To the Minister, he’s telling me that it’s public information and yet the report is not in the public realm. I’m having a little trouble understanding how he references it as being public.

So to the Minister, since the report is not yet available to the public and the recommendations are not there so that the public and Members can discuss them, I’d like to ask the Minister if he could give me a bit of a summary of what the recommendations in the report are.

There are, let’s see here, approximately 18 recommendations within that SFA that was brought to my attention. I can share that with the Members as well as the standing committee. This is an area where there is

a management response to SFA, the review of the final report. I can share that information. We are focusing on which priority areas we need to start implementing and it will be brought to the standing committee, as well, as an information item as we move forward.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Final supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.

To the Minister, I appreciate that he’s going to make this report available, but I believe it’s before standing committee already. My question is whether or not, or why it can’t be made available to the public. I’m sure that the recommendations in that report would like to be seen by some of the people who had input, would like to be seen by some of the people who are using SFA right now. I would again ask the Minister when he anticipates that this report can be tabled.

What we were waiting for was the management’s response. Now that is before me. The next step was to introduce that to standing committee. That happened. The next step is, of course, tabling the document with all the 18 recommendations and it will be for the general public.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Member for Range Lake, Mr. Dolynny.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m going to weigh in on a topic that was brought in earlier today by the Member for Yellowknife Centre. We don’t have money for long-term care beds, as we heard today from Hay River, we don’t have money for a nurse in Tsiigehtchic, and we’ve heard today that we don’t have money for a school in Trout Lake, but we do have lots of money to pay out and dole out $1.2 million in bonuses last year in 2011.

My question is to the Minister of Human Resources. Would he agree to and commit to tabling the various criteria that is used to evaluate how bonuses are being paid out by department, by category, by position?

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. The honourable Minister of Human Resources, Mr. Glen Abernethy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That information is on-line. We’re happy to re-provide it to Members.

I appreciate that. I’m going to be looking for my glasses next time for that question. The criteria, which I again hear is on-line, and I’ll definitely make the effort to do so. The concern I have is the fact that in some cases we’ve got

departments, like, some of our health authorities are running deficits. In some cases our health authorities aren’t even complying with the financial act by reporting their annual reports on time, yet we’re giving out bonuses in these areas.

Can the Minister indicate to me and the House how it is that we can give out a bonus, when really some of these criteria – basic criteria – are not being met to the public?

I just want to correct my last answer just slightly. Employees’ information, excluded senior management are on-line. I’m not 100 percent sure about deputies’ information, how that is determined. It is by policy, and I can share that with the Member if it’s not on-line.

With respect to individual bonuses and why they may be awarded, financial management would be one category. At the end of the day, we have collective agreements in place, we have agreements with our employees, we have the Public Service Act which outlines bonuses as a possibility. Every deputy is responsible for doing an assessment of their staff, setting performance criteria for an upcoming year and assessing at the end of the year. For those individuals who are eligible for bonuses, they would have to have those assessments done and they would have to be ranked against those criteria to determine whether or not they are eligible for a bonus. Not all employees that are eligible do get bonuses.

I would like to thank the Minister for his response. I’m going to ask the Minister a very forthright question here. If the criteria is such that they meet certain standards for an employer senior bureaucrat and they receive a portion or pro-rata of their bonus, would the Minister agree to looking at basically an all-or-none policy that you have to meet all your criteria, you have to meet everything involved with your employment to receive your full bonus?

In order to get a bonus, an employee would have to be seen as exceeding their expectations. If they don’t exceed their expectations, then they shouldn’t be getting a bonus. It doesn’t matter, it’s not specific to one category or another category. They have to be seen as overall exceeding.

I’m happy to meet with committee to discuss bonuses, how they are awarded, how they are earned, and if any changes are required, we’re happy to consider those with committee.

Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Final supplementary, Mr. Dolynny.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It appears that we’re actually moving in the right direction and I appreciate the Minister’s offer, which leads me to my last question. Should the

Government Ops standing committee come back to this House and to the Minister with specific revisions, if we’ve done our due diligence with privacy legislation, would the Minister comply with such recommendations?

It is a hypothetical question. I have committed to going to committee. I have committed to sharing our information with them and working with them. If committee has some direction they would like us to follow, we’re absolutely open to discussing that and working with committee on any issue that’s important to them and the people of the Northwest Territories.

Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to follow up with the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment. I’m a little confused about some of the information that he was giving me with regard to the Student Financial Assistance Program review. I understood the Minister to say that the document or report has been done. There has been a response from management – I presume that to be the department staff – and that he as a Minister must review that before anything can be made public.

I’d like to ask the Minister why the report must remain private before the Minister determines the response. Why can the report not be made public? If it’s out there, people can comment on it while the Minister analyzes the management response.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The honourable Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. I already committed that I will be tabling the document in the House.

I didn’t hear the Minister say when that is, so I hope that’s soon. I’d like to know from the Minister, it seems that in the last little while that it appears to me that reports are done, and then before the report gets tabled there are responses from management.

I’d like to know from the Minister whether or not this has become a current practice that a report is asked for, a report is received, and before the report actually gets tabled, the management response is asked for. Is this something which is becoming standard practice in the Minister’s department and across government?

When the recommendations are brought forward based on the input from the general public, there is a

management response provided, and then based on that, the tabling of the document pursuant after that. As I stated, I will be tabling the document before the end of session.

Thanks to the Minister for that commitment. I look forward to seeing that report made public. I guess I still don’t quite understand the rationale for this current situation, so I would like to ask the Minister again: Is there a reason why the report would not be tabled before the management response is prepared?

That has been the process for quite some time now within the Department of Education, Culture and Employment. We are following the process and we’ll continue to follow the process as well. There may have been some discrepancies in the past where recommendations were brought forward by consultants, issues with the consultants, so we had to make sure that there is a management response to deal with that matter. We have gone through some hiccups along the way, as well, with this process last year and this year. We just want to make sure that we have the right document going out to the general public based on the recommendations brought forward. That’s part of the process of management response.