Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think Mr. Dolynny summarized it pretty good about the…summarized it very good, actually, in terms of what some committee members expressed as concerns in some areas of the clauses that are being brought before us today. In some cases they are just small little changes to the wording, but what I see out of those small little changes are some possible big consequences not only for the department but for our public service sector and people who have been working with the government for X number of years. You can actually be overlooked with some of these possible power decision-making made by a single Minister.
Mr. Dolynny referenced that employees who are deemed for layoff can actually be appointed to any position within the public service without competition. I have some concerns over this, that if
an employee was recognized for layoff and they were able to be put into another position, any position within the public service which we have over 5,000 positions within the GNWT, he or she might be able to go into another department where somebody who had been working five, 10, maybe 25 years, who is looking to fill that position, now might be overlooked because of a direct appointment. Taken out of the hands of all Cabinet members to discuss such an appointment, I think, does draw a lot of concern.
As I have stated in a lot of discussions with the Minister’s office, I have worked in the public service sector for 12 years. I have seen some of these practices happen. I have seen some employees who were looking for a position, waiting for the job competition to open up, and a direct appointment was given to another employee sometimes from a different department and it really affected the atmosphere of the working conditions within that department. I think, as you move forward into making these amendments as small changes to the act itself, it will cause big consequences. I also do feel that it puts too much power into the hands of one Minister, in terms of direct appointing an employee to any position without competition within the public service sector.
There was another area here that I did have another concern with and I will discuss it more in detail with the clause-by-clause review, and that was for any employees that want to run for office, and putting that in the hands and decision of the deputy minister when we have a small population here in the Northwest Territories already and the relationship between the deputy minister and the Minister, and even though the Minister doesn’t have the right now because it is just an amendment, there still can be a conflict of interest because the deputy minister and Minister work so close and it could be even deemed more of a conflict if the deputy minister and that Minister were together for two, three or more terms. Obviously, the deputy minister and the Minister would have developed a strong relationship over however long they have been working together and that can be a conflict of interest as well.
Like I said, it’s a small population in the Northwest Territories, and with the deputy minister so involved in what happens in the goings-on of business in the Northwest Territories, travelling to communities, meeting with people who might be potential candidates – because I am sure they would be listening to people who would be very vocal, very outspoken, very involved in the community – and should that individual want to run for office, now we are leaving it in the hands of one individual and that’s the deputy minister. I think there is potential for conflict of interest there as well. There is nothing, I believe, in this act that would allow for the potential candidate, who could also be a good
employee for the GNWT, there is no appeals process that they can follow if they want to run, to get that opportunity to run. So we are actually shrinking and limiting the amount of potential good-quality candidates that would like to run for office within our government. Should the individual decide to run, it looks like the only option for them is to resign their position and run for office. Then there is no appeals process; there is nothing that says they can go back into the public service sector because there was no approval given.
Those are just some of the concerns that I’ve had with this. As we get into the clause-by-clause review, you will hear more questions to the Minister to get a little bit more clarity on some of these clauses that have given some concern to me.
As I say, working in the public service sector for over 12 years, I have seen some of these practices go on and I do believe putting all that power into one person’s hands on some very important issues is very conflicting for me and also gives me concern for all the people that go out there and do work in the public service sector. I think that speaking up for them, especially the long-term employees who might be getting overlooked, it’s going to be a concern for them as well. I think they should be spoken for in that case. With that, I will close my general comments. Thank you, Mr. Chair.