Good afternoon, colleagues. Item 2, Ministers' statements. Minister of Environment and Natural Resources.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Government of the Northwest Territories has made a commitment in its mandate to develop a territorial climate change strategy and I wanted to tell Members about the work that is underway. As you know, climate change is occurring at an accelerated pace in the Northwest Territories. We have no choice but to be leaders in addressing and adapting to the impacts of climate change in our communities.

The Northwest Territories is warming at a rate four to five times faster than global averages and this is causing significant changes to the natural environment. These changes include: thawing and degradation of permafrost; shorter winters; longer and drier summers; changes in wildland fire patterns; shrinking sea ice; and increased coastal erosion. This is resulting in impacts on species, ecosystems, water quality and quantity, the health and well-being of residents, Aboriginal cultures, infrastructure, buildings and some economic activities.

Risks to economic, social and cultural values in our communities will intensify if climate change continues to affect our ability to maintain our traditional pursuits and lifestyles. Mr. Speaker, climate change mitigation and adaptation, the high cost-of-living and reducing our territory’s reliance on diesel-generated power are key priorities for the government and we are actively working on climate change at a national and territorial level.

The Government of Canada is developing a pan-Canadian framework on clean growth and climate change. Four federal-provincial-territorial working groups were established to begin implementation work. The NWT is participating in all four groups, working on adaptation and climate resilience, mitigation opportunities, carbon pricing mechanisms and clean technology, innovation and jobs.

The Department of Environment and Natural Resources is developing an NWT Climate Change Strategic Framework. This framework will act as a road map in our efforts during the next five to 10 years as we continue to deal with the impacts of climate change. It will identify ways the NWT can contribute to national emission reductions and benefit from investments in clean energy, adaptation and low-carbon infrastructure.

The Department of Public Works and Services is leading the development of an Energy Strategy. A key objective of both of these strategic initiatives is reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. As a result, ENR and PWS are coordinating joint public engagement on energy and climate change issues.

Engagement on the Climate Change Strategic Framework and the Energy Strategy will involve a series of workshops and regional public information sessions starting at the end of October.

ENR has developed fact sheets and a backgrounder to help inform residents and interested stakeholders prior to holding these workshops and community public information sessions. Mr. Speaker, the framework will be developed in partnership with NWT residents and key stakeholders. It will rest on three key pillars: knowledge; resilience and adaptation; and economy, innovation and emissions.

It will better prepare the NWT to adapt to climate change impact by improving monitoring, planning, coordination and implementation. The Framework will build on existing strategies and initiatives that include significant public engagement and input, and explore key linkages between the Climate Change Strategic Framework and the Energy Strategy. The Energy Strategy will focus on energy supply and use in the NWT, including electricity, renewable and alternative energy, heating, transportation and energy efficiency. Development of the Climate Change Strategic Framework and the Energy Strategy will complement each other to ensure economic, social and cultural needs are considered without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their need.

Topics for discussion at workshops and public information sessions will include: building knowledge of climate change impacts and opportunities; identifying priorities for monitoring and risk assessments; finding ways to increase resilience and adaptive capacity to withstand climate change impacts; improving energy use and supply in communities; reducing greenhouse gas emissions and cost-of-living; exploring carbon pricing and making meaningful contribution to national and international efforts to reduce emissions. I look forward to thorough and meaningful engagement in the coming months. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Ministers' statements. Minister of Public Works and Services.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, transitioning away from expensive fossil fuels for home heating and electricity generation will be critical to reducing the costs of living for NWT residents and protecting the NWT environment, but it will take time, innovative approaches and continued investment. I would like to update Members on some of the work that Public Works and Services is doing this year to support the use of energy efficient technologies, as well as increase the production of renewable and alternative energy in the NWT.

The department will be undertaking several key initiatives this year as we strive to make energy in the NWT more sustainable.

We are developing a new Ten-Year Energy Strategy to guide our long-term approach to energy, a strategy to address the energy security and affordability, as well as address the environmental impacts of energy in the NWT. This new strategy will focus on energy efficiency, as well as on renewable and alternative energy.

To inform this strategy, the Departments of Public Works and Services and Environment and Natural Resources will partner to host a number of regional public engagement sessions in the coming weeks. We will ask questions and listen to suggestions about how we will deal with issues concerning energy and concerning climate change.

The GNWT will host regional engagement sessions in Fort Simpson, Inuvik, Norman Wells, Fort Smith, Hay River and Yellowknife. We will bring in stakeholders from surrounding communities and provide venues in which community voices can be heard. We will also host open houses in each of these centers so that the general public may ask questions and provide feedback.

I am pleased to announce that Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada is our partner in these engagement sessions, and have contributed $250,000 to help us fund this initiative.

The GNWT has also been in discussions with Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada about securing additional funding to support and deliver other energy initiatives. These initiatives include LED lighting upgrades, solar panels on public housing in Inuvik, and a combined heat and power pilot project in Fort Simpson.

Mr. Speaker, the GNWT has made a commitment in its mandate to continue to investigate and implement renewable and alternative energy solutions to replace diesel. While working towards a new long-term strategic direction for energy, we continue to undertake many initiatives to support efficiency, as well as renewable and alternative energy projects.

One of those initiatives in Aklavik has the GNWT working with the Northwest Territories Power Corporation to install a special high efficiency variable speed generator combined with 40 kilowatts of solar power to reduce the community’s dependence on diesel for electricity.

The department is also assessing the feasibility of installing a large wind turbine project in Inuvik. This project, up to four megawatts in size, has the potential to displace up to 5,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas in our largest thermal community.

The Department of Public Works and Services is also finding ways to reduce electricity costs in thermal communities. A tender was recently awarded to a northern Alberta supplier for the supply of liquefied natural gas to Inuvik. This replaces the supply of LNG from southern BC, allowing us to increase shipments and reduce transportation costs, displacing more diesel fuel and reducing the cost of power generation to government by $300,000 to $400,000 each year.

Mr. Speaker, we also continue to focus on energy efficiency and conservation throughout the NWT. This year we are providing the Arctic Energy Alliance with $3.5 million to deliver energy programs to residents, business and governments. The LED swap out project will distribute 10,000 LED light bulbs in thermal communities this year, providing residents with an energy-efficient and cost-saving alternative to traditional light bulbs. Households that receive the bulbs will save an average of about $300 annually, and the project will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by about 380 tons per year.

The GNWT has also made a mandate commitment to work with our partners in the federation and in the territory to implement the Canadian Energy Strategy. Public Works and Services is actively involved in this work; in particular, participating in the Pan-Canadian Task Force on reducing diesel in remote communities. Another of our mandate commitments is tasked with exploring solutions to reduce diesel fuel and the use of 300 off-grid communities throughout Canada. We know that part of finding those solutions is to partner with stakeholders here at home. A Pan-Canadian seminar reducing diesel in remote communities will be held in Winnipeg this November, and I am pleased to report that the Public Works and Services has invited the Arctic Energy Alliance, the NWT Power Corporation, and representatives from seven NWT Aboriginal governments to join us and with stakeholders from across Canada at this meeting.

Mr. Speaker, we are doing a lot of important work to address energy, security and affordability, as well as to address the environmental impacts of energy in the NWT. We will continue to engage with the federal government seeking support to implement our long-term energy strategy. As we develop our long-term approach, we will work closely with our appropriate standing committees, communities and governments and other stakeholders to ensure they address the energy issues Northerners find important. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Ministers' statements. Minister responsible for NWT Power Corporation.

Mr. Speaker, continuing to invest in our power system and looking for innovative approaches to meeting NWT energy needs will be critical to our efforts to reduce the cost-of-living for NWT residents and protect the NWT environment. I rise today to provide an update on how the Northwest Territories Power Corporation, or NTPC, is contributing to that work.

Mr. Speaker, NTPC is a member of the Northern Energy Consortium which is driven to solve electricity-related problems across Canada's North and includes utilities in all three territories. The federal government is matching funds provided by the consortium members to support an industrial research chair in Northern Energy Innovation awarded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada to Yukon College. The chair, Dr. Michael Ross, and the consortium aim to achieve the highest level of efficiency, reliability, cost reduction, and enhanced environmental stewardship standards in the northern electrical industry through applied research and innovation.

Mr. Speaker, one of the areas of this research will be the integration of renewable energy into isolated community grids. NTPC, in conjunction with the GNWT, recently introduced new solar arrays into the local electrical systems in both Wrigley and Fort Liard and in the first five months of operation has already decreased diesel consumption by 8,500 litres.

