Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On October 7, 1897, Frederick Haultain had taken the reins of the Northwest Territories as its first Premier. We lost that dream on September 1, 1905. Then Prime Minister Wilfred Laurier, who happens to be my favourite Prime Minister not because he's liberal but for a lot of reasons, took away the rights of the Northwest Territories' people to govern itself. For 109 years we have been waiting for home rule to finally return to the Northwest Territories where it belongs in the hands of the elected people of the Northwest Territories. Home rule has finally come home and it's time we get on with business. No more negotiations. Let's get this job done, finally.
Since this idea of a plebiscite has finally risen, I have received three e-mails in support of a plebiscite. Conversely, I have received dozens of e-mails saying, finally, let's get this job done. Many people are saying we need this done; we need to move forward.
Never before has the future been so promising than it is now before the people of the Northwest Territories. One hundred and nine years it has taken us to finally get our act in order, finally to get the Government of Canada onside and we cannot miss this opportunity.
Every Member of this Assembly has been elected to make decisions, as my colleague Mr. Bouchard has said and several other of my colleagues made reference to. With that, this issue has never been a surprise to anybody in the Northwest Territories that when this deal finally came after 109 years. I'm not talking about the 12 years in the last negotiation round we have had. It has taken us 109 years to get this far. We cannot let this opportunity pass by once again.
I completely agree with the Premier on this, and a few other occasions, that a plebiscite is important, but it's not the right tool at this particular time. I believe, in my travels as an MLA over almost 10 years, I have used every occasion to remind people how important devolution is and I have used every election to talk about it. I have no doubt every Member, in some form or fashion, of this House, has used the occasion of their election to talk about the opportunities of devolution and finally in the Northwest Territories succeeding to its rightful place as a full partner in this confederation of Canada.
Our language may have come in different forms, but we have all talked about, in some manner, the same message, which is, Northwest Territories is an equal partner in Canada, and a plebiscite, in my view, may be delaying that. I think it sets the public up for the wrong message. I think if we proceed with a plebiscite, it better be succeeded with a clarity act as to what it actually means to make sure we know where we're going.
I think a plebiscite is a yes or no, but it doesn't take into account the last 12 years of work required. It doesn't take the last year and a half's work into consideration. As I said earlier, it certainly doesn't take the 109 years into consideration when home rule is finally returning to where it belongs: to the Legislative Assembly for the people of the Northwest Territories.
In closing, I want to point out this: It has been repeated several times in this House, this plebiscite could cost up to $1.8 million. I cannot imagine how we would not consider spending that $1.8 million on programs for nurses in small communities, for addictions and treatment programs, for investment in students at Aurora College. This could go so much further than just a simple question. So I put programs before this vote. I put programs and people and services first. In that sense, there should be no surprise to this House where I stand. I will be voting against this motion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.