Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Committee wishes to continue with Tabled Document 66-16(5), NWT Capital Estimates 2011-2012, and do the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Finance and, time permitting, Bill 8 and Bill 9.

Is committee agreed?

Agreed. Alright, with that we’ll take a short break and we’ll return with Tabled Document 66-16(5), Environment and Natural Resources, Finance and then Bills 8 and 9, time permitting.

---SHORT RECESS

I’d like to call Committee of the Whole back to order. Prior to the break we agreed we would be reviewing Tabled Document 66-16(5), NWT Capital Estimates 2011-2012, starting with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Mr. Miltenberger, do you have witnesses you’d like to bring into the Chamber?

Yes, Mr. Chairman.

Does committee agree?

Thank you. Sergeant-at-Arms, could you please escort the witnesses into the Chamber?

Mr. Miltenberger, could I please get you to introduce your witness for the record?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have to my right Mr. Gary Bohnet, deputy minister of Environment and Natural Resources.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Department of Environment and Natural Resources starts on page 11-1. We will defer the department summary on page 11-2 and go straight to page 11-5, page 11-6 and page 11-7, the wildlife section. We are on Environment and Natural Resources, information item, wildlife, activity summary, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, $250,000.

We will move along to page 11-8, page 11-9 and page 11-10, activity summary, Environment and Natural Resources, forest management, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, $1.403 million. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With regard to forest management, one of the things that the communities I represent is that forestry is a very important element to the community’s ability and sustainability to use wood heat and using wood as a product for building cabins. To use those products, we have wood misers in all the communities I represent. They are fully utilized through different programs to use that type of product and ensuring that there are workshops in the different communities where different people

come from southern Canada who are experts in the field of different uses of wood products: the harvesting of wood, the management of wood, the usage of wood for constructing different products. Fort McPherson is part of the workshop where they built a tourism information cabin. They built it in just a matter of a couple of days as part of the workshop. I was impressed with what they were trying to do. It took the community’s efforts, along with funds received from Indian Affairs through the band. This is the type of stuff the Department of Environment and Natural Resources should be doing in our communities, rather than having to use federal money through Indian Affairs to do these types of workshops.

I’d like to ask the department what we’re doing to develop a cottage industry in our communities when it comes to usage of wood products and being able to use the different expertise that is out there to assist us in developing that industry in the communities, generating employment, and being able to use the resources around us such as the forest resources. I’d like to know where the department is going on that and what we are doing to really stimulate that part of our economy.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Not a hundred percent sure how that relates to this particular capital, but I will go to the Minister for a response.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have come out with our Biomass Strategy. We’ve met with committee. It’s in the business plans and we’d be more than prepared and happy to have that full discussion when our business plans are before the House or anytime the committee would wish to ask us to appear.

For the purpose of today’s exercise, while it’s under forest management, our capital plan relates more to the support services for aviation and things like lightening sensors and those types of things.

My question is more around the activity description of forest management on page 11-8. I think as a department we seem to put a lot of focus on the managing or the forest response or forest repression aspect of the business. We’re not doing anything to really look at using the forest resources and the trees before we have to respond to a fire. To having more of a management plan with regard to managing the forest products and developing forest inventories, looking at the different forest species. I’d like to ask the department if, as he comes forward to forest management, we could look at more than just how we’re going to respond to forest fires. What are we doing to manage the forest in such a way that we’re benefitting from the forest rather than just spending money on forest repression?

As we look at managing forests we are doing a whole host of

things. We are continuing with our inventory that we’re undertaking on Crown lands. We’re working with communities on community forest management plans that are anticipating in the boreal forest area the development of possible biomass facilities that would allow communities to have access to ongoing biomass supplies close to their communities. We’re working, with interest, as we’ve indicated in this House yesterday. For example, Member Groenewegen from Hay River South mentioned about biomass pellet plants. We’re investigating that opportunity. As well, we’re looking at our obligations and requirements under silva culture to make sure that we’re replenishing the forests. We’ve been up the valley working with communities as far north as the Member’s riding, looking at fast growing willows to see the potential there for biomass. We are doing a lot of work. We’ve tied in with Wilfred Laurier University through our science agenda to look at things like permafrost, the changes to the landscape, what’s happening with climate change as the forest moves north, what that’s doing to different species that make up the boreal forest. We are engaged on many fronts on this particular area.

