This is page numbers 43 – 82 of the Hansard for the 18th Assembly, 3rd Session. The original version can be accessed on the Legislative Assembly's website or by contacting the Legislative Assembly Library. The word of the day was review.

Topics

Wally Schumann

Wally Schumann Hay River South

Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the following three documents entitled "Northwest Territories Community Futures Program 2015-2016 Annual Report," "Business Development and Investment Corporation 2016-2017 Annual Report," and "Follow-Up Letter to Oral Question 887-18(2), Federal Funding for Infrastructure." Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Tabling of documents. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Julie Green

Julie Green Yellowknife Centre

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I wish to table a document entitled "An Open Letter to the Minister of Justice NWT dated October 7, 2017, from the Inmates at the North Slave Correctional Centre." Thank you.

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Tabling of documents. Member for Frame Lake.

Kevin O'Reilly

Kevin O'Reilly Frame Lake

Merci, Monsieur le President. I would like to table the following document, "Northwest Territories Mineral Sector Review and Benchmarking," by Andrew Bauer Consultant. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Tabling of documents.

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

I wish to table the Report of the Auditor General of Canada to the Northwest Territories Legislative Assembly 2017 – Independent Auditors Report – Climate Change in the Northwest Territories.

Colleagues, I wish to draw your attention, obviously, to the presence of visitors in the gallery of Jerome Berthelette who is here with us today, and also Erin Jellinek of the Office of the Auditor General of Canada. Welcome to our Assembly.

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Item 15, notices of motion. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Tom Beaulieu

Tom Beaulieu Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh

Marsi cho, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Friday, October 20, 2017, I will move the following motion:

Whereas the Yellowknives Dene First Nation have used and occupied the lands and waters around Yellowknife Bay for thousands of years and continue to do so; and whereas the workings of the Giant Mine were located in their territory without consultation or permission from the Yellowknives Dene First Nation; and whereas the operation of Giant Mine contaminated the lands and waters surrounding the site, to the extent that some traditional activities, including hunting, fishing, and gathering by the Yellowknives Dene First Nation have been harmed, and potentially will never again be possible; and whereas the massive stockpiles of arsenic created by the mine threaten to cause a major environmental catastrophe that could prevent Yellowknives Dene First Nation usage of its traditional lands and waters; and whereas a treaty entitlement and land rights agreement has yet to be completed with the Yellowknives Dene First Nation, and the impacts and damages created by Giant Mine are of an extraordinary and exceptional nature; and whereas on July 1, 2017 the Prime Minister of Canada publicly stated that "Indigenous Peoples in this country have faced oppression for centuries. As a society, we must acknowledge and apologize for past wrongs, and chart a path forward for the next 150 years"; and whereas the Giant Mine Oversight Board in its 2017 Establishment Report recommended that in the interest of reconciliation, "the decisions and actions of past governments…are acknowledged, and an apology is made for the impacts that these decisions and actions have had on the Yellowknives Dene First Nation";

Now therefore I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Frame Lake, that this Legislative Assembly call upon the Government of Canada to make a formal public apology for the damage done by the Giant Mine, and more specifically to the Yellowknives Dene First Nation; and further, that this Assembly call upon the Government of Canada to enter into negotiations with the Yellowknives Dene First Nation to provide compensation for these damages and loss of use; and furthermore, that the Premier of the Northwest Territories convey this motion without delay to the Prime Minister of Canada with a letter requesting a reply. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Notices of motion. Member for Mackenzie Delta.

Frederick Blake Jr.

Frederick Blake Jr. Mackenzie Delta

I give notice that on Friday, October 20, 2017, I will move the following motion: Whereas the Porcupine caribou herd has sustained Gwich'in people for thousands of years; and whereas part of the critical calving habitat for the Porcupine herd is located within the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge that does not have permanent protection; and whereas the Government of the Northwest Territories has actively supported previous efforts towards permanent protection of the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge; and whereas the current United States federal government is making public statements about lifting the protection for the Porcupine caribou herd through the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge;

Now therefore I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes, that this Legislative Assembly call upon the Government of Canada to make representations to the United States federal government opposing the removal of protection for the Porcupine caribou herd by allowing any industrial activities within the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge; and further that this Assembly call upon the Government of the Northwest Territories to actively support and assist Gwich'in governments and related organizations in their efforts to prevent the opening of the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge and to seek permanent protection of this critical habitat for the Porcupine caribou herd; and furthermore that the Premier of the NWT convey this motion without delay to the Prime Minister of Canada with a letter requesting a reply. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Notices of motion. Item 16, notices for motion for first reading of bills.

