Good afternoon, colleagues. Welcome back to the Chamber. I will now provide my ruling on the point of privilege raised by the Member for Hay River South on Monday, June 2, 2008.

The role of the Speaker when a point of privilege is raised is twofold. First, the Speaker must determine whether the point of privilege was raised at the earliest possible opportunity. I find that Mrs. Groenewegen did raise her point of privilege at the earliest possible opportunity.

Secondly, the Speaker must determine whether a prima facie breach of privilege took place.

In stating her point of privilege, the Member for Hay River South referenced the following comments made by the Member for Thebacha on May 30, 2008, during debate on a motion to delete a capital project from his constituency from the Main Estimates.

“And as we keep open minds to look at all the options, one of the options that hadn’t been considered is we’re talking about repatriating a bunch of adults into a supportive living structure that has yet to be built. Has that been considered as a possibility for Arctic Tern? I don’t know. But clearly it’s a circumstance that strikes me as interesting and somewhat ironic.”

Mrs. Groenewegen went on to say, and I quote from the unedited Hansard from June 2:

“I believe the Member for Thebacha’s comments were made to intimidate me as I attempted to carry out my duty...as a Member to vote the way I wished on this potentially contentious motion.”

In responding to the point of privilege, the Member for Thebacha stated, and again I quote from the unedited Hansard:

“My one comment on that issue was that there’s an option that hasn’t been considered that I think is fully valid, and in fact, other Members, when it was discussed with them, agreed that it should be worth at least looking at.

“In the course of debate...I raised that comment and I raised that option. It was done within the context of broad debate. It was no threat.”

We are thus left with two competing interpretations of the spirit and intent of the Member for Thebacha’s comments. In the absence of further evidence I find it difficult to come to any clear and certain conclusion as to what exactly he was getting at.

Breaches of privilege are serious and should only be found to exist in rare circumstances. Intimidation and instruction of a Member is one of the most serious breaches of parliamentary privilege. When such actions are found to have occurred with absolute certainty, they should be and have been met with serious consequences in this House.

While the Member for Hay River South was justified to raise the matter, I am unable to find a prima facie breach of privilege with the evidence before me.

Members, the events in question occurred in Committee of the Whole. In reviewing the transcripts in the context of the point of privilege, I was surprised and concerned by the tone and context of the debate that day. The debate was frequently unrelated to the matter at hand, and in some circumstances it reflected upon previous votes of the House. False or hidden motives were attributed to some Members, and comments were made that were likely to and, in my view, intended to create disorder in this Chamber.

The debate before you is important and can be taxing. I want to urge each of you to exercise restraint and self-control when debating issues in this House. A failure to do so would be inconsistent with the traditions of consensus government and could usher in a new era of conflict and confrontation in the Legislative Assembly. The people we serve expect better from us as elected leaders. Thank you, Members.

Orders of the Day. Item 2, Ministers’ statements. The honourable Minister responsible for Transportation, Mr. Yakeleya.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

[English translation not provided.]

Mr. Speaker, we all know the terrible effects of transportation accidents. This is why we continue to enhance the Drive Alive! Transportation safety program — to ensure the public has the information to make good choices when they travel in the NWT.

I am very passionate about this issue. We are particularly committed to our young people’s safety, as we all want them to grow into strong, healthy adults who can contribute to the northern way of life. Today I want to share some of the ways we are helping to increase the safety of young people, especially when they travel.

It has been proven that our children are very vulnerable when drivers do not pay full attention when driving in school zones. Although we have lower speed limits in school zones, some drivers fail to reduce their speed and place our children at risk. Changes to the Motor Vehicles Act regulations will double the fines for offences in school zones and construction zones. We are following the lead of a number of other jurisdictions that have found that increasing fines further assists in reducing speed in these critical zones.

We recently had a writing contest asking young people to share ways they and their families can reduce the risk of accidents and injuries when travelling. The winning entries are now posted on the Department of Transportation Web site youth page. I’m very impressed with the quality of these essays. Clearly, they gave a lot of thought to this important issue, and it demonstrates the quality of our young people and their teachers.

Nikita Larter from Thomas Simpson School said, “If you are traveling with two or more people, you are not only trying to keep yourself safe, but everyone else.”

Nadine Menacho from Chief Albert Wright School said, “On the road, we can wear our seatbelts, and babies should be in a car seat.... On the water, we can wear our life jackets.... On trails, we can wear our helmets.... When we do all of these things, we can make it safer for us.”

These are some of the worthy suggestions, and I hope people will listen to the wisdom of our young people.

One area of concern this summer is the safety of young people on bicycles. Sometimes our children do not drive as well as they should, and I encourage drivers to pay extra attention to kids on bikes. I’m very pleased to tell Members that as a result of a very generous contribution from BHP Billiton, 500 bicycle helmets will soon be available to young bicyclists across the territory. Drive Alive! is working with the Department of Health and Social Services to distribute these helmets across the Northwest Territories, and I want to acknowledge my colleague the Minister of Health and Social Services for the valuable assistance her department is providing.

This summer preschool and young school-aged children, along with their parents, will have an opportunity to learn more about transportation safety through a children’s activity book promoting safe choices. Each Member will receive copies of this book for distribution in their constituencies.

I encourage the Members and the public to keep an eye on the Department of Transportation Web site for important safety messages and to drive alive. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Minister responsible for Industry, Tourism and Investment, Mr. Bob McLeod.

Mr. Speaker, the Northwest Territories Protected Area Strategy helps NWT communities protect special areas of land for the long term. The strategy is the collective effort of both federal and territorial levels of government, aboriginal government and organizations, industry, and environmental organizations.

