Just making sure I'm procedurally correct, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When I was elected, I got a strong sense from the residents of my riding that they wanted to see someone represent them who would make collaboration their main mode of operation. They wanted someone who would listen to them as residents but also someone who would listen to all Members of the Assembly. That baseline expectation is what I strive to live up to every day that I have the privilege to stand here and proudly represent my riding. I have heard from constituents on both sides of the public inquiry argument. Some see a public inquiry as the only way forward. Others have cautioned, like the Premier, to the expense of what a public inquiry might entail.

The most poignant request that was shared with me was a detailed account from the perspective of a redeployed GNWT employee. They worked at an evacuation centre and provided me with several pages of issues that they flagged from that experience. I have shared this account on an anonymous basis with all Members in this House well before this motion came to the floor. I did this in the spirit of collaboration to spark a conversation about what a scope could or should entail, and I was told in so many words that I was putting the cart before the horse and, in some ways, I was. But I still think that that conversation should have happened with all 19 of us and that it would have led to some conversations earlier on about what the best container looked like collaboratively. But that did not come to pass.

After conferring with my colleagues and legal staff in the past two weeks, I can say that the Public Inquiries Act affords, through regulation, everything that residents want to see - constraints to timelines, budgets and, especially important to me, the ability to provide for anonymity when requested.

The people in the NWT deserve to know exactly what the GNWT did to fight last summer's fires and what it did to plan for and support all the people displaced from their homes and communities. And more importantly, the people deserve to find out why the GNWT made the decisions that it did, particularly the decisions of Ministers and senior officials in charge. An independent review of staff actions may tell part of the story, but the more important story lies in finding out on what those staff were told to do in the first place. However, to see what we want, the scope will remain the crucial part of the conversation that I was so eager to have. This means that we need strong terms of reference for the inquiry. I hope that all 19 of us together can collaborate meaningfully on that piece together.

Unfortunately, right after the deferral two weeks ago, the Premier told the media that a public inquiry is not the way to go effectively signaling that meaningful collaboration with all Members, that I thought I was voting for through deferral of the motion, was dead in the water. And although it is certain that this motion will pass today, adding to dashed hopes Cabinet is not compelled to do what we request in the motion. Others may infer meaning behind that choice but, ultimately to me, it comes down to this: It's kind of depressing that the government needs to be convinced to do the right thing and, ultimately, it feels likely they won't, even now. It diminishes the trust in the GNWT further. Cabinet had an amazing opportunity to make a strong gesture of good faith and prove that they were not going to make things business as usual, but that boat seems to have sailed.

I'm going to get a little technical, Mr. Speaker. The Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act obligates MLAs to perform their duties of office and arrange their affairs in such a manner as to maintain public confidence and trust in the integrity, objectivity, and impartiality of the Member and to act in a manner that will bear the closest public scrutiny in all other respects. This obligation exists because public trust is at the heart of good government. Members must always strive to maintain that trust.

The thing about trust is that the person who wants to earn it doesn't always get to define when they have done enough to be trusted. Maybe the government can be trusted to investigate its own actions last summer but however thorough and complete its review, there are sure to be doubts, particularly among those who are most directly affected by the fires. Cabinet could take those doubts right off the table right now and earn a whole lot of public trust and respect by agreeing to launch a public inquiry.

We have reached a critical decision point only a hundred days into our time as Members that now sets the tone for how we work together as an Assembly. We can decide to send the message that this government will stand for truth, transparency and integrity, and that it is committed to partnership and collaboration with all Members. If we decide otherwise, it will leave a question mark hanging over us about our ability to move forward together. I will continue to push for all 19 of us to have collaboration as our preferred mode of operation. I'll always ask for that collaboration and ask for it to be meaningful.

One last thing I'll say and then I'm done. Trust is not something that is found or restored; it has to be earned every day. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.