Mr. Speaker, along with integrating new alternative energy, NTPC continues to invest in its aging infrastructure to ensure safe and reliable electrical systems in all of the communities it serves. This year, $27.8 million is being invested in capital projects including major repairs, engine replacements and overhauls, and maintenance. One of the major projects earlier this year was the seven megawatts Snare Falls hydro plant overhaul which was completed in April and was fortunately not affected by the wildfires that burned at the Snare site this summer. Those same wildfires burned one section of the Snare to North Slave transmission line causing several outages for customers in and around Yellowknife. However a safe but quick repair was carried out, minimizing the need to rely on diesel generation.

Mr. Speaker, the past two years have seen increased diesel usage due to low water in the Snare River and I am happy to announce that water levels for 2016-2017 are average in the Snare system. The Bluefish system has also recovered although the Duncan Lake reservoir remains below normal as we approach winter.

Mr. Speaker, NTPC continues to balance safety and cost with meeting expectations of reliability from its customers. However, like utilities across the country, NWT's generating infrastructure is aging and NTPC is feeling the pressures of increases in its own operating costs, which in turn increase the rates customers pay. I think it is important for the public to understand that power rates are not set by NTPC or the GNWT. People have been hearing that NTPC is charging Yellowknife customers a premium to subsidize the operation of the NWT power system; that is simply not the case.

First of all, rates from one electricity zone do not subsidize rates in other zones like the South Slave and thermal communities. Secondly, power rates for all utilities, including NTPC, are regulated by the Public Utilities Board through a fair, thorough and open process that examines how much it costs a utility to generate and distribute power and how much consumers need to pay to cover those costs.

NTPC filed a General Rate Application with the PUB in June seeking rate increases of 4.8 per cent, 4 and 4 per cent respectively for the next three years. These increases cover inflation and are being partially off-set by a Fuel Refund Rider made possible by lower diesel costs. Far from seeking a premium, Mr. Speaker, the latest GRA proposes to charge Yellowknife customers only 98 per cent of the cost of service for 2016-17 and to hold that rate at around a hundred per cent for the next few years.

Not only is Yellowknife not paying a premium, Mr. Speaker, but the GNWT has provided direct subsidies of over $40 million to NTPC in recent years to offset increased costs in the Snare Hydro System. Without that subsidy from government, rates in Yellowknife would already be higher.

NTPC continues to work hard to look for ways to lower costs and to ultimately lower the cost-of-living, Mr. Speaker, and looks forward to participating in the upcoming energy discussion and the subsequent Energy Strategy that will establish principles to guide us as we tackle climate change, manage carbon taxes and our impact on the environment, all the while managing reliability and affordability of electricity. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Ministers' statements. Colleagues, I'd like to draw your attention to the public gallery. I'm pleased to recognize Mr. Erin Weir that's here with us, Member of Parliament for the riding of Regina-Lewvan. He is in Yellowknife to attend some meetings. Welcome to the Assembly. Masi for being here with us.

Item 3, Members' statements. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned yesterday this is an important week for the business community. This week the Yellowknife Chamber of Commerce is recognizing Small Business Week. I have the privilege of being a small business owner and operator myself. Small businesses are the lifeblood of our communities. They reflect the will, resolve and dedication of individuals and families. They are people who have a good idea and want to make things happen in their community, so they go out, relying on their own idea, work hard and make things happen.

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned yesterday, small businesses are at the core of activities that keep our community healthy, active and vibrant. They are the corner store, the coffee shop, the gathering place. They provide the first job for a boy or a girl in their foray into the workforce; the chance of a little pocket money for a student working towards his or her future. If there is a new idea out there being tried for the first time, it's often a small business that's doing it.

I feel fortunate that my riding of Yellowknife North is home to a broad range of thriving small businesses. From artists and authors to bush plane operators; from auto body shops to the NWT's only craft brewery; from tourism operators to naturopathic health providers, a glass recycler and one of the North's oldest retailers, Weaver and Devore. I am fortunate to represent the riding that's home to these businesses, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to single out three Yellowknife North businesses that received awards at the YK Chamber of Commerce business awards gala last weekend. The Small Business of the Year award was given to the NWT Brewing Company. The Breakout New Business award went to Award Communications, and the Customer Service Award of Excellence was awarded to Quality Furniture. These successful businesses and many others are good examples of the spirit of independence, hard work and determination that makes small businesses such an important element of our economy in the North.

Mr. Speaker, the business community is always there for our communities. I ask my colleagues to join me in consciously making an effort to support our local businesses. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Members’ statements. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I wish to speak as a Member for the Nahendeh riding. It is about representing all six communities. Mr. Speaker, Wrigley is facing job losses after being passed over for a highway maintenance contract. Pehdzeh Ki Contractors bid on a contract to do the maintenance on part of Highway No. 1. Unfortunately, they were not successful with their bid on this contract.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately this is not the end of the story as they say. Mr. Speaker, Wrigley was the last community of the Nahendeh tour with the three Ministers in October of this year. As we headed into a meeting the Chief and some of the councillors and community members addressed this concern. Even though the Minister of Transportation wasn't there, that was a prime issue brought forth.

Mr. Speaker, the loss of the highway contract puts five to seven people out of work, this could affect up to 10 families, which is not good at all. Mr. Speaker, this is not about the process, it is about people's lives. It is about working, not social income. What saddened me is how the band found out that they lost the contract; the previous day they had a meeting with some public servants from Yellowknife after setting up a meeting with the Minister. Unfortunately, the very next day they were informed that the contract was awarded without even given the opportunity to discuss it with the Minister.

Mr. Speaker, it was very disappointing that the commitment was made, then it was not. To make it even more disappointing, the Development Corporation had to purchase brand new equipment in order to initiate receiving the previous contract. Mr. Speaker, it was my understanding that there would be a potential of extending the contract at least two to five years, until the equipment was paid off. Unfortunately, this did not happen. So now, not only did they lose their jobs, they also have to foot the bill to pay for this equipment.

The press reported that the Minister was unable to meet due to other work commitments, and communicated this in a letter, but not by phone which could have easily been done. Mr. Speaker, here is a perfect opportunity for the government to do something to help a small community, and they slam the door on them. To even do more damage, the airport contract was brought up at the meeting and the department wanted to discuss it with them, consolation prize so to speak.

Mr. Speaker, if this is the Minister's real understanding at what capacity building was about, he would understand for small communities you need to work harder to get things done. Mr. Speaker, today I will have questions for the Minister of Transportation. Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Member's statement. Member for Frame Lake.

Merci, Monsieur le President. I made a Member statement on 911 emergency services in this House on June 7th and asked some follow-up questions. I thought we were getting somewhere, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs committed to see whether Northwestel could change its current message when people dial that number to at least give the right telephone information rather than a simple recorded message about the absence of any service. The Minister also committed to look at a phased-in approach to implementation of 911.

Last week the new Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs tabled a written follow-up to these commitments. On the good side, the Minister has committed to advertise the fact that there is no 911 service in early 2017, and checked into the Anderson v. Bell court decision as a possible avenue for funding. She also indicated that the lack of 911 service has been brought to the attention of the federal government as a possible area of investment and said that a briefing would be offered to the Government Operations Committee.

However, the Minister also said, "In light of the GNWT current fiscal environment, 911 is not included in MACA's 2017-2018 business plan." To say I was disappointed would be an understatement. What we have here is how the $150 million reduction target has hamstrung Cabinet in introducing the most basic new service designed to protect lives and public safety that now exists in every other part of this country except Nunavut. To say we can't afford $615,000 and $266,000 a year afterwards is beyond belief, Mr. Speaker. Can we afford to continue to put our residents and visitors at risk and roll the dice in terms of liability from our failure to provide adequate services? I will have questions later today for the Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Members’ statements. Member for Deh Cho.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, small business is imperative to the Northern economy. Mr. Speaker, this is Business Development Week and across Canada people are highlighting the contribution that businesses make to our country. Mr. Speaker, independent businesses enhance our community's character, quality and the value of services available to residents. The government distributed a total of $21.5 million in grants and contributions in 2014-2015, almost 20 per cent of that funding went to business and manufacturing support and 17 per cent to business support agencies.

Mr. Speaker, even our smallest communities have local business ventures. Take Kakisa, for example, where Noda Enterprises manages the local store, hotel, gas station, and campground. These services are much needed in the hamlet and offer essentials to residents and visitors. As a territory, we must ensure we support the small business sector and encourage Northern entrepreneurs who have the tenacity and courage to launch an independent business or take on a franchise. Support the entrepreneurs in economic development contributions, the Business Development and Investment Corporation, and sector-specific funding for ventures that develop the arts, agriculture, tourism and fisheries are examples of some of the ways that GNWT offer support to small businesses.

