Does the committee agree?

I’ll ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to please escort the witnesses to the table.

Mr. Abernethy, for the record, could you please introduce your witnesses?

Thank you, Madam Chair. On my right is Mark Aitken, the acting assistant deputy minister for the attorney general branch. On my left is Kelly McLaughlin, the acting director of legislation.

Thank you. General comments. Mr. Dolynny.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I wish to take just a minute here to clarify in general comments, as indicated in both opening addresses and the one we did from committee, regarding the amendment of the bill which allowed the Minister to consult with the Supreme Court before setting fees or court fees. That reference is to, later on as we’ll note in detail, Section 24 of the act and number 2.

What we see within that amendment is a compromise to the true intention of what many in committee were striving to achieve. This concept was fair and reasonable court fees. Now, the department was adamant that this simple concept of fair and reasonable could not be included within the fabric of the act, as it would have had disastrous consequences for a number of other acts that could be challenged in the courts. So again, why the fuss?

In simple terms, court fees which are unreasonably high may pose a barrier to access of the courts and to justice and, as such, can be deemed unconstitutional. Courts should not be run on a cost recovery basis, and seeking to do so would more than likely dissuade the average person from seeking justice.

The committee recognized that some fees are appropriate, but it was important to have some scrutiny of the fees the government charged and to

make sure they do not become real barriers to justice. In essence, the court cannot fulfill its democratic function as an independent and impartial arbiter between government and individual or between individuals if the government limits those who come before the court by means of financial deterrence such as significant, unfair, or unreasonable fees.

The committee could not leave this amendment in the same position; therefore, the oversight of compromise was established with the Supreme Court who deals with average citizens on a daily basis. The committee felt that they were the best able to review the proposed fees and provide advice to government as whether the fees sought to be charged are fair and reasonable, taking into consideration not only the economic needs of government but the circumstances of the average member of the general public.

I would like to thank the committee for allowing me to qualify this amendment in the proposed line that we’ll be discussing later on today.

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. General comments. Does committee agree that we’re ready to proceed with clause-by-clause review of the bill?

We will stand down the title page and preamble. Clause 1.

---Clauses 1 through 24 inclusive approved

Committee, I will return to the title page of this bill. Bill 7, An Act to Amend the Judicature Act, to the bill as a whole.

Agreed. Does committee agree that Bill 7, An Act to Amend the Judicature Act is now ready for third reading?

---Bill 7 approved for third reading

I would like to thank the Minister and his witnesses for their help with Bill 7. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Menicoche.

Madam Chair, I move we report progress.

---Carried

Thank you. I will now rise and report progress.

Can I have the report of Committee of the Whole, Mrs. Groenewegen?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Your committee has been considering Bill 5, Legal Aid Act, and Bill 7, An Act to Amend the Judicature Act, and would like to report progress with one motion being adopted, and that Bill 7 is ready for third reading, and that Bill 5 is ready for third reading as amended. Mr. Speaker, I move that the report of Committee of the Whole be concurred with. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Do we have a seconder to the motion? Mr. Menicoche.

---Carried

Item 22, third reading of bills. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Great Slave, that Bill 16, Supplementary Appropriation Act (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 2, 2012-2013, be read for the third time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Bill 16 has had third reading.

---Carried

Mr. Clerk, orders of the day.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until Monday, November 5, 2012, at 1:30 p.m.

---ADJOURNMENT

The House adjourned at 1:44 p.m.