Good afternoon, colleagues. Welcome back to the Chamber. Orders of the day. Item 2, Ministers’ statements. The honourable Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. The Department of Education, Culture and Employment is pleased to share news about its Aboriginal Student Achievement Initiative. The focus is on increasing the accomplishments of Aboriginal students across the Northwest Territories.

The initiative’s long-term goal is developing and implementing a territorial education plan to help eliminate the achievement gap between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal students. Helping these students achieve success in their studies is one of the ways that the Government of the Northwest Territories is working to fulfill this Assembly’s goal of healthy, educated people.

The Aboriginal Student Achievement Working Group was established in April 2009. Partners included Aurora College, district education councils, Aboriginal organizations, the Northwest Territories Literacy Council, the Northwest Territories Teachers’ Association, the Native Women’s Association, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Health and Social Services. The working group helped direct the initiative’s focus and developed the following priorities:

•

early childhood and child care;

•

student and family support;

•

literacy;

and

•

Aboriginal language curriculum and resource development.

To date we have held regional forums in four regions. The first took place in the Sahtu region from September 28

th

to September 30

th

. The next

was in the Tlicho region from November 17

th

to

November 19

th

. In January, two regional forums

took place; from January 5

th

to 7

th

we visited the

Deh Cho region and from the 18

th

to 20

th

of January

we visited Dettah, who hosted the Yellowknife forum. The last two forums take place in the Beaufort-Delta and South Slave regions in April.

The Sahtu meeting went well and we had a great turnout. Many community and regional leaders attended all three days of our discussions. The level of engagement from participants was outstanding. Support for building community connections was a common theme.

The Tlicho meeting was well attended with the addition of youth participating from different communities. These bright, young minds are also our future leaders and showed a deep understanding of the issues discussed. They spoke for their communities and peers.

Youth involvement in the Deh Cho meeting saw a strong focus on increasing Aboriginal languages and culture in the education system. Margaret Thom, a community counsellor and educator with the Fort Providence school, provided an inspirational keynote address that reinforced the significance of traditional teachings.

For the Akaitcho region, we could not have asked for a better location to host the meeting. The Chief Drygeese Government Building in Dettah provided the perfect environment for this unique forum that saw three school boards coming together to talk about bettering our education system. Communication was a major theme at this forum. Delegates agreed that steps need to be taken to improve communications amongst all education partners.

Community forums held on the third day of meetings gave special attention to action at the local level. Community Aboriginal leaders and educators identified education issues and developed plans of action. Attendees made a commitment to start moving on plans and working towards short-term goals.

In addition to these regional forums, the department is also supporting an attendance project in each

community in the Territory. Funding is $10,000 per community and is matched by funds from the education authority or other partners.

We intend to keep Members informed of the progress of both the regional forums and the attendance projects as the work continues, and plan to table a preliminary report during the next session of this Assembly.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Minister responsible for Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m pleased to announce that phase 2 of the Single-Use Retail Bag Program is now underway. As of February 1, 2011, paper, plastic and biodegradable bags now cost 25 cents in all stores in the Northwest Territories.

The Single-Use Retail Bag Program is the second program created under the Waste Reduction and Recovery Act. The program was started in January 2010 to address the millions of disposable shopping bags that cause unsightly litter in our communities and on the land.

Phase 2 of the Single-Use Retail Bag Program includes clothing stores, convenience stores, hardware stores and jewellery stores. The program does not include bags used inside the store for unpackaged bulk items like produce, bakery items, candy and small hardware items. It also does not include bags used for dry cleaning, prescriptions, or primary packaging of prepared food.

Information and details on this phase of the program was shared with Northwest Territories businesses and retailers last summer and again in December.

Fees collected from phase 2 of the program continue to go into the GNWT’s Environment Fund to cover program expenses and help pay for future waste reduction and recycling programs.

As we have seen with phase 1 of the program, fees placed on single-Use retail bags work to reduce consumption. Reducing consumption, reusing materials and recycling waste products are ways we can all reduce our impact on the environment.

The Waste Reduction and Recovery Program expansion is part of the Managing This Land strategic initiative identified to meet the 16

th

Legislative Assembly’s goal of an environment that will sustain present and future generations.

Information regarding the Single-Use Retail Bag Program can now be found on the I-Care-NWT website at www.icarenwt.ca. The website highlights the changes for retailers and distributors. It also

includes the amended regulations, a plain-language summary of the regulations, program policies and all the forms a retailer or distributor needs to complete at this time.

When we think about the three Rs, reduce, reuse and recycle, Mr. Speaker, it is the first R, reduce, that is the most important. This program is a great example of a waste reduction program. The fewer bags we use means the fewer natural resources we consume and the less waste and greenhouse gases we produce.

