Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we have been working very diligently in the development of the integrated service delivery model, which is a process where we work with a model for service delivery that is collaborative, community-based and integrates services at the community level. Part of that process was to do a full and complete inventory of all the services that all the communities have. There is whole range of sizes of communities and there are different service levels in a lot of different communities, and part of the process is to develop a baseline of what is acceptable, what is there and how far do we have to move to in fact standardize the service delivery. The Member is correct, that across the Northwest Territories there is a lack of consistency in terms of how services have evolved in various communities and it is one of the long-term issues that we are going to strive to address. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Supplementary, Mr. Lafferty.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Minister of Health and Social Services, Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we are moving as consistently and as comprehensively as we can in terms of health facilities. We have done work in Aklavik, Inuvik and we are doing work in Sachs, in Holman and Paulatuk. We are working with the Hay River Reserve in dealing with their issues. There is work to be done in the Hay River hospital as well, and Fort Smith is on the list. Mr. Speaker, we know that there are facilities that we have that need to be improved. We know that there are areas where we haven't got facilities and we have to put them in. It is a question of getting everything planned and into the process, accessing available funds the same as we try to do with the actual program services with the nurses. We have added doctors, we have added social workers, we have upgraded alcohol and drug workers and we are trying to do as much as we can, but we have time constraints and funding constraints. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Supplementary, Mr. Lafferty.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The honourable Minister of Health and Social Services, Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we are looking at protecting and upgrading the facilities we have, the investments we now have on the ground. As I said, Sachs, Paulatuk, Holman; we have just opened a health centre in Aklavik. We are doing work in Hay River and a number of other areas. We have other work to do; we have to compete for scarce capital dollars. The community service delivery models will address both the program needs and where there are shortages of infrastructure. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Your final supplementary, Mr. Lafferty.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Minister of Health and Social Services, Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, clearly in the business we are in, we all know in this House that there are more needs than there are resources. We do not upgrade just for the sake of upgrading. We upgrade for the sake of protecting our investment to make sure that we can continue to deliver high-quality programs from these critical facilities. We also know that there are places that need facilities, they have to be dealt with and we are taking steps to do that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. The time for question period has expired. Item 7, written questions. The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.

I have a written question for the Minister of Health and Social Services.

1. Can the Minister provide a firm date as to when the job competition will be posted for an alcohol and drug worker in Aklavik?
2. Can the Minister provide a firm date as to when the job competition will be held for a position under the new mental health/addictions investment for the community of Aklavik?
3. Can the Minister provide a timeline for the Department of Health and Social Services and the Inuvik Regional Health and Social Services Authority to once again involve the community of Aklavik in delivering mental health/addictions programming?
4. Will the Minister consider removing the requirement of any new mental health and addictions services provider or board in Aklavik to take on the debt of the previous board and, if not, why not?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Item 7, written questions. Item 8, returns to written questions. The honourable Member for North Slave, Mr. Lafferty.

Thank you. The honourable Member is seeking unanimous consent to return to item 6, oral questions. Are there any nays? There was a nay. You do not have consent. Item 8, returns to written questions. Item 9, replies to Opening Address. Item 10, petitions. Item 11, reports of standing and special committees. The honourable Member for Inuvik Boot Lake, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. The honourable Member for the Deh Cho, Mr. McLeod.

Inspection And Audit Powers And Penalties

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members initially had concerns that the enforcement powers included in the bill might be somewhat heavy handed. As Mr. Massey stated with respect to the inspection and auditing powers, "the fact that power is there to use at their discretion with no forewarning, and all over the deposit refund money and how they are doing that seems somewhat overkill."

In particular, there were concerns that the maximum fine of $50,000 for violating the act was unreasonably high. For example, Members would not want to see a volunteer-run not-for-profit group fined $50,000 for inadvertently failing to complete the proper paperwork for a depot it was running.

However, Members heard from Mr. Jack Walker of Petersen and Auger that the enforcement provisions may not be strong enough. Mr. Walker's concerns are discussed in more detail in another section of this report. The committee also noted that other Canadian jurisdictions with mandatory recycling programs have similar inspection and audit powers.

Further, the Minister and department indicated that strong enforcement powers and heavy maximum fines are needed for deterrence in the case of large distributors that intentionally do not comply with the act and regulations. As a result, the committee was generally satisfied that the enforcement provisions in this bill are reasonable.

