Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that

this is an issue where the Member has concerns, not specifically with Health and Social Services alone but government-wide. I believe the answer has been given in that regard, in that a decision was made to notify the employees of their potential impacted status. Then the choices are given to the employees to see whether they want to pursue other options. I do understand there are affected employees who have chosen not to do that. That’s their option as well.

As the Member is aware, the principle behind it and the good intention behind it was so that instead of having the entire civil service of 4,500-plus employees wondering whether they would be impacted or not.... It was thought it would be a better idea to have 100 or so employees who were potentially impacted notified of that. Obviously, nobody is forcing these employees to be looking at other options, but there are constantly positions being opened for competition, and these employees are free to consider other options if they have chosen to. If they want to wait until the budget is processed, that’s up to them as well. I believe that’s how the processes were rolled out.

Mr. Chairman, I guess that is a fairly

large assumption on behalf of the department and on behalf of government: that this budget is actually going to pass. We’re affecting the lives of over 100 people to what end? It’s not entirely necessary, in my mind, that we’ve had to do this. Notifying them is one thing, but moving them around and impacting other people while you’re doing it, to me, is not a

very good process we’re following here. It’s totally pre-empted the budget we have before us.

Really, we’re working with a document that’s not set in stone. It’s evolving every day as people come and go and move around. I really don’t know what we’re doing here. I don’t want to pick on the Minister and the Department of Health and Social Services, but they do have 17 positions that were eliminated. By the looks of things they’ve moved around five people or placed five people without us even passing the budget. That’s more an observation than anything, and that’s an issue I’ll bring up with every department that comes before us.

Thank you,

Mr. Ramsay. As there was no question there, we’ll move on. Page 6-8, Department of Health and Social Services, information item, Active Positions — By Region.

Department of Health and Social Services,

Department Summary, Active Positions — By Region, information item, approved.

Active Positions –

Community Allocation, information item.

Department of Health and Social Services,

Department Summary, Active Positions – Community Allocation, information item, approved.

Moving on to page 6-

10, also an information item, Active Positions – Health and Social Services Authorities. Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There is an

increase in staffing at community health authorities of seven positions. I wonder if I could get some explanation, some rationale for the need for these changes. I want to say I don’t begrudge the health and social services authorities from getting more staff, but I’d like to know why we’re cutting positions in headquarters and increasing at the authorities.

Thank you,

Ms. Bisaro. Minister Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There

is a reduction component of this budget, but there are lots of other investments. The increases in the positions for the department are on the THAF program, which is federal funding that we have. It’s the Territorial Health Access Fund. There’s a coordinator for accreditation, which is located in the department. There’s patient wait times, e-health project

management in the department. There’s a

midwife position being funded in Fort Smith. There’s an STI nurse being funded in Yellowknife. There’s a registered nurse, a Northern Women’s Health position, being funded at Stanton. There is a dialysis registered nurse at Stanton, a home care nurse in Deh Cho, a home care coordinator in Hay

River, and home support workers in Tlicho, Beau-Del and Hay River. That amounts to 12 additional positions, but with the reductions and reallocations that’s a net increase in the authorities.

Thanks for the information. I thought I

heard the Minister say there is a position in Fort Smith, but if I look at the numbers on page 6-10, Fort Smith is going down by one. I’m getting confused again.

These are net numbers. I am

going to ask Mr. Elkin to do the math for me.

Mr. Elkin.

Thank you, Mr. Elkin.

Ms. Bisaro.

Okay. Thank you. That’s fine.

Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m just

trying to get a grip on some positions here. Are all the positions listed on this page funded?

Yes.

How many unfunded positions do

we have?

Mr. Chairman, there are 2.5

unfunded positions in Health and Social Services, and they are in the department: one in population health and one senior policy adviser and intergovernmental officer.

Mr.

Chairman, under Stanton

Territorial Health Authority I see we have five in growth. Is that a net gain of five, or was there a growth of, say, 6 or 7 and the loss of a couple? Is that a net, or what type of change has happened at the Stanton Hospital?

Thank you, Mr. Elkin, for that. I have

to tell you it got muddled in there. I was trying to get a sense of the dialysis positions. Were they lost or gained?

It’s a gain.

Seeing as we’re on the dialysis

positions, how many positions are dedicated to that type of treatment in the unit?