Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let us be honest here. This is the one recommendation or motion that is likely to spur quite a bit of discussion and debate, and I look forward to that. I think it is very important that all Members speak on this issue so that their views are known, and we know where everybody stands.
I would like to start by going back to the original referral motion and cast our mind back to December 17, 2015. This is shortly after we were all elected. The very first motion that we passed in this House is we wanted to refer this issue to Members' conduct to the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures. This was the very first piece of business that we conducted in this House, and it is a very important one. It was fresh on everybody's mind at the time, and what was asked was that the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures was asked to conduct a comprehensive and public review, including a thorough examination of conduct guidelines from other jurisdictions, both parliamentary and non-parliamentary organizations, all relevant legislation, and the rules of the Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories Committee report back in the fall sitting of 2016.
We did do that. We had an interim report that highlighted many of the issues that had been brought to our attention through our research. Then we went out on the road and held public consultations with regard to those issues that were highlighted in a discussion paper as well. We received written submissions. We held three public hearings in Inuvik, Hay River, and Yellowknife, and we had lots of very careful, crafted submissions to us. As I earlier stated, I thanked all of the parties that participated in the process.
This was a long process for the committee as well, and I do want to commend all the committee members. We have been working on this for over a year, and it has come to a head today, and I look forward to the debate and discussion.
I would like to start by what, I think, the committee heard, and I do not think any of the committee members are going to disagree in any way that there is an expectation out there that Members of this House and those that would like to become Members of this House, there is an expectation of a higher standard for what we do and how we behave. I think that was universal from everybody that we heard from.
Now, people were varied in how best to do that. What we heard was that a variety of positions ranging from leave it basically to the electorate to decide, right through to anybody who has a criminal conviction should not be allowed to run ever again. That was sort of the range of opinion that we had presented to us in terms of eligibility for becoming a candidate.
Now, I think it is also fair to say that we did have some individuals talk to us to say, you know, it is common practice if you would like to become a security guard, a bylaw officer, a school bus driver, a substitute teacher, a childcare worker, even a volunteer in sports, that you have to have a criminal records check. If there is something on there, maybe even a record of non-conviction, that you may not get the job. You may not have the opportunity to serve as a volunteer.
We did have people say to us: why is it that somebody can become an MLA without that sort of criminal records check? Anyways, it was an interesting question that was posed to us. Now, I guess I would like to say that we fully understand that there is a basic Charter right to run for public office, and that any attempt to restrict that has to be very, very carefully considered. It has to be justifiable. It has to be narrow, and we did seek the advice of the law clerk as we worked our way through that. I am glad the law clerk is here in the Chamber with us, and if there are any questions, I am sure she will be delighted to help us work our way through that.
I think it is fair to say that one of the biggest issues that we heard was concern around the epidemic of family violence that we have here in the Northwest Territories. The statistics are quite plain and clear. They are laid out in our report. Family violence rates here in the Northwest Territories are nine times the Canadian average. I am not going to go on about those, but some of the submissions that we received wanted to take us into a direction of -- well, as I said earlier, all of the submissions that we received, wanted to ensure that there was a higher standard of behaviour, higher standard of conduct for us all to make sure that politicians are in a position of trust, and there's public confidence on what we do and how we behave.
The committee looked at this issue very carefully, and we decided to help us show leadership to address this issue of the epidemic of family violence. We recommended that there should be a restriction in terms of eligibility, but it is a very narrowly defined restriction and you have to have been convicted of a Criminal Code offence that involves violence or threat of violence. If you've had a pardon this would not apply to you, but most importantly, it's a requirement in the Criminal Code that if you've been convicted of a crime of violence or threat of violence the presiding judge has to determine whether an individual was in a position of trust, authority or intimacy. So that's how the Criminal Code system works and there has to be determination about those things.
The majority of the committee members felt that this was reasonable and justifiable in terms of Charter rights to put this forward, and we do have other jurisdictions in Canada where this is the case. Nunavut has legislation, its Elections Act, that provides for something similar, and Nova Scotia as well. If you've been convicted of a criminal matter in Nova Scotia and the sentence could be greater than five -- sorry, I had better get this right; I'm going to go back to the committee report. If you have been convicted of an offence -- sorry, Mr. Chair, I've just got too many papers on my desk here, but if you've been convicted of a Criminal Code offence in Nova Scotia you would be restricted from running for a period of five years afterwards. So this is not unique; in fact, the Northwest Territories had similar provisions until that was removed in 2006 as well.
So all of that to say that I know this is a very difficult matter, but this was what the committee came up with. This was not a recommendation that we put forward lightly; it involved a lot of discussion and internal debate, and I look forward to having that discussion and debate as part of the consideration of this motion. Thank you, Mr. Chair.