The committee notes that the bill would allow for specific penalties to be set in regulations, and would urge the government to consider whether smaller maximum penalties could be set in the beverage container recovery regulations for offences by depot and processing centre operators.

Further enforcement issues specific to the proposed beverage container recovery program are discussed in a later section.

Exemptions

The act allows for regulations to be made providing exemptions from the regulations. Questions were asked about why such exemptions would ever be appropriate. The department advised the committee that exemptions would only be considered in cases where distributors set up their own program which provides an equivalent level of environmental stewardship. The committee would suggest that any exemptions should be granted with caution and then only on the recommendation of the advisory committee.

Proposed Beverage Container Recovery Program And Regulations

The following are issues that were raised specifically with respect to the proposed beverage container recovery program.

Costs

Members and some witnesses suspect the government has underestimated the funds necessary to run this program. For example, the department indicated that it has budgeted approximately $10,000 per depot for setup costs. The committee asked several witnesses whether they thought this amount would be adequate, and heard that the costs of setting up and running a depot may vary significantly from community to community depending on who runs it, the availability of space, existing equipment, utility costs and the hours of operation. In most cases, costs will probably exceed $10,000.

Members would also suggest that transportation and handling costs are another area where more analysis and discussion are needed. For example, Mr. Greg Rowe from Tri-R Recycling in Hay River identified the need for adequate handling fees to be paid to the processing centres and depots in order to ensure they are able to run viable operations. More discussion is needed with stakeholders about what if any transportation costs would be paid out of the environment fund.

The committee had concerns about whether the department would be able to enforce the regulations within the estimated budget. Although the Minister indicated only one new full-time position is planned, Members question whether it is realistic to expect existing field staff to enforce this program in addition to their other responsibilities. At minimum they will require training which could in itself be a substantial cost.

Administration

Some presenters were very concerned about the administrative and paperwork burden that could result from the regulations. Ms. Judy Harder from Wrangling River Supply in Inuvik warned, "I see the paperwork looking a lot like GST.... it's really important not to give too much paperwork in addition, because with paperwork comes that additional cost and there's already a lot in a business."

Members are sympathetic to Ms. Harder's concerns, and would not want to see this program become an administrative nightmare with costs spiraling out of control. The committee would urge the government to consult in particular with small retailers, and groups and businesses that will be operating depots in order to ensure the paperwork required from them is reasonable and manageable.

Enforcement

Mr. Walker emphasized the need for the act and regulations to be strenuously enforced to prevent what he referred to as "bootlegging." One scenario he provided was a truckload of soft drinks or juice brought from Alberta into the NWT. The "bootlegger" would have paid the lower Alberta deposits, which would allow him or her to sell the drinks at a lower cost than drinks with the NWT deposit, and enjoy an unfair advantage over NWT businesses complying with the regulations. Depots would have no way of knowing the NWT deposit had not been paid on those containers, and so would pay for their return, potentially costing the environment fund thousands of dollars. Mr. Walker's fear, which the committee believes does need to be addressed, is that "an environment where legitimate wholesalers and retailers are at a serious price disadvantage will be created and we will not be in business for long given our slim margins, if this act and regulations are not carefully thought out and executed." Mr. Walker is also concerned that prosecutions under this legislation may not be a priority for either the GNWT Department of Justice of the federal Crown. The committee would like to stress that the government must be vigilant in finding ways to minimize the risk of illegal activities so that legitimate businesses are not put at an unfair disadvantage.

One potential solution suggested by our colleague, Mr. Brendan Bell, the MLA for Yellowknife South, is that containers could be marked in some way to show the NWT deposit has been paid. The Minister advised that this had been considered, but that preliminary studies had indicated marking all beverage containers would not be feasible. Members would suggest the Minister request the advisory committee to investigate all possibilities further.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask Ms. Lee to continue on with the report.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Member for Range Lake, Ms. Lee.

Need For Public Education

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Some presenters spoke about how critical public education will be to the success of a beverage container recycling program, and underlined the need to have funds available for this purpose. While voluntary programs are already operating successfully in some communities such as Inuvik, recycling will be new for others. Mayor Evelyn Storr from Aklavik provided the example of people taking cans of pop out to their camps. "What they want to bring back is their muktuk and their fish and they do not want to bring back empty cans...We are asking people to try to change their lifestyle when we ask them to separate their garbage. Before, garbage was garbage."