Through a variety of legislative tools and processes the strategy enables communities to identify and protect culturally and ecologically significant or core representative areas of our territory. For example, a chosen area can be preserved under the Territorial Parks Act as a cultural conservation area, a heritage park, a natural environment park or a wilderness conservation area. These classifications were determined through extensive collaborations with our partners in the Protected Area Strategy, including aboriginal representatives, environmental organizations and the federal government.

The Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment has created an information package to help communities understand the processes and tools that are available for establishing territorial parks as a means of protecting our valuable lands. I have forwarded this information to Members of this Assembly, and ITI representatives are looking forward to meeting with communities who would

like to learn more about how territorial parks can be used as a tool in the PAS process.

We depend on our land and natural resources for our wealth and our livelihood. Land management options such as the creation of territorial parks under the Protected Area Strategy are one way that we can work in partnership to manage our lands and resources for the future.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Item 3, Members’ statements. The honourable Member for Nunakput, Mr. Jacobson.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s with great pride that I rise today, for today is a special day for all Inuvialuit everywhere. Today is the 24th anniversary of the signing of the Inuvialuit Final Agreement.

Back in the early ’70s a group comprised of both young and old Inuvialuit realized that if they did not get organized, they might lose their rights as Inuvialuit people, so they established the Committee of Original Peoples’ Entitlement, also known as COPE. In 1974 they entered into formal negotiations with the Government of Canada. After ten years of negotiations, on June 5, 1984, COPE and the Government of Canada signed the Inuvialuit Final Agreement. This was the first comprehensive land claim agreement signed north of the 60th parallel and only the second in Canada

at that time.

The Inuvialuit agreed to give up exclusive use of their ancestral lands in exchange for certain other guaranteed rights from the Government of Canada. The rights came in three forms: money, land and wildlife management. The Inuvialuit would now have legal control of 91,000 square kilometres of land, including 13,000 kilometres with subsurface rights to oil, gas and minerals, including the right to hunt and harvest anywhere in the claim.

The basic goals of the Inuvialuit Final Agreement are to preserve Inuvialuit culture, identity and values within the changing northern society; enable Inuvialuit to be equal and meaningful participants in the northern and national economy and society; and protect and preserve Arctic wildlife, environment and biological productivity.

With the signing, the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation, IRC, was established and was made responsible for managing the rights and benefits of the Inuvialuit Final Agreement.

I was 11 years old when that important agreement was signed, and I remember it being a day of celebration. I know it was something important. Mr. Speaker, I’d like to take the opportunity to acknowledge those who played a role in that historic day.

Mr.

Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to

conclude my statement.

Unanimous consent granted.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, colleagues.

Mr. Speaker, the past and present leaders are Mr. Peter Green, Nellie Cournayea, Charles Hoagak, Andy Carpenter Sr., Sam Raddi, Robert Kuptana, Billy Day, Nelson Green, Eddie Gruben, Mark Noksana, Bertha Ruben, Renie Arey, Annie Gordon, Agnes Semmler, Elsie Klengenberg and Robert Delury.

I ask my fellow Members to join me in wishing everybody a happy Inuvialuit Day.

Thank you, Mr. Jacobson. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to talk about an issue in the riding here where a parent has come forward with a concern about access to kindergarten. Before I go into my statement, I should make it absolutely clear that there’s been no breach within the system, and of course, the school board is providing full and fair access within their rules. Before I talk about what needs to be done, I should also stress that the Department of Education is working fairly as well.

Now that I’ve laid that out.... To be honest, Mr. Speaker, we all know the rules around entering kindergarten. You have to be five before the date of December 31. Well, what happens in the case when you’re born not days after December 31, not months after December 31 but a few minutes after the date of December 31? That parent would have to wait a full school year before their child could access kindergarten.

Mr. Speaker, Alberta considers an option where if you are in that type of situation, you can go through a little bit of a review, and the school board looks at your situation and does some tests on some kids. What they do is evaluate if that child should or could enter that school year. They do a bit of a functional review. They work with the parents, and they find a way to say, “Is this considered a reasonable option?”

Mr. Speaker, we don’t have that type of option here in the Northwest Territories. We have a school board that would be willing to take a child who just happens to be five moments after the cut-off date, and we have a parent that would really like to do that. I know we have an education system that would like to provide those types of opportunities, but the problem is that we don’t have a policy to allow that type of negotiation or discussion or any type of flexibility in that process.

Today I rise on this point because I have a parent with that predicament right now. They would like the education system, through the Education Minister, to come up with a policy and possibly a solution to build some flexibility in that type of review. We’re not talking about bending rules for one person. We’re not talking about bending rules that would breach any type of policy. What we are talking about building is flexibility into a system that is sensitive to the needs of children and parents.

Mr. Speaker, ultimately, the Department of Education needs to build a framework so this policy could be looked at by a school board. I think this is ultimately a school board decision worked out with the parents. We don’t have rules, like Alberta does, to allow something like this to even be considered.

Mr. Speaker, I thank you, and I will have questions again for the Minister later today.

Thank you, Mr Hawkins. The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, too, would like to congratulate the Inuvialuit and the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation on this important day, the fifth day of June.

Mr. Speaker, some 24 years ago the Inuvialuit of the Beaufort-Delta signed a land claim agreement with the Government of Canada and the Government of the Northwest Territories. They’ve gone a long way since then. From being hunters, harvesters and caregivers of the land, they are now owners, land owners and managers. They also have control over developments that happen in the Beaufort-Delta region from their land management regimes in regard to Inuvialuit land administration through their wildlife boards, through their environmental review boards and also through land and use planning.

The land claim agreement is a devolving document. As we all know, the Inuvialuit are continuing to work on political development and also ensuring they also have a say in regard to the political devolution of what happens in the Beaufort-Delta region.

In regard to some of the major achievements they have through companies such as NTCL, Canadian North and other subsidiaries, the Inuvialuit were able to acquire, build and sustain by way of their economic arm the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation. Again, Mr. Speaker, they are still working with the governments of Canada and the Northwest Territories in the area of political development.

