Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chair, I find it also very intriguing that the new federal government is moving in this area. Maybe sometime in the future we will ask more detailed questions on the justice system and if it will follow suit as the big guys in Ottawa are doing and see if we can step up to the plate and look at some similar process in the future. That's just a thought here. I am going to leave it at that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Next I have Mr. Braden.

Mr. Chairman, as noted by the Minister in his opening comments, the NWT Judicial Remuneration Commission has been obliged to sit every three years to look at judges' salaries and benefits. It's going to be extended to every four years now, so we will, to some extent, get some more economy from the cost of this commission. That's really the point why I wanted to put a couple of things on record, Mr. Chair.

In 2001, as the Minister advised, this commission wracked up a bill of $200,000, and in 2004 the cost was over $300,000. I certainly don't want to get myself on the bad side of any judges, Mr. Chairman, but spending this amount of taxpayers' money to determine the salaries and benefits of this very necessary part of our democratic system seems to me excessive. I would welcome any stage, any step that could be taken to realistically control this expense and yet give us the confidence to know that judges in the NWT have been fairly paid and yet respecting the independence that they need to have. If I have a question here, Mr. Chairman, it is, aside from going from a three to a four-year period for striking this commission, are there any other criteria or guidelines that we have been looking at to make what -- again, it's my opinion -- is an excessive cost for determining this pay scale, Mr. Chairman?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman, obviously we wanted to make sure this was done in the most cost-effective manner, as well, which is why we are extending the time in between commissions. There is a Supreme Court of Canada Commission that speaks to the need to have an independent commission established that sets judicial pay. I think if we were to try to step in and limit the budget of that independent commission, we would run into problems because we would be interfering with the independence of that commission. So this is one way for us to make sure we do this in a cost-effective manner. Obviously the money is spent on pension consultants and on actuaries and needs to be spent. That work needs to be done, but we think it can be done less frequently. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In this profession, like any other profession, it's like when salaries and things are reviewed, we start from certain baselines and certain assumptions and thresholds that are reasonably well recognized. Could something of this nature be contemplated here, or are we really sort of starting from scratch every time we look at salaries and benefits for judges? Does this kind of time and expense have to be invested every time we go around the circle, or is there a certain amount of formula and ratio and percentage that can be applied to this, Mr. Chairman?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman, really these were the first two commissions set up and there was a need to establish baseline and, of course, do this work in terms of actuarial projections and pension comparisons. That work has been done. So we think most of the work has been done now and it's really a matter of if salaries go up, in line with that, pensions go up and other things are triggered. So there isn't the necessity for as comprehensive an approach each time out now, and we think there will be a significant cost-savings. In addition to that, extending the period between commissions we think makes sense. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Next I have Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just referring to the area of non-resident judges, now we are suggesting that...or now it's been pointed out in the Minister's comments that they have to relocate to the NWT, which is not an issue. Do we have any type of time or something that specifies reasonability on this? For example, if we appoint an Alberta judge who is qualified to become a territorial judge, do we not say you have to become a resident of the Northwest Territories within six months of your appointment? We specify certain things. In one of the clauses, a chief judge can lose maybe their appointment as chief judge if they have been ill or absent for more than 40 days. So why wouldn't we put anything specific if we don't have anything specific? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Can I have committee be quiet, please? There are people talking in the background. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We think it is specific in that residency has to be established immediately. You can't sit unless you are resident. If there would be some problem and some delay in having the judge move to the jurisdiction, they couldn't sit until they are resident and arrive here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In that particular case, could they still work as a non-resident judge?

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman, we are only talking about appointments to the Territorial Court here. If they were a Court of Appeal judge used, I guess they could continue to do that, but in order to be a Territorial Court judge, you have to be resident here. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I won't belabour that point. I was just curious. Is there anything that is very specific that points out if a Territorial Court judge is appointed to, for example, Inuvik or Hay River, that they have to be a resident of those areas? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman, I don't think there is anything specific to the act that speaks to the community of residency. It could be a term of the employment, but I don't think there is anything in the act that speaks to specific community. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, although I am not 100 percent on this, I was pretty confident that Alberta had a rule whereas you had to be a judge in that residential area. So I don't know the specifics because this is obviously not my area, and I concede that, but why don't we have a district representation point to be made there? So if you are the territorial judge in the Beaufort-Delta northern region of the Northwest Territories, why wouldn't we make it one rather than having a particular judge moved to Yellowknife and then fly back and forth? What stops that? For example, I think it took quite some time before we had the Hay River judge take up residency in the community of Hay River. I don't even know if they are there now. That being said, it doesn't seem unreasonable to have some type of requirement that if they are going to be a justice in a particular area, to ask them to live in that area. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.