Mr. Speaker, I, too, would add my comments to the motion here. In our pursuit of looking for efficiencies in the Government of the Northwest Territories as stated in the 16th Assembly, certainly in terms of efficiencies, it has to do with the interpretation as efficiencies. When you look at the efficiencies of the government, certainly we all strive to see where we can do better.

In terms of the interpretation of efficiencies with this government, if you look at, for example, the McDonald’s restaurant. They’re pretty efficient in terms of operating their organization and how they serve the customers. I don’t think in terms of efficiencies that that is the kind of services and programs that we want for our people in the Northwest Territories in terms of how to cut on money and how to cut on time and just to get the services across as quickly as possible.

We are having a hard time right now in our region in terms of programs and services. Now they’re suggesting that maybe we should go into a super

board because of the efficiencies. The Minister has a good argument in terms of the economics and the dollars that are being spent on all the boards in the Northwest Territories. But in terms of the services to the boards and the agencies, I think sometimes people have to be put first before paper and profit. People have to be served in terms of what this government is here for, in terms of their quality of life in our small communities.

Our front-line workers have told me in the Sahtu where they can cut efficiencies. But it seems that our front-line workers are not being heard at a higher level at times. Our front-line workers know the difficulties when they operate in very severe conditions, and environment. They don’t have some of the supplies or materials for them and how they get these into our communities. The front-line workers are going to suffer dearly if we continue working into a Board Reform Initiative.

I think more support, more trust and more resources should be given to our front-line workers. We’ve got to have belief in our workers on how they can look at things. A case in point: When I went back into the Sahtu, many people stopped me on the road and said how things should be looked at in our communities. There are policies today and regulations today that prevent some efficiencies in our communities. So I think that’s what we need to look at in terms of any type of reform. What existing policies and regulations stop us from being a service to our people in our communities?

As I said before in my Member’s statement, the communities in my region have not been convinced enough to say even a maybe on this board reform. I’ve received phone calls, I’ve received letters, and I received a flat out no, do not proceed with the board reform. They are saying let’s look at what we have now and how we can improve it. They know some of the issues that are going to take a long time; issues that have been brought up over the years in terms of programs and services in our communities. We are saying in the process of this board reform, would it make a difference in our communities? Will Colville Lake get a nurse and mental health worker, a social worker, an RCMP officer? Will they have that if we are to go with board reform? Can we get some signal from this government saying, yes, Colville Lake will no longer have to be serviced by laypeople who have minimum training in terms of health care in Colville Lake? Can we say that to the people in Colville Lake that they will get a social worker, get home care services for the elders if we are to go with the board reform? We are fighting desperately for these basic services in my region up in the Northwest Territories in the Sahtu.

Mr. Speaker, we fight passionately, as I read in the newspapers, for the Yellowknife Catholic School

Board to have a right for their own education in their own system. We have fought very hard in the Sahtu to have that, our own education system. We support our groups and agencies to also have that same right and accord us to have that same right. With the board reform, you will take this right away that we fought for. We are negotiating self-government agreements. The territorial government is at the table also with our self-government negotiations.

Mr. Speaker, I have faith in our people. I have faith in my people when they say no to board reform. I have faith because I know things could be better and could be done differently if this government had come to my community and sat down with my elders and my people and said we want to do something like this, what do you think. What I heard from my region is that representatives came to my region and said this is what we are going to do. Tell me how you are going to fix it. I have an issue with that, because that type of a relationship and attitude put a lot of fear into my board members and they were angry, just as I see members from the gallery here who are concerned and angry. How would you want to go into somebody’s house and say, this is how I want you to run your house. I don’t think it is efficient or proper enough. I am going to be the boss of you in your house when you agree with me. How dare they come into the Sahtu house and tell us they should be respectful in terms of that nation building relationship with our people and sit down with us and say we know there are issues here. They don’t need to tell us. We know there are issues here, but when is the government going to come and look at the community level and say what can we work on them in a respectful way.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say that this morning I, too, was thinking about this issue here. The question came to me. What is government here for? Why are we around this room representing our people in a government institution? Isn’t the government here supposed to be for the people? Isn’t it we will put our representatives in our region? Isn’t this government created by the people to be of service to the people, to be led by the people? Isn’t government taking direction from the people? That is what I have been told about government from my people and from my elders.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say to this motion here and ask Members here to think about our people and our communities. It is to have faith in people on the boards right now, education board, health board and the housing boards. Have people have faith in our people. They know a lot, and more than we think they do. They are very smart. They represent their people passionately and in their beliefs and values. Have faith in our people in the Sahtu. They may not quite see the way you see the world because my people are from the land. They are