With that, I’d like to congratulate the Inuvialuit people of the Beaufort-Delta and remind them that this is your day. You have gone a long way in the last 24 years.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I listened with interest to the Ministerial statement made by the honourable Member Michael McLeod yesterday on improving the GNWT’s capital planning and delivery process and elimination of the Business Incentive Policy, or BIP, as we know it.

There is no doubt in my mind that the capital planning and delivery process does need to be improved, but eliminating the BIP is not the way to do that. I think that any improvements to the capital planning process and delivery should be done in consultation with those in the industry who reside and have money invested on the ground here in the North. I think they and their opinions could be a tremendous asset to undertaking such a review.

It was only a short while after the Ministerial statement was made that I had my first communication from a northern contractor on the need to retain the BIP. Mr. Speaker, the flaws in the Minister’s reasoning are confirmed by the fact that without the BIP even more contractors will move south for the lower operating costs and better networking opportunities. This would mean a loss to the NWT economy of jobs and a loss to the GNWT of the taxes, the workers’ pay and the transfer payments we get from Ottawa for the workers and their families. That is just to name a few of the benefits that would be lost.

If the BIP is gone and companies from the south can bid against our northern companies that have stayed and invested in the North, then the northern companies will be less competitive because of their higher operating costs. If the BIP is scraped, contractors will be seriously looking at relocating to the south, along with the many permanent jobs they provide in our communities.

There has to be middle ground to be found. We have already lost a lot of our capacity when the larger contractors opted to move operations to Alberta to take advantage of opportunities there. We do not want to lose our medium-sized contractors for the same reason.

Mr. Speaker, some of the changes proposed by the Minister, like making sure the capital budget is approved in time to take advantage of winter roads and barge scheduling and improving the class C estimates process, have been discussed in previous government by committees. It is good to see the government would be moving forward on those things. However, there needs to be more consultation on the ending of the BIP program. There needs to be an understanding on the part of the government of just what the actual consequences of eliminating the BIP would be, not just theorizing that by removing the BIP suddenly more contractors will be interested in tendering on government infrastructure projects.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Members’ statements. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As fossil fuel exploration rolls across the Northwest Territories, people are noticing rapid growth and cumulative effects on our land. We have only to look beyond our border into Alberta to see what can happen when we fail to ensure best practices in non-renewable resource development. In view of this, Environment and Natural Resources, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, and Environment Canada are to be commended for their decision to develop NWT guidelines for seismic lines.

Wide and straight seismic lines have environmental consequences, such as the almost complete loss of boreal caribou in Alberta. Yet that appears to be exactly what our ENR is recommending for adoption in the guidelines. Wider lines cause cumulative impacts from habitat fragmentation, direct habitat loss and severely extended recovery time. In contrast, low-impact seismic line widths of three to zero metres alleviate many of the above concerns.

Guidelines are not meant to entrench the status quo or to support poor practices. Rather, they are intended to set the bar, to promote best practices and to increase the chance of achieving management goals.

Compared to other jurisdictions in Canada, the oil and gas industry is relatively new here, with a still modest footprint. There is time to learn from others’ mistakes and provide progressive and meaningful exploration guidelines.

The science is clear. Seismic lines of six-to-eight-metre widths in the lowland black spruce areas of boreal forest in Alberta showed no significant recovery after 35 years. Recovery here, where our boreal forest is even slower growing and more fragile, would be much longer.

To minimize cumulative effects, the Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board is recommending meandering seismic lines of widths no greater than 2.5 metres with additional limits on linear density. Yet ENR’s draft guidelines recommend more than double this width, with little recognition of the need for meandering low-density considerations. This is in contrast to Minister Miltenberger’s proclaimed interest in not repeating the mistakes of our southern neighbour and becoming Alberta North.

Mr. Speaker, I recognize that some community contractors may have picked up some old equipment that carves out six-metre-wide and larger seismic lines, but as we know, these impacts are direct, accumulating and extremely long term. A progressive best-practices approach is needed to fulfill our mandate of responsible management for our current and future generations.

Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.

Unanimous consent granted.

Guidelines are meant to establish the standard and promote progress toward achieving our goals. On the subject of guidelines for seismic lines, this Minister needs to commit to limiting cumulative effects and revise these draft guidelines with that in mind.

I will have questions for the Minister. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes, Mr. Robert McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Along with my colleague and fellow Inuvialuqtun from Nunakput and another one from Inuvik Boot Lake, I’d like to also speak to the Inuvialuit Final Agreement today.

Years ago the Berger inquiry stalled the development or any talk of a pipeline, and I think this was a good thing. It gave the aboriginal governments an opportunity to take some time and get their claims settled in case development does happen. Eventually it will. I think that was a big move, and a lot of the claimant groups, in the meantime, have settled claims. They’ve put themselves into positions to benefit.

The Inuvialuit, after some growing pains and under the guidance of Nellie, have done just that. We’ve all benefited from the Inuvialuit Final Agreement. They’ve made some investments, and that comes back to us in the form of dividend payments.

The Inuvialuit still respect the old way of life. They still respect the culture. They try to promote the culture and living the old way of life but are also visionary enough to know that development could happen. So they, along with the Gwich’in and the Sahtu, have joined forces to form the Aboriginal Pipeline Group.

Now, that would put them in a position to become players and benefit from any building of a pipeline. Eventually our gas and oil will be needed, so in my opinion, a pipeline will go ahead. How soon, we’re not sure. But I like the fact that some of the claimant groups have decided this is going to happen, and they’re putting their people in a position to benefit from the resources from our land.

They still continue to practice the old way of life. They continue to promote it among their young people. So I think this is a great day for the Inuvialuit, and I think it’s a great day for claimant groups across the Northwest Territories. I look forward to — once all the claims are settled — celebrating these types of days for years to come.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Abernethy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Over the last couple of weeks there has been a lot of talk, both inside and outside of this House, on consensus government and whether or not it works.