In the previous capital estimates, I believe it was last year, there were dollars that were supposed to be allocated to a fire tower in my riding with regard to the Schiltee fire tower in Fort McPherson or outside of Fort McPherson. The money was reprofiled and expended in the South Slave region. I’d like to ask the department, at that time I had a commitment from the Minister that those dollars were going to be eventually reprofiled and spent on what it was supposed to be spent on in Fort McPherson, or Schiltee Rock as it’s better known. The commitment has already been made in this House, so when can I see those dollars being reprofiled and allocated for what it was originally intended?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Bohnet.

So when can I see it in the... Is the cheque in the mail or when do I get to see it?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As the deputy minister indicated, it will be in the next business planning cycle for 2011-2012, I believe. Sorry, 2012-2013. So that will take us into the 17th Assembly. The Member for

Mackenzie Delta will be able to be given that assurance hopefully by the Assembly at that time as well.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sorry; can I just confirm that we’re on forest management? Is that correct?

Yes, Mr. Bromley. We’re on page 11-8, page 11-9 and page 11-10.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just have a question on the North Slave regional warehouse upgrade that’s scheduled for 2011-2012. I see in the substantiation that there was some consideration to replacing the building, but it was deemed advisable to remediate it rather than replace it. The remediation costs were somewhat over a million dollars. The budget for the work being done is considerably less than that. I don’t see any planning to deal with the rest. I’m just wondering what the department’s plans are. I think we try now in our infrastructure plans to do things on a comprehensive basis and not leave projects hanging. If I’m reading this correctly, there’s a substantial amount of work that needs to be done to bring this 30-year-old warehouse up to code and up to snuff. I’m just wondering what the plans are for the rest of the remediation costs for this building.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Bohnet.

That sounds imminently reasonable to me. I guess perhaps the statement “the total remediation costs for the building was estimated over one million dollars” would more accurately read “the total replacement cost for this building.” I would just ask the Minister if he would check that and confirm that. I’ll leave it at that.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. For confirmation, Mr. Bohnet. Mr. Miltenberger.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, we will confirm remediation versus replacement.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. We’re on page 11-9, activity summary, forest management, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, $1.403 million.

We’ve concluded detail so we will go back to page 11-2 for the department summary. Environment and Natural Resources, department summary, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, $1.653 million.

Is committee agreed that we have concluded consideration of Environment and Natural Resources?

Thank you, committee. Mr. Miltenberger, if I could get you to please thank your witness and, Sergeant-at-Arms, if I could get you to please escort him out, that would be great.

As agreed earlier, the next department on our list is the Department of Finance, which is in section three of the binder. Michael Miltenberger, do you have witnesses that you wish to bring into the Chamber?

Yes, Mr. Chairman.

Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the witnesses into the Chamber.

Michael Miltenberger, please introduce your witness, for the record.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have with me Margaret Melhorn, deputy minister of Finance.

Thank you. We will proceed with the Department of Finance. Page 3-2 is the summary page so we will move to the next page, which is 3-4. Finance, activity summary, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, $925,000.

That concludes the detail. We will go back to the department summary, which is on page 3-2. Department of Finance, department summary. Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wonder if I could just have a little explanation of this fund, the $925,000. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. We will go Ms. Melhorn.

When did we purchase the SAM system and how much was it?

Are we anticipating any further expenditures other than just about a million dollars in this case?

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With this new system we have taken on a commitment to maintain and upgrade, and in the IT world that’s an ongoing commitment. While we’re not expecting any, hopefully, yearly major changes, we do want to keep it up to speed with the changes in software and programming so that it continues to provide the service that it was intended to, but it is going to be an ongoing commitment. Thank you.

The Green Procurement Policy, I understand, is currently, I believe, either farmed out to each department or under Public Works and Services. But I think it’s the hope, perhaps optimistically, the intent is to move that into the Department of Finance so that it could be done under one hat. I’m wondering, currently it’s a rather hollow policy but should some teeth be provided in the Green Procurement Policy, would it fit under this module for implementation administration? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Ms. Melhorn.

