Good afternoon, Members. Item 2, Ministers' statements. Minister of Infrastructure.

Mr. Speaker, the Government of the Northwest Territories made a mandate commitment to implement a new NWT Energy Strategy that would include renewable and alternative energy solutions and actions this government and its partners will undertake to meet targets for greenhouse gas reductions.

Earlier this month, the GNWT publicly released its 2030 Energy Strategy, along with the Climate Change Strategic Framework and the NWT Petroleum Resources Strategy. Together, these documents define our long-term vision and approach to energy and climate change and will enable the NWT to transition to a strong, healthy economy that is less dependent on fossil fuels.

The 2030 Energy Strategy sets the course for a more secure, affordable, and sustainable energy system, and contributes to the economic, social, and environmental well-being of the territory and its residents.

Mr. Speaker, this strategy identifies six key strategic objectives designed to address the cost of living, energy reliability, and climate change. These objectives provide a firm basis with which to engage and empower communities to participate in finding energy solutions. The strategy sets achievable sectorial targets, including a 25 per cent reduction in diesel use in our remote communities. Other targets include increasing the share of renewable energy used for space heating to 40 per cent, achieving a 15 per cent reduction in energy use for buildings, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the transportation sector by 10 per cent.

Mr. Speaker, to achieve the objectives outlined in the Strategy, the Government of the Northwest Territories through the Department of Infrastructure has developed a rolling Three-Year Energy Action Plan that identifies specific actions and initiatives that this government will undertake. The action plan identifies approximately $200 million to be spent by the Government of the Northwest Territories and its partners over the next three years. Investments will be made toward a variety of initiatives, including partnering with community and Indigenous governments in local renewable energy projects; investing in a major wind turbine project in Inuvik; enhancing Arctic Energy Alliance programs; and supporting greenhouse gas emission reductions from industrial emitters through a new grant program.

To achieve success in these initiatives we must establish effective partnerships with the federal government, the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation, the Arctic Energy Alliance, and the Northwest Territories Power Corporation, as well as with communities, businesses, and industry.

Mr. Speaker, while we undertake these short-term initiatives, the 2030 Energy Strategy also serves as a guide to develop a lower carbon economy over the long term. With these actions, the Northwest Territories will continue to do our part to help Canada meet its international commitments.

To achieve transformative reductions in our emissions, we will need substantial projects like the Taltson Hydro Expansion. This project would increase power generation and connect our Snare and Taltson hydro systems, providing electricity consumers to the north and south of Great Slave Lake with plentiful clean and renewable energy. Transmission lines could ultimately be extended southward to join the continental electrical grid and northward to link to the vast resources of the Slave Geological Province. Hydropower and transmission line development will enhance energy security for present consumers, build capacity to serve future consumers, provide investment opportunities for Indigenous partners, and support local economic development and job creation.

Mr. Speaker, it is abundantly clear that we must reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to a changing climate, but we must balance this requirement with sustainable resource development and clean economic growth. The 2030 Energy Strategy is part of the Government of the Northwest Territories' overarching approach to achieve this balance. By implementing the 2030 Energy Strategy in concert with the Climate Change Strategic Framework and the Northwest Territories Petroleum Resources Strategy, we will support innovative solutions to provide renewable energy to communities and industry and ensure the social, economic, and environmental well-being of NWT residents now and into the future. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Ministers' statements. Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as we have heard many times in this House, the impacts of climate change in the Northwest Territories are real, and they are having a profound effect on Northwest Territories communities. The community of Tuktoyaktuk is at the centre of these changes. Coastal erosion has impacted the community for decades. However, with the increased frequency and intensity of storms and rising sea levels caused by climate change, the impacts on the community's coastline have reached the point where adaptation measures are now required.

The Hamlet of Tuktoyaktuk has been proactive. Over the past two years, the community government has undertaken a project to revise its community plan and zoning bylaw. The revised plan and bylaw support the community government's plan to relocate inland those homes at greatest risk. The community will also continue to search for techniques to slow erosion and protect the community's infrastructure and cultural sites which need to remain on the peninsula for the near and medium term.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce that the Government of the Northwest Territories has received funding for the community of Tuktoyaktuk to begin adaptation efforts to address the erosion issues impacting the community. This is an example of our government working, through its ongoing engagement, with the Government of Canada to access funding for the Northwest Territories that will directly benefit residents. The Departments of Municipal and Community Affairs and Environment and Natural Resources worked in partnership with the Hamlet of Tuktoyaktuk to access funding, through Indigenous Services Canada's Climate Change Preparedness in the North program. The total funding for the project will be $800,000.

This funding will be used to relocate private residences from the western shore of the peninsula to residential parcels located further inland. This funding will support the relocation of those homes that are facing the most severe erosion issues, where the erosion has reached the home's foundation. This is a commendable first step to addressing climate change impacts in this community, and I would like to thank Indigenous Services Canada for their support for this project.

This project is also supported by the work the Hamlet of Tuktoyaktuk and Municipal and Community Affairs began late in 2016 on the development of a mitigation plan for the community. The mitigation plan is being developed with funding support through Public Safety Canada's National Disaster Mitigation Program. Once complete, the plan will outline the long-term adaptation measures for the community.

Mr. Speaker, Tuktoyaktuk is not the only community facing hazards related to climate change. The department has identified eight other flood-risk communities in the Northwest Territories. These communities include Hay River, Fort Simpson, Fort Liard, Nahanni Butte, Tulita, Fort Good Hope, Fort McPherson, and Aklavik. The Department of Municipal and Community Affairs is actively working with these community governments to develop the plans and access the funding needed to address these issues. Creative solutions and inter-governmental collaboration, as we have seen with the project in Tuktoyaktuk, will enable us to meet those serious environmental challenges to the greatest extent possible. Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, when you and I were youths, smoking was everywhere. There were no restrictions on where people could smoke. In fact, planes had ashtrays built right into the armrest. Remember that? You could smoke in workplaces, even government offices. You could smoke in bars, restaurants, and patios. You could smoke anywhere.

Now, all of that is gone and for good reason. Second-hand smoke was harmful to the health and well-being of our society. More recently, the WSCC has banned smoking in commercial vehicles. Many municipalities, including Yellowknife, have now banned smoking in public outdoor spaces. All this to protect people from proven, deadly effects of second-hand smoke.

When we know that something causes significant health risks, the government must take action to reduce those risks, especially when it comes to our most vulnerable citizens, our youth. That is why governments around the world, including most of Canada, have banned smoking in vehicles with minors in them. Yes, Mr. Speaker, this is still a thing. In all our efforts to protect citizens from second-hand smoke over the years, we have forgotten about the child who is strapped into the car seat while mom and dad puff away on their cigarette, driving their vehicle.

Mr. Speaker, we know that second-hand smoke is dangerous. It is an even greater threat in closed, confined spaces like a vehicle. Second-hand smoke can pose a very serious risk to children in those vehicles. Children who breathe second-hand smoke can develop cancer later in life, even if they never take up smoking.

Children absorb more pollutants than adults because they are smaller and their respiratory system is still developing. Second-hand smoke can also lead to asthma and other respiratory illness and make children more vulnerable to bronchial infections and allergies. Clearly, it is a detriment to a child's well-being during their developmental years.

Mr. Speaker, you and I could not imagine going back in time when all that smoke was in our face everywhere we went. Let's stop living in the past and bring our tobacco laws into the present and protect those who need it most, our children. I don't think. I know. It is time to ban smoking in vehicles with young children in them.

Later today I will be presenting a motion to that effect. I would be most grateful for my colleagues' support on this very important health issue. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Members' statements. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Marsi cho, Mr. Speaker. [English translation not provided.]

Mr. Speaker, today I would like to speak to a new program that has recently been launched in the city of Yellowknife. This program is called Common Ground, and its purpose is to help the most vulnerable citizens find employment and lift themselves out of poverty.

Mr. Speaker, this initiative is being led by one of my constituents, Michael Fatte of Lutselk'e, who is a founder and lead coordinator of Common Ground. This program is aimed to hire homeless and the marginalized people to pick up the litter in public areas around the City of Yellowknife, which uniquely positions itself as a single solution for two major issues we have in the territory, homelessness and littering.

Mr. Speaker, this is truly an innovative program that has been tried, tested, and successfully adopted within numerous municipalities across Canada. It really is a win-win scenario, and it helps provide a small income to homeless individuals and helps keep our streets and environment cleaner. It also provides an opportunity for public perception of our most impoverished citizens to be enhanced.

Mr. Speaker, it is programs like this which I believe our government should be investing and promoting on a territorial-wide scale. While this program is currently in a pilot stage in Yellowknife, I see great potential to expand the scope into other communities. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge this government to work with the City of Yellowknife on securing a long-term funding for Common Ground, and to begin working with other communities on such programs in order to both maximize a number of honourable people employed, as well as grow a cleaner, litter-free environment in our territory.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the City of Yellowknife, the Yellowknife Women's Society, and Michael Fatte for their work on this program because their time, effort, and funding of this initiative has made it a reality. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Members' statements. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, during the last sitting, the Minister responsible for the Status of Women indicated she's moving the NWT's Status of Women Council in a new direction, the scope of that new direction is becoming clearer over time.

To refresh the memory of my colleagues, the Status of Women Council is an arm's-length agency of the territorial government, with its own board of directors. The board and staff are authorized to regulate their own affairs, including conducting research on matters that relate to the status of women, to participate in programs that improve the status of women, and, of course, to provide the Minister with assistance and advice.