But how well do these programs work? Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to say that funding was distributed in all 33 communities, proving that there's an interest and uptake. SEED funding was distributed across all sectors from mining, oil and gas, to fine and performing arts. But how do we ensure funding is being used as intended and in ways that gives us the most bang for our buck? Mr. Speaker, we're duplicating efforts, we're paying staff to deliver workshops using funds that could be allocated to businesses that offer basically the same service. But how do we measure the effectiveness of our investments? Are we getting adequate feedback from entrepreneurs and small business owners to target funding and other resources?

Mr. Speaker, we have some good programs, we have some great entrepreneurs and the NWT offers some of the best opportunities. How are we making the most of that potential? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Members’ statements. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in August of this year changes came into effect for the Income Assistance Regulations administered by the Department of Education, Culture and Employment. The department changed the amount of both the food and the clothing allowances available to low-income families. Mr. Speaker, the Department refers to the number of people in a household as units. Until the end of July a household included each member in the family counted as a unit for the purpose of food and clothing calculations.

At the beginning of August the new Regulations counted only adults and mature children as units, and left children under 18 out. Take the example of a single-parent family living in Yellowknife with one child; only the parent now qualifies for the food and clothing allowance. That means the amount of money the family as a whole receives from Income Assistance has gone down. The amount of money the parent gets for food has been reduced by $137 a month and for clothing, $37 a month. In this booklet of exemplars provided by ECE, living in Tulita a single parent with two children over six and one under six, her food allowance has gone from $1,286 to $643. For two parents and three children living in Fort Providence, their food allowance has gone from $1,006 to $744. I'll table this document so that Members may see additional detail.

So, no matter the example, the end result is the same, the family is getting less money for food and clothing because income assistance doesn't count children anymore. Mr. Speaker, how are low-income families supposed to get by? Why does the department think children are fed and clothed at no cost? Families have to turn to the federal government for help. Families with income under $80,000 are eligible for the federal government's Child Tax Benefit, paid on a sliding scale. Coincidentally, the federal tax benefit came into effect in July, just a month before the changes to the income assistance regulations. The Minister had made much of the fact that the federal benefit would not be clawed back as income. In reality, the GNWT has offloaded the responsibility for feeding and clothing children onto the federal government. So what, you may ask. May I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement? Thank you.

---Unanimous consent granted

MS. GREEN: Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. So what? Well, first almost a quarter of NWT children live in poverty, 22 per cent. The Canada Child Tax Benefit is supposed to alleviate poverty for these children and low income families, but NWT families on income assistance are being shortchanged. The federal government has given with one hand, and the GNWT has taken away with the other. Poor families are the ones out of pocket. I will have questions. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Members’ statements. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Marci cho, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the NWT Housing Corporation must begin to change the way they do business. Currently, the suite of programs they deliver are not desirable to NWT seniors.

Mr. Speaker, there are very few jobs in the small communities and the people cannot afford to pay house insurance and pay the copayment requirements of the programs. Also, Mr. Speaker, elders in small communities do not have money to leave to their adult children. All they have is their homes. On applying for any substantial programs, the elders must sign a document that encumbers their house for 10 years. They are afraid their houses will go to the NWT Housing Corporation if they pass within those 10 years.

Mr. Speaker, the NWT Housing Corporation must find a way to communicate and advise them that changes were made recently that allows 100 per cent of the outstanding mortgage should the elder pass before full forgiveness. However, Mr. Speaker, if the elder moves into long-term care, the mortgage becomes due and payable and that is still a problem. Mr. Speaker, copayment mortgage house insurance requirements are high deterrents to elders applying for help. Therefore, they continue to live in inadequate houses.

Mr. Speaker, the NWT Housing Corporation must deliver a new program that achieves several goals that are good for the government, the elders, and the rest of the people of the NWT in as far as deferring costs go that would otherwise be a huge burden for future generations. I am speaking of Aging in Place, which, Mr. Speaker, is part of our mandate. For example, if the NWT Housing Corporation was to develop a program that would allow a senior to remain in their home for an additional 10 years versus going into long-term care, it would defer a cost of $1.3 million, double that if the household had two seniors.

Mr. Speaker, right now, the Department of Health and Social Services is looking at a looming issue of how to house all the seniors that must go into long-term care. Moving forward, they are short many, many beds. The program that keeps them aging in their own homes, in their own communities, will defer that cost for years to come. Mr. Speaker, today I will have questions for the Minister responsible for the NWT Housing Corporation to see what she has done towards GNWT's mandate of Aging in Place. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Members’ statements. Member for Nunakput.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, today I talk about the Darnley Bay marine protected area. Mr. Speaker the people in Paulatuk are awaiting a creation of a marine protected area near their shores. Darnley Bay protected area, north of Paulatuk, is proposed to be 2,361 square kilometres, almost half the size of PEI. It would protect species such as polar bears, beluga whales, ringed seals, bearded seals, and important arctic char and migratory bird habitats. Species including octopus, crab, shrimp, krill, cod, herring, capon, and rare kelp beds also contribute to the vast ecological diversity of the area.

Mr. Speaker, the ocean is a grocery store for the people of Paulatuk. Many residents rely on the bay to feed their families and stock their freezers. The ocean is an integral part of their way of life, and protection and management would allow the area to continue to be used as it has been for centuries and would help maintain the health of the Arctic Ocean. I'm pleased to say the people of Paulatuk have been involved since day one, when the area was first proposed by Canada in 2008. At the beginning of talks, Inuvialuit were assured that their rights and benefits would not be closed off in the marine protected area. The new designated area will not include any strict no-take zones that are limited to everyone. Other activities, like dredging in the area around Paulatuk, some shipping, and activities related to national defence and emergency service will also be allowed.

Protecting the area is a high priority as shipping traffic is expected to increase in the Arctic, Mr. Speaker. Darnley Bay also has rich mineral resources and offshore oil and gas potential. The designation would ensure long-term safeguards to the environment, help prevent species loss, and address ecosystem concerns through regulations and management plan.

Mr. Speaker, under the United Nations Convention of Biological Diversity, the federal government committed to protecting 10 per cent of Canada's oceans by 2020, but, in 2014, Canada had fully protected only 0.11 per cent of its oceans against constructive industry. In contrast, nearly 10 per cent of the U.S. and U.K.'s oceans are protected.

Originally, Paulatuk wanted almost four times larger to be designated for protection, but the community still supports the proposed amount. They say a protected area is a very good idea for future and for their children. Mr. Speaker, if established, Darnley Bay would be the second internationally recognized marine protected area in the Arctic, after the Tarium Niryutait Marine Protected Area in the Mackenzie River Delta. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Members’ statements. Member for Hay River North.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we've all heard about NTCL's financial problems. It's been granted creditor protection because it owes over $130 million that it can't pay. Steps are being taken to raise that money. As one such step, NTCL made an application with the Court of Queen's Bench in Alberta to cease the special payments it has been making to top up an underfunded employee pension plan. The plan is only funded to around 80 per cent, with a shortfall of about $22 million. That application is going to be heard by the court on October 26th, next Wednesday.

If NTCL is successful, it appears as though the 622 pension recipients will be the ones to eat that $22 million. If you're one of the eight key employees who NTCL was granted a court order to pay bonuses to, then that shortfall might not hurt you that much. However, it's more likely that if you worked at NTCL recently you were given a temporary layoff notice.

These temporary layoff notices were issued 11 days after Kyle Barsi, NTCL's Vice President of Finance, stated in an affidavit that it is highly unlikely that attempts at restructuring or refinancing would save the company, so he clearly believed that these layoffs would be more than temporary.

Coincidentally, under the Canada Labour Code, employees subject to a temporary layoff are not eligible for severance pay until a layoff becomes permanent. If they become permanent, it's likely NTCL won't be around to make those payments, so employees and their families face the possibility of no severance pay and a reduced pension. NTCL has stated that the existence of the pension plan was a significant impediment to finding a buyer to carry on NTCL's business. Many people I've talked to see this as adding insult to injury, and it sounds a bit to me as NTCL's attempt to justify not living up to its obligation.

I'm aware that NTCL is a privately held company and that the GNWT can't bail out every private company that gets into trouble. However, that doesn't mean that we should do nothing to help the employees who have dedicated their lives to that company. We should be taking steps to ensure that the promise made to the people and to the families of the people who have provided a vital service to the North for generations is honoured, and the government should be working to make sure that this doesn't happen to employees in this territory in the future, as well. I'll have questions for the Minister of Finance at the appropriate time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Members’ statements. Member for Kam Lake.