trappers, hunters and fishermen. But they also have a mixed nation of people in the Sahtu. They have to work together to survive up there. It is very difficult and challenging. It is all about building a relationship. So this is one issue that I can say that unifies the Sahtu region in terms of us coming together as one nation of people in my region. We need to really take this very seriously and have faith in what they are saying to us. We have to have faith in them, otherwise we won’t be here and they won’t be here. I think that is what government is all about.

Sometimes we lean too much on evidence which is okay, but I think that, above all, it is to have faith that things are going to work out okay for us. Like my elders say, always pray to the one who sits in the heavens. People call him God. People call him Creator. They always say that. If you are going to have a difficult road ahead, you always pray. So this is what this motion is, as I see it, Mr. Speaker.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, a question was asked to me this morning about the Roman Catholics. I said I don’t know; I’m not too sure. The reason I said that was because I have attended residential schools. I attended for a long time. In the schools, they have many stories. However, I was forced to go to the Roman Catholic Church and pray the Roman Catholic way. Throughout the years I learned one good thing about being in a residential school. That was to have faith. Faith I have always had. Work out to the best in your life. There is no right or wrong about that but that is what I learned. I learned from my people to have faith in them. I want to say, in closing, that I will be supporting this motion until I hear from my people otherwise on this board reform. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Mr. Speaker, I, too, am in support of the motion. My reasons for supporting the motion and not supporting board reform as it stands are many; many of which I heard from other MLAs here today. One of my main reasons is that there are so many unknown factors because nobody really knows what the plan will come, how the plan will evolve.

No one I talked to likes the board reform. I’ve asked many people in my riding about the board reform and, honestly, not one person said, boy, that’s a good idea. You should go with it. I also feel that there is a tremendous lack of consultation, if any real consultation has occurred at all, with the organizations, some of the organizations associated with these three disciplines and also just with the governments of the communities and also the regional governments that support the communities at this time.

I also feel that the management of education at the community level, at all levels across the Territories, and the management of health and the management of housing are all very difficult jobs. They have vastly different mandates. I cannot fathom how we could find people that would be able to be efficient in managing all of the disciplines and how they could maintain focus and maintain the importance of all those disciplines when we have, as I indicated in my Member’s statement, health, which is very demand driven, and housing; also it is very demand driven. It may not be as demand driven as health because of the nature of both of those disciplines, yet the majority of education, aside from the income support portion of education, education is very, I’d say, proactive, thinking about the future, trying to figure out ways in the future and how to make the students feel good and have the students take as much education as possible with them throughout their life so that they become productive members of society. So housing and health, a couple of departments which are demand driven are, in a sense, very social departments, and well-educated people will have better health. That is a fact. Well-educated people will have less demands for social housing. One department is trying to be proactive. It is not because of the way that departments are, the people in it or anything, it is just the nature of the beast, I suppose. I feel that that focus will be lost with the amalgamation of these departments.

I also feel that this government has had amalgamation mishaps. I really do. Some they have undone to a great expense to the people of the Northwest Territories and some are just beginning to prove, but not without great expense and great frustration. We deal with some of the things that this government has done; the amalgamation of the Technical Services Centre. The objective was to create one department that would be efficient, supportive and more cost efficient as well as just being efficient at work. Yet I feel, although I don’t have the numbers myself, that was a tremendous cost and it is probably blown way beyond what the initial budgets were, the amalgamation of Human Resources and some of the things that were introduced into Human Resources. That has actually caused a tremendous amount of frustration amongst the public service. When you have high paid managers that have to sit there in front of the computer and figure out how to run a system to approve leave for their staff, Mr. Speaker...It was incredible. When HR was first being introduced and amalgamated, a lot of those things were wrong. It was frustrating. I was amazed that the government didn’t stop and say, whoa, I think this is a wrong idea. But that didn’t happen. I think things are improving now; again probably at a tremendous cost. But I don’t think we are doing this to save money anyways, so I really don’t know why.

