Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, today we're being asked to consider a Private Member's bill that touches on an issue that is important and deeply felt not only in this House, not only in our healthcare system, but obviously throughout the Northwest Territories and the Northwest Territories public service.
And let me begin saying clearly, Mr. Speaker, that nurses are essential. We don't want to see them leave. Their contributions to this territory's healthcare system are invaluable. Their contribution to the health and wellness of all Northwest Territories residents is invaluable.
The GNWT must support nurses as a profession, support healthy workplaces in all of our healthcare settings, support safe and reliable access to health care for residents which, in turn, may include looking at things like patient care ratios, scheduling, and effective workplace communication.
There have been significant public statements of late about healthcare workplace conditions, about morale, about ensuring frontline service delivery are included in decision-making, and about whether the current representation structure is best suited to the realities of nursing. There is much happening across government to change the delivery of health care and also to change the delivery of human resource services. Of course, Mr. Speaker, more can always be done to improve our services, including our services to our own staff. Some of those things, Mr. Speaker, indeed a great many, are not the subject of collective bargaining. And so then the question today is whether Bill 26 is the right tool at the right time to create positive, effective, efficient, and lasting change for all workers across the Northwest Territories, including healthcare workers.
Mr. Speaker, the Government of the Northwest Territories has been engaged for several years now in a comprehensive modernization of the Public Service Act. We don't always speak about our work when it's just underway, but we have been taking those steps in the last little while to bring folks better up to speed with the efforts that we've been making.
The first phase of this work is nearing its completion, and legislation is expected to be introduced this fall. It will include important updates related to safe disclosure protections, job evaluation and classification, hiring processes, and labour relations frameworks, to reflect a modern and inclusive public service.
One single part of that Act was set aside from this first phase, and that is section 41, which governs how bargains units are structured and certified. There are two aspects that we are committed to explore, both the right to determine a bargaining association and the entity that represents the association. Those two aspects are typically satisfied through an acceptable certification process by an independent entity. This section, section 2, is a focus of phase 2 of our modernization effort, and work is already underway to review certification frameworks used across Canada to consider the legal and constitutional requirements and to ensure that any changes are grounded in fairness, transparency, and the principle of employee choice.
Importantly, this work will include engagement with the Union of Northern Workers and PSAC, both longstanding bargaining partners for the GNWT. The UNW and PSAC are experts in organized labour space, and they will have an invaluable and unique perspective to contribute. And as the union and the employer, we have engaged respectfully about all other contents of phase 1 of our Public Service Act amendments and that draft legislation, as I said earlier, will be tabled this fall and will be the better for this process.
I'm aiming to begin the engagement on the Public Service Act, phase 2, that is to say section 41, over the summer and continuing into the fall, and it will also include not only the unions but of course our public service with opportunities for the public as well.
But, Mr. Speaker, the Private Member's bill was not developed in the same manner with the same process with the same level of consultation or the same engagement. It does not address the public service as a whole. It does not address the healthcare profession as a whole. And so, Mr. Speaker, the issue of how nurses are represented at the bargaining table, we realize has clearly struck a chord. Although the preamble of the bill speaks to some of the broader workplace issues, I do hope it is clear this vote on this bill is not a vote about the workplace safety of nurses, the importance of nursing, or the importance of providing healthy workplaces more generally.
And so, Mr. Speaker, while I do not support this bill in its current form or its process by which it was developed, I will recognize that it reflects these issues, and so it is important to explain why this process and this proposal is not receiving my support.
First, Bill 26 proposes to legislate a structure that would allow for the immediate formation of a separate bargaining unit without, however, a neutral or independent certification process. That is a serious departure from how union representation is structured in every other Canadian jurisdiction. It would bypass employee-led certification through a labour relations board or tribunal or some other similar entity and, instead, it is requiring the courts to play a role that they are not designed to fulfill.
Second, there are questions about whether a Private Member's bill is truly the right legislative tool for this kind of reform. New structures can require funding, require regulatory oversight, may require government operational changes. This can, in turn, require procedural challenges and policy updates may be required. There are questions about financial authority and constitutional compatability, of this is best addressed through comprehensive legislation. It's the kind of comprehensive response that would be appropriate for a government-led bill, and it's one that will take time. But, Mr. Speaker, again, we are well onto that path, that work is underway, both for the public service as a whole as well as for section 41.