Mr. Speaker, on the morning of August 10th, an individual escaped custody from the North Slave Correctional Centre and almost immediately this information was in the media, sending the community of Yellowknife into a sense of great unease. Through the commendable efforts of the RCMP, the individual was apprehended three days later, on the morning of August 13th. I applaud the efforts of our officers in “G” Division. They acted with great distinction in resolving this unprecedented incident in a peaceful manner. However, throughout the crisis the response from the Minister of Justice was lacklustre and failed to inspire confidence that this issue was of serious concern to Northerners. On the day of the incident, it was reported that this escape exploited the pre-existing gap in the physical security to facilitate the escape at the Centre and, more specifically, into my constituency of Kam Lake. I was pleased to hear that area used for the escape has been isolated and that necessary improvements are being made. It is unfortunate that it took an incident of this proportion to realize that this security gap existed, and this is a great disservice to our territorial peace officers.

Sheriffs, correctional officers and others put their lives on the line every day for the benefit of Northerners. It's crucial that we provide them with the equipment, training and facilities they need to ensure they can do their job safely and effectively. What our correctional officers go through every day in the course of their duties is something to be admired and not dismissed or trivialized. I'm deeply saddened to see media reports questioning the ability of our correctional officers to do their jobs when, in fact, the issue was with a previously unknown security gap at NSCC. It is up to the Minister to demonstrate his commitment to public safety by ensuring the integrity of our facilities so all Northerners know that this government stands behind our correctional staff.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister directed a critical incident review after this escape took place and now has recommendations to prevent such an incident from ever happening again. I now urge the Minister to release as much information as possible from the review so that my constituents, those who live a stone's throw away from the jail, know that their homes and families are safe. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Members' statements. Member for Mackenzie Delta.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, during this summer in the Delta region we had a lot of rain, similar to the last number of years. It was looking like the widening on the Dempster would not be completed, but, Mr. Speaker, luckily in September we had about three weeks of great weather and the majority of the work was completed.

Mr. Speaker, I'd also like to take this time to thank the Department of Transportation for resurfacing the road between Tsiigehtchic and Wrangling River. Mr. Speaker, this has made the highway much safer. Mr. Speaker, there is a lot more work to be done on this section, but I know it will happen over the next few years as this area is the next in line to be widened through the Building Canada Fund. I will have a couple of questions for the Minister later today. Thank you.

Masi. Members' statements. Member for Sahtu.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I'm going to have questions for the Minister of Finance on the fibre optic project. I understand it was initially started as a two-year project with a one-year extension, so given the fact that this is going to be the last year I'm kind of hoping that the wave of solidarity might be wishful thinking, but I'm going to ask anyway from my side having not experienced yesterday. However, this is a project that is going to be an ownership by this government for the people and at a significant price tab and I'm particularly going to ask questions and get the assurances that there's no liens or encumbrances that is going to be incurred by this government during the transitional phase for non-payment to subcontractors that are providing current services. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Members' statements. Item 4, Reports of standing and special committees. Member for Frame Lake.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. I have the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures Report on the Review of the Establishment of a Mid-Term Review Process.

Introduction

One of the first actions by Members of the 18th Assembly was to task the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures with recommending a process for a public mid-term accountability review. Motion 7-18(1), entitled "Establishment of a Mid-Term Review Process" and carried on December 17, 2015, states as follows:

WHEREAS the Members of the 18th Legislative Assembly have resolved to work together to set priorities and to develop a mandate to guide this government over the next four years;

AND WHEREAS the development of a mid-term review process will provide an opportunity to evaluate progress on implementing the Assembly’s agreed-upon priorities;

AND WHEREAS such a review will also provide a mechanism to evaluate the performance of the Executive Council and standing committees, both collectively and individually;

AND WHEREAS the establishment of a public mid-term review process will demonstrate the commitment of the 18th Legislative Assembly to greater transparency and accountability;

NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the honourable Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh, that this Legislative Assembly conduct a mid-term accountability review of the adopted mandate of the 18th Legislative Assembly, including the performance of the Executive Council and Standing Committees, to take place in the Chamber of the Legislative Assembly prior to the Fall 2017 sitting;

AND FURTHER, that this Assembly refer this matter to the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures to recommend a process, including terms of reference, for such a review and that the standing committee report back to the House with its recommendations during the Fall 2016 sitting.

The committee met 11 times on this matter from January to October 2016, in addition to countless internal discussions with other Members, Ministers, and staff. To the best of our ability, the recommendations in this report represent a positive step in the evolution of consensus government in the Northwest Territories. We look forward to consideration of this matter in the House and by the public at large.

Despite efforts to reach full consensus of committee Members, the recommendations are not unanimously supported. The Honourable Louis Sebert, the Minister Responsible for Public Engagement and Transparency, exercised his right to issue a dissenting opinion. It is included in its entirety in the addendum of this report.

Background and Precedents

The challenge in conducting mid-term reviews in a consensus government is focusing on accountability -- the government's progress on its priorities, and legitimate performance issues -- rather than individual opportunity. This uneasy dynamic has cast a shadow on mid-term reviews since the NWT's first one in 1985. It was conducted entirely behind closed doors, and resulted in a new Government Leader and two new Ministers. The news was delivered in a terse press release with no explanation of the process or Members' reasoning.

It is worth remembering this took place in a different time, when the Government Leader (not yet Premier) had much less sway over his or her Cabinet. Ministers were selected to represent a wide range of regional interests from Fort Liard to Pangnirtung. There was no guarantee this collection of Ministers would pull together as a team; they had little official direction and no mandate letters. The government's overall priorities were vague; the Northwest Territories' consensus system was in an early phase of its development.

Subsequent mid-term reviews, held only twice and in public, were much less dramatic and attempted to add a layer of accountability to our consensus government. Members of the 12th and 13th Assemblies both agreed at the outset of their terms to carry out a mid-term review of Cabinet performance. Both were conducted by the Territorial Leadership Committee, which was then, as now, the forum for selecting the Premier and Cabinet. The mid-term reviews featured extensive discussion of priorities and questioning of Ministers by Regular Members. Neither review resulted in changes to Cabinet membership, but grades from A to F were assigned to Ministers in 1993. No mid-term reviews have been conducted by Northwest Territories Assemblies since the creation of Nunavut in 1999.

Nunavut, however, adopted a mid-term review as a regular feature of its consensus system. Four successive assemblies have conducted the review, which features public questioning of Ministers about priorities, progress and leadership. Confidence of the House was formally affirmed for every Minister but one. In the past two Assemblies, this was done by a secret-ballot confidence vote for each Minister.

Today's Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures has heeded the lessons of history, and recommends a mid-term review process that reflects the goals of the 18th Legislative Assembly, as outlined in the initial House referral motion.

Principles for a New Mid Term Review

The Committee’s next order of business was to set out principles to guide the mid-term review and elaborate on the goals of the process. All process options were considered in light of these principles:

● Accountability to the Legislative Assembly: a consistent, formal mechanism is needed to assess progress on achieving the mandate, demonstrate the responsibility of Cabinet, and make necessary changes.

● Public accountability: a formal mechanism is needed to improve public understanding of the Assembly’s work and demonstrate the accountability of consensus government demanded by voters.

● Flexibility and adaptability: a mechanism is needed to adjust the government’s mandate at mid-term to fit changing circumstances, and in light of what has been achieved.

● Fairness and transparency: the process for assessing the government’s progress in delivering on its mandate, Cabinet’s performance, and committees’ performance, must be fair, consistent, transparent, and evidence-based. Anonymous assessment surveys are not consistent with a fair and transparent process.

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to turn to Ms. Green to deliver the next part of the committee's report. Mahsi.

Masi. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

The Toolbox: Measuring the Government's Progress Priorities of the 18^th Assembly and the Mandate, 2016-2019

New tools recommended by the 17th Assembly and put into effect by the 18th Assembly make it much easier to fairly measure performance of the government and all Members – not just at mid-term, but also at election time. The 18th Assembly’s priorities were developed by Caucus before the selection of Cabinet, with all Members having equal opportunity at all levels of their creation. For the first time, a televised roundtable discussion of priorities took place in the House on December 14, 2015, after a similar private roundtable with leaders of Aboriginal and community governments. The resulting priorities are published and available on the Legislative Assembly’s website, as well as the transcript of the roundtable discussion. These priorities represent the first tool for Members and the public to use in measuring the performance of the government: its actions should advance the 18th Assembly’s priorities, and be consistent with them.

