Thank you, Minister Ramsay. Continuing on with questions on the court services activity, I have Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. First of all, let me thank my good colleague Ms. Bisaro. I was worried I was the only one who had an issue with this particular vehicle and I thought her questions were well thought out to the issue.

I’ve had grave concerns about a $65,000 vehicle just to drive a judge around in luxury, because we want to make sure that they don’t feel the bumps on the way to Behchoko. I don’t think there’s any vehicle you could drive to Behchoko without feeling the bumps, but in all seriousness, the ultimate answer here is so they can ride in comfort.

Let’s start off with not the hypothetical of the eight- person vehicle. How many people actually go to Behchoko on the court process? I mean, we don’t

put the prisoners in there with the judge. I mean, for shame we wouldn’t want that. So, let’s be very clear on this. How many people in that actual vehicle would be driving to Behchoko in a normal circumstance? Not the one time we max out all eight seats, but the normal circumstance. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The court party is required to travel to communities to hear court matters, and in some cases road travel is the most economical and logistical way to travel. All circuits range from three to five days in duration and, in the case of Behchoko, the vehicle accumulates between 600 and 1,000 kilometres per week. There are between five and eight staff who travel on these circuits and are required to bring all items required to conduct court, such as files for court, hard of hearing equipment, interpretation equipment, CCTV equipment, laptops with portable printers, portable defibrillators, personal items for staff for the day and also winter clothing during the winter months, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, it sounds like we should buy them a moving van, not a luxury leather Denali Suburban, who knows? I mean, let’s be honest. Maybe the Minister can explain why a Ford Escape that holds four or five people in there, or even a four-do

or pickup couldn’t do this. It would

certainly come at half the price for the occasion of driving to Behchoko. We’re not even getting into this yet about the fancy $65,000 vehicle sitting at the courthouse probably doing nothing during the day while one is on its adventure on its way to Behchoko. I’m curious what the Minister has to say about that. Thank you.

In order to conduct the work of the sheriff’s office, it’s vitally important that they have vehicles to ensure that they can carry out their duties and in this case they need a vehicle of this size and of the nature, and as I mentioned earlier, if the one vehicle is in Behchoko, the sheriff’s office here in Yellowknife could utilize the vehicle for transport to the airport, picking up from the airport and also the execution of seizures and the ability for the vehicle to tow a boat or other pieces of equipment and that is why it’s important that it’s a vehicle of this type.

As I mentioned to Ms. Bisaro, and I know the Member mentio

ned Denali, it’s not a luxury vehicle.

It doesn’t have all the bells and whistles on, and it won’t. It’s a vehicle that’s a good size and with capabilities to ensure that the sheriff’s office can conduct its business in a safe manner. Thank you.

How many times did the court party go to Behchoko last year?

I’m starting to wonder how

this is germane to the question about a vehicle, Mr. Chairman.

Well, Mr. Chairman, I mean, if he’s

saying they need this vehicle, this luxury vehicle to sit in the fleet at the courthouse or can go to Behchoko, I am curious how often it’s used. But keep in mind, it’s not just one vehicle, it’s two that they have in their fleet. We’re going to get to the second one in a second that sits on standby so they can travel in great comfort. So, how many times did the court party go to Behchoko last year? It’s a good question.

I’m not sure if the Member

was listening earlier when I said it accumulates between 600 and 1,000 kilometres per week. I will get the number of times the vehicle travelled out to Behchoko, and we also have to remember, Mr. Chairman, that these vehicles are utilized also to transport juries when needed, and again, it’s very important that the sheri

ff’s office have this type of

equipment to carry out their jobs. Thank you.

Well, it’s a shame that the Minister

is so ill-prepared to answer this question because I think it’s germane to the problem, which is if it’s only travelling once or twice a week in 52 weeks, that tells you that maybe

– again I wish I had the number

before me;

he doesn’t seem to want to share it or he

doesn’t have it – that if it even goes twice a week, that means it’s sitting in Yellowknife three days a week. I not only mention that, I spent a lot of time talking about the second vehicle. So, the second vehicle has to be so large to tow a boat, for example. So you’re telling me that that seizure, call it a boat or whatever the case may be, couldn’t wait a day or until the evening to be done, which could probably be done by a smaller vehicle. I have yet to find something that, say, a small Ford Escape or a small four-door pickup truck that could carry people, and the final point is it’s also to travel juries. Well, it’s been my experience that juries aren’t made up of eight people, so I don’t know how you’d have an eight-person vehicle, luxury vehicle by the way, plus five to eight people in it, plus the jury. The math doesn’t add up; the story doesn’t add up. So, can we get some facts on how many times it went to Behchoko last year, because I think it’s important.

The next question will about the other vehicle. Thank you.