Colleagues, before we get into the next item, I am going to call for a short break. Masi.

---SHORT RECESS

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Colleagues, we left off from notices of motion for first reading of bills. The next item is item 17, motions. The Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Tom Beaulieu

Tom Beaulieu Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh

Marsi cho, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 49 and have Motion 1-18(3) placed on the orders for today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Masi. The Member is seeking unanimous consent to waive Rule 49 to deal with a motion, the revocation of appointment of the Honourable Louis Sebert to the Executive Council. That is the motion before us.

---Unanimous consent granted

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

You may proceed.

Tom Beaulieu

Tom Beaulieu Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

WHEREAS pursuant to section 61(1) of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act, the Legislative Assembly recommends to the Commissioner the appointment of Members of the Executive Council;

AND WHEREAS pursuant to section 61(2) of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act, the persons appointed hold office during the pleasure of the Legislative Assembly;

AND WHEREAS the Assembly, pursuant to these powers, has chosen the Honourable Louis Sebert to sit as a Member of the Executive Council;

NOW THEREFORE, I MOVE, seconded by the Honourable Member for Kam Lake, that this Assembly formally revokes the pleasure of the Assembly from the appointment of the Honourable Louis Sebert as a Member of the Executive Council;

AND FURTHER, that this Assembly recommends that a Member be chosen to be a Member of the Executive Council.

Mr. Speaker, I request a recorded vote. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Masi. There is a motion on the floor. To the motion. I will allow the mover to speak on the motion. The Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Tom Beaulieu

Tom Beaulieu Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I make the motion today to follow up on the Mid-Term Review that we had earlier. Mr. Speaker, the Mid-Term Review was set up so that the vote would be on each of the Executive Council. All of the Members of Executive Council were asked questions in the House. The Members' Rule Committee went through the process of how we are going to do the Mid-Term Review. Part of the Mid-Term Review was essentially an evaluation of each of the Ministers and by their performance from the time they were appointed to Ministers until the date of the Mid-Term Review. In addition to that, the Members of the House on this side of the House, the Regular Members, asked each of the Ministers the same amount of questions, or each of the Members on this side asked the same amount of questions to Executive Council, but the Executive Council may have had different amounts of questions.

Based on that, the performance to date and the questions and answers that were received here in the House during the review, a secret ballot vote was held. The secret ballot said that one Member of the Executive Council did not have confidence of the House to continue as Executive Council. That was Mr. Sebert. Now, we are at a stage where we will now have a public vote to determine whether or not Mr. Sebert will remain on Executive Council. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Seconder of the vote. I will allow the Member for Kam Lake.

Kieron Testart

Kieron Testart Kam Lake

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, Members of the 18th Assembly made transparency and accountability a fundamental principle of our four-year term. Together, we developed the public accountability process in the form of a Mid-Term Review. This process was not perfect. It was designed to be fair, issue-based, and open to the public. The review was in place for close to a year. Although government Members were critical of this Mid-Term Review and in fact voted against establishing it, at no point did they refuse to participate in the process.

This motion today is the outcome of that Mid-Term Review process, which is why I am speaking to it. Unfortunately, on the day of the Mid-Term Review, every Member of Cabinet announced that they would refuse to honour an outcome of no confidence and voluntarily step down. The only recourse left to the Assembly was to bring a revocation motion forward, which is what we are debating today, Mr. Speaker.

I believed on that day, and this day still, that that was a bad faith move on the part of our elected Cabinet Ministers and Premier. They take no issue, Mr. Speaker, with how they are elected to Cabinet, and that process also falls on a secret ballot and a non-binding result. I think we can all agree, all honourable Members of this House can agree, that it would be inconceivable that a result in the Territorial Leadership Committee that elects a Minister would be not honoured when formal session begins and appointment motions are brought forward. That kind of consistency is built into processes like the Territorial Leadership Committee or like the Mid-Term Review and is fundamental to preserving the integrity of our democratic institutions here in the Northwest Territories.