It's important to note that the council staff is not part of the public service. Its independence is crucial. It is the publicly established and funded advocate, distinct from the service deliverers that are dependent upon government for funding.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister responsible for the Status of Women is jeopardizing the independence of the council. The Minister has not made public the evaluation she is using as a justification for removing the campaign schools from the council. The council is now fully staffed and in a position to resume offering the schools, but the Minister has directed the curriculum development and implementation be taken into the Department of Executive and Indigenous Affairs. She has not provided a solid reason for this change.

Perhaps most disturbing, the council has been directed to suspend its leadership of the Coalition Against Family Violence. Does anyone need to be reminded about the importance of advocating for women's safety, given our high rates of intimate partner violence? The council has hosted the Family Violence Coalition since its inception in 1999 because of its unique advocacy role. It is the primary advocate for to quote the act, "promoting a change in attitudes within the community in order that women enjoy equality of opportunity."

Mr. Speaker, women's equality begins with their safety. The coalition under the council's direction has been the driving force behind the development of the Men's Healing Program, Family Violence Awareness Week, and other anti-violence initiatives, but no longer. The coalition hasn't met in five months, and the council believes this is no longer their work.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister is presiding over the wholesale dismantling of the Status of Women Council. If it can't set its own priorities, what is the meaning of its independence? The council is moving in directions that are at odds with the stated purpose of the council in the act. There has been no consultation. The Minister owes the women of the NWT an explanation. Mahsi.

Masi. Members' statements. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On May 1, 2018, I had the opportunity to visit the community of Sambaa K'e, and the topic of renovations to the school and a needed community gym was brought to my attention. I was advised that the community had a public meeting to discuss the design and outline of the school expansion with the Department of Education, Culture and Employment and the Department of Infrastructure. The band council raised the concern that the wastewater location would block the future expansion of the community gym. They were advised that the architects would come back with other options for discussions, but this did not happen. Now, the contractor is placing the wastewater in that location, which will impede any future gym expansion.

Mr. Speaker, the community of Sambaa K'e is the only community in the Nahendeh riding that does not have a full-sized gym. The facility of what's called a community gym is not even close to being a gym. From my personal experience, and in reality, it should be called a large meeting room. Marking on floors does not make it a gym. The facility is too small for children to play in. As you are aware, it is very important that children need to have physical activity as part of their learning process; as well, provide physical activity opportunities that help improves their health. Currently, there are 26 students from kindergarten to grade 9 at Charles Tetcho School.

Mr. Speaker, the community needs to have a gym that will be part of the community for its growth plan. The younger generation are very active in sports. Over the last two years, the students have been fundraising and going to soccer at regional and territorial events. However, it is very difficult for them to practise in this area because of the size.

Mr. Speaker, they've tried to be active. They offer daily after school programs six days out of the week. Unfortunately, due to the size, they are not able to offer quality programs to all students. As well, it is my understanding that older youth access the facility for physical activity. Some of these students get hurt because it's too small. Due to this factor, Charles Tetcho School has to take students outside for physical activity, but this limits the number of times they can have PE.

The community needs a community gym, as the new generations are active and want to make positive, healthy lifestyle choices. The community and I are looking for the department and the government to step up and help build a much-needed gym. Mr. Speaker, I will have questions later today for the Minister of Culture, Education and Employment. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Members' statements. Member for Frame Lake.

Merci, Monsieur le President. The project assessment policy requires "Any technical advice and evidence provided by two boards by their respective staff is in line with legislation, Cabinet direction, and Ministerial policies established under this policy." This policy reads like a way of muzzling our scientists and preventing presentation of evidence that may be critical of Cabinet direction.

My concerns were borne out by the review board in its March 29, 2018, report on the Tlicho all-season road. The board found that the so-called whole-of-government approach "has limited the ability of evidence and expertise from GNWT departments about potential impacts, concerns, and mitigations on issues within their respective mandates and jurisdictions. In addition, it is not apparent to the review board how these departments may have influenced the developer's position in the CA."

The board continued: "The old approach was preferable to the one taken by the GNWT in this EA in terms of transparency, robust project design, the provision of useful information to parties and the review board, and serving the public interest. In future, where it is the developer, this would be a preferable approach for the GNWT to take."

In an attempt to mitigate this damaging finding, the associate deputy minister of Lands wrote to the board on April the 10^th to try to clarify the roles of various departments as a "matter of good governance and transparency." That letter went on to state: "The GNWT's implementing an internal firewall between the Departments of Infrastructure and Finance, and the staff of other departments who will assist in the decision making process." I guess someone forgot to tell the Department of Infrastructure.

The regional superintendent for Infrastructure wrote a letter directly to the Minister of Lands on April the 30^th complaining that there would be no Tlicho all-season road if the proposed measures to protect boreal caribou are accepted. It's not clear why this letter was sent, as it tries to override the review board's work. That letter casts a long and dark shadow of interference with procedural fairness and legal uncertainty over any decision on the Tlicho all-season road. GNWT's role in future environmental assessments and protection of threatened boreal caribou. I continue to call for Cabinet to change the project assessment policy to reflect the role our government can and should play in resource management decisions in the Northwest Territories. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Members' statements. Member for Sahtu.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Sahtu regional independence is truly, and similar to many other nations, seeking their objectives for solidarity and, more importantly, self-reliance through a decision-making authority.

Mr. Speaker, the Government of the Northwest Territories delivers programs and services through 12 departments and 350 employees to residents of five Sahtu communities. Mr. Speaker, this will soon change, as full staffing is under way for the new Sahtu Regional Health Centre, with an additional 25 physicians now under recruitment.

Mr. Speaker, when considerations are given to regional Aboriginal self-governments, joint intergovernmental regimes, delivery of programs and services, and efficiencies, these objectives on oversight require more thought to having a Sahtu regional director position. The structure will provide the cohesiveness of management required to ensure efficiency and delivery of programs and services.

Mr. Speaker, on capacity and accountability, it is essential for this government to provide the necessary resources and decision to filling this position. Later, I will have questions for the Honourable Premier and Minister responsible for Indigenous Affairs. Mahsi.

Masi. Members' statements. Member for Kam Lake.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address perhaps the greatest social issue affecting the Northwest Territories: the crisis of addiction, substance abuse, and chronic mental health problems.

I first want to acknowledge the work of the Standing Committee on Social Development and the efforts undertaken by the honourable Minister of Health and Social Services to review our current addictions treatment options and in working together to make progress on this continuing problem. However, the honourable Members of this House are not alone in their diligent efforts to make a difference in this government's support for addictions treatment. No, Mr. Speaker, as I have a constituent, Jennifer Lafferty, who has taken it upon herself to advocate for renewed focus on local addictions treatment options.

Mr. Speaker, it has been encouraging working with Ms. Lafferty, a former addict who has become a tireless advocate for those seeking treatment. Since the fall of last year, she has hit the streets of our capital with a petition calling for more treatment options for those affected by addictions. For her efforts, I will now be introducing a petition later today with hundreds of signatures in support of this cause.

Mr. Speaker, addictions and mental health is one of the government's most important mandate priorities. It affects the lives of hundreds of Northerners and lingers on to impact future generations. As it has been made so clear to us by the work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Indigenous peoples face systemic barriers in our society that non-Indigenous Canadians take for granted. Further, the Northwest Territories has the most residential school survivors per capita in Canada, not to mention the ongoing trauma caused by the Sixties Scoop, missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls, and the continued overrepresentation of Indigenous people within our jails, our courtrooms, and the child welfare system. These shameful elements of our colonial past have contributed to the oppressive conditions for ever-present substance abuse and addictions borne of intergenerational trauma that Northerners are faced with on a daily basis.

Mr. Speaker, although this government is working hard to address the problem, we need even more tools and resources to be made available here at home to help our people heal and break the cycle of abuse. Too many of our most vulnerable community members are falling through the gaps in society. We need to close these gaps and give people the best chances possible at recovery here in the North. Northerners seeking wellness for themselves and their families need more than residential treatment options, but aftercare and detoxing services available in their communities. To quote Ms. Lafferty, "They want help, and not just a phone number."

Mr. Speaker, I will have questions later today about the state of aftercare and detox programs in the Northwest Territories. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Members' statements. Member for Mackenzie Delta.

Mr. Speaker, spring is a time that is celebrated by everyone in the territory, when we welcome warmer temperatures, more sunshine, trees coming back to life, and the abundance of wildlife. On the Dempster highway, this also means that brush tends to overgrow.

In the past few years, the Department of Infrastructure has done a stellar job of clearing the brush. This year, it has already cleared about 15 kilometres of highway between Tsiigehtchic and Inuvik. Brush clearing is important, not only for fire smarting, but also to ensure that willows don't get too close to the highway, especially in the fall. This lowers the chances of moose coming onto the highway, which could pose serious dangers to drivers.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to commend the Department of Infrastructure for coming to the Mackenzie Delta and clearing the brush along the highway. I would like to see the department continue their work this season and also clear brush from Fort McPherson to Tsiigehtchic.

Mr. Speaker, blind spots were done, but we need to ensure that the whole roadway is completed for the safety of our residents. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I will have questions later today.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Hay River Regional Health Centre has a beautiful dialysis unit that is staffed by a great group of practitioners. I hear nothing but good things about the services provided by that unit, and we are lucky to have it in Hay River.

However, Mr. Speaker, there is only enough staff to service eight dialysis patients, and that is simply not enough. The facility itself can easily accommodate more patients. There are four dialysis machines, but they are each only used twice a day, three days a week. In Yellowknife, I believe they run three shifts a day, six days a week. If we did that in Hay River, we could triple our capacity. I am not sure if we need that many slots available, but I know for a fact that we need more. Last that I heard, there were three residents of Hay River receiving dialysis treatment in Yellowknife, and prior to that, at least one of them was staying in Edmonton to receive treatment. Situations like this are not uncommon.

