Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I bring this motion to the floor in my continuing effort to improve the prospects of persons with disabilities for employment within the GNWT.

At the moment, as I have stated, the known percentage of persons with a disability in our territorial government workforce is just 0.5 percent. It is quite likely that that number in actually is much higher, but, as is often mentioned by the Minister of Human Resources, our statistics rely on GNWT employees self-identifying as a person with a disability. The first action of this motion seeks to change that. It seeks to establish a reliable, trustworthy, confidential tool to measure the number of persons with a disability in our workforce. Without an accurate measurement of the number of persons with a disability, we really don’t know how to design an improvement program. I am somewhat surprised that an analysis to that effect has not already been done.

The second action of the motion asks the government to reassess the hiring priority lists that we now use for affirmative action. This motion does not ask for an evaluation of the Affirmative Action Policy. Opening up that policy is fraught with difficulties and complications, but the priority lists are not in the policy; they are laid out in the Human Resources Manual. We can examine those lists with a view to see if they are still relevant, to see if they are still achieving their intended purpose.

We do give some priority to persons with disabilities via these lists, but I believe it is not enough and that change is needed. Let me give you an example. Consider a job competition between two P1 candidates who have been evaluated and are considered equals for the competition; that is they both have the same skills and experience. One of them is a person with a disability, but according to GNWT policy and procedure, that P1 with a disability does not have any priority over the other non-disabled person.

Research indicates that persons with a disability have a much harder time finding and gaining employment than those who do not. Presumably that is why the Affirmative Action Policy lists persons with a disability as a priority for GNWT hiring. This motion recommends that that priority be recognized and that the person with a disability in my example be given preference and rated higher than the other P1 candidate. But the current language in the HR manual precludes that.

Mr. Speaker, I have to ask: when was the last time that our priority list was thoroughly evaluated? I have to emphasize the word “thoroughly.” When have we undertaken an honest, open and extensive review? It is time to take a long, hard look at those lists.

There are at least two changes that I believe are necessary. Firstly, we have two priority lists, Mr. Speaker, one for management in non-traditional occupations competitions and another for all other competitions. But persons with a disability in the management in non-traditional occupations priority list are rated lower in priority than women. They should have at least equal priority, in my view. As well, we need to amend our procedures to allow priorities to be cumulative, as was evident in the example I gave. If it is the goal of this government to have a representative public service, then the Department of Human Resources and this government must consider whether or not the current priority lists encourage and enable the GNWT to achieve that goal.

Mr. Speaker, I do want to acknowledge and recognize the efforts of the current Minister of Human Resources and the staff of the Department of Human Resources to increase the number of persons with a disability in the GNWT workforce. I appreciate that they have recognized the deficiency in our numbers and they are taking steps to try and fix it. I have been pleased to see some of the changes that have taken place in the last year or so. With that said, there is more that must be done to really affect the change that is so necessary. Once an analysis is done, then the Human Resources 20/20 plan can be amended to implement any indicated change. That is what this motion asks for.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues agree with me that persons with a disability deserve a higher hiring priority than what we now give them. I hope my colleagues will vote in support of this motion with me. Thank you.