Of course, that report is due any day. It’s a bit of a chicken and egg thing here. I

think we’re talking about cost of living and so on for our people. Is there the flexibility, should the report confirm what we have hired experts to tell us, and I assume it would, that we would have the capacity to get going on that legislation pronto?

I believe I’ve heard our Premier say repeatedly that this is a priority to get these recommendations from our country’s best and pursue them quickly, so I guess I would ask the Minister if he would, the week after the report comes out, if it does confirm an energy efficiency act, that he would be prepared to come forward and seek very expeditiously the resources required to get that legislation in place.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Beaulieu.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Perhaps I could get some support in responding to that from the Premier.

Thank you, Minister Beaulieu. Premier McLeod.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I can confirm to the Member that this will be a priority. As we’ve laid out the timetable, the government will be preparing a response to the recommendations of the Energy Charrette report, and at that time, for those recommendations that are accepted, we will identify the sources of funding accordingly.

Thank you, Premier McLeod. Mr. Bromley.

That’s all I had on this page. I appreciate that response. I guess the lead on this is transferring to this Minister next April 1st , as I

understand it, but I will look forward to that and moving forward with whatever our priority recommendations are.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Directorate, operations expenditure summary, $11.874 million. Mr. Dolynny.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to get back to what I was speaking about earlier regarding the occupational health and safety. Just if I am getting this clear, we are not wanting to do a contractor management system which is pretty much status quo in every other province in Canada, and again I didn’t get a chance to look at unedited Hansards, but we don’t want to leave companies

out in the cold. That’s what I’m getting. So, I guess we are okay. From what I’m hearing, we’re okay to lower our standards on safety and it’s okay to put people at risk because we don’t want to put people out in the cold here. We want to roll the dice with the taxpayers’ money, because the courts have already told us we have been doing that already. So, am I getting the clear picture here from the department?

“We are working towards something; we don’t want to leave people out in the cold; it’s okay that we’re going to roll the dice with taxpayers’ money; with every court challenge we are going to have a failure.” Again, these are not my words. These are words of courts and judges. I can provide copies and transcripts if the department wants them. We are doing all this because we don’t want to put companies on out in the cold. Is that the genre? Is that the response from the department? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Minister Beaulieu.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. No, that’s not what we’re saying. Safety is still an important part of our work. We are not going to abandon all of the safety programs or anything we have in place for safety. That’s not what we’re saying. What we are saying is, if we develop hard rules saying that individual contractors have to have certain types of specific safety certifications in order to be on our jobsites today, then we will have eliminated the majority of people that are doing contracting in the Northwest Territories today.

So what we are doing is we are working with industry to roll out this process and determine what is acceptable for the government and what’s acceptable for industry and the contractors, and we are going to come up with something that will prevent the issues that we have encountered in the past.

The Member is correct; we had received a couple of hefty fines on safety issues and we’re not interested in continuing to pay those types of hefty fines as well. We’re not gambling with taxpayer dollars, but taxpayers are the ones who would be adversely affected if today we were to make this rule and we eliminated half of the industry in the Northwest Territories from working in the Northwest Territories and from working for the government. That wouldn’t be wise either.

What we are trying to do is we are moving forward in a safe manner and trying to get certification off of everyone, safety certification of everyone that is going to work for us. I am just saying we can’t make that decision today. We will move into that decision once we are comfortable that the majority of the contractors…and a large majority of the contractors that have consistently done work for the GNWT are certified. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I am listening to the Minister’s reply. I am not sure I agree 100 percent. You know, it is government’s job to set that bar. We set it with legislation, we set it with regulations, so why wouldn’t we set it for safety? I don’t get it. What makes safety the Achilles heel of trying to do what’s best for everyone that’s involved with the government in terms of making sure that we are compliant, even ourselves? I don’t get the fact that we are lowering those expectations because we don’t want to leave companies out in the cold.

I can assure the Minister, if the government sets the bar and says these are the minimum requirements you have to apply to a jobsite, to apply for a construction contract, to build a road, I can assure the government, I can assure the Minister companies will comply. There are programs out there that can meet those standards. We just don’t know what those standards are because we don’t set any standards. That is the concern, Madam Chair.

This is a very unorthodox way of doing business. This is a very unsafe way of doing business, and quite frankly, I can only expect we are going to be finding ourselves in the courts and getting tongue lashed by court judges, Territorial Supreme Court judges, saying, “Where is your safety program? Where is this culture of safety?”

Again, I am going to leave it at that. The Minister has responded to my concern. I just think that we’re failing, and until such time as we set that bar, as our duty is and is incumbent on the people we serve. To do otherwise is sacrilege. Sorry. Thank you, Madam Chair.

We are not lowering the bar. That’s not what we’re doing. We have an obligation to continue to be in the business of constructing public infrastructure for the Government of the Northwest Territories. What we are saying is that if – I am going to repeat myself – if we were to put in a rule today that eliminates most of the contractors, it just would not be wise.

At the same time, we’re not dropping all the safety programs here. We are on site. We are saying individuals who have had safety plans, any large projects, any renovations, any opening of older buildings that we are expecting asbestos, as an example, we want to make sure that our staff who are going to be on site are trained in those areas. It’s not like we have thrown all the safety rules out until everybody has been notified and everybody has been registered to be considered safe. We are moving through the process with safety in mind, and at the end of the day we are hoping that we have the majority of the contractors that wish to do work for the Government of the Northwest Territories have some sort of safety certification and we move forward from there. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Beaulieu. Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I move we report progress.

---Carried

I will now rise and report progress. Thank you, Minister Beaulieu. Thank you to the Sergeant-at-Arms. If you could please escort the witnesses from the Chamber.

Good afternoon. Item 21, report of Committee of the Whole. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Do I have a seconder? Mr. Menicoche.

---Carried

Item 22, third reading of bills. Madam Clerk, orders of the day.

Thank you, Madam Clerk. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until Monday, March 9th , at 1:30 p.m.

---ADJOURNMENT

The House adjourned at 2:46 p.m.