Thank you, Madam Chair. I will go through the notes that I’ve heard from my colleagues. A number of my colleagues repeated similar things, so I’ll try to lump them into groups and then I’ll talk about some of them individually.

One of the things that came up a number of times is obviously Bill C-10. That’s something we are hearing a lot about right now and we have just completed the review, which has been shared with Members and has been tabled in the House. That report clearly shows there’s going to be what equates to about an 11-person increase in our male facilities.

We are concerned. We are planning around that, but we know that we have some space to last some time to help us plan our way through this. We do have opportunities within the facilities to double up to some degree, so we’ll manage within. At the same time, we’re going to look for opportunities to find ways to get low-risk offenders into alternatives, other methods of incarceration, which may include wilderness camps and those types of things. That’s part of the partnership stuff we were talking about or Mr. Yakeleya was talking about.

In the past we’ve done wilderness camps. When I was in Fort Good Hope, I had an opportunity to meet with the residents of Fort Good Hope who indicated they’d really like to get back into the world of doing these camps. We’re very interested in it.

We have to work with the community. We’ve indicated that we want to work. In fact, we’ve already begun that relationship, if you will, and we will find a way. But we do have to make sure we meet certain security standards.

The next option for us in the facilities is obviously to look at possibly sending inmates to other jurisdictions or stop accepting inmates from other jurisdictions. Now, I did have a conversation with the Minister of Justice yesterday and we talked about the challenges we expect we will face. Right now you will notice there’s no increased money in the budget because, quite frankly, it isn’t going to hit us this fiscal year. We don’t see that. The bill isn’t even going to come into full effect this year, so we have some planning time. But given that it’s 11, given that we are projecting 11 worst-case scenarios, which will grow over time, we don’t actually see having to end a relationship with Nunavut at this point. We believe we will be able to take both Nunavut inmates and federal inmates over an extended period of time as long as we manage and plan accordingly and, once again, finding ways to get some of the low-risk offenders into alternatives.

So there’s work to be done. It’s not going to be easy, but we know with a little bit of focus and a little determination, we can get it done.

Bill C-10 does put on some long-term pressures and one of the things that we’re very interested in pursuing is diversions. Whether that’s at the front end with the RCMP or in the court system or with our community justice committees, there are opportunities and we continue to pursue those. Yes, Bill C-10 is going to be a challenge but we think we have a good grasp of what’s coming. There will be some surprises because we don’t know how the judges are necessarily going to interpret every piece of legislation, but we’ve done a pretty good analysis that’s been shared with you and we’re looking forward to continuing to work on that.

A number of the Members talked about RCMP, in particular in small communities. We fully recognize the challenge that we have there. I personally have had an opportunity to get out to a couple of the small communities, Colville Lake and Tsiigehtchic, to talk with the people in the communities about creative solutions. In all those trips I did go with the commanding officer of “G” Division, who has agreed and will be working with the communities to try and find those creative solutions. There were a number of ideas that came up in Tsiigehtchic that the RCMP is pursuing. In Colville Lake we had a number of good conversations and Wade Blake, the commanding officer, did spend some time with the chief and council in Colville Lake to start talking about those opportunities.

Mr. Menicoche’s situation is a little bit different given that Wrigley, the community he identified, does have a detachment, it just doesn’t have an on-site detachment. It has the staff compliment but it lacks a building or infrastructure. Infrastructure is now a responsibility of the Government of the Northwest Territories for RCMP infrastructure, 70 percent of the cost and 70 percent of the build, which is a slightly new relationship. Some money was built into the contract to cover some of the builds, but we have some priority areas and things that are kind of falling down, like the Inuvik detachment, that need to be dealt with right away. We need, and I need, to go to places like Wrigley and I am committing to go to Wrigley with the commanding officer to talk about some interim measures, some creative solutions to help make sure that Wrigley has policing coverage that they’re happy with and satisfied with until such a time as we can take that larger step down the road. Work is required there.

With respect to Legal Aid, I think we’ve even done first and second reading. Have we not done first and second reading of the Legal Aid Act? Okay. We will be doing first and second reading of the Legal Aid bill, which is basically a new Legal Aid Act, very shortly. That act will be coming to you, the Regular Members, to do a comprehensive review. We know that there’s a lot of people interested. This is a great opportunity for all of us to work together to get this Legal Aid Act right, so that we can meet the needs of our residents. We’ve all heard problems and concerns. I travelled with social programming in the last government where we reviewed the Child and Family Services Act and we heard a lot of concerns about the Legal Aid Act. So this is our opportunity to dig in and get it right. That’s not going to address everything. Workload and backlog is something that we heard an awful lot about. In fact, I have had that discussion with committee and as a result of that discussion and important work with the committee, we will be putting forward a supp to create or increase the legal aid division by one position, once this particular budget is concluded. So we are adding a position, assuming it will get through this process. I’m both hopeful and optimistic that it will.

Mr. Yakeleya talked about strong, independent people in Colville Lake. Some creative things are happening. This is the type of thing that we’re talking about when it comes to partners and stakeholders. They’ve approached us and asked us about opportunities to do things like reintegration programs, inmates who have been in the facilities – whether it’s federal, territorial, or whatnot – for a long time and come back to the communities. One of the residents of the community talked about how long or how difficult it is for them to reintegrate when they come back and they’re kind of lost. They’ve approached us with some options. We’re

very excited. We don’t fully know what it means yet, but we’re approaching with open ears and open minds to see if we can find something that works out for both.

