Mr. Speaker, thanks to the Minister for that. I would hope that that information would be on the website sooner rather than later and that there would be some public statement to that effect.

There has been concern. I certainly heard concerns at the meetings I was at about infringement on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by some of the provisions or some of the clauses in the draft act. I would like to know from the Minister what the department has done to deal with those concerns, those legal issues. I understand that there may be some kind of a legal opinion being sought, that the Department of Justice analyzes acts from a legal perspective. What is happening at this point to deal with the concerns of the public relative to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms infringements? Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, all the legislation that we do as a government is reviewed by Justice to make sure it complies with the senior laws of the land, like rights and freedoms, Canadian Constitution. This bill was no different and is no different. It has been reviewed thoroughly, and while there are some assertions from some quarters that it does not comply, we are of the opinion, clearly, that it does. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, to that review, a couple of the concerns that I know of is the hunter education for only some of our residents, the limitation of age on hunters, those two things for sure and there are a couple of other ones. But I guess what I would like to know from the Minister that the review that was done by the Department of Justice, was that done before these concerns were raised or after? Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, we have legal counsel with us every step of the way on this piece of legislation looking at all issues, all amendments, changes when concerns are raised to look at the interpretation, make sure that whatever is put into the bill complies completely. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Your final, short supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to reference a comment that the Minister made relative to the conference of management authorities. He said that the GNWT has three seats on this body. If GNWT has three seats, will the Minister agree to have one seat for a GNWT representative and allow those two other seats to be filled by members of the public or public organizations? Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, it may only be two seats depending on what the final count comes to, but the fact is that we will have some seats at the table and we will look at, as appropriate, bringing other parties, stakeholders, to the table. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Item 8, written questions. Item 9, returns to written questions. Item 10, replies to opening address. Item 11, replies to budget address. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate this opportunity to reply to the budget address. I want to start off by recognizing that we are in the final year of our term as the 16th Legislative Assembly. We have had some large challenges when we initially got together and started work. We have made some progress on some issues. I want to acknowledge that.

Today I would like to speak to some of my frustrations in lost opportunities and some persistent issues and shortcomings of our budgets. I speak generally of the last four budgets as well as this one and the budget address.

The first one, and I am going to restrict it to two things here today just to try and bring some focus here, is a focus on prevention. I don’t think we have done enough in this regard. It has been brought up from the days of our strategic planning to today. One example is especially the need to fully use our opportunities to support people in the critical first years of life. Numerous studies indicate the opportunities that are available here and how achievements in working with prenatal and post-natal, post-partum children can establish an incredible potential for their development and address, really, many of the broad goals of government. So in particular this example would stress childcare and early childhood development programs, which I know we have done some work on but I think there’s much room to be doing more. Research informs us that meaningful investment here would serve all of our broad goals.

My second example is Health and Social Services where about half of 1 percent of our Health and

Social Services department budget is focused on promotion and prevention, and I think it’s recognized that 3 percent is sort of a minimum requirement in that area. This is a problematic department in terms of the huge issues and challenges and costs we face. So I recognize it’s difficult, but it needs attention nevertheless.

The second one is the need to do things in a comprehensive and new way that serves, again, this broad range of goals. I think we’re missing the boat here, Mr. Speaker, as I’ve said repeatedly. We are making some moves in that direction, but there are huge opportunities that remain.

Of course, these two themes are much related to each other. Just by way of developing this a little bit further, everyone needs energy, everyone needs food, and in energy I think of heat and power, transportation. Everyone needs food, everyone needs housing, by way of example. We also need skilled and educated people. We need sound local economies. We need a strong social fabric and strong and healthy families, land and water.

Currently meeting our basic needs is provided by importing goods and services from afar. What are the consequences? Well, the jobs accrue to distant jurisdictions with this approach. Skills are developed by non-residents, courtesy of our support. We export barrels and barrels of money that could be put into local economies and circulate gathering value seven times the denomination. People leave the land and their knowledge is left behind. Local economies suffer and, of course, the relative cost of living increases. The environment suffers as greenhouse gas emissions are increased due to importing from afar and so on, inefficient ways of doing business energy-wise and the social fabric suffers. We lose our cultural roots and become dependent on the system rather than contributing to the system.