Most patients, if not all, who are sent to Yellowknife are put up at Vital Abel House. It is a boarding home that is meant to accommodate brief stays. However, Mr. Speaker, these dialysis patients are usually not there for just a night or two. It is more likely that they are there for weeks, months, or even years.

These patients, many of them seniors, must leave their friends and families and move into a facility where they must share sleeping quarters and washrooms with strangers. These people have no privacy, none of the comforts or emotional supports that they would have back home, and have no idea when they will be able to return home. That is far from an ideal situation. It can have real negative effects on people's mental and physical health.

What I don't understand, Mr. Speaker, is why we do this. It is my understanding that it costs the government about $200 a day to put people up in boarding homes such as Vital Abel. That's $73,000 a year. It seems like there are always a few residents of Hay River staying at Vital Abel House so that they can receive dialysis. That's hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. Mr. Speaker, it would be cheaper to get these people their own apartments in Yellowknife and put them up for a year. Moreover, I have constituents who have told me that they have had to sleep on the couch while staying at Vital Abel because there were no beds available.

Mr. Speaker, there must be a better way to provide dialysis treatment to the residents of Hay River. I will have questions for the Minister of Health at the appropriate time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Members' statements. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Marsi cho, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I request unanimous consent to move to item 6, recognition of visitors in the gallery, on the orders of the day. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. The Member is seeking unanimous consent to move item 6 right after Members' statements.

---Unanimous consent granted

Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Marsi cho, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize Michael Fatte in the gallery today. I spoke of Michael in the statement that I made today, working with the homeless people in Yellowknife, and I would also like to recognize YK Dene members, Jennifer Lafferty, Donald White, and the baby, Cameron Lafferty. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, too, would like to recognize Jennifer Lafferty, her partner Donald White, and their son Cameron. Thank you for being with us today and your hard work in developing the petition that I will be tabling later today. Thank you.

Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize two Pages here, Kyra Sanguez, who I have actually had the opportunity to coach this year, as well as Ava Erasmus, whose mother and father are really good friends, and grandparents I know really well. As well, I would like to recognize Debra Richards, who is my CA, who is also chaperoning our Pages from Simpson, and it's her birthday today, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Happy birthday. Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Member for Nunakput.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to recognize the translator from Nunakput, Ms. Annie Goose. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to recognize and welcome a life-long friend of mine, Trevor Kasteel, to the House today. He recently won an award for community builder. It came from the NWT Disabilities Council. So, congratulations and welcome, and thank you for being here.

Masi. Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to move to item 13, reports of committees on the review of bills, on the orders of the day. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Unanimous consent granted

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Members. Mr. Speaker, I wish to report to the Assembly that the Standing Committee on Government Operations and the Standing Committee on Social Development have reviewed Bill 6, Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Implementation Act, and wish to report that Bill 6 is ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi, Member for Kam Lake. Bill 6 is ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 75(5) to have Bill 6, Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Implementation, moved into Committee of the Whole for consideration later today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Unanimous consent granted

Bill 6 is moved into Committee of the Whole for consideration later today. Masi. Reports of committees on the review of bills. Item 4, reports of standing and special committees. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we are here today for the Standing Committee on Government Operations and the Standing Committee on Social Development report on the review of Bill 6, Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Implementation Act.

Introduction

In April 2017, the federal government introduced two bills to legalize cannabis in Canada. Bill C-45 deals with federal licensing and oversight of the cannabis supply chain, including all production and distribution, and sets regulatory standards to protect public health and safety. Bill C-46 sets out offences and procedures relating to impaired driving.

To avoid having this default federal framework imposed on the Northwest Territories when the Government of Canada legalizes cannabis across the country, it is necessary for the Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT) to adopt its own framework. To create these rules, which pick up where federal legislation leaves off, the GNWT introduced Bill 6, the Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Implementation Act. Bill 6 proposed two new laws for cannabis control: the Cannabis Products Act; and the Cannabis Smoking Control Act. To address drug-impaired driving, it also proposed amendments to current provisions of the territorial Motor Vehicles Act. This omnibus bill is the proposed legislation under review here.

Our Review of Bill 6

On March 1, 2018, Bill 6 received second reading in the Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories and was referred to the standing committee for review. The Standing Committee on Government Operations reviews activities of the Department of Finance, which will administer the Cannabis Products Act once it becomes law. Similarly, the Standing Committee on Social Development reviews activities of the Department of Health and Social Services, which will administer the Cannabis Smoking Control Act once it becomes law. These committees also share membership with the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment, which reviews activities of the Department of Infrastructure, which in turn administers the Motor Vehicles Act. For this reason, the standing committees, operating as the "joint committee," with no pun intended, have worked together to review the bill.

Between April 23 and May 4, 2018, we travelled to 16 communities, holding 16 hearings. We also met with students at six schools to gather input from Northerners. These communities and schools are listed in an appendix. We received 15 written submissions, and have undertaken our own research, including a review of proposed cannabis legislation and best practices across the country.

In our review, we have assumed that the federal enabling legislation will be passed. Neither the standing committees nor the Government of the Northwest Territories may change or overrule this federal legislation. As Regular Members, our approach to Bill 6 has focused on the need to ensure that, as much as possible, territorial cannabis legislation best reflects the wishes of the people of the Northwest Territories.

Our report is divided into two portions. First, we will discuss what we heard from the public hearing during our tour. Then we will discuss what we did, a combination of motions to amend the bill and policy recommendations to the GNWT. The bill debated in the House after we have formally submitted our report to the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly will reflect the changes we have made.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to pass the reading of this report to the Member from Kam Lake. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What We Heard

Economic Growth and Job Creation

Support for Private-sector Cannabis Stores

The GNWT proposed that cannabis be sold only in existing liquor stores for at least two years, with all business conducted through the Northwest Territories Liquor Commission and all expenses and revenues flowing through the Liquor Revolving Fund. The GNWT's initial consultation revealed that "preferences for the retail sales system were mixed, with little over half of survey respondents supporting the liquor commission model and others wanting opportunities for private stores or dispensaries."

However, this is not consistent with public views expressed during our tour. While a few witnesses expressed satisfaction with the Liquor Commission model, the majority of witnesses in small communities, regional centres, and Yellowknife objected to private businesses being excluded from cannabis retailing at the outset. Many residents are interested in the potential economic development and job growth that legalization may bring and are concerned that the GNWT has chosen to monopolize this opportunity. In Lutselk'e, Ms. Florence Catholique told us that: "Lutselk'e women have gotten together to deal with issues in the communities... to enhance the community, work with the youth, and protect rights. Because we knew this [hearing] was coming up, we looked at the business angle. We're looking for money to go to a cannabis workshop in Edmonton to get the details on how to run a [cannabis] business."

The Yellowknife Chamber of Commerce advised that its members "strongly disagree with the proposed retail model." Their "formal position is that, if licenses are going to be issued for cannabis retail, Yellowknife entrepreneurs should have the opportunity to apply for those licenses and demonstrate that they can operate within the chosen regulatory framework." This sentiment was echoed by a representative of the NWT Chamber of Commerce, who said its members want the opportunity to get in on the recreational cannabis business from the start and are prepared to meet regulatory requirements to do so.

It is apparent that, although there are many unknowns in the emerging recreational cannabis market, many Northerners are eager to join their fellow Canadians in learning on the job. Medical cannabis consultant and advocate Ms. Kim MacNearney wrote, "the opportunity for cannabis business development in the NWT is huge and should be embraced by the GNWT, allowing it to grow in an entrepreneurial fashion."

Motion 3 and Recommendation 6 addressed this matter.

Mr. Speaker, I would now like to turn the reading of this report over to the Honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Impacts of the liquor commission model on small communities. Many witnesses raised concerns that neither the potential side effects of the GNWT's proposed liquor commission model nor the unique needs of small communities were appropriately reflected in the bill. Under the proposed model, cannabis would be available in up to seven liquor stores in just six of 33 communities, provided that the owners of these private businesses, who currently sell GNWT-owned alcohol on consignment from the Liquor Commission, agree to sell cannabis. This would leave the majority of NWT communities, including all the small communities, reliant on a mail-order system. As proposed, this system would also operate through the Liquor Commission.

In smaller communities, residents travelling to larger centres to shop will often shop on behalf of neighbours and friends, as well. In Fort Liard, we heard that if residents' only alternative was mail-order, the proximity of Fort Nelson, BC, would ensure that most residents would travel there by car to purchase cannabis and that possession limits would likely not inhibit them from buying for as many legal purchasers as possible. Many residents expressed the view that the mail-order system is too restrictive, which could also encourage cannabis bootlegging. We heard repeatedly that in order to minimize bootlegging and encourage people to buy legal cannabis, cannabis should be cheap and plentiful. Mr. Jason Perrino wrote, "I want to see the illegal market cease to exist. New legislation and regulations can't be so restrictive that [people] continue to buy from dealers."

Residents also identified the challenges posed by limited job opportunities in smaller communities, coupled with expensive necessities (food, fuel, et cetera). Other witnesses noted that many residents have a strong desire to work and would welcome the jobs that could be created by cannabis sales in smaller communities. This absence of legitimate jobs is also seen as a factor contributing to bootlegging alcohol and dealing in illicit drugs. During a hearing at the Hay River Reserve, Mr. Jeffery Fabian said, "Bootleggers are feeding their own families with bootlegging. Food is expensive."

