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; 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; Bill 7, An Act to Amend the Student Financial Assistance Act; and Bill 9, Northern Employees Benefits Services Pension Plan Protection Act, with Mr. Krutko in the chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The committee today would like to deal with Committee Report 2-16(3) and Bills 1 and 3. Thank you.

Is committee agreed?

With that, we will take a short break and begin with those matters.

---SHORT RECESS

I would like to call Committee of the Whole back to order. Before the break, we agreed to begin with Committee Report 2-16(3), Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures. I would like at this time to call Mr. Hawkins as chair of the committee. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures tabled Committee Report 2-16(3) on October 24, 2008. The report was read into the record and a motion was passed that moved the report into Committee of the Whole. Members may recall that the report dealt with two matters both referred to the committee by Speaker Delorey.

The first matter concerned the former response by government to a motion in the House. After careful review, the committee is recommending that an amendment to Rule 49 be adopted requiring the government if a motion is adopted by the House requesting response, to table the response within 120 days.

The second matter was a request to clarify the form and content of a written question. The committee provided a recommendation to amend Rule 39 to have the Clerk ensure that written questions conform to the rules of the House, setting out the number of written questions a Member may have on the Order Paper any one time at five, and allowing a written question to contain one initial question and, if required clarification, up to four supplementary questions.

Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to make two motions amending the rules of the Legislative Assembly as recommended by the Standing Committee on Rules

and Procedures. I will wait just in case Members have any comments they want to provide or any questions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. I will ask if there are any general comments in regards to Committee Report 2-16(3). Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that this committee recommends that Rule 39 of the rules of the Legislative Assembly be amended by adding the following:

•

39(3), the Clerk shall ensure that written

questions conform to the rules and practices of the House;

•

39(4), a written question may only contain the one initial question and four supplementary questions;

•

39(5), a Member may only have five written questions on the Order Paper at any one time.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The motion is on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion. Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am a member of the Rules committee. I do support this change in the rules of the Assembly. I think it is important that, when a motion is moved, debated and then passed, it is important that we get some kind of a formal response from Cabinet or to whichever…

...(inaudible)…before us this motion. It is on the second page in regards to the handout. It is the motion in regards to Rule 39 of the rules of the Legislative Assembly. Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So we are discussing written questions, are we? Okay. I guess my brain was turned off while Mr. Hawkins was reading the motion. My apologies. I still feel, however, that this is a good motion. I think it is important that, as Members, we have some guidelines that are clear when we provide written questions. There have been a couple of occasions where written questions have included rather more than one question. I think having the guidelines kind of keeps them down to a relevant amount. It makes it easier for certainly whichever Minister or department has to respond. It also avoids having to

have a 20-page report written and answered to what is presumably one written question. I support the suggestions of the amendments that are being proposed here. I think it gives good clarification and I think it also leaves ample opportunity for Members to ask the written questions that they need to. Thank you.

Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to make sure it is clear on the record that a fairly good debate went on to make sure that no Member’s privileges would be infringed in any way to do their business. This is just to make sure, as stated by Ms. Bisaro, who is a member of the committee, that questions are essentially put in due and proper form and that they are organized for effectiveness and efficiency of the House as well as for the Member. That guidance is provided, of course, through the Clerk’s office. Again, we want to make sure that the practice is a useful time in the House.

With that, a motion is on the floor. To the motion.

Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that this committee recommends that Rule 49 of the rules of the Legislative Assembly be amended by adding the following as section 49(3):

“A motion adopted by the House and requesting a response from the government will require the government to table such a response within 120 days or at the earliest opportunity subsequent to the passage of the 120 days.”

The motion is in order. To the motion. Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. What I said before, repeat.

---Laughter

I just want to add to it, I do feel that any formal motion of the House, if it’s directed towards a Minister or to the Cabinet as a whole, deserves a formal response. We have been receiving responses from Ministers, but it has been to

individual Members. Very often, I have to admit, it is copied to other Members, but there’s no formal response through this body. I think that’s important that if there’s a recommendation to the government, that the public has an opportunity to see that the response has been provided and for the public to hear it through this particular body and through what we do in the House. So I think this is again a good amendment. As Mr. Hawkins mentioned earlier with the other motion, this was debated at some length in committee and we did have the consensus of committee to bring this forward. With that, I will be supporting this motion.

Thank you. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’d like to thank Ms. Bisaro for sort of cornering the whole issue quite well. Just the one area I’d add, although she did say it, I’d just kind of like to underscore it a little differently. The public interest, I fear, is not represented by our process perfectly. That’s no fault of anyone, it’s just when a motion goes through the House it disappears and quite often people will ask in the public what happened. What did the government do? Where did the response go? It’s difficult for them to follow.

In my five and a half years as an MLA in this Legislature, I’ve had the privilege of seeing not one single occasion that the government hasn’t considered in some form of motion, and I’m grateful that they’ve always taken the time to respond. The problem is it tends to end up being directed to the committee or Members, as Ms. Bisaro has highlighted. What this would do is close the gap where the public itself would be able to follow the formal response of the government. This would also give them the sense of understanding on how the government is positioned on this. It by no means means they have to agree. It doesn’t mean, of course, that they have to disagree either. I wouldn’t want them to think that. But it at least closes that information loop. That way again when the issues get out on the table, the big question always seem to come the very next day of now what happens. This will now provide that understanding for the public. I thank Members for their time and work on this consideration and I think it’s a good process.