Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That's my point. My point is that we have a contractual agreement to provide a public service. If those contracts were not in place, we as a government would have been providing that service and those people would have been protected under health boards or protected under the Public Service Act as it stands today. But because a contractual arrangement is with a party, regardless of whether it's a hamlet council, a community council or whatever, it's still a contract. Does that mean that this government can undermine our legislation that we passed in this House, the Human Rights Act, and now bring in this act knowing that it discriminates between persons regardless of how the contract reads? Because if you're paying somebody to provide a service for $50,000 knowing that a person doing similar work will cost you $80,000, that's discrimination on the basis of equal pay for work of equal value. So I know you've been trying to say if we do this, we're going have to do it to the whole Northwest Territories. I'm asking that we consider those people that provide a public service under a contract arrangement with this government and be considered as such under legislation.
David Krutko on Bill 14: An Act To Amend The Public Service Act
In the Legislative Assembly on June 11th, 2003. See this statement in context.
Bill 14: An Act To Amend The Public Service Act
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
June 10th, 2003
Page 962
See context to find out what was said next.