I believe in consensus government. I feel that it can, and does, work. However, for it to be effective, it will take cooperation from all Members: those on Cabinet and those on this side of the House. Unfortunately, open two-way communication and open dialogue does not always occur.

Prior to the Territorial Leadership Committee, Members seeking Cabinet and Premier positions talked consistently of open dialogue and working together. After the completion of TLC the open conversation and productive dialogue existed for a time — unfortunately, not for long.

Cabinet continues to suggest that they have continually included Regular Members in decisions and direction of the government. As a Regular Member, I feel this isn’t always true, and here’s an example. Yesterday, as quoted from the unedited Hansard, Mr. Ramsay asked the honourable Mr. Michael McLeod — concerning the implementation of BIP — if he could come back to Regular Members and sit down with stakeholders in the area so we can work on this together and come up with a solution. According to the unedited Hansard from yesterday, the honourable Mr. Michael McLeod made the following comments: “I would commit to the Members, and I think all my committee colleagues would commit, that we would share the information with Regular Members on where we plan to go and the decisions that we’re moving towards as the information comes in.” This is an exact example of what Members on this side of the House are making reference to.

Once again we’re being told by Cabinet what’s being done — not included in the decision making, not being permitted to work together in the best interests of the people of the Northwest Territories.

Today I would like to encourage the Premier and Cabinet to think about their commitment to working together during the TLC. Working together is critical for the success of this Legislature and the consensus government. It’s time to re-find our way.

Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to use my Member’s statement today to acknowledge a constituent of Frame Lake. Crystal Milligan, daughter of Gary and Carol Milligan, is today receiving her master’s degree in international development and management, with a specialization in public health from Lund University in Sweden.

The Milligan family are long-term Yellowknifers, and Crystal grew up and was educated in the North. She was an outstanding student who not only performed well in the classroom but achieved excellence in sports and other activities — a truly well-rounded individual. Crystal represented the NWT more than once in interprovincial or international sports competitions, such as the Arctic Winter Games.

Crystal spent the last two years studying in Sweden. For her thesis — the title of which is a mouthful, but I’ll try it anyway — From Conceptions to Capacity: A Phenomenographic Study of Health Personnel and Their Conceptions of Child Sexual Abuse and Health Services…. I told you it was a mouthful. For her thesis Crystal did six months of fieldwork in Esteli, Nicaragua.

But Crystal’s not one to rest on her laurels. She will be returning to Canada shortly to prepare for a six-month funded internship with CIDA, the Canadian International Development Agency. She will be working in Kigali, Rwanda, on gender policy and gender mainstreaming issues with the organization Youth Association for Human Rights Promotion and Development. She will be done her internship in February or March of 2009, and then maybe she’ll stop to rest for a bit.

I am pleased to be able to highlight the significant accomplishments of an outstanding homegrown Yellowknifer, and I join with her parents and her brother in expressing pride in her achievements.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am going to speak today about a subject that Members have heard me speak about almost since the day I was first elected as MLA for Kam Lake in 2003.

That issue, Mr. Speaker, is the Kam Lake bypass road. This long-awaited, much-anticipated piece of public infrastructure finally looks as though it will be going ahead. The access road into Kam Lake Industrial Park will link the industrial park and Highway 3. It will address the issue of public safety, as there will be less truck traffic on Old Airport Road, and in the event of an accident or hazardous material spill at the top of Kam Lake Road there will now be an alternate route into and out of the industrial park. It will open up the west side of our airport for future development, and it will also allow the City of Yellowknife to access more industrial land for development.

Mr. Speaker, I am aware an MOU was signed earlier this year between the City of Yellowknife and the Government of the Northwest Territories on this bypass road. I want to thank the federal government for providing the GNWT with the multi-year, multi-million-dollar Building Canada Fund, which was the catalyst to finally getting the bypass road to the stage we’re at today. Funding from the Building Canada Fund, coupled with money from the City of Yellowknife, will eventually get this road built. I would also like to thank Mr. Yakeleya and the DOT department for brokering this MOU.

Mr. Speaker, the question now is when and how the funding will be allowed to flow so this important piece of transportation infrastructure can finally be built.

I will have questions for the Minister of Transportation at the appropriate time. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Beaulieu.

Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. [English translation not provided].

Today I would like to talk about the cost of living and its impact on residents in smaller communities. The Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight of the 15th Legislative Assembly

conducted pre-budget community consultations on what the government spending priorities should be. These consultations confirmed that the number one issue was the cost of living. It’s not a new issue but one that continues to remain high on the public agenda.

Many residents in larger communities tend to have different perspectives on cost-of-living issues from those in small communities. In the larger communities basic daily expenses such as fuel, electricity and food are generally in comparison with larger centres in the south, thus having minimal impacts on a household’s total disposable income.

In smaller communities these basic daily expenses have a much larger impact on household incomes. For example, Mr. Speaker, a two-litre container of milk costs $7.89 in Fort Resolution and $7.98 in Lutselk’e. This is similar for other items such as Pampers, formula, bread and meat items.

Can you imagine, Mr. Speaker, the impact of limited income on a single mother with three children when one container of milk costs $8, Pampers cost $30 and one case of formula goes for almost $90? The cost-of-living perspectives are certainly different among those living in larger centres from those living in smaller communities.

Mr. Speaker, in the Premier’s Budget Address he specifically acknowledged the cost-of-living issue and said, “Taking actions to provide long-term solutions to address this reality” and “address the factors that impact the cost of goods and support individuals and families.”

When a family from Lutselk’e wants to do some Christmas shopping, it’ll cost them over $1,700 before they even get a chance to walk through the doors at Wal-Mart. Mr.

