Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to sort of expand a bit on some things that my colleagues have talked about. Yes, there is a massive amount of money in here for infrastructure which does includes roads, but as my colleague from Monfwi pointed out, a big part of that is the Frank Channel Bridge. Another piece of that is also the Great Bear River Bridge planning study and as well a lot of -- there's at least five highway reconstruction projects. And I think it's worth noting that for the first time in a while under ICIP, I believe we are seeing 100 percent dollars for this funding. So while the amount of money that looks like it's being spent is disproportionate on highways and roads, it is actually, in fact, largely funded 100 percent through the federal government, or at least 75 percent. So that's a bunch of money that comes in that basically keeps our main industry or business industry alive, which is our construction industry. So to me, the $94 million on highways and roads actually shows an increase in investment from the federal government into our infrastructure deficit. And I'm really pleased to see the 100 percent dollars, which was always something that I've said from day one that we needed to be pushing the federal government on because we can't afford to pay the way a province does. We don't have the same revenue sources. So when I look at that, I'm quite pleased. And the same when I look at airports and runways. Yes, it looks like a really large number, $62 million, but Madam Chair, you know from that in your own region, a large portion of that is the Inuvik highway -- sorry, the Inuvik runway expansion and the terminal buildings, which is 100 percent funded by the Department of National Defence.

So while these numbers look like they're very heavily weighted over towards more of the roads and industrial type work, it's not a full picture to say that -- like, to sort of express that as being GNWT money and GNWT investment when clearly it is more about the federal government than it is about us. And often, as we noted numerous times in this House, we cannot afford -- we are not allowed to move money from certain pots of funding from the federal government to other pots. So this is not a questioning of housing versus roads. They come from two different sources in the federal government.

So I am disappointed though, however, to see that the housing is only at $13 million. I struggle after four years to understand where the houses have actually shown up for all this money that the Minister speaks to getting. I see stuff in communities that -- when I speak to the communities when we were on committee tour, they told me they worked with the federal government directly, they got those houses. So I'm not quite sure what housing has been doing. And I hope $13 million here actually means $13 million in units on the ground and not $13 million that half is sloughed off to administrative costs and bureaucracy. This department needs to get under control the fact that they are a social programming department and stop, you know, middle managing and not getting their money out the door properly.

So I think with that being said, I just also wanted to echo the disappointed in seeing the dismally low number for the schools. We did tours for -- we went on tour for the Education Act or with committee and as an engineer -- I'm not a building engineer so I'm not going to profess to have that expertise, but I know when I can go in and look at a school and see that the entire floor of the school is being jacked up and held up by plywood on the ground and jacks to hold it in place to keep the building from falling down, the buildings all smell. As a Minister, I went into Aklavik school on a tour with Cabinet, and I could smell mildew in the gym, and that's their hall. That's what they use for every single event that's ever held in Aklavik is in that school. So what is that doing to our health care and to the people's health in those regions?

This government has not been serious or taken really to heart the mandate item to actually improve the educational outcomes of students to the rest of Canada because how could they even begin if they're in schools that are making them sick and are not full of the equipment and the things that they need to learn. And that's when you consider students that are probably starting at an equal footing, and then we have students that aren't even coming from an equal footing with southern Canada. So I have to say that this is actual quite shameful, that it's only $3 million for schools considering that I sat here now and listened to my colleagues from Nunakput and Monfwi talk about the schools that are lacking and then yet I was -- had been invited to the opening ceremony of the beautiful new school here in Yellowknife. So the school that was here in Yellowknife that it replaced would have stayed in a community for another 40 years like that, just being shored up and fixed up, but because it was Yellowknife it was replaced. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm glad to hear that there was a recent meeting. I think it's really key right now given where we're at sort of economically in our rebuild. I guess the question I'd want to ask, then, is -- oh, gosh, now I'm losing my train of thought.

With the Minister meeting with her colleagues and such, and given that as we watched the safety issue with our communities not having roads and the acute infrastructure deficit, has the conversation shifted at all for a recognition that our mining sector is also going to be supported if we look at the infrastructure needs that our territory has? So I guess what I'm trying to say is is there now a greater recognition federally that the lack of roads really, while impacting our safety, is really impacting mining. And is that a way that the Minister can kind of push for us to fix that infrastructure deficit. I feel like it's a good thrust that we now have more than one reason why we need roads. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I'm glad to hear that. I was a bit concerned about impacts on supply chain, especially since we've already been reeling after COVID with that sector not being super stable as well as materials being shorthanded. I guess another way that I think that we -- you know, I'm hoping our mineral industry can be supported is that we've been long awaiting the federal government's sort of plan for what they're going to do around the critical mineral strategy, and I know that the Northwest Territories and other territories are key to the federal government's strategy. So I'm just wondering -- I know there was money allocated in -- billions of dollars, I believe, in the 2023 Budget. So I'm just wondering can the Minister speak to -- is that money actually materializing here in the territory any time soon? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And that's really encouraging to hear. I'm not surprised to hear about the donation from the diamond mines. They always have been stepping up when needed, including during COVID and providing cleaning supplies and such to NGOs.

