This is page numbers 899 to 954 of the Hansard for the 16th Assembly, 2nd Session. The original version can be accessed on the Legislative Assembly's website or by contacting the Legislative Assembly Library. The word of the day was health.

Topics

The House met at 1:32 p.m.

Prayer.

Speaker’s Ruling
Speaker’s Ruling

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

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.

Norman Yakeleya

Norman Yakeleya Minister of Transportation

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.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

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

Bob McLeod

Bob McLeod Yellowknife South

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.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

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

Jackie Jacobson

Jackie Jacobson Nunakput

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.

Jackie Jacobson

Jackie Jacobson Nunakput

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.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

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

Robert Hawkins

Robert Hawkins Yellowknife Centre

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.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

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

David Krutko

David Krutko Mackenzie Delta

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.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

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

Jane Groenewegen

Jane Groenewegen Hay River South

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.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen.

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

Bob Bromley

Bob Bromley Weledeh

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.

Bob Bromley

Bob Bromley Weledeh

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.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

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

Bob McLeod

Bob McLeod Yellowknife South

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.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

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

Cabinet Communications
Members’ Statements

Glen Abernethy

Glen Abernethy Great Slave

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.

Cabinet Communications
Members’ Statements

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

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

Wendy Bisaro

Wendy Bisaro Frame Lake

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.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

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