I thought about it. Things are actually not too bad. I had an opportunity to go to St. Pat’s School with Minister Lafferty and meet some of the teachers, and some of the teachers from Lutselk’e and Fort Resolution were there. I know that there is a pride amongst the teachers, students and schools. I know for a fact that in this community of Yellowknife where I live, there is a pride. The kids that are in St. Pat’s are proud to be in St. Pat’s and the kids that are in Sir John Franklin are proud to be in Sir John Franklin. Those are tangibles that could potentially be removed. These are non-tangible items, but they are things that could be removed. Pride could be removed by just making everything the same, just putting everything together. There is nothing that stands out anymore. They are all going to be viewed as one. Sometimes you look at these things and you think about where these things evolved from. Mr. Speaker, whose idea was it? Sometimes you think, well, if you go back far enough, it is probably a southern consultant.

---Laughter

I thought that. Every time these southern consultants come in with great ideas -- maybe ideas that fit well when you are managing huge numbers of bureaucrats and huge populations that they are serving -- it doesn’t work well here. I don’t think there has ever really been a tendency for this government to look at more than consultants and the people that live here and know what will work. It is often the high-priced southern consultants that come up with these ideas that don’t really work, but no one ever admits that they don’t work so we just forge ahead.

The other thing I thought of was, as it is, is it too much work for the government? I can’t really see that being an issue because if they think managing 67 boards is cumbersome, try managing three disciplines in seven boards. I’m pretty sure that will be extremely cumbersome and frustrating and the loss of authority to the communities. That, I think, is one of my key issues with this whole thing. The people that want to assist their own kids to get educated, the people that have an interest at heart to make sure that their kids have the right stuff in their schools to be educated the way they want I think would be lost. I think that is going to be a management unit. I think that is what these boards will become, management units. How can they possibly pay specific, detailed attention to one area of housing, one area of health or an area of education? When we do things like this, we never look at things that are not tangible; things like pride. Teachers are proud to be teachers. Do they just want to be viewed as a bureaucrat that may deliver housing? Or maybe they are nurses. Who knows? Nurses are proud to be nurses too. Community development workers are proud to be community development workers. They don’t want to be all

mashed together and managed together. They are people. They have special skills. They chose to be what they are. They shouldn’t be mixed in with other people that they didn’t choose to be managed together. It should be something that should be kept separate.

Most important, I think, is the students. I think it’s very important that we do what we can to try to keep things the same. None of the students are actually happy at all about this either. From what I heard anyway, the students are not happy. Those students are excited, especially here, especially in communities where there is more than one school. The students in Lutselk’e, the students in Res, they have pride and they are successful. They are becoming more successful and they have DEAs, local DEAs that watch out for these kids. Those boards will be gone under this model.

So for those reasons and all of the other reasons that I have heard around here today, I will support the motion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Thank you very much there, Mr. Speaker. I share my colleagues’ concerns and I, too, stand with them on this debate on the GNWT Board Reform Initiative. Effective and efficient is an expectation of our public and our people. The people are not convinced that this is what the Board Reform Initiative is about. There are still no clear and important reasons to make people understand why the changes should take place. I don’t think that people are afraid of change, Mr. Speaker, but they are afraid of not knowing; not knowing what these changes will bring.

Often in my experience with government, sometimes we’ve got good ideas out there and we work hard to find solutions to them, but sometimes those ideas fall apart when we choose to implement them. As other Members have spoken about recent experiences and the most recent one was the harmonization of income support. They had this great idea that they would create this one window for people that need income support, need housing assistance, we’ll put them in one central area and everybody goes there. But what happened there, Mr. Speaker, is it ended up being a detriment to the people. We created hardships and, in fact, in housing we created a whole group of people that are in arrears to our government and now they don’t have to answer those. Still, that was a good idea, a one-window approach, but implementing it was a huge fiasco and I still fundamentally oppose that. Just the same, that is the kind of feeling I am getting about the Board Reform Initiative.

