Good afternoon, colleagues. Welcome back to the Chamber.

Orders of the day. Item 2, Ministers’ statements. The honourable Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, for the first time, teachers from across the NWT will be gathering to learn and share together at the ‘Our Students, Our North, Our Success’ educator’s conference in Yellowknife.

This three-day event has been organized by the NWT Teachers’ Association with assistance and support from all district education councils and authorities as well as schools across the NWT.

Northern educators are a very special group of people. Though schools within the Northwest Territories vary from region to region, in terms of size, grades taught, culture and languages spoken, educators deal with many of the same challenges and successes across the North, and this conference gives them the opportunity to discuss, share and learn together.

Major topic areas include a focus on K to 12 literacy, building children’s confidence, the use of technology in the classroom, and strategies for working with children with FASD. A highlight of the conference will be a discussion panel titled “Our Students, Our North, Our Success,” which will include representatives from the Canadian Teachers’ Federation, the NWT Teachers’ Association, Education, Culture and Employment and a few well-known and respected northern principals.

This event will only be three days long, but it is the hope that our educators and schools will experience the benefits long afterwards, in new perspectives to teaching or new approaches to dealing with differentiated instruction of all students.

This conference is a very large event, Mr. Speaker, with over 800 participants. The NWTTA has worked long and hard with many different partners to make this event possible, and I would particularly like to recognize the work that they have done to make this an exciting learning opportunity for the northern educators.

Mr. Speaker, this year, Education Week happens to fall on the same week as the conference and we are choosing to celebrate the role of teachers through a reception on the evening of Monday, February 16th . Mr. Speaker, I hope that you and all

Members will be able to join me in celebrating the teachers that do so much in our communities. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Item 3, Members’ statements. The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I had an opportunity this morning, along with my colleagues from the Nunakput riding and the Sahtu, to have an update from Richard Nerysoo who just got back from Ottawa meeting with the federal Minister and Privy Council, Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs Chuck Strahl and the Minister of Natural Resources. They are pushed to try to get the Mackenzie Highway built up the Mackenzie Valley. Mr. Speaker, they are looking at a partnership with all the First Nations governments up and down the valley to build a road which we’ve been waiting for some time to see constructed.

In his discussions, it seemed like the federal Ministers were asking where the Government of the Northwest Territories is on this major project for the

Mackenzie Valley, of which we are talking about $1.8 billion.

Mr. Speaker, I think it’s important that we continue to work together with our partners, the aboriginal groups, the Mackenzie Valley Construction, to ensure that we have a system in place that we can move this major project forward. It’s not going to be easy, but I think through the partnership arrangement that’s been considered by the First Nation governments from the Deh Cho all the way to Nunakput, the Sahtu and the Gwich’in settlement areas, that we have to move this project forward.

Mr. Speaker, I think it’s important that this capital investment happen right now with regard to the natural and fiscal restraints we are under, but more importantly putting people to work, investing in our infrastructure and making sure this capital project moves. Yes, it’s a major project, but like any major project we do have to have the incentive to move forward, get the support from all our partners and, more importantly, convince the federal government that the Government of the Northwest Territories is onside with the coalition which consists of groups from up and down the valley to move the Mackenzie Valley Highway forward.

I think it’s important that this government or this House show we support this major initiative by way of a capital project. I think we should have a debate in this House and I believe we will be later on next week.

I will be asking the Minister of Transportation about this issue with regard to the transportation infrastructure for the Northwest Territories and the Mackenzie Valley Highway.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There have been several animal neglect and abuse instances in the NWT over the past year that have garnered much public attention and criticism. We need to be doing more to prevent incidents like this from occurring by developing a public awareness and education program and stronger animal rights legislation.

I want to be clear that I’m talking about pets, agricultural, and working animals here. I think the Wildlife Act has good protections written into it for wildlife and we don’t want to affect hunting and trapping in the NWT, which I strongly support.

Several months ago the Animal Legal Defence Fund published a report which ranked provinces

and territories on the relative strength and comprehensiveness of their animal protection laws. The NWT ranked in the bottom tier. This poor ranking is due mainly to the fact that the NWT doesn’t have a specific animal rights act. What we do have is the Dog Act, which is a start, but, as its name suggests, it only applies to dogs.

The report makes some suggestions as to how the NWT could improve their legislation, including a broader range of protections that apply to all animals, not just dogs; better definitions of standards of basic care; harsher penalties for repeat offenders; and provisions that allow a judge to prevent offenders from owning animals in the future, to list a few of the suggestions. To my mind this needs to be complemented by a program that profiles the responsibilities of a pet or working animal owner in the NWT.

There is much room for improvement here and a model that could be used is Manitoba, whose legislation ranked first in the Animal Legal Defence Fund report. Manitoba, like the NWT, highly values hunting and trapping; yet they have managed to draft progressive animal rights legislation of the highest standard.

The NWT is a place where animals play a fundamental role in people’s lives. Incidence of pet ownership is high in the North, and dog mushing and other such activities are good for tourism and part of our cherished traditional heritage. The vast majority of people recognize the important relationship these animals play in our lives and treat them with the respect they deserve. However, from time to time an appalling violation of the terms of human decency will occur; typically one that could be prevented with the development of appropriate legislation and implementation of enforcement provisions.

With good education and the implementation of an animal rights act, we can ensure the proper and responsible treatment of our pets and working animals.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In pretty much every session since I was elected into the 16th Assembly I have asked questions on

performance bonuses paid to deputy ministers, senior managers, and excluded employees within the GNWT. Every time I ask, I get generally the same response from the Premier that, yes, bonuses

are paid. In fact, around $1.65 million is paid out annually, give or take a couple hundred thousand.

