Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Frame Lake.

Merci, Monsieur le President. When I was in high school, I was getting $1.25 an hour, but, look, this is irrelevant. The fact is that people are now getting $20 an hour through the wage top-up program, and that $20 an hour is going to get rolled back when this program ends. We are not going to increase the minimum wage to $18 an hour. People are going to have their wages rolled back. That is the fact of it. Our minimum wage and even the wage top-up program did not provide a living wage of around $24 an hour for people living in Inuvik, Hay River, or Yellowknife, let alone the smaller communities. Can the Minister explain how we can ever lift people out of poverty when 9 percent of our labour force makes the minimum wage, which does not even get close to a living wage? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

It's probably the biggest question I have ever been asked. It's multifaceted. It's not just mandating a minimum wage of a certain amount. If I were to mandate a minimum wage of a living wage, $25 an hour, we would be putting people out of business and the cost of goods would be going up because the cost of business goes up, so we would need a new living wage. What we need is a cross-government approach. There has been a lot of talk about guaranteed basic income in this House. British Columbia just looked at this. They undertook a study. It took two years. They had an independent commission. They looked at 40 different reports. What conclusion did they come to when the report was released just last month? They said that a guaranteed basic income probably is not going to solve all the issues. What you need are targeted supports. You need to deal with people if they have addictions issues. You need to make sure that there are jobs for people to have. You need to make sure people can be trained. You need to make sure people have housing.

Just throwing money at a problem, as simple as it seems, and that is probably the allure of it, it does not necessarily mean that it works. We are undertaking a review of the Income Assistance Program to ensure that we are helping people get over that welfare wall, get out of poverty. We are undertaking a review of the Student Financial Assistance Act to see if there are barriers to people getting training. We are looking at our apprentice programs and how we support businesses and people who want to become journey-persons, to see if we can help facilitate that.

I have 11 minutes left, and I am sure I can fill the entire 11 minutes, but I will leave it at that. There is a lot going on, Mr. Speaker. Everything we do here, everything we do in this Assembly, is to get people out of poverty; it's to improve the lives of our residents. It does not lie solely on myself as Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, and it certainly is not tied solely to the minimum wage. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you, Member for Kam Lake. Minister of Justice.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Full disclosure: I have had a number of conversations with the Member about this. I know she is very passionate about it, and I understand why. As MLAs, we all deal with our constituents, and we all feel their frustration when they cannot get services that they want to access.

Integrated case management has been a very successful program to help individuals with a lot of needs, who access a lot of different departments. It has been able to help them find the help that they need. Right now, there are around 95 clients who have pathfinders, as they are called, assigned to them, but there is also a large waiting list. Even without self-referral, we have a very large wait list. If there was self-referral, it would then put more burden on the ICM program to sift through those people to see, "Okay. Who do we take next?" At least with the process as it is, that filtering process is done.

That is not to say that everyone who should be referred has been referred, but we are trying to do better. While we are not looking at a self-referral model, we are doing a lot of the things that the Member has already spoken about in terms of making it easier to access programs as they are as opposed to having somebody walk with you while you access them. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think that, given the large wait list of ICM and if you even take a look at the House business papers of what people are choosing to talk about these days, this is a big problem and this is a big problem that needs our attention. When NWT residents cannot find doors to open to get services, that is a huge problem. It is our job to open those doors for them and to fix this system so that it actually works for the people of the Northwest Territories. I have not been very kind to the Minister, I feel, on this subject matter. I have persistently come back to him on this one. I feel that just simply saying that people cannot refer to ICM, just strictly, it's not good enough. I do not think that ICM, given its huge success, is a place where people should be finding a dead end, and so if the Minister cannot commit at this point in time to allowing people to self-refer to ICM, will the Minister create a process so that nobody finds a dead end at ICM?

There was a recent review of integrated case management done. From that, there were a number of recommendations, a number of very good recommendations, and we are moving forward with implementing some of those. However, those alone will not solve the Member's concerns. The big issue is that, when one of her constituents attends a single office, they are not then being referred to perhaps other services that they could be; they are not getting the type of assistance in that moment that perhaps would help them along and help them help themselves. Not everyone needs a pathfinder with them, but perhaps some people need a different interaction when they interact with any front-line worker, especially when it's related to poverty or addictions or things like that.

There is a lot of research that shows that it is the interactions they have with the front-line workers that can solve a lot of those issues without referring someone to ICM. If we change that, how people interact and what is expected of employees when they are presented with certain situations, then we can go a long way to alleviating some of these concerns. That really is a client-centred focus when it comes to service. I want to assure the Member that ICM is not the end-all and be-all, but it is part of a larger transformation that is currently happening in the GNWT, and that is integrated service delivery.

What that is is a very client-centred model of providing programs and services. It starts with a focus on the individual. It requires change within the organization, a culture change, and then involves governance changes, as well, in how we develop policies, how we develop legislation. It's really more of a long-term goal, but I want to assure the Member that it is something that is happening and that a lot of people are very committed to.