At the best of times, government guidelines and policies are difficult to interpret and understand and now we are talking about creating a whole new way of administrating education, health and housing. In question period, we asked the Minister were there any other models or are there any other ways of presenting board reform and they really weren’t able to answer that. In fact, the rollout package only included one model, Mr. Speaker. At the minimum, it should have included this model or keep things the same. At least that’s an option, but the way it’s being presented, there are no options being given. I think that creates a lot of the concern, a lot of the pressures from the public saying wait, slow down, why are you trying to give us something that we know anything about.

In my Member’s statement, I spoke about apples and oranges, Mr. Speaker. That’s exactly what we are looking at. We want to take something that has its own unique way of doing things like in health and then we are taking education and we are actually trying to merge these two. They are fundamentally diametrically opposed. They are very, very different entities and now we want to throw in housing as well, Mr. Speaker.

The arguments that the Ministers use, they say they want to gain efficiencies, they want to join HR functions, they want to join administration functions and if they were to use those arguments, they could use those same arguments if they wanted to join, say, the Workers’ Compensation Board and the Power Corp Board, Mr. Speaker. Those two are just as fundamentally different as the organizations that the government is looking at joining as well. It really doesn’t make sense when you look at it this way.

Just yesterday, I was talking to a constituent that didn’t know as much as we do about the issues and I was trying to explain it to them. That person looked at me and said that doesn’t make sense and, she’s right, Mr. Speaker. It just doesn’t make sense.

---Laughter

So I think that the government has no doubt used many resources and staff dedicated to develop the plan as it is. But it will only be overshadowed by the huge resources that we dedicate to the implementation of this Board Reform Initiative. The public is, indeed, looking for leadership, Mr. Speaker, but there are other pressing, important issues in our Territory that demand our attention. There is the high cost of living, power rates, fuel costs, housing costs and, to add to the mix, an economic slowdown.

Our Territory is a year behind what’s happening in the United States and southern Canada. We are only going to be impacted at a later stage, probably

at the same time the government would be implementing this. This plan is creating undue stress that our people do not need at this point, Mr. Speaker.

I will just conclude by saying that I believe that our current system is effective. I also believe that the proposed changes will not provided improved services to our people. I am not in favour of the proposed Board Reform Initiative, Mr. Speaker. I will be voting in favour of the motion. Mahsi cho.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. To the motion. The honourable Premier, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we’ve heard much today and in the days and weeks building up to this situation, whether it played out in the media or to the event here today. We’ve heard much today about the need to look again at the initiative. There’s been some very good comments made by folks around the table, but I need to set the record straight on a number of things. Number one, this is not a Minister Miltenberger initiative. This is an initiative that was originally looked at through the exercise of board reform that spilled over from previous governments and was supported by the 16th Assembly. Now, the

work done to that moment to where we are has been undertaken under the lead hand of Minister Miltenberger and he’s taken that duty and he’s run with it and he’s put his energy into that.

Now, of course, as he’s stated recently and he continues to state, that if this was to proceed, we were working to the April date, not a decision for implementation, but a decision of what the next steps that will be, so we can sit down and put lots of the information Members have stated and have raised as an issue of -- the lack of information -- on the table.

With the motion that Members have put out here, Mr. Speaker, the need to look at this again and initiate a process without a predetermined end point with full public input and find efficiencies that improve the effectiveness of government processes and board structures. We do that in conjunction with our employees that deliver the program. We do that with the Members of this Assembly. We do that with aboriginal governments and First Nations. I would agree that we are going to take a different step, a different approach. We need to do that type of work and incorporate their input into this whole process. Obviously, the work that has been done previously by previous governments is not adequate to continue this process as the way it was highlighted here. I must say, though, that one of the Members -- the Member for Kam Lake -- spoke about, and quite a number of times, spoke in this House about past decisions, about past governments and how poor those decisions were.