However, a statement of priorities is not a realistic mandate for a government, which must be tempered by consideration of what can be accomplished in a four-year term with the resources at hand. After Cabinet was selected, it was directed to draft a mandate based on the 18th Assembly’s priorities. This draft mandate was publicly discussed, amended, and unanimously approved in the House. It is a statement of goals akin to the platform of a political party. The revised Mandate of the Government of the Northwest Territories, 2016-2019, was then published, re-tabled in the House, and is available on the Assembly’s website. This document serves as the primary tool for measuring the government’s collective performance, and that of the Premier and Ministers tasked with carrying out work in specific areas.

Other Potential Tools

A variety of other tools will be available to assess Cabinet’s performance. The government has committed to public annual reports on its progress in implementing the 18th Assembly’s mandate. The committee recommends that a report be completed by August 31, 2017, and include an assessment of the need for potential changes and additions to the mandate. It should also include Cabinet’s formal assessment of its own performance. Those results will be compared with an evaluation to be produced by the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning, comprised of all Regular Members. The committee evaluation will include consideration of the government’s performance in implementing its mandate, reviews of annual business plans, the government’s responses, and the Cabinet’s collective effectiveness in carrying them out. These two reports should be public and tabled in the House. These are the principal tools for measuring the collective performance of the Executive Council, or “Cabinet,” or “the government,” as it is generally called.

Scope of the Mid-term Review

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures was directed to develop a review that “includes the performance of the Executive Council and Standing Committees both collectively and individually.”

There was much debate over the need to include individual Ministers and standing committees in a mid-term review. The committee considered recommending that individual reviews of Cabinet Ministers (including the Premier), and standing committees not be carried out. Proponents of this view argued that the purpose of the mid-term review is to adjust the mandate if needed, and provide updated public direction to the Premier and Cabinet for the final two years of the Assembly’s term. It was also pointed out that if need be, a Minister’s appointment can be revoked at any time by passage of a motion to that effect in the House. Some considered this method the fairest and most transparent, as voting on this type of motion is public and not by secret ballot. It would not, however, likely be a “free” vote. Cabinet solidarity is sure to be invoked, if only to preserve necessary working relationships. Motions of revocation or non-confidence are rare, of course, but past experience suggests they deepen the normally healthy tension between Cabinet and Regular Members, and undermine future prospects for consensus.

The committee considered processes and the outcomes of a mid-term review without assessing the performance of individual Ministers and standing committees, but ultimately found them lacking when measured against the principles for the review and the instructions contained in the House referral motion.

Most Members noted that a decision not to review individual performance of Cabinet Ministers reduces accountability and diminishes the potential for constructive direction, expression of renewed confidence, as well as possible non-confidence. Moreover, declining to provide an option for evaluating individual performance is counter to the Assembly’s direction to this committee.

Recommendations

Recommendation 1

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that a mid-term review be carried out in the fall of 2017, and that it include a public accountability review of the mandate, and assessment of the performance of the Executive Council, both collectively and individually

Recommendation 2

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that Cabinet formally assess its own performance, that the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning produce its own independent assessment of Cabinet’s collective performance, and that both reports be public and tabled in the House.

Public review and potential amendment of the government’s mandate is properly in the hands of Caucus, Cabinet, and the House, as set out in the Assembly’s process convention. But as noted above, the committee determined that regular House proceedings are not best-suited to a review of the individual performance of Cabinet Ministers.

In the two previous Assemblies that conducted a mid-term review, the forum was the Territorial Leadership Committee, or TLC, also the venue for speeches and selection of the Premier and Cabinet by secret-ballot vote. Members of the current Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures judged that the TLC is not an appropriate venue for the new mid-term review, given the consensus government principle that “Regular Members are not a Cabinet in waiting.” A new forum is needed in which all Members are substantially equal. The committee proposes a new Mid-Term Review Committee allowing full participation of all Members (including the Speaker), enabled by the selection of multiple rotating chairs, and secret-ballot voting so all Members may vote according to their beliefs and conscience.

Recommendation 3

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that a new Mid-Term Review Committee be established, specific to that purpose, with designation of multiple chairs to enable all Members, including the Speaker, to participate fully.

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures further recommends that the Mid-Term Review Committee conduct its review publicly, in the Chamber of the Legislative Assembly.

I'd now like to turn to my colleague Mr. Shane Thompson to continue this report.

Masi. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Tools for Assessing Individual Performance

In addition to the tools mentioned above, various others – all of them public documents – may assist a review of individual Minister’s performance, including:

● Consensus Government in the Northwest Territories: Guiding Principles and Process Conventions;

● Ministerial mandate letters by the Premier;

● Speeches by the candidate for Premier before the Territorial Leadership Committee, December 9, 2015;

● Questions and answers to and from candidates for Premier before the Territorial Leadership Committee, December 16, 2015;

● Speeches by ministerial candidates before the Territorial Leadership Committee, December 16, 2015;

● Hansard excerpts of responses to oral and written questions in the House, and before Committee of the Whole.

These documents, along with performance before standing committees, also enables assessment in areas such as:

1. effective leadership;

2. responsiveness to issues related to the portfolio mandates;

3. ethical conduct, honesty, integrity and impartiality;

4. commitment to transparency and accountability;

5. open, respectful, considerate communication with fellow MLAs;

6. ensure Regular Members are informed of and given opportunity to provide meaningful input in important decisions in a timely and respectful manner;

7. inclusiveness, earning a support the respect of NWT residents by engaging the public, municipal governments, businesses, non-governmental organizations in the volunteer sector seeking their input and advice;

8. work to build and maintain respectful and effective government-to-government relations with Aboriginal governments;

9. work to build and maintain respectful and effective relationships with federal government;

10. engagement, encourage others to give full consideration to different, sometimes opposing, points of view in order to promote informed decision making.

Such fundamental matters as these should not be reviewed solely in a mid-term review after two years in office. They are currently dealt with relatively informally by standing committees or even fireside chats between the Premier and regular Members. While not part of the new mid-term review process, the members of the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures commend Ministers, express desire for more regular feedback to promote productive relationships. We therefore make the following recommendations, Mr. Speaker:

Recommendation 5

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning meet annually with each Minister to conduct an oral performance appraisal similar to those in many workplaces, and for the Ministers to raise any performance issues that they may have with committees. The meetings should be informal, in-camera, with set time limits and strict adherence to openness and fairness.

Review of Standing Committees

A Mid-Term Review of Standing Committee's operation and accountability was considered by Members of the 12th Assembly, but no criteria were developed and no review took place. This may be because of fair and productive review of the standing committee is a difficult and risky task.

Standing committees are appointed in the House by motion and are individually and collectively accountable to the whole Assembly, which also establishes the mandate and terms of reference for each committee. These are set out at Appendix 3 of the Rules of the Legislative Assembly. Notably, the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures include two Ministers; one is a fulltime member, and another is an alternate. Given these factors, the proposed Mid-Term Review Committee would provide the most suitable forum for a public review of standing committees' performances if one is conducted.

Standing committees are generally tasked and review proposed legislation, departmental business plans, budgets, strategies, action plans and how they are implemented in overall departmental performance. Policy initiatives in the implementation plans are reviewed, as described in consensus government in the NWT Guiding Principles and Procedures Conventions. Providing advice to Ministers is a common element of all the work and can be contentious. This is a natural aspect of the job, part of the healthy tension between Cabinet and Regular Members. Standing committee may also call public meetings, issue press releases, seek external advice, and even subpoena witnesses.

The work of standing committee is therefore a key accountability mechanism in consensus government. It's primarily through these committees that Regular Members exercise the responsibility, review and monitor the leadership and the direction of Cabinet and to hold it accountable as set out in consensus government in the Northwest Territories Guiding Principles and Process Conventions. Communities' effectiveness and the effectiveness of a consensus government requires a high level of independence for standing committee. Standing committees select their own chairs and govern their own meetings and procedures. They are largely self-policing with members and chairs holding each other to account. There is a strong incentive to do so because standing committees' performance is critical to Members' daily work. Resignations and removals of chairs are rare, but do occur as personal or performance matters arise. Members believe that this internal accountability is appropriate, practical and efficient.

These considerations loom large in the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures deliberations on how committees' performance might be assessed in a mid-term review. Moreover, Members were unable to envision a public process in the House that would be appropriate, productive and efficient. The committee therefore advises that informal feedback be sought annually from Ministers as outlined in Recommendation 5 as an additional tool for ongoing self-regulation by committee.

Recommendation 6

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommended mid-term accountability review not include the performance of these standing committees collectively or individually. Further, that the standing committee complete internal evaluation annually with informal input from Cabinet as set out in Recommendation 5.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At this point in time, I'd like to pass over the vote to Mr. Beaulieu who will continue.

