Thank you, Madam Chair. It is my honour to appear in front of the Assembly today as a sponsor of Bill 24, An Act to Amend the Liquor Act. I had the pleasure of attending the committee’s public hearings on this bill in the Sahtu communities. Today I want to discuss the key points and concerns raised by those who came and spoke on the bill and what this bill proposes within the Sahtu.

Decision-making of limits on sales of alcohol in Sahtu would occur at the regional level. Regional service delivery and decision-making is not a new concept. In the Sahtu there are many examples where services are supplied and decisions are made on a regional level, such as the health and education authorities, the renewable resources board and the Sahtu land claim.

During the committee hearing on this bill, we heard a lot about the restrictions, whether they should or should not be brought back and whether people should or should not be able to buy as much alcohol as they want. This bill on its own will not bring back restrictions. What it does do is allow all the residents in the Sahtu to be involved in the decision as to whether there should be limits on sales of alcohol at the liquor store that serves the region.

We do know, according to the RCMP, limitations do help the enforcement in our communities. The Norman Wells liquor store is unique in the Northwest Territories. It is closest to the neighbouring Sahtu communities, meaning that changes made at the liquor store affects the entire region.

Over a year ago, residents of Norman Wells voted to lift all restrictions on how much alcohol you can buy per day at the local liquor store. Those in favour won the vote by a slim majority, 113 to 101, which is 25 percent of voters deciding. This is 113 people of the total population of 2,680 in the Sahtu. Approximately 30 percent of the Sahtu population lives in Norman Wells, but 100 percent of the population have to live with the results of the decision to remove the liquor restrictions. The liquor store not only serves the local population but the other four Sahtu communities. True, liquor can

come from Yellowknife or Inuvik. When you consider how much it costs to travel there compared to the trip to Norman Wells, plus the cost to purchase the alcohol, we know that most, if not all, the alcohol in these communities comes from Norman Wells.

However, from the Liquor Commission, since the restrictions were lifted from the Norman Wells liquor store, sales of wine and coolers were each up by 17 percent, beer sales were up by 3 percent and sales of spirits were up 46 percent in 2012. That’s nearly 7,000 litres more than 2011. I have pictures to show what RCMP have seized from bootleggers.

Norman Wells has about 2 percent of the NWT population and 5 percent of the NWT liquor sales. Since the Norman Wells liquor restrictions were lifted, I have heard strong support for a regional approach to liquor sales. The sale of liquor in the Northwest Territories is already a highly regulated industry. Although liquor stores are owned and operated by private vendors, they must be licensed by the government and buy its product from the government. The government also regulates the model of store. For example, the Norman Wells liquor store is based on a consignment model and receives inventory on consignment from the Liquor Commission.

The Liquor Act already restricts who alcohol can be sold to. It also already provides for a referendum to apply, remove or change liquor restrictions. The bill before you changes who participates in that decision-making. This bill will not impact the operation of liquor stores in other regions. There is precedence for treating regions differently as the municipal statutes allow for various approaches for liquor sales amongst the communities in the Northwest Territories.

The committee heard from the Sahtu residents that lifting the restrictions would result in increases in alcohol in their communities and an increase in social problems. This is supported by early RCMP statistics; crimes had increased in the Sahtu communities and there are more bootlegging charges and charges laid related to the arrival of large amounts of liquor into a community. For example, in Tulita, 30 percent of the calls seeking the help of the RCMP during May 2013 occurred in a single day, the day after an arrival of a large quantity of liquor.

The RCMP reported that in 2012, the percentage of alcohol-related service calls doubled over previous years: assault-related calls increased by 50 percent in Tulita and 133 percent in Colville Lake; the RCMP in Fort Good Hope, Tulita and Deline responded to an average of 117 more alcohol-related calls in 2012 than in 2011; in Fort Good Hope where the population is only around 559, police responded to over 600 alcohol-related incidents. The Sahtu Health and Social Services

Authority has written to me about the safety of front-line workers dealing with intoxicated, agitated and threatening community members.

People who want to quit drinking need practical options for doing that and support in their communities when they quit. We don’t have the treatment programs and services in the region to help people deal with addictions. We don’t have enough police resources to enforce restrictions in other communities. We are limited in what we can do by the search and seizure provisions under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Limiting how much alcohol people can buy at the point of purchase is one of the few really effective tools we have.

People of the Sahtu have a strong tradition of working together. When there’s a problem affecting the lives of people – famine, disease, an enemy – people came together and tried to find a solution. It wasn’t every man for himself. The regional approach proposals here may not work for every region, but it is what is right for the Sahtu region. Yes, one region may be treated differently, but the Sahtu wants to make a decision on a regional basis.

If involving the entire region in decision-making around liquor sales means saving lives, rescuing families, stabilizing communities, then there’s no inconvenience. In the long run, it is more inconvenient to deal with trauma, Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, increased health care costs and generational legacy of alcohol abuse than any other current argument against a regional approach to the liquor sales in Norman Wells.

This bill simply sets a framework for regional decision-making. If we decide to hold a regional plebiscite, it would be a long process. It might take about two years to implement the changes. There will be lots of opportunities for community members to have a say in what should be included.

Madam Chair, I urge all Members of this Assembly to support this legislation and give voices to the residents of the Sahtu. Thank you.