Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, when the Western Caucus first looked at this issue, I agreed that the status quo should continue. Mr. Speaker, at that time, the timetable set by the Constitutional Working Group saw resolution of the constitutional process taking place a lot more quickly than what we expect now. I felt that for the short period of time, we would have had envisioned before the implementation of a new constitution that we could get by, and we could tie a Boundaries Commission to the implementation of the government that resulted from that new Constitution because it would be for just a short period of time.
Mr. Speaker, we know that the Constitution will not be approved before division and that the length of time that the 14th Assembly will govern looks to be longer than what we expected a year and a half ago. I have now changed my mind, Mr. Speaker. I believe that we do need to have a Boundaries Commission. This is why I have seconded this motion. Mr. Speaker, the major reason for me to support this motion is that I believe we need to have the capacity to set up good government. I do not believe we can set up a government that will enjoy public confidence with just 14 Members. Under the current arrangement, Mr. Speaker, Ordinary Members outnumber the Executive Council by almost two to one. We have eight Members of Cabinet and 15 Ordinary Members. The public sees this as a key part of maintaining government accountability. Cabinet needs to build a consensus to make sure it has the support to move ahead with new initiatives. With 14 Members, Mr. Speaker, we have agreed to go to a Cabinet of six. In spite of the reduced population we will have in the Northwest Territories, we will still have the same departments and government responsibilities. It will be very taxing work for those selected to Cabinet. My experience in the last two and a half years of being in Cabinet, Mr. Speaker, with an eight Member Cabinet, you have to be prepared to put in long hours, and it will get much, much longer if we have only six.
Mr. Speaker, there is another problem, too, with accountability with six on Cabinet, with one Speaker and six Cabinet Members, that leaves seven Members as Ordinary Members. The balance of power shifts significantly from what we have right now. If any one Ordinary Member is travelling or out of the House because they are ill or even just on the phone, Cabinet will completely control the process. To get support for initiatives or legislation, the Cabinet will only have to convince one Ordinary Member to go along with it. The public will not see this as protecting their interests.
Mr. Speaker, I would argue that the functioning of the House will also be extremely difficult with just 14 Members. We now have 15 Ordinary Members. These Members now serve, five each on each of the three standing committees, with the Chair and deputy chair of each committee then serving on Government Operations. With only seven Ordinary Members, there certainly will not be enough Members to divide up into a number of committees, certainly not three committees as we have now without a significant amount of overlap. More likely, we will see one committee of seven Members which would have to oversee all issues now sent to committee. That means that each Member will have an awful lot more to do. It means that they will have less time to work in their constituency and on constituency issues. It will also translate, most likely, into less time for Ordinary Members to pursue information in committees which again will mean that the Ordinary Members will be less able to hold the government accountable. Some suggest that a smaller government could be more responsive. I say, Mr. Speaker, in a smaller government, the Members will be too busy to even talk to their constituents as much as we do now.
Mr. Speaker, I also think that there is a significant liability of a court challenge given the current make up of our seats. A court challenge, Mr. Speaker, I believe, could be based on just the Yellowknife seats. They do not even have to look at comparing any of the seats in Yellowknife to outside, but just within Yellowknife because the size discrepancy just within Yellowknife has the smallest seat in Yellowknife less than half the size of the largest seat. There is no justification for that kind of difference in size. So somebody going to apply to the courts could allege that the boundaries are not fair right now. Yes, Mr. Speaker, some have expressed some concern about the fact that a Boundaries Commission might result in Yellowknife getting another seat or two. Given the population, Yellowknife probably deserves another seat or two. I certainly think we need to give the Boundaries Commission a chance to have a look at the issue. Mr. Speaker, someone suggested that we should wait for the challenge. I would say that the responsible approach is to be proactive with the debate taking place in this House today and the coverage it will get. I have no qualms about saying, Mr. Speaker, that a challenge is now assured. Rather than put off what we will probably be forced to do and rushing through it, Mr. Speaker, I say, let us do the responsible thing, do it now and take the time that it requires to do a good job.
I have also heard, Mr. Speaker, concerns about the cost of adding extra members. I would have to say that in the grand scheme of things, Mr. Speaker, the cost is not very big. We are talking about a $600+ million operation here. To add four Ordinary Members would cost approximately $1.2 million. Mr. Speaker, I am willing to bet that the reduction in the size of Cabinet from eight to six will more than offset the cost of four additional Ordinary Members. We could add four Ordinary Members without driving up the cost of government, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I have also heard people say that more MLAs does not mean better government. You know, Mr. Speaker, that is right. More MLAs do not automatically translate into better government. However, Mr. Speaker, I would argue that fewer MLAs, like 14, will mean a less accountable government, and I do not think the public wants that. Let us hear what the public has to say. I personally think that we need 17 or 18 Members for this House to operate in a manner the public will see as accountable. The only way we will find out for sure is by sending this out to the public. Let us vote, yes, for this motion, and let us allow the public to have their say. Let them tell the Boundaries Commission what they think about the numbers of Members and what the seats should look like in the Northwest Territories. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
--Applause