Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in this bill, I think some people should learn from the past, especially coming from the 13th Assembly. I for one feel we were suckered into passing a motion with bad advice, in which we were under the understanding that through that resolution, we were going to be able to clawback the supplementary pension of the supplementary funds that were there.

I think on that basis, we decided to vote with the understanding that there was a surplus. We had over a $100 million deficit and we had to do something. We looked at every avenue that was out there. We looked at the pots of money available to us. We had to make some big decisions. We made some tough decisions. We were not liked because of some of those decisions, but we had to make the decisions. One of the decisions was because of the amount of money that was in different supplementary funds, if it was possible to take those funds back, put it against the deficit and bring down the impact of the deficit on the people of the Northwest Territories.

We assumed that was possible. We were given information and advice to that, in which we voted on the basis of...the majority of the Members of the House were rookies. I for one was a rookie.

I think it is that type of advice that I have concerns in this bill right here, because my concern is the effects this bill has on other people, not in this Assembly but in future Assemblies, and in Assemblies prior to this will be affected. I think in order to do justice to everyone, we should ensure that we do it right. We do not want to be put into a situation where people can stand up in this House and say, "You are getting a free pension. You are not going to put anything into it."

Just to make it clear to those people out there who can hear me, for me to buy back the pension of the 13th Assembly, that is going to cost me $128,000. Is that fair? I think as a government when we make comments or statements that it is a freebie, it is not a freebie. You have to put into this fund. There is a surplus to this fund of I believe $9 million. The $9 million surplus did not come from the majority of the coffers of this government. Some of it did, but those were put in place because of the good investments by the people that are investing that fund. The intention of a pension fund is how you invest those funds and how you manage those funds. I for one should praise the people who are managing that fund.

Again, getting back to my point, I think it is important as the Legislature that whenever we make statements that we have a one-time option, if you do not buy in by the end of the term of the 14th Assembly, that is it. There is no other alternative. I think that for us to tie the hands of previous or future Assemblies, it limits the ability of a Legislature to basically develop and mold a system that is workable, compatible and you can basically tie it into other Legislatures across the country.

I have to really sit here and bite my tongue when I think about people that I knew, such as Mark Evaloarjuk in the 13th Assembly, who is no longer with us. He did not have a chance to enjoy his pension. We have Pete Fraser who passed away a number of years ago. He was almost at the age of being able to enjoy his pension, but he is no longer here. I know a lot of people in political life, such as Johnny Charlie, who put 30 years of his life into being a community leader. Most of our chiefs and band councillors in our communities do not have a pension.

I think it is sad to say that just because you serve in public life, you have to give up something to get something. I think we are giving up something being in this Legislature. When I came here in the 13th Assembly I do not think I had one gray hair. Now, I am almost looking like Jake Ootes.

-- Laughter

I think the stress and impact of the work that is associated with this, and the effect that it has not only on yourself but previous Members of this Legislature. I know my predecessor to this Legislature had a hard time getting a job after he left office. It took him many months, if not years, to build up that credibility to find a job within the private sector. To develop yourself so you can find those opportunities, for myself, I have served in public service with regard to aboriginal politics since 1984. I have seen a lot of good people come and go, many good people who are no longer with us. That is the part that has an effect on me, looking at ensuring what we do here is fair and that it does not obligate or put restrictions on other groups or people from previous Assemblies and the effect it will have on future Assemblies. It has to be construed that we have a system in place that flows from the previous 33 Members right up to the 13th Assembly, and the ones that are going to come in the future.

On that, I will be making some amendments to the motions to ensure that it is fair. I think that in order to do that, we have to ensure this act is fair. I will be making amendments to the resolution and will speak on that at the time of my amendments, so that people can see exactly how bills or acts we pass in this Legislature have an affect if we do not have all the information, or do not do it with the understanding of what the implications are on previous or future Assemblies. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will speak very briefly to this, but I first of all want to say that the one thing the public expects from us on this bill and other bills is to ensure that the information we have is accurate. I do accept Ms. Lee's apology for having given the media some inaccurate information, which may have misled or coloured people's thinking on this issue. I do take a bit of exception though to the statement that was made today about this being surplus public money. This is not all public money. There was some public money in it. I believe somewhere in the neighbourhood of a third of what is there now is public money. I do not have an exact figure.

Some people have said that there were no contributions by Members in past Legislative Assemblies. I am told by Members that there were contributions. A lot of the money that is in here is money that has been earned through investments in the pension plan.

There is a question, who does that money belong to? Who does any money in any pension plan belong to? Does it belong to the pension plan of those people who paid into it or does it belong to government? I guess the question I put out to other Members to consider is when does a government dip into pension plans? Is it appropriate for a government to dip into pension plans? For example, the Ontario Teachers Federation has a huge surplus in their pension plan. They are public servants, and there are other public pension plans that all have some public contribution in them. Should the Ontario government dip into the Ontario teachers' pension plan? I do not know. It is a serious philosophical question. Whether it is an MLA's pension plan, whether it is a teacher's pension plan or a union worker's pension plan, whose ever it may be, when do we step into a pension plan and begin to dip out the money?

