Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just getting back to the hunters and the trappers in the NWT and with the new Wildlife Act coming into effect, hopefully in the next year or so and with changes to that. Would this split in the department allow the hunters and trappers to do some window shopping when it comes to trapping programs; fur programs, trapping assistance, compensation for cabins that have been lost in forest fires? Is this going to make it even easier for them to deal with the government? In a lot of cases a lot of hunters and trappers really have a limited ability to read and write. How are the new departments going to help the hunters and trappers deal more effectively with government programs?

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. Mr. Bell.

The split shouldn't have a bearing on the level of service that the hunters and trappers are receiving. It will be the renewable resource officers, under the new department that will be delivering the programming. Save for the one program, which the Member referred to, in terms of compensation due to fire or other natural disasters for hunters and trappers. That program related to fire would come under ENR. The other programs that the Member was referring to come under ITI and would be administered by a renewable resource officer.

We are vastly improving this program and have had a lot of positive response from hunters and trappers over the past few years. We have put some resources and some effort into this area and we will continue to do so. We think it is a priority. I know the Member is aware that the support for traditional economy and the diversification for the economy was one of the main tenants of our strategic plan. We think it is of critical importance to support this industry.

I have had a number of discussions with the federal Environment Minister. We were successful in getting some additional funding this year, federal funding, put toward the Vegreville facility, which does humane trapping research and I indicated the importance of that in keeping the agreements that we have with the EU open. I think the premise that we have arrived at, is that the traditional economy is very much a part of the legitimate economy of the Northwest Territories. It shouldn't be pushed off to the side and characterized as something different, tucked away in a wildlife section. This really is about economic development. We want to make sure it gets the focus and support it deserves and that is in fact why it is housed in ITI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Mr. Villeneuve.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. When we are talking about program delivery, are the renewable resource officers that are now in the regions and the communities going to be the same people who are going to be manage the ENR aspects of the whole project?

I just don't see the point in splitting the department up. In the regions you are still going to have just a sole source, one point of contact for both departments through renewable resource officers. How does that make it a little more visibly split, for people who are dealing with the GNWT?

A lot of people have issues with the renewable resource officers in their area. If they go to that same officer with an issue that has something to do with the environment or natural resources, I think they will probably get the same level of feedback that they currently are not getting. What is the Minister's opinion on that?

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. Mr. Bell.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We don't believe that the trappers will notice a negative impact on the level of service delivery. If anything, we think the heightened focus will stand these programs in good stead when it comes time to budget negotiations and business planning time. We think the potential for additional resources is heightened by the fact that there will be additional focus on this segment.

The Member I think is asking the question, since you've divided the department will it be the RROs delivering the programs from two separate departments. We will be able to do that and we are very cognizant of not wanting to disrupt service delivery in regions and not having to have people learn all over again where they go with their furs and who they talk to about trading in their traps and these kinds of things.

It will be the same people, but there will be protocol arrangements if there is a program that an RRO is in charge of delivering for ENR, as opposed to the bulk of them with ITI, then we will have a protocol arrangement, much the same way we do with -- the Member will be familiar with the Business Credit Corporation -- contracting RWED for service delivery in a region. We have a number of protocol arrangements.

There was no other way to do this, other than add a lot of administrative capacity and create redundancies all over the place, which would have been very, very expensive if we had to add additional staff to just deliver one or two programs in a region. It made much more sense, we believe, to have some sharing of resources between the two departments and that is why we set up these protocol arrangements and agreements.

If there are issues, where the Member believes, from hearing from his constituents, that service has not been adequate in a region, that is something to bring to our attention, so that we can in fact deal with it and ensure that hunters and trappers are getting the level of service they are entitled to, and are comfortable with the support the department is providing, from both our current department and the department going forward.

I think it is important that we recognize the importance of hunting and trapping. We are, and do intend to be, very client focussed. This is a department that has spread and has most of its resources on the ground in regions, so we think we are effectively able to deliver programming. But where we can improve, we certainly aim to do that and I hope the Member will work with us in bringing some of these issues to our attention. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. General comments. Next I have Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In terms of the new positions that were created with both ITI and ENR, I think there were 23 new positions. How many of the 23 positions actually went out to an open competition and weren't excluded to only indeterminate employees? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Bell.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It was the senior management positions that were kept as indeterminate and we went internally first, to try to fill those. I'm not sure if all those positions have in fact been filled internally. The ones that aren't will go to an external process and in terms of what numbers that constitutes between ITI and ENR, the total number is 23, as the Member noted. I don't have the information here readily in front of me, in terms of which positions.

I guess I could go through the positions and we could make a determination on each position, position by position, as to whether that is a senior management position, whether it went to internal competition. I don't know that we have the information to tell us if in fact that has been filled or if we have had to go to plan B.

Is that the level of detail the Member is looking for? If it is, I can certainly provide it.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. What I am really looking for is a rationale on why the decision was made to go indeterminate only, on the senior management positions in both ITI and ENR. From strictly a transparency and an accountability and an openness, and you name it, you can say it here, I believe the job competition should have went out and been open to anybody, not just indeterminate employees. I am just looking for a rationale, which is fine. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Bell.

The quick answer is we believe that there are a number of competent people in the regions and we are mostly talking about the superintendents in the regions, who are probably more qualified or better qualified for these positions in many instances, because they have been through and understand the current management regime in RWED. Obviously, where that wouldn't be the case, we would then not have a successful internal applicant and go to an external competition. Where we don't have to spend money on an external competition, because we feel that the best candidate is internal, we would go with that internal candidate. That has been the aim here.

We think that this is a good opportunity for some of our current staff. I have traveled extensively in the regions and met with our regional staff and I am certainly convinced that there are some very, very competent people on the ground. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Mr. Ramsay. Thank you. General comments, Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a comment and a question about the point that is being raised here. That has to do with the hiring of these new positions being done internally and open only to indeterminate positions. The Minister just indicated that that only applies to senior management, but even with that I don't really understand why that is the situation.

One would think that when there are openings like this, those that are within the system probably have had a heads-up, because they are familiar with the department, they are well known in the department and if they are good at what they do, they are probably going to get a pretty good response throughout the selection process, right from the beginning at the screening stage to the interview process and in terms of getting references from people that they are known to already. The people inside the system already have a heads-up or leg-up, so I don't understand why, because if this were wide open, preference would have been given to those who are already a long-term northern employee, affirmative action candidate and such.

I would like to know, for these new positions, what would have been a pool of people that would have been eligible to apply then, because it was for the senior management positions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Braden. Mr. Bell, sorry.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am going to confirm this, but I believe the senior management positions, primarily the superintendent positions, the competitions were first internal GNWT. Obviously, the next step after that is if you don't have qualified people, then you go to a full-blown competition and advertise north and south. It is more time consuming and costs more money.

As the Member has indicated, we do believe that much of the expertise does reside in the department. Potentially people in an open job competition, we think, many of these employees would have won the competition at any rate. We have had a difficult time staffing many of our positions in the department. There are currently a number of unstaffed positions. It is very difficult to fill positions. We wanted to make sure that there was a minimum of service disruption and we were able to roll this out effectively as of April 1st. That really was our motivation in this regard. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Could I ask where the hiring process is at? Is the department hiring internally already? Or is all this in a plan, subject to approval in this House? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Bell.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe we have advertised now and the competitions close shortly -- I don't have the exact dates -- and then we would begin the screening process. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Ms. Lee.