Thank you, Mr. Chair. At the beginning of Bill 25, I certainly also had concerns with the reporting, the proposed structure and set up, and the jurisdiction, the authority, and maybe the confusion around the board chairs and the Minister himself. I had that confused. I have noted that I did receive a letter from our chair of the Sahtu education board and they wanted to clearly state that there are clear indications as to our superintendent and the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment. I believe the Minister did receive that letter and that the board wanted to know that, you know, are we creating a two-headed dragon here called superintendents of education boards. There is clear, as the Minister just read out, ministerial statement guidelines for the superintendents. Even though it falls under the premise of the GNWT now, the jurisdictions, the funding will go to our education boards who will sign off on the cheques as they are being discussed here.

I did talk to the education superintendent in the Sahtu and he wanted to make sure, and he is okay. There is still a bit of apprehension yet in the Sahtu health board. You know, it’s a matter of transition. I somewhat agree with my colleague from Hay River. The chairs are voted like a political body. They deal with us and they deal with certainly the overseeing of our superintendent, and the Minister has clearly written down the board still has that responsibility. I just wanted to say that very clearly. I’m not too sure where the previous speaker mentioned about in the act, and that’s always been something we think about in the future. We’re not going to be sitting in these chairs all our lives. In the future, if for any reason the interpretation is misconstrued about what is meant in the act and what the Minister is saying right now to us. Is this the intent, the spirit and intent of this act, and they cannot deter, erode or derail what the previous speaker and myself are saying, that a board still has a strong connection to our superintendent. What happens if the superintendent does not agree with the Minister’s direction yet still works for the Sahtu, and if the Sahtu does not feel that the direction of the Education department is going the way they want to go, and they’re directing their superintendents to do something else may be very radical? That’s what they want to know.

That’s my one comment. I mean, I have read the Minister’s statements. There is a little bit of a leap of faith here. There is some trust here, but like my colleague says, 10, 15, 20 years down the road, we don’t know the interpretation, and if the interpretation of what we’re talking about today and what the Minister is saying, that’s it and then that’s it. Because we know that, over the years, interpretation changes. Different players come into place. Just as when we negotiate our land claim, the spirit and the intent of some of those clauses have changed with the different players and today we get different interpretations, so you’ve got to pull out the old files and say is this what you meant when you’re sitting across the table and you agreed to this clause. That’s what we have to not to always go back to that. That’s what I’m saying.

The other one, before I close, is the Minister, in his comments, says that overall this bill will improve our education system. I guess it’s a matter of, again, interpretation. I’m not too sure how it will improve our education system. That’s a pretty vague statement. It’s kind of… It doesn’t say too much. I just want to say, what do you mean by improving our education system? We always want to attract the best and the brightest and the most culturally driven type of superintendents in our education system. Well, our Minister knows how much work we have to do in that. So, what does he mean by that? I guess it’s too vague for me, how he’s going to improve our overall education system. So, I am looking forward to hearing what the Minister has to say. Mr. Chair, those are my comments.

In summary, I want to say that the reporting has to be clear; it has to have a strong foundation because you’re dealing with a political body, which is a community chair to be voted by everybody. That’s a political body. They fight for our people in the community and we’re the ones that go to the regional meetings and give direction to the superintendent. The superintendent has the…(inaudible)… The Minister is right; they have the Education Act they have to follow. In the chair sometimes we want to do something radical to improve the education of our children, and they have to know that they cannot be in conflict if the board says something and the Minister’s staff say something else. The department can always fall back on, it says in the agreement here. It’s a very greyish area, I would say. The easy answer says, well, you have to follow that. This is it. Without any type of, I don’t know, they may be tired, they don’t have any discussion, they have lots of things on their plate. That’s what I’m looking forward to, especially from small communities, small regions. I think it could work.

As my superintendent is okay with it, my chair is going to know that as long as we don’t lose that relationship with our superintendent and not have the government, in the future, come down and say, too bad, you signed it already. We have history amongst our people of these things happening, so we want to be very careful. That’s what I want to say. I’m not going to oppose the bill; I just want to say, those are my concerns. I support the Minister and the bill. Maybe a good preamble should go to that. Anyhow, that’s it, Mr. Chair. Thank you.