Page 63, clause 109, clause 110, clause 111, and clause 112.

Page 64, clause 113 and clause 114.

Thank you. Clause 115. Mr. Villeneuve.

Mahsi, Mr. Chair. I move that clause 115 of Bill 6 be amended by striking out "one year" and substituting "three years".

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. The motion is in order. To the motion.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Thank you, committee. To clause 115, as amended.

Thank you. Clause 116 and clause 117.

Thank you. Clause 118. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. In this area and related to it was a considerable piece of change in here in going from a three person panel with the expectation that there would be a chair and a nominee from the employer sector and a nominee from the workers' sector to hear appeals and thus have more assurance that there was going to be balanced decision-making through this process.

We are, in this bill, making a shift from a multiple person panel to sole adjudicator process for the appeal mechanism. I am speaking in favour of this. It also reflects what we have already done, I believe, Mr. Chair, with our human rights appeal process and also, much more recently, with the employment standards process. The sole adjudicator model is one that has some consistency here and it is also reflected in this act.

Mr. Chair, I would like to reflect in this clause and in this amendment the interests that were expressed at least to me and to the committee as reflected in the report that has already been read and tabled by three labour organizations, the NWT Federation of Labour, the PSAC, the Public Service Alliance of Canada and the Union of Northern Workers, who expressed their opposition to the sole adjudicator model. They wanted to retain the security of knowing that in an appeal there was going to be somebody from the labour, their sector, who would be hearing the whole course of a worker's appeal or potentially an employer's appeal. It works for both sides, of course. I spoke with a couple of the labour leaders. I wanted to make sure I understood very carefully what their position was. I am going to support, though, the motion to amend and continue on with the sole adjudicator model as it is being proposed here. Also, Mr. Chair, I want to express my confidence in the Minister in being able to appoint people who indeed are going to be professional, unbiased and objective in hearing the case and making their rulings.

The amendment proposes that we want to see people with broad experience in administrative tribunals or courts or who have equivalencies that can reasonably expect to give us that same skill level. So I wanted to put it on record, Mr. Chair, that I listened. I know that other committee members did as well to those concerns, but I do believe that the model that is being proposed here and, of course, thorough consideration by the Ministers in making these appointments is indeed going to give us a workable system; I very much would like to think an improved system through the sole adjudicator model. That is my comment, Mr. Chair. I have no question. My endorsement is for the amendment as proposed.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. We will go back to the motion. To the motion.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Thank you, committee.

---Applause

To clause 118, as amended.

Thank you. Page 67, clause 119.

Clause 120. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I move that clause 120 of Bill 6 be amended by renumbering subsections (1.1) to (3) as subsections (2) to (4) respectively.