Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I said earlier today about the agricultural policy, this is another topic that has been on the agenda of the Government of the Northwest Territories either in the forefront or on the backburner for many, many years, the idea of an ombudsman for the Northwest Territories. It was certainly something that was discussed by many, many candidates over the years in candidates’ forums and on election platforms.

We are here today to make a decision on a motion to ask the government to move forward with the establishment of an ombudsman’s office. I think that the success of this office is going to be largely dependent on a few things, and I think that the detail in terms of the parameters of what this office would actually look at is very important, because when you think of the 42,000 people in the Northwest Territories who in their day-to-day life have some contact with the GNWT, I think that the myriad and scope of issues that people may have with the government could be quite extensive. I mean, everything from staffing complaints to contracting complaints to student financial. I mean, we just think about all the scope of issues that we deal with as MLAs every day, and so how a complaint or a concern gets elevated to the level of being heard or investigated or responded to by a statutory officer such as an ombudsman, I think that has to be very clearly laid out, and I think Members have explained here a little bit about how the establishment of an ombudsman is not going to affect the relationship between MLAs and constituents and MLAs being the go-to person for people and constituents when they have concerns.

I’m not exactly sure how all of that is going to work out, but if it is wide open with no parameters, no guidelines, I mean, the sheer volume of issues or inquiries or complaints that an office like the ombudsman could necessarily deal with would mean that it would be so powerful and require so

much resources and so much staff to be effective that that’s a concern. I think we have to, moving forward, be clear about what’s the pathway, what’s the process for a person, an individual who has a grievance to get their issue to the level of an ombudsman, because I think there are many other opportunities before that which people can access to have their concerns met.

I agree with what the other Members are saying here today about it’s hard to take on the government and win. It is a David and Goliath situation. I’ve been a big proponent of transparency and accountability in government. Anybody who’s been around the North for very long will know that I took on a very big challenge in the area of transparency and accountability at one time, and it was hard, and I remember at the time thinking, there’s the Premier and there’s God, and there’s nobody in between to appeal to, or there’s the courts, and that’s about it. Unless you are very, very well resourced, court is not an option. I don’t want people to feel despair in their dealings with the government. I don’t want them to feel like it’s a hopeless or a helpless situation when they cannot get answers to the issues and the concerns that they have, so I think that the idea of the office of an ombudsman is a good idea.

Now, an Ontario ombudsman has been here and has talked to a lot of the Members and made quite an impression obviously. Other jurisdictions have ombudsmen, so we’re not inventing the wheel here. This is not a foreign concept in democracy and democratic government, but there is one thing that’s a bit unique in the Northwest Territories and that is I don’t think very many places in Canada you could know every one of your constituents and actually run into them on any given day. I mean, we are very close to… I mean, when I was the Minister of Health and Social Services, I’d have people call me at home to tell me that their washer and dryer had broken down. I mean, we are very close to our people, and I think that that sets us apart and makes us a bit different, and I don’t want the office of an ombudsman to change that relationship where people feel our constituents, other people’s constituents. I don’t want to lose that approachability that we have as MLAs to respond to the concerns of our constituents, and so I think that, first and foremost, it would always be better if we could come to them.

I also want to say that I don’t think that putting in an ombudsman office should be any affront to the good folks who work in the public service, because again, as a very experienced Member in this Legislature, I want to say that I have had good success with the people who serve us in the departments and the Ministers who represent those departments and those activities. I think that, for the most part, people want to respond, they want to be fair, they want to provide good service to the

residents of the Northwest Territories. But there are those occasional instances where it becomes impossible, as an MLA, to solve the problem, and other Members have referred to those experiences that they’ve had as well.

I can think of some situations over the years where the person who has been, I guess, affected by a government decision has tried to explain it, has tried to lay it out. A lot will depend on their ability to communicate their issue, and then for an MLA to be able to unravel the layers and the complexity and the knowledge that it would take to understand the situation and actually say, yes, there’s an issue or there isn’t. It would be very, very challenging, and there are those cases, and I think those are the kinds of cases that could go to an ombudsman.

I am going to support the establishment of the office of an ombudsman. At the end of the day, no matter how much power we give that office, it will still be up to us as legislators, and we will make final decisions. I’m a little bit concerned that we sometimes, well, we’d have to have a very respectful relationship.

Another thing, and this is very kind of, like, right down to the brass tacks, a lot will depend on who is in that position, and it has got to be somebody who understands and respects the various roles that people play in a government like ours. It can’t be somebody that’s got an axe to grind or a chip on their shoulder against the government. I’m just talking very candidly here, but it’s going to have to be somebody who has a respectful understanding of all the players and where we all fit into the scheme of things here, because if you had the wrong person in a role like this, it could get kind of out of hand, so I think it would need to be a person that would be very, very carefully chosen for a position like that.

Sometimes we do turn things over to independent statutory officers, independent commissions that review salaries, or boundaries commissions and that, and then they come back with their recommendations and we have handed off the authority to deal with things and then we pull back because we don’t want to respond to whatever those findings are. I think that that whole give and take in the relationship with an ombudsman office has to be clearly laid out, and I think it could be successful, and I will support the motion.