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that waste reduction and recycling is important to the people of the Northwest Territories. Expanding the Waste Reduction and Recovery Program will reduce litter on the land and in communities, as well as reduce our consumption of natural resources. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Premier, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wish to advise Members that the Honourable Robert C. McLeod will be absent from the House for the remainder of the week and the following Monday to attend the federal-provincial-territorial Ministers responsible for Sport meeting and Canada Winter Games in Halifax. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Item 3, Members’ statement. The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I received a concern from a constituent regarding Student Financial Assistance; in particular, claiming a student travel benefit to return home for winter break.

The 2011 SFA Handbook states SFA will provide assistance for the basic airfare if travelling by plane or the current government rate for mileage if travelling by land or water. It goes on to say, “Important: You are responsible for making your own travel arrangements. Contact a travel agency near you listed in your local telephone directory. If you travel by land or water you are required to submit Form ‘A’ Travel Claim, for reimbursement after you have travelled.”

There is no reference to air travel here, but if you look at Form ‘A’ Travel Claim, you will find that this is the correct form to submit. The Form ‘A’ Travel

Claim does not have air travel as an option and it states “attach original ticket and receipt.”

My constituent followed the instructions in the Student Handbook. He booked and paid for his air travel and then submitted a Form ‘A’ Travel Claim to SFA. He submitted his ticket and the receipt indicating the ticket was paid for by Visa. He signed the declaration on Form ‘A,’ which certifies that he incurred the expenses for this purpose and is seeking reimbursement.

In response to his travel claim, my constituent was requested to supply a photocopy of the Visa card that paid for the ticket, revealing the name on the card and the last four digits of the account number, or a copy of the Visa statement showing the same information. Instructions to forward this information are not in the Student Handbook or requested on the Form ‘A’ Travel Claim.

When my constituency assistant made inquiries to the Minister’s office related to this concern, it was brought to my attention that the policy and procedures manual advises that airline tickets should be booked through an approved northern travel agency and preapproved by SFA. That’s great if you live in Yellowknife. I don’t know of any other travel agencies anywhere else in the North, so I guess we assume that everybody going to college is from Yellowknife.

I was also provided with an excerpt from the SFA Spring 2011 Newsletter to students. Under the section titled “Student Travel Reminders” along with other information referring to air travel, it reads: “If the ticket was purchased with a credit card, you must submit a copy of the credit card or credit card statement showing the last four digits of the credit card and the name of the cardholder.” This was in a newsletter under a reminder section. This was not a new release or notice of change in policy.

I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement, Mr. Speaker.

---Unanimous consent granted

Are you confused? I am confused. The instructions in the policy and procedures manual contradict the information and instructions in the Student Handbook, and the newsletter reminder is different information yet again. As for requesting a copy of the credit card or credit card statement, what if the student had paid cash or borrowed the money from a friend, relative or bank, purchased the ticket knowing they’d be reimbursed and can pay the funds back to the lender later?

Mr. Speaker, I have more to say on this, but let’s just put it this way: there is a contradiction here between the policy. It shouldn’t matter if Santa Claus bought your ticket home for travel. You should be able to get reimbursed for it. Thank you. This is ridiculous.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Forty years ago Canada initially started its fight against poverty with the founding of the National Poverty Foundation, now called Canada Without Poverty. Forty years ago a special senate committee on poverty published a report, a report which opened with the words, “Poverty is the great social issue of our time. Unless we act now, nationally, in a new and purposeful way, five million Canadians will continue to find life a bleak, bitter and never-ending struggle for survival.”

We haven’t made much progress on poverty as a country in the last 40 years, Mr. Speaker, and the NWT has contributed to that lack of progress. To date we are one of seven jurisdictions in Canada without a comprehensive Anti-Poverty Strategy. We started to make progress, Mr. Speaker. A motion was passed in this House February 11, 2010, calling for the GNWT to develop an Anti-Poverty Strategy and a definition of poverty. As a result of that motion, the NWT Legislature was lauded by several national anti-poverty organizations. On May 19 last year, the Premier made a statement in the House in which he announced the formation of an anti-poverty working group, a group which, unfortunately, did not include any non-government people.

But in early October of last year, when there was no evidence of any concrete action on the part of this government, an anti-poverty alliance of 21 organizations with some support from this government, held an anti-poverty workshop. Eighty-one participants from throughout the NWT met for two days to discuss the meaning of and solutions for poverty. The result of that workshop was a very thorough and comprehensive report. It was distributed to participants and the government in early December 2010.