Speaker, transportation

costs in and out of the community are an everyday reality for residents in fly-in communities like Lutselk’e. How will this government address these factors, and how will this government support individuals and families to minimize these impacts?

It’s good to hear the Premier talk about energy-efficient programs, enhancing programs for building

affordable housing and funding major changes to the current income-support programs.

Mr.

Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to

conclude my statement.

Unanimous consent granted.

For those residents living in smaller communities, Mr. Speaker, these initiatives have minimal impact on the daily grind of managing the high costs that come with living in smaller communities. So I ask once again: how will the government support individuals and families to minimize these impacts? In the Budget Address, reducing the cost of living was one of the five strategic initiatives. These initiatives were developed by all 19 MLAs, with mandates from their constituents. Later, I will have questions for the Premier.

Thank you, Mr.

Beaulieu. The

honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.

[English translation not provided].

Mr. Speaker, I would like to state that I am pleased the government has reinstated the regional senior recreation coordinator position. The services that recreation staff provide are very important to my constituents, as we have seen through the numerous petitions, letters and media reports.

The regional sports and recreation office in Deh Cho has one more valuable member of its team that was identified as part of the cuts and has yet to be reinstated. This is a youth worker position. This position is unique to my region and provides much-needed support to community recreation and sports programs in the ten communities in my riding. Deleting this position would be a step backward and leave a big gap in service for the youth of the region. I ask that the Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs reconsider the decision to eliminate the youth worker position in Deh Cho riding.

Mr. Speaker, good recreation and sports programs focus on the strength of the youth, help build confidence and self-esteem, and support healthy choices, which are key priorities for youth identified by this 16th Assembly. In order for us to get there,

we need to enhance youth sports and recreation services in the community, not reduce them. Mahsi cho.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. The Hon. Premier, Mr. Roland.

Mr. Speaker, I want as well to follow along with my colleagues from the Inuvialuit region and my colleague from Mackenzie Delta in recognizing Inuvialuit Day here in the Northwest Territories. We’ve heard lots of discussion about the claim process. In 1984 the idea was to start bringing authority to the rightful people — the jurisdiction and the land. This agreement has done that and shown time and time again the fact that when you bring authority to the North and to the people, things can get done and they can move on with many decisions. Much like that, we talk about the North and the development of the North. When we get this kind of settlement done, a conclusion brought to the table, we can start building and moving on, much like the Inuvialuit have.

Mr. Speaker, there have been past statements I’ve made in this House as a Member, and I talked about how one day we were the haulers and the cutters of wood and now we are business owners and involved in that. So I just want, again, to recognize, along with my colleagues, that today is Inuvialuit Day, and the fact that, as we’ve talked about getting authority in the North.... When you look at the settled claims, they’re an example of that progressiveness by aboriginal people in the Northwest Territories. We will look forward to continuing to build on those types of initiatives.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Item 4, reports of standing and special committees. Item 5, returns to oral questions. Item 6, recognition of visitors in the gallery. The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to recognize one of my leaders in Mackenzie Delta, Charlie Furlong, Chief of Aklavik. Charlie’s one of my mentors; I think we got involved in politics in 1984 with the formation of the Mackenzie Delta Regional Council back then. It was my first step into politics, where I was the vice-president and Charlie was the president. We’re talking about going back 24 years; that’s quite a while ago. Charlie is on the campaign trail, as we all know. I wish Charlie all the best on the trail. Best of luck and thanks again, Charlie.

I’d like to recognize some visitors to Yellowknife. They’re here for the Matco barbecue

to celebrate 20 years of the company

being here in Yellowknife. No stranger to many of us here, I’d like to recognize the president, Mr. Ray Anderson. Joining him today is Mr. Lorne Stockley,

vice-president of government services for United Van Lines, based in Mississauga, Ontario; his wife as well is with him, Shirley Stockley. As well, Mr. Ed Keelaghan, sales manager of Matco

— I hope I got

that last name right — and Ms. Jenine Cerny, marketing coordinator for the company.

As well, I’d like to welcome Chief Charlie Furlong.

I’d like to recognize a very successful businesswoman and one of the best constituency assistants in the business, Ms. Denise Yuhas.

I, too, would like to recognize Mr. Ray Anderson of

Matco

Transportation and the

folks from United Van Lines who are here with us this afternoon. Ray is a former business mentor of mine — a fine, upstanding business person located in Kam Lake Industrial Park. As well, Mr. Anderson is a big supporter of the Kam Lake bypass, so I’m glad to see him here today.

I’d also like to recognize Chief Charlie Furlong, whom I’ve had the opportunity to work with during the days of the Dene Nation and Métis Nation joint leadership. He is now a candidate for the Gwich`in opposition.

I’d also like to recognize Ray Anderson and thank him for joining us. I’m sorry we couldn’t make your barbeque.

I’d also like to recognize Ray Anderson, who has the operation in the Sahtu region. Congratulations on your 20th anniversary.

I also recognize the Chief of Aklavik Dene Band, Mr. Charlie Furlong.

Not to be repetitive, Mr. Speaker, but I’d also like to recognize Mr. Ray Anderson, who was a colleague of mine when I was involved with the NWT Chamber of Commerce and who contributed greatly to that organization. Also, Matco is a resident in my constituency of Hay River South in Hay River.

I don’t think we’ve missed anyone in the gallery today. If we have, welcome to the House. I hope you’re enjoying the proceedings.

Item 7, acknowledgments. Item 8, oral questions. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.

Mr. Speaker, I’d like to direct my questions to the Minister of Education. Earlier today in my Member’s statement I talked about the need

for flexibility. I have a constituent problem where they are trying to get a child in potentially a little early to kindergarten, but the policies we have existing today don’t allow that type of flexibility. My question specifically to the Minister of Education is: would his department look at developing a policy so some type of review could happen, just like Alberta has set up, so that if a child is able to or it’s warranted under special circumstances, they could allow a child to enter kindergarten — enter the school system — just a little bit early?

