Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, Bill 65, Builders' Lien Act, received second reading in the Legislative Assembly on November 3rd, 2022, and was referred to the Standing Committee on Social Development for review. On January 18th, 2023, the standing committee held a public hearing with the Minister of Justice.
At the public hearing, committee expressed serious concern about the lack of consultation on the bill. The Minister acknowledged this and made a commitment to conduct further engagement with the public.
Following this, committee sought an extension of the review period under Rule 8.3(2). Over the next several months, committee engaged extensively with the department to consider several potential amendments to the bill.
Bill 65, as drafted, does not bind the GNWT but it does bind municipalities. Committee does not want the GNWT to be exempt from the application of liens while other governments are subject to this clause. Committee was concerned that other levels of government in the Northwest Territories, such as municipalities and Indigenous governments, were not as protected from seizure and sale of land as the GNWT. Committee wants to see all levels of government in the Northwest Territories treated the same. Committee recognized that if the bill was amended to bind the GNWT, municipalities, and Indigenous governments to liens, but not seizure and sale, that very little infrastructure in the Northwest Territories would be left for which seizure and sale could apply. Recognizing this, committee felt that the bill as drafted, which provides exemption for seizure and sale on the basis of who owns a project, was problematic.
After a lot of consideration on this point, committee felt that exemption for seizure and sale of land should rather apply to the type of project, not the owner of the project. This would ensure that critical public infrastructure like health centres, schools, and roads are always protected. Because this is such a substantial shift in how the bill is applied, committee feels the bill needs to be redrafted.
While Bill 65 is proposed to improve assurances that parties who contribute to construction projects are paid, committee believes the bill can do more to establish prompt payment in legislation. There are also other changes committee would like to see that address procedural and technical improvements to the administration and application of the bill. The unequal application of the bill to different levels of government, whether territorial, municipal, or Indigenous governments, remain the outstanding point of contention for committee.
Madam Chair, on June 29th, 2023, committee held a clause by clause with the Minister at which time committee passed a motion to report the bill as not ready to proceed.
Madam Chair, I'd be remiss if -- I am speaking first and foremost as the chair of social development but, second, I'm also the MLA for Kam Lake and ultimately I want to state that this -- the point of this bill is that private industry be paid for the work that it does and the material they provide. As the MLA for Kam Lake, I believe that this is first and foremost what we need to keep in mind as the goal of this bill.
The existing Mechanics' Lien Act has not changed substantially over -- in over a hundred years. Since then, practices and contractual arrangements in construction and real property development have changed considerably and continue to evolve. During committee's review and public hearing on Bill 65, participation focused on applying the Builders' Lien Act to the Government of the Northwest Territories, Indigenous governments, and municipalities, including questions on how provisions related to lands owned by those entities would work.
As a result of January's extension, no substantial amendments were brought forward by the GNWT. The same core concerns, though, remain, Madam Chair. Determining which land interests held by different levels of government and Indigenous governments would be subject to sale and seizures and that committee preferred the core structure that on exemptions to seizure and sale be made on the basis of the type of infrastructure rather than ownership to strike a balance between protecting critical public infrastructure and ensuring private industry is ultimately paid.
This is how British Columbia has successfully drafted its lien legislation and during the clause by clause, the Minister agreed with committee, that this would have been the preferred way forward for lien legislation. Ultimately, it was committee's desire that all levels of government be treated the same under the act.
Committee proposed several draft motions to amend this aspect of the bill and considered many draft motions proposed by the department. As these discussions progressed, though, Members quickly realized that this topic raised bigger questions about defining an Indigenous government that could not and should not be answered within the context of this bill or in the Standing Committee on Social Development.
I maintain my concern about the GNWT not being bound by this legislation. As the primary purchaser and builder in the Northwest Territories, business needs to ensure it is also getting paid by this government. Binding the GNWT was ultimately the impasse on this bill and as such, the majority of committee members wanted to see this bill reported back to the House as not ready, which we did.
Madam Chair, I also want to say a few words about prompt payment. Bill 65 did not include a provision to introduce a prompt payment system to ensure a timeline for both issuing and paying invoices on building projects or provide a dispute resolution mechanism to resolve payment disputes. Prompt payment is crucial to lien legislation. It assures private industry that within a set timeline for contractors and subcontractors to issue invoices for their work and for owners to pay invoices for services rendered. This is crucial when you have limited timelines to both preserve and protect a lien. When liens have deadlines but payment isn't legislated, it makes it hard for people to participate in the process. Where payment used to be 30 days, these days many organizations are working towards net 30-day payments, or others don't even need the net 90 days.
I am left, as the representative of Kam Lake, the home of multitude of NWT businesses, to either support a bill that isn't what I believe to be the best possible product for its purpose or hold out for something better with no guarantee of when that might make it through the legislative agenda. Bill 65 does have marked improvements from the original Mechanics' Lien Act, but I will be trying to move motions today to amend parts of this bill to make it even just a little bit better. None of the motions today will be able to address the issue of how governments are bound or prompt payment, both of which I believe need to be addressed sooner than later, and hopefully long before 100 years if this legislation passes today.
Madam Chair, individual Members may have comments or questions at this time. Thank you.