Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, as we all know, the problem has been the communication factor with regard to how we, as Members of the Legislature, the Minister, people at the Workers' Compensation Board, communicate amongst ourselves. I think it was crucial that we had to come up with something with regard to the recommendation of the Auditor General, but also we realized that this is a draft document in which it will change over time and it will be implemented to make sure that it does fit with regard to the Legislative Assembly.

As Members coming in, we all know that we have briefings and the question is what is the best process to use to brief new Members coming forward into the Legislative Assembly. How does that fit in with the Legislative Assembly agenda itself? So we have to see exactly how this is going to work. It has to be implemented. It will have to be changed ensuring that it is workable, it is a workable document and there will be trying times when we try to meet the demands of everyone. More important is how does it work in the context of the real action? Simply having a draft communication plan doesn't really mean anything until you can implement it and see how it's working.

So the challenge for all of us here is to spell out how this is implemented, how does it work, how are the different segments being involved in this process. We need to ensure that we try our best to find those ways so that we can bring down those barriers between ourselves as Members of this Legislature, myself as the Minister, the board and the workers' compensation system, so that it is transparent and it is workable.

So again, just getting back to the Member's question, yes, this is a plan and has gone through all the steps for approval, but now it's just a matter of implementing it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that it's not just a matter of implementing it now. A very critical stage was left out, I would suggest, in designing this and that is actually talking to us about what our expectations or our thoughts might be. I don't recall a deliberate step that was taken by the Minister to say, Bill, you asked for better communications. What do you think and how do we go about this? If I had been asked and if I had been shown what might have been a draft when I had a chance to change it, there is no way what is before us now would have got to this stage without my criticism. I would like to think we have influence on what we do about it.

Mr. Chairman, let me give you a few examples. The proposed...It's not proposed now, it's all been approved. One of the things about it that I found surprising from the get-go on page 3 is called assumptions. There are about 10 assumptions there. How can we have a communication plan that makes assumptions? Communications, Mr. Chairman, is about avoiding assumptions and making sure that people agree on what's going on or at least trying to make an effort of understanding and then going from there. If we have an organization that is making assumptions about what I think, then we don't have very good communication to begin with.

Mr. Chairman, there is one example of why I think this is a flawed document, the process by which it was arrived at did not include me, did not include this committee, even though that is suggested on page 2 where it says the parties to the protocol, the Ministers' responsible, the Governance Council of the WCB as represented by the chair, the WCB itself is represented by the president and then it says MLAs. I don't know where I fit into this.

So there are several other aspects of it, but I think I would like to turn it back to the Minister to see whether or not we can take this very essential part of the program and see if we can have another go at it before we take the words "draft" off it.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With regard to the communication plan, it is direction we were given by the Auditor General to develop such a document so that it can improve communications between ourselves and all the parties involved to ensure that we are talking

amongst ourselves. I think it's important that we allow this thing to proceed. It is a draft document like any other draft document out there. It is draft and it can be changed. The whole reason we are here today is to get input from Members here, discuss these items in front of us and make changes for improvement to the document we have. So I think that we are open to those changes, especially with this being the perfect opportunity for us to do that. I think the findings of Mr. Braden are great because exactly how does the structure we use as committee members, Committee of the Whole, the legislative process, as Members, come in? How do you dialogue between yourselves as MLAs and constituents? This is going to not only improve the dialogue here, but improve the dialogue with the general public and our stakeholders and, at the end of the day, that's what this is all about. Again, it's direction we have from the Auditor General with regard to implementing and developing that communication plan. It was endorsed by committee by their recommendation for us to bring something forward and we have done that. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Krutko. We are on number 32. Is there anything further on 32? Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just to add, I have to thank the Minister for even allowing us to even have this communications protocol discussed here, because I understand at the beginning we weren't even going to have a look at it. We had to work with the Minister to get to this point.

I go back to the original point and I am not going to belabour it too much, but I really think this speaks to a lack of agreement between the WCB and the Legislature as to the accountability. Communication is a medium or accountability. I found it interesting in the communications protocol, the board states that they do their research on how departments do their communication. Lo and behold, there is nothing written anywhere. So I am told that they cannot borrow from that, but the fact is we don't have a rule but we have very good convention and understanding. The Minister responsible for the department responds to whatever the Members have to inquire about. We don't have to write a letter, we don't have to write a law, we don't have to have a policy to have regular communication.

