Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am taking the opportunity today, under replies to the Budget Address to speak to a number of things that I have been pondering for some time. Many of my colleagues have spoken to the specifics of the Budget Address and the details of various programs and initiatives, most of which I agree are positive directions.
I would like to focus my comments on the broader subject which is indirectly related to the way this government spends money. Mr. Speaker, listening to some of the comments made in the House by our leaders, one would wonder who they talk to, where they go and what they read. They seem oblivious to the fact that we have a very serious problem in this government. Everyone including myself would like to get on with the business of governing and look to the future.
Sometimes we have to stop and assess the way we are doing things. We have a fundamental flaw in our terms of reference, our game plan or the rules of engagement if you will. It strikes at the very credibility of the way in which we do business and brings into question everything that we do and say. I hear contradictions proclaimed almost every day with such resolve that I am starting to think that the person saying them actually believes themselves.
Let me give you a few examples and let us use examples from just this week in the House. For example, the Finance Minister in response to putting more money into food payments for income support clients says and I quote, "we are working under very difficult fiscal conditions". Mr. Speaker, we know that at least one quarter of a million dollars was available for a PPD privatization report that no one wanted or needed. The Premier, for example, in response to concerns raised about health care in the Keewatin health situation, and I quote, "I believe the health care in the Keewatin is quite adequate and does its purpose". However, we know that shortage of staff, basic management deficiencies and shortages of supplies are putting northerners at some risk. The people impacted by these and many other issues must marvel at these detached decrees or maybe they do not even listen anymore.
Mr. Speaker, I do not know if anyone is hearing what I am saying, but let me say it again. We have a responsibility to uphold the confidence of our constituents in this government, and spouting platitudes about responsible and good government sometimes appears to fly in the face of reality and the serious concerns facing our constituents. Getting back to one of the most pervasive and systemic problems, there is an inordinate amount of suspicion, distrust and disrespect in the public when it comes to the credibility of this government. We must examine what this stems from. Much of the suspicion surrounding this government relates to the lack of transparency in contract awards, hiring practices and what seems to be very discretionary spending. Whether you are a frustrated business person responding to a request for proposal, who is unsuccessful and will never know why or you are a person seeking employment running into a seemingly endless invisible barrier, whether you are just an enlightened taxpayer, whether you are the recipient of programs and services delivered by this government or you are a front-line worker struggling to do more with less, people want a government that is accountable, transparent and a good steward of the public purse.
One might argue that all governments have been criticized because of unpopular decisions. Mr. Speaker, I would argue that this government falls into a different category. All we have to do is compare this Assembly with the previous 12th Assembly. I was a follower of the government for many years before coming to this House. Although, people did not agree with every decision the government made, they did not despair over the integrity of the government as they do now.
We have fallen down in the area of openness and communication. The constructive criticism I direct at our leadership is purely on a professional level. On a personal note, going back two years, I came to this Legislature under the threat of being, and I will quote, "stuffed in a corner for four years if I got out of line". Mr. Speaker, I do not know if this was because some Members were traumatized by a female Member of the 12th Assembly and that they were still not over it, and since I am a woman, perhaps I would naturally cause grief. I think it was more likely that they knew that I possessed the skills to communicate and would not be particularly amenable to being too quiet, kissing too many, I do not know what word to use there, or being co-opted into any schemes.
I thought I should respond to this notice by standing up on the first day and facilitating a public process for selecting a Premier. I hope that I have established that I am not really a good person to threaten or try to intimidate. Like everyone else, I had to learn, but I confess that I am not satisfied anymore nor do I consider it to be an effective use of my privilege as a Member to stand up every day for two and a half minutes and state my opinion on a diverse range of subjects. Although I will continue to comment on subjects that I consider relevant to my constituents and northern constituents, my underlying mission is going to be what I have dubbed the truth and transparency commission.
I began to be approached almost from the beginning of my term with questions about issues, instances, innuendoes, irregularities that I was not able to respond to. I did not know the answers. I was not really sure how to get the answers and I was not assured that these were my problems. At the prompting of many of my constituents and continuing to receive questions, I made a commitment to get some answers to questions people were asking. We do not have an ombudsman or any central mechanism or process by which concerns can be compiled and measured other than contacting individual MLAs to make complaints or raise concerns. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to respond to these questions because in the big picture, what this government does affects us all.
Mr. Speaker, there is despair in the public and as a believer in the democratic process, this saddens me. The people wonder who will stand up. I am going to attempt to stand up for them and I know that other Members of this House are going to stand up as well. I believe along with my colleagues, we will only be able to be strong advocates on their behalf of a more accountable transparent government if they hear from our constituents. This is actually a very good group of Ordinary MLAs. I know some people have been disappointed by the lack of cohesive effort on the part of the Ordinary Members' Caucus and there are a lot of contributing factors to this, not the least of which is our collective newness to the job. Also in our defence, I will reveal that there is very subtle intimidation techniques employed here.
For example, ridiculing a Member that takes exception to something the government does, it is a natural part of this style of government we have. It is very subtle. It is a constant little game of alienating, patronizing, criticizing, flattering and the tactics are endless. Sometimes it is carried out in the name of being responsible. For example, they will say, that is not a good thing to bring up right now because we are at a sensitive time in our negotiations with Ottawa or, if we bring that out in the public our credibility will be injured, and so on. For example, Mr. Speaker, a Minister, after recently returning from a meeting in Ottawa, informed some of the Members that someone in Ottawa, supposedly Ottawa hangs on to every word in our Hansard, referred to our mid-term review by Ordinary Members as a midnight seance with a bunch of jokers and clowns. Mr. Speaker, that even is a subtle form of intimidation.
Anyhow, back to my subject and in conclusion, Mr. Speaker, we cannot effectively represent in a vacuum. The electorate also has an important role to play. The enemies of democracy are ignorance and apathy. People do not have the right to complain if they do not participate in the process. To combat ignorance, it is their duty to keep themselves appraised of the issues and how the government is responding to those issues. To battle apathy, they need to get involved, phone their MLA, write a letter to their local newspaper, talk to their friends, attend constituency meetings. We need to hear from the electorate. Not only about what we are doing wrong, but what we are doing right. I really appreciate the phone calls and faxes that I have received over the last few days in support to the questions that I have been asking in the House.
The choice is simple. I have heard our government called a banana republic. This conjures up a picture of an isolated dictatorship where might is right, the friends of the regime in power do well and the enemies of the regime in power are out in the cold. The alternative is an open transparent functioning democracy where people feel welcome and are encouraged to participate, not only on election day, but at any time. In a democracy the leaders should be the humble diligent hard working representatives of the people. When any leader becomes caught up in the power or prestige of the job, begins to lose perspective and lets their sense of responsibility turn into vanity or a delusion of importance which feeds some egotistical bent, we are, indeed, in trouble and things begin to unravel.
In summary, Mr. Speaker, to northerners I say get involved, do not give up, do not get discouraged, get organized and get active. To my colleagues, I say, let us get organized, let us not let our words, our ideas and our recommendations go unheeded. To the Cabinet, I say, please stand up and be counted. Let us demonstrate the highest standards of transparency and restore confidence and be the most humble servants of the people. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
--Applause