Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, over two years ago when we came to this Assembly, we came here to work for all our constituents. During the opening address by the Commissioner, Helen Maksagak, she mentioned that we are here to work together for the betterment of all people in the Northwest Territories and all of our constituents. When we are in this House, Mr. Speaker, we have an obligation to represent all of our constituents to the best of our abilities and to work together with the Cabinet and those Ordinary Members to provide that counter balance to Cabinet. In that role, we have to ask questions and in the questions that we ask, we try to find answers and the answers that we find sometimes are not appropriate to the Member. Therefore, you ask a supplementary question. When Ministers try to imply that questions and statements made are innocuous or asinine, which is not acceptable. That brings you to the next point, Mr. Speaker, the credibility factor of the government itself. People are credible in the things that they do and the work that they carry on and the statements that they make. It is very cheap to have innuendo to say that a Member or an individual has said one thing in committee and another thing outside the House. Find the transcript to state that and prove it. That would be my response or my retort to an address made like that. Questions are posed, not to pose debate, Mr. Speaker, but questions are asked to find answers. Sometimes the answers to questions that you are asking have already been given in the committee, but they are not available to the public at large and, thus, the opportunity in this House to ask a question so that it comes in the public domain.
Sometimes, Mr. Speaker, it is very frustrating as an Ordinary Member of this House to bring up questions. It is almost like a tooth-pulling exercise to try to get an answer. When the House prioritizes areas of concern for financial expenditures of this government, hopefully, it is done with the best intention of all the people who we are here to serve. Public money spent for the public good should be accountable to the public. That is the whole basis of transparency within government, Mr. Speaker. That is why some motions have been brought forward within this House over the past several months and the past year. An example is a motion on May 13th, moved by myself and seconded by the honourable Member, Mr. Ootes. All these points come to one conclusion, one finale and that is to give an opportunity to all Members to have an opportunity in this House to express opposing views and debate. Mr. Speaker, it is not up to myself or any other Member of this House to warrant if the questions being asked are opportune or if they are of an imbecilic nature. To grade someone's questions is not the question. Mr. Speaker, it is the answers that are given to the questions that are being asked, and that, Mr. Speaker, is the credibility factor of this government.
People are listening or reading Hansard, they can see that the questions are being asked and posed and the flippant responses sometimes that are received. That is not acceptable. We are here as a group of people to represent our constituents as a whole. Sometimes, Mr. Speaker, it would seem to me that some Members of this House spend too much time in the House. They start to believe their own rhetoric and that is some of the stuff that is being said on the street. They pass that off as not important or superficial. The people on the street are the people that elected you in the first place and their thoughts, wishes and understanding should be brought forward. That should not be here to be made fun of or to disregard. Mr. Speaker, the Commissioner in her opening address said, and stated very plainly, that the Government of the Northwest Territories, this the 13th Assembly, had a very difficult task to do and that difficult task is not made any easier, Mr. Speaker, with flippant responses or fun making or trying to bait Members into saying things or raise debate. That is the credibility factor brought on by this government.
Another area, Mr. Speaker, that I would like to bring up is the information that is put out by the government. We have demonstrated over the past two years that there are fiscal problems within the government and yet the public at large sees items and examples like the $250,000 spent for the study of the privatization of POL, although it was rejected by the standing committee of this House, someone, somewhere, thought it was a priority. We saw the $750,000 spent on a Med-Emerg report that was slammed by the NWT Medical Association and criticized widely in the media and by the public at large. That was $750,000 spent by this government. When you question those types of expenditures by the government, then you are putting yourself up for ridicule by the Members who answer our questions. That is not acceptable. Those types of things do not allow a Member to do his job or her job. To be told that you are tactful because someone said that you are on an Internet foreign server, that is incorrect. To have Ministers phone you and say that statements you have made are slanderous and liable, that is not correct. To imply that you have said one thing in this House and another thing somewhere else, that is not correct. It is not acceptable. Although it may not fall within the jurisdiction of this House legislatively, through points of privilege or through points of order, it is still not correct.