Minister of Education, Mr. Lafferty.

With respect to the Member’s question, we do follow the Education Act, and our legislation clearly highlights that we do accept children to enter kindergarten at age five before December 31. Those are the rules and regulations we’ve been following for a number of years now. We are following the Education Act.

It comes as a great relief to me and probably this House to see that the Minister of Education follows the Education Act. What I’m asking is that the Minister go back and take a look at the act and see if they can create some flexibility in the policy. Alberta has a policy where if your birthday just falls a little past that December 31 date, the parents, in conjunction with the school board, do a review with the child to make sure they’re able to and if the school board can allow that child. It’s a school board decision. That’s really what I’m asking for. Would the Minister be willing to go back to his department and discuss coming up with a policy to build that flexibility into this situation so we can move forward just like Alberta?

In order to look at those areas of concern the Member has raised, certainly our department can look into other jurisdictions, the policies we have on hand and what other jurisdictions are involved in, whether it be accepting those students that are born after December 31 or, based on their criteria, their testing of those children to enter the school system. This type of work can certainly take place. I can certainly work with my department to initiate that process.

Can I accept that as a commitment from the Minister?

Certainly, like I said: I will work with my department and get back to the Member on what we find in our investigation and research with other jurisdictions throughout Canada.

Thank you, Minister Lafferty. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.

Mr. Speaker, my questions are addressed to the Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs. Several months ago I spoke in my Member’s statement about the lack of any legislative requirements for holders of land leases to provide security to the GNWT to ensure that land remediation is done once the leases are ended. Here in Yellowknife, Newmont Mining Co.

holds

several leases for the now closed Con Mine property. Portions of these lands are of great interest to either the City of Yellowknife or the Akaitcho First Nation.

To the Minister: can he advise how many leases are currently held by Newmont Mining Co. for Con Mine?

The honourable Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs, Mr. Michael McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe the leases are still being held by Miramar Con Mine, and they are in the process of being assigned to Newmont under the terms and conditions that are currently in place. The number of leases we’re talking about is five different leases.

Thank you to the Minister for advising me that they are not yet with Newmont but still with Miramar. What are the dates of expiry for these leases, and can they be renewed by Newmont and/or Miramar on their expiration?

There are a couple of different expiry dates for these leases. Three of them are expected to expire by 2011, and the other two are, I believe, 2021.

The second half of my question was whether or not these leases can be renewed by Newmont at expiration. I’d also like to know if Newmont, or Miramar, has given any indication of their intention to renew any or all of these leases.

I didn’t answer the second question, and I apologize for that. Yes, the leases can be renewed. At this point I don’t have any indication whether there’s going to be an application to extend the leases or renew the leases upon expiry. The leases are currently in good standing, and we expect them to be transferred over.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.

I’d like to know, then — to the Minister — whether or not the department is going to be pursuing this issue with Miramar or Newmont, whenever the licences get transferred over, to determine their intentions in regard to renewal of

leases. It’s of great interest both to the City of Yellowknife and the Akaitcho

First Nation.

I can’t say with any certainty the extent of our responsibility to inquire to that effect. I will, however, have my staff have a general discussion with the company and see what some of the general plans are, and report or advise the Member on what the results are.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of ENR. I want to start by saying that I’ve heard the Minister’s concerns about cumulative defects, and I understand his commitment to ensuring we actually avoid another Alberta North

situation. I’m wondering: will he ensure that the guidelines for seismic lines that are being drafted are not business-as-usual and do reflect a more progressive approach to that situation?

The honourable Minister of Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Miltenberger.

Mr. Speaker, the intent, as the Member has indicated, is going to be to work with the federal government, Environment Canada as well as with IMAC. There’s a draft coming out in June, and we’re going to look very carefully at the feedback to the third draft. Our intent is to allow the work to be done but in a way that minimizes the footprint. We’ll be taking the feedback we get very seriously.

The Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board has done a comprehensive review of projects that have submitted proposals for development in Campbell Hills and other areas. They’ve established guidelines like 2.5 metres and so on. Would the Minister ensure those standards that are set are given some weight in that consideration?

Mr. Speaker, we listen very carefully to the concerns raised in this House and the recommendations made. As we speak, we have staff in the department making note of the issues. I will commit to making sure I talk to the deputy and, as we proceed through this process, that those concerns are definitely kept in mind.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for those comments from the Minister. I’m wondering if the Minister would agree to share that draft with me so I can share that with my constituents when the drafts are ready for further consultation.

Mr. Speaker, the plan is to have the third draft ready for public consultation release. I have yet to see it myself. As soon as I have one in my hand, I’ll make sure I get some more copies, and I’ll share one with the Member; as well, I will send one to the Chair of the Economic Development and Infrastructure Committee.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Beaulieu.

Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. Today I talked about the cost of living and its impact on residents in smaller communities. I would like to follow up the statement with questions to the Premier.

Mr. Speaker, in the Premier’s Budget Address, he specifically acknowledged the cost-of-living issue and talked about “taking action to provide long-term solutions to address this reality.” I’d like to ask the Premier: what actions within the context of the small-community issue is he referring to with the mention of long-term solutions? What time frames has he identified in these areas?

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. The Hon. Premier, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The area of reducing the cost of living incorporates quite a number of areas, whether it’s energy, housing packages or rents in a number of areas. We’ve laid out a package under the lead in this area of reducing the cost of living. Minister Lee will be working with the departments. As well, we can consider working with Members on specific initiatives. I think it would be a good opportunity. But we need to look at resolving the maximum-rent issue through, for example, the Housing Corporation and how rents are set in our communities. We’d like to start that work in ’08–09, so this year.