Masi. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Marci cho, Mr. Speaker. As noted above, the mandate of the Government of the Northwest Territories 2016-2019 was drafted by Cabinet, reviewed in Caucus, and adopted with amendments in the House. The same process should be applied for the mid-term adjustments to the mandate. This work should be completed in the October 2017 Session.

Recommendation 7

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the Mandate of the Government of the Northwest Territories 2016-2019 be revised, if necessary, by Cabinet with input from the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning, reviewed in Caucus and tabled for potential debate, amendment and adoption in the October 2017 session of the House.

The committee is mindful that time in the Chamber is at a premium and that it is in the best public interest to be efficient. The tools recommended for the review were, in part, chosen to maximize information made available to the public and to lay the groundwork for the efficient public proceedings by the Mid-Term Review Committee. Two previous mid-term reviews in the Chamber were long and arduous. Members were each permitted 12 questions for each Minister in the first review and eight questions in the second. In addition, it is only fair that the government and the Ministers know where they stand at the conclusion of the review and that the outcome is clear to the public, and therefore recommend the following procedures and time limits for the proposed mid-term review.

Recommendation 8

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the Mid-Term Review Committee provide that:

1. each Minister starting with a Premier and subsequently in alphabetical order, speak for up to five minutes on his or her performance and leadership of his or her departments, each Member will be permitted to ask up to two questions no longer than two minutes each. Responses will be no longer than two minutes each;

2. the Premier speaks for up to 10 minutes on his overall leadership and performance and the collective performance of Cabinet, each Member will be permitted to ask two questions no longer than two minutes each. Responses will be no longer than two minutes each;

3. rules for the proceedings prohibit signs of approval or disapproval such as table banging and comments such as shame or hear hear during speeches and questions;

4. a confidence vote will be conducted on the overall progress of Cabinet in meeting its mandate in an open forum by secret ballot;

5. confidence votes will be conducted on the overall performance of each Minister in an open forum by secret ballot; and

6. overall results will be announced by the chair on conclusion of the process.

In conclusion, the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures is honoured to present its work on the establishment of a mid-term review process. The committee believes that, by adopting the recommendations above, the Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories will set new benchmarks for accountability and transparency, build greater public trust, and increase understanding of the government’s work on behalf of all residents. The Committee thanks all Members for their input as we worked on this challenging task. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to turn the floor over to Minister Sebert.

Masi. Minister Responsible for Public Engagement and Transparency.

Mr. Speaker, Addendum: Dissenting Opinion of the Honourable Louis Sebert, Minister Responsible for Public Engagement and Transparency, MLA for Thebacha.

Introduction

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures was tasked by Motion 7-18(1), passed by unanimous consent of the House on December 18, 2015, to recommend a process, including terms-of-reference, for a mid-term review and report back to the House during the Fall 2016 sitting. The standing committee has not been able to come to unanimous agreement on a report, with Minister Sebert being the sole dissenter. The Clerks have advised Minister Sebert that it is his right as a member of the committee to submit a minority report.

The report of the standing committee includes seven recommendations, the majority of which contradict the direction as set forth by the motion. This minority report will act as a rebuttal and as an argument for adhering to the directions of the House.

Recommendation 1

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that a mid-term review be carried out in the fall of 2017 and that it include an assessment of the Executive Council, both collectively and individually.

Minority Opinion

The motion clearly states "this Legislative Assembly conduct a public mid-term accountability review of the adopted mandate of the 18th Legislative Assembly, including the performance of the Executive Council and Standing Committees, to take place in the Chamber of the Legislative Assembly prior to the fall 2017 sitting." Recommendation 1 fails to meet the direction of the House for the mid-term review to be an assessment of the mandate, which includes the performance of the Executive Council and standing committees in achieving the goals of the mandate.

Minority Recommendation 1

Recommend that a mid-term review be carried out prior to the fall 2017 sitting, to assess the progress on the adopted mandate of the 18th Legislative Assembly, including the performance of the Executive Council and the Standing Committees, collectively and individually, as directed by Motion 7-18(1).

Recommendation 2

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that Cabinet formally assess its own performance, that the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning produce its own independent assessment of Cabinet's collective performance, and that both reports be public and tabled in the House.

Minority Opinion

Such a process was not included in the mandate and is not directed by the motion. Members of the Executive Council are held to account for their performance in achieving the goals of the mandate and in the management of their respective departments through several means, including appearances before Standing Committees in business plans, legislative reviews and, at request, on specific issues of concern; oral hearings and written questions; main estimates and review in Committee of the Whole. These are tangible, measurable results that do not require self-assessment. If the House is at any time dissatisfied with the performance of the Executive Council or one of its members, a motion of non-confidence can be introduced. It is also a duplication of work to require a written assessment be created before then going into a mid-term review in the House.

Minority Recommendation 2

That recommendation 2 be deleted.

Recommendation 3

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that a new Mid-Term Review Committee be established specific to that purpose, with designation of multiple chairs to enable all Members, including the Speaker, to participate fully.

Minority opinion

This recommendation creates a secondary duplicate committee as the Territorial Leadership Committee already fulfills this function when selecting the Executive Council, as does Caucus when discussing matters of interest to all Members. In the interest of public transparency, efficiency, and openness, the mid-term review should be conducted in the House, with the Speaker presiding, given that the mid-term review is meant to be reviewing process on the adopted mandate of the Legislative Assembly. This recommendation seems to be directed more at assessing only the performance of Executive Council.

Minority Recommendation 3

That the mid-term review be conducted at the opening of the fall 2017 sitting, with the Speaker presiding, and be open to the public as well as publically broadcast, as directed by Motion 7-18(1).

Recommendation 4

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures further recommends that the Mid-Term Review Committee conduct its review publicly, in the Chamber of the Legislative Assembly.

Minority Opinion

This recommendation is redundant, given the express direction of the motion that the mid-term review take place in the Chamber of the Legislative Assembly. It is agreed that it should be public.

Minority Recommendation 4

That Recommendation 4 be deleted.

Recommendation 5

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning meet annually with each Minister to conduct an oral performance appraisal similar to those in many workplaces, and for Ministers to raise any performance issues they may have with committees. The meetings should be informal and in camera, with set time limits and strict adherence to openness and fairness.

Minority opinion

Notwithstanding that in-camera meetings are by default not open, this recommendation goes far beyond the scope of a mid-term review and the directions in the motion. It is an unnecessary exercise given that Ministers meet with the Premier to review their progress on mandate commitments and overall performance, and the Premier meets at the request of the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning in fireside chats to discuss openly any issues of concern.

Ministers regularly appear before committees in business plans, review of legislation, and, at request, on issues of pressing concern. A mid-term review allows for the House to assess the performance of Ministers in achieving the goals of the mandate, and motions of non-confidence in the House can be introduced at any time against a Minister who is deemed to be underperforming.

Minority Recommendation 5

That Recommendation 5 be deleted as contradictory to the direction of Motion 7-18(1) and the established processes of consensus government.

Recommendation 6

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the mid-term review not include the performance of standing committees, collectively or individually, and, further, that standing committees complete internal evaluations annually, with informal input from Cabinet, as set out in Recommendation 5.

Minority opinion

The House specifically directed that the mid-term review include a mechanism to evaluate the performance of standing committees, both collectively and individually. Seeking informal feedback from Ministers annually is not open nor transparent. Members felt that internal accountability is appropriate, practical, and fairly effective. Standing Committees, as noted in the "Consensus Government in the Northwest Territories: Guiding Principles and Process Conventions," have substantial powers, including the power to call public meetings, seek external advice, and subpoena witnesses. It would be reasonable to expect that the public would be interested in hearing how committees both hold themselves accountable and help advance the priorities of the Legislative Assembly as laid out in the mandate.

That the chairs of each standing committee table a report as part of the mid-term review on actions taken by their committee on advancing mandate priorities.

Recommendation 7

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the Mandate of the Government of the Northwest Territories 2016-2019 be revised, if necessary, by Cabinet (with input from the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning), reviewed in Caucus, and tabled for potential debate, amendment, and adoption in the October 2017 sitting of the House.

Minority Recommendation 7

It is agreed that the Mandate of the Government of the Northwest Territories, 2016-2019 be revised, if necessary, by Cabinet (with input from the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning), reviewed in Caucus, and tabled for potential debate, amendment, and adoption in the October 2017 session of the House.

Recommendation 8

The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the Mid-Term Review Committee provide that:

1. Each Minister, starting with the Premier and subsequently in alphabetical order, speak for up to five minutes on his or her performance and leadership of his or her departments. Each Member will be permitted up to two questions or no longer than two minutes each. Responses will be no longer than two minutes each.