Just a little bit further, and I'm not sure if the Minister has this information, but have any of the mines expressed that there would be delays to their projects given the wildfire season? I'm glad to hear that equipment that was here was utilized. I actually -- if you run into former Member Wally Schumann ask him about the anthrax guy showing up with his chopper at the 60th parallel during his evacuation. So definitely impacting a lot of our workers are scientists, so. Does the Minister know if there will be any delays to any of the project timelines that were proposed prior to the wildfire season? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of ITI. It's been a while since I asked her about anything to do with mining so I thought it would be a good opportunity to do so.

Given that a lot of what we've been talking about has been around the wildfires, can the Minister please give us an update on how wildfire evacuation and fighting has impacted our mining sector. And I guess particularly I'm interested to know how Pine Point is doing considering they are in the South Slave area that was quite impacted. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the 19th Assembly made history when a record number of women were elected in 2019. With the subsequent election of my colleague, the Member for Monfwi, our small Legislative Assembly broke through the glass ceiling to become a legislature with a majority of women. This is one of our achievements that I am the most proud of. As a result, this Assembly has addressed critical issues impacting women, youth, 2SLGBFQIPA+ people, and families. Issues such as Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, intimate partner violence, universal child care, suicide, fertility, mental health, and family well-being among many others. And Mr. Speaker, I'd be remiss if I didn't thank you, and the rest of our colleagues, for not only allowing us the space to do so but for also taking up the mantle for issues that have typically been considered only for women. While the Northwest Territories made huge strides electing record numbers of women, the work to support gender equity and gender equality cannot stop here.

Mr. Speaker, people who identify as women, or are from the 2SLGBTQIPA+ community, face serious barriers to running, including financial barriers as men are typically better poised to self-fund their campaigns or to solicit funds from others. Colonial political environments have traditionally been patriarchal and unfriendly to those who do not identify as male. Women and 2SLGBTQIPA+ people are discouraged from putting their names forward as candidates because of the threats of violence and verbal attacks that often use social media to target, bully, and demean. Many women and 2SLGBTQIPA+ people also face negative perceptions of competency and qualification despite our intelligence, experience, and education.

The Legislative Assembly and our territory need to take bold steps to overcome these challenges for women and 2SLGBTQIPA+ people to have full and effective participation in politics and our democracy. Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.

---Unanimous consent granted

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and my colleagues. So the Legislative Assembly and our territory need to take bold steps to overcome these challenges for women and 2SLGBTQIPA+ people to have full and effective participation in politics and our democracy. They must be sitting at the table and in this very room to share their perspectives, values, and goals to ensure that decisions made will support gender equity efforts and achieve gender equality.

With the end of this Assembly and the election around the corner, it's an important time to remember the political and social barriers that prevent women and 2SLGBTQIPA+ people from entering politics. I hope that the momentum for a more diverse group of MLAs will continue beyond this Assembly as we will continue to see complex economic, social and environmental issues impacting our communities over the next four years, however, through a diverse leadership group and new perspectives we can inform how we address those issues in a more holistic way. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I would be remiss if I didn't bring forward more details on exactly what the Chamber of Mines, as well as the Mining Association of Canada, what their concerns were with this bill. Some of this may be a bit duplicative of what's already been said but I think it bears repeating.

So it does propose to make changes to three pieces of legislation which could have far reaching negative effects on our mineral investment competitiveness. Industry members found that the bill was duplicative of other legislation. It proposes unusual sharing of confidential tax information beyond government staff who have the responsibility and assistance to protect business sensitive financial information. Disconcertingly, this confidential and sensitive information would also be available to business competitors, and it is being proposed before the GNWT has completed its study on resource royalties and the tax system. And as well, Madam Chair, this does not support the 19th Legislative Assembly's mandate to, quote, "increase resource exploration and development," and, quote, "restore levels of investment, partnership, employment, and growth in the NWT's economy."

As my colleague mentioned, it is duplicative of the ESTMA legislation, and that is the Extractive Sector Transparency Management Act, where individual mines report what they pay to governments in various taxes, including royalties, which are then posted publicly. This legislation was advanced and supported by the Canadian mining industry, working together with two NGOs, to become law.