We’re looking for alternative energy. For example, natural gas conversion is an option in ’09–10. As for alternative energy studies and work, whether it’s run-of-the-river hydro, things of that nature, some of that work is ongoing now. We want to continue that process as well.

For example, the housing strategy aimed at quality infrastructure is a public housing repair investment. We want to aim at starting something there in ’09–10. There are quite a number of other initiatives under transportation, whether it’s widening of highways and airport extensions, realizing that does help in the cost of living when goods are landed in communities.

In his Budget Address the Premier also states that the government will address the factors that impact the cost of goods and will support individuals and families. I’d like to ask the Premier: keeping within the context of small communities, what factors is he referring to? What kind of supports will be available for individuals and families?

Mr. Speaker, we’ve yet to come up with a final product, but here’s where we’re looking at going. One of the areas I talked about is the maximum rent in our smaller communities. That needed to be balanced out when we looked at our housing initiatives across the Territories.

The other one falls into, for example, the income security reform piece with the Department of Education, Culture and Employment. That is looking at things like a healthy food basket, as well as the income security programs that reflect on our seniors and those who are disabled in the Northwest Territories, and looking at how we deliver that level of programs and services in our communities.

We’ve also discussed the area of the Food Mail Program. That’s delivered by the federal government — Canada Post — and there are increasing concerns coming from communities who say that’s not really benefiting their community as it was supposed to. We’re going to have to look at how we proceed and gauge at that level as well.

Mr. Speaker, I’d like to ask the Premier: is there anything that’s happening right now in this area that would impact the cost of living immediately?

We do have quite a number of programs that were operated and will continue to be operated by the Government of the Northwest Territories. We will need to sit down with Members, especially in communities where there’s high cost of living and access is difficult, to review those programs and how they can either be enhanced or altered to work better in those communities.

There are programs, for example, in today’s environment that are available to all people across the Territories that have a bigger impact in those highest cost communities. The Territorial Power Support Program helps people for the first 750 kilowatt-hours, the Seniors’ Fuel Subsidy Program as well; and then our Income Support program, the food basket…. Now we have to look at, I guess, what would be termed as those on lower incomes working in communities that are feeling the very brunt of the increased cost of living and how we come up with programs. We need to sit down and have some discussion and debate on those.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mr. Beaulieu.

Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. To assist the Premier in reducing cost-of-living initiatives, and again keeping within the context of small communities, will the Premier commit to establishing a joint committee of representatives — with Ministers and Ordinary Members — to look at and identify the high-cost-of-living factors and their impact and ways for this government to support individuals and families to minimize these impacts?

Mr. Speaker, I would say that that would be a good avenue to work on. The fact is, as a government we talk about sustainable communities and delivery of programs and services. Minister Yakeleya, for example, is going to be the lead on the regional and community delivery initiative, so we could probably work in that area to try to set up some terms and look at different avenues. So yes, I would be willing to engage at that level and see what we can come up with together.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. The honourable Member for Nunakput, Mr. Jacobson.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On numerous previous occasions I spoke about the shortage of teachers in Nunakput. This continues to be a great concern for many parents in my riding. I’d like to ask the miniature — Minister — of Education, Culture and Employment to tell me: what is the status of the placements?

Thank you, Mr. Jacobson. The honourable Minister responsible for Education, Culture and Employment Mr. Lafferty.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. I thought I was beyond the miniature status.

Laughter.

I’d like to thank the Member for asking that particular question, because it has been a concern for the Beaufort-Delta, and it has also been a concern for our department. Our department, as I said, along with the Beaufort-Delta school board, is pursuing the filling of the principal and the teacher positions. There were five principal positions that were vacant, but the good news is that all five have been filled to date. Of the 26 teaching positions that were to be filled, there are only four outstanding at this point. We’ve come a long way since the last question from the Member.

Mr. Speaker, can the Minister commit to keeping the communities informed on these last four placements?

Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to keep the Member informed of the status of these positions that are being filled. It is the expectation that these four teaching positions could be filled by the end of June. We will keep the Member posted on our progress.

Can the Minister tell me what plans the department has in place to ensure that in the future the department takes a proactive approach rather than a reactive approach to these issues?

Our department, along with the school boards in various regions, does monitor the teachers and the principals and the high-profile positions that are to be vacant. At that point the request goes out, and that’s when the recruitment drive goes into full action. Certainly, we’ll continue to monitor that. The teachers and professionals give notice, I believe, in early spring, so at that time we know for sure. Certainly we’ll keep working hard in these areas with the Members and also with the regional perspective. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Transportation. It’s in regard to a motion that was passed in this House on accessing gravel sources for communities, especially in the communities of Aklavik and Tuktoyaktuk. I see you’ve taken care of the problem for Tuk, but you haven’t dealt with the problem for Aklavik.

I had the opportunity to speak with the Gwich’in Land Administration. They do have a pit-management plan that this government is part of. They’ve done core samples on the pit outside of Aklavik. There’s an extensive gravel reservoir there that has been accessible for quite a few years. I’d like to ask the Minister: exactly when can I see some movement in regard to this government allowing Aklavik to be treated no differently from the community of Tuktoyaktuk?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The honourable Minister responsible for Transportation, Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The department is fully committed to working with various levels of industry and government in terms of improving our transportation system. It is also

committed to giving capacity to partnerships in the community.

As I’ve mentioned to the Member, I’m prepared to go into Aklavik and sit down with the community to scope out what needs to get done to work on the issue of Aklavik gravel pit.

Meetings are all great and well, but at the end of the day we can meet until we’re blue in the face. My issue is: what is this government going to do in the meantime?

This pit has been accessed going back to the mid-’80s. It's part of the Gwich'in Comprehensive Land Claims Agreement. It was part of an overlap agreement between the Gwich'in and the Inuvialuit. It's identified in those land claim documents as a gravel source. Yet I see nothing in regard to why this government is not recognizing this as a gravel source like any other gravel source in the Northwest Territories.