Again, Motion 3 and Recommendation 6 addressed this matter.

Record Suspension

We heard that criminal records related to cannabis are a barrier to employment, education, and travel opportunities. Mr. Amos Cardinal of the Hay River Reserve observed that living with a criminal record is like "dragging a big pile of garbage behind you." This burden is compounded by the expense associated with obtaining a record suspension; the Parole Board of Canada charges $631 to process an application, and we heard that this cost is often an insurmountable obstacle for those who would otherwise be eligible. Several witnesses asked if record suspension for cannabis-related offences, administered through the Government of Canada, would be more readily available after legalization.

Recommendation 5 addresses this matter.

Revenues and Taxation

According to the Government of Canada, the "provinces and territories will work with municipalities towards legalization." However, during the consultation, we heard from the Northwest Territories Association of Communities. The association wrote that they:

"Have requested a municipal share of the revenue and have received an irrevocable no. While we respect that the revenues will be low for our territory and that communities are not responsible for policing in our jurisdiction, communities are currently underfunded to the tune of 37 per cent. They should not be expected to absorb these additional costs. The federal government increased the provincial/territorial share from 50 to 75 per cent so that it could be passed on to communities. Some jurisdictions in Canada have already announced they will be passing on 40 per cent of revenues to communities as well as providing training to all appropriate staff."

We heard concerns that, if government raises the price of cannabis too high, people will continue to buy it from the illicit dealers they already do business with. We also heard support for tax rates for cannabis products based on the concentration of THC, with high-concentration products subject to a higher tax rate. Several submissions suggested that cannabis revenues be targeted to public awareness and education campaigns. It was also suggested that pricing should be used to control youth access by making cannabis an expensive luxury.

Further, in nearly every community we visited, we heard recommendations to dedicate cannabis revenue to related public education and public health initiatives.

Recommendation 7 addresses this matter.

Public Education

Public education was discussed in every community we visited. Witnesses were interested in learning more about the bill itself, relevant health information, and federal rules for commercial cannabis production. We heard questions on cannabis "pros and cons," second-hand smoke, different types of cannabis products, the suppliers the GNWT intends to engage, options for plebiscites, school curricula, impacts on youth brain development and general human health, and more. We also heard recommendations for cannabis-specific training for community health nurses and youth workers, door-to-door information campaigns, and information delivery in Indigenous languages. Ms. Pauline Roche said, "Marijuana is here already. The GNWT has to put resources in schools and teach our kids." Mr. Jeff Norn recommended "tailored education [initiatives]" designed for a broad demographic: not only youth, but also elders, parents, law enforcement, et cetera.

These questions and comments tell us that Northerners are keen to understand cannabis legalization and its likely impacts on their communities. They also tell us that the GNWT has not clearly communicated its intentions for cannabis regulation. In Fort McPherson, Mr. Taig Connell asked, "How will legalization benefit the NWT? Will it create jobs, promote healthy programs? Who wins?" Effective public education is necessary to mitigate the risks posed by incorrect information, fears, or misconceptions about cannabis.

Recommendations 1 and 2 address this matter.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn the reading of this report over to the Member for Hay River North.

Masi. Member for Hay River North.

Public Health and Safety

Addictions treatment. Witnesses spoke of their desire for local clinical and on-the-land options for addictions treatment and aftercare, including programs for those living in small communities. Mr. Tim Harris also spoke of the value of the Substance Abuse Management program designed for use in our criminal justice system. Many witnesses were concerned that the GNWT will implement cannabis legalization without parallel plans to strengthen treatment options. Witnesses also spoke of the impact of isolation and shame on addictions and on the decision to pursue treatment, suggesting that public perception of cannabis and cannabis use will continue to evolve after legalization.

The Standing Committee on Social Development recently completed an in-depth examination of addiction treatment options described in Committee Report 4-18(3), Report on Adult Residential Addictions Treatment Facilities Tour 2017. In this report, the committee recommended that the Department of Health and Social Services enhance public communications on addictions treatment, enhance community-based aftercare services, and develop a pilot program to ensure that Northerners completing residential treatment placements are not discharged into homelessness. We await the GNWT's formal response to these recommendations.

Alcohol and Drugs in our Communities

Many witnesses spoke of alcohol's devastating impacts on our communities and on our Indigenous peoples, often comparing cannabis to alcohol. Some were concerned that cannabis would have severe and negative effects, as alcohol has. At the Hay River Reserve, Elder Pat Martel spoke through a translator:

"Sometimes, we talk about things or experiences of how it used to be, years ago, things that we know. Anybody talk about when you're drinking alcohol, I've been there. Today, sometimes people say, 'What do you know about what drugs can do to people?' I've seen what drugs can do to people... [I want to] have somebody come to us here and tell us how it's going to work, how you can buy, sell, grow. I need to know those things before I can sit here and say, 'It's okay' [or] tell my granddaughters they can smoke all they want. I'm not here for that; I'm here to protect them, not only from marijuana, but from drinking. I need you to think about those things and tell the government we asked for help."

Other witnesses asserted an opposing perspective. Also at the Hay River Reserve, Mr. Jeff Norn told us, "I have never seen anyone overdose on pot, [but] I have seen people in hospital, lives, families, communities destroyed with alcohol."

We have considered the views submitted to us and our own research. Although we recognize that cannabis and alcohol are distinct substances with different physiological and social impacts, we also recognize Northerners' concerns. We know that cannabis use is not without risk, particularly for youth and in use of high-potency products such as distilled cannabis resin (also called "shatter"), currently available illegally. In a written submission, the Registered Nurses of the Northwest Territories and Nunavut ("the nurses' association") recommended that "it would be proactive to get ahead of the curve" in preparing for the regulation of high-potency products, including edibles. Similarly, the Northwest Territories and Nunavut Public Health Association ("the public health association") recommended that high-potency products be subject to higher taxation.

Although cannabis and alcohol are not the same, Northerners spoke strongly in our public hearings of alcohol's toll on their communities and their strong desire to protect their families. Widespread cannabis use by minors and children as young as 12 years old was a grave concern expressed in many communities. Witnesses' proposals for improved public education and engagement, as well as community-led harm-reduction initiatives, further speak to their focus on public health and safety.

Recommendations 1 and 2 address these matters.

Co-location of Cannabis and Alcohol

We must also address the co-location of cannabis and alcohol sales, as proposed in the GNWT's retail model. Witnesses repeatedly echoed the federal Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation ("the task force"), which recommended "no co-location of alcohol or tobacco and cannabis sales, wherever possible, [and that] when co-location cannot be avoided, appropriate safeguards must be put in place."

Our research shows that in developing its retail model, the GNWT has broken with national trends: British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland and Labrador will not allow cannabis to be sold alongside alcohol. Further, in its written submission, the Canadian Cancer Society recommended against co-location to discourage "poly-substance use," or the co-occurring use of cannabis, alcohol, and/or tobacco. This is consistent with what we heard in our public hearings, where witnesses were concerned about the creation of "one-stop shops" for bootleggers and the temptation to purchase alcohol in addition to cannabis. In Lutselk'e, Ms. Florence Catholique said, "I do totally disagree with having the cannabis sold to us at the liquor store. I don't see the prohibition act as a remedy, but allowing them to go to the liquor store to buy the cannabis... It's also very tempting to buy a bottle." As discussed, many witnesses also opposed the GNWT's proposed liquor store retail model for economic reasons.

Motion 4 addressed this matter.

Enforcement Capacity and Community Resources

Bill 6 proposed two streams for territorial enforcement of cannabis laws: Enforcement of laws on possession, production, and sale under the Cannabis Products Act; and enforcement of laws on public smoking under the Cannabis Smoking Control Act. This is in addition to RCMP enforcement of federal laws. However, many witnesses told us that enforcement responsibilities had not been clearly defined.

Limited enforcement resources were also a prominent concern in public hearings, both with respect to new cannabis-specific laws and more generally. Residents were skeptical of the GNWT's ability to enforce new laws in addition to the already challenging workloads. Community leaders from north to south stressed that they lack resources to enforce provisions of the cannabis legislation or bylaws that might flow from it in the future. We also heard recommendations for additional highway patrols, new RCMP positions, and new RCMP detachments. In Tsiigehtchic, Ms. Grace Blake summarized the issue: "We can have all the laws you want, but the problem is enforcing them."

Again, witnesses identified bootlegging as a major debilitating problem. Both bootlegging and the so-called online "grey market" are enforcement challenges impacting and impacted by the territory's cannabis retail model. We heard concerns that current drug dealers and/or alcohol bootleggers will incorporate cannabis bootlegging into their repertoire; that current cannabis dealers will transition to dealing harder drugs; and that the proposed retail model, coupled with limited enforcement resources, risks creating new bootleggers altogether.

In Fort Providence, Mr. Jim Thom warned that the GNWT risked substantial lost revenue if online grey market sales were not addressed, and, in Tuktoyaktuk, Ms. Marie Pokiak said, "I'm really tired of bootleggers making a living off it... We need an outlet for the sale of cannabis. Otherwise, we are creating more opportunity for illegal trade." These concerns were echoed in many other communities, often coupled with concerns about illegal sales to underage young people. Former Premier Nellie Cournoyea described illicit drug-dealing as a hidden, "ghostly" crime that causes great harm, even death, but most of the time, "no one will go to jail, no one will go to court." Recommendation 4 addresses these concerns.

I would now like to hand the report over to the Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Masi. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Marsi cho, Mr. Speaker.