But when we reference past work by governments it’s sloughed off and no attention is paid to that. We have to take the work necessary to do proper implementation, for sure.

Now, also there was a call as process, Mr. Speaker, and for the public, because there was a call made out for the public and the people in the gallery that the process used when it comes to a motion of this House that it is a recommendation to government. Being a recommendation to government, our practice has been that we will sit and we will abstain from the vote and we will watch and see how the vote occurs in the House. Clearly, all Members are in support of that and we will take that under advisement. In fact, I would say that we would agree there needs to be a different process to this. In fact, I have approached the chair of the Priorities and Planning in hopes of finding a way past this, the next steps of we can look at this and try to come up with something that works for the people of the Northwest Territories. I think that’s the important thing here. Nobody here is looking for a fight, Mr. Speaker. I save that for the ice.

---Laughter

And it’s been many years and I don’t encourage it.

Mr. Speaker, the Cabinet process is one where we will watch the House and we will take that under recommendation. I would say now with the fact that there’s a motion here, we need to look at it, we need to work with committee, we need to work with aboriginal governments to come up with a better plan, because, as I believe the Member for Tu Nedhe had mentioned about the students, at the end of the day this is all about what we’re trying to do for the people of the Northwest Territories; not for government structures, not for the system as it is. We’re trying to improve how we deliver the programs, because many a times, and we can go to Hansard from this Assembly, from previous Assemblies, about the concern that’s raised around the delivery of housing, how it’s delivered in communities, the delivery of health care, how it’s delivered in communities, if there’s enough nurses, doctors’ visits, dental visits. As well, the quality of education has been raised numerous times during budget process, during questions in the House. That’s the impetus for looking at change. It is not just necessarily a southern contractor coming up with an idea, throwing it on the table and saying make it happen and it shall be done. No, Mr. Speaker, there has been much work done.

I can recall back in 1999 when I held, at the time, the portfolio of Health and Social Services, and back then Minister Miltenberger held the portfolio of Education, Culture and Employment. We approached the boards at one point and said we need to start working together to deal with the

student that has trouble in the school room but has a health issue where the two departments can’t work together because of privacy policies; where an issue may spill over because of a housing issue but there are privacy policies. It’s that case management that we need to focus on and try to change so that we can fix the issues that people are facing in our smallest communities. It is a blessing the fact that if many of us that are healthy and don’t have to use those facilities, don’t have to see the doctor that often, and have good health care provision in our communities. We’re blessed with that, for sure. But there are many people who end up crossing all the boundaries, whether it is housing, education, justice, and our health care system. In fact, it’s such an issue, not just for the Territories but the rest of the country. For example, Mr. Speaker, between governments, even there needs to be a better system in place. I use the Jordan’s Principle as an example of where departments and governments had too many structures in place that didn’t allow an individual to get the proper kind of treatment that was needed. This is what was intended with trying to make some change.

We’ve heard from Members of this Assembly, we’ve heard from the people of the Northwest Territories, and would say that with the motion as its worded we would be supportive and look forward to sitting down with the Members on the next steps. How do we take the work -- some of it needs to be put aside, some of it is good work that gives us the detail that Members have started asking about -- how do we structure it, how do we look forward and how do we make it better for the people of the Northwest Territories? We continue to do that and, in fact, we will continue to do that. As one of the Members pointed out, that our fiscal situation isn’t better and it isn’t going to get better, so we need to find out how we can continue to operate or improve on the delivery of our systems in the Northwest Territories. That would be our goal overall.

As for apples, oranges, bananas, well, I guess if the Members stuck with that, we can make fruit salad and at least share that with the folks. Realistically, there are challenges when it comes to the professions in education, in health care and in housing. We fully recognize that and we know that’s a huge task, but we will definitely take this under advisement. I look forward to sitting down with Members to try and come up with a better approach as to how we can make it work for the people we represent in the spirit of consensus government.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Roland. I will go to the mover of the motion to close debate on the motion. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Mr. Speaker, I will try to be brief. My colleagues here have spoken again very eloquently to the motion, have covered and canvassed almost every point that they could. I just have a few comments that I would like to add in closing.