I don't know. I feel like we are the North Koreans and South Koreans negotiating the boundaries and you still have to agree on the size of desks and where you are going to sit.

Like Mr. Braden said, communication is an attitude. The communication strategy can't be like we are going to have three meetings a year and if you have any questions by invitation, you are going to wait until that happens. Could it be that WCB make a communication statement saying we are open to informing our stakeholders about what's going on and that we understand that we account to the Legislature because they represent the public? We have a Minister that we have to report to. Whenever called up, we will give briefings. When we have a policy announcement like the chronic pain policy, we will let you know or it's assumed by practice. That's the latest example. When the chronic pain policy was issued and decided in Iqaluit, I got a call from the media saying do you know that WCB made a decision in Iqaluit. Of course I didn't know because we weren't privy to that. We had to read it in the media. When there was a meeting last fall when a lot of information was going back and forth, we were invited to the briefing. That briefing invitation was not asked...If you are going to meet with somebody, you should have the courtesy to ask them, can we meet. A week from now, are you available, are you town? This is so minimal. I can't even believe I have to talk about this. We all got an invitation in our mail box and we were all booked up with other meetings. You said we offered and you didn't show up. There was a briefing in the middle of session about the building idea. I went there and I had to leave because session was on and I was told later that Ms. Lee can't be aware of what she's talking about because she left in the middle of the meeting.

This is such an attitude thing. This protocol continues to do that. It says we are going to decide when we will give the committee members a meeting. In fact, it tells us that MLAs should consult with MLAs from Nunavut. With all due respect, we don't need the WCB telling us how a committee of this House is going to communicate with a Nunavut committee. Somebody at WCB, please get your thinking cap on.

I will pose a question. Sorry. Could the Minister go back and review this and write a statement of spirit that we are open for business, we will communicate and we will communicate as long as it takes for the people to understand what we are doing? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. The chair does not want to have to utilize the priority button if at all possible. Thank you. Before I go to the Minister for a response, I just wanted to recognize in the audience, Ms. Denyse Nadon-Holder who is executive director of the NWT Native Women's Association. Welcome.

---Applause

Sitting next to her is Ms. Sharon Thomas, executive director of the Status of Women Council of the Northwest Territories. Welcome.

---Applause

Always nice to have an audience. As well, I see we have Ms. Jeannee Johnson with us from the Workers' Compensation Board. Welcome.

---Applause

Thank you, committee. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chair, I will just touch on it and then I will pass it over to Mr. Doyle with regard to the process. Again, right now we don't have a communication protocol. I think it was identified by the Auditor General that we need one. This is the first cut at it. It's not perfect. I think we are trying to improve that relationship. Everyone realizes that, along with myself as a Minister, that it is frustrating that you are either the last one to hear or there is no real day-to-day, weekly, biweekly or monthly correspondence between the parties. We are a crucial party to what goes on here because we do pass that legislation. We want to ensure that the powers given to the board are being carried out the way we expect them to be by the legislative authority we give them.

We had to find a mechanism of how to work better together as being responsible for the workers in the Northwest Territories and elsewhere and ensuring the legislation we pass is being implemented the way we understand it. It's a first cut at it and we are open to make revisions and changing it to ensure that it is workable.

For myself and the Minister of Nunavut, we have different committee structures within our Legislatures. We found it hard amongst ourselves just how our committee structures could have input into the reporting mechanism and the Workers' Compensation Board. We don't want to just file an annual report at the end of the year and that's the end of it. You have to do more than simply file an annual report. Because of the recommendation of the Auditor General, they made it clear that we need to do a better job of communication and we have to have a protocol to do that. I will pass it on to Mr. Doyle.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Doyle.

Thank you, Mr. Doyle. Anything further, Ms. Lee?

No, we'll move on.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. I have Mr. Braden next.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, I think we can move on the communication protocol unless of course there are any other Members here, but this very much misses the boat to me. I do think I heard that there may be some avenues that we could discuss this and see if we can iron a couple of things out.