I’ve heard from the Premier and the Minister of Human Resources that bonuses are a necessity. I couldn’t agree more. When bonuses are earned they should absolutely be provided. However, it’s clear that pretty much every deputy minister and every senior manager who is eligible for bonuses receives them on an annual basis. Once a bonus becomes expected, they lose their effectiveness. They stop becoming about increasing results or output and become a part of an employee’s base salary.

I know many of our deputy ministers and senior managers and I know that many of them work really, really hard, often above and beyond normal expectations. These individuals deserve bonuses. Unfortunately it’s also clear that there are no official processes to determine when a bonus should be paid; no mechanism to determine and assess when somebody has taken that extra step.

Last year the federal government developed a rigorous assessment process for their performance pay. With their plan and process in place fewer than 20 percent of the senior executives received bonuses. Under the federal program senior managers are assessed based on performance targets and a 360 degree review which includes input from fellow senior managers, colleagues, Ministers and others.

We must ensure that staff are rewarded for outstanding performance; performance that is above and beyond expectation; for thinking outside of the box; for streamlining government through increased efficiencies and better use of resources, not paid bonuses because we always have and that staff receiving them expect it.

Last year I asked the Premier to review and implement a process similar to the federal government’s to ensure that when bonuses are earned, they will be paid and when they aren’t, they won’t be paid. Processes like this will ensure that we remain competitive with the private sector by providing high-quality performers with financial incentives which encourage their continued commitment to the GNWT as opposed to jumping ship and seeking employment in the private sector. Unfortunately, I never received confirmation that this was done and it appears once again that virtually every eligible deputy minister and senior manager received performance bonuses for the 2007-2008 fiscal year.

At the appropriate time I will be asking the Premier some questions concerning bonuses in the NWT.

Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We continue to speak of supporting our children and ensuring that they receive high quality education beginning with the primary and elementary levels. Studies show that paying attention to young children’s learning needs pays off. These children develop into more enthusiastic students and are more likely to succeed in higher education.

Learning starts in the home community. When the children begin school they need a healthy, safe, nurturing environment. They need the necessary space to play and work together in groups. Our children require a safe and enjoyable place to learn.

In my riding of Nahendeh, the community of Trout Lake has outgrown its school. The Charles Tetcho School is a one-room classroom built 20 years ago for a small population of 50. At that time there were very few children.

I am proud to say that Trout Lake is now a growing community. Now the students in the classroom have both primary and middle school age. The community needs a building where there can be some separation of grade levels to allow for different activities to be going on at once.

In order to satisfy the needs of children and youth in grades kindergarten to 9, Trout Lake needs two or more classrooms. I ask the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment to recognize the needs of the students of the Charles Tetcho School and ensure that a budget for a new school is in the next capital plan. I will be asking the Minister questions during question period.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I`d like to speak today about my constituency meeting that I had last night at N.J. Macpherson School, which is located in my riding. It was the most well-attended constituency meeting that I`ve had in my five years representing the Kam Lake riding. Twenty-seven constituents showed up to voice their concerns over how this government is being run.

There is an anger and anxiety amongst the public that I have not witnessed before. For the first time, some constituents even brought demonstration signs and placards with them to my meeting. They

are very unhappy with the way this government is operating. They are upset with the handling of the proposed changes to the supp health benefits, the Opportunities Fund and the loan to Discovery Air, sky-high power rates, and as if that wasn`t enough, board reform is now front and centre and, it appears, being shoved down their throats.

I spoke yesterday about the GNWT`s pathetic effort at consultation and engaging the public in a meaningful way. The government just does not seem like they want to listen to our people. Rather they seem intent on force feeding a plan on board reform that does nothing for anyone except make a Minister’s job easier; less accountability and less oversight and more bureaucracy. The plan has not articulated what is wrong. The government line should be: if it’s not broke, don’t worry, we’ll break it.

My constituents want the government to keep their hands off of education in our community.

They want health and social services and housing to be managed and run by professionals in that field. Parents want to have a say in electing school boards, not whoever the Minister’s buddies happen to be that day.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I’d like to talk about consensus government. I was reflecting on the comments of a former colleague, Mr. Dent, during a CBC interview this week. When extolling the virtues of consensus government he was raising the Regular Members’ input into the budget process and how we see it before it’s delivered and we should feel honoured to have such a privilege to be that involved. That is one that constantly gets brought up: Well, people in other jurisdictions don’t even see the budget before it comes to the floor and you all do.

There are some really good things about consensus government versus the party system. When it comes to our legislative process it’s pretty clearly defined and seemingly works quite well. So what is it that goes wrong with consensus government that allows initiatives like supplementary health benefits reform, board reform, revenue option, consultations, the ATCO proposal, the Deh Cho Bridge initiative, to get so far down the road and to absorb so much of our

resources only to find out that it is untenable and has no public support and causes the kind of acrimony and stress that we have had to experience recently as legislators?

I am no political scientist, Mr. Speaker, but consensus government fails at some point. You can say that we expect leadership to lead, but that doesn’t mean doing things without support of the Regular Members. I understand the frustration of Cabinet Ministers and the Premier while we expect things to happen, but consensus and building consensus is a lot of work.

We all come here as Regular Members, equal and elected by the people we represent. That election qualifies us to fill any role in this government. So what is lost in the translation when then on bended knee Regular Members have to prod, beg, threaten, question the Executive Council to hear the voice of our people? Often in response to initiatives that they can’t even convince us the merits of, never mind the public. Consensus government to really work does require that effort and leadership. Mr. Speaker, it reminds me that I would like to seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement. Thank you.

