It could still be considered as part of the strategic initiatives and as part of the business planning process for next year.

I’ll take that as some sort of commitment. I appreciate that. I wonder if the Minister would consider bringing a draft forward at some point during this session so we could have some input into that and start that process. It’s one of those things that the earlier we start it, the bigger the returns we could realize. I just want to emphasize that the employees have expressed an interest in that sort of thing through their regular MLAs and possibly through Members of Cabinet as well.

We’ll look at our budget for employee recognition, and we’ll work with the Department of Environment to see whether we can develop this.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and the Minister. Obviously, this is something every department could be engaged in and enjoy the fruitful returns of, I’m sure.

That would be something I’m sure all departments are interested in.

Next on my list I have Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have two questions. This section includes Organizational Development. The information we received indicates there will be a reduction of a competency officer.

I will back up. In the information we received today that lists Employees and Vacant Positions and so on, I see a listing for an organization design officer, and the telephone listing for the department lists two employees in the organizational department, one of which is the manager and one of which is a succession and workforce planning consultant. I’m just wondering if I could get clarification on whether our information is wrong — that there is nobody called a competency officer — or if I could get some indication from the department of just exactly which position has been earmarked for reduction.

Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. It’s a competency position. It’s been vacant for some time, and that’s probably why you couldn’t find it in the phonebook. It’s a position that’s been eliminated. We still have the remaining organization design officer who will continue this work. I think that developing proper competencies is something that is very important to make sure jobs are classified properly and evaluated properly. It makes

a significant difference in our ability to hire and staff positions so we have the right competencies.

I guess I’d like to know where it is in the document we got today, “DHR Vacant Positions April 21, 2008, Funded.” I don’t see a competency officer. Maybe the department could direct me to the particular page where I would find it.

It’s not on that list, because it’s been inactivated and been removed.

Okay. Thank you. That brings me to another question. If it’s been inactivated and removed, has the funding not also been removed? Does this mean we’re reducing $100,000 for a position that really hasn’t been funded?

For the purposes of this budget it has been removed.

I’ll try another question. In a document we received today as well, called Status of Potentially Affected Employees, the second item on that list has: Justice relief employees added in Inuvik, plus-4. I’d like to ask the department what those employees are, what their work is. What work do they do? Which employees are those?

Those are four relief

employees who had been notified they were potentially affected or impacted but had not been included on the list or had been missed on being included on the list. So that’s why they’ve been added.

Can the Minister please advise me where these employees work?

My understanding is that these four relief workers worked at the Arctic Tern facility in Inuvik.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. That’s all I have.

Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize that I haven’t been here the whole time, so forgive me if this question has already been asked. What’s the status of the new whistleblower legislation that could be in the works or contemplated, with the idea that whistleblower legislation might allow people in the public service to report areas that could be interpreted as wastefulness or practices that are not conducive to value for money? I’d like to ask the Minister: what is the status of whistleblower legislation in our government?

Minister McLeod.

The previous government had directed that the Department of Human Resources consult other employees and employee representatives on the feasibility of whistleblower protection. We received 69 responses. Of the 69,

59 were generally in favour and 8 did not indicate support. We are still reviewing the information we have and trying to determine whether it’s an area we want to proceed with. We haven’t included it in any deliberations, but with business planning coming up for 2009– 2010, this is something we could look at.

As the Member may know, there are a number of issues we would have to resolve if whistleblower protection is to be provided. How would we deal with anonymous complaints? If people are not willing to identify themselves, how would we deal with that? There are also multiple complaint venues. Currently people can file complaints in a number of areas: grievances, Workers’ Compensation, human rights, et cetera. So there are already a significant number of venues for employees to complain or report wrongdoing. We’d need to analyze whether another venue would be appropriate or required.

Over the years, I’ve known of situations that existed. They were fairly well known. It didn’t seem like the government could get a handle on them or document them or do anything about them. And the people who worked in those divisions didn’t really want to say anything.

I think there’s a contradiction there. To say you could have whistleblower protection for people to make complaints anonymously or identify situations anonymously — well, if they can do it anonymously, you don’t need whistleblower protection because nobody would know who did it, right? I think the idea is to let people feel they could step forward — they could bring something to the government’s attention, to the department’s attention — and they would not suffer reprisal as a result. I think that’s the gist of whistleblower protection. I wouldn’t get hung up on whether it’s anonymous or not. It’s just an avenue that needs to be there, whether people choose to take it or not. I guess they would weigh their options.

I think the more opportunities we have for people to feel like they’re engaged in the process…. Sometimes when there’s some wrongdoing going on, say even at the management level, it kind of demoralises the whole organization that’s underneath that. Sometimes, even, it sets a standard. Let’s use an example: a manager is — I don’t know — using a government facility like a shop or something in a community to service their own vehicles, maybe their friends’ and their family’s. And they say, Well, I’m doing it; if you don’t say anything about it, then you can use it too. Then you sort of get buy-in and everybody starts getting into questionable practices with government resources. It tends to have a bit of a domino effect. We’ve all heard of situations like that.

I think it would be good to pursue it and keep the issue alive, keep proceeding down that path.

We’ll continue to work in that direction.