Mr. Speaker, it’s been another interesting day at the Legislative Assembly. Mr. Speaker, we have to ask ourselves why did we need to step forward at this point with a theme day and a motion on this particular topic. It’s because we have heard from our constituents. They feel strongly about this Board Reform Initiative and, therefore, we feel strongly about it. The Premier has said that no one here is looking for a fight, but when we see an initiative like this come forward and we feel that it is premised on a foundation of lack of information and principles that could do serious harm to the good work and establishment of the boards across the Northwest Territories, we on this side of the House are ready for a fight. I think we showed that today.

I do appreciate the Premier’s comments that their side of the House can support this motion, but trust me, without the work of the Regular Members on this side, this motion would never have made it to this and who knows how far this would have gone.

Mr. Speaker, the enemies of democracy are apathy and ignorance and I would suggest that by the participation here today of the public, I would say that democracy in the Northwest Territories is alive and well.

---Applause

People are neither apathetic nor ignorant of the issues; they are following what their elected government is doing.

Mr. Speaker, I still have to question why this government would pay such an insult to the leadership at different levels in this Territory. Mr. Speaker, this Assembly, these 19 Members, many of us got here, actually, because of our community participation at different levels of leadership. Many of us sat on town councils, we sat on health boards, we sat on education boards, and that’s how we got here, but we don’t have the market cornered on leadership in the Northwest Territories. That is what is so refreshing about the public input that we received on this, is that other people are also keenly aware of and concerned about the issues that we face as leaders in the Northwest Territories.

As one Member said, it is a shame in a lot of ways that we had to devote this much time and this much energy to something that...I guess we will look for those efficiencies. But when you look at the fact that people are worried about their jobs, people are worried about the cost of living, they have so many

other pressing issues on their mind right now it does seem a little hollow that our government would expend such an effort on just trying to restructure governance for a reason that they can’t really convey to us what’s behind it.

Now, I have said this to Mr. Miltenberger before, Mr. Speaker, and I’ll say it again: Mr. Miltenberger has obviously never been involved in sales because if he thought he had such a great idea in board reform he should have brought the idea to it. He should have been able to lay it out and say, hey, Regular Members, I have got a great idea and here are the reasons why it’s great. He should have been able to sell us on it. He can’t even sell us. I don’t know how we’re going to sell the public. I have not heard any of that kind of talk from Mr. Miltenberger and, like I said, obviously he’s never had to try to sell anything.

Mr. Speaker, consensus is alive and well, but, as I said earlier today, it goes far beyond these doors and far beyond this dome that we sit under. We have a type of government here in the North where we will consult and we’ll take our direction from the people. As Mr. Yakeleya said, it’s people first. It’s the people who sent us here we serve. That’s where the direction has to come from. It has to come from the grassroots up, not from the top down. I don’t want to live in a Northwest Territories that is a totalitarian where we have a government that sits on their high and mighty horse and dictates to the people out there in the regions and the communities how things are going to work. I don’t want to be a part of that and I will certainly fight anybody who does.

Mr. Speaker, the theory of this initiative being a lack of communication and some of the most recent initiatives of this government being premised on a lack of communication, I am starting to believe it goes far beyond a lack of communication and I think the Cabinet needs to take a very sober, inward look at some of these initiatives they are putting out there because I am starting to perceive them as an attack on people in our Territory, whether it be the public service, whether it be the seniors for the supplementary health benefit, whether it be the people out there working in our boards and agencies. There’s a trend developing here. It’s starting to go beyond bad communications. We can try to mop up after the fact but, to a large extent, some of the damage is already done. Some of our credibility has already been eroded and it’s very, very hard to get that back.