This government has been spending money on access to the gravel source for years, yet we hear, Let’s have another meeting. I'd like to ask the Minister: exactly when will we see the dollars that are going to be needed to put this road into this gravel source?

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to go into Aklavik, have a discussion with them, make them offers in a partnership process. We had identified in our proposed budget, through the lead Minister of the Building Canada Fund in terms of the research and development fund, that there is going to be some dollars there identified in terms of working with Aklavik.

It’s an extensive process. We want to get the work done. We certainly want to work with the people of Aklavik. There are other needs — investments — that are also competing with the Aklavik gravel source initiative. I am prepared to go into Aklavik and work with the community to see what we can do within the life of this government. That’s my commitment to the Member and to the people of Aklavik.

The Minister can go into Aklavik all he wants. At the end of the day, all we’re going to do is talk.

In regard to this project, we have major projects for community access roads. Projects that weren’t even part of the planning process are getting money through federal infrastructure funding by way of bypass roads.

I’d like to ask the Minister: when will I see dollar signs in this budget or some direction from that Cabinet that there will be capital expenditures on this road to Aklavik? I’m not meeting unless I have that answer.

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned before and I’ll say it again, I’m very, very optimistic and would like to sit down with the people in Aklavik and look at the issue. When it comes to Building, we in my department have identified research dollars going into this particular project.

We do have competing issues out there right across the Northwest Territories on transportation issues, gravel issues, airport issues, new roads and existing roads. So let’s be fair here. Let’s see what we can do within this lifetime and sit down with the lead Minister of the Building Canada Fund. Let’s see what we can do. I know I want to move on this issue, and I’m prepared to go into Aklavik — as I said before — to see what we can do within the time frame of this government.

Thank you, Minister Yakeleya. Final supplementary, Mr. Krutko.

Mr. Speaker, there were some 21 items that were sent to the federal government. I’d like to ask the Minister: did you meet with every community that those 21 projects were addressed for? Did you get the permission of those communities to get those projects in place? Do you have a written agreement with every one of those 21 projects before you send a letter to Ottawa?

I will certainly take into consideration the concerns about projects of the Members from the other side. I have listened from the time I’ve been sitting on this side here. They have been advanced in the past government. They have looked at issues where projects have been on the books for 12 or 15 years. They are coming forward, and I am looking at the plans. Certainly I’d be happy to work with the Members in terms of their projects for their regions and their communities and where best to put our investments in all of the Northwest Territories to improve our transportation system.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for the Minister of Transportation, and it gets back to my Member’s statement and something I’ve talked of a number of times in this House: the Kam Lake bypass road, the city of Yellowknife bypass road.

For reasons I spoke of in my Member’s statement, the road is much anticipated, it’s long overdue, and I’d like to ask the Minister of Transportation: how much is this road going to cost and who is going to be paying for what?

The honourable Minister responsible for Transportation, Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to say to the Member for Kam Lake that he has been very persistent in this area, as have other Members from Yellowknife. On this specific project there’s an estimated number right now of $7 million to build this road. I’ve very happy that the Department of Transportation and the City of Yellowknife have reached an agreement on an MOU to construct the bypass road from Highway No. 3 to the Kam Lake area.

I thank the Minister for that. Again, I thank the Members who have supported this project along the way, and also the City of Yellowknife for their patience in all of this.

I’m just wondering again: how much money is the GNWT actually contributing to the Kam Lake bypass road?

As I said before, the agreement has been reached by the department and the city. The negotiations took some time to complete, and then the agreement of the MOU, which states the terms of the financial agreement. Fifty per cent of the estimated $7 million is coming from the GNWT.

The $3.5 million the Minister talks of coming from the GNWT, is that from the Building Canada Fund? My understanding is that the City of Yellowknife is paying $3.5 million and the Building Canada Fund is paying $3.5 million. I thank the department and the Minister for brokering the deal, but how come the GNWT is not involved in this financially?

I do appreciate the thanks from the Member. The bill cannot fund the project, having not been approved yet. The lead Minister is working with his counterparts to conclude those financial arrangements.

We are anticipating this will be a project that will go ahead. The funds will begin through the department to work with the City of Yellowknife in terms of building this important bypass road.

Final supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wonder if the Minister has any idea when and how the federal funding from the Building Canada Fund is going to flow through this department and to the City of Yellowknife so they can leverage their $3.5 million, and get this road started and constructed.

Once we have signed the final funding arrangements with the Government of Canada, through the Building Canada Fund project, then the lead Minister would

renegotiate the project. Certainly the department would be on side with the lead Minister in terms of concluding these important projects we see from the Northwest Territories.

The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I brought up in my Member’s statement, I have questions about what the government’s plans are for our Business Incentive Policy. I understand that Minister Bob McLeod, with ITI, is going to be putting together an options paper to look at that.

I feel like I’m having déjà vu, because it feels like every government I have been involved in has tried to figure out a way to kill the BIP. Then ensued a very long and heated debate, and then a decision not to do it — for very good and sound reasons, I might add.

Someone has already alluded to the grandfathered nature of our BIP under the free-trade and interprovincial trade agreement. If we do away with it, we will not get it back in its current form. I think it is important that we look very seriously at this. Now, I’d like to say, Go out and do extensive consultation, but I happen to know that just a very few short years ago we went out and did very extensive consultation at a fairly good price. I would like to ask the.... At that time, I should say there was an agreement to set up a monitoring program to monitor the BIP for three years so that a cost-benefit analysis could be done. What is the status of that monitoring and that report?

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Minister responsible for Industry, Tourism and Investment, Mr. Bob McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have set in place a contacts registry, which makes for a very transparent contracting and tendering process. That registry has been in place for four years, and so we will be tabling a report in the next week or so.