So what is this alternative way? What is the new way of doing business that others and myself have spoken for quite often in this House?

First of all, instead of pursuing mega development dreams that will really benefit relatively few people rather than all people, we could choose to focus on developing local resources to meet those basic needs. What does this do for us, this simple theme? It would provide support for developing the skills, knowledge and business opportunities for businesses that meet this approach rather than just broadening business support, support for all these things that meet this approach. It would provide support for education and traditional knowledge of the land retaining this key element in our society, including focus on outdoor education and sports in our school programs. Promotion of healthy activities that recognize the potential of the land to teach, strengthen, heal and connect people with their cultures, spirituality and with each other.

Development and implementation of policy and services that requires the engagement of able, unemployed people receiving government services in activities that support the commons, such as the local supply of food, energy and housing. Examples might be for those receiving housing but unable to pay for it, again, able bodied without childcare needs or with childcare needs provided, start demanding some hours of service for the community. For example, in the area of working in a community garden, learning house maintenance skills and contributing that to public housing in their community, providing energy by being trained in how to use wood saws, chainsaws, and go out and cut woods for a distributed energy system in the community. These are practical things that address exactly these sorts of goals and address all of the issues of developing a strong social fabric, local economy, appropriate skills that are gradually built and become more complex as time goes by.

I realize, Mr. Speaker, again, that we have made some progress on some issues and I don’t want to detract about that and detract from that, but I’m focusing on some of the frustrations and opportunities that I see being passed by. Time is passing, in fact, and the challenges are not only continuing, they are looming larger and larger and we need everyone at the table if we want to see ourselves working together. It’s time for a new way forward, doing business that is imminently doable and probably this will be to be expected by the next Assembly, but I would encourage us to bring that focus in this last six months or whatever of our regime as the 16th Assembly.

So, once again, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to reply to the address.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Item 12, petitions. Item 13, reports of standing and special committees. Item 14, reports of committees on the review of bills. Item 15, tabling of documents. Item 16, notices of motion. Item 17, notices of motion for first reading of bills. Item 18, motions. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Motion is on the floor. Motion is in order. To the motion. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, colleagues. Mr. Speaker, I’ve listened over the years and listened to a number of Members’ statements, listened to the government’s position on high school graduates in our small communities, especially in our small communities, Mr. Speaker. In 2009 the Northwest Territories-wide graduation rate was 53 percent. For smaller communities it was at 38 percent, Mr. Speaker.

Knowing these numbers, we are doing a disservice to our smallest communities, especially the students. Most of those who graduate, Mr. Speaker, too many of them have to go back to Aurora College or some upgrading institution just to go and take trades programs or university or any other post-secondary studies. Graduation rates in our small communities are still smaller and lower, compared to the rest of the Northwest Territories.

The reason I bring up this motion is that in our smaller communities especially, we do not have quality programming for grades 10 to 12 students. The current formula now is not doing us any good. Even if you have 10 to 15 students, you need critical mass under the current formula now to have more teachers. Right now you get 2.26 teachers per year in our schools.

Educators are complaining to us in the small communities. We need help in our small communities. We don’t have the higher numbers such as Yellowknife, Hay River, Fort Smith or

Inuvik. They’re okay. They have the critical mass. They have the numbers. In my region we don’t have the numbers. Teachers are frustrated. They have to deliver a program they know darn well won’t meet the quality that they want their students to achieve.

The students are asking for more quality programs and more teachers so they have a chance to at least get into a trades program or university program. They’re saying, what’s wrong with us? Why are we not getting the same type of funding as in Yellowknife or Inuvik? Why can’t they fix that? They can do nothing about that. Then they wonder why they’ll have to go to Aurora College to do an upgrading program; do another year because the current formula doesn’t allow us to do this.

We’re asking for that to be looked at and to be considered, to give our students a fair chance at a career that they choose to pursue.