Mr. Speaker, just on one issue as a personal note and I know we are in Yellowknife today and Yellowknife is the only community that has a Catholic School Board and I just have to share this small experience. I was at church on Sunday

morning and we quite often have a sharing time and I shared my deep concern. I mean, I believe that all the teachers in all the schools are doing a very good job, but I shared my deep concern of the possibility that the work of the Catholic School Board would be eroded. When my children were in Yellowknife, I sent them to the Catholic school because that is not my denomination but that is my faith. I come from a background of a Christian faith. Mr. Speaker, if our government would have the audacity to go against what those teachers and what that school in their mission statement is trying to impart to children, which is about values, it’s about faith, it’s about things that are going to hold them through the valleys and the difficult times in life, it’s a choice that people make and it’s an opportunity that’s out there. On Sunday, I said to people, I was so distressed about this that I said I am going to use my Member’s statement and I am going to stand up for two and a half minutes in the Assembly and I am going to pray over our Territory. People said oh my gosh, you don’t have the nerve to do that. I said I was going to do it because I was afraid that I would chicken out by today and I wouldn’t do it.

Mr. Speaker, we have a wonderful Territory here. We have an awesome responsibility. We have good leadership here. We need to find a way we can work together but not put our people through the stress that we have with this Board Reform Initiative. So going forward, yes. The Premier did come to me and I will commit that we will try to, in a reasonable fashion, look for efficiencies, but we cannot do it in a heavy-handed way.

I heard with my own ears, even though he says Mr. Miltenberger is not the author of this initiative, I heard with my own ears numerous times on the radio, we are going from 70 to seven boards. When a leader of this magnitude in our Territory stands up and says stuff like that, of course the people are going to believe and they are going to have the anticipated reaction which we have seen.

So, Mr. Speaker, I do thank everybody for their input on this. It would appear that the Cabinet is not going to vote on this, but I do thank my colleagues for the work they have put into this motion and into this debate today. Again, thank you so much to the people who have participated by bringing their ideas forward to us and I will ask for a recorded vote. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The Member has asked for a recorded vote. All those in favour of the motion, please stand.

All those opposed to the motion, please stand. All those abstaining, please stand.

The results of the vote: 11 for, none opposed, seven abstentions. The motion is carried.

---Carried

---Applause

Thank you, Members. Item 18, first reading of bills. Item 19, second reading of bills. Item 20, consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 7-16(3), Ministerial Benefits Policy; Committee Report 2-16(3), Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures Report on Matters Referred to the Committee; Committee Report 3-16(3), Report on the Use of Laptop Computers and Blackberry Devices in the Legislative Assembly; Tabled Document 11-16(3), NWT Main Estimates 2009-2010; Bill 1, An Act to Amend the Historical Resources Act; Bill 3, International Interest in Mobile Aircraft Equipment Act; Bill 4, Public Library Act; Bill 5, Professional Corporations Act; and Bill 7, An Act to Amend the Student Financial Assistance Act. By the authority given me as Speaker by Motion 10-16(3), I hereby authorize the House to sit beyond the daily hour of adjournment to consider the business before the House, with Mr. Krutko in the chair.

I’ll call Committee of the Whole to order. Consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 7-16(3), Committee Report 2-16(3), Committee Report 3-16(3), Tabled Document 11-16(3), Bill 1, 3, 4, 5 and 7. What is the wish of the committee? Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The wish of the committee today is to proceed with consideration of the budget for the NWT Housing Corporation.

Committee agree?

With that, we’ll take a short break and begin with the Housing Corporation.

---SHORT RECESS

I’d like to call Committee of the Whole back to order. We agreed prior to the break that we will begin with the NWT main estimates for the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation. At this time, I’d like to ask the Minister if he has opening statements or comments.

Yes, Mr. Chair. I am pleased to present the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation’s main estimates for the fiscal year 2009-2010, which requests a total GNWT contribution of $37.820 million.

This is a decrease of 28 percent from the 2008-2009 main estimates and is primarily due to the sunsetting of the Northern Housing Trust, which provided $50 million in federal housing investment over the past three years. Together with other revenues of $69.673 million the corporation will have approximately $107 million available to spend on housing in the Northwest Territories this fiscal year.

As Members are aware, the federal government has recently announced significant new short-term investments in housing in the Northwest Territories as part of its stimulus package to boost the Canadian economy. Based on information received through federal budget documents and in discussions with Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the NWT Housing Corporation anticipates that it will receive approximately $55 million in new federal investment over the next two years, some of which must be cost-matched. The federal investment in the NWT will include funding for:

•

renovation and retrofit of social housing;

•

housing for low-income seniors;

•

housing for persons with disabilities; and

•

northern housing.