---Unanimous consent granted

Mr. Speaker, I don’t have a solution to where we go on consensus government, but I must tell you I did have a mental image, while I was driving to work this morning when I was thinking about consensus government, of that little centaur on the Hercules cartoon named Newton who has the head and torso of a human and has the backside of an ass. Mr. Speaker, that is the hybrid that I kind of feel like we are trying to work with here. I won’t lead to any speculation about which side we are. Thank you.

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

It is a tough one to follow up on, Mr. Speaker. Today I would like to talk about the importance of the northern manufacturing sector and what it does to the northern economy and how this government can help.

Manufacturing is a small but important growth sector in our economy which is a vital pillar to our North and the growth for the future. There are approximately 100 businesses and at least 400 people that are employed in our northern manufacturing. This includes lumber mills, doors, windows, water tanks, cabinets, and log homes. There are furniture, boats, homes and don’t forget

about those canvas bags made in Fort McPherson. Even in Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Speaker, we have jewellery made by Hau Huynh at Arctic Jewellers and even publishing done down at CanArctic Graphics. So let us not forget about the other people such as artisans. They create crafts, tanned furs and make leather goods and don’t forget about food.

So, Mr. Speaker, as you can see, the list really does go on. What is obvious here is whether you live in Yellowknife or Fort McPherson, manufacturing is not just important to the economy but it is important to Northerners as a whole. We should all find ways to take pride in our northern manufacturers who help our economy and produce products here in the North. However, in some cases we know not everyone knows about these amazing products, these innovative products that are created in our own backyard. These businesses sometimes are facing serious challenges relating to finding and retaining their employees, controlling their costs of the supplies including their power and utility costs. One way or another, most of these businesses are facing substantial marketing challenges. This government can lend that helping hand. That is all they are really looking for. There are more efficient ways that we could work to help connect them with their customers. We could use what I have called the “made in the NWT” promo campaign which I have suggested to past ITI Ministers.

Mr. Speaker, I raised this on several occasions. It wouldn’t take much to design a logo and help develop a marketing campaign that could help support this, our manufacturing industry. Mr. Speaker, it wouldn’t take much more than a simple tag and a certain small promo session. It wouldn’t be complicated but sometimes if you give it to government, they will make it complicated. Mr. Speaker, we hear time and again how the United States talks about “buy America”. Well where is “buy NWT”? Mr. Speaker, promoting northern business is not just a job that we need to do, it is a right we have to make sure we instil so Northerners understand what is important to their economy.

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

---Unanimous consent granted

Thank you, colleagues. Mr. Speaker, we understand the error of free trade and how it imposes purchasing rules and requirements, but this is not about isolating those products and saying we can’t buy. I want to talk about promoting them and fostering that growth. Mr. Speaker, a lot of people work very hard to promote their products. Where is this government standing behind them? Because promoting home grown manufacturing is

not about protectionism; it is about taking pride in what Northerners do. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Mr. Speaker, today I would like to bring up the… it is IRC Cup weekend in the Beaufort-Delta and it is the biggest tournament in the Northwest Territories for senior men’s hockey, Mr. Speaker. Just to let you know, I heard it last week on the radio that Simpson said they were the biggest, but they are not. We are.

---Laughter

Mr. Speaker, to all the players and fans, I hope you have a safe drive in from the communities or a plane ride in. This weekend will be good to see everyone from all of the regions and spend time with our family and friends and to let the House know I will be a little bit late on Monday. Good luck, have fun and I hope to see everyone in Inuvik this weekend. Happy Valentine’s Day to my wife. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Mr. Speaker, these days with our economy and commodity prices in the poor state that they are in, unemployment numbers are, unfortunately, increasing. As 2009 progresses, I expect we will see more people in the North lose their jobs. That will force more people to apply for unemployment insurance for the financial assistance they need and deserve. But things do not always work out the way they should, Mr. Speaker, and sometimes a worker’s application for employment insurance is denied. In such a case, it is the right of the worker to appeal that decision to an employment insurance board of referees. Most provinces and territories have at least one board to hear appeals, but I was surprised to learn recently that the closest appeal board for the NWT is in either Alberta or the Yukon. These boards don’t travel to the appellant’s home for their hearings; the claimant must come to them.

The NWT is only one of two jurisdictions in Canada without its own employment insurance board. Consider the plight of a worker in Inuvik, for instance, who has had an employment insurance application denied. Although they have the right to

appeal that decision, it is highly unlikely that he or she would bother, knowing that they would have to travel to Edmonton for a hearing at their own expense. If they do launch an appeal, days of travel are required, again at large expense. This is for someone who has just lost their only source of income. The end result is an unfair situation for our residents at a very tough time in their life. Our workers deserve better, Mr. Speaker. They deserve the same access to an appeal as the rest of Canada. I know I am talking about a federal responsibility, but the NWT government, through the Department of Education, Culture and Employment, can request of the federal government that a board of referees be established for the NWT. The best part of that is that there is no cost to us, Mr. Speaker, because the employment insurance board costs are covered by the federal government. So I strongly encourage the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment to look into this situation post-haste and then contact his federal counterpart to see if we can’t get an NWT board of referees established as soon as possible. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will have some questions for the Minister of ECE during question period.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.