2. The Premier speak for up to ten minutes on his overall leadership and performance, and the collective performance of Cabinet. Each Member will be permitted up to two questions or no longer than two minutes each. Responses will be no longer than two minutes each.

3. Rules for the proceedings prohibit signs of approval or disapproval, such as table banging and comments such as shame or hear hear, during speeches and questions.

4. A confidence vote be conducted on the overall progress of Cabinet in meeting its mandate, in an open forum by secret ballot.

5. Confidence motions will be conducted on the overall performance of each Minister, in an open forum by secret ballot; and

6. Overall results will be announced by the Chair on conclusion of the process.

Minority opinion

There is a duplication of process, as noted previously, in having a mid-term review committee conduct this work. It needs to be noted that motions of non-confidence are only binding when passed by the House, not a committee. Therefore, any vote by secret ballot conducted by the Mid-Term Review Committee will need to be repeated in the House, which are not secret votes.

Therefore, the recommendation proposed here can be interpreted as one meant to embarrass or shame a Minister into resigning without having the knowledge of which of their colleagues lack faith in their abilities -- an issue that does not occur when the vote is by motion of the House. Therefore, any motions of non-confidence, in the interest of timeliness, fairness, and transparency should be through the established process in the House, by recorded vote.

Specifically to each point:

1. It is agreed in principle that the Premier speak for a set amount of time on the overall progress of the government in fulfilling mandate priorities, and each Minister on their overall progress in meeting mandate priorities and fulfilling their mandate letter objectives; however, as noted previously, asking someone to evaluate their own leadership is unnecessary.

Members of the Executive Council should be evaluated on their performance, which includes leadership of their respective departments; however this does not require self-reflection. A record of actions taken, initiatives advanced, mandate priorities fulfilled is more than sufficient to evaluate performance. Any lingering questions should be able to be answered through Members asking for details as part of the questioning envisioned in this recommendation.

It is agreed that each Member shall be entitled to ask two questions of no more than two minutes in length; however, to limit Ministers in their reply to the same amount of time does not enable Ministers to provide Members and the public with a full and comprehensive response. It is agreed with the principle of efficient debate, and to that end, recommend that questions should not be open-ended, overly long, nor on more than one topic.

1. It is agreed in principle that the Premier speak for a set amount of time on the overall progress of the government on fulfilling mandate priorities. It is agreed that each Member shall be entitled to ask two questions of the Premier, of no more than two minutes in length, with answers being no more than two minutes in length. The same objections to evaluating Minister's own leadership listed above apply here.

2. It is agreed that rules for the proceeding prohibit signs of approval or disapproval, such as table-banging and comments such as shame or hear hear, during speeches and questions.

3. It is agreed in principle that a vote of confidence be conducted on the overall progress of Cabinet in meeting the priorities of the mandate. However, this should be done by motion in the House, by recorded vote, as directed by Motion 7-18(1).

4. The direction of the House, as laid out in Motion 7-18(1) is that the mid-term review is to evaluate the performance of Executive Council and standing committees in the context of the mandate. This direction is fulfilled by questioning the Premier and Ministers on their individual actions in advancing the priorities, and by conducting a motion in the House on whether the House retains confidence in the Executive Council to continue. As motions of non-confidence in Ministers can be introduced at any time, if the actions of a particular Minister or Ministers are deemed to be contrary to the will of the House, a motion can then be introduced to remove them from Executive Council.

5. As it is the minority opinion that any confidence vote be conducted by motion of the House, there is no need to have results announced at the conclusion, as the votes are public from the start.

Minority Recommendation 8

It is recommended that the Mid-Term Review consist of the following parts:

1. The chairs of each Standing Committee table a report detailing their Committee's actions in advancing the priorities of the Legislative Assembly as laid out in the mandate.

2. Each Minister, starting in alphabetical order, speak to up to five minutes on his or her progress in advancing the priorities of the Legislative Assembly as laid out in the mandate and mandate letters from the Premier. Each Member will be permitted up to two questions, with each question being no more than two minutes in length on one topic, and each reply being as complete and concise as possible.

3. The Premier speak for ten minutes on the overall progress of the Executive Council in advancing the priorities of the Legislative Assembly as laid out in the mandate. Each Member will be permitted up to two questions to the Premier, with each question being no more than two minutes in length on one topic, and each reply being as complete and concise as possible.

4. Rules for the proceeding prohibit signs of approval or disapproval, such as table-banging and comments such as shame or hear hear during speeches and questions.

5. A motion of confidence be conducted at the conclusion of the questions, waiving the 48-hour notice period by unanimous consent, on the overall progress of the Executive Council on meeting the priorities of the Legislative Assembly as laid out in the mandate. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi for the Report. I now turn over to Member for Frame Lake.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh, that Committee Report 1-18(2) be received and adopted by the Assembly. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Motion is on the floor. Motion is in order. To the Motion. Member for Frame Lake.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker, and thank you colleagues for the hard work that has been done to present the mid-term review process in our report. The path is never an easy one when you're breaking trail. Every option the Committee considered was looked at through the lenses of transparency, accountability and fairness. In more than a dozen official meetings and countless informal discussions, all Members were focused on living up to the directions set out in the referral motion passed by us all in this House. The committee was also very much aware of the promises that we, as Members of the 18th Assembly, have made to the public. We have done our best to live up to your high expectations.

On behalf of the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures, I ask the 18th Assembly to receive and adopt our report. It is important that the public understand what is meant to receive and adopt the report. Once the report is adopted, it will be available for discussion in the House, and this is also an indication the committee has discharged its duties. It does not mean that every, or any, recommendation in the report by the committee or in the dissenting opinion is agreed to for further action by this Assembly. Later today I will give notice of a motion to implement a process for a Mid-Term Review and look forward to that debate later this week. Until then I thank all Members for their input, their work and their support in this very challenging task, and I ask that the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures Report on the Review of the Establishment of a Mid-term Review Process be received and adopted. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Masi.

Sorry, Mr. Speaker, I request that we vote. Thank you.

Masi. To the motion.

Question has been called. I will call upon the Member for Frame Lake if there is any concluding remarks.

Thank you.

There has been a request for a recorded vote. All those in favour, please stand.

Masi. All those opposed, please stand. All those abstaining, please stand. All those in favour, 17; opposed, zero; abstentions, zero. The motion is carried.

---Carried

Masi. Reports of standing and special committee. Item 5, returns to oral questions. Minister of Housing Corporation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have a return to oral question asked by Mr. Blake on Friday, October 14, 2016, regarding power connection to modular housing unit in Tsiigehtchic.

The Northwest Territories Housing Corporation has increased the number of market housing units in small communities to meet the housing needs of critical community workers essential to the governance and safety of our residents, such as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and nurses. In the community of Tsiigehtchic, two new market housing units have been constructed and are ready for occupancy, which include having the necessary utility connections, such as power, needed to operate a home. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Returns to oral questions. Item 6, recognition of visitors in the gallery. Member for Frame Lake.

Masi, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to welcome Mr. John Kidder to the Gallery. I had the pleasure of dining with him last night. He lives in Ashcroft, British Columbia, and he spent the first four and a half years of his life in Yellowknife so he's visiting our community and geting refreshed. Thank you.

Masi. Welcome to the Chamber. Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Item 7, acknowledgements. Since we have gone through a detailed report the chair will call for a short recess. Masi.

---SHORT RECESS

Welcome back to the Chamber, Members. Oral questions. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, today you heard about what is happening in Wrigley with their negotiated contract for the highways. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister please provide the House with the department's definition of capacity building as it pertains to contracts? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Minister of Transportation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Capacity building focuses on developing the skills and knowledge and abilities required to increase community workforce and capacity and also project readiness.

I thank the Minister for his answer. Mr. Speaker, in the Deh Cho Drum, the Minister of Transportation commented: "Since 2005, the department helped build capacity through a range of negotiated contracts." Mr. Speaker, can the Minister please provide the House with some of the training the department offered to help build capacity in Wrigley since this time?

Yes, since 2005, we have done a number of initiatives with Wrigley. The contract staff has helped out with marine training for ferry operations in the region and, also, the department has offered air-side vehicle operation permanent training as well as nine-day summer maintenance and nine-day winter maintenance training programs through the Department of MACA.

Mahsi cho to the Minister for his answer. Mr. Speaker, we are in a riding that understands the importance of verbal commitments. Can the Minister confirm that he will honour the verbal commitments made by the department or the senior public servants to this community?

I'm not aware of any verbal commitments made by the department.