Impaired Driving and Road Safety

Bill 6 proposed a framework to govern driver's licence suspensions for drug-impaired driving, including zero-tolerance rules for young, novice, and commercial drivers. These zero-tolerance rules mean that drivers aged 21 or younger, and new and commercial drivers of any age, will lose their driver's licence for 30 days if caught driving after using cannabis or any other drug. Mr. Sam Gargan of Fort Providence questioned the impact of these new rules on drivers' civil liberties.

Many witnesses also asked how police will determine whether a driver has used a drug or if a driver is subsequently impaired. In the Northwest Territories, the RCMP enforces impaired-driving laws. We understand that the RCMP intends to use a combination of practical technologies (e.g. mouth swabs) and subjective analysis (e.g. driver inspection by an officer trained as a drug recognition expert). However, drawing on our own research and the concerns brought to us during our tour, we have serious reservations about these methodologies.

Additionally, we heard concerns regarding cannabis-smoking in cars where children were present. This is prohibited under the proposed legislation, a decision we support, particularly given that cannabis is an intoxicant affecting driving ability.

We also note that, because on-road use of all-terrain vehicles such as quads is regulated under the All-terrain Vehicles Act, not the Motor Vehicles Act, neither current territorial impaired-driving legislation nor the amendments proposed in Bill 6 will apply to those vehicles.

Medical Cannabis

Many witnesses were concerned that Bill 6 would impact the prescription and use of medical cannabis. However, medical cannabis is regulated under separate federal legislation. The legal requirements governing the prescription and use have not changed, and will not be affected by this bill.

Possession Limits

Bill 6 proposed possession limits consistent with pending federal legislation: 30 grams per person and four plants per household. Many witnesses were interested in the rationale for these limits and identified concerns respecting cannabis consumption and growth in homes where minors reside.

As we have mentioned, many also questioned the impact of possession limits on small-community residents shopping for friends and neighbours in regional centres. Witnesses also noted their concerns that a 30-gram limit would encourage bootlegging, particularly if cannabis sales were restricted to existing liquor stores. Others suggested a two-tier possession limit with a lower possession limit (or cannabis potency limit) for those aged 19 to 25, reflecting the increased risks to younger consumers suggested by recent research. We also heard questions about whether possession limits would apply in private residences.

Motions 7 and 8 addressed this matter.

Regulating Cannabis Use in Public Places

Witnesses were often uncertain about where Northerners will be permitted to smoke cannabis under the proposed legislation. We understand that the GNWT intends to clarify this matter through regulations, but we also feel strongly that the rules must be clearly communicated to residents. For example, witnesses asked about cannabis smoking at home, around minors, on sidewalks, in parks (municipal and territorial), in yards or on balconies, and in licensed establishments. It is evident that the GNWT has not clearly communicated one of the cornerstones of its cannabis framework.

Overall, we heard recommendations to restrict cannabis consumption in community spaces and around minors, but we were also reminded that we must ensure access to reasonable options for legal consumption. As legislators, we recognize each individual's right to safely access public spaces in accordance with the law and must balance this with our obligation not to frustrate cannabis legalization by making it practically impossible to use cannabis. We encourage the GNWT to monitor these issues as they evolve across the country, with a view to future improvements of territorial cannabis laws.

Motion 19 addressed this matter.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn the reading of this report over to the honourable Member from Deh Cho. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Member for Deh Cho.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Regulating Cannabis Use in Licensed Establishments

A regulatory framework for licensed establishments (e.g. "cannabis cafes" or "vape lounges") is outside the scope of the bill. This means that we could not amend the bill to explicitly allow such establishments immediately upon legalization. Still, we recognize that this subject is important to many residents.

Many witnesses, including the Yellowknife Chamber of Commerce, spoke of the economic benefits potentially associated with such establishments. Others, such as the Canadian Cancer Society, raised health concerns, believing "'cannabis cafes would be untenable if any worker were to be employed, [because] no worker should have to be exposed to any second-hand smoke, [and] especially to continuous high concentrations." A third point of view, from the Public Health Association, suggested that "allowance for the use of specified dwellings in communities where it could be a safe place for those 19 years and older to consume cannabis" could reduce harm by encouraging cannabis consumption outside the home. Similarly, Ms. Kim MacNearney wrote of her concern that highly restrictive rules for public consumption would "perpetuat[e] the stigma of 'cannabis use and users are bad and should not be within public view.'"

Recommendation 3 addressed this matter.

Workplace Use and Impairment

We heard many questions about cannabis use and impairment in the workplace, particularly where impairment could pose a risk to public safety (e.g. pilots, truck and bus drivers, et cetera). Witnesses also asked about rules for employers and tools for determining impairment.

In a public meeting on April 20, 2018, the Workers' Safety and Compensation Commission (WSCC) advised the committees that regulations and policy will be developed to address any changes arising from cannabis legalization. We trust that the WSCC will continue to provide all reasonable support to territorial employers, including legalization-specific training, materials, and other supports. We also note that employers are able to have their own policies related to drug use and/or impairment in the workplace, while the Mine Health and Safety Regulations already prohibit "impair[ment] by alcohol or drugs while at work."

Youth

Legal age

Bill 6 proposed that the minimum legal age for cannabis purchase, possession, and use will be 19 years, as it is for alcohol.

During our tour, we heard support for maintaining the proposed legal age, as well as raising it (for example, to 21 years or to 25 years) and lowering it (e.g. to 18 years). Students in Ulukhaktok and Tuktoyaktuk discussed a range of options, up to age 21. Other witnesses spoke to the impact of cannabis on brain development in children and youth, given that contemporary medical science suggests that parts of the brain continue to develop through age 25. We heard advocacy for a "harm-reduction" approach, although some citing this methodology felt that a higher legal age would not prevent consumption, but instead encourage illegal consumption, while others put forward an opposing view.

We also heard comparisons to the Northwest Territories' legal age for purchase and consumption of tobacco (18 years). The Canadian Cancer Society recommended "that the GNWT set the same legal for cannabis and tobacco [in its proposal, age 21], and ensure active enforcement of regulations prohibiting the sale of cannabis and tobacco products to minors is fully implemented." Students at Hay River's Diamond Jenness Secondary School made similar comparisons, noting that the GNWT's proposed legislation would incongruously allow northern teens to legally access cigarettes with "tonnes of chemicals" before they are able to legally access cannabis.

Our research shows that the decision to synchronize legal age for both alcohol and cannabis is consistent with those of all other Canadian jurisdictions except Manitoba's. Ongoing studies continue to assess the impacts of cannabis, which has generally increased in potency over the last 50 years, on the human brain. We encourage the GNWT, as both a cannabis regulator and healthcare provider, to monitor this research.

Purchase and Possession by Minors

Bill 6 proposed to prohibit minors from possessing any cannabis and to ticket for possession, with penalties consistent with those for youth possession of both alcohol and cigarettes. As set out in proposed federal legislation, minors will face criminal charges only if they are found to possess or distribute more than five grams.

Throughout our engagement, Northerners emphasized their belief that education at home, at school, and in the community is essential and that youth should not be criminalized. Students at Deninu School in Fort Resolution suggested that an appropriate enforcement response to youth possession under five grams would be the seizure of any cannabis and discussion with parents or guardians, not a monetary penalty.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn the reading of this report over to the Member for Sahtu. Mahsi.

Masi. Member for Sahtu.

Other Issues

Community Control

The territorial plebiscite regime enables community control of alcohol (e.g. restrictions or prohibitions). Bill 6 proposed a similar model for cannabis. Many witnesses asked questions about plebiscites, when they would occur, how they would be organized, and were generally supportive of community control. For some, however, "community control" meant coordinating plebiscites and any subsequent restrictions, while for others this meant local options for retail and production, as we have discussed.

Some witnesses also questioned the overall reasonableness of the plebiscite system, suggesting that, if cannabis is legalized throughout Canada, then each Canadian has a right to consume it.

Although witnesses did not always agree, personal and community autonomy were consistent themes. In Deline, Mr. Morris Neyelle said, "We have to work together to deal with this issue. Marijuana will be with us until the end of the world. It is up to the community to decide... how to deal with it." Ms. Nora Wedzin of Behchoko added this advice: "Don't create what happened with alcohol. Don't impose on [the] community. Listen first."

Notably, the bill would prohibit plebiscites in any community where a cannabis store already operates. This means that communities face a potentially narrow window to exercise plebiscite options, as highlighted in a written submission from the Northwest Territories Association of Communities. It is critical that these timelines be communicated clearly to the public and that all communities be given reasonable opportunity to pursue a plebiscite if they so desire.

Motions 5, 6, 9, and 21 addressed this matter.

Jurisdiction

We heard questions about the regulation of cannabis on reserves and in communities with provisions for self-government:

"First Nations communities and Indigenous governments must have more input into how cannabis laws will be governed within their communities. They must have greater autonomy with how they want to go about legalization, especially in terms of taxation (they should get a cut of the profit, along with the territorial and federal governments), ownership of cannabis retail outlets, and the pricing of all cannabis products in stores that would exist within their communities."

Although these questions are outside of the scope of Bill 6 and are to be debated between negotiating parties, we recognize that they are very important to Indigenous governments. We understand that the territorial government is developing a negotiating mandate on cannabis, and we expect that as legalization proceeds, the GNWT will work more openly and directly with its inter-governmental partners. Members look forward to regular updates as the GNWT's work proceeds on these matters.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn the reading of this report to the Member for Mackenzie Delta.

Masi. Member for Mackenzie Delta.