Mr. Speaker, in my language I said I will speak on behalf of my people in the Sahtu region. I want to raise a concern in my region. It is not in any other regions in the Northwest Territories. Mr. Speaker, this morning at about a little after seven, I heard on CBC, with Randy Henderson speaking to a representative from Sachs Harbour and Wrigley, about the Food Mail Program. It was very refreshing to hear people from the communities who talk right from the heart, right from their knowledge as to what it costs to live in these small northern communities that are serviced by the Food Mail Program in the Northwest Territories. Mr. Speaker, those two gentlemen who spoke with Mr. Henderson certainly could have spoke on behalf of many other residents in the Northwest Territories about the Food Mail Program.

The Food Mail Program is a program that is funded by the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs and is administrated by Canada Post. Canada Post sets the regulations in terms of what’s available in terms of the Food Mail Program for the Northwest Territories. Mr. Speaker, this program is so vitally important to the people in the Northwest Territories that the federal government established an evaluation process with three northern communities: one in the Kitikmeot region, one in

Nunavut and one in Northern Quebec some time ago. Yet, we have not heard the evaluation of this Food Mail Program.

I’m going to be asking the Minister or the Cabinet in terms of what type of support has this government done in terms of initiating discussions with the federal government to do some type of evaluation in the Northwest Territories or take those findings of those evaluations and apply it so that they can change the Food Mail Program so people in those small communities that have to pay even for a can of pie filling…I understand in my communities it costs close to $8; potatoes are in the $20 range. Those prices are very familiar to us in the communities. I’m going to ask the Minister or the Cabinet in terms of how to look at the Food Mail Program and how we can make a difference in those people’s lives in the communities.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Item 4, reports of standing and special committees. Item 5, returns to oral questions. Item 6, recognition of visitors in the gallery. We welcome everyone in the gallery today. I hope you’re enjoying the proceedings. Item 7, acknowledgements. Item 8, oral questions. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.

Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Minister of Transportation, can the Minister of Transportation inform this House and the people in the communities as to his knowledge, his information as to the evaluation by the federal government on the Food Mail Program?

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Minister of Transportation, Mr. Michael McLeod.

I can confirm that a review has been launched by the federal government to look at the program. That includes consultation with people in the Northwest Territories. A number of research contracts have been awarded by the federal government and we have provided some input in terms of recommendations. Our recommendations were more in the area of trying to make the program more flexible and allow more origin points for shipments and also to allow the aircraft carriers themselves to do some administration of the Food Mail Program. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I certainly welcome the good news from the Minister in terms of the evaluation involvement. When can this side of the House be involved in the process and privy to this information? Mr. Speaker, also to look at certain locations in the Northwest Territories, like Norman Wells in the Sahtu, to be a point of location for the Food Mail Program. My understanding right now is that Yellowknife and Inuvik are the points of location for this Food Mail Program. It would make a huge difference if Norman Wells would be considered strongly to be a point of location for distributing the Food Mail Program.

Our government and the Department of Transportation are not actually involved in the review. Our involvement has been more to the area of providing some recommendations as to how to improve the program. This is a federal program and is administered by the federal government. There has been actually no date indicated by Minister Strahl as to when this would wrap up. If there is an interest from the standing committee, we certainly can provide that information and let that be known to INAC that there is a request from the standing committee to have a presentation. We can certainly accommodate that if there’s that desire. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, my understanding from the federal government and from my notes is that the evaluation that was being looked at by the federal government, it’s taking a long time; actually years in terms of them coming forward with any type of strong recommendations. I think this government, through this Minister and the Cabinet, needs to sit down with the federal government in terms of stating our strong feelings towards this program and implementing some strong changes through the recommendations as to looking at some of the communities in the Northwest Territories.

Can this Minister, through his Cabinet colleagues, suggest that some of these locations such as Norman Wells be a point of distribution for the Food Mail Program? This would make a huge difference in my region in terms of the foods that are available through this program. Again, I urge the Minister that he would carry this strong message to the federal government.

Mr. Speaker, the Member is quite right; this review has been a long time in the making. There have been several governments that we have gone through on the federal side to get to this point. As I indicated earlier, our involvement has been basically to provide some recommendations. However, we hear the Member and certainly hear his request to take a stronger role in terms of our involvement. We will request to sit down with Indian Affairs and have a

face-to-face meeting and try to get a better handle on how long this is going to take, what they’re hearing up to now and put forward the recommendations that we think will improve the program. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Mr. Speaker, I certainly would applaud the Minister for going the extra mile for the people in the Northwest Territories, especially with the Food Mail Program. Would the Minister commit to the House and the people that next time they have a meeting with Minister Strahl, or communicate with Minister Strahl through writing, would he bring this point up in terms of asking the Minister to put this on the agenda for his next visit to the Northwest Territories in terms of an item that needs to be discussed and to look at making some changes to the Food Mail Program?

We do have 17 communities in the Northwest Territories that participate in this program and it is important for those communities to ensure that we get good results. We will write a letter to the Minister, we will commit to a meeting with the federal officials of INAC to discuss this program, and we will certainly commit to providing that information to the Members. Thank you.

I have a couple of questions for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment today. Easy questions, I hope. I’d like to know whether or not the Minister agrees with me that the NWT should have its own employment insurance board of referees, that it is a void and that that void should be filled.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The honourable Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.

Mr. Speaker, we certainly do provide...Not just us but the federal government does provide those kinds of services throughout the North, whether it be Service Canada offices...Yes, we need to provide all sorts of services that meet the clients throughout the Northwest Territories. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

So if the Minister feels that this service is something that needs to be provided, is he willing to take on this particular issue to bring it to the attention of the federal government and to correct this particular situation? Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, certainly we need to identify those Service Canada offices throughout the North, where they are located, and work with them, and if they can expand their services throughout the North. At the same time, I’m willing to certainly deal with the federal government on those kinds of services throughout the North. It could be administered through our offices as well with the appeal services board. Certainly I make a commitment to the Member that I’ll work with my federal counterparts on this particular issue.