I would say to you, Mr. Speaker, that the public at large sees it for what it is. It is a flippant disregard for parliamentary procedure. We have all seen on our TVs what happens in the House of Commons or in other jurisdictions, but one of the reasons that we are here in the Northwest Territories is that we have a unique form of government which is called consensus government. Under the consensus rule of government, each Member is allowed to speak to issues that they feel free to speak to, without a party affiliation, without towing a party line. That is a unique opportunity for each individual Member of this House to vote that way. Although we all know, Mr. Speaker, indeed in some cases and in some instances, when you do that, you open yourself up for other problems and that could be slight intimidation, cat call, joint questioning or being given the cold shoulder by your colleagues. This is part of the game we see here in the Northwest Territories. Consensus government systems and the acid test of consensus government, Mr. Speaker, are when you have money. When you have money within a government to give you accountability and transparency and when you have people that agree with you. If I support someone's bridge in hard luck bay and they support my breakwater in tough luck harbour, then you can get a consensus. But when you have no money and you have individual MLAs fighting over a small piece of pie, then it is hard to have a consensus.
Mr. Speaker, in the crux of the situation that is the acid test of consensus government, is that a good thing or a bad thing Mr. Speaker? It is not for us to decide here today, it is for the public at large who watch the House, who watch the program on TV, who read in the media and the newspapers, who read Hansard, Mr. Speaker, that is now available on-line in many of the government offices and at private computer terminals in the Northwest Territories. They can see what is being said and what is debated. That type of exposure of the 13th Assembly probably has not occurred in the history of this Assembly. I think, Mr. Speaker, in itself, that has been a good thing because the public at large can see what is being said. Mr. Speaker, sometimes what is being said has to be taken into context of what the topic was at the time. To take something out of context and say one thing to imply another, that is called innuendo, is cheap and not acceptable in a consensus form of government. If I choose, or any other Member chooses, to ask questions during the committee of the whole or in any other form, you are asking questions because of legitimate reasons.
When I read the Hansards, and I have heard other people say when they read the Hansards, based on the questions that individual Members ask, I have never heard anyone say that the questions were flippant or the questions were of a meaningless nature. To imply such is unparliamentary, Mr. Speaker, and that is not acceptable. The flippant retorts when an Ordinary Member asks questions or the perception of flippant retorts by some Ministers when they answer questions, is not acceptable. Mr. Speaker, the public at large is sophisticated enough to know the difference between those types of answers and the questions given, Mr. Speaker.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, the Ministers, the Members, they could all smile, laugh and do whatever they want when you are asking your question, but I know myself Mr. Speaker, when I am here at night when I write my questions, I do them in an effort to bring out public disclosure. To mock that, Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day which is a buzz word and a buzz phrase, certain Members of this House like to say because every sentence that they have has to have at the end of the day in it, for my children and your children. These slogans, Mr. Speaker, slogans, because that is what this government sometimes, I believe, is becoming a slogan government, is not acceptable. I think that the public at large sees it for what it is.
The Commissioner in her opening address talked about the challenges of the 13th Assembly. Those challenges were fiscal, as well as logistical problems, in dealing with division and other issues. It will be history, Mr. Speaker, history, that will judge this Assembly. It will not be the Members in this Assembly. It will be five years. four years or ten years down the road when people look at what has happened in this Assembly, based on probably the questions that were raised, the deals that were done and, again, Mr. Speaker, I think when I hear it in this House, questions on accountability, questions on money being spent for the public good, it should be accountable to the public. Mr. Speaker, the public is informed, they are sophisticated, they listen to the radio, they read Hansard, they read the media reports and they talk to individual Members. They know what is happening within this House with the questions that are being posed by Members, and they read the questions that are being posed by Members and they know the answers are not forthcoming and thus that raises the concept or the illusion or I guess even, you could say, Mr. Speaker, the fact that there are problems within the government. Has that been stated before? Yes, Mr. Speaker. Has it been stated in the public at large? Yes, it has, Mr. Speaker. I think that is what the Commissioner in her opening address tried to allude to, that the challenges of this Assembly were not only the fiscal problems we had, the run-up to division, the perception of the public at large.
