Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I wish to advise the Members that the Honourable Jim Antoine will be absent from the House today and tomorrow to attend the meeting of Federal/Provincial/Territorial Ministers of Aboriginal Affairs and National Aboriginal Leaders in Quebec City. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Premier. Ministers' statements. Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the negotiations between the Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT) and the Union of Northern Workers (UNW) concluded on May 8, 1998 with the parties at an impasse. The GNWT has tabled a final settlement offer and invited the UNW to take the offer to its membership and let the members decide whether or not to accept it.

The UNW has taken the position that they will not negotiate rates of pay to implement the Hay Job Evaluation System and to settle the Pay Equity Complaint. The Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) negotiator from Ottawa said that he was instructed not to talk about pay equity at the bargaining table and they would not be taking the final settlement offer to the members.

During the last round of bargaining, the UNW proposed that the job evaluation process be referred to binding arbitration and that a southern arbitrator be selected to tell us whether or not the point ratings are bias free. This proposal was geared to take the implementation of the new job evaluation system off the bargaining table and move it to another legal process that would be in addition to the legal processes already in place. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that the UNW and its pay equity experts can review the evaluation process for themselves to decide whether the point ratings are bias free and do not require a southern arbitrator to do this. The GNWT and the UNW had signed off an agreement to do this at the second round of collective bargaining, but unfortunately, although the UNW had agreed to the review process, they chose not to attend.

At the last round of bargaining, the GNWT once again invited the UNW to participate in a joint review process. This offer was made because the only way the UNW can satisfy itself that the job evaluation process is bias free is by gaining an understanding of it. The UNW declined this offer.

The GNWT cannot sign an agreement that renews rates of pay knowing that there is a pay equity problem. It would be irresponsible for the GNWT to sign a collective agreement that then gives the UNW the opportunity to sue the GNWT for more money because there is a pay equity problem. The parties who were at collective bargaining created the pay equity problem. The parties at collective bargaining must resolve the problem. The GNWT negotiated as far as it could on all other outstanding issues. Many significant concessions were made by the negotiators to address employee and UNW issues.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the GNWT's final settlement offer. I believe you will agree that the offer is fair and there is absolutely no downside risk to employees and the UNW in the way that the new job evaluation system is to be implemented. Employees see only pay increases. No employee will see a decrease in pay. The offer provides pay equity payments that go beyond what the GNWT is legally obligated to pay.

The final settlement offer includes:

- A 2 percent to 31 percent wage increase in the first year;

- A 2 percent wage increase in the second year;

- Up to 5 percent annually in performance increments or bonus;

- $421 to $4,096 in Northern Allowance increases for employees outside of Yellowknife;

- An additional $500 lump sum Northern Allowance amount in each year for all employees;

- $790 to $33,199 in pay equity payments;

- Five mandatory leave days for continuous employees on the same basis as non-continuous employees;

- School year hours of work for dental therapists; and

- Many other significant improvements in benefits, rights and protection for employees such as shift premium increases for shift workers, a study on how to improve child care and a pro-active prevention strategy to deal with workplace conflict issues.

I believe employees should be given an opportunity to vote and I am confident the package would be accepted. The final settlement offer is generous and gives everyone more money, achieves pay equity and allows the GNWT to modernize its job evaluation system with absolutely no downside risk to any employee. It provides an environment of certainty for employees during the transition to two new public services on April 1, 1999.

Mr. Speaker, the matter is now between the UNW and its members who are our employees and our constituents. If employees are concerned with the impasse, they should talk to the UNW who is their legal bargaining agent. It is time for employees to make their stand on the issue known. They can do this by demanding a ratification vote. This would give them the opportunity to either support the UNW's strategy to use a long drawn out legal process to resolve pay equity or they can accept the final settlement offer and require the UNW to sign off a collective agreement and to work with the GNWT and employees to look for ways to improve the system and ensure pay equity is maintained in the future. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

--Applause

Thank you, Mr. Todd. Ministers' statements. Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as you are aware on March 28, 1989 the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) filed a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (Commission) on behalf of the Union of Northern Workers (UNW) alleging that the GNWT did not provide its Public Service employees with equal pay for work of equal value contrary to Sections 7, 10 and 11 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.

The GNWT presently has an application before the federal court challenging the decision of the Commission to request the appointment of a Human Rights Tribunal to inquire into the Section 7 and 11 portions of the complaint while continuing to investigate the Section 10 portion of the complaint. It is expected that this application will be heard in the fall.

Mr. Speaker, on March 17, 1998 Justice Muldoon of the federal court, in a decision in a pay equity case involving Bell Canada, said the following:

That the method of comparing wages of employees in female dominated jobs with employees in male dominated jobs presently being used by the Commission is illegal.

That it is bad faith for a union to negotiate a collective agreement and then file a pay equity complaint against the employer.

