Thank you, Mr. Speaker -- or sorry, Mr. Chair. Maybe next go around.

Mr. Speaker, I'm quite frustrated with this entire process and how this has gone. You know, the decisions and reasons that were given to me, or to us as a committee from the department and the Minister regarding why this could not go ahead as of now or even in the two years that we've compromised on, they don't wash with me. Some of these things are things that -- such as well, no dental hygienist brought this forward. Well, they're busy. They're working. Everybody's trying to get into dental appointments. So just because they didn't come and initiate this program does not mean they did not show interest. And every single one of them told us this would be a great thing. I had a dental cleaning in the meantime while this bill was going on and my hygienist told me she used to work independently in the south and didn't understand why she wasn't able to do so here in the North. Another reason we were given was that the -- there needed to be time to do culturally-appropriate standard operating procedures and protocols. However, standard operating procedures for this type of work are available across Canada, and that includes in the other two territories, I'm sure. So to me, it would have just been a matter of taking things that already exist and adapting them for our territory. To put it off as waiting for it to be done culture -- in a culturally-appropriate manner when all it is doing is impacting Indigenous children is quite laughable, actually, to me. When I look at that as a reason, we're going in the meantime sacrifice the confidence and the self-esteem of Indigenous children. I've seen children in this House, pages come in, who smile like you wouldn't believe at me until the camera comes out. And when it's time to take the picture, the teeth go away because they don't want people to see their teeth being recorded looking that the way that they are. I noticed that, because I tried to take a picture a couple times with a young page who I knew his family and he wouldn't smile the way he'd smiled the whole week before. I've had braces. I've had numerous fillings. I have teeth that are not great. I can thank my dad for that. And I can tell you that it has impacted me as a person my entire life, to have had teeth that didn't feel like everybody else's and were not the same. And I am lucky because I had parents that had benefits. I had orthodontics. I had cleanings. I had everything. So how do you have that when you have poor health already, because you're living below the poverty line given that everything seems to be here in Yellowknife, including dental services, so now you have all of these issues that lead to medical issues. Like my colleague said, surgeries that are unnecessary, other things that can be determined by dental hygienists. I currently am waiting on something to be investigated from my -- that my dentist has identified. And now I'm in the bog down of health and social services waiting to get that looked at. So if I'm a person who can advocate for myself, I'm a white, professional woman, an MLA in the territory's capital and I find our services lacking, what does that look like in communities? And, you know -- and it comes back to the same thing as mental health. When we're continuously triaging things because we're so far behind, we will never get to the chronic cases. We will never get to the backlog because we are constantly just fighting to stay ahead of the game of where we're at. And that means, like my colleague said, everybody that's an emergency will get what they need -- then they're not even getting what they need. I shouldn't even say that. But the people in emergency will get prioritized, and the other people will not, and their issues will escalate. And when I look at this, this could have been an opportunity for this to have been quite creative because this could go out to engagement with the other professions Acts that are on the table for the next Assembly. There are ones that this department will be going out to do engagement on. So how hard is it, Mr. Chair, to add one more on to that where everybody agrees that it needs to be done? They could have just brought it along in the next one, but instead we actually not only did not have a compromise, we have something that is being actually rolled back even further by a Member that isn't even going to be sitting here. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, Bill 80, Dental Hygienists Profession Statutes Amendment Act, received second reading in the Legislative Assembly on March 30th, 2023, and was referred to the Standing Committee on Social Development for review. The standing committee held a public hearing in Yellowknife on May 12th, 2023. Committee heard from two stakeholders at the meeting -- at the hearing and received two written submissions on the bill. Bill 80 will designate dental hygienists as their own profession and provide dental hygienists with the option to work independently of a dentist.

Committee recognizes the state of oral health care in the NWT, that dental services are so limited that many residents go months, even years, before they can receive dental care. For many residents, there is no other option but to wait with decaying teeth and in physical pain until services are available locally. Because of the limited access to oral health care in communities, committee heard that this has resulted in dentures being made for children as young as 12 years old.

For those who can afford it, residents resort to paying for their own travel expenses to go to Yellowknife, or further south, to receive dental work. This is not an acceptable solution when dental hygienists could be empowered to work independently. Committee heard from the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation the benefits of enacting Bill 80, specifically that it will potentially allow for greater access to federal funding. It would allow the IRC to bring services into communities faster. It would enhance the quality of life in the region. The IRC recognized the relationship between oral health and mental health, with those having access to oral health having greater self-esteem and self-confidence.

While committee endeavoured to negotiate a date for implementation of the bill, committee could not find agreement with the department.

On August 3rd, 2023, committee held a clause-by-clause review of the bill with the sponsoring Member and moved two motions to amend the dates for implementing the regulation of dental hygienists. Committee recognizes the challenges the department has identified to adhere to the timeline as proposed in the bill. Committee heard the challenges from the department regarding self-regulation but committee also heard there are options, and the NWT would not need to create its own association. Committee wants the department to move faster, to see concrete action to improve oral health for residents in the NWT and not wait until the end of the 20th Assembly to do so.

I would like to thank the stakeholders who engaged with the bill with committee. And individual Members may have additional comments or questions. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So reading through all that, the answer's no, there was no discussion about them being the landlords of the future facility.

I guess where I kind of struggle with this, we're talking about economic development. We're talking about land claims. We know at some point the land around Frame Lake, because it will be settled and hopefully sooner rather than later, not that I think anything progressed during this Assembly; however, when that land is settled it will be developed. And at that point, there will be buildings, there will be things put on it. I really can't see the ec dev part of the YKDFN not wanting to see buildings near the hospital.