Thank you to the Minister for his commitment. I want to emphasize that I’m not referencing Service Canada offices. The thing that is lacking, in my estimation, is that Employment Insurance Canada establishes boards of referees across the country for people to appeal employment insurance applications that are denied.

If the Minister is willing to take on this commitment, which I think he said he was, I’d like to know what kind of a time frame we’d be looking at. When might he be able to report back to the House on progress on this particular issue?

Certainly this has been brought to my attention today, so I’m certainly making a commitment to follow through with the federal government. Certainly as soon as I hear from the federal government, if there’s a positive outcome I’ll certainly be sharing that with the Member.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In the last government I questioned the former Minister of ITI, Mr. Brendan Bell at the time, about creating an NWT manufacturing program with the logos. At the time he seemed interested in the idea and it seemed like an idea that the department could create quite simply. I’m going to have questions for the new Minister, our present-day Minister Bob McLeod of ITI. The fact is the manufacturing campaign could help build self-esteem and awareness within our industry amongst our regular, everyday people here in the North.

Would Minister McLeod be willing to look into something like this to create a logo program, as well as a campaign of awareness for northern manufacturing here in the NWT?

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’re quite experienced in the use of branding for Northwest Territories products and we do use it for NWT arts and crafts. We have very unique arts and crafts and have developed a branding logo that was put in place in 2007. Similarly we have logos for our genuine Mackenzie Valley furs. I think it only makes sense that we would do something similar for NWT manufacturing.

I appreciate the Minister’s response and I thank him for getting into my second question before I get there, which is about the arts program. I think the arts logo is a successful program to help identify products and I would hope they would follow somewhat similar and certainly not make the guidelines overly complicated.

My question to the Minister then is, do you think guidelines could be developed and perhaps a campaign could be launched by the end of summer?

The branding logo for arts was introduced in September 2007. The criteria are not that onerous. They’re for NWT artisans. It helps promote the uniqueness of NWT arts and protects them from copies. For the NWT manufacturing we do have an NWT manufacturing policy as part of the Business Incentive Program. The difficulty with that is to ensure that there are NWT manufacturers using NWT products and resources.

I think the arts campaign is very successful; the logo identification as well as the work gone into identifying the guidelines. But I would also like to hear if potentially the Minister could involve working with the NWT chamber, the local chambers in our communities to help elevate what business would like in the marketing campaign. The only reason I ask is I want to make sure the Minister and his officials will involve local manufacturers into making sure their objectives will be met going forward.

That would be our normal practice. When we developed the branding logo for NWT arts and crafts we worked very closely with the NWT Arts Council and made a call for proposals. We will be quite prepared to work with the NWT Chamber of Commerce on a similar basis.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I know these words don’t get uttered too often in Yellowknife, but would the Minister be willing to come with me to my riding to visit some of my local

manufacturers in the next little while? I did highlight the jewellery by Hau Huynh and certainly I’m sure he’s well aware of CanArctic. Would he be willing to make time to go visit and see on-the-ground manufacturing, at least here in Yellowknife? And I’m sure other Members would expect somewhat similar. Could he do that?

I’m always willing to visit constituencies as long as it doesn’t involve a large amount of money.

---Laughter

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a procurement question with respect to this government’s policy. I have to create a bit of a scenario to premise this question on.

The Government of the Northwest Territories goes to public tender for a service and product. Three bids come in that are within a very small percentage of each other, which would indicate that would probably be the market value. Then we find out that the Government of the Northwest Territories only budgeted $700,000 for $1 million worth of product and work. So the Government of the Northwest Territories, the department, then goes back to the drawing board and realizes that they were wrong in their estimate and instead of talking to the person who was low bid on the first round, they go back to tender for exactly the same product and service again, and potentially the same people bid again.

This is a problem in our procurement system. I’m not really sure who should answer that question. But my question is, would it not be reasonable and fair to have a discussion with the person who was the low bid?

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Premier, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d have to get the details of what’s going on there and work with the Member to what area and work with the appropriate department on that. We do have our policies in place when it comes to our procurement and manner of tenders and RFPs and so on. I’d have to work with the appropriate Minister and the Member.

Companies go to a lot of work and expense to bid on government contracts.

They’re obviously happy when they see the results posted and they are low bid. Then to find out that the government has substantially under budgeted for the contract that they have bid on, only to go back out to tender again for exactly the same product and service puts the people who bid on that contract originally in a very untenable situation. What would the Premier suggest to improve our procurement policy to prevent that from happening?

I’m aware of a situation that is under review right now that we will have to look at. But the process would be, and we have in quite a number of cases found out, that when we’ve gone out for tender or RFP, that the numbers come in substantially higher than we’d budgeted. Departments then would have to decide if they go back to the drawing board and change the original request; either construction or equipment or material that’s being requested or they go to negotiate with the low bid to see if they can work within that environment. Usually something does change before it goes back out, but I’m aware that this particular situation is under review.

This is premised on a scenario that I have suggested and it is a real situation, but it comes to the larger issue of is it not inherently not fair to ask people to compete and then have their numbers known, have them be low bid, and then go back out to tender again for exactly the same thing. It puts people in a very untenable situation as bidders. I don’t think it’s really living up to a very high standard of procurement for this government. I would like to ask the Premier, could they make it a policy rather than doing that, to go back to the low bidder and have that discussion? To make it a matter of policy.