Well, we’ve had discussions in this House where it was identified that the Green Procurement Policy might rightfully belong in the Department of Finance so that it would be applied and implemented. Whereas it’s not now, it would be applied and implemented across the government. I am interested in what it would take to configure this module to be able to handle it. I recognize that

there must be other policies that this software is responding to and if we should move that policy into Finance, I hope that the potential for this to be useable to administer that policy would be part of this purchase. So I’d ask the Minister if he would consider that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We’re buying a module, basically off the shelf and we’re going to be able to tailor it to the requirements, our contracting requirements. So it will be able to reflect what the Green Procurement Policy will eventually end up being. It will be configured to accommodate the BIP requirements and those types of things. So, yes, we will have the capacity to have it tailored to the specific realities of our contracting world with the Government of the Northwest Territories.

Thanks to the Minister for that commitment. That sounds good to me.

I’ve raised the concern in the past about how much we’re actually saving with these sorts of things and I’m hoping here that there will be clear savings. I will be interested in what the costs of these configurations are as well as the maintenance, so I will be watching this in the future, possibly. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. No question. Just a comment. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We appreciate the Member’s comment and we, as well, will be looking to see whether there are any efficiencies here in terms of dollars. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Next on my list is Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to pick up where my colleague Mr. Bromley was asking questions on the contract management module. I would equate it to, you know, last year we bought a souped up Porsche, we got it home and we found out it’s got no air conditioning. That’s the kind of thing that really bothers me, when the government spends millions of dollars on new, state-of-the-art software system and SAM and it can’t manage contracts that the government has. It’s kind of ridiculous that a year later we want to spend another million dollars on that component, that piece of it.

I’m not sure, and Mr Bromley touched on it a little bit, but in the life of the last government we had many discussions, I remember, with the previous government on migrating the contract registry and the BIP monitoring all over to Finance. If we’re going to spend a million dollars on a new contract

management module, wouldn’t it make sense that we’d be having those discussions again? I’d like to know exactly where that discussion is at or if that’s not part of the equation, then we’re not really managing all the contracts government-wide if ITI still has the contract registry. These guys are spending a million dollars on a new contract management module for this SAM system. Again, we’re not covering all of our bases here, Mr. Chairman, so maybe a comment on that would be great. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Two specific points in response to the Member’s question. This project has a life going back to 2003 when it was initially contemplated. When it was finally ready to go in 2009, the price was almost $29 million and was scaled back to $20 million to get us up and running with our stripped down economy model Chevrolet kind of system to allow us to do the basic business of government. Now, as we look at consolidating our contract and procurement services within government, this module will in fact assist us in doing the work to do that consolidation and is, in fact, underway. Thank you.

So maybe the Minister can commit that in fact the contract registry, BIP monitoring and the efforts that ITI are going to be migrated over to the Department of Finance and managed under this new $1 million upgrade. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We are working on that consolidated shared services model and we are bringing as many of the infrastructure resources together and the decision-making and the policies and procedures so we have something similar to those of us that have been around a long time and would remember the old government services kind of approach. The final configuration hasn’t been decided on, but regardless of that, the assured services model, this module will be an integral part of that system and infrastructure. Thank you.

I’d hope that happens sooner rather than later. This is year three of four for the current government and that’s something I think that we need to try to get concluded before the next government comes in.

The other thing, we’re spending close to $1 million on this upgrade and on the O and M costs we’re spending $125,000 a year. Maybe I missed the answer to Mr. Bromley’s question, but is that for a staff person to manage the new module?

No, that’s for the ongoing licensing costs. What has been anticipated, though, is that there will be, because of the consolidation and change to SAM, the other

modules that we in fact will be able to save on the cost of one position, which is over about $110,000, which will help offset the ongoing licensing fees and other costs. Thank you.