It further goes to building trust in the public. If members of the public see a vote of non-confidence, a majority vote of non-confidence that is issued by this Assembly or one of its committees, it is important that that vote be followed through with.

Mr. Speaker, I have always stood for inclusive, positive politics that ensure that Northerners are front and centre in the governance of priorities. I cannot support this process that plays fast and loose with our democratic institutions and offends the spirit and intent of processes like the Mid-Term Review. We owe it to our constituents and to the people of the Northwest Territories to preserve our integrity and to honour the vote that was the outcome of the Mid-Term Review. This isn't about personalities. It is not about politics. It is about principles. I have no problem taking a principled stance here today and supporting the outcome of a process that we all agree to as an Assembly of 19.

I can speak to great length about the shortcomings of the honourable Member of Thebacha in his role as Minister of Justice, Minister of Lands. I have already done that during the Mid-Term Review, and I don't think that ground needs to be re-tread here. For me, this is not about one Minister's performance; that question was settled in the Mid-Term Review. It was settled with a vote of non-confidence, and I urge all Members today to stand up and be counted and vote the way they have voted at the conclusion of the Mid-Term Review. That is what our constituents expect. It is what Northerners expect and it is what our democracy deserves. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

To the motion. Member for Yellowknife North.

Cory Vanthuyne

Cory Vanthuyne Yellowknife North

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I regret that I must rise in this House today to speak about revoking the appointment of a Minister of our government. As MLAs, all of us made this pledge when we took office. I quote, "I will do my best to fulfill my duties to the Legislature, the public, my constituents, and my colleagues with integrity and honour."

We also pledged to earn, through our actions, the confidence of the people. We each made this solemn oath as Members and as it applies to our work here, whether as a Member or as a Minister. All 19 Members elected our Cabinet Ministers, who must also work hard to earn our ongoing confidence. Today we are considering our confidence in a single Minister, Mr. Sebert, but the motion before us stems not only from his decisions, but the decisions of the entire Cabinet.

During our Mid-Term Review, all Members, including Cabinet and the Speaker, had a secret ballot vote to express confidence in each Minister. Even so, every single Minister stated publicly that, if they received a vote of non-confidence, they would refuse to resign their position.

Mr. Sebert and the rest of Cabinet may be within their rights to ignore or disregard the results of the confidence vote, but that doesn't make it right. That course of action goes against the spirit and intent of the Mid-Term Review, a public review we adopted as an Assembly to increase the accountability of Cabinet and strengthen consensus government. Mr. Sebert's choice further eroded my confidence in his leadership ability, his dedication to public accountability, and, frankly, the future of consensus government.

Consensus government comes under fire all the time. That is why principled leadership, accountability, and transparency are so important for our Assembly. It is a crucial part of any Minister or Regular Member's performance. Critical aspects of this are in Mr. Sebert's hands as the Minister responsible for Public Engagement and Transparency. In his campaign speech for a ministerial job, he pledged his support for accountability. Mr. Speaker, above all, we have to have principled leadership, and yet during our Mid-Term Review, and I quote, "If Members opposite wish to remove us, they can do so in an open vote." Mr. Speaker, the Mid-Term Review process was designed for all Members, not just Regular Members. The reality is that Cabinet Ministers will not vote freely in an open vote on a revocation motion. The Speaker is unable to vote unless there is a tie.

Today, we are dealing with a revocation motion because the Minister refuses to be accountable except on his own terms. Those same terms are preferred by Cabinet. We are not here considering this motion as some frivolous revolt. We are here because of Cabinet's collective decision to ignore a vote of non-confidence. In no other form of democracy, consensus or otherwise, does a non-confidence vote suggest that I will continue to work with you towards improvement or that I will give you a second chance or that this was a friendly warning. No. No, Mr. Speaker. Non-confidence means as it suggests: I have lost my confidence in you.

For my part, I will vote today as I voted on October 5th. My vote was and will always be based on what I believe results in the best government for the people we represent. We were elected to make hard choices with integrity. The majority of Members of this Assembly made such a choice on October 5th by expressing non-confidence in one Minister. In my view, there are many reasons for that result, but I would like to outline just a few. When Mr. Sebert ran for his Cabinet position, he supported universal daycare and noted it would lead to a stronger economy, but during the recent review of our mandate, Minister Sebert supported the removal of that promise.

Mr. Sebert is also Minister of Justice, yet his performance on family violence issues is lacking. The continuation of A New Day Men's Healing Program was completely mishandled. An established program was wiped out as a result of broken partnerships with the provider, the Coalition Against Family Violence, and Members who raised this issue time and time again.

Failure to work with people in the field resulted in a new provider for A New Day, a provider that was hand-picked by the government without consultation or a chance for others to bid on a contract. On October 5th, Mr. Sebert said, "The changes made improved the program. The transition to the new service provider has been smooth." To be kind, I will suggest the Minister's handling of this whole affair has been anything but smooth. I have no confidence the Minister is working productively with the Coalition Against Family Violence.

Let's turn as we have today to the rehabilitation of those serving sentences in our correctional centres. Under Mr. Sebert's leadership, inmates have reached the boiling point and have begun to protest. "Unprecedented" is the word Mr. Sebert used to describe the situation. We have a flood of letters from 70 inmates complaining about lack of programming, removal of the recreation director, and lack of access to educational upgrading. Mr. Speaker, denying inmates the tools they need to change their lives flies in the face of everything we are trying to achieve as an Assembly.

The protest should have come as no surprise to the Minister. These very issues were raised by the Auditor General in his review of NWT corrections in 2015. The Auditor General pointed to inadequate delivery of rehabilitation programs and serious deficiencies in case management for inmates, and yet Mr. Sebert claims that 95 per cent of the Auditor General's recommendations have been carried out. Surely, if 95 per cent of the recommendations have been carried out, we would not have numerous letters from inmates reaching out for help.

As Justice Minister, one of Mr. Sebert's jobs is to ensure that necessary legislation is written, sent to committees for review, and then considered in this Assembly. So far, legislation appears to be seriously behind schedule. For example, to improve government services for people of the Northwest Territories, our mandate called for legislation to establish an independent ombudsman within two years. We have not seen it yet. Another issue of great concern to every resident and business in the Northwest Territories is power rates and the operation of the NWT Power Corporation. What has been achieved? For starters, rates in Yellowknife are still going up with no end in sight, while in Hay River their rates were promised to be lowered by up to 30 per cent. That promise killed a 30-year relationship with Northland Utilities at a time when Northland Utilities was offering to explore ways to control rising electricity prices. Instead, there appeared to be a plan to take the private sector out of the electricity market.

In addition, governance of the Power Corporation took a step backward when the independent public representative board was dismissed and replaced by a bevy of deputy ministers. I find this particularly frustrating coming from the Minister Responsible for Public Engagement and Transparency. We have since seen no improvement in the operation of the Power Corporation, which paid millions of dollars to buy diesel generators from a questionable American supplier. Years later, we are finally seeing three of the five generators arrive while incurring extra costs and having no indication when the remaining will, if ever, arrive. Again, Mr. Speaker, very discouraging, and none of this inspires my confidence.

So far, I have raised a few big issues and challenges that, in my view, the Minister has failed to address and meet. I wish I could say he is better at dealing with the small stuff. Instead, removal of a derelict barge that is now having an impact on the environment in a nature preserve on Yellowknife's waterfront seems to be beyond the reach of the Minister's influence. The situation with the owner is a legal one, and I understand that, but the matter of removing the barge should have been straightforward, Mr. Speaker. It should not have required a campaign by residents and questions in this House to trigger some action, yet here we are, still waiting for its removal.

Mr. Speaker, these are a few of my reasons for not supporting Mr. Sebert continuing as a Minister. I mean no disrespect to him. It is not at all personal. I recognize that all portfolios are a challenge and can be difficult to manage, and I thank him for his service despite the difficulties in delivering the goods. I should make it clear: if any other Cabinet Minister were facing a revocation motion, I would apply the same level of scrutiny to their performance.