When that vehicle transports the court party, and there’s a court circuit in the community of Behchoko, its occupants are in the community usually between three and five days. They require transportation while they’re in the community, and the vehicle is a very important part of the sheriff’s office and their ability to carry out their work. The sheriff’s office conducts seizures of assets across the Northwest Territories and they are required to transport them to secure storage. This

can occur in any community within the Northwest Territories and the sheriff’s officers travel via roadway whenever they can to keep the costs of travel down, and a heated cargo area is required if some items can’t be exposed to the elements. The vehicle must have a towing capacity to move items that could be seized which, as I mentioned, could include a boat, snowmobiles, trailers or personal watercraft. You can’t tow those with a smaller vehicle. Thank you.

Well, I hate to call the Minister wrong, but he’s wrong because I did it last week. I towed a big boat with my vehicle and it’s a small vehicle. It’s not as fancy as the $65,000 luxury vehicle they want for the sheriff’s office to drive the judges around and it doesn’t ride as smooth as an Audi, but I’ll tell you my vehicle did it. So, I still haven’t got to the answer of how many times did the vehicle go to Behchoko last year and the Minister doesn’t have it, he just wants to cite platitudes, saying, well, it goes three to five times. But we don’t really have a real answer, because I think that’s important when going to the next question, which is: How often is that vehicle used, the one that’s left behind. I think Ms. Bisaro very astutely picked it out, which is: Is that busy running to Tim Horton’s? Is that busy maybe serving a summons which only is a piece of paper and a cup of

coffee, really? I mean, it’s not driving court parties

around town so we need a full-sized vehicle, a $65,000 vehicle sitting at the courthouse just in case we might need it to run someone to the airport. Why not make two runs to the airport?

When I had invited the mayor, the old mayor of Edmonton, to Yellowknife, I made a comment in saying, “Yes, Yellowknife suffers from rush minute,” and he laughed for about 20 minutes. “Because we’re so small,” I said, “everywhere is about five minutes away.” So, we don’t need the second super- sized vehicle just to drive a sheriff around so they can serve a summons. I mean, it just seems like poor management and a little bit on the gluttony side of ourselves. I mean, we only really, from the sounds of it, could barely justify one, Mr. Chairman.

So, perhaps the Minister could go back and answer the honest question, which is: How many times did it go to Behchoko last year? I don’t know why they haven’t answered this question and how do we go forward without knowing t

his. I don’t know why

they’re asking for $65,000 without being able to answer that question. Thank you.

A safe assumption would be, and it would vary from month to month, depending on what month of the year you’re talking about, but an average of at least twice a month the court party travels from Yellowknife to the community of Behchoko. They’re there for three to five days, at least twice a month, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Ramsay. Committee

, we’re on court services,

infrastructure

investments, $867,000.

Does committee agree?

Mr. Hawkins, I’ll allow

another question on this activity as long as it’s nothing to do with the sheriff’s vehicle. We’ve exhausted all information on that one. Go ahead, Mr. Hawkins.

Well, debate is being stifled very quickly then. I’d like to know how many times the other vehicle is used and what type of services the other sheriff’s vehicle is using. So I’m staying away from the specific on the $65,000, but it’s important to unders

tand what it’s being used for.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. I will give you some latitude on the other vehicle. Minister Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We will get the Member the detailed information on what the other vehicle is used for. I will just mention again the cost of the vehicle at $65,000 is not excessive for this type of vehicle and it is not certainly a luxury vehicle, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

I’m not sure it’s worth questioning

anymore. The

information will come. We all know…

What do we have? We have five days left in the Assembly. I’m sure it will show up on my desk on October 9th . It’s really disappointing. To say that it

travels to Behchoko now from three to five days a week to at least twice a month, that tells me… It just doesn’t tell me it’s needed. I think I’d like to move a motion to delete it. I think that this is a super-sized vehicle this department and this section doesn’t need. If they need one, keep one in your fleet but you don’t need two super-sized suburbans sitting there most of the time gathering dust. They are some of the most expensive vehicles to drive anyway. Anybody who’s got one will tell you that you get almost zero gas mileage out of that thing, so we’re not only buying a super-sized vehicle, we are buying an inefficient one. If it’s that important, we should be driving them in a big bus. I’m not suggesting buying a school bus, but I am suggesting we find a different way to do this business. It wouldn’t be unrealistic, Mr. Chairman. That’s the fact. I’ll leave it at this: I think it’s a terrible waste. I would prefer a policy that forces us down to at least one vehicle and a small Escape. I can tell you that even delivering summons, little pieces of paper, they don’t need something more than a Toyota eco car or something like that to do those particular jobs. This is just a terrible expense. The reason it continues is because it’s continued. People got used to a big vehicle and the enjoyment of it. That’s where I will leave it. They like the big car because they want to be important, I guess.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. I will allow Minister Ramsay to have a final comment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have a duty and an obligation to ensure that our staff and the duties that they carry out on behalf of the residents of the Northwest Territories each and every day are done and conducted in a safe manner. These vehicles are required to ensure that the sheriff’s office can conduct its business in a safe manner. I don’t think we should be underscoring the important work the sheriff’s office does on behalf of all residents here in the NWT. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Hawkins, you’ve got some time left. Okay, thank you. Committee, we are on pages 54 and 55, court services, infrastructure investment $867,000. Does committee agree?