Just one other question. When we purchased SAM, how come we didn’t buy something that would incorporate contract management inside of SAM and why are we spending $1 million a year later? We should have been ensured that SAM was going to cover off the needs of the government that we required. Obviously it didn’t and we’re spending $1 million a year later, it doesn’t make a lot of sense. So maybe we weren’t shopping at the right store or with the right company. There were a lot of discussions around who we ended up doing business with and maybe there was another model out there, Mr. Chairman, that would have incorporated this and we wouldn’t have had to spend another $1 million. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. I think you answered it with your Chevette response, but I’ll go to the Minister again.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, keeping with the automobile analogies, the reality was that if we were prepared to pay the 28 or 29 million as opposed to the 20 million at the time, we could have had all those extra features incorporated. Given the pressures and the fiscal realities of the day a year or so ago, we scaled it back to do the most fundamental core services we had, recognizing that we would probably want to, as time and resources permitted, expand and put in the programs that we’re talking about today to do the things as a government and as a Legislature that were not targeted, such as this consolidated shared services for procurement. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. We’re on page 3-2, which is the departmental summary for the Department of Finance, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, $925,000.

Agreed. Is committee agreed that we have concluded the Department of Finance?

Okay, I’d like to thank Ms. Melhorn. If I can get the Sergeant-at-Arms to please escort the witness out. That was the department summary.

Alright, next on our agenda is Bill 8, the Social Work Profession Act. I’ll now ask the Minister responsible for the bill, the honourable Minister Miltenberger, to introduce the bill. No, sorry, my bad. I will now ask the Minister responsible for the

bill, the Honourable Sandy Lee, Minister of Health and Social Services, to introduce the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m pleased to introduce Bill 8, Social Work Profession Act. This bill will regulate the profession of social work in the NWT and ensure that only qualified individuals will be able to call themselves social workers. It was developed collaboratively with the NWT Regulation Subcommittee of the Association of Social Workers in Northern Canada.

Social workers play a crucial role in the health and social services system and provide services to children, adults, families, groups, organizations and communities. This legislation is intended to protect the public by ensuring that social workers are qualified to practice, by including a complaint and discipline process that is fair and protects the rights of social workers. The major components of this legislation are registration licensing and complaints and disciplinary procedures.

Mr. Chairman, the registration model in the act is consistent with other NWT health profession legislation such as the Pharmacy Act. Because there are too few resident social workers in the NWT to enable the profession to be self-regulating, the GNWT will administer the licensing and registration of the profession. This model is supported by stakeholders. The new legislation will assign registration duties such as the maintenance of registers to the registrar and also provides an appeal mechanism for registration decisions. Appeals of decisions are made directly to the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories.

Two registration categories for social workers will be established under the act. Registered social workers will require a bachelor’s degree in social work and licensed social workers will require a diploma in social work. Aurora College graduates of the Social Work Program will be eligible to apply as licensed social workers. A dual category system was considered the best option as the NWT continues to be challenged in recruiting health and social services professionals. Under this system, Aurora College graduates can be licensed. It provides the GNWT with the flexibility of developing and training a homegrown workforce and employers will still have the option of considering education and experience equivalencies when recruiting for a position.

Mr. Chairman, some of our northern social workers have worked for years as social workers and have accumulated a wealth of experience and knowledge but do not have minimum formal education requirements required to be licensed under the act. The proposed act contains a grandfathering provision allowing anyone employed as a social worker in the NWT for at least two years immediately prior to the act coming into force to

have the opportunity to apply for registration as a licensed social worker.

Mr. Chairman, there are many non-profit agencies, teachers, band councils, aboriginal leaders and elders that provide services that might be considered within the scope of practice of social work. The act will not prohibit those individuals from continuing to provide those services as the act protects the title of social worker rather than the scope of practice.

In order for social workers to maintain a standard level of competence, the proposed act includes a continuing competency provision. Every three years all registrants will be required to fulfill the continuing competency requirement as a means of ensuring that social workers maintain current skills, knowledge and abilities throughout their careers.

The conduct and discipline section of the proposed act is consistent with modern health profession legislation in the NWT and other provinces in the areas of complaints, investigation and the board of inquiry. The disciplinary process separates the investigative and adjudicative provisions to ensure procedural fairness.

The complaints officer will review a complaint and decide if it should be dismissed or if he should attempt to resolve it. The complaints officer will also have the option of appointing a facilitator to engage in alternative dispute resolution or to appoint an investigator to investigate the complaint or refer the complaint to a board of inquiry. The appointment of a deputy also gives the complaints officer the ability to initiate the complaints process if he or she has reasonable grounds to believe that a social worker may be engaging in unprofessional conduct.