In Canada, it is fully consistent with other international financial payment purporting schemes in the United Kingdom and in Europe. These jurisdictions mutually recognize each other's legislation as equivalent. This equivalency recognition allows for a company to report government payments only once and have that report address reporting requirements in multiple jurisdictions, minimizing reporting burden and duplication. ESTMA is fundamentally an anticorruption tool to determine whether payments made by industry to government match with government reporting of payments received. While not an issue in Canada, these anticorruption mechanisms have high relevance in other parts of the world where governance is weak and corruption is high. Quebec is the only other Canadian jurisdiction with similar legislation, and it too recognizes legislation in other jurisdictions as equivalent.

The extra details that are proposed in this Private Member's bill are therefore unnecessary, inconsistent with international norms, and they propose many sensitive competitiveness issues for industry and government that are not in the Northwest Territories' best interest. It is the belief of the Chamber of Mines the disclosures made under ESTMA are sufficient to provide the public with an appreciation for the royalties paid without exposing commercially sensitive aspects of each individual business to competitors or the general public. This is also unusual and inappropriate sharing of sensitive tax information. Mineral resource royalties are essentially a profits tax. They are calculated through a legislative formula that considers various factors that could affect profits positively or negatively and differentially for one mine compared to another. These include sensitive, confidential information such as market price, but in the case of diamonds, also the efficiency of an individual company's customer supply chains to maximize their own market price. It also considers business losses, capital investments, fuel costs, depreciation and amortization, and the various other taxes that companies must also pay.

In the NWT, ice road costs, for example, the cost of self-generating power, and property taxes, and other costs associated with our acute infrastructure deficit, are also some of the unique additional costs incurred by mine operators that are taken into consideration. Current NWT legislation recognizes and respects the need to protect such potentially sensitive business information. For example, under the current Northwest Territories mining regulations and under the upcoming Mineral Resources Act, through the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Under current privacy laws, this detailed financial information is limited to the government staff responsible to use it for detailed tax calculations and who are obligated to safeguard it. The current legislation is designed to protect the public interest by requiring companies to follow the law in reporting to government the detailed information required for royalty calculation purposes. If enacted, this bill would unusually allow the release of tax information and sharing of other sensitive information beyond government staff who have the authority and responsibility to audit and assess company confidential information with politicians and Indigenous governments without this responsibility. We say "unusually" as this is not the norm in other jurisdictions in Canada.

This broadening of the distribution of the information to a much larger group of people also substantially increases the likelihood of a breach of confidentiality requirements. As the number of people who have the information increases, the level of confidentiality applied to the information decreases. The type of disclosure proposed under Bill 29 could pose harm to the commercial side of the mineral resource business for companies that mine or may be considering it in the NWT.

Government regularly protects all businesses and industries with confidentiality of their financial information for tax reporting calculations. Bill 29 is unusually intrusive in proposing that detailed, sensitive information be shared more broadly. It begs the question, would government then ask other mining and related businesses to reveal confidential information related to their profitability?

Similarly, our personal tax filings are not available to politicians. We see no added value, and the Chamber does not, and the fact that the added risk in sharing business details beyond those whose jobs and skills and responsibilities are to use this data to calculate royalties and other taxes.

It is also noted in the statement from the Chamber that there's unclear intentions but that the bill is jumping the gun on the GNWT's royalties study. The intentions behind Bill 29 are unclear. If it's to allow politicians to propose different royalty systems, we'd suggest this is not appropriate. Since we understand the GNWT ITI is currently conducting an in-depth royalty review to look into this issue, that process should be completed to help the standing committees, all MLAs, and the public understand the current system before discussing options to others. And I do recognize that things have advanced since the time that this was shared with us. Again, the Chamber likes to point out that they're not aware of any other Canadian jurisdiction that is requiring such an unusual level of sharing of detailed and frankly sensitive business information as this bill would require. And like I said before, the closest might be Quebec but that only requires a partial reporting of information from the rock quality to the process plant. So in other words, they do not require any information on processes and sales beyond that.

I won't go into any further. I think everybody can understand why this does not support the GNWT mandate -- or sorry, this Assembly's mandate to promote and secure our mining sector. I don't think that it's any surprise that I would come out and -- to not support this bill. I definitely was a member of the committee that was not in agreement with it. For me, all this is doing is giving the Minister just yet another option to say maybe I'll share it with you. It isn't obligating her to do so, so therefore it just seems to be very redundant and not necessary to me. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Monfwi, that Committee Report 60-19(2), Standing Committee on Social Development Report on the Review of Bill 80: Dental Hygienists Profession Statute Amendment Act, be received and adopted by the Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Introduction

Bill 80: Dental Hygienists Profession Statutes Amendment Act (Bill 80) received second reading on March 30, 2023, and was referred to the Standing Committee on Social Development (Committee) for review. Bill 80 is a private member's bill, sponsored by the Member for Kam Lake, to amend the Health and Social Services Professions Act and the Dental Auxiliaries Act. This Bill proposes to provide dental hygienists with the option to work independently of a dentist. Specifically, Bill 80:

• • • Will require the Minister of Health and Social Services to recommend to the Commissioner regulations under the Health and Social Services Professions Act, on or before March 31, 2024;
    • Designate the profession of dental hygienists as a profession, effective April 1, 2024;
    • Transfer the regulation of dental hygienists from the Dental Auxiliaries Act to the Health and Social Services Professions Act, effective April 1, 2024; and
    • Replace gender specific language in the Dental Auxiliaries Act with gender neutral language.

