Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chairman, the worker's advisor, in regards to his responsibility, is there so that injured workers looking for appeal or to have an opportunity to get a second opinion can work with a worker's advisor. But again, the whole area of medical advice or legal advice goes through that appeal mechanism that we have through the Appeals Tribunal that is set up for that second observation or opinion that takes place once that injured worker has filed a claim, got it rejected and then appealed. Again, it's to ensure that the mechanism that we use fits within the responsibility of the different authorities that are out there. The worker's advisor is one authority which his authority is clearly spelled out. I think that in order for him to be able to carry out this duty, right now he does not have the full authority to get medical evidence or give legal advice in regards to someone filing a case. So I think that, again,

it's how do you interpret that motion in the context of what the worker's advisor responsibility is; more importantly, how do the other processes fit within the context of this motion. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Ms. Lee.

Mr. Chairman, for the benefit of the committee I just read that motion. It's one sentence long. It's not complicated. It doesn't need legal advice. It doesn't need any interpretation. It's pretty clear. The Minister, with all due respect, did not answer my question. I want to know when was the worker's advisor asked to do this proposal? The Minister mentioned that he was asked. I want to know on what date. A week ago, two days ago, a month ago? When was he advised to do this proposal? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I met with the worker's advisor when I was in Iqaluit, along with the Minister of Nunavut, in regards to the motions that were in front of us, which was presented to ourselves as Ministers. At that time we had a discussion with the worker's advisor in regards to this particular motion. At that time he basically needed a little more time to look at this and also develop the proposal. That's when I met with the Minister, which was in January in Iqaluit.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Ms. Lee.

Then why was that not provided as an answer on page 5? Why wasn't that said, worker's advisor was asked to do the proposal and he will do that? Instead, we get a whole page telling us how it's being done, which is basically that the workers right now do not get independent assistance. You know, worker's advisor is one person. All the workers who need his assistance have to go with him and it was made very clear in our public hearing process that we need to balance this imbalance of power so that the workers don't have to come here. The WCB administration and tribunal, everybody, by law, have WCB lawyers, WCB medical advisors. They have all the infrastructure they could ever have. Workers have nothing other than the worker's advisor. We, as a committee, said we need to balance this and we are asking the expert. The worker's advisor is the expert on workers' interest issues. We're asking the Minister to ask him to do a proposal. You know what? I'm not going to ask any more questions because I think this goes back the fact that WCB is a public institution, they're supposed to be accountable to the Legislative Assembly. The Legislative Assembly is a law-making body, WCB gets to do what they do, collect money from employers because we enable them by law to do that, and the whole infrastructure and the intent of this legislation exists for the benefit of workers and nothing I see today...It just demonstrates again that WCB doesn't get it, and this latest answer says that again. I'm sorry; I cannot help it. But it just repeats itself. There's a whole page on WCB telling us how it's done now and it ain't gonna change. So I just want to put WCB on notice that I look forward to seeing the legislation next week and I expect to have there enough infrastructure built for the workers and, if not, we will change the legislation to make sure that it does. So I don't need to ask any more questions. Thank you.

Thanks for the comment, Ms. Lee. Mr. Braden.

Enough on this one, Mr. Chair, enough. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Any further questions on 37? Thank you, committee. Now on to 38. Are there any questions on 38? Mr. Braden.

Mr. Chair, this motion addresses a longstanding situation that has confounded, I know it's confounded workers who have talked to me and, consequently, myself, and this relates to medical opinions. I think, thankfully, the vast majority of the injured workers who come before the WCB are dealt with in an expedient and professional and satisfactory manner, given that most conditions that come before them are pretty straightforward, from a medical point of view, and quite conventional. It's the ones that are less obvious or require more sort of interpretation or clinical diagnosis and require the WCB to exercise more discretion and more care in how it assesses them. Where workers have really come up against some issues here is that sometimes multiple specialists' assessments and recommendations are made, but they continue, for some reason, to conflict with the medical assessment made by the WCB itself. So we have this argument going on among professionals, and in the meantime the worker continues in limbo, potentially without a pension or without rehabilitation, until these conflicts are resolved. We are hoping through this motion, Madam Chair, to see that we could a have a process or a polity that would address these situations. However, the response indicates that the proposed solution is going to be a legislative one contained in the bill that we anticipate will be coming before us next week. So it doesn't give us anything to talk about here. It does say that the proposed solution is supported by the WCB, the Appeals Tribunal and, in principle, the NWT Medical Association. I guess I would like to say where are the workers or the workers' advocates, the employers? Have they been consulted in this proposed legislative solution and is it one that we, as a committee here, will be able to endorse?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, in regards to the legislation that we're hoping to bring forward next week will allow us to find another avenue to resolve these disputes, especially when it talks about medical opinions. Also, having an outside opinion, which will be final. I think that for us to add another layer or trying to resolve conflict, if anything, it's a plus. So I think that by having the legislation spell out having that third opinion than simply having that opinion made by the medical officers, we will now have an outside final opinion by a medical physician of the choosing between the parties. So that decision will be final, which hopefully will resolve a lot of these cases. So that's sort of just a quick little snapshot of what we're looking at with the new legislation coming forward. So hopefully that will be an improvement on what we have right now. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Braden.

Well, thanks for that explanation. I guess we'll basically pick up the bill like any other piece of legislation, Madam Chair, and put it out to the public, which, of course, I hope will include plenty of workers and employers to have a good look at this and see if it's going to work.

That, Madam Chair, concludes my questions on the presentation before us today.

Anything further on committee motion number 38? Mr. Yakeleya.

Madam Chair, just a quick comment again to the Minister in terms of this issue here. Again, I always make reference to our situation some years ago in terms of dealing with the federal government on certain claims. You know, you've got to validate certain process of claims and sometimes it takes a long time. Are these injured workers given support through this system? Because sometimes, for whatever reason, roadblocks, or barriers, or misunderstanding, or confusion comes up. It just prolongs the pain for seeking a fair and just hearing or discovery. What type of support is given to the family? I say this, Madam Chair, because for the workers it's a stressful time and for the families sometimes they're not given enough support. Sometimes the only reason some things happen is because there's a court system or because some body is being held liable to make some compensation to the situation, and usually it's to the families and to the injured workers. So I guess for the people in the smaller communities that sometimes don't have the ready access to resources in the communities. If you want a medical opinion, is it the nurse in our communities? Is that good enough, or do we have to wait for a doctor? I just hope that we have some flexibility in terms of how we look at workers in our smaller communities in terms of this situation here and support for them when they go through this process. I imagine it must be a painful process and we have to really support them, otherwise we're going to be here next year again having the same kind of discussion. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, again, hopefully with the changes to the legislation it will simplify be where we have these conflicts, especially between the medical opinions, one party over the other, but also, again, offering the parties to identify someone that they will allow to make or assess the evidence, but also make a final decision on how that final hearing should be. So again, through the changed legislation I know we're talking about suggestions of medical evidence, but I think, again, it's always a problem of my evidence is stronger than yours and vice versa. I think in order to avoid that, trying to get a third opinion, in most cases, you know, that's what you need. It's just someone else from outside the argument coming in and trying to settle things down and find a solution to the problem. So again, with that change we're hoping to be able to improve on that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Are there any further questions, on more time, on 38? That's good. Thank you, committee. Now I just want to go through this tabled document, Workers' Compensation Board Action Plan, page 1-13. Are there any questions there?