, frankly Mr. Speaker, that we are now into a legal, I do not know if battle is the appropriate word, situation and that has to move forward in an orderly way. I would suggest to you that this could be a long, drawn out issue. It is certainly not my desire, but that is where we have ended up. It will be an expensive exercise for all parties and, at the end of the day, what do we accomplish? There was, I thought, in the previous government some arrangement, but for whatever reason, it did not come to fruition. It certainly would be my desire to see an agreement reached, but it has to be equitable and I repeat again, affordable. There is an affordability issue out there. So when we move forward in relationship to the leave to appeal, this will be, if it is granted, a long drawn out costly process for everybody.

Thank you. Final supplementary, Mr. Miltenberger.