It goes on some of the crises that we have had here including the Keewatin situation, some questions on Lahm Ridge Tower, Mr. Speaker. The Lahm Ridge Tower, when that first came up, it was brought up by myself in October and, at that time, I was satisfied with some of the responses that I had from the Ministers. On the Aurora Fund, Mr. Speaker, I look back at the Aurora Fund as an instrument to this government that was not very clear. When I asked simple questions, Mr. Speaker, I never once asked on the Aurora Fund who got the money. I asked how many jobs had been created, how do you have access to this program, is it marketed, Mr. Speaker. It turned into full page ads in the newspapers and the disclosure of the loans that were being made by this government. Was that a good thing, Mr. Speaker? I think it was. Sometimes, Mr. Speaker, when you look at public money spent for the public good, you will get a retort by saying, well, that is private business. Well, it is not private business, Mr. Speaker, if the Royal Bank lends Bombardier $2 million. That is private business because private shareholders own the Royal Bank. If the Government of the Northwest Territories, through one of its corporations, the Development Corporation, the Business Credit Corporation or the Aurora Fund, which is an instrument of government, is lending money, then that is public money. Public money spent for the public good should be accountable to the public.
On the other hand, the Aurora Fund, because it is private investors, I would tend to agree that the money being loaned out by that fund, although it is an instrument of government, probably should be confidential, but money spent by this government in loans and grants could be and should be public knowledge. It is done in other jurisdictions, Mr. Speaker. So, if someone gets a loan for $1 million from a government agency, I have no problem having that money made public and how much was received, even though it is a private individual getting it. They are getting public money. Mr. Speaker, when I came here, when I looked over my questions that I have asked in this House, they run the whole gamut from environmental questions to education concerns to health concerns and so on, Mr. Speaker. I would challenge anyone in this House, Mr. Speaker, to show me a flippant question in Hansard. I did not ask any flippant questions and I have tried to keep the decorum of the House to the standard that the Commissioner had talked about in her opening address when she talked about the difficulties that would be experienced by this, the 13th Assembly.
The difficulties faced by this 13th Assembly, Mr. Speaker, were not only difficulties brought on by fiscal problems and monetary problems, they are brought on by the retorts, the answers and the questions given in this House. If there is public perception, Mr. Speaker, of problems within the 13th Assembly, as some people have said a banana republic, we heard that the people in Ottawa, Mr. Speaker, during our mid-term review thought it was a circus. Well, Mr. Speaker, that is the perception because they probably read the Hansard which is on-line in different places in the Northwest Territories and also in the federal civil service and in the government of Canada where anyone who has access to an Internet provider can look at it. I do not believe, Mr. Speaker, in anyone's wildest imagination, that John Chretien, the Prime Minister of Canada, is sitting in his office every day waiting with bated breath to read the Hansard of the Northwest Territories government, and the statement to that type of effect, I think, is ludicrous and I think anyone listening to that type of statement would have to tend to agree.
Mr. Speaker, we have had an opportunity in this House to pass legislation that has benefited the people of the Northwest Territories and I have agreed to some of that legislation. I did not agree to the Public Service Act because it was a draconian piece of legislation and I think I have been proven right on that. I introduced a motion, Mr. Speaker, to censure Cabinet because of the way they were shifting capital dollars around which was supported by the majority of Members in this House. It was not done in a flippant manner. When I ask a serious question, I would like a serious answer. I do not appreciate, Mr. Speaker, the offhand cracks and comments and so on and so forth. Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of things that the Commissioner talked about in her opening address with regard to the challenges faced by the 13th Assembly and the biggest challenge, Mr. Speaker, is the challenge the Members in this House present by themselves, to themselves with regard to the way we act and the decorum of the House. If we all remember that, we could probably have a better House.
