There have been no insinuations. I have stated clearly right from the start, and consistently, that the issue of elected versus appointed has yet to be determined. That the structure that we currently have has a mix and as we move forward with board reform, that would be one of the issues that would have to be debated and decisions made on the most appropriate type of structure. Are there other hybrid models? There’s some appointed seats, there are some guaranteed seats, there’s a number of options out there that have yet to be considered.

Perhaps I have been misreading the statements, as have many other people. I’m wondering, just for clarity, is the Minister equally interested in comments on elected versus appointed memberships on these boards and agencies and will he actively seek input on that specific question of democratic elections?

Going forward from April those questions would have to be discussed. The whole issue of all the work done to cost out some of the Collective Agreement issues, pension issues, would have to be looked at. The discussion about the concept and if that’s not the right concept what is the plan, there are a number of significant issues that would have to be addressed going forward. April is just one of the first milestone dates. We had given ourselves to 2010-2011 to work through the planning, design, and implementation. After April we will be looking at those decisions and further consultations.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That hasn’t clarified the process here to me. Just for clarity, will the Minister be providing the public with the information necessary for them to be able to comment prior to April 1st or is our public to remain

mute until April 1st and then they can look at the

results and comment thereafter?

We’ve laid out the work we’re trying to get concluded by April so that we can have that fulsome discussion about next steps. The issue of the debate over some of these fundamental issues is yet to be had. The debate over and looking at some of the numbers and costs that are tied into some of the broader issues with collective agreements and implementation and the costing have yet to be had. So the assurance to the Member is that we look forward and plan on further consultation and debate on those fundamental issues, recognizing once again that there is going to be, in all probability, regional differences as there are regional differences that currently exist.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.

Mr. Speaker, the community that I come from, Tulita, I asked the Tulita Housing Association if they understand the Board Reform Initiative and if they do, whether or not they agree with it. The members of the housing association said no, they don’t understand it, and no, they don’t agree with it. So I’m asking the Minister here, in terms of his consultation policy, what it will take for him -- and he’s giving some indications by April -- as to how to go forward in terms of this reform initiative. This consultation process between now and April, just one community of Tulita -- I represent five communities -- the consultation process in terms of communicating with the people in their aboriginal language and in their second language of

English, can the Minister assure me that this process will happen in the meaningful way that it’s intended to be?

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Minister responsible for refocusing government, Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There are seven weeks left. I have asked them to lay out all the work that we’re going to conclude, the consultations that we’re going to try to undertake in the next seven weeks, taking into consideration as well that we’re going to be in this House until March 13th . We recognize very

clearly going forward after April the next phase, once we decide on how we move forward, that there’s going to be more consultation required, probably broader consultation once we get things clarified in terms of general direction.

I would like to ask the Minister, the Tulita Housing Corporation said no, the Fort Good Hope community says no, the Sahtu Regional Health Board and education board have said no. What part of “no” on this board reform does the Minister not understand? The people in the Sahtu do not want…

---Applause

I ask the Minister what it will take for this House here to tell the Minister to cease and desist on the health board initiatives from the Sahtu people. What will it take?

We’re back to the fundamental question. If the Legislature decides that board reform is totally off the table for this Assembly and it will be dealt with at a later date by a different Assembly, that’s a very fundamental question. If it’s a question of board reform, but not this type of board reform, then we have to have that discussion about how to best move forward on the broad issue of board reform to not lose sight of that goal as a priority of the 16th Assembly. So this

Legislature will be determining the next steps.

The people of Colville Lake have a dire need for basic services and programs in their community. This proposal, the majority of this Assembly says yes, we will look at a model, will the reform look at the community of Colville Lake to get basic care for dental, nursing, social workers, mental health workers as right now they’re fighting strongly for it. Will this do that for them? Because right now, the way it is, this structure here will certainly deter services farther from Colville Lake than ever. I have not yet seen any type of evidence in terms of how this proposal is going to help my people in the Sahtu.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just a few days ago we concluded the health budget. It’s over $300 million; about 25 percent of the territorial budget. This issue of board reform deals with administration, finance, and governance. The health programs and needs that the Member talks about, the requirements for further enhanced services are all issues that are being dealt with through the health budget, through the education budget for education issues, through the housing budget where there are additional funds. What this particular initiative concentrates on is trying to rationalize the governance structure and look for efficiencies when it comes to finance and admin. It does not detract from the importance of the issues that the Member is raising, but those will continue to be dealt with through the program and budgeting processes and business planning processes that now exist with the Department of Health and Social Services.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the Minister has alluded to, the Health and Social Services budget I know the majority of funding where it’s spent. We all just check the records where this money is spent in terms of funding for health and social services issues. I would ask the Minister in terms of this reform initiative here, in terms of going forward here, that the Minister has talked with the self-government negotiating tables in our communities in terms of what is it that he’s trying to do. We are trying to get power back to the people to make decisions in our communities for our people. This government here is taking power away from people. So it’s going against what we have been fighting for, for many years. Has the Minister talked to the self-government communities in terms of their self-government arrangements in terms of programs that we’re fighting for in our communities?

We believe that this initiative is going to affect with the clarity and efficiencies we think we will realize if the board reform is done properly in whatever the final configuration is should lead to better and stronger support of the community and regional level. We also acknowledge, and from the very start and continue to acknowledge, that as self-government discussions and negotiations continue and as they’re decided, then of course the structures in the regions where these agreements are negotiated will reflect the final content of the self-government agreements.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I listened to the Ministers’ statements earlier today and I was impressed that the three Ministers -- Housing, Health and Social Services, and Education -- actually broke their silence on board reform.

Finally. I think it’s about time that they stood up and are held accountable for their support of this Board Reform Initiative. I want to begin by asking the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment if he’s not going to defend the interest of the DEAs that are out there, the school boards, the parents, and the children in our Territory, who else is going to defend their interests at that Cabinet table?

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

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Certainly in my role as the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment I will be defending my department on a moving-forward basis, making sure that programs are not impacted. We are going to continue with the program delivery in all schools, all 33 communities that we serve.

The next question I have for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment is I would like to know who wrote his Minister’s statement today. Was it his department or was it the Refocusing Government committee?

---Interjection