That unions have a responsibility for lost wages due to pay inequities in collective agreements they negotiate.

In light of this decision, the GNWT is in the process of amending its present federal court application to ask to have the complaint filed against the GNWT dismissed or alternatively to have the UNW held jointly responsible for any award made by a Human Rights Tribunal. On March 23, 1998, Justice McGillis of the federal court, in another decision in a pay equity case involving Bell Canada, said that Human Rights Tribunals, appointed under the Canadian Human Rights Act, lacked the requisite level of independence. Because of this federal court decision, the Human Rights Tribunal appointed to hear the complaint filed against the GNWT, has been adjourned indefinitely.

Mr. Speaker, the GNWT's preference is still a negotiated solution to the pay equity complaint filed against the GNWT. The GNWT and I, as Finance Minister, stand by its final settlement offer to the UNW, which as you know includes the introduction of a bias-free job evaluation system, as a fair and reasonable settlement to the pay equity complaint. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

--Applause

Thank you, Mr. Todd. Ministers' statements. Ms. Thompson.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, later today I will be tabling the Inspection Report for the Enterprise Settlement Corporation.

--Applause

Thank you. On March 2 to 6, 1998, the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs conducted an inspection of the Enterprise Settlement Corporation. As a result of the inspection, numerous violations of legislation were found. There were 25 specific violations of the Settlements Act; Enterprise Settlement Corporation Continuation Order; Cities, Towns and Villages Act; Local Authorities Elections Act; Conflict of Interest Act and the Civil Emergency Measures Act.

Mr. Speaker, copies of the Inspection Report were distributed to the residents of Enterprise by the Settlement Administrator, Mr. Ian McCrea, earlier today. I will be going to Enterprise next week to hold a public meeting and to discuss the next steps with the residents. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

--Applause

Thank you, Ms. Thompson. Ministers' statements. Item 3, Members' statements. Mr. Enuaraq.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to take this opportunity to properly acknowledge the hard work being done by Senior Administrative Officers or SAOs, and especially those in my communities of Broughton Island, Clyde River and Pangnirtung. They function as best as they can with a minimal amount of qualified support staff. Mr. Speaker, with limited resources, they get the job done.

For those of you who may not know what SAOs do, let me briefly describe their responsibilities for you. All municipal officers and politicians, like ourselves, are responsible to the residents and to the GNWT for delivering and administering programs locally. The SAO is the key person in municipal management. He or she provides and coordinates the administrative, financial and management services for the municipality.

In many of the more remote communities, the SAO is responsible for all of these important functions. Most northern communities are very small and it is very difficult to find enough staff locally who are qualified to help the SAO to complete financial or managerial duties. It is sometimes more difficult to get people to come to the communities to take over those positions. Many times the SAOs have to rely on the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs regional or headquarters staff to help him or her fulfil their responsibilities. In most cases, the SAO will complete all required duties themselves with very little support. As a result, they do not have enough time to spend with their families or time to properly rest. The shortage of support staff available to help the SAO at the regional and headquarters levels makes the task even more difficult.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that the job of the SAO is very stressful and I wish to once again acknowledge their hard work. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Enuaraq. Members' statements. Mr. Miltenberger.

Members' statements. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Members' statements. Mr. Barnabas.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I will speak in Inuktitut. (Translation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Good afternoon. I would like to welcome my fellow colleagues back to the House. The former Member Ludy Pudluk used to say that he does not like meeting in the summer time and I also feel the same way. I would like to extend my gratitude to the people of Grise Fiord. They expressed some concerns about pay equity and the lack of office space. Those were the concerns expressed by the people of Grise Fiord.

There has been another sad event in my community, there has been a person who passed away, which of course is not a very happy event, but the people of Grise Fiord have tried to make my stay there happy. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (Translation ends)

--Applause

Thank you, Mr. Barnabas. Members' statements. Mr. Rabesca.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today as we all know is the first day of our spring session. I would like to welcome my colleagues back to this House. I hope everyone has had a very restful and enjoyable visit to their home, families and communities.

As you may recall, prior to closing the last sitting I pushed to get the Department of MACA to recognize that Rae-Edzo is a unique community and does not fall within the typical Municipal Funding Formula. Today, I would like to inform this House as well as thank the Minister of MACA for recognizing the unique situation Rae-Edzo is in. This, of course, is just a start in rectifying the total problems that have occurred and I hope that work will continue through the normal funding review process.

As in all funding formulas of this type, one will never make everyone happy. However, by assisting my community, at least we are not the lowest funded with the largest population, as was the case before we started this exercise. I, again, would like to welcome my colleagues back to this Chamber and thank Ms. Thompson for her assistance to the community of Rae-Edzo. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

--Applause

Thank you, Mr. Rabesca. Members' statements. Mr. Ootes.

Thank you, Mr. Ootes. Members' statements. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Members' statements. Mrs. Groenewegen.