Mandatory Review of Legislation

Not since the prohibition of alcohol was lifted in the majority of Canadian provinces in the 1920s has the country seen an initiative like the national legalization of cannabis. During our public engagement, many people voiced concerns about the "unknowns" associated with legalization. We expect that the GNWT and its federal/provincial/territorial counterparts will encounter issues and circumstances not fully anticipated when cannabis legislation was drafted.

At public hearings in Behchoko, Inuvik, and Tuktoyaktuk, some witnesses emphasized the need to revisit cannabis legislation after communities have firsthand experience of the results. The point was made that the government must respond promptly to public needs after enacting laws of this magnitude.

Motion 22 addressed this matter.

What We Did

To complete our review of Bill 6, we considered all public submissions and reviewed national best practices and other jurisdictions' proposed cannabis frameworks. In response, we developed 11 motions to amend the bill and eight broader recommendations to the Government of the Northwest Territories.

Clause-by-Clause Review of Bill 6

The clause-by-clause review of Bill 6 was held on May 28, 2018, at the Legislative Assembly building in Yellowknife. The Committees moved 22 motions, including nine developed by the Department of Justice and two developed by the Member for Frame Lake.

Motion 1: To amend subsection 1(1) of Schedule A to define "consume"

The terms "consume," "smoke," and "use" are used throughout the bill, but the distinction between them may be unclear to the average reader. This motion provided clarity by establishing that "consume" includes, but is not exclusive to, both smoking and the consumption of cannabis products ("edibles").

Motion 2: To amend subsection 1(1) of Schedule A to delete the definition of "public place"

This motion was developed by the Department of Justice to correct a drafting error by deleting the definition for "public place" under the proposed Cannabis Products Act. Because this term is not used in the act, a definition was unnecessary.

Motion 3: To amend section 5 of Schedule A to revise the retail model for cannabis sales in the Northwest Territories

This motion ensured that private retailers, other than those operating liquor stores through consignment with the Liquor Commission, may be designated as cannabis vendors. The motion proposed to require the Minister of Finance to designate a cannabis vendor if the vendor met prescribed criteria. It also proposed that although cannabis vendors may also be liquor retailers, liquor retailer status will not be required.

This motion was carried. However, the Minister did not concur, so the bill was not amended.

Motion 4: To amend section 5 of Schedule A to prohibit co-location of cannabis and alcohol

This motion provided that where a cannabis store will be located in the same building as a liquor store, the two establishments must be entirely separate, including separate exterior doors. This reflects what we heard from Northerners, as well as national best practices.

This motion was carried. However, the Minister did not concur, so the bill was not amended.

Motions 5 and 6: To amend subsection 6(1) of Schedule A to clarify rules for community consultation prior to designating a cannabis vendor

Bill 6 initially proposed that where no cannabis store operated in a community, the Minister of Finance would be required to ascertain a community's views before designating a cannabis vendor. This motion expanded that requirement to ensure such notice will be given at any time a new cannabis vendor is considered. It also established that where the potential vendor would be the community's first, the Minister would be required to give notice of plebiscite rules, ensuring that sufficient time is available to hold a plebiscite as needed.

Motion 7: To amend section 11 of Schedule A to clarify limits on household possession of cannabis

This motion was developed by the Department of Justice to explicitly provide that the 30-gram possession limit does not apply to cannabis held in a person's private residence.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn the reading of this report to the Member for Frame Lake. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Member for Frame Lake.

Merci, Monsieur le President.

Motion 8: To amend clause 11 of Schedule A to develop a two-tier, age-based possession framework

This motion was developed by the Member for Frame Lake. It proposed to maintain the proposed 30-gram possession limit for those aged 25 and over, but to establish a 10-gram possession limit for those aged 19 to 24. This enables the choice of consumption for all those of legal age, while also establishing a model of limited consumption for younger adults.

This motion was carried. However, the Minister did not concur, so the bill was not amended.

Motion 9: To amend Schedule A to expand plebiscite options

This motion was proposed by the Member for Frame Lake. Under the bill, plebiscites will not be permitted in any community with an operating cannabis store. This motion proposed to allow plebiscites in a community with an operating cannabis store, if the store has been in operation for two or more years, if at least 20 per cent of the voters in the community petition the Minister to hold a plebiscite, and if the plebiscite proposes only sales restrictions, not a prohibition-based system.

This motion was not carried. As such, the bill was not amended.

Motion 10: To delete section 23 of Schedule A

This motion deleted the provision enabling the Minister of Finance to form a committee to advise him or her on territorial cannabis industry operations. We believe that public involvement in cannabis regulation is essential, but feel that the proposed advisory committee could unfairly prejudice such involvement. First, the GNWT has stated that it does not intend to strike such a committee in the foreseeable future. Second, we consider that as elected representatives of the people of the Northwest Territories, Members of the Legislative Assembly already have a mandate to consult residents on the operation of the Cannabis Products Act and the cannabis industry. We were also concerned that this provision has the potential to provide a non-elected body, without required qualifications, with an unfettered ability to influence the administration of the act.

Motions 11 and 14: To amend sections 29 and 71 of Schedule A to create regulation-making authority respecting cannabis cultivation

These motions were developed by the Department of Justice to create regulation-making authority respecting the growing, cultivation, propagation, and harvesting of cannabis.

Motion 12: To amend subsection 42(3) of Schedule A to clarify rules for individuals accompanying inspectors under the act

In its original form, Bill 6 would have allowed an inspector to be accompanied in their duties by "any other individual that the inspector believes is necessary," providing an overly broad scope. The amending motion defined clear parameters for such accompaniment. This will ensure that inspectors may be appropriately supported in their work while also assuring the general public that inspectors' powers are limited to the fulfillment of their duties under the act.

Motion 13: To amend section 52 of Schedule A to clarify rules for court-ordered forfeiture of property

This motion defined clear parameters for the forfeiture of seized property where a person has not been convicted of an offence under the act. Bill 6 had proposed to allow the Minister to apply for a judicial order requesting the forfeiture of seized cannabis, as well as "any other property" seized, where a person charged with an offence is not convicted. While we understand that there may be situations where forfeiture is appropriate, as when the property's owner is not known, we found this power overly broad. We were concerned about the potential for infringement on residents' civil liberties and noted that a similar provision in the Liquor Act is not as broad.

Motions 15 and 17: To amend Schedules A and B to create new sections addressing transitional rules for cannabis cultivation and smoking in rental properties and condominium corporations

This motion addresses transitional rules for existing leases on rental properties and existing condominium bylaws following cannabis legalization. Where a rental agreement or condominium bylaw addresses tobacco smoking, the same rules will apply to cannabis smoking. Additionally, cannabis cultivation will be permitted in rental properties where permitted under the rental agreement. If the rental agreement is silent on this matter, cultivation will be permitted unless the landlord notifies the tenant in writing that it is prohibited.

Motion 16: To amend subsection 8(3) of Schedule B to correct a drafting error

This motion was developed by the Department of Justice to address a drafting error. It ensures that the Cannabis Products Act is referenced correctly, using its full title.

Motion 18: To amend subsection 8(3) of Schedule B to correct a drafting error

This motion was developed by the Department of Justice to address a drafting error. It ensures that inspectors fulfilling their duties under the act may submit any lawfully collected sample of a substance for analysis.

Motion 19: To amend section 20 of Schedule B to establish regulation-making authority respecting restriction or prohibition of cannabis smoking areas adjacent to public places

This motion established authority for the Minister to consider the future development of rules for cannabis smoking in areas adjacent to public places, such as school grounds and business establishments.

Motion 20: To amend paragraph 13(3)(a) of Schedule C to correct a drafting error

This motion was developed by the Department of Justice to ensure that all references to "drinking and driving" offences in the Motor Vehicles Act would be identified as "alcohol and drug related" driving offences. Previously, one reference had been missed.

Motion 21: To amend subsection 1(4) of Bill 6 to address a drafting error in the bill's coming-into-force schedule

This motion was developed by the Department of Justice to address a technical transitional error. It ensures that the community engagement required before the Minister may designate a cannabis vendor will occur after the bill receives assent, but before cannabis is formally legalized.

Motion 22: To amend Bill 6 to establish a mandatory one-time review of territorial cannabis legislation

In rare instances, such as in the Official Languages Act, legislation requires the Legislative Assembly to review a statute on a regular basis. Past experience reveals that recurring reviews can be costly and time consuming and may not result in legislative change. However, we feel that there is value in this motion, which amended the bill to ensure that there will be a review of the territory's cannabis legislation after it has been in effect for a few years.

We stress that this does not preclude future reviews of the legislation created by Bill 6. As legislators, Members of the Legislative Assembly retain the right to review and reconsider existing legislation at their prerogative, provided it is done in accordance with the Rules of the Legislative Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn the reading of this report over to the Member for Kam Lake. Mahsi.

Masi. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Recommendation 1

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories develop a fully costed implementation plan for Bill 6, including multi-demographic public education, enforcement planning, and expected cannabis revenues; that this plan be returned to the committees for review prior to legalization day; and that the final plan be made available to the public.

Overall, we found that the GNWT did not adequately provide citizens of the Northwest Territories with information about the proposed framework for cannabis regulation, resulting in uncertainty for communities and citizens. This placed the committees in the unenviable position of serving as a source of public information on a government bill while it was under our review. Throughout our tour, residents asked about the impacts of cannabis legalization on our communities and our economy, on existing services, and on the social challenges we already face. We heard questions about enforcement responsibilities and training, public education, healthcare (including mental health and addiction counselling), guidelines for entrepreneurs and producers, and rules for plebiscites. We also heard clearly that residents want public education that targets not only youth, but also adults and elders. Legalization will affect all Northerners, and they deserve to be informed.