This report, Mr. Speaker, should be the basis for further work on an Anti-Poverty Strategy. It should be accepted as a starting point for the work the GNWT needs to do. We should not redo work already done. But I recently learned that the GNWT working group composed only of bureaucrats, no non-government representatives, is planning a round of community consultations with a goal of a discussion paper by the end of March this year, and we are preparing to spend $35,000 to do it. In my view, it will be a wasted $35,000. Mr. Speaker, the money would be much better spent acting on the No Place for Poverty report’s recommendations.

Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.

---Unanimous consent granted

Mr. Speaker, the consultation was done last fall by a group of 81 diverse representatives, 12 percent or so of whom were GNWT staff. Why are we consulting again and why the very short time frame? It seems as though, once again, the government is not listening to its citizens, that it is forging ahead without consideration for the input of our non-government partners. I will have questions for the Premier at a later time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I will speak about the devolution agreement and the impact on my people and our land claim. Mr. Speaker, the Premier and the federal government signed this AIP without the majority of the Aboriginal governments. How did we justify this action? Yet the Premier has said, come be a partner in building our future together. How can the Premier say come to the table when only after you signed?

Mr. Speaker, I believe the signing of this agreement was rushed. For reasons unknown to me -- I can only speculate -- the AIP was signed without 75 percent of the Aboriginal governments on their land. Mr. Speaker, the Gwich’in, the Sahtu, Dehcho, Tlicho and Akaitcho, both treaties were not signatories to this non-binding agreement. Isn’t it our responsibility as a government to bring everyone to the table? Mr. Speaker, to date we only have the IRC that have signed and indications that one Metis group will sign. We wish them well.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier has said he wants to bring people into the tent. First, we need to help him put up a tent and Lord knows how my people are known for their tent setting abilities. Maybe we should listen to them and ask them what is needed for a sound structure.

Mr. Speaker, this devolution agreement will certainly alter our settled and unsettled land claim agreements. Is this an indication as to why the majority of Aboriginal governments are not in the tent with us? Do we not want our people to be involved in this historical deal? The stakes are higher; higher than any other agreements that I have witnessed to date in the North. We’re not all in this together. What a shame.

Mr. Speaker, our relationships with the Aboriginal governments are now being called into question. Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to reference Section 22.1.6 of the Sahtu Land Claim Agreement. It states the Government of the Northwest Territories shall involve us in developing an implementation of

any agreements which transfer jurisdictions over minerals of Canada to the Government of the Northwest Territories. The AIP called for big changes in our homeland; control over our lands and waters and resources is to be transferred to the GNWT. Our entire resource management structure is now up for discussion. How can the GNWT and Canada continue on this road without the support of the majority of the Aboriginal governments? The people of the Northwest Territories...

Mr. Yakeleya, your time for your Member’s statement has expired. Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.

Mr. Speaker, mahsi cho. Evolution before devolution is the biggest concern of Nahendeh residents at this time. I’m getting many phone calls and concerns from constituents. I guess, firstly, as myself and all Nahendeh constituents will be part of the Dehcho process, how exactly will it impact the Dehcho people and those living there? There is still no clarity as the distinction and difference between the agreement-in-principle on devolution of lands and resources and the actual devolution final agreement.

I read, with great interest, in this week’s News/North the editorial: Territorial and Aboriginal governments represent the same people. I think that’s exactly what our Aboriginal governments and people are saying, so it is proper to say that. They say why is our concern to stop the signing of the AIP on devolution not recognized? The wisdom of our elders and the Aboriginal leadership want to build and forge a strong future for our North. I believe they feel that our political and constitutional development must be in place before devolution.

You only have to look to our provinces and even to the Yukon government to see the dismal track record when it comes to dealing with Aboriginal people and governments. It is still felt that the federal government is giving away Dene lands.

I am in agreement that this government must begin the discussions of our political future. I believe that it must include guaranteed Aboriginal representation and leadership. The fear, Mr. Speaker, is that in the future if there is no Aboriginal involvement because non-Aboriginals get elected, then we’ll end up in a situation like our southern provinces.

I ask that all discussions that lead up to final devolution should include Aboriginal governments. There must be another solution for involvement for those that do not want to sign. I am certain that constitutional development discussions will be

necessary as we work towards our final devolution agreement. Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I discuss the government’s response to the recommendations to the Child and Family Services Act review. In a nutshell, I am disappointed. Of 73 recommendations, 10 are rejected; 28 accepted conditionally read yes, but no change required; and 13 accepted in principle read yes, but no money. The detailed responses offer obtuse and often quibbling comments claiming that the recommended actions given such priority by the committee are already in practice or implicit in the legislation.