Oral questions. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the Minister for his answer. It's very disappointing that we heard very loud and clear at the meeting that there was a verbal commitment, but will the Minister commit to meet with the chief and council to discuss this and other important transportation issues with this community? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister of Transportation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Our department staff have met with the local community on many occasions, and, moving forward, we are always willing to engage with communities that want to discuss opportunities with the department. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, earlier this morning I spoke of an escape at the North Slave Correctional Centre. Mr. Speaker, what corrective actions have been taken to close the physical gap in security measures at the facility? Those questions are to the Minister of Justice. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister of Justice.

Mr. Speaker, I can advise this House that the department and myself took this matter very seriously. A critical incident report was prepared, and I also will be meeting with committee tomorrow evening, I believe. I can give a fuller answer at that time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm sure committee and members of the public are looking forward to that fuller answer. I assume this meeting will be in public so the answer will be available to the public, as they would be in this House?

Mr. Speaker, I don't believe the meeting will be public because we will be discussing certain confidential information that would not be appropriate to share with the public. There are, however, many of the issues around this incident that are already known. I can advise this House that the report, which was quite comprehensive, found that the escapee acted alone, he exploited a gap in the physical security of the building to access the roof of the building; the number of correctional officers on site at the point of escape was appropriate, and proper procedures were being followed at the time of the escape; the area used to access the roof was one the inmates had been using for the past 12 years, since the opening of the facility, without incident. Proper emergency procedures to address the escape were immediately implemented and no changes to those procedures are required.

Mr. Speaker, did this comprehensive review take into account any additional security concerns related to the neighbourhoods in my riding of Kam Lake close to the correctional facility? Was there an assessment done on potential security issues related to the close proximity of neighbourhoods with a correctional facility?

Mr. Speaker, I don't have the report, pardon me. I think the report mainly looked at the institute itself, the walls, the roofs, and so on. Obviously, we are aware that the facility is in the middle of an urban area, so that would be an ongoing concern. I'm not sure if it was addressed specifically in the report, but I can advise this House that we are very aware of the location of this facility, of the possible dangers to the neighbourhood.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Kam Lake.

Mr. Speaker, has the Minister spoken to frontline staff or personally toured the facility to see their daily experiences and the challenges they face and, if not, will the Minister commit to do that so he gets a good sense of what our peace officers go through in their daily lives?

Yes, Mr. Speaker, I did have the opportunity some months ago to go on a visit to the facility. I had been there many times in my former capacity as a defence lawyer. I do not speak to, and I don't think it would be appropriate for me to speak to the individual workers there with respect to this incident.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Marci cho, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have questions for the Minister of NWT Housing Corporation pertaining to the Aging in Place, as it's laid out in our mandate. Mr. Speaker, in answering questions in February, questions from me, the Minister responded to a question I was asking about Aging in Place by indicating that she would be meeting with the federal government on March 10, 2016. I want to know what the results of that meeting were? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Minister of NWT Housing Corporation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At the last meeting that we had with the federal/provincial/territorial Ministers we had strongly advocated for Northern consideration within the national housing plan. The result of that meeting is that the federal government is going to do a Northern Strategy, so that meeting was very successful. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the Minister when the Northern Strategy would come into effect and if there's any money associated with the Northern Strategy insofar as money from the GNWT or money from the federal government? Thank you.

I cannot say exactly if there will be any money or when there will be money. It is hopeful that there will be money, but until the federal government releases that, we don't know. I will be meeting again at the end of this month, with them again, advocating for a northern strategy, and as soon as I find out then I can bring the results back.

Mr. Speaker, our mandate is not incumbent upon money from the federal government as far as the Aging in Place goes. I'd like to ask the Minister if there has been any budgetary discussions pertaining to a program that will allow seniors to age in place?

There's actually quite a bit that we're doing to assist seniors to age in place. So there are many programs; we have a CARE Major program that will do major renovations such as ramps up to their buildings, et cetera; we have CARE Minor; that'll do small programs, and then we have the preventative maintenance that we do every year that goes in and looks and tries to just nip it in the bud and make sure that their houses are in sustainable shape so that we're not looking at extended renovations.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in my Member’s statement I spoke about the deterrents that were associated with a lot of the programs NWT Housing Corporation is delivering, deterrents that make the seniors apprehensive to apply for the programs that are in place. Has the Minister had a discussion with staff or with Cabinet on features that might be added to a program that specifically looks at allowing seniors to age in place in their communities without a lot of the deterrents? Right now, those individuals are not applying for the programs for various reasons. So I'd like to see if the Minister has really focused in on trying to allow the seniors to age in place without a lot of the deterrents that I spoke of in my Members statement. Thank you.

It is a mandate of the 18th Legislative Assembly and we do take the mandate very seriously. I think that all Members actually have a serious concern for our elders and a respect for them and want to promote them to stay in their own communities. So we're doing a number of things. Actually, one, prior to the engagement survey, that we're asking every person in public housing, every person that is taking part in housing programs, what's working, what's not working, what they want to see, so I'm taking that very seriously. Once that's received, we'll be going through every single policy, every single program that Housing provides so that we can alleviate as many barriers as possible for people.

The other thing specifically that we're doing right now actually for seniors is since September and ongoing until the end of November we've made a commitment, and we're going into every single community and we're reaching out to seniors specifically to tell them about the programs that we have to assist them in understanding what they are eligible for and to try to identify any barriers that they have. So we're taking our commitment very seriously and we are going into every single community as of now. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Deh Cho.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment. In my statement I made reference to SEED funding in the amount of $21.5 million that were distributed to all 33 communities in 2014 and 2015. The question that I have for the Minister is how are grants and contributions monitored to ensure they are used for their intended purpose? Mahsi.

Masi. Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm glad to inform the Member that ITI, who currently distributes SEED, is reviewing the outcomes and effectiveness of the program and the delivery of seed programs, and this is something that we'll be hopefully finishing up by the end of this fiscal year and be able to present to the standing committee. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Could the Minister state in terms of committee and this side of the House, in terms of how it is that perhaps the review's been done, whether there's a scope of a terms of reference or a framework in terms of just how detailed perhaps the report could be developed in terms of accounting for that amount of money from that year, but also perhaps for the past fiscal year?

I can't answer that question in detail, I'd have to get back to you exactly how we're doing the review. But what I can say is we are completing it. As I said, the SEED policy and programs is expected to be completed this fiscal year, and we will be tabling it with the Committee as soon as that's possible.

From start to successful stage in terms of deriving profit from perhaps a business venture, what are we doing to help small businesses become self-sustaining? Mahsi.

As this Assembly knows, I'm a small business owner prior to coming to public life, and I know the importance of sustaining a small business. As of today, i actually had an opportunity to meet with a group that is working with BDIC, it's called Futurpreneur and it lays out the groundwork from the business idea to establishing a business plan to working through to marketing to become a successful business as well as matching up entrepreneurs with mentors. This is the one of things that BDIC is doing through one of the initiatives through the Department of ITI. As I just found out about it today, it's something i really want to look into to help entrepreneurs in the Northwest Territories.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Deh Cho.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There are good things that this department is doing in terms of supporting small businesses in small communities. Just to name a few, like, there's a Business Incentive Policy and plus there's policy (inaudible) in terms of how it is that this department provides funding for small businesses. One proviso is if there's an existing business in a small community the department heeds to the policy of, you know, not creating any market disruption and policies like that. How often are programs reviewed to ensure effectiveness and incorporate feedback from clientele?

I don't have an answer to that question. I'll have to get back to the Member on that.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Nunakput.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, earlier I spoke about the Darnley Bay Marine Protected Area and my questions are for the Minister of ENR. Mr. Speaker, my first question is: has the GNWT participated in any capacity on consultations for the Darnley Bay Marine Protected Area? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Minister of Environment and Natural Resources.

Mr. Speaker, when necessary ENR has been providing information and working collaboratively with our federal counterpart.

Recognizing that the GNWT does not have jurisdiction over the offshore, how much influence do we have as a government on recommending areas for protection?

Mr. Speaker, as far as the protected areas, we do have some influence, I mean, we would work closely with our federal counterparts; work closely with the communities. I understand in this particular situation, the community of Paulatuk are keepers of this particular area, so we will work closely with them. But as the way things are working now we do have a bit more influence than we may have had in the past.

Mr. Speaker, recognizing that all ecosystems are connected, would the GNWT be involved in the creation of a management plan for the new protected area designated for Darnley Bay?

Mr. Speaker, because we would have a vested interest in this particular area, we will work closely, as I said, with our federal counterpart. We will work closely with the community of Paulatuk and then if they determine that it was an area that needs further evaluation then I can see ENR playing a very significant role there because we do, at the end of the day, have to be the caretakers, so it would be to our benefit if we work closely with the federal government and the community of Paulatuk.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Nunakput.