So that being said, can the Minister commit that they will go back and re-engage -- or the department will re-engage on the location of the polytechnic university? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. They may have been looked at, but I don't think they were really considered given that I have not been able to find any information on why Tin Can Hill was selected out of all of these groups.

The Minister speaks to the fact of the lack of area for expansion around the capital site and sight lines and things like that. Well, the sight lines, we can change. We're consensus. We can pass things so that we can look at a building across Frame Lake. I think we'd all be fine with that.

When we talk about the expansion piece, this would actually be an opportunity for once the Akaitcho land claim is settled for the Indigenous people of this territory and area to become the future landlords of the polytechnic. So to say, yes, the capital site is restricted in space and expansion size, yes, in and of itself it is. But we're not getting another building. We're too small. So start there, and then you can expand into the Akaitcho. So with that being in mind, can the Minister speak to whether there has been any conversations with the Akaitcho whose impacts -- it is their land that the North Slave Campus will end up on. Have they shown any interest in the polytechnic university and potentially being the future landlords? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We see this time and again where, you know, stuff is being done behind the scenes or things are advancing before it really is taken out to the public for that engagement. I think a good example of that was the five options presented to us for the airport terminal building at which point committee told the Minister right off the bat two were not viable.

So given that, I'm kind of -- you know, I have to wonder why we had all this kerfuffle if we haven't even picked that as the site yet. However, I would like to know has the department done a comprehensive assessment on areas such as the downtown or the capital site as proposed areas for the new build, has it only been looking at Tin Can Hill, and if so, why not? Thanks.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.

Given that the funding is still required to come from Canada to complete the new North Slave Campus, has the department given any thought to re-engaging with the public on the proposed location of the polytechnic university? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don't see my page in the Chamber at the moment, but I would like to recognize Rhiannon Ackerman-O'Connor who I have actually known since she was a little baby. And as well welcome my friend Nicole Sok to the gallery, who is here watching the proceeding today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, time and time again I have heard from constituents and residents of their concerns with the proposed location of the polytechnic university. Although the Minister pointed me to the Facilities Master Plan Engagement Report to explain how he chose Tin Can Hill, I feel as if he engaged on the criteria of a site without really thinking of the operational and, more importantly, the emotional implications of this site. Mr. Speaker there are real, practical concerns with the Tin Can Hill site.

Traffic to the campus would be directed along School Draw Avenue or cut through Copper Sky Apartments. Neither of these entry points are prepared to handle the volume of traffic that would be involved with a university and pose serious safety issues for my constituents living there. Housing will be seriously impacted given the limited Yellowknife rental market. The apartments in my riding are sitting at practically zero vacancy with overcrowding issues. How do we intend to house students while also ensuring that residents, who live in my riding, are not pushed out given the plan calls for 50 percent of students to find market housing?

I worry for my constituents, including many long-term pensioners and low-income families - residents who are already struggling to keep up with our skyrocketing cost of living. I worry that they will be forced from their homes due to rising rents and neighbourhood gentrification.

The Minister has said the Tin Can Hill MOU is not legally binding and that things will be flushed out with consultation. However, Mr. Speaker, I think we need to be more innovative and forward thinking with the selection of the university site. One option I want explored is the capital site which encompasses this Assembly as well as the museum.

The capital site represents a more sustainable and strategic parcel of land for the university, not only from a traffic, growth, and housing perspective but also from a recreational land use perspective; that emotional piece I was mentioning earlier.

Mr. Speaker, I want to highlight that the Facilities Master Plan Engagement Report does not transparently reflect how the Tin Can Hill site was chosen and how engagement occurred. It is a flawed plan that does not adequately address the practical realities of the area, the limited accessibility by road, and the potential emotional and physical impacts on residents' health and well-being at the loss of such a treasured, valued green space in the backyard of my community that I love, Great Slave.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I don't reiterate everything that my colleague from Kam Lake said, and I don't think I actually could after this long day in the House and week as well so far. I did just want to say that I too am disappointed that we didn't get this bill further along and kind of did get stuck in this conversation that ultimately did not end up going anywhere. However, I shouldn't say it that way because it really did sort of bring back the importance of ensuring the entire Government of the Northwest Territories has the same approach and all of the bills and acts have the same consideration to be made for what is that entity that we sometimes so loosely call Indigenous governments, which can have many different meanings in many different rooms. So I would have liked to have seen this get done. I, as coming from a consulting background where I dealt with a lot of contractors, I know how important it is for them to have this bill and this act updated. However, I feel that it really missed the mark with the prompt payment, which literally is the number 1 issue for most businesses in the Northwest Territories, is getting paid on time, so that they're not having to float costs which then ends up, you know, costing more because they're financing their work waiting on the government and others to pay. And oftentimes, their sub-consultants don't get paid until they get paid. So as you go further down the line, it becomes longer and longer to the smaller and smaller businesses who can't really take those types of hits and don't have any cash in the bank to sort of to float their business.

And, again, I've never been a person to just do something for the sake of doing it, and when I hear that both sides recognized that this is not a good piece of legislation, it's not hitting the mark properly, for us to go forward with it, it seems kind of pointless. There are other bills where I can see why we could still pass something even though it -- we all agreed it wasn't perfect. But I don't think this is one of them. And I think rather -- it's never, in my opinion, a failure that we say we're not going to go forward with the bill because it's not like this work disappears. But the onus then is on the next government, the next committee, to ensure that the work that was done by the previous one isn't lost. And so all I can say for that is continuity is a good thing, Madam Chair. So I will leave it at that. Thank you.