The implementation of cannabis legalization is a monumental task. An implementation plan, outlining such things as targeted communication initiatives (e.g. campaigns for children, youth, parents, elders, et cetera), timelines for vendor designation, enforcement training initiatives, follow-up community engagement, and inter-departmental and inter-agency collaboration, would provide a clear and accessible public roadmap. This is a natural next step in the GNWT's "way forward" for cannabis legalization.

Recommendation 2

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories develop curricula to deliver evidence-based health and safety education respecting both cannabis and alcohol through the territorial education system.

Residents of all ages emphasized the importance of education, and both the Public Health Association and the Nurses Association spoke to the importance of legislation and policy founded in principles of harm reduction. We are under no illusions: we know that Northerners of all ages currently use cannabis, and we feel strongly that multi-demographic public education is essential. However, we also know that, as elsewhere in Canada, young people comprise a significant portion of active users and that targeted education programming works. Consider the Don't Be a Butthead anti-tobacco campaign, which saw interactive educational modules delivered through territorial schools and which was praised during our tour. It is necessary that territorial health curricula reflect the realities of cannabis legalization and provide young people growing up under legalization with evidence-based information on cannabis and poly-substance use.

Recommendation 3

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories form an inter-departmental working group to prepare for the future regulation of cannabis-based products, including high-potency cannabis products, and licensed establishments for cannabis consumption.

With legalization, an illegal substance will become legal and available for recreational use. Accordingly, Northerners will be looking for safe, recreational places to consume cannabis, comparable to bars and lounges for alcohol. We also know that high-potency products are already available illicitly, while the legalization of edibles is expected within the next two years. The development of regulatory frameworks to address these matters will be a large task. Beginning this work now will help to mitigate operational challenges in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to turn the reading of this report over to the honourable Member for Nahendeh. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Member for Nahendeh.

Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank all of the Members who are reading the report at this moment.

Recommendation 4

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories form an inter-agency working group to address cannabis-related enforcement planning.

Enforcement responsibilities were a recurring topic of discussion during our tour. Members of the public, representatives of community governments, and enforcement officials themselves raised questions and concerns. An inter-agency working group, potentially including GNWT inspectors and environmental health officers, municipal enforcement, the RCMP, the Northwest Territories Association of Communities, and other parties as needed, could ensure that the new laws are clearly communicated. Such a working group could also encourage discussion and information-sharing, and provide additional support to communities with limited resources.

Recommendation 5

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories work with the Government of Canada and other government partners to resolve outstanding questions on record suspensions for offences related to cannabis possession.

We recognize that the federal government is responsible for administering record suspension, but we feel strongly that the territorial government must engage its federal counterparts on this matter.

Recommendation 6

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories develop economic development programs to support northern entrepreneurship related to cannabis sale and production.

The GNWT administers several strong and successful programs to support entrepreneurs and community economic development, including the Support for Entrepreneurs and Economic Development (SEED) policy. We heard repeatedly that Northerners are eager to pursue the economic benefits of legalization. Targeted programs addressing cannabis-specific planning and programming would help local businesses, and the territorial economy, to grow and thrive.

Recommendation 7

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories consider specific spending targets for the distribution of cannabis-related revenues aimed at public education, public awareness, and public health research related to cannabis use; and that the Liquor Commission report on cannabis sales in its annual report.

To address the revenue-related concerns we heard during our tour, we investigated options to amend Bill 6 to specify that cannabis revenue be targeted to specific expenditures in a manner similar to the disposition of territorial lottery revenue. However, the committees' legal counsel advised that an amendment of this nature would be out of bounds because it is the government's exclusive privilege to propose how to spend its revenues.

Nevertheless, we hear and support residents' calls for targeted investment by the GNWT in matters of public concern related to cannabis use. With this recommendation, we urge the GNWT to take action.

Recommendation 8

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development recommend that the Government of the Northwest Territories provide a comprehensive response to this report within 120 days.

Conclusion

The Standing Committees on Government Operations and Social Development thank everyone involved in the review of this bill, with particular thanks to those who provided their input and recommendations. All committee reports and public submissions are available online at the Legislative Assembly website: www.assembly.gov.nt.ca.

This concludes our review of Bill 6. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Kam Lake, that the Committee Report 7-18(3): Standing Committee on Review of Bill 6: Cannabis Legalization and Regulation and Implementation Act, be received by the Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole for consideration.

The motion is in order. To the motion.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed?

---Carried

The Committee Report 7-18(3): Standing Committee on the Review of Bill 6: Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Implementation Act is received and moved into Committee of the Whole for further consideration. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 100(4) and to have the Committee Report 7-18(3): Report on the Review of Bill 6: Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Implementation Act be received by the Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole for consideration later today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Member is seeking unanimous consent to waive Rule 100(4) to have the Committee Report 7-18(3) Report on the Review of Bill 6 be received by Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole for further consideration.

---Unanimous consent granted

We have unanimous consent to have Committee Report 7-18(3): Standing Committee on the Review of Bill 6: Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Implementation Act received by this Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole for further consideration.

Reports of standing and special committees. Item 5, returns to oral questions. Item 7, acknowledgements. Member for Nahendeh.

I would like to recognize John and Louise Moreau, who will be celebrating their 50^th wedding anniversary on June 8^th. They met at the Giant Mine dance in Yellowknife while both being employed at the Giant Mine. After being married 10 months, they moved to Fort Simpson, where they still reside today. They are strong pillars of the community. They have five children; Brenda, Becky, James, Barbara, and Clayton; and eight grandchildren, Sidonie, Malorey, Victoria, Shelton, Tonya, Ethan, Laine, and Naren; and two great-grandchildren, Lillian and Greyer. They are both role models for all of us. Marriage is a huge commitment. I would like to congratulate them for this huge milestone. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Acknowledgements. Colleagues, before we proceed onto oral questions, I will call for a short break. Masi.

---SHORT RECESS

Okay, Members. The next item on our list was item 8, oral questions, before we took a break. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister responsible for the Status of Women. In March, the Minister promised to consult women of the NWT about the new direction she is setting the Status of Women Council by conducting a survey. Where can women find that survey and respond to it? Thank you.

Masi. Minister responsible for the Status of Women.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, I did promise to do a survey regarding voices of women. At this point, we have not got that developed yet. I think it is okay to say that my last women's advisor actually decided to move back to her home community about that time, so I just hired a new woman, Elizabeth. I can't think of her last name at this point. So we will be reinstating that work.

In the meantime, change is afoot at the Status of Women Council. It's worth noting that the Status of Women Council lays out an arm's-length but accountable agency, but I feel the act is being frustrated because key pieces of the council's work have been removed. What is the impetus for this change? What is the council doing wrong?

What is the council doing wrong? I have no idea, Mr. Speaker, what the council is doing wrong. In fact, for the last two years, I have been asking the council to meet with them. The council has only met during session, and I have gone to them when I can meet with them. It is during session, and I have only been able to go in for a lunch hour and say hi and leave to come running right back to session.

I have asked them over the last two years that I want to meet with them. I have given no direction, period, to the Status of Women Council. I know that I have been accused of giving directions, but I have given none. In fact, the only conversation I have had was asking them to have a meeting when it is not in session so I would be able to talk to them about what they were doing and how we could work together, but to this day, that has not happened.

I did phone the president the other day, and she is wanting to meet with me, as well, but to this day, I have given no direction, period, to the Status of Women Council, nor have I met with them, other than to attend a quick dinner before I return to session.

I am puzzled by that response, because, on March 12^th in this House the Minister said that she had met with them at that point a couple of weeks ago, and they had been reviewing their budget and so on and so forth. This is all available in Hansard.

Where is this direction coming from, if not from the Minister, to change the mandate or the work of the Status of Women?

Yes, during one of the dinner events that I went to, I did tell them at that time that I wanted to meet with them, that I wanted to have at least a four-hour meeting that we could actually talk about the direction and how we could work together. I did meet with them, and like I had said earlier, I also met with them during lunch hours, but it was only a matter of going in, saying a cordial "glad to work with you," and then I had to run back. I don't really consider those actually directional meetings, and nor should I, because it is not my authority to give direction to them.

The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre actually brought it up to me the other day and stated that she had heard that the Status of Women Council had decided to stop chairing the Family Violence Coalition.

Mr. Speaker, I would never give direction to stop working with the Family Violence Coalition. I am a child of violence, not a slap on the hand, of fists and boots and knives and guns and hospitals and RCMP detachments. I know family violence, I have lived family violence, and I would never stop anyone from addressing that issue.

I called the president because I had concerns, and the president told me. She said that they are looking at a strategic plan. They need to review things because, she said, 75 per cent of their time was donated to just supporting the Family Violence Coalition. That's half a million dollars in funding that we are giving; 75 per cent was going to that. I never gave direction to stop. The council themselves wanted to look into it to see if that is the best use of their resources.

Mr. Speaker, at no point have I given direction to stop. In fact, when the MLA from Yellowknife Centre asked me that a couple of days ago, I replied via email and, actually, in conversation stated that I never gave direction to stop. I do take a little bit of offence that I have been accused of it, because at no time have I ever, nor at no time would I ever, give any direction to stop combatting family violence. We have huge family violence rates in the Northwest Territories. It is an issue we need to deal with.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I don't question the Minister's commitment to eradicating family violence, but there is a great deal of confusion around who is taking the leadership on this file. The Status of Women Council feels that it is no longer their job. It was their job for 19 years because they are at arm's length, and they are in a unique advocacy role. What is the Minister going to do, then, to put right this issue of the drifting coalition against family violence? Thank you.