Mr. Speaker, everyone has their own way of dealing with stress. The Commissioner, in her opening address, spoke about some of the challenges and stress that we would face. Some Members in the past have dealt with it in different ways and have had problems with the law, some have had marriage breakups and some have had fiscal problems. The life of a politician, Mr. Speaker, is not an easy one. The majority of the Members in this House are new Members. There were 15 rookie MLAs elected two and a half years ago. Mr. Speaker, sometimes, I know myself, I wonder what I am doing here and am I here for the right reasons, am I a politician for the right reasons? Sometimes colleagues may question your sincerity but, Mr. Speaker, I do not think anyone can question the work ethic. Some people complain you might be too accessible to the public but, Mr. Speaker, it is the public that elected us and we should be accessible to them. I do not see any problem with that.
Mr. Speaker, many times in committee things are said but the committee meetings are not open to the public. One of the things which has been a plus within the consensus form of government is, it has given the Ordinary Members an opportunity to influence or at least massage the budget and the priorities of the government. However, Mr. Speaker, we do not forget that the government is the Cabinet as elected by the Members of this House. If we had a chance, Mr. Speaker, to do it all over again, there might be some changes.
--Laughter
Those changes would be made within the guidelines, regulations and past practices set down by this Assembly. That, to me, is a good thing. Recently, we have seen in the east, for example, Mr. Speaker, the land claims organization, NTI, form a shadow Cabinet because they felt a lot of the issues that they saw as important were not being brought up in this Assembly. In particular, Mr. Speaker, they talked about the Keewatin situation, articles 24 and 23, and I did speak to the chairman of NTI and, for example, mentioned that I believe...and I went through Hansard. I had brought up article 24, as an individual MLA more than 15 times in this House in the past two and a half years and article 23, at least a half-dozen times over the past couple of years, Mr. Speaker. All Ordinary Members have tried to the best of their abilities to ask questions, to make statements for the benefit of the people of the Northwest Territories.
When we look at the challenges, the Commissioner spoke about in the opening address, those challenges have not only come from outside forces, Mr. Speaker, but they have come from inside forces. The manipulation, the innuendo, the back stabbing and the other things that go on in this House are, yes, they are shameful, Mr. Todd - but they do happen and to say they do not happen would not be a fair assessment. Mr. Speaker, those types of things should be brought out in the open and they should be brought forward. I do not expect when a statement is made within a committee to have it thrown back at someone without any type of proof. Innuendo, Mr. Speaker, is cheap. As an Ordinary Member of this House who has tried to do the best job to represent my constituency, I have tried to stay away from that but we are all guilty of shortfalls and shortcomings.
Mr. Speaker, I never came here on a banana peel but, after saying that, Mr. Speaker, I have learned a lot over the last two and a half years. I have learned to respect a lot of the Members in this House and I have learned to put up with some of the Members in this House. Mr. Speaker, I would like to say, in closing, in my reply to the opening address, that as an Ordinary Member we are allowed one question and three supplementaries and the Minister, as in any parliamentary government, has the chance of a final retort. I used my opportunity to retort during the reply to the opening address by the Commissioner, Mr. Speaker. Earlier, I had talked about some of the stresses that we are all under as politicians and I talked about the internal and external stresses. The internal stresses, of course, would be the work inside this House and the external stresses and pressures are put on us by constituents, by the job we have to do and by the tough decisions we have to make. Mr. Speaker, the votes that I have made in this House and the statements that I have made, I stand by them. The questions I have asked, I would probably ask again. I did not ask questions on the Aurora Fund to embarrass anyone. I asked those questions for public accountability. I did not ask the questions on the Lahm Ridge Tower to embarrass anyone. I asked those questions on the basis of public accountability.