The committee sees this as one of the reasons why it will be so important to have representation from small communities on the advisory committee, so that programs and education strategies can be designed to be as relevant to them as to the larger centres where recycling is already more common.

Costs To Individuals

The department shared with the committee estimates of the costs to the average NWT household of the proposed beverage container recycling program. The estimates are $2.61 per month for households that return their containers to claim their deposits back, and $7.95 per month for households that do not return their containers.

The committee would like to remind the government that these are averages only, and that some households with more family members, or who consume more beverage containers than average will have higher costs. These costs may be significant for people with fixed incomes, and this should be reflected in the income support program.

What Happens To Collected Products?

Members heard from Ms. Katherine Silcock, from the City of Yellowknife, that she has experienced a number of difficulties finding places in Alberta that are willing to take NWT waste products including pop cans and tires. The committee would urge the government to get to work immediately on discussions with businesses and governments in other jurisdictions in order to ensure there are places to send NWT products.

What Happens To Containers That Are Sold Before The Deposits Start?

The department indicated it expects that depots will end up taking in some containers that are sold before the deposits begin to be collected. Although this will be a cost to the environment fund, on the whole the result will be positive as containers will be recycled rather than going to landfills. The department will need to ensure depots are given startup funds that are adequate to cover any deposits they may have to pay out if containers have been stockpiled in the community for some time.

Will Retailers Who Buy Products From Outside The NWT Have To Pay Two Deposits?

The committee heard that some retailers in the NWT buy beverages from Alberta and are already paying Alberta deposits on them. Ms. Judy Harder was concerned that this will mean she and other retailers will have to increase their prices to reflect both deposits. The committee was, however, advised that NWT retailers may be eligible for refunds from the Alberta Beverage Container Recycling Corporation provided the beverages are not resold or recycled in Alberta. The committee urges the government to take steps to ensure that retailers pay only the NWT deposit on beverage containers, possibly including inter-jurisdictional agreements which would take the onus off of individual retailers to reclaim their deposits.

Who Will Run Depots And Processing Centres?

The department assured the committee that if there is no group or business in a community that is interested in operating a depot, no one will be forced to do it. However, one witness, Ms. Barb Armstrong of AB Salvage in Inuvik, wondered about what would happen in the opposite situation, where there is more than one group or business interested in recycling. How will the government decide who has the opportunity to run the depot or processing centre?

The department will need to consult and communicate on this issue in the near future so that existing businesses and organizations will know where they stand.

Location Of Processing Facilities

The Minister has advised the committee that Hay River, Yellowknife and Inuvik are the proposed locations for processing facilities. Members would recommend the government give some consideration to locating these facilities in smaller communities so they too could see some economic benefits from the program.

Other Programs

Presenters had a number of suggestions for future programs to deal with materials such as electronic waste -- also called e-waste -- batteries, used motor oil, construction waste and tires. These are all good suggestions which the committee hopes government will look at in future years. The possibility of programs targeted at industry, in particular resource exploration and development companies who have usually buried their waste or brought it to community landfills, was also discussed. Members hope this legislation will encourage all citizens, including corporate citizens, to be more proactive about reducing, reusing and recycling waste. Ms. Armstrong summed it up well when she said, "long gone are the days of solution to pollution is dilution...You bring it in, take it out." The committee would also encourage the government to consider how programs under this legislation might be tied with other environmental initiatives such as cleanups of old industrial sites.

Members hope that interested communities will be able to access money from the environment fund to undertake pilot projects. For example, Mayor Winnie Cadieux from Enterprise indicated that her community would like to enter into discussions with the government about potential reuse programs that could be located there.

Conclusion

The committee was impressed with the number of private individuals, business people, and members of environmental groups who made submissions or came to speak on this bill, and who are clearly willing to do what it takes to make this legislation work. Members would encourage the government to take heed of the advice provided by these people, and to welcome them as partners in developing and implementing programs and regulations.

Bill 22 is only the first step, Mr. Speaker. As Ms. Erica Janes from Ecology North said, "the next government needs to be committed to this legislation and committed to the overall desire to protect our fragile environment." The committee very much hopes that this will be the case.

That concludes the report on Bill 22. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Member for Hay River North to introduce Bill 25.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. The honourable Member for Hay River North, Mr. Delorey.