As stated, I did phone the president and was asking where the direction came from, recognizing that she does have the authority to direct the council and to direct the staffing, as the speaker for the whole board. Where did the direction come from? That is something that they are looking at.

I did take note that the MLA did state within her opening statement that it is arm's length, and it needs to be arm's length. Our act says that they can advise the Minister on issues, and I can refer them back to the council for consideration. It says that they can provide assistance to the Minister in promoting change to ensure the attainment of equality of women. That's what it states. I can give some support to them. I can ask them to help me. I can ask them to look into things, but at no time do I see in this act that I can tell them, "This is what you do in your day-to-day in operations." In fact, there are "mays" in this act that say they may do other things.

The Status of Women Council needs to have autonomy so that they can decide what they are doing best with the resources that they have. I can give suggestions, but I will not direct them. They need to be able to do what they want to do. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions will be to the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment today. In my Member's statement, you heard me talk about the community in Sambaa K'e, about their school expansion and the issue about the gym. My first question to the Minister: the architects in the department made a commitment to come back and give them alternative options there. Has the department provided these options to the community? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Most Members know that I just took over this portfolio a month ago, and so I didn't know what was going on before that time. However, I did ask the department, and they told me that no options were developed specifically for the community. However, at a community expansion meeting held in October 2017, the department confirmed that there was sufficient space on the land reserve where a larger community gym could be built. I don't believe, according to my notes, that they looked at different options, but they did reaffirm that the space that the school was on could actually support a larger gym if that was what the community wanted. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the Minister for that answer. I realize she wasn't the one in there, but my big problem is that the community was promised to have some alternatives in the expansion. We will probably have to disagree with that, and we will probably have to try to get the Minister in there.

My next question, though, is in regard to this. Without having a good gym in this community, we have a safety issue. How is the department working with the community and the school to ensure that they have quality and safe education programs in the school?

Quality and safe education in the community; I am guessing you are meaning facilities in the community. Student safety is a primary focus within all education systems in the Northwest Territories. Every school has a safety plan. We make sure that we take care of the children as best as possible. Incidents will occasionally happen. As soon as incidents happen, we go in. We do an investigation. We make sure that that issue hopefully wouldn't happen again. We look for solutions for that. I know that, if there are issues with gyms, et cetera, if we don't have that support, then we look at other ways within the communities that we can actually provide the activities, physical activities for children, but still making sure that they are supervised within a safe manner.

I might be a little bit confused about the MLA's question, but I am trying to answer it the best that I can.

I apologize to the Minister. Maybe I should write the questions and send them to her so that I get clearer direction of what I am trying to ask. So I must apologize to the Minister for that. I am hearing a lot that the government is not going to put a gym in this community because of the population there, so will the department work with the community to come up with a plan, and, if that plan involves going to the federal government, will they work with the community to actually approach the federal government to provide a gym, a community gym, so they can have safe, quality recreation programs?

Gyms are important in communities. Children need to have physical activity, so the Department of Education does try to make sure that there is some kind of facility. In communities where there are under 150 students, it is not feasible at this time to actually put in a school gym, so what the department does in that case, they try to work with the community to make sure that there is activity to a facility that children can access as a gym. So, in that community, I know that they are looking at building a new gym or extending it, so, in that case, we are more than willing to work with the community.

I should state, though, that it's not only working with the community. We will work with the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs because, the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs, their mandate is to actually work with community governments to access federal funding for capital projects. How do I know that? I just happen to know that, Mr. Speaker. So I promise I will work closely with the community and with the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs to address the need for a community gym.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I understand what the Minister has said, and I thank her for that. I know the reality. I was there when they built it. It was a community hall, and they expanded it to make it a "community gym." It's not a community gym. It's a large meeting room. So, the Minister, I know she is really busy because of a lot of work that she has to do over this summer. Is she willing to work with me to go into the community, have a sit-down with the community, discuss it, see for herself what the community is talking about, and see what the department is calling a gym right now? Will she make that commitment?

As a Minister, my responsibility is to represent all communities and all residents of the Northwest Territories. I would be more than honoured to actually go with the Member to the community to actually work with the community and see what we can do to support them. As the Member stated, my schedule is very busy over the summer with all of the graduations that are taking place, but as soon as we can find a mutually agreeable time, I am more than willing to go in. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Sahtu.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Further to my Member's statement, my question is to the Premier, Minister of Executive and Indigenous Affairs. With the growing employees in the Sahtu region and departments, can the Honourable Premier elaborate and give consideration to the position for a Sahtu regional director? Mahsi.

Masi. The Honourable Premier.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In the 16^th Legislative Assembly, the Government of the Northwest Territories had five regional directors, including a regional director for the Sahtu, and, in the 16^th Legislative Assembly, the government of the day saw fit to reduce the number of regional directors from five to two, so we have a north and a south regional director. It was seen as a cost-saving measure, and, also, the fact is that, at that time, it was felt that the workload did not justify the need for a regional director in every region.

The 16^th Assembly to the 18^th, two Assemblies later; in consideration of our physical positive position, would the Premier reconsider this reinstatement for this position here before the end of the 18^th?

Through decentralization and a number of other Government of the Northwest Territories initiatives, the programs and service delivery is being done by departments and agencies in the Sahtu, and we have recently increased the management with the superintendent of infrastructure position, so now all Department of Infrastructure projects and issues are managed out of the Sahtu regional office.

Thanks to the Premier for that response. Talking about projects and employees, they are two different things here. It seems to me that, where we are growing in the Sahtu, thanks to the government to date, as mentioned in the statement, we have grown to 375 employees, but the challenge in the Sahtu is communicating to the surrounding communities when in most cases there is only annual access. So, given that challenge, would the Premier consider reinstatement prior to the end of the 18^th to that position?

We travel throughout the regions, and every time we go into a region we have had a senior management meeting with all of the senior management in the region. The last few times we have been in the Sahtu, there have been no outstanding issues that would indicate that the Sahtu would be better served with a Sahtu regional director over a rotating departmental regional superintendent to chair the senior management committee. For example, in front-line workers, there were an additional 41 positions, as the Member stated, over the last two years in Norman Wells for the new Sahtu Regional Health and Social Services Long-term Care Centre, and so I think hiring those front-line workers would be a more appropriate use of scarce resources and will better serve Sahtu residents.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Sahtu.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thanks to the Premier for that response here. I will use a couple of examples. The probationary officers from the Sahtu have to report north to the Inuvik office, and the financial services personnel have got to report to Yellowknife. Those are just examples of outside decision-making authorities given to the destination of the region. Would the Premier consider providing some options to my office for further consideration of this reinstatement, if possible?

There are also four GSO positions in the Sahtu, and they are supervised and supported by the manager of regional operations, who works with the regional director who is located in Inuvik. Having said that, we are now into business planning for the 2018-2019 season or into the last year of the 18^th Assembly, so, as part of the business-planning process, we always review our operations, so I will be pleased to have a look at this again. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Hay River North.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, earlier I spoke about the plight of dialysis patients, not just from Hay River North or Hay River South but from across this territory, who must relocate to Yellowknife to receive the life-saving treatment that they need. In the South Slave, we have a beautiful dialysis centre in Hay River, a wonderful staff, and I hear nothing but good things coming from there. I spoke of the costs of housing people in Yellowknife, taking them away from their home, taking them away from their families, and the emotional and physical toll this can have on them. So, given all this, has the department looked at the business case for increasing staff at the Hay River Regional Health Centre in the dialysis unit so we can keep people in their homes? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Minister of Health and Social Services.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the Member for his question. Dialysis is an important service that is provided to residents of the Northwest Territories. In the Northwest Territories, we have the ability to provide dialysis in two communities. That is the hemodialysis. We also support peritoneal dialysis, which can be done at individuals' homes and individuals' communities.

To the Member's point, I hear the Member loud and clear. I agree with the Member. We need to do more to provide those services close to home. We would prefer not to have people coming from Hay River to Yellowknife when that service is provided in Hay River. Before we move forward with considering expanding the service in Hay River, we need to make sure that we are benefitting from the other opportunities that exist for us, such as the peritoneal dialysis, which can be done in the people's homes at home, and other options, whether it is a treatment in Hay River and then a treatment in Yellowknife offset by peritoneal dialysis. I am totally saying that wrong every time I say it, and I accept that.

There is a lot of work we have to go here. I hear the Member, and we are prepared to start that work. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think it is a pretty easy decision, given the numbers that I quoted earlier. It is about $200 a night, from my understanding, to put someone up in a boarding home. That is about $73,000 a year. There are always a handful of people from Hay River and, I am sure, surrounding communities in Yellowknife. We can get them their own apartments in Yellowknife so that they at least have some privacy if they are there.

I have heard of people being in Vital Abel for years on end. That is not a very comfortable way for our elders to live. Has the government looked at different ways to house dialysis patients who have to come to Yellowknife for these long stretches of time?

This is an area where there is currently a policy gap that we are actually working on. We have done some medical relocations as a result of things like dialysis, and we are certainly open to that on a case-by-case basis until we re-fix that policy.

Having said that, yes, we do have individuals stay at the Vital Abel House. If they are staying for extended periods of time, the option does exist for them to go out and get their own accommodations or stay with family or other things, at which point we would provide $68 a day, which equates to just over $2,000 a month that eligible residents of the Northwest Territories can utilize. If we have a patient from Hay River who is coming up for an extended period of time, they simply have to have a discussion with us about not staying at the Vital Abel, collecting their $68 a month, and finding accommodations which are more appropriate and suitable for them for long-term stays.