And beyond these legal and structural issues, there are concerns about process generally and whether legislating a solution now, before a consultation process is complete or before system-wide impacts are better understood, will it bring the kind of lasting change that nurses deserve or fix the challenges of morale felt not only by nurses but by the public service as a whole.
The Minister of Health and Social Services has now spent the last several months meeting directly with frontline care workers across the territory. The Union of Northern Workers and PSAC are also conducting their own outreach, including a series of regional meetings with healthcare members. And just last week, GNWT, the UNW, and PSAC issued a joint statement reaffirming our shared commitment to resolving section 41 issues and concerns collaboratively even as we may be entering active bargaining this fall and winter.
The GNWT is already committed to revisit what would be required to bring the Hay River Health and Social Services Authority into the public service. Again, we want to ensure that there is choice, and making the choice to join the GNWT's public service is not one that should be presumed without properly going back to all affected employees. As well, bringing this pension in at an unknown cost requires a fulsome update and analysis. But, again, that work is underway, and I'm pleased to confirm that this work's been assigned to the health system sustainability unit and will be ready for update by this fall.
And last, but far from least on concerns of process, Mr. Speaker, this bill treads into an area of work that if we are not thoughtful, inclusive, and transparent during the development of the legislative changes being proposed, we could be seen as undermining the independence of collective representation or seen as interfering with the union that is the representative of workers.
Finally, I want to speak to some of the evidence used for this bill. Bill 26 notes that a separate collective agreement would increase the likelihood of targeted benefits and allowances for nurses that do not necessarily apply to the entire GNWT workforce and that this would support better employee retention or higher morale. Mr. Speaker, the current collective agreement is structured to do this. Appendix A10 as well as several memorandums of understandings does focus on public service nurses and health care professionals specific to hospitals and health care facilities. Appendix A10, along the job share MOU, the labour market supplement MOU, the professional development MOU, all provide nurses with increased monetary benefits, additional professional development time, and job share opportunities.
As well, Mr. Speaker, the department of finance very actively monitors salary and benefits across all Canadian jurisdictions. We want to ensure that we remain not just competitive but truly attractive as a place to work. And Mr. Speaker, the recent survey conducted by CAN, which of course I realize is being relied on, and I note really was for the purpose of information gathering only and meant to inform ongoing policy discussions and to contribute to the understanding of the workforce. The survey was publicly available. It was not limited to nurses or controlled for the number of times one individual could respond. And so -- and not restricted only to CAN registrants or even NWT residents, and it only had a response rate of 31 percent. However, of the questions posed or were in addition of the questions posed, Mr. Speaker, not all of those initiatives are solvable by a collective agreement, such as the availability of housing.
That said, to be clear, again, this survey does provide helpful information. The Minister of Health and Social Services and myself have already committed to bring our teams together to review the list of questions on that survey and see what progress we can make now without looking into other processes elsewhere. Again, much of the issues around workplaces require this kind of collaboration and much work is happening in both places and under both departments. But this survey alone is certainly not a mandate to proceed to change without a proper process.
And so in short, Mr. Speaker, the Private Member's bill does not provide a proper channel for core fundamental change to the Public Service Act that is needed, and it is not one that is providing a channel that will apply to all public servants or all healthcare professionals. It is not a complete solution to the many and very challenges facing healthcare professionals or nurses specifically. Any workplace that we know is under strain.
The work to improve the situation of not only nurses but all public servants is urgent. I have seen the strain on the public service morale since COVID. It has not improved. In that sense, it is urgent, and I'm committed to this work. I believe we have a path forward for a complete Public Service Act that is not driven by urgency but is driven by thoughtfulness and engagement. That collaborative work has already begun and is so far proving successful. It's a path that we are on. It's a path I believe will lead us to stronger representation, greater fairness, and a more responsive system for everyone involved. As such, those are the reasons for which I'm not supporting Bill 26 as the best path or channel for change.
That said, Mr. Speaker, one of the aspects of this House that makes us different from a traditional partisan Assembly is that it is MLAs who exclusively do the work of legislative committees and, traditionally, Private Members do have the opportunity to bring forward ideas and policy options through Private Member's bill for review by committee. Cabinet, in these circumstances, abstains, and that allows committee to govern their own processes. We will be continuing that tradition today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.