Thank you, Mr. Chair. I thank the Rules Committee for bringing this forward and also to my colleague that I have sat next to here for some time and across the room in P and P.

Definitely, today was a lot of stress, a lot of pressure. You see a sense of healing when someone can speak like that to something so powerful, and especially when it feels like someone is being zeroed in on. I definitely felt that. I think there is a sense of healing and a sense of moving forward.

We talked about candidacy and eligibility. I know I don't support family violence, but at the same time, we don't talk about healing. The Northwest Territories consists of so many different Aboriginal groups from all walks of life and the differences from poverty to wealth are so extreme that sometimes I look at something like this and I think they're so far from the actual -- some live life in poverty it's so far-fetched from that that there's nothing that reflects people who live in poverty or live in smaller communities who don't really have a voice.

I've worked with men's healing groups, you know, in different parts of Canada and I see that men are totally, in a sense, are less looked at. As far as healing, I just had a text here from one of the leaders in my region saying that someone was just sent home. Okay, where's the after care? I think we need to focus on the after care programs for people who have attempted suicide and people who have offended and people who are struggling. We don't look at those aspects of their lives but we judge them right away at an instance, and I think that's totally unfair and I think it takes away from what an Indigenous person has to offer.

My colleague Mr. Beaulieu mentioned having Indigenous people who can speak their languages. Yesterday, we had some people talking about revitalizing language and that's something we have to focus on. Look at the Truth and Reconciliation Commission; they're looking at ways to implement that. Even here in the Territories we're so far behind from colonialism and other pressures of Indigenous people from other sources. The GNWT includes Indigenous people with the mining industry, so in a sense there are some good positives there that we can focus on and build on and look at those as examples of working together.

There are Indigenous groups who are negotiating their land claims. We need to focus on those and say, okay, well, how is the system working and is it working for the people of their respective regions across the territory?

I work with Indigenous groups around the world and I see that Indigenous peoples are totally unrepresented and sometimes don't even have a voice. So, in a sense, in Canada here we're lucky that we're focusing on Indigenous peoples, including making them a priority. We need to ensure that they have a voice and that the people who they decide to elect for office is up to the people. I believe that if we take that away from Indigenous peoples or from non-Indigenous peoples then we're taking a step backwards.

Mr. Sebert mentioned earlier about the timeline of when women were able to vote or when people of different ethnicity were able to vote. I think that's a good example of which way we're going and we need to continue going that way. In that sense, I won't be voting for this motion. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Abernethy.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I've been listening carefully as everyone has been talking this afternoon and this is clearly a tough one, a tough discussion for many individuals. I hear two conversations that I believe are separate conversations but they're being morphed into one, and those are the right of individuals to run for election, but also the major problem we have here in the Northwest Territories of domestic violence. I truly appreciate the work that the committee did, and I know what they did was not easy and they put their hearts and souls into this report, and I truly appreciate that, but at the end of the day, I'm not prepared to take away the ability of residents to choose who they want to vote for, and I also don't want to penalize or punish somebody for something that they've already been convicted for and done their time and paid their debt to society.

That in no way, shape, or form changes how I feel about domestic violence in the Northwest Territories or my desire to fight and combat domestic violence. It is a major problem in this territory, and I would be disappointed if anybody would suggest that we don't care about domestic violence in this House if we don't support this recommendation. I find that deeply troubling.

I've listened to people in this House talk both today and at other times, and this House cares and is committed to doing work to combat domestic violence. Do we do enough? No. Do we need to do more? Yes. As a House of 19 can we do better? Certainly. Should we? Absolutely, and I think we need to continue to have this dialogue around domestic violence here in the Northwest Territories.

One of the things we know about domestic violence is not enough people talk about it. Not enough people question it. Not enough people challenge those who might be committing acts of domestic violence.

I think today in this House we've heard a real desire to talk about it, to start working together to find more solutions at a community, at a regional, at a personal level, and I think that's important and I think that's something we could take away from today and I feel we should and I feel we can, but it doesn't change the fact that I can't support this motion as it's written. I can't support this recommendation.

I think people need the ability to choose and I think, once you've paid for your crime, you should have the opportunity to heal and move forward.

So I thank the Members for the work they did on this. I know it wasn't easy; I know they poured their hearts and souls into this. We simply have a disagreement that this is the right forum to address domestic violence in this territory, and I look forward to working with all my colleagues in this House as we work to strengthen our response and our prevention and work with our residents, Aboriginal governments, community governments, people to combat domestic violence in this territory. Thank you.

Thank you. To the motion. Mr. McNeely.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I, too, would like to thank the committee for their work and efforts put into this and, admirably, I respect my friend and colleague from the Deh Cho in sharing his experiences and heartfelt statement. I truly continue and will support him, and I respect everybody's words and wise words of thought and statements. So rather than re-state them in my own presentation, I endorse everybody's statement and respect the rights of the voters, and to respect the rights of the voters I just don't see myself supporting this motion here. Keeping in mind, I do not want to see my representatives or my riding voting members dis-privileged of that; I would encourage them by giving them a ride to the poll instead. Having said that, thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. To the motion. Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think it's become quite evident in the Chamber today everyone's feelings on family violence, and I share those feelings. I grew up in an era where there was a lot of drinking in the community and I've seen the change in people who have gone through this and how they've turned themselves around, and I can guarantee you that I would put my X beside their name any day. There are some people, I wouldn't give them the time of day. I appreciate the comment from the Member from Deh Cho; I think he manned up to it and took full responsibility, and I've got a lot of respect for that.