On the Land Program I already touched a little bit. We are looking to continue to do those types of things and Fort Good Hope has expressed a desire.

The one issue that Mr. Yakeleya brought up which is a little bit more complicated, is the travel long distance for court. From time to time, depending on whether juries are required or whatnot, this is a requirement from time to time. Obviously, we want to try to get into communities as much as we can. We can’t get into every community. If an inmate comes from Colville Lake and they’re set for a trial in Fort Good Hope and we have to bring them out, it’s my understanding that they shouldn’t have to pay, that we would cover those costs. I did hear people say that they did have to pay when we were there, and I need to work with Mr. Yakeleya and my department to figure out what was the situation there. Was it an oddball sort of situation or was it the norm, because they shouldn’t have to pay when we have to bring them out for trial. I will commit to looking at that for Mr. Yakeleya.

Mr. Dolynny talked about the family violence RCMP officer. This is something we’re excited about. It is actually a position in the RCMP. It isn’t in the Department of Justice. We have a new relationship with them as a result of the contract. We have a little bit more cooperation, for lack of a better word, on setting some direction. We don’t tell them how to be RCMP but we talk about the types of services. This is a position we’re excited about. I want to know about it. I want to keep informed about it. I will make sure that Members are informed and up to date on this one as well.

Courts. If you go to the Yellowknife courthouse, as an example, we actually have a downstairs courtroom that actually is fully set up with videoconferencing and that technology and we are trying to push out of Yellowknife to create opportunities to create some efficiencies, so you’re bang on correct. This is something that continues to need work, but it is something that we have been working on and we are going to continue working on it.

Corrections. We do have treatment programs in pretty much every facility that we have. They differ depending on the type of facility that we do have. By way of example, the youth facility that we have here in Yellowknife has a fantastic program called Healing and Learning Together, the HALT program, which we just managed to obtain some additional federal money so that that program can continue to live and continue to be delivered over time. It’s a great program. I will be talking about it in more detail in a Minister’s statement in the next couple of days. It’s a good, good program. We do provide

programming. There are obviously shortfalls. Everybody can probably identify where they think there needs to be some more.

We have had some discussions with committee over the last couple of weeks, and it was identified or suggested that we needed to put a little more attention on some programs at SMCC. We are coming forward with a supp on that for $250,000 this year and $339,000 ongoing so that we can enhance that particular program in the South Mackenzie Correctional Centre. We’re excited about that. Obviously, we hope that goes through the Assembly and passes.

Can we do more? Of course we can. We always can. Money is always a challenge. We need to set some priorities. We want to make sure that we’re providing quality rehabilitation to the inmates because, as Mr. Dolynny said, we want to fight against recidivism. I believe we have some statistics that give us a little bit of the recidivism sort of statistics over time, and I will look for that and I will share that with the Members when we do get that.

Mr. Bromley talked about prevention and our prevention role is also partially a partnership. A number of the things related to prevention that have to happen are going to have to happen in other departments like Health and Social Services. We are an active partner trying to find some solutions, but there are some important things that we do. You can’t knock the value of the community justice committees when it comes to prevention. They play an incredible awareness role and I’ve had an opportunity to get out and meet some of these people and talk about the types of things that they’re doing. Quite frankly, it’s amazing some of the things that they’re doing. We would like to continue to work with them. We would like to continue to enhance their role. We would like to give them more opportunities to do diversion with both youth and adults, where appropriate. It’s exciting and we want to grow that so it’s even more effective than it is.

There are some other things like our Not Us campaign which we’re very proud of. It’s a program that we actually give the money to the community and they decide how they’re going to spend it. They design their own programs that suit their needs and meet their styles. We’re excited about that and we’ll keep working on that and keep getting that money out there so that lots of individuals can take advantage of it.

I’ve already talked about Bill C-10. I believe I’ve touched on legal aid. I’ve addressed, I hope, some of the concerns about the RCMP. I really look forward to getting out to the small communities with the RCMP, with the commanding officer to talk about some solutions, some interim measures. I think I got everything.

The one thing that I’ve left here now, let’s go back on, is divorce. Divorce is very challenging to people who happen to be living through it. We’ve actually put in a program of mediation which is actually quite good. When you’ve got two healthy parents that are both healthy, well, and capable of providing support and love to their child in a safe manner, they can utilize these programs.

We’ve had really fantastic success with this Mediation Program. There have been a lot of people talking about equal parenting. I see why some people talk about equal parenting but I do have my concerns about equal parenting because, in my opinion, and in the opinion of many, many people and research, we always have to err on the side of safety of the child. In many situations it’s possible that a child will get positive benefits from equal access to both parents, assuming that both parents are healthy, well adjusted, and aren’t a danger to the child. If we were to change to presumption of assessment to equal and shared parenting, we would actually be putting our children in danger, because the presumption of equal and shared parenting would override the condition of safe child. That has to be paramount. The safety of the child has to be paramount above everything.

We will continue to work with parents to find opportunities to give them access, shared access to children when they’re both healthy and safe and the safety of the child is absolutely paramount. I hear what the Member is saying. We have a slight disagreement even though I do understand the value of equal and shared parenting when both parents are healthy. Assuming that we don’t get rid of the presumption of child safety.

That’s it. Thank you, Madam Chair.