I appreciate that ICM is not the be-all and end-all, and I was trying to hopefully pick up a yes in the Minister's response to me. My point being that, yes, ICM is not the be-all, end-all, but ICM cannot join the team of dead ends within the GNWT. ICM needs to have a solution for people who show up at the door and are asking for help. If somebody comes to the Government of the Northwest Territories asking for help, the government needs to say, "Yes." The government does not need to say, "You are at the wrong door. Try another door." What I am asking the Minister today is: will he turn ICM into a real door instead of a fake one, for people who do not have government referral?

To call ICM a fake door is really doing a disservice to the work that has been done by that team. They have helped a lot of people. The reason the Member is advocating for it is because they have helped so many people. However, they can only do so much, and to add another element, it's just not possible at this time.

That being said, I get what the Member is saying. When someone shows up, what do we do? Ideally, they should be going to the service they need, but for whatever reason, they might show up at ICM. I can look into that and have a discussion again, another one of our offline discussions with the Member. I just want her to be assured that this is something that we take very seriously. It's a passion project of mine. I can't say that when I got another department, I thought, "Oh great. I have so much time to fill, another department." But when I really started getting into integrated service delivery and ICM, I really did get excited because it is one of the most important things I think this government is doing.

Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the Minister's efforts and the Minister's time, and I can definitely say the Minister has given me a lot of time on this topic. I can also say that my intent is not to downplay the work that ICM does. ICM is incredibly effective at the work that they do, but I just believe that client service for the people of the Northwest Territories should not be held within one, small, four-person division within Justice. It really is: the entire government needs to learn from ICM and needs to able to be more like, "Let's all be more like ICM." Does the Minister commit to helping me identify and open some dead ends in other government departments so that we can work through this together a little bit quicker because I am slightly impatient? Thank you.

I don't think I can stop the Member from sending me email requests and coming to my office and chatting about this. She can keep bringing those issues to us, and I will keep trying to work through them with her. I will leave some time on the clock because I know we have another Member ready to ask questions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to Minister Simpson for allowing me some time on the clock. My question is a question I've often asked the Minister of Lands multiple times, but I want to acknowledge that I am excited for the implementation of the Public Lands Act and for the regulations to come into force. I think this is an important step. It is an important step in having control of public land in the NWT. My concern is largely with my constituents and their private land, so my question is: does the implementation of the public lands regulations contain any work to convert longstanding leases to title? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member for Yellowknife North. Minister of Lands.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, I'd like to thank the Member for coming to me and talking to me about this. I know it is a very important issue for him, and I thank him for that. I am probably going to run out the clock, but that's all right because I'm the last one talking here today.

To give this answer, it needs to be very clear and provide as much information as I can to the Member and the people of his constituency. The community boundaries, the development controls can be regulated through the Area Development Act. The Area Development Act regulates development on both private and public land in designated development areas. For the Ingraham Trail, development controls and regulations only exist for Cassidy Point and the Yellowknife watershed area. Outside of these areas there are no development control currently in place.

Before we look at fee simple plan sales along the Ingraham Trail, new regulations will need to be developed under the Area Development Act to ensure the land is managed effectively. The development of the land is currently focused on bringing the Public Land Act into force, and we will review the Area Development Act once this has been completed. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My issue with the insistence of having an Area Development Act regulations done after the Public Land Act regulations are done means I will be asking this question in four years. Additionally, I would like to point out that there are multiple areas with title outside of the Area Development Act. Prelude Lake has titled land. Therefore, there are no area development controls that the Minister says is a prerequisite for getting title. Can the Minister explain that? For example, is there any restrictions in place for those people on Prelude with title? Could they, for example, build an apartment building or a skyscraper, for instance?

I hope it's not a skyscraper, but it would be really interesting to see, though. To answer the question, the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act would guide development activities. Construction of the apartment building would trigger the need for several permits and authorization under the MVRMA. Any title land or leases within the territorial park may also have restrictions for development.

I assure the Minister that the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act and our land and water boards were not designed for regulating people's properties and whether they want to put a greenhouse on their lot. The idea that they have to apply for a land use permit to the land and water board in order to change their property, it is one of these things that Lands has created and is refusing to adjust. Right now, the department knows that there are numerous people living on the trail in recreational leases, and they are not allowed to do that. They are not allowed to live in recreational leases, and yet, the department refuses to either enforce this or give them residential leases. Do the efforts to implement the Public Land Act have any solutions, or does the department plan to address this issue?

I hear the Member's challenges and that. It is something that I inherited, and we are working on it. The department is working hard to get these issues addressed. There're lots of land issues, and we need to focus on where our energy is right now. We are focusing in on that. Currently, the department doesn't issue residential leases outside the community boundaries. Lease types are under discussions through the Public Land Act work that is expected to be completed by 2023. I encourage all residents to visit the Government of the Northwest Territories Lands website and click on "Have your say" selection to provide input on how the Government of the Northwest Territories regulates public land. Public consultation on the Public Land Act are currently under way. The first phase of engagement will be open until February 12.

Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think I heard that, maybe by 2023, when we bring the Public Land Act, we will be looking at leases, and maybe then it will be possible for people to legally live in their houses on the Ingraham Trail. My question is: does the department have any plans to enforce the people living in violation of their leases? Perhaps, I can get a commitment of the Minister that, despite these people living in violation of their leases as they have done for decades, it's actually okay. Maybe I can get the Minister to tell me what is the plan for all of these people living in violation of their leases and the department does nothing about it? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.