Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to support my colleagues in this particular motion. I understand very well, and in some respects I acknowledge the need for a conservative agenda where it is a law and order type of government.

There are issues of crime that need to be tackled, and tackled harder, but it’s very difficult out there who believes on a typical process, everyday process, that more jail time, longer jail time really solves the root causes of crime. Very few people would argue that particular situation.

I agree with colleagues that have said serious crime needs to be addressed differently and perhaps even longer or in a harsher sense. That probably does make sense. I’m not a believer that bigger jails, tougher jails solve the crime problem.

As I highlighted in my questions today, addiction is a real problem. That is a solution right there. If the government refocused its efforts on tackling the root of crime rather than punishing people at the end of the process, we would be doing a true service in a Canadian fashion. One with heart, one with empathy, rather than, as I said, in a punishing

sense and the law and order type of government we have in Ottawa now.

Probably what’s becoming apparent is I clearly don’t agree with the approach taken by the federal government. In this particular case we see yet another colonial example, where they are going to offload a direction and probably quite a financial burden on all provinces and territories across this land. I could be mistaken, but I have not heard how this government, be it territorial or any other provincial government, is going to pay for this particular program.

So it’s like coming up with a new solution, a new format with no plan on how to implement it other than the fact that we are coming up with stiffer fines, longer jail times, we are going to put more people in jail and we are going to figure it out as we go along.

I have yet to hear – and if there’s only one, I still say I have yet to hear – but I haven’t really heard a lot of people in favour of this from a provincial government point of view or a territorial government point of view. Who is the loud majority on this particular issue that says we need more jails, and longer jail sentences and more punishment?

I think this sets us back away from the type of people we want to be. We want to be a very humane type of people and I think this sets humanity back, in a Canadian context.

I think this government needs to draw a line in the sand, whether we do it nervously or with some courage and confidence, but this government needs to draw a line in the sand with some courage to say we will refuse to pay these extra costs unless the federal government supports us in these particular efforts, because these are not costs directed by our own choices. These are costs directed to us. This is not developed here for the people of the Northwest Territories by the people of the Northwest Territories. It’s being told to us in a prescriptive sense, you will now do this, you will now punish people harder and I don’t think that’s right. I don’t think that that’s the solution.

I just want to tie it together and finish off by saying this: Many amendments have come forward to make alternative solutions through an amendment process as options to this bill, but they were all refused. The question is: Are they leading with a future in mind or are they leading with the fact of a lot of unknowns? Canada is barely keeping itself up, due to good prudent management that we’ve had for decades. It’s keeping us off the cusp of falling into a recession, which many countries find themselves going towards.

By burdening provinces and territories with a huge amount of costs that are still so unknown, this is not good fiscal management for the Canadian books, for the Canadian taxpayer, for the territorial

taxpayers. So I would urge caution to the federal government that if they do proceed on this particular process, they have to come up with a plan to pay for it. I consider it clearly and definitely unfair that the territorial taxpayer could be on the hook for this federal initiative that we do not want. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.