I guess if there was one thing I would like to clarify, Mr. Chairman, is that if the approvals that have already been given, as I say, at just about every other level will be put into abeyance, if you will, until we do get something...I would also suggest that we would want to talk to our counterparts in the Nunavut Assembly to see if we can come up with something that works for everybody, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Minister.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, we can allow for more input with regard to the process. The whole reason for the approval was to get it into this public forum in order for it to become a public document. That's why it was approved for the different governments, the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. Nunavut also has a copy of it and is reviewing it in the context of the revised legislation that will be coming forward next week in this Legislature and also it will be coming forward in Nunavut at the same time. That's the reason we have those approvals. It is crucial that we get those approvals to have it become a public document. That's the reason for the approvals. I am open to allowing more input in allowing changes to improve on the communication protocol and make it a workable document. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Anything further there, Mr. Braden? Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is more just a check process as to what the intention is. We've been discussing now for some time the WCB. There's been some very clear signals given, I think, about the concerns of this Legislature and the need to resolve some issues and work on some things that we're not going to get done in this House. We have a significant agenda left before us today and I was just wondering, are we going to continue on with the detail work or are we going to accept the message being sent has been heard, sent and heard and then we can deal with the detail in another form? It's more a question, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Minister. Oh, okay. That was a question. Yes, just so we go back over what we had set out at the onset for everybody's information, we were going to go through the committee motions one by one and ask questions related to those committee motions. When we get to the end of that, we can go through the other two documents, the action plan and the communications protocol as a whole. I would suggest that would then end the discussion on the comprehensive response as a package. So we are on number 32 and, actually, if I could, I don't have anybody else on the list.

Number 33 we have, there was a number of questions regarding the Appeals Tribunal office being located separately. So if there aren't any more questions on that, I think we've done that.

Let's now go on to number 34 and we'll see if there are any questions on 34. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On the WCB's answer to this Motion 34-15, in which committee recommends the Minister direct the Governance Council to overhaul its reception protocols, security practices, and client and public relations function to provide a more accessible and responsive level of service. Mr. Chairman, I have to point out to you the answer, and the answer says, you have to read this. I have to read this into the

record. It says, "The Governance Council has long recognized the concerns that the committee identified about the unfriendly, fortress-like atmosphere and has stated" and I quote, "It is hard to have an open-door policy when you have no door." That's the answer to committee's motion. I have to say that's another example of not understanding the spirit and intent of what we're trying to do here. The response is we need to get a new building so we can get a door so we can have an open door. I mean is WCB the only people in the world who don't understand what the spirit of an open-door policy is? I mean last time I was at WCB building in that office when we went there for briefing, there is a door. If we want to talk about whether they have doors or not, there is a door and there's a security guard sitting behind that. Every possible door on that floor is locked. You cannot go there without somebody escorting you from one point to another. So now I'm telling you if you have a shack or a log house or a 20-story marble building, every place has a door. So I'd like to ask the Minister when could we expect the WCB to really, you know, just have a common sense understanding of what we mean by friendly, compassionate, responsive, open-door policy where people could go in there?

There are a lot of Members here who are threatened for the work we do. There are lots of people in the income security office; there are lots of people who are in lawyers' offices. There are lots of people whose job it is to deny clients, to deny cases for people who really want it. WCB is the only place that has that fortress policy. So I'd like to know how will the Minister implement this open-door policy? Or, Mr. Chairman, whoever wants to answer it. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, in regards to my opening comments, I made reference that we are doing a major retrofit to ensure that we improve the environment that people walk into so that they know that it's friendly, it's open, you feel that you're not in the situation that the Member states. I think it's that type of atmosphere that we have to improve. First it's to improve the atmosphere, improve the physical seating arrangement they have in that facility, and remove some of those barriers that people run into as soon as they get off the elevator. I think that for us is one of the stages.

But also the other improvement that we're seeing is the amount of money we're putting into training and also improving the client relationship, ensuring that we have people who are able to deal with clients friendlier to ensure that we make you feel welcome. I think that, if anything, that's what we're going to be doing here and I think for the amount of capital investment that we are putting into this, it's something that we have to not only look at by way of training our staff but, more importantly, make it a friendly environment that our clients would come into, regardless if it's the worker or employer or the injured worker, so that they feel comfortable coming into that place that they're able to open it up. So I'll just pass it on to Mr. Doyle to add exactly what we're doing by way of physical capital investment on this. Thank you.