I do not think we should view ourselves in our role here in any particular way. I do not feel that I am abusing my authority. I do not believe that is what I came here for. I did not believe it when I ran for election. I do not believe it now. I will not abuse my authority, but at the same time, I want to ensure that all people in the Northwest Territories are treated fairly. I do not like the suggestion that somehow we have been abusing our authority. I for one have not done that at all and I will not do that.

Mr. Speaker, on this whole issue, really the fundamental question in my mind is if we begin to dip into pension plans as a government, where does that stop? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the commission that reviewed our compensation recommended that we deal with this issue and I have no problem with this House considering the issue of pensions. I regret that commission did not make a recommendation on pensions, because I would point out that this House has already accepted most of the recommendations that commission made, and most of them will, of course, come into effect after the next election.

Mr. Speaker, in the 13th Assembly, we were faced with a difficult financial situation and we agreed to end the supplementary pension. We were cutting jobs and salaries and it was the right thing to do. Mr. Speaker, I am not opposed to considering pension plan changes but, Mr. Speaker, like other changes to our compensation, I think the pension changes should come into effect after the next election, a similar approach that we have taken with the recommendations that were made on our compensation.

The pension plan we ended was a so-called 3 percent plan. I know that people thought that was too rich. I think it is important that the public understand that Members did contribute to that pension, but the public still thought we did not contribute enough to justify a 3 percent pension.

The pension proposed today is a 2 percent pension. That is better than 3 percent, I think, in the eyes of the public. Mr. Speaker, I think I could personally go and justify to my constituents a 1 or a 1.5 percent pension, but I am having trouble with the 2 percent. If we cut the old one in half, I think we would be able to say that it was justified.

For those reasons, Mr. Speaker, I will have to vote against the bill in its current form. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Deh Cho, Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am not in the habit of turning down money, even if it means receiving it when I am 60 years old.

I have given this issue quite a bit of consideration. I am fully aware that my colleagues have given it a lot of thought. Some have even gone as far as providing confidential Cabinet documents to the media, as I heard this morning when I tuned into the radio station...I meant Caucus information that is only available to us.

I was in support when the supplementary pension was withdrawn during the last session. I think most of the North was. The rationale at that time was to lead by example. I fully supported that because the government was in a deficit situation.

Today, now that we are in a surplus, we are reconsidering that. However, the surplus situation is not going to stay in place for very long. Our Finance Minister has indicated that we will be in a deficit situation by next year.

I really have had to give it serious consideration. I went through Hansard and went back to when the days of the supplementary pension were introduced and voted on. I wanted to see what was stated at that time. What was the rationale for introducing such a pension? However, there was no discussion in those days. The motion was put on a table and it was voted on without any discussion. Nobody said anything on it. It is really hard to go back and look at this thing historically.

I have heard the arguments for it and against it. I have heard arguments by my colleagues, stating that we will have a difficult time as former politicians after our term is done to obtain a job. However, when I look around and see what the former MLAs and Ministers are doing now, it is obvious most of them have very good jobs. If some people get elected and get a position as an MLA and do not have the qualifications prior to coming here, they are still going to have a difficult time once they leave here. They are not going to have any more qualifications other than the experience as an MLA. They will continue to have problems obtaining jobs.

I plan to live for a long time yet. I plan to be a contributing member of society for many years. I knew the terms when I was elected. I came into this position with my eyes open. I knew that the supplementary pension was gone. I accepted that. I continue to think that this pension we have currently in place is fair. I am willing to live with that.

However, what really seals my decision to vote against this bill is when I look into my own riding and see the economic and social conditions my communities are in, I certainly cannot accept it. If I had my way, all supplementary pensions would be terminated. However, we are not voting on that today. My position on this is I will be voting against it. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes, Mr. Allen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I feel compelled to reply and speak to the motion. As well as many Members across the hall and including myself, we are newly elected to the 14th Legislative Assembly. I do not beg to differ, however, in the context of the information provided to us by the actuary, I still feel that we have put our political life on the line. We have worked non-stop for the betterment of the people of the Northwest Territories. Some of us have taken great strides in trying to improve the socio-economic development of our communities. We have sacrificed our own ability at the regional and territorial level to participate in what is now a highly developed territory. That is certainly my reason for supporting this bill.

The obvious reason for myself is that we have worked diligently to provide the same level of opportunities for our people. In doing so, we have foregone those opportunities. I beg to differ on the fact that, and I share the same sentiments as my colleague for Weledeh, we are not here to abuse our power, nor are we looking for authority. We have complied with the requirements to be transparent and open and accountable and we have in many of our portfolios.

We are also working with our Members to ensure we have met the demands of our people across the Northwest Territories.

I do not think this is putting our people at any risk, but to allow ourselves as Members who want to support this motion, so that we have an opportunity at some point in our future to share in those benefits as we do work on behalf of the people of the Territories. Mr. Speaker, I am in support of this motion. I will vote in favour of it. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Allen. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Yellowknife South, Mr. Bell.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am speaking in favour of this bill. I have done so already previously in the media. I do not imagine that will surprise many people. I agree entirely with Mr. Handley. I do not believe government should be in the business of dipping into pension plans. Certainly neither should private companies. We have seen what can happen when private companies leave pension plans unfunded and then go belly-up. I do not think it is fair. I think people rely on this money, people's families, possibly estates, count on this money and it is not fair to leave them underfunded or short-funded.