I believe with the procurement policies in place there is usually a requirement for change to happen. It is to go out so that scenario doesn’t occur. As I understand, we are reviewing the situation and can inform the Member as to how things turn out.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In this case I believe the only thing that is contemplated to be changed is the date by which the product needs to be delivered, which isn’t a very significant change to the scope of the tender and the scope of the work, in my opinion. I guess I would just like to see this government try to see things through the eyes of the contractor and try to be as fair as possible.

The other little added note on this one is that when people do run into these situations they should be allowed to go to their MLAs and they should be able

to have their MLA bring this forward to the government and to the Minister and not fear any reprisal for doing so. I would trust that this is a principle that this Premier and this government would also concur with.

In this particular case, although the Member has put out a scenario, we have to be careful in how I respond to this area. There is a review being done in a similar situation. The fact that the Members raise their issues here, there would be no reprisal from departments to anyone who would go to their Members for some help raising issues to our departments. We’ll make sure that’s the case.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I spoke earlier in my Member’s statement about a constituency meeting I had last night. We had 27 constituents show up at the meeting. The discussion centred around a few of the big issues that we’ve been talking about here in the House since we’ve been back. Most of the discussion, though, centred around board reform. I have a few questions for the lead Minister in charge of the Refocusing Government committee, Mr. Miltenberger, in regard to board reform. In fact, some boards may need some aspect of reform, however, I want to get an understanding from the Minister why the Government of the Northwest Territories feels that the regional model for these boards is necessary.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The lead Minister on Refocusing Government, Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The regional service board model that the Tlicho Government has subscribed to and that we’ve worked with over the last decade or so with them on seems to have applicability in other regions. We started the process of board reform on that basis. We’ve proceeded to do the work and we’re continuing to do the work, and we’ll continue to pull together the information on this approach, on the feedback that we’re receiving, on the information that we’re gathering from the regions. Then we’ll have a milestone date in April where we’re going to look at how applicable that model is. The underlying issue of board reform has been subscribed to, from what I’ve heard, from everywhere I’ve been. There may be questions on the regional service board model, which is the purpose of the April 1st milestone date to allow us to

take a look at where we are and decide how we move forward from there.

When the government goes out to, and they call it consultation, the way I see it, there’s no accountability for the Government of the Northwest Territories because they have nothing to back up their plans. They have no research, no data, no costs, no HR plans or anything of the like. I’d like to ask the Minister why it is the government’s intent to cause such anxiety across our land every time they make an announcement. The board reform is the latest example. I’d like to ask the Minister why we are causing our residents so much anxiety and anger that they’re feeling.

We embarked upon this arduous journey that we’ve laid out to 2010-2011. We recognized there was work to be done. We were moving forward with the concept and initial plan. We had a lot of work to do and we continue to have a lot of work to do. April gets us about a third of the way down the track in terms of 2010-2011. It’s a milestone date. We’ve been engaging with the communities. We’ve been engaging with the boards and regions. We’re doing the work to pull together the information as we go, recognizing that there are complexities here in the North Slave that are going to take probably even more time than there would in the rest of the Territory. We’re doing it, we believe, in a measured way. In April, seven weeks hence, we’re going to gather around and look at where we go with the whole issue of board reform as it was initially contemplated. How do we adjust? If we adjust, how do we adjust? What other steps do we need to take?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Minister probably wouldn’t want me mentioning the way this government’s operating in the same light as a certain Prime Minister operates, but one of the things that’s coming out here is the fact that I understand Mr. Miltenberger is the lead Minister, but the Minister of Health, the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, and the Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation have been eerily silent on the issue of board reform. That’s causing people a great deal of concern. If they’re not going to stand up and protect the institutions that are out there, who is going to?

This is a government-wide initiative. It is an initiative that was sanctioned by Cabinet. I was given the lead role on this. Cabinet has been involved and has been apprised every step of the way. We’ve agreed to the April 1st date. The Ministers haven’t been eerily

silent. I’ve been given the lead on this. The Ministers have spoken when the issue’s been raised with them. But in terms of moving the process, I have been given that task and I’ve been

doing my best to carry that task forward. Once we get to April, we’ll all be collectively regrouping.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I haven’t heard any one of those three Ministers make a public statement about board reform in the Northwest Territories. If they’re that supportive of it and if their departments are that supportive of it they should make a public announcement.

I’d like to ask the Minister, after April 1st , how will

the decision be made to either proceed or to park the board reform initiative and how will Regular Members be involved in that decision-making?

This is a Cabinet initiative. The Refocusing Government committee on which the Member sits is going to be tasked, our job is to bring it together to come up with our best recommendation, at which point Cabinet, P and P, will be reviewing where we stand, how we move forward. Board reform was seen as a priority of this Assembly. How do we sort that out and move forward on the 10 years’ work? In April we will regroup and see where we go from there. We’ll all collectively be involved over the last number of months. This has been a joint committee where we’ve had two Regular Members on it. We’re going to continue that work until April, over the next seven weeks, and then that information will be put on the table and we’ll look at that.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’d just like to follow up on my Member’s statement where Trout Lake is a growing community. They are having more and more children. I’m pleased to see that the children are staying in the community. Is the Department of Education, Culture and Employment aware of an identified need to expand the school in Trout Lake?