This investment will be focused on the construction of new public housing units and affordable homes, the repair and retrofitting of public housing units, and the repair of private homes. Until we receive formal confirmation of the NWT’s allocation expected within the next few weeks, we are unable to confirm our allocations related to these additional resources.

Fully utilizing this recently announced federal support will be challenging, however, the delivery of past projects under the Northern Housing Trust has strengthened the capacity of our construction partners in communities. The private sector’s

ability to respond and to deliver gives us confidence that they will be able to maintain this momentum over the next few years as we work together to address the housing needs of Northerners.

It should also be noted that the funds recently committed by the federal government come with a strict two-year timeline for delivery. All funds must be committed within a two-year window. We understand that jurisdictions who do not have the capacity to deliver will risk having funds reallocated to other jurisdictions. The Housing Corporation is currently in the process of completing their detailed project plan and I am confident that the corporation will meet the federal requirements associated with this initiative.

As the Housing Corporation completes the plans for this new investment, we can confirm that our current capital acquisition and program delivery plan, provided for in the 2009-2010 main estimates, proposes to invest over $27 million in new housing and repairs. This includes $9.8 million to construct new housing units, as well as $7.9 million in major modernization and improvement projects to upgrade the existing public housing rental stock.

A portion of this $27 million investment has been funded through the GNWT’s strategic initiatives process. This includes a $2 million increase in the Contributing Assistance for Repairs and Enhancements -- CARE -- Homeownership Program, under the Reducing the Cost of Living Strategic Initiative, to fund repairs for low-income households. Repairs completed with this funding will focus on health and safety, structural, mechanical, and energy efficiency upgrades of homes. Additionally, $1.5 million in funding has been allocated, under the Refocusing Government Strategic Initiative, to develop and implement, in partnership with the Department of the Executive and service departments, a housing for staff initiative that provides incentives to communities, aboriginal development corporations, and private industry, to develop housing that can be used by essential service providers in our smaller communities.

The Housing Corporation will invest an additional $1 million received under the GNWT’s energy investment plan into its modernization and improvements budget to conduct energy retrofits on 100 public housing units on which home energy evaluations were conducted in 2008-2009.

We also plan to invest $3.3 million in minor modernization and improvements on our public housing rental stock through our local housing organizations. In addition to the $2 million that I have previously mentioned will be allocated to the CARE program under the Reducing the Cost of Living Strategic Initiative, we have set aside $3

million to fund additional homeownership repair and renovation projects. These will be expended through the CARE program and through federal renovation programs such as the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program, RRAP, and the Emergency Repair Program, ERP.

An investment of $88,000 will also be made by the Housing Corporation as part of a four-year strategy to assist local housing organizations in the hiring and retention of much needed apprentices in the housing trades.

In 2009-2010, the Housing Corporation has also identified expenditure reductions in the amount of $1.5 million, which reflect our efforts to reduce costs while minimizing the impact on our delivery of programs and services. Forced-growth funding in the amount of $504,000 is also being requested by the corporation for the 2009-2010 fiscal year, to address a base deficiency in our office accommodation budget.

The Housing Corporation remains committed to meet the housing needs of our residents. While the last three years have seen substantial investments in homeownership and public housing replacement, our housing needs remain high. Our primary focus in the next two years will be on conducting energy retrofits and upgrades to existing units and providing assistance to low-income homeowners to repair their own homes.

In closing, it should be noted that while we are very pleased with the federal government’s commitment to the North through new housing investments, the sustainability of our existing public housing stock remains at risk if we are unable to secure a long-term funding commitment from the federal government. We will continue our efforts, in concert with other provincial and territorial jurisdictions, to encourage the federal government to work with us to address the housing needs of our residents and ensure the sustainability of NWT communities.

That concludes my opening remarks. At this time, I would be pleased to answer any questions the committee may have. Thank you.

At this time I would like to ask the Minister if he would like to bring in any witnesses.

Yes, Mr. Chairman.

Committee agree the Minister brings in his witnesses?