Thank you, Mr. Premier. Mr.

Krutko? That’s all. We’re on page 2-29,

Executive Operations, Operation Expenditure Summary: $4.048 million.

Department of Executive, Activity Summary,

Executive Operations, Operation Expenditure Summary: $4.048 million, approved.

Page 2-31, Executive Operations, Grants and Contributions: $125,000.

Department of Executive, Activity Summary,

Executive Operations, Grants and Contributions: $125,000, approved.

Page 2-32, information item, Executive Operations, Active Positions. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. In regard to earlier discussions around the positions in the Executive and the lack of aboriginal employment, especially in management positions in this government, where the Premier stated that some 18 per cent were within the department…. It’s the management positions I would like to look at.

Mr. Chair, I’d like to move a motion.

Very good, Mr. Krutko. Your motion.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The motion is on the floor, and it’s being distributed now. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Beaulieu.

Mr. Chair, I just wanted to speak very briefly on the topic.

I think this is a good motion. I recognize that there are difficulties in getting this number up. I don’t mean difficulties; I just mean that it’s not an easy task. However, I think that if the government overall actually set a target....

I believe that the Affirmative Action Policy has been in place since 1983, actually. That’s what I believe. I heard the number 1989 here. However, in 1983, as I recall, the numbers of aboriginal hires were 17 per cent of the government. Soon after the Affirmative Action Policy was put into place, the effectiveness of that policy came to fruition, and we got the number to around 30 per cent. I think we actually hit 34 per cent across the government at one point, but we’ve been levelled off at 31 per cent for a few years, from what I understand.

I agree with the MLA for Mackenzie Delta. Maybe instead of just having the number out there that says that it should be representative of the population and that it should be 50

per cent,

51 per cent, maybe a target of 40 per cent, that we have not achieved yet, might be something we could actively try to achieve.

If the departments were to determine successive targets by year, then break down the targets department by department and then rate the departments based on those targets, it’s actually achievable. If the targets are reasonable and they’re spread out over a good time period, I think they’re achievable.

If we said that departments had to be at 40 per cent next year, then everybody will fail. But if we said, “Well, we could be at 33 per cent at the end of the next fiscal year,” then I would say that we’d have a high per cent of success.

So with that, I support the motion because I think it’s possible. Thank you.

Thank you,

Mr. Beaulieu. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, this area is one that has had debate for quite a number of Assemblies. The Member for Tu

Nedhe is correct: this policy has been in place for many years and had success early.

One of those successes could be the fact that a lot of the aboriginal people — and I count myself as one — entered a lot of the front-line positions back in my apprenticeship days with the Government of the Northwest Territories and then as a tradesman in the field. Many of our communities provided many journeymen in trades areas. So that’s, I think, an example of how things went and worked.

It’s something like that we need to focus on and get the education out into the system, because the best affirmative action policy is a good education.

We need to improve in our program areas so that we have our graduates channelled in the right areas so that they can take their experience and grow in those areas and can help in writing those policies we work from in this Legislative Assembly.

Here’s one of the areas. With an earlier motion we talked about, Mr. Chairman, working together. The Minister responsible for Human Resources is prepared to sit down with committee on a new employment equity piece. Here’s an opportunity to talk about those progressive targets and other actions we can put in place. I would invite that opportunity. Let’s get down to work and roll up our sleeves in those areas. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. To the motion. The question has been called.

Motion carried.

We’re on page 2-32, Executive Operations, Active Positions, information item. Any questions?

Department of Executive, Activity Summary,

Executive Operations, Active Positions, information item (page 2-32), approved.

Page 2-33, Executive Operations, Active Positions. Questions?

Department of Executive, Activity Summary,

Executive Operations, Active Positions, information item (page 2-33), approved.

Page 2-35, Public Utilities Board, Operations Expenditure Summary: $421,000. Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have a couple of questions in regard to the Public Utilities Board.

On page 2-35, under Details of Other Expenses, fees and payments go from $154,000 in ’07–08 to $18,000 in ’08–09. I just wondered what those reductions are. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For this level of detail I will go to Mr. Ramsden.

Thank you.

Mr. Ramsden.

Thank you for the information. I

wanted to also ask a question in regard to

honoraria rates for the PUB. It’s indicated that there’s an increase of some $27,000 due to forced affgrowth because of honoraria rate increases for the Public Utilities Board members.

How are these honoraria rates determined? Is it set in legislation or regulations? I’ll leave it at that. Thank you.

The process that was involved in honoraria rates being changed was one where, when you look at the process used, we had to look at the GNWT, as well the federal government and some of the targets that were set.

When that was done, many of our boards, depending on their level of complexity, were affected, and some of those changes occurred. This is a result of that, of working with the standards that are out there and defining the level of a board in the work it carries out and the level of complexity. This is a result of that. Thank you.

Thank you to the Minister for that. I didn’t quite follow, though. Are these rates determined by a panel? Does the PUB suggest that they need a rate and it’s evaluated by someone, or do they set their own rates and then they’re verified? If I could get a little more information, please.

Mr.

Chairman, the PUB

doesn’t set its own rates. In fact, with the different documents we have to work with — and this one falls under the Financial Administration Manual, I believe section 1818. We work with our rates, the federal government’s, and come up with a process and a level of complexity. So it is a result of some of our own documentation and controls we have in

place. This was the result, and the rates did increase as a result of that work. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. We’re on page 2-35, Public Utilities Board, Operations Expenditure Summary: $421,000.

Department of Executive, Activity Summary,

Public Utilities Board, Operations Expenditure Summary: $421,000, approved.