I'll be very brief, Mr. Chair. We've heard comments going around the Chamber, and I was looking at the title of the document, and the title of the document says that you are standing for your people, which is true. My position is the people who I stand for, who we all stand for, will be my judge and determine whether or not I'm qualified to stand for them or not. I will leave that decision in their hands. Who am I to judge? Who am I to judge? I think for the most part I think we respect the will of the people.

Sometimes they take a look at what people have been through, what they bring to the table, and the lessons they learned from it and they elect him, and I think we should respect that, because who are we to judge? I mean, what are we going to do next; only people born in the Northwest Territories can run? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

To the motion. To the motion. We will return to Mr. O’Reilly to close the debate.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess I will start with some acknowledgments of my friend the MLA from Deh Cho. I have known the Member for Deh Cho for more than 25 years, and I have the utmost respect for him. He has been a very valuable Member, and I am happy to work with him in the House committees. I regret any stress that this has caused him and his family and, certainly, that wasn’t the intention of any of our work, but I want to go on the record as saying that.

I do find it necessary to address a few of the issues that were raised by my colleagues. I recognize that everybody knows that this was a difficult process for everybody on the committee, and for all of us to actually go through, but we are talking about a narrowly defined restriction on a Charter right. It is not for all Criminal Code offences. It is not a permanent prohibition; it is a five-year one. The rationale for the five years actually came from an existing prohibition for anyone who is convicted of major electoral offences. That is the rationale for the five years.

The committee felt that that was a valid prohibition, and a restriction of a Charter right than for the issue of Criminal Code convictions, where the judge finds that you were in a position of authority or intimacy with the victim. Then we felt that there should be a similar prohibition.

My colleague from Kam Lake talked about how we don’t have a political party system here, so there is no vetting of candidates. We don’t have that here, and we struggle with a consensus government, at times, and this is one of those struggles. I think the way that this would actually be operationalized, if it was voted on, and I certainly have the sense that that is not the case, is it would be a self-declaration process, much like the nomination forms that you fill out now for a candidate, where you indicate that you were a resident for 12 months, you are a Canadian citizen, and so on.

This would just be another part of that self-declaration process, and if anybody wanted to challenge it, the onus would be on them to bring forward evidence that somebody would not be eligible to become a candidate. I don’t think there are any operational limitations to this. I think the one thing that I really want to address is that, certainly, our committee was not asked to address the issue of family violence, or overrepresentation of Aboriginal peoples in the justice system.

We were asked to deal with the issue of trust, public confidence, and leadership, and that is what the issue was. I think these other matters are equally important and, certainly, they have received a lot of attention in this House, and for me personally. I know that I brought forward the issue of additional funding for the men’s healing program, to allow that to be spread across the Northwest Territories, and that became part of the ask by the Regular MLAs. I certainly support those efforts, but the committee itself was asked to deal with this issue of trust and public confidence.

That is, I think, what this recommendation is about. I guess I want to make a few other remarks here, that this has been a very important debate, and I do think all of the Members who have spoken publicly about this – these are very important matters, and I recognize that this hasn’t been an easy discussion or debate. It’s been quite divisive, but it is a very important one to have, for the public to see our thinking on this, and to have this discussion and dialogue.

I regret that this sort of came to a head in this kind of a setting. I think it probably will be part of a continuing dialogue that we all will work together on. I guess I had hoped for a respectful and informed debate, and I think I can say that this exceeded my expectations. Thank you.

A couple of other things I want to say; that, you know, we are not all going to agree on this, and I hope that we can all find ways to respect the differences that have been expressed in House today. I know that we are all going to continue to work on these issues of conduct, family violence, and overrepresentation of Aboriginal peoples in the justice system. You should all vote with your conscience, and that is what is going to happen. Thank you for the debate and discussion, and I sincerely thank all of the Members for their thoughtful comments. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. O’Reilly. All those in favour. Mr. O’Reilly.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to request a recorded vote.

Thank you, Mr. O’Reilly. I will allow it.

The Member requested a recorded vote. All those in favour, please stand.

All those opposed, please stand.

All those abstaining, please stand.

The results of the recorded vote are two in favour; 13 opposed; one abstention. The motion is defeated.

---Defeated

Mr. O’Reilly.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to move that this Assembly recommend that the Legislative Assembly’s oath of office be revised in schedule B of the Legislative Assembly, an Executive Council Act, as follows:

“I (Member’s name) do swear or affirm that

a) I am fully qualified to hold the office of the Member for the district of, to which I have been elected;

b) I have not knowingly contravened the Elections and Plebiscites Act respecting any matter in relation to my election;

c) I will faithfully, to the best of my ability, perform the duties and responsibilities of my office, and will not allow any direct or indirect monetary or other personal or private interest to influence my conduct or affect my duties in public matters;

d) I hereby affirm, subscribe to, and agree to follow the Members’ Conduct Guidelines, or Members’ Code of Conduct, if applicable, adopted by the Legislative Assembly, in the case where the oath is sworn, so help me God."

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. O’Reilly. There is a motion on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. O’Reilly.

Mr. Chair, I know we have gone on a long time. I think that the important point that I would like to make, for those who are watching or listening, is that this change to the oath will provide a link to the other sorts of tools that we do have available to guide Members’ conduct, including the Elections Act, and the code that is the subject of the next motion. It is weaving together all of these pieces, and including those in the oath, and I hope and expect that all the Members will support this motion. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. O’Reilly. Minister McLeod, Inuvik Twin Lakes.