Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in our sister territory Yukon, Yukoners are only officially known as Sourdoughs until they have survived a full winter. Here in the Northwest Territories it's a bit more complicated. You have to live half your life and then you become a P2. This has been -- for 30 years, this has been a cultural touchstone of the Northwest Territories, somewhat absurdly as well because there's plenty of people who don't work for government and, of course, plenty of people who do work for government who don't occupy that status but enjoy their careers anyway. But no matter what, that idea of, like, when you officially graduate and become, you know, a true blue Northerner, a true frozen Northerner, whatever we want to call it, so the idea to just take this away with the stroke of a pen after 30 years of this being, again, part of our culture, part of our workforce, part of our set of benefits that when Northerners think of themselves and think of the advantages they receive, this is one of them. SFA is another one. BIP is another one. The northern tax deduction. These are things that are cherished and people look to them as a competitive advantage to why we're here and why we stay here. Because it's hard, and it's getting harder.

Mr. Speaker, for 30 years, we've had a failed Indigenous hiring policy. That is not under debate. It hasn't been working. We have -- I think the last public service report, it had the worst -- the worst statistics we've ever seen. This is a problem that needs to be solved. But in trying to solve it when departmental staff spoke to the Standing Committee Committee on Government Operations just earlier this week, they acknowledged that the gaps that exist within this new policy, the Indigenous employment policy, have been creating brand new gaps that the old policy covered. And there's no plan yet to fill them.

The language that was used at the presentation was taking away affirmative action. And I don't know if that was intentional, Mr. Speaker, but I knew that -- do know that that is how so many Northerners feel, that something is being taken away. And the Minister disagrees that this is a benefit. I think Northerners would disagree. And they do feel like something's been taken away.

In an effort to fill the gaps and improve Indigenous hiring, we are creating new ones. People -- persons with disabilities, visible other minority populations are not being covered by the new policy, and that was one of the first messages I got from the public. And I've had many, Mr. Speaker. And it was someone who works for the government who has -- who is differently abled and was furious that this change was made without any consultation and implored MLAs to stand together and reverse the changes.

Mr. Speaker, advocacy groups, to my knowledge, were not consulted on these changes. The people who were consulted on these changes were given a broad set of a problem statement and ways it could be solved but not an actual definition of policy. The drive-by consultations, as my friend has said, in the past of -- of Yellowknife Centre -- were insufficient, insensitive, and wholly inadequate. Because that's what we heard, and that's what we heard from our partner Indigenous governments in particular. We're not making this stuff up, Mr. Speaker. There's a difference between a big P policy of government that governors everything we do here -- or everything -- sorry, not here, but everything we do in the public service and a framework. So the fact that a diversity -- a DEI framework is being pitched as a solution to these problems for the people who are left behind, a lot of those folks are not buying it because it's not -- it doesn't have the security that a big policy of government has. Hiring was iron clad. It followed these rules: P1, P2, P3. That was it. You couldn't get around it on paper. And we'll get into that, how have -- people have gotten around it. Because like I said, this has not been working.

Mr. Speaker, Northerners deserve to be put first by their government. They deserve priority access to jobs that allowed them to make decision for their territory and serve their communities. At a recent constituency meeting in the Range Lake riding, this was the number one topic of concern, and it was around P2s. And look, there are a lot of different opinions around this and around the P2 status, where it came from, is it constitutional, is it racist. But for members of our community, our northern community, we're all Northerners and we're all in this together. And no one there who was concerned about the loss of P2s and felt like it was an erosion of their identity as a Northerner said we don't want P1s. Everyone's okay with supporting each other and putting Indigenous people first because that's what our policies should do. But to take away P2 with nothing to replace it, that's something that has them concerned.

Mr. Speaker, in the Standing Committee of Government Operations, public engagement, they received 50 respondents. Normally, when we engage the public, if we get a dozen letters that's pretty good. And usually they're being written in by advocacy groups and stakeholders and people with a vested interest in communicating with committee. This case, it was driven by citizens, Northerners. Only one of those pieces of correspondence was supportive of these changes.

Mr. Speaker, the biggest issue was the elimination of P1s, followed by the elimination of P2s, and there was no support for prioritizing southern Indigenous people over Northerners. It's rare we get so much public commentary on matters before this House. So I want to share some of those stories today.

Before we began sitting, Mr. Speaker, I was approached by someone who's had 25 years in the public service. Never raised a complaint, never been to the union, never been to an MLA, completely content with working with for the public service, a career that made him feel proud and valued and even though it's challenging at some times, it was something that got him out of bed and motivated to do every day. When this policy was announced and there was no sense that it was coming, this was shocking to this individual, Mr. Speaker. They feel like they are no longer valued and they're being pushed out of the North. Now, I know that's not the intent of the policy. Let's be very clear. But we're not talking about what's written on the page. We're talking about the message it sends to our people and the message it sends to public citizens.