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

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, certainly, I think we need to look at the school itself, the capacity that is full capacity or not. According to our records that we have in place, we do have 12 students enrolled on September 30, 2008. The school has a capacity of 33 students. So we do have quite a number of students that could still enter the school. At the

same time, Mr. Speaker, I did commit to the Member that I will be visiting Nahendeh. Part of that will be a touring of the schools in that particular region. I am looking forward to looking at this school as well. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Absolutely, I will be looking forwarding to touring the Nahendeh riding with the Minister. However, the case remains that it is still a one-room school. Even with 12 students, there are lots of distractions. That is a key message the community has sent to me.

Before, in anticipation of that meeting, perhaps, Mr. Speaker, the Minister can commit to send officials to talk with the community of Trout Lake to discuss their needs. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, certainly we can send our…We deal with the regions, whether they be superintendents or DEAs or DECs. We do have staffing in the region. Within our departmental staff here, I will work closely with them and identify challenges at the community level. With respect to the one-room school that the Member is referring to, we certainly need to look at that and if we can move forward on how we can identify spaces in that area. Mahsi.

I would just like to ask the Minister as well, is he aware that there is a 15 or 20-year capital infrastructure refit schedule for the Trout Lake school? Mahsi.

Mr. Speaker, certainly, we do have 15 or 20-year plans for the schools in the Northwest Territories. Trout Lake will be one of the schools that fall under that as well. We need to look at the school where it is at. The school was built in 1993, so I guess he can say it is a fairly new school as well. We need to look at the overall structure of the building inside the space capacity and look at the 15-year plan as well. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Final supplementary, Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just identified that, to make sure it is in the capital budget. I don’t want to be missing the capital budget planning process, Mr. Speaker. Just to ensure that the Minister is aware and he will at least consider this as part of the capital planning process when it begins. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, before we get through the capital planning process, we need to identify the needs of the school and also the community. There needs to be an educational plan, as well, dealing with the capacity issue. I am more than willing to sit down with the Member and also the school board to deal with this particular

matter. We will be doing that once we tour the Nahendeh. We will have our staff go there as well. Mahsi.

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

Mr. Speaker, the vast majority of people in the Northwest Territories have great respect for wildlife. However, there are the well-publicized incidents of animal cruelty and neglect. People are asking for something to be done about this. My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. I was wondering if there is new animal rights legislation that is being adopted to prevent these issues from occurring. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs, Mr. Robert McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I agree with the Member; there has been some publicity given to this issue in the last while. At the moment they are considering amendments to the Dog Act to bring it in line. The Dog Act is old. It is from 1950 when dogs were a way of life here. That is being considered at the moment. We are hoping to get a public discussion paper out there to ask for opinions and what the public wants to see in this particular act or if this is an act that works for the Territories. Thank you.

Thanks for the comments from the Minister. That is a start; a fairly modest start, I would say, compared to what the public is clearly asking for already. A number of people here would remember the incident with the starvation of horses just outside of Yellowknife. Obviously an Animal Rights Act is needed here. The Dog Act refers to the necessity for proof of intended neglect which, of course, is an oxymoron. Neglect infers that there was no intent to start with. The possibility of enforcement is impossible. Will at least the amendment propose to actually put some teeth in the enforcement aspect of that act? Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, the intent of getting us out there and having public discussions so we can see what is needed in the act to give it some teeth because, as I have said before, this is the act from the 1950s when dogs were a way of life and the way of travel for the Northwest Territories. That is the kind of input that we would welcome, is to get some good positive feedback as to what would give this act more teeth, as the Member refers to. Thank you.

Actually, this is a half-cooked idea just tweaking the Dog Act. We need an animal rights act. Will the Minister commit to expanding that to the appropriate level of concern that is an animal rights act? I am assuming that the Minister is not comfortable with the Northwest Territories being firmly lodged in the bottom tier in the national rating on this issue. At the same time, perhaps the Minister could comment on whether he is comfortable with that or will try and do something about it. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, no, I am not comfortable at being in the bottom tier. Nobody likes to be at the bottom tier. We are hoping to move our way up there. As I said before, in the history in the Northwest Territories, animals were used a little differently than they were down south, but it doesn’t excuse anything. I will let the Member know that Justice is working with MACA at seeing how we can expand this particular issue. Again, we are looking for a lot of positive feedback from the public, because we already have people communicating with us, their desire to see stronger animal welfare legislation. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final supplementary, Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As my colleague says, “Doggone! We have to get our act together here.” And emphasis on the act. I appreciate the comments from the Minister and my last comment is, when can we expect that to come forward? I know there is lots of interest in seeing that come forward soon. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, we are hoping to have the work started on it very soon. I couldn’t give the Member a particular timeline, but I will confer with Justice and my department. As soon as I can come up with a timeline, I will communicate that with the Member. Thank you.

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

My questions today are for the Premier and are a follow-up to my Member’s statement. Earlier in the week I put forward a written question asking for some specific detail on the bonuses paid for the 2007-08 fiscal year and those answers will be coming forward by March 2nd ,

so I won’t ask specific questions on the numbers. Regardless, I am aware that bonuses were paid for 2007-08. In February I had asked the Premier if they would be willing or if they could put in some sort of processes and some procedures to ensure

that bonuses are paid for the exceptional rather than the standard. I was wondering if the Premier could tell me what criteria was used in determining who in the senior management and the deputy minister categories would be getting bonuses for the 2007-08 fiscal year. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Premier, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The area of the merit pay or performance pay is one that has been raised a number of times by the Member and did reference, for example, the work the federal government was doing and if we could incorporate some of that work into the Northwest Territories. I have been working with the Department of Human Resources. The Minister of Human Resources is getting as much of the information together that we could use and try to find out if there are some comparisons here. We do have some numbers and I will share those with the Member in response to the written question. More importantly, the fact that the federal system changed the ratings of deputies, they created another level of deputy ministers, gave a substantial increase in pay and then changed their bonus system or at-risk payment as well. So they have two levels of combination at-risk pay and bonuses for their deputies ranging from 10 to 30 percent in one area and, as well, for bonuses, another 6 to 9 percent that the federal government works.