We’ve done some calculations, some rough estimates using the 2010-2011 student enrolment numbers. We think that it will cost around $150,000, that ballpark. For example, five schools would benefit: Tsiigehtchic, Fort Liard, Dettah, Ndilo and Colville Lake. Schools in that range would benefit greatly. Compared to many other things that this government spends this money on, it would be a small investment that this motion is asking for. It’s also in keeping with the goal we set at the beginning of our term for healthy, educated people and also with the government building our future and maximizing our opportunities and initiatives.

I think that it’s very reasonable to ask for the minimum funding of three person years for schools with grade 10 or more, full-time equipment for students in grade 10 to 12. It’s a reasonable request that this motion is asking for and we think that this small investment will have a big payoff down the road.

I ask for support from the Members on this motion.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. To the motion. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to thank Mr. Yakeleya for bringing forward this motion and also extend my appreciation for letting him allow me to work with him on this particular motion and seeing the development.

I believe that the best investment that this government can make in any program is education. We can put them in health and we can put them in wildlife programs, we can put them in business programs, but the absolute best programming that we can put our dollars in is a good, solid education that will enable the next generation coming behind with the knowledge and attitude to go forward and pursue their dreams with the best of abilities, rather

than being handcuffed with the lack of being able to pursue those dreams.

I know what Mr. Yakeleya is talking about because I’ve seen it myself, growing up in a small community. I realize and have experienced the limited programming that they have to offer. I must put a caveat on that particular point. I also saw ingenuity at its finest, where teachers took on programming that they weren’t necessarily familiar with and were able to deliver excellent things on the skinniest of budgets, to ensure that students wouldn’t be held back in any particular way. In being one of the fortunate students and being able to finally come to Yellowknife to finish my high school, all of a sudden you stepped into a new realm of educational opportunities that we did not see and experience. When you go to a biology class that didn’t have all the microscopes and beakers and things like that. Or you go to a chemistry class where nobody can teach chemistry in that particular school. It becomes very challenging for them to ensure that the students who want to pursue the dreams of higher education, who want to be contributors to our society, can’t be limited by what really is just one or two additional teachers into our system. I go back to my original point, which is this is one of the best investments we can make in education.

I recognize the challenges put forward and recognized by Mr. Yakeleya’s motion and I think it makes a lot of sense. With those limited opportunities, what are we asking our students? In all fairness, are we being fair to them by not giving them the opportunity? It’s almost a shame to say or look back to say that the reason you didn’t succeed is because the government couldn’t find money for one more teacher in your particular school to ensure you had a balanced programming that you could actually apply at university. In some cases that’s actually the particular case, because schools are forced to deliver programming on the skinniest of marginal budgets in order to get through. Recognizing, yes, that some schools are very small, but the students are still just as important in those small schools as they are in our larger schools. I think of them in no less value. Are we empowering them with the appropriate skills and abilities to succeed to pursue their dreams, whether it’s a trade school or a university or college programming? Of course, the question constantly comes up as to why do our students, when they speak from the small community perspective, need to go to Aurora College or another type of learning institution to upgrade those skills? That by itself should raise questions of fairness.

It’s incumbent on us to ensure that our successive generation is empowered with the most abilities. I think it makes a lot of sense. If this motion could boil down to a simple point, it’s about fairness and quality programming, recognizing the restraints and

difficulties and the challenges that are in there with the district education authorities and boards in the small communities, I think this can be one of the pillars that propels it to move forward. If you’re a parent, you don’t want to have the stigma by saying if I send my child to my home community school, they’re going to have to go to Aurora College years down the road. That’s not really fair. How do you think the students feel about that particular programming, knowing that their graduation certificate is not as reasonable a merit to quality as someone else’s? I mean, it’s again my point of it’s not fair to temper their dreams just because of where they live. When it really comes down to it, it is only over a few short investment dollars that could go that extra way. If anyone thinks that’s money saved on the system, well, we’re just putting it into another pile or into somebody else’s budget to teach them later on. It doesn’t make sense.

