Does committee agree?

Thank you. Can the Sergeant-at-Arms please escort the witness in, please?

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Minister. Can you introduce your witnesses, please? Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, thank you. With me is Peter Vician, deputy minister of ITI; and Mark Aitken, legislative counsel.

Thank you. General comments. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I'm obviously in support of the amendment to the Territorial Parks Act, but I just wanted to ask of the Minister, this has been an issue in the former Department of RWED and now ITI for the past almost 15 years. I'm just wondering why it has taken so long to get this amendment brought forward. What explanation on the delays has his department got? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We're continually looking for ways to improve park safety and enjoyment for park guests. This has been something that's been discussed in the department for some time. The Member is correct; we decided, with some of the recent concerns we've had in parks closest to our municipalities, some of this has been escalating over the years, that we needed to give this legislation more teeth, we needed to give our parks officers more of an ability to clamp down on unruly behaviour and that's what we've done.

In 2004 we initiated a review of enforcement practices in our parks. Residents, property owners at Prelude Lake Territorial Park were contacted to discuss and document their concerns and suggestions, because that had been a focal point. In addition, consultations with the RCMP were initiated. We've done a number of things to improve safety in addition to this, Mr. Chairman. I don't want to give the impression that this is the only thing we've been doing.

RWED at the time entered into a service contract with the RCMP to allow off-duty RCMP officers to patrol the parks on the Ingraham Trail on long weekends. We're still continuing with that initiative and that activity. In addition, new radios compatible with those of the RCMP were purchased and an agreement reached to provide direct access to their dispatch centre. This was to alleviate the concern that it was difficult to get a hold of somebody, one of our officers or somebody who could help if you had concerns in the park in the middle of the night.

Also, the departments of ITI and ENR have established a protocol in compliance that outlines how the two

departments will cooperate and how they will share expertise and resources in delivering programs that involve compliance activities.

So there are a number of things, Mr. Chairman, that are underway. We've been working, as I say, to improve safety over the last number of years and this is just an additional tool that we think will help us do that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Minister Bell. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, like I mentioned earlier, it's long overdue and I think it will be much of a benefit to the park staff that's out there that this amendment is in place and I'd much prefer amendments like this that give our employees some more things to work with in the field rather than us building, you know, big fences and things like that to try to corral people and go at it that way. I think this is much more useful.

In the Minister's opening remarks he doesn't really get down to saying that parks officers will actually be able to issue tickets under the Parks Act and I just wanted the Minister to clarify that for me, that actual park officers will be allowed to issue tickets to people in the parks that are contravening the Parks Act. That's for a variety of different reasons, but maybe the Minister could explain why that's not in his opening remarks. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Bell.

Mr. Chairman, it's a bit of a two-parter here. We're going to make the changes to this bill, but then the next step is to change the regs of the Summary Conviction Procedures Act, and that's the act that the tickets will be written under, under the authority of that act. So not actually under this Territorial Parks Act. Those regs have already been drafted, we're just waiting for this bill to be passed and the assent of this bill, and then we can move forward with those. So, yes, parks officers will be able to issue tickets. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Bell. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So they will be able to issue tickets. Will those regulations be changed in time for this season, or is it something we're going to have to wait for until next year? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Minister Bell.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. They'll be ready for this season and of course we appreciate the willingness of Members to expedite this legislation. That is what has allowed us to do this. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Bell. Next I have Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A few general comments and some questions, Mr. Chairman. Obviously it's not too difficult to support the intent and the content of what this bill is trying to achieve. I think that I don't know exactly what incident or incidents may have given a rise to this amendment in a way that it had to be done in a very expeditious manner. I wasn't purview to the GED committee who probably got some more detailed information, but I can think of situations that have happened in Yellowknife at the Fred Henne Park last summer that could probably speak to the merits of such a bill.

I just want to state that this bill is going through somewhat of an irregular process in that we're passing this bill through three stages without the benefit of a public hearing process and I don't mean to sound too conventional or conservative, but I take very seriously the convention and protocol of our legislative process. There are good reasons why we have a public hearing process, obviously. Every one of these bills that we pass through this House has implications for the public. We are passing laws and discussing laws that would impact members of the public in one way or another, and hopefully all of them are for the public interest and public benefit, but I think it's important to note that this is going through a irregular process and it could be...I think it does speak to the importance that the Members are placing on this bill, but also it may speak to a lack of preparation on the part of the department somewhat.