The Association of Social Workers in Northern Canada established an NWT Regulation Subcommittee to assist the department in the development of this legislative initiative. I would like to thank Members of the subcommittee, Ms. Sandy Little, Mr. Les Harrison, Ms. Anne Gill, Mr. J.C. Catholique and Ms. Jette Finsborg, for all of their time and effort thus far and for committing to continue to work with the department in the future to develop the regulatory framework required to implement this act.

I would also like to acknowledge the nearly 80 stakeholders who participated in the regional workshops that helped lead to the development of key elements in the legislation. This collaborative effort has resulted in a modern piece of legislation that meets the needs of all stakeholders: social workers and the general public.

I would also like to take this opportunity to thank Ms. Sandy Little, secretary-treasurer for the Association of Social Workers in Northern Canada, and the chair of the NWT Regulations Subcommittee, and also to thank Ms. Denise

Bowen, chair of the Health and Human Services Program with Aurora College, for voicing their support of the bill during the public review process.

Finally, I would like to thank the Standing Committee on Social Programs for their review of this bill and for their comments. Questions posed demonstrated their interest and support of the legislation and their passion for ensuring the legislation protects the public while remaining fair to social workers.

That concludes my opening remarks and I would be pleased to answer any questions Members may have.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. I would now like to ask the chairperson for the Standing Committee on Social Programs, which reviewed this bill, to make comments. Mr. Beaulieu.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Standing Committee on Social Programs conducted its public review of Bill 8, Social Work Profession Act, on September 28, 2010. The committee thanks the Minister and her staff for presenting the bill.

The bill provides for regulation of social workers in the Northwest Territories. It sets out a system to qualify and enrol registered social workers and licensed social workers, the definitions of unprofessional conduct, a complaints mechanism, and a fair system to resolve them. These standards were designed to protect both the public and social workers.

The bill advances with strong support from the Association of Social Workers in Northern Canada. The association was well represented at the committee’s public hearing. A representative from Arctic College also spoke in favour of the bill.

Following the committee’s review, a motion was carried to report Bill 8, Social Work Profession Act, to the Assembly as ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.

This concludes the committee’s opening comments on Bill 8. Individual members from the committee may have additional questions or comments as we proceed.

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. I’ll now ask the Minister responsible for the bill if she would like to bring any witnesses into the House.

Yes, I would, please. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Is committee agreed?

Thank you. Sergeant-at-Arms, can I please get you to escort the witnesses into the Chamber?

Ms. Lee, could I please get you to introduce your witnesses for the record?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To my right is Ms. Lisa Cardinal, director of policy and planning and evaluation for the Department of Health and Social Services. To my left is Mr. Mark Aitken, legislative counsel with the Department of Justice.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. I’ll now open the floor to general comments on Bill 8. General comments? Detail? Is committee agreed that we proceed with detail on Bill 8?

Thank you, committee. I’ll defer the title and begin the clause-by-clause. Is committee agreed?

Clause 1.

---Clauses 1 through 43 inclusive approved

Does committee agree that we have concluded detail?

Does committee agree that we have... Okay, Bill 8, Social Work Profession Act. Bill as a whole.

Does committee agree that Bill 8, Social Work Profession Act, is now ready for third reading?

---Bill 8 as a whole approved for third reading

I’d like to thank the Minister and her witnesses. Ms. Lee.

Thank you.

Sergeant-at-Arms, if I could please get you to escort the witnesses from the Chamber.

The next item on our agenda is Bill 9, An Act to Amend the Tourism Act. Is committee agreed that we move on to Bill 9?

Now that we’ve agreed to consider Bill 9 I will now ask the Minister responsible for the bill, the Honourable Bob McLeod, the Minister responsible for Industry, Tourism and Investment, to introduce the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m pleased to introduce Bill 9, An Act to Amend the Tourism Act. This bill addresses the proposed changes to the Tourism Act, specifically the removal of the Tourism Deposit Assurance Program.

The Tourism Deposit Assurance Program was established in the early 1990s in an effort to

increase consumer confidence in Northwest Territories tourism operators following the demise of two large lodges on Great Bear Lake. No other Canadian jurisdiction offers a program like the Tourism Deposit Assurance Program.