Anyone who sat through those exhaustive, emotional public hearings must wonder how so much that is supposedly implicit or in practice could so obviously be failing in delivery. Implicit or not, the committee thoroughly reviewed the act and concluded explicit wording and better practice was required.

Is the Minister failing to propose an ambitious response believing there is a lack of support in this Assembly for creating a new and improved system? Surely not. Has the government failed to understand that because of the system, the legislation delivery isn’t working, the people are demanding recourse through law that finally spells out the responsibilities government can be held accountable to?

As we’ve heard repeatedly, government has to wake up to the need for a whole new way of doing business. Early intervention and prevention in every community is where the human and fiscal savings lie. Until we turn our focus to causes instead of effects, we will continue to be swamped, mopping up consequences. Short-sighted thinking will only cause human and financial costs to mount.

How can the Minister say a plain-language act is not possible when so many jurisdictions across the country are adopting that very approach with acts of this sort? We are expecting a can-do approach from this government on this. Committee members are fully aware of the fiscal and organizational challenges we must confront and we are fully aware of current practices and what the act says. We will not wait through an endless rumination by justice on the will of the people. This 16

th

Assembly must

begin making this vision real; lives are in the balance.

The Minister has support for a fresh start. Let’s get it done.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Abernethy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Unless you want to fly out of Yellowknife on a Saturday morning, the days of departing from Yellowknife in the morning on one of the four major airlines is a thing of the past. Canadian North, WestJet and Air Canada do not offer morning flights to Edmonton and First Air only offers one weekly morning flight and that is on Saturday mornings. No morning flights are offered during weekdays.

Airlines have the right to set their schedules in alignment with their operational and business plans. Unfortunately, I believe that these changed schedules will cost the GNWT money specifically related to medical travel.

Over the years, with the advantage of morning flights, this government has been able to send our residents south in the morning for an afternoon medical appointment and fly them back to the NWT that same evening. This allowed the GNWT to avoid the cost of housing residents overnight for short appointments, such as MRIs and other specialist-type of appointments. Now I believe medical travel will be faced with increased costs as we’ll have to house many of these people overnight where we didn’t used to have to.

I’m wondering what the Department of Health and Social Services is doing to attempt to alleviate some of these potential costs that we face. Specifically, are we changing our medical travel processes and procedures? I know that medical travel is currently being reviewed by the Program Review Office and I’m wondering what kind of findings are coming out of this that are going to help us reduce these ever-increasing costs to medical travel. I’ll be asking the Minister responsible for Health and Social Services some questions on that later.

Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to follow up on my statement from yesterday where I was speaking about the abysmal statistics in the Northwest Territories when it comes to family violence.

Having the highest crime rate in the country and the second highest rate of violent crimes in the nation is not a statistic we should have and it should be an embarrassment for this government. Spousal assault is up 107 percent in four years and there’s a 43 percent increase for sentences in violent crimes in just seven years.

In my opinion, what we can do immediately is to review our programs and rehabilitation services provided for violent offenders incarcerated in our corrections system. We must target the only people who can stop the violence and the abuse, and that’s the offender.

I was recently back on the government website and, again, I would like to note that our largest correctional centre, North Slave Correctional, does not have a resident clinical psychologist on staff. I’ve been asking questions and raising this issue for well over two years and still today there is no clinical psychologist on staff. If the NWT does not have the highest repeat violent offender percentage in Canada it would surprise me.

We have to start the review immediately and both Health and Social Services and Justice should be involved in how the review is structured, and we should find where the best programs for treating violent criminals exists and bring it into our corrections facilities as soon as possible. We need to treat violent offenders. They must have available to them every opportunity for rehabilitation so they don’t reoffend, so that our families are safer, so that our communities are safer. If we do anything less, we are short-changing public safety here in the Northwest Territories.

In addition to this concern, I’m also very alarmed at the trend I see in our justice system where previous offenders of violent crime seem to have all these previous convictions summarily cast aside. Whether it’s 15, 16, or even 18 previous convictions per violent offence, the punishment, it would seem, does not fit the crime.

How can a multiple repeat violent offender kill someone in the Northwest Territories and get five years? How can a husband beat his wife to death and get five years? How long are we going to continue to coddle violent criminals in our Territory? Can this Minister and this government have any impact on sentences of violent offenders?

I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.

---Unanimous consent granted

What message does this send to the victims -- these light sentences -- and to their families? Certainly we know the message that light sentences have on offenders, especially if they’re not thoroughly rehabilitated. They will get out and, sadly, most of them will reoffend. We have to do everything in our power to turn that trend around.