This is the third year into our Legislature and I have to tell you that the Members on this side have been just waiting, dying for some legislative food to chew on. So I could assure you that had any bills like this have come in time, you know, we would have been happy to take it on the road. But to be fair to the department, I could turn that into a question and see if the Minister could state for the record here, are there some specific incidents that may have prompted this action at this time. The Member from Kam Lake stated that this is something that is very long overdue. So I don't know exactly what the picture is that prompted this. I think from the general point of view I'm actually surprised that the park officers did not until now, through this bill, that they didn't have the power to ticket people for some of the misbehaviours or wrongdoings or something more serious. So that's my first question.

The second question I would like to ask is, would the park officers need to get training or any additional equipment? Would this need extra resources or would there be need for more officers to do their job, all of which I am prepared to entertain but about which I know very little.

I know there were situations in Fred Henne Park last summer where someone was attacked by quite a vicious dog. It could be that with the rise of crime in the city, there might be more activities going on in the park that might require more resources and more training by the parks officers. I don't know. The Minister could tell me that everything is fine the way things are, but I just want to give the Minister an opportunity to explain the state of affairs for the work of parks officers in these changing times. Things do change and it's important that our public servants and the people who uphold our laws and enforce our laws are properly equipped and properly trained and given the resources necessary.

My next question and my last has to do with what the extent of fines or any tickets would consist of. The Minister mentioned earlier that part of this bill will be dealt with by way of regulation, but he's also stated that those are written already. I would just like to get an idea of what the members of the public would be looking at in terms of tickets they can get for different levels of misbehaviour, if

the Minister could itemize for me the activities that will come under the purview of this legislation and the sorts of things that will be subject to fines and enforcement by the park officers.

I think those are my four questions that I would like the Minister to answer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Minister Bell.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A few questions there. There was no one specific incident that lead to us deciding that it made sense to come forward and provide this tool for our parks officers, but with increased activity levels around our major centres, there has been an escalation of unruly behaviour at some of our parks that has been troubling. There is a trend here over the past couple of years, as I mentioned in my response from Mr. Ramsay. There have been a number of things that we have been doing to try to alleviate this. This is simply one more tool that we are providing our parks officers. Could this have happened earlier and come forward sooner? It probably could have. I do appreciate Members willing to be cooperative and expedite this so we had it in time for this season, which I think was important.

The question about new training, really there will be some new training required but only in the area of how to appropriately issue tickets under the Summary Convictions Procedures Act. So the rest of the training that our parks officers undergo still holds. Having said that, I think we always continue to evaluate the training that we have our officers go through and continue to upgrade that and make sure it is still relevant and make sure it takes into account the kinds of situations parks officers are seeing in our territorial parks.

Maximum fines under the Summary Convictions Procedures Act is $200 and that could be exceeded in court, but $200 is the amount. I think that gets to most of the questions the Member has asked.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I may just squeeze in another question on that, could the Minister provide information on what in the Territorial Parks Act...I am understanding that this amendment will allow the parks officers to issue tickets, but I am understanding that they are going to do that on the basis of what's already written or are we writing regulations that would state what the offending acts are; for too much partying for all hours or going to the next camp. I don't know. Perhaps unruly or drunken behaviour, violence, either graded system of behaviours that would fall under these enforcement measures. If I could just get those details, please. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Under the current act, the powers of a parks officer currently, they can order a person to desist from an action or a conduct if in the opinion of that officer: 1) it's dangerous to life or property; 2) interferes unduly with the enjoyment of the park by others; 3) bothers or damages the natural environment in the park. So they can issue these orders, but what we are trying to do is provide an additional tool, more teeth, a $200 fine or hopefully just the threat of a fine. The intent here is this would be a deterrent, Mr. Chairman. So that's the difference. They already have the powers to make these orders. This would simply be a fine added for non-compliance. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.