Thank you, Mr. Braden. Honourable Minister responsible for the WCB, Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think while Justice Schuler's decision did comment on the policy in effect as of 2004, the decision and the ruling was based on the policy in place as of 2001. So that was the reason that the WCB was considering having a constitutional look at the 2004 policy, to see if it would fit the test. In fact, I'm advised the WCB has decided that they are going to go out to stakeholders and take a look at redrafting the 2004 policy over the course of the next few months. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to see if I get this straight now. So the WCB has decided not to take the direct step of going to court and checking its work out, it's instead going to go to stakeholders and add yet more months, perhaps even longer, to getting a policy that is constitutionally correct, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The WCB is aware of what the ruling is in the Martin case; it is quite aware of the ruling from Justice Schuler; and they will be working to ensure that the policy that they bring in is one that fits within the Constitution of Canada. But they are also hoping to work with stakeholders, injured workers and employers to make sure that the policy reflects not only that constitutional requirement, but what northern workers and employers are expecting to see from the WCB.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Mr. Speaker, in the case of the injured worker, Mr. Ivan Valic, the 19 years of delays and denials and systemic discrimination and avoidance and delay of seeing this man at least get his day before our system and have his case heard, Mr. Speaker, we're just going again in loops and circles at least with this man and I understand potentially a few dozen other workers who have chronic pain cases before our Appeal Tribunal. Mr. Speaker, how is it, then, that we are going to enable Mr. Valic to have a fair and open hearing in a timely manner before the Appeal Tribunal if we're still out there trying to figure out what our chronic pain policy is going to be? This is the centre of his case. What are we going to do to get Mr. Valic's day before our tribunal, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, I think that Justice Schuler's decision is quite clear. It says that the appeal shall be heard in a freshly constituted tribunal in advance of the Workers' Compensation Board having a new policy. She recognized that it would take some time to work out a new policy, and provided direction for the standards that should be in place for the rehearing. I understand, Mr. Speaker, there will be a preliminary hearing later this month for Mr. Valic's lawyer, and after some issues there are resolved we expect that the tribunal can be scheduled fairly shortly after that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Braden.

So, Mr. Speaker, do I have this right then? Is the WCB continuing to interfere in Mr. Valic's due process before the Appeal Tribunal? So, Mr. Speaker, while we have a new chronic pain policy based on 2004 going forward hopefully, we're still arguing on an old chronic pain policy that has been rejected and is common knowledge that it goes against best practice and what other WCBs are doing? Mr. Speaker, are we still continuing to subject this worker to old, outdated, outmoded and, obviously, an unconstitutional process, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I said no such thing. I don't know where the Member gets that information from. The WCB has not applied to take an adversarial point of view at all in the Appeals Tribunal hearing. It has been five years since it has been reheard

and I expect there will be some new medical evidence that will be submitted. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Oral questions. The honourable Member for Range Lake, Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I was holding back on the questions for WCB because I believe that the AOC is working on the response to the work that the committee has done, but the Minister's answers to the Member for Great Slave has intrigued me on this issue so I would like to ask the Minister for more information about what it is exactly that the WCB is going out to the stakeholders on. Does that suggest that the WCB is now ready to change the policies that would be more in line with the Valic and Martin decision, which is different from what the corporation has been telling us? The information I have is that it's the corporation's position that their policies are in line with these decisions and that no changes had to be made. Another change I've just heard from the Minister is the fact that the corporation is not going back to the Supreme Court to have them look at the constitutionality of whatever it was doing with Valic, which was always my position. I always thought that the corporation had all the information it needed to make its own decisions. It's good that it's not going back to court and using that as a process of delay. But I'd like to know exactly what the corporation's position is. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The current pain policy that the WCB has in replace recognizes chronic pain as a convincible injury and that compensation may last for as long as the chronic pain lasts, which could be a lifetime for some people if that's the way it was. One of the things the WCB is going to take a look at, though, is specifically whether or not a permanent partial disability should be one of the things that's listed as possible. The current policy, 03.10, does not specifically list permanent partial disability, even though in effect it can be granted to somebody who has that long-lasting syndrome. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Supplementary, Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have to tell you, this is really, really good news. I'm really glad to hear the Minister say this. I am very hopeful with the Minister's suggestion that the WCB actually is willing to look at chronic condition as not just a compensable injury, but the whole issue has been about the fact that workers with chronic pain cannot get the permanent disability pension and the Minister is now just suggesting that that is a possibility. So I'd like to ask the Minister for some deadline and what exactly is this process, what is the role that the Members here have? Can we have a process with the corporation to work on this together, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Dent.,

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'll certainly make the compensation board aware of the Member's interest and I have no doubt that they'd be interested in having Members participate in the consultation process. When I talked last to the chair of the Governance Council, the Governance Council is examining their options for consultation. They're looking for a process that will allow stakeholders some meaningful input and not one that would see them holding public hearings that perhaps nobody showed up to. So they hadn't really set the final process, but they're hoping to do it fairly quickly to have things resolved over the course of this winter.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Supplementary, Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to be cautious in my support of the Minister, because I happen to think that the corporation really doesn't need that much more consultation and dithering on this issue, I'm going to tell you. But I have to tell you that I've had such little good news out of this that I'm prepared to hang onto anything, and what I'm hearing today is that the corporation is willing to look at chronic condition as something that would be eligible for permanent disability. Now, that's an opening that I'm willing to go with. But I'd like to ask the Minister and the corporation and the board of governors, you don't need that much more consultation. They know everything there is to know, so could we set some deadline? Could the Minister commit to having a proposal to us within the next month for us to really review it? Thank you.