Mr. Speaker, I have a lengthier quote from a former GNWT employee who worked for the public service for 35 years. They were a manager when they left the GNWT for a secondment to an Indigenous government and at the end of the two years, this person resigned from the GNWT rather than go back. This individual says that they left the GNWT for many reasons. One was hiring and promoting practices in their department.

Quote: As a GNWT manager for three years, I had no issues with external competition. I was always reminded by my human resources representative assisting me with the competition that I was required to hire a priority 1 Indigenous person if they successfully passed the competition process. It was drilled into me. So I assumed that it was drilled into other hiring managers. The problems that I saw personally were the hiring and promotional activities that happened within departments when there was no human resources representative oversight. People who had the right attitude were selected for transfer assignments into positions for the appropriate time to allow for these persons to gain enough experience to allow them to, air quotes, "apply" on the job. There was a perception within at least my department that First Nations people made excellent support as frontline workers but were not suitable for promotion. Since my resignation, I have met with a lot of other former GNWT employees of First Nations descent, and this has been a running theme.

Mr. Speaker, this story, this work experience, is not one of a failed -- of people failing to follow the policy. It's one of personal workplace biases failing to promote and support Indigenous people through career advancement. That is a much deeper problem, and I know the government is working to fix that through other mechanisms. But this policy was not broken. This policy was just not being followed well enough.

Mr. Speaker, more quotes from -- or more feedback from the public: As the mother of a non-Indigenous child, I do not believe this policy's a very good idea. We have stayed here in the North because of the opportunities for people who have lived here for most or all of their lives. With this new policy, there is no advantage to living or going to school in the North. People who have lived here should have the first opportunity over anyone who does not live in the North, no matter if they are Indigenous or not.

Mr. Speaker, another: I wholeheartedly support priority staffing for Indigenous staff and recognize that change is needed. But the other folks already living in the North having equal footing as a southern candidate is not the right approach in employee retention, succession planning, continuity of services, and fiscal prudence in our current environment.

Quote: This new proposed hiring policy seems like you're trying to achieve an Indigenous hiring quota without a plan to support northern people.

Quote: At a time of such economic uncertainty, why is the GNWT creating opportunities for people who aren't even NWT residents? This new proposed hiring policy seems like you're playing politics with my future to make a more positive government report.

Quote: We have stayed here in the North because of the opportunities for people who have lived here most their lives. With this new policy, there's no advantage to living or going to school in the North.

Mr. Speaker, quote: If the GNWT is committed to human rights, equity, inclusion, economic stability and workplace diversity, it should be expanding and strengthening protections for persons with disabilities rather than rolling them back.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, quote: The morale of your frontline providers has never been so low and many of us feel insulted and disgusted by this new directive. End quote.

What is especially frustrating about this, Mr. Speaker, is how it came through -- how this process came there. My friend from Yellowknife Centre mentioned that this -- he used the word rammed through. And I would tend to agree. This was pushed through a process with little concern for the role of Members of two standing committees, both as representatives of their constituents and active committee Members who play on oversight role to government. Twice the Standing Committee on Government Operations asked for the Minister to pause changes to affirmative action and continue working with committee. Twice the Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight asked the Minister to pause changes to the affirmative action policy and continue working with committee. Seven members took a major step of issuing a public letter to the Premier asking for the policy to be reversed and sent back to committee, the same thing this motion calls for. It was only after all of these actions and a public flogging in the media that the Minister decided to compromise the policy and bring back northern Indigenous hiring in a more limited capacity.

Committees must be respected if this form of government that we have is going to work, Mr. Speaker. Ministers should be listening carefully to the concerns of committees and not ignoring them. That is not consensus government. How this matter has been handled sets a bad precedent for the role of committees in the oversight of major policy decisions going forward, Mr. Speaker. Changes to significant policies are also -- this changes significant policy that, again, has so many people upset. It's not part of the priorities of the Assembly. It's not part of the mandate of the GNWT. And it's not present in the Minister's mandate letter. Certainly I did not run to represent my constituents in this chamber on that promise. And I don't recall anyone else in this chamber saying they pledged to do that on the campaign trail.

So why are we here, Mr. Speaker? Why have we spent so much time and energy on a policy that does little to improve the hiring of Indigenous people and is hugely frustrating to Northerners. No matter the Minister's intention, Mr. Speaker, the results are clear to Northerners: You aren't valued, you aren't wanted, and you aren't a priority to this government.

I didn't think this needed to be said but as this government continues to make decisions that erode the advantages our people have enjoyed for 30 years or more, let me be clear: Every decision we make in this chamber should have one goal - Northerners first. We are sent here to solve problems, not to create them. By leaving so many gaps behind and non-Indigenous Northerners behind, we are actively adding to the challenges Northerners face every day in our communities. Working people deserve better, especially those in our public service and those aspiring to join it.

If you value -- so if you value the work of committees, then you must support this motion. If you value accountability, then you must support this motion. If you value the concerns of dozens of working people who contacted their MLAs to reject these policy changes, then you must support this motion. If you value consensus government and working together and listening to one another, you must support this motion. And if you want to put Northerners first where they belong, you must support this motion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.