This bill is an important one because the Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment believes that the Tourism Deposit Assurance Program has not accomplished what it was designed to do. It has not increased consumer confidence in our tourism industry and the Tourism Deposit Assurance Program ultimately drains valuable resources from programs designed to develop our tourism industry development. The industry is much better served by encouraging tourism operators to adopt payment practices that protect their clients, such as credit card payments.

The removal of the Tourism Deposit Assurance Program from the Tourism Act is consistent with direction we have received from industry partners such as Northwest Territories Tourism. In June 2010 the chair of the Northwest Territories Tourism advised Industry, Tourism and Investment that its board had passed a motion recommending that the department eliminate the program from its legislation.

Removing the Tourism Deposit Assurance Program from the Tourism Act is also consistent with the recommendations of the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Infrastructure, which recommended that the Tourism Deposit Assurance Program be cancelled in March 2010.

Industry, Tourism and Investment and the Government of the Northwest Territories remains committed to providing a diversified economy that provides all communities and regions with opportunities and choices. It is our view that removing the Tourism Deposit Assurance Program from the Tourism Act and focusing our resources on programs and services that assist the development of our tourism industry will help us meet this important objective.

I want to thank the committee for its input into the review of the proposed changes to the Tourism Act. I would now be happy to answer any questions you might have about this issue.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. I would now like to ask the chairperson for the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Infrastructure, which reviewed this bill, to make comments. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Bill 9, An Act to Amend the Tourism Act, revokes Section 13 and 14 of the Tourism Act that established the Tourism Deposit Assurance Program effective November 15, 2010.

The Standing Committee on Economic Development and Infrastructure conducted a public

hearing on Bill 9 on September 27, 2010, in Yellowknife. The committee heard concerns and opinions from many outfitters as well as from representatives from NWT Tourism. The committee took everything it heard, both written and in person submissions, under advisement in its consideration of this bill. The committee also held a public clause-by-clause review of Bill 9 on October 13, 2010. Following the committee’s review, a motion was carried to report Bill 9 to the Legislative Assembly as ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.

This concludes the committee’s opening comments on Bill 9. Individual members may have additional questions or comments as we proceed.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. On that, I would ask the Minister responsible for the bill if he would like to bring some witnesses into the House. Mr. McLeod.

Yes, I would, Mr. Chairman.

Is committee agreed?

Thank you, committee. I will now ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to escort the witnesses into the Chamber.

Mr. McLeod, can I please get you to introduce your witnesses for the record?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On my right I have Doug Doan, assistant deputy minister with the department. On my left I have Mark Aitken, legal counsel.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. We’ll now open the floor to general comments on Bill 9. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With regard to this bill, I was probably the lone wolf in the wilderness on this one because I was yee-yawing back and forth. At the end of the day the original intent of the bill that was brought in in the early 1990s was in regard to the closure of two lodges on Great Bear Lake and some means of protection for the consumer. I think there’s still that type of need in the Northwest Territories from what we’re seeing with the big game outfitters in the area of caribou hunts and polar bears. I think that we have to be cognizant of the fact that we are unique in our tourism ventures and we have some unique challenges in the Northwest Territories such as isolation, transportation, logistical challenges getting people in and out of the lodges, and our distance from southern urban centres.

I just wanted to state that as a member of the committee I was the only one who sort of opposed the bill, but for the sake of progress I will not respond to the bill or vote on it. I want to put that on the public record, because I do have concerns of

not having it there to protect the consumer in an industry that basically has had to bring in legislation because of what happened in two lodges on Great Bear Lake. We are not immune to that today. We’ve talked to the tourism industry. We’ve talked to the lodge owners, and even they weren’t all unanimously on side when it came to this issue before committee. Again, I’d like to leave it at that and just like to state for the record where I stand on this. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr, Krutko. That’s more of a comment, but would the Minister like to respond?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Our tourism industry has indicated they have a clear preference for departmental resources to be used to support operators with workshops, training and product development. Also, the protection of client deposits is better done through the use of credit cards.

In our opinion, the Tourist Deposit Assurance Program was created to boost confidence in the tourism industry but in actuality we feel that the program has had the opposite effect, because it shows that the government does not have confidence in the NWT tourism industry because they’re assuming that this industry will fail. In our view, that’s why we feel it should be changed. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister McLeod. Next on my list is Mr. Ramsay.