This report outlines key events leading up to the introduction of Bill 80; describes Committee's engagement with the public; and summarizes stakeholders' positions and Committee's decisions on key issues.

Committee Welcomes Improvements to Oral Healthcare

The purpose of Bill 80 is to permit dental hygienists to work independently of a dentist. Currently, under the Dental Auxiliaries Act, all dental hygienists working in the NWT must be supervised by a dentist. Section 6 of the Dental Auxiliaries Act reads:

6. No dental hygienist shall practice dental hygiene except under the direction and control of a dentist who assumes direct professional responsibility for the patients in respect of whom the services are being provided.

On May 12, 2023, Committee held a public hearing on Bill 80. Committee heard comments focused on the important role of oral health in preventative healthcare, and its significance within the overall health of individuals. Members expressed concern with the current state of oral healthcare delivery across the NWT, especially in small communities and regional centres. Members also voiced concern about the lack of equitable access to preventative oral healthcare across the NWT. Committee agreed unanimously with the intent of Bill 80 and all Members agreed to support it.

While the Department of Health and Social Services (the Department) did not present at the public hearing, Committee did meet with the Minister to discuss the Department's concerns with the Bill. Committee also exchanged correspondence with the Minister to try reaching consensus on an agreeable timeline for when the proposed changes within Bill 80 will take effect.

The Minister stated that the estimated timeline for the Department to complete the work within Bill 80 would take up to four years to complete. The Department also sent draft motions to amend Bill 80 with the dates of July 31, 2027, and August 1, 2027, as the dates of enactment for professional designation of dental hygienists, as well as the date for the creation of dental hygienist regulations, respectively.

However, Committee did not agree with the proposed amendments from the Department and advanced motions with a more aggressive timeline to implement the regulatory work.

AMENDING BILL 80's TIMELINES

Committee held a clause-by-clause review with the Member for Kam Lake on August 10, 2023. Committee engaged with the Member for Kam Lake on a compromised date of enactment on the Bill's proposed timelines. Committee then passed two motions to amend the Bill's timelines for when dental hygienists become a designated profession, and the date by which the Department shall establish dental hygienist regulations.

Originally, clauses 1 and 2 of Bill 80 read:

1. (1) The Health and Social Services Professions Act is amended by this section.

(2) Section 5 is repealed and the following is substituted:

5. (1) The Commissioner in Executive Council may, by order, designate professions to which this Act applies.

(2) The profession of dental hygienists is designated as a profession to which this Act applies, effective April 1, 2024.

Additionally, the original wording for Clause 3 read:

(3) The following is added after section 67: 67.1. (1) The Minister shall, on or before March 31, 2024, recommend to the Commissioner regulations under section 67 to regulate the practice of dental hygienists.

(2) Before recommending regulations under subsection (1), the Minister shall consult with

a) Indigenous governments;

b) the Canadian Dental Hygienists Association; and

c) dental hygienists actively practicing in the Northwest Territories.

Committee proposed two motions to amend the timelines (included in Appendix 1). These amendments will extend the timelines proposed in the Bill to December 1, 2025, and November 30, 2025, respectively giving the Department more time to enact the proposed legislative changes. Committee believes these amendments, which will come into force approximately halfway through the 20th Assembly, will be a sufficient timeline for the Department.

On August 10, 2023, at the clause-by-clause reading of Bill 80, the Member for Kam Lake, sponsoring Member of the Bill concurred with these amendments.

Committee Considered Public Input

Committee sought public feedback on Bill 80 with a public notice and targeted engagement letters. Committee received written submissions from:

- Ms. Nadja Lennie;

- Ms. Ashley Morine; and

- Hon. Julie Green, Minister of Health and Social Services.

All written submissions are included in Appendix 2 to this report.

Moreover, during the public hearing on Bill 80, Committee heard remarks from the Member for Kam Lake, along with Mr. Todd Orvitz, CAO of the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation, and Ms. Nadja Lennie, owner of Fireside Denture Clinic. Committee thanks Mr. Orvitz and Ms. Lennie for their engagement. Their participation helped inform Committee discussions on key issues for future consideration.

Committee Recommends Urgