Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think, to anyone observing today's debate, it is very clear that the honourable Members of this House place the rights of Northerners at the highest possible level the paramount responsibility of this Assembly, and that is to be commended. Further, anyone who heard the honourable Member from Deh Cho speak knows firsthand that the experiences he brings to this House are irreplaceable and speak to many things. That experience informs the decisions of this Assembly and makes us a stronger Assembly by having that experience shared and infused into how we discuss very complex and often painful issues.

Family violence affects everyone, whether it is your family, your neighbours, or people near and far, and it is without a doubt that it needs to be condemned in all its forms and every time it is encountered. I believe that that principle is why the standing committee has brought forward this recommendation. It is well-intentioned in that they want to make a strong statement, as they say in their report, on "creating a strong statement on normative values for the Northwest Territories." However, when there is any fear or concern that it could impact on the rights of the individual, we have to question its validity.

In its current form, I cannot support this recommendation. One of the most important things about consensus government is that we are all here as independents. We are all here as individuals, and the only people we serve are our constituents. That is a very important principle that Northerners have chosen and expect from us. The strength of that system also means there are some trade-offs.

The committee, in its report, mentions specifically that in partisan systems, where there are political parties, there is a vetting process. In those cases, there is a higher degree of scrutiny on who can run for candidates on that party's ticket. We do not have that vetting process. That is something we have to accept as a feature of consensus government. We can try to rejig rules and to change procedures as much as possible, but fundamentally there are just some things that our system cannot accommodate.

I personally think that that is a choice that Northerners have to make. They have made a choice for consensus. We are all here as consensus politicians. As a result, we have to be responsive to that. We can only bend or modify the rules so far. We have to respect that as well.

It is very clear from the statements that have been made in this House today that placing a limit like this goes too far. Without any assurances that rights will not be infringed, it cannot be considered. I think that is an important thing to consider when we address other issues with our code of conduct, our rules, and the very system of government that we have.

With that, I will just reiterate that I think that the committee was well-intentioned, but has put forward something that raises too many questions as to whether or not it infringes upon constitutional rights. I cannot support it in this form and will not support it when it comes to a vote later today. Thank you.