There have been other options that have been talked about, as Members have indicated. The possibility of taking the surplus was there. The Members of this House have decided that would not be appropriate. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the entire supplementary pension is unprotected. We can simply swoop in, in one vote, and take it all and leave past Members high and dry. Well, you know, we are not prepared to do that and I think rightly so. That is not fair to past Members, to their families. We have a fiduciary responsibility. There are still Members in this House currently sitting here before us who are enrolled in that pension plan. I do not think that would be fair at all.

Mr. Speaker, there is no new public money going into this and there has not been for some time. Members are contributing and have contributed in the past. This is also only two-thirds of past pension. The fact remains that there is a surplus that will take us forward without new contributions, and our actuaries tell us it is a conservative estimate with some eight to ten years before any new money would be involved.

Mr. Speaker, I guess for me, standing here today, having talked to my colleagues, I am aware that this bill is going to pass. I had to ask myself if it passes, would I sign up for this pension? The answer, Mr. Speaker, is yes. Knowing that, and knowing that I would sign up for this, I am not prepared to stand here today and say I do not support this and then turn around and say look at that, I will accept the will of the House and quietly sign up. I do not think that is fair.

One of my colleagues has insisted, or suggested -- requested, I suppose, that Members stand here today and make it known how they feel about this pension and which way they are going to vote. Mr. Speaker, I do not even think that is the real issue. We know it is going to pass. I think the thing that Members should be speaking to is whether or not they intend to sign up for it. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak in favour of the bill. I am going to be supporting this with my vote. Mr. Speaker, I was one of those rookie MLAs that came in here very idealistic and bright-eyed into the 13th Assembly, having no idea what I came to face, wondering why so many of the Ministers and former MLAs had not come back, had decided not to run again. I was not here very long before I started to realize why some of them maybe did not want to come back. We were facing a $150 million deficit. We at the time were facing a rollback of the entire public service of 6 or 7 percent. I had the job of going back to my riding to explain to members of the public service why their wages and benefits were being cut and we thought it was the right thing to do at the time.

Having said that, Members of the 13th Assembly did have to make some tough choices. Things such as the rollback of public service wages, cuts to programs. We had to do the responsible thing and address the deficit and we did that. I find it ironic then that some of those Members from earlier who had created this supplementary pension for themselves lived in happier times in terms of government largesse and they were able to do more for their constituents.

We came along. We had to make the tough decisions. We had to deliver the bad news and at the same time, rolled back our own wages as Members and did away with supplementary pensions. Well, you know, times have changed a little since then. In looking at the actuarial reports and looking at the surplus in this supplementary pension, I look at it and I say if, through good management and good investment, there is this surplus money there, why not bring the Members of the 14th Assembly back into -- not to the full extent, not at the 3 percent, but at the 2 percent -- why not bring them back into this benefit that was set up? This money is there.

If we do not want to do that, then we are going to be so righteous, I suppose, to say there should be no supplementary pension. Well then, let us take the whole pension out. Let us take the full amount of the supplementary pension, what is it, $25 million? I mean, if you want to do that, let us put it all back into general revenues.

-- Applause

If the surplus is there, then it was there for a purpose; to provide a supplementary pension to Members. I do not see what Mr. Krutko or myself or any of the Members who came in on the 13th Assembly, what have we done less than our predecessors? Have we not worked as hard? Have we not made the same sacrifices? Have we not done our jobs just as well? Why should the pre-13th Assembly Members be the beneficiaries of the supplementary pension and we are not?

My position on this all along has been either kill it for everybody or, since there is this big surplus which is not going to require any more public funds, do the right thing and bring the Members of the 14th Assembly into the supplementary pension. That is my position. I think it is not the right thing to take something away from these former Members, so I am going to be supporting the bill to support supplementary pensions. Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for North Slave, Mr. Lafferty.

Mr. Lafferty, we have a point of privilege. The honourable Member for Range Lake, Ms. Lee.

Point of Privilege

Mr. Speaker, I rise to raise a point of privilege. I appreciate the debate that is going on. I believe that this is the right thing to do. The Member for North Slave just suggested that I had somehow intentionally misled the media. I have already indicated -- I did not apologize -- I clarified that I made an error in one message.

The implication that I am somehow out there spreading misinformation, I find that to be an infringement of my right as a Member to show integrity and respect for this House. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. I am not sure whether you have a point of privilege. The Chair did not hear a point of privilege. Your rights have not been violated. I would just caution the Member. I was going to call the Member to order anyway, to caution him on his language and the direction that he may have been going in speaking to the principle of the bill. To the principle of the bill, Mr. Lafferty.

Mr. Lafferty, to the principle of the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Nitah.

Thank you, Mr. Nitah. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Hay River North, Mr. Delorey.