In closing, I want to stress that this probably does a lot from a community perspective, way more than the money alone. The community knowing that their students are graduating with the same quality as any other schooling system in the Northwest Territories is quite an exciting thing. The fear of that and that’s not to emphasize that the quality of programming is bad, I just believe that it’s limited. I think its limitation is what the problem is here. I would not want to let it be clouded to assume that the teachers are doing a bad job, because they are not, but they are working with the limited resources they have. I think that’s what’s holding some of the students back from some of their dreams.

I will be supporting this motion and I again thank Mr. Yakeleya for letting me be a part of this. I think if government listens very carefully, they can go through their own analysis to realize that it is not an expensive initiative that could pay big dividends over the long haul and it meets our goals and objectives as a vision of the 16th Assembly.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. To the motion. The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will support the motion brought forward by Mr. Yakeleya and Mr. Hawkins today. However, I think that if we think that having three teachers in a small community for grades 10, 11, and 12 is going to result in the, I don’t know, some utopia in education, I think we’re sadly mistaken.

The fact of the matter is that it would be an improvement and, therefore, it should be an option. I, as a parent and as a representative of many other parents, believe that what would be best for the students would be options. By the time a student gets to grade 10, 11, 12, maybe it’s time for a change of scenery, if that were an option. Maybe it is time to get to a larger centre in a larger community where there are more sports

opportunities and more part-time work available, more interaction with a larger body of students. I think we as a government should make options available.

Like I said, I support the motion. I think it is a step in the right direction, but I think with that, there need to be options for students who do want to pursue other things. There are many students in Hay River, even the community of a size of the school in Hay River, that still need to go for upgrading. Many, many still do need to go for upgrading. Like I said, I support it, but I think we as a government need to think. We sometimes associate going someplace else for high school with the proverbial residential school. I know from experience, my own children came out of Hay River to a larger centre like Yellowknife around the time they were 14 years old. Jordan graduated from St. Pat’s; Jeffrey came here for Grade 11; Jillian came here when she was 14. It was a very positive impact on them to have more access to different types of subjects, a larger group and more opportunities. I will support the motion.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. To the motion. The honourable Member for Nunakput, Mr. Jacobson.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I will be supporting the motion. I have the same issues in Sachs Harbour right now with no grade 10, 11 and 12 teacher in the community. Students are leaving for the community of Inuvik for schooling and there’s no place for them to stay. No safe place that they’re saying that there is to stay. We do have plans. I’m trying to work with the Minister’s office to get a place in the community for them so they can continue their grade 10, 11 and 12. The options are very little.

The community needs a high school teacher. It’s gone too far already. The social passing is in now that kids are being passed and having to go back as soon as they’ve got grade 12 for a year or year and a half of education in Inuvik or Arctic College just to try to get into Aurora College. That’s not right. We should be stopping this right from grade K to 12 in the smaller communities. Stop it before it starts.

I wish we could fix this all in one fell swoop but it can’t be done. We have to start off slow. I think this motion will start it off. It’s all small communities that are being affected, not just the ones that are named, all across the Territory.

I do support it and I look forward to putting it to the vote.

Thank you, Mr. Jacobson. To the motion. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will also be supporting this motion. The Minister mentioned in his budget address a number of

places where additional funding was being planned for expenditures. One of those was the Aboriginal Student Achievement Initiative. I think those sorts of things fit exactly with this program, from what I know of it. I recommend that we do have the dollars for this and that it be made. I will be supporting the motion.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. To the motion. The Minister responsible for Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. I would be pleased to share some information with the Members on the Member for Sahtu for bringing this motion forward on the high school staffing funding formula. Small high schools in the Northwest Territories, as you know, are funded through the school funding framework. We are talking about approximately eight communities. Once communities have reached 10 students or more, then there are options that have been referred to as grade extensions. That’s an option that we have been working with and has been very successful.

The Member also stated that 2.26 teaching positions are needed. It’s not only that, Mr. Speaker. In addition to teaching staff, there are classroom assistants, program support teachers and counsellors within the school system. However, Mr. Speaker, I’m more than willing to direct my department to review the funding provided to senior secondary programming for small schools, taking into consideration the motion that’s before us. This motion is a direction to our government, so Cabinet will be abstaining from the vote. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. I will allow the mover of the motion some closing comments. Mr. Yakeleya.