My questions today are for the Premier. In order for the voluntary sector and government to work more effectively together, the responsibility of maintaining a relationship should rest with the Executive. Will the Premier commit to dedicating a Minister at an Executive or cross-government level to be the primary contact for relationship-building and strategic planning with the voluntary sector as a whole?

Mr. Speaker, earlier in the life of this Assembly I made a Member’s statement concerning the voluntary sector in the N.W.T. The voluntary sector is essential to community wellness. Volunteers and voluntary groups, often referred to as non-government organizations, support the values and overall health of communities at large. In my previous Member’s statement and follow-up questions to the Premier, I asked the Premier to improve the G.N.W.T.’s relationship with and financing of this sector.

A first step would be to designate a lead minister responsible for the voluntary sector, a minister responsible at the executive level, rather than putting the entire sector under the responsibility of a

department with a focused mandate such as Municipal and Community Affairs. The sector covers all areas of responsibility and is not limited to just sports and recreation. There is clearly a difference between volunteer development and the area of sports and recreation and dealing with government-wide policy and financing issues that cut across the sector as a whole.

When I asked him to designate a minister responsible for the sector, I received no commitment from the Premier. Since then, the Members of this Assembly have completed our strategic planning. In our strategic plan there is clear reference to supporting and strengthening the voluntary sector as a whole. The cabinet’s response to the strategic plan also makes reference to supporting the voluntary sector, as did, although incredibly briefly, the Premier in his opening comments during the sitting of this Assembly.

In order for the voluntary sector and government to work more effectively together, the responsibility for entrenching and maintaining the relationship should rest in the executive. Other jurisdictions in Canada, such as Newfoundland and New Brunswick, have already adopted this approach.

A department dedicated to relationship building, located in a department such as MACA, even though they have a lead role in sports and recreation, will be less effective in reaching across the whole of government than the responsibility based in the central and executive location.

Mr. Speaker, at the appropriate time I’ll be asking the Premier questions concerning the voluntary sector and will be seeking his commitment to dedicate a Minister at an executive or cross-government level to be the primary contact for relationship building and strategic planning with the voluntary sector as a whole. Thank you.

Specifically related to the Public Service Career Training Program, it was never cut completely. In fact, after the budget cut there was still a significant amount of money left that was sent out to the regions specifically; it was going to be delivered at a regional level. Since then the program has just faded from the books.

I’m curious if the Minister could tell me where those dollars have gone. Can those dollars be re-profiled back into re-establishing the Public Service Career Training Program in the interest of residents of the Northwest Territories in smaller communities with the desire to get into the public service?

The Management Assignment Program is for employees who are already in the G.N.W.T. public service. The intern program, although it’s a very good program and does have a significant amount of value, does actually focus mostly on Yellowknife, as most of the people want to come back to Yellowknife. I’m more interested in a program such as the PSCTP, when it did exist prior to the cuts in ’96, that gave people from the smaller communities and the regional centres an opportunity to get into the public service — where they didn’t have the education necessarily to allow them to be screened into competitions, but they could demonstrate skills and abilities in other ways that, with minimal training, they would be able to take on more advanced roles such as officer-level jobs or management jobs.

To the Minister specifically: can I get the Minister to commit to reviewing a program like the Public Service Career Training Program with the intent of implementing something that would benefit those potential employees who are not already working for the G.N.W.T. public service — those individuals from the communities who will work up and stay in the communities once they complete their training?

Based on the MLA strategic plan that we put together earlier in the year, the government’s response is to develop some

committees and have those committees go out and work on some strategic initiatives. One of those committees is refocusing government, and the role, at least as far as I understand, is to identify avenues for improving the public service and deciding how we can do business more effectively. To me that means or suggests that they’re going to be responsible for putting in initiatives related to training and development.

What types of initiatives and/or programs is the Minister intending to put in place that would help bring, into government jobs, people in communities who may lack education but who have skills and qualifications that might be related to the positions they’re applying on?

I'd like to see a commitment from this government to invest in Northerners in a meaningful way. I'd like to see the reinstatement of the Public Service Career Training Program, based on its original design.

I would like to see people with skills and abilities from the communities offered an opportunity to develop the knowledge, skills and abilities to do the jobs which, with minimal training, they would be able to do.

I would like to stop the revolving door of highly educated southerners coming to communities for short periods of time.

I would like to build a strong public service with dedicated Northerners. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yesterday the Member from Inuvik Twin Lakes raised concerns in a Member’s statement about the Affirmative Action Program and the inability of local people to get jobs with the G.N.W.T. — jobs which, with minimal training, they would be able to do regardless of the perceived educational requirements that they as individuals may not meet.

Currently, the G.N.W.T. spends a lot of money flying highly educated southerners into communities. Most of these individuals have little to no experience in small communities. Often they only stay for a year or two before returning south. It’s a revolving door. This is expensive.

Is this the best use of our limited funds? Would it not be more effective and better use of our funds to invest in the people of the North? Would it not be better to train people from the community to do the work required in those communities?

Prior to the major cost cuts and job cuts of 1996, the G.N.W.T. delivered a program called the Public Service Career Training Program. It was a competency-based, on-the-job training program focused on training indigenous aboriginal people to help them obtain managerial and officer-level jobs. It gave these individuals an opportunity to train for positions which they had skills to do but lacked either the education or the experience to get through the normal competition process.

This program had an 84 per cent success rate and graduated between 25 and 30 indigenous aboriginal people into meaningful officer and managerial level positions per year. Upon completion of their training, they had the required knowledge, skills and abilities to completely and confidently perform the duties of the jobs they were trained to take on.

It was a very successful program, and as the G.N.W.T., we should have been proud of it. Instead, as part of the reduction exercises in 1996, the G.N.W.T. cut the budget in half, eliminated all the support positions related to the program, and devolved the responsibility for the delivery to the regions without providing the positions required to support the program. As a result, it became completely ineffective and died. Today it does not exist in any capacity.

Now we have no comprehensive training programs to assist indigenous aboriginal people in obtaining meaningful employment through comprehensive training on the job. This is a shame.

Over the last couple of weeks we have heard about budget cuts and reinvestments. We have heard about maximizing Northern employment. At the appropriate time I'll be asking the Minister Responsible for Human Resources questions concerning these reinvestments in training for people of the North.

Mr.

Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to

conclude my statement.

Unanimous consent granted.

Mr. Chair, I move that $80,000 be deleted from the Interim Appropriation Detail booklet amount set out in Schedule 2, Capital Investment Expenditures, item No. 6, Education, Culture and Employment, on page 6, for the project Lahm Ridge Tower renovations.

I guess I don’t quite understand what the definition of significant renovations is. I mean, in 2002–2003 they redid that entire basement. It’s quite nice. It’s got one of the largest boardrooms in it, completely rigged out: nice tables, everything. It looks fantastic. I think that cost about $300,000 and some.

I know they’ve done a lot of work on the second floor. You go into the main floor where the student financial assistance is. It’s quite nice in there. They’ve got all the fancy new desks, and they’ve got a whole new area set up for their computer people. It looks pretty good every time I go in there. It’s put together quite nicely. The third floor was renovated a couple of years ago, as well. They’ve put over $900,000 in renovations into that building since 2002-2003, so I’m kind of surprised by the comment that it has had no significant renovations.

I’d be curious about what it is they’re doing and why in times of cuts we need to keep moving forward and buying fancy new desks and making buildings look fantastic and pretty, when all they have to be is functional and usable. It seems a little odd, so I guess my question is: what do they have to do that is different than what they’ve done since 2002-2003, 2003-2004, and on and on and on? They’ve done renovations in that building almost every year.