This brings me back to the need to make difficult decisions, the need for sound, driven leadership and accountability. There is also the issue of our own integrity. At least 10 of 19 MLAs, maybe more, expressed non-confidence in this Minister by secret ballot. That is a very significant threshold, representing the majority of Members. If we are truly accountable and transparent to those who elected us, we should now be consistent in a public vote. For me, it is a matter of integrity. In the last election campaign, we all received the message from voters: they want open and accountable government. I campaigned on that, and I have continued to work towards it. As far as I am concerned, we all promised the people of the Northwest Territories an accountable, open, and transparent government. The Mid-Term Review, including a secret ballot confidence vote, was a part of that promise. Now the decision of Cabinet to ignore the non-confidence vote reneges on that promise.

Mr. Speaker, when I go out in my riding next week and when I go to my constituents in the next election campaign, I will be able to say that I worked as hard as I could to support accountability and openness in this government. I will be able to say that I stayed true to my word. Mr. Speaker, we have to focus on getting the job done for the people of the Northwest Territories no matter how hard the job is. We have a tremendous load of work to do in the two years remaining in our term. If we are to succeed, we need every Minister to be held to the highest level of account. Those are my comments, Mr. Speaker. I will be voting in support of the motion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker

The Speaker Jackson Lafferty

Masi. To the motion. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Julie Green

Julie Green Yellowknife Centre

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by acknowledging that this is a distressful conversation for the Minister, and it is for me, as well. I want to reiterate what some of my colleagues have said: it did not have to be this way. Had the Cabinet taken the direction of the non-confidence motion, as is normally the case in Westminster systems of governance, then the Minister would have resigned. We have all made a commitment to do things differently in this Assembly -- that was the result of having 11 new Members -- with a special focus on accountability and transparency. Unfortunately, it has not amounted to much. Although there was support for the idea of doing a Mid-Term Review, there was a minority report on the process and Cabinet ultimately abstained from the vote, which brings us to where we are today.

I elected Mr. Sebert to his position with high hopes. I knew that he had a long history of public service and a law degree, and I thought he would make a terrific Justice Minister. I am very regretful today that I have to say that I was wrong about that. I have no desire to increase his humiliation by presenting a catalogue of complaints, but I am going to discuss the one that is really important to me, and that is the A New Day program.

As you know, as I never tire of talking about, and my colleagues as well, we have epidemic levels of family violence in the Northwest Territories, and they have been epidemic for years and years. We have been searching for ways to reduce that level, and that includes work by both the government and by the NGOs.

The Coalition Against Family Violence worked with the Department of Justice to establish the "A New Day" program as a pilot project, and, after a rocky start because of the lack of NGO capacity, the program arrived at the Tree of Peace, where it was taken up with great gusto by very dedicated staff who wanted to see what the women who advocated for this program wanted to see, which was healing for their intimate partners, which was a way to reduce family violence by having men admit that what they were doing is wrong and finding ways to break the cycle.

The program was evaluated, as you know, and the evaluation was positive. The program was being offered according to the curriculum that was set out, but the Minister decided that the program needed to be revamped, and he offered a new contract in the spring of this year. Unsurprisingly, because it was only a nine-month contract, there were no takers. Then, a short while later, we learned that the John Howard Society had signed not a nine-month contract, but a four-year contract to provide this revamped program, an organization that had been on the ropes just weeks before with the loss of their long-time executive director and some of their board members.

The John Howard Society is now offering this program, and the Minister has reported on it. He has not reported in the kind of detail that we have asked for in the past, but he has said that it is all going smoothly, and at this point we have no contrary information. However, what the Minister did was to take a successful program and trash it. That is the reason I do not have confidence in him. That we are engaging in this exercise today is Cabinet's choice. Instead of taking direction from the Regular MLAs in the form of a vote of non-confidence, they have decided to flout it. What we have decided to do is that we need to act on principle that this vote of non-confidence was not just a piece of political drama. It means something. It means that we don't have confidence in the person doing this job and we need someone else to do it.

So here we are today, repeating the work of the Mid-Term Review that we conducted almost two weeks ago. That is because Cabinet has decided not to adhere to the spirit of the Mid-Term Review and instead to force us into the painful exercise.

Mr. Speaker, this Mid-Term Review has had both intended and unintended consequences. I had actually hoped that another Minister would lose his appointment, but that did not happen. The outcome of those who did and those who didn't lose their appointments says nothing good about consensus government. It says that consensus government works for those in power and not for Regular MLAs. There is a division between us. It says that consensus doesn't provide for accountability. Our special form of government is not so special. I will be voting in support of the motion.