Here in the Northwest Territories we have one system. It’s part of the contract we sign with our deputies and it goes from 0 to 15 percent with the Northwest Territories. We do have four different policies that affect deputy ministers, senior managers, excluded employees and, of course, the UNW. What we use on the executive manager side are four criteria and it is contributions to the achievement of corporate results, contribution achievement to ministerial results and Minister results, demonstration of some management practices and other contributions of an outstanding nature. So those make up the review that is done specifically, I would say, for the deputies that I did do the work on. Thank you.

I would like to thank the Premier for that. It is good to hear that there are some parameters and programs in place to help us determine who is going to get bonuses. I am curious, though. I am familiar with the excluded employee programs and procedures around bonuses, but with the senior management, more particularly the deputy heads, in assessing whether or not the individuals are going to get bonuses, what types of performance targets are put in place to determine who is going to be eligible for bonus and who isn’t? How do you determine how much of

a bonus in that range you’ve identified from 3 to 15 percent that an individual is going to get? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the process is one of an assessment that is done. That assessment is sent to the secretariat of the Cabinet and reviewed at first level, and I review that as well. It is to see their stated achievements, and the achievements would be based on the previous report that was done and what they were trying to do, as well as highlighted achievement of corporate results being budget process, what the direction of government was given, the ministry results if we made a change in acts. So those are weighed against the direction that was given, how much work was supplied or done and ranking in that area. Now, I must say it was 0 to 15 percent, not 3 to 15, and not all deputies received merit pay this time around. Thank you.

I apologize for that. Zero to 15 percent sounds better than 3 to 15 percent. In the fiscal years 2003-04 to 2006-07, there are 14, 17, 19 and 23 deputy ministers or senior managers eligible for bonuses. In those same years, 14, 16, 19 and 21 got bonuses. So for the most part, we have been paying all of our deputy ministers and senior managers bonuses. You are saying this year that not all of them got it. Can you give me a rough idea of how many received senior manager or deputy minister bonuses and how many didn’t? No, that is probably coming in the other thing, but I am wondering if he knows off the top of his head. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have 16 deputy minister-level contracts and 75 percent of those received merit pay. Thank you.

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

Mr. Speaker, in my statement, I made reference to the Mackenzie Aboriginal Corporation and they recently had a trip to Ottawa in which they are trying to convince the federal government that there is a possibility of a project to complete the Mackenzie Valley Highway up the Mackenzie Valley from Wrigley all the way up to Tuktoyaktuk. Mr. Speaker, that issue has been around for some time. We tried to put it in the light of the pipeline application in which the pipeline companies did not want anything to do with it. But I believe that, through this partnership that has been established through the Mackenzie Aboriginal Corporation, they are trying to bring it forward by way of a P3 project and they will construct it, build it

and move forward. I would like to ask the Minister of Transportation exactly what is the relation between the Mackenzie Aboriginal Corporation and the Department of Transportation to moving this project ahead.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The honourable Minister of Transportation, Mr. Michael McLeod.

Mr. Speaker, we don’t have a partnership with the Mackenzie Aboriginal Corporation. We have reviewed their information and have acknowledged the work that they have done. We don’t really have a formal partnership. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, we are pushing a lot of projects in the North in regard to hydro for diamond mines. We are pushing the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline, but when it comes to this highway, it seems like there is very little by way of investment in the budgets. I would like to ask the Minister how much money has the government put into looking at the engineering design of such a proposal. Has any work and expenditures been put forward on this project?

It would take some considerable work to put everything that we have done historically on this section of road. In the time that I have been here in the 14th , 15th , 16th Assembly, we will have put in 39 bridges on the Mackenzie Highway, along with a lot of big work, a lot of improvements of the structure of the highway. We have also compiled a lot of information in terms of baseline. We put together a number of strategies. I think I can count four off the top of my head that included the Mackenzie Valley Highway. We have taken many, many trips to Ottawa. In fact, we have raised it with three different Ministers and the Prime Minister since January. The Premier has had discussions over this issue and has raised it at almost every venue that he has attended. To get an actual figure on how much work has been done would take some time and we certainly could put that together but we would have to take the time needed to compile it. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, one of the issues that came from our meeting this morning with Mr. Nerysoo is that the federal government’s impression of the Government of the Northwest Territories for support of this project is that we are not supporting this project. I would like to ask the Minister exactly, in regard to the meetings, he talked about and the investment of such a project. I think that in order for it to proceed, we do have to be seen to be not only mentioning it at our meetings or show it either on the floor of the House by way of motion but, more importantly, people will really see you are invested in this project by the capital

investment that is going into this project. What are the plans from this government to make a capital investment in regard to the Mackenzie Valley Highway by way of an engineering design or working with the Mackenzie Aboriginal Corporation to move this project forward?

I would be hard pressed to be convinced that the federal government doesn’t know that this is a priority item. As I indicated, we have raised it twice in the short period that we have been into this new year. We have raised it as a sovereignty issue. We raised it as a possible P3 project. We looked at it through devolution and resource revenue sharing. We looked at it through partnership opportunity. We looked at it and presented it as an economic stimulus project. We will continue to look at ways we can bring this forward. I am sure the federal government is completely aware how important this project is to the North. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Your final supplementary, Mr. Krutko.