Mr. Speaker, in my platform I stated that I would try to make government more accountable to the people. It is what I have tried to do, although some of the Members in the House might think I was asking questions facetiously, but I must say, Mr. Speaker, when I look around the House to my honourable colleagues, I have learned a lot from individuals in this House. I respectfully say, Mr. Speaker, that one of the Members last week mentioned that we do not say enough about people when they are here with us and then when they pass on we usually give them great congratulations and thank them for their work. It is a sad commentary on our whole social structure.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to, at this time, point out a couple of people for whom I have a lot of respect and thank them for their guidance in helping me anytime I have had questions and needed support. Mr. Jake Ootes, who is the chairman of the Ordinary Members' Caucus and is a very honourable man, who is very forthright; I would like to thank Mr. Ootes publicly for his support. I would also like to thank Mr. Mark Evaloarjuk. Mark is from Igloolik and is an experienced politician, having served in this House before. I remember many times being at the Hall Beach airport in 1983 and 1984, seeing Mark come through the airport. Recently, this summer in Pangnirtung, Mark chaired the Baffin Leaders Summit when Mr. Abe Ookpik died. Mr. Abe Ookpik was a very good friend of mine who used to visit me at my house. Mr. Evaloarjuk pointed out that a lot of times we support people and say nice things about them after they are gone. This is an opportunity in this forum to thank those two individuals, Mr. Ootes, who was the first government employee of the Northwest Territories, back in 1968, and Mr. Evaloarjuk, who is a person who has served in this House before, not in this actual House. We should thank those types of people and yourself, Mr. Gargan, who is now the dean of the Assembly. Sometimes, Mr. Speaker, as politicians the public side of our life is seen a lot, the private side is sometimes hidden. I have felt perhaps we could arrange to follow a person around to see what they do in a normal run of a day. Some of us have quite an enormous constituency workload that we try to deal with, as opposed to other Members who might only get a call or two a day, some Members get ten, 15, 20 calls a day. They get E-mails, faxes and so on. The workload for individual Members varies and because of that some of us put more time in than others. To question some Members and say you were not in at 8:00 a.m. or 9:00 a.m. is sometimes an unfair statement. Some Members prefer to stay after-hours because the building is quiet. There are fewer people around. The phones are not ringing and you can do more work.
Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I would like to say in my reply to the Commissioner's address there have been many problems within this Assembly, many of them brought on by the Members themselves with perception, but if anything, Mr. Speaker, the pros and cons are, you try to learn from mistakes you have made and from statements that might have been made. Sometimes it is in fun or in jest when you ask a question and the response comes back. Sometimes it is taken the wrong way at the beginning and it leads to something else. Never once, Mr. Speaker, have I ever questioned the sincerity of the Members in this House on the job they have tried to do for their constituents, although all of us, as individuals, would probably do their job differently. When we ask for rebasing of monies and priorities spent on issues like health care and education, when those issues are brought up, I believe, in a sincere fashion, I would hope that the government, which is the Cabinet, would ultimately look at those requests and, hopefully, act on them accordingly for the betterment of all the people of the Northwest Territories and not the public perception which is that vested interests seem to have got a hold of the 13th Assembly. I do know, Mr. Speaker, that many of the Members of this House who have tried to bring the accountability question forward have demonstrated that, indeed, is not the case.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I will conclude my reply to the opening address and thank the peanut gallery across the hall, across this great Assembly for allowing me the opportunity to say my piece today. I do feel refreshed after spending four days at home, after having been here in this, not the City of Yellowknife, which is a nice place, but this Assembly for something like 33 straight days which can wear on anyone's patience. It is a good thing to get home and be refreshed, come back and go back at it. It is what we are elected to do and that is what I am going to continue to try to do to the best of my abilities, Mr. Speaker, over the next 14 months. I would like to thank you, Mr. Speaker, for your cooperation and support when things get a little out of hand and when points of order are raised and points of privilege. As, indeed, you have always acted in a fair and courteous manner toward this Member. I thank you for that, Mr. Speaker, and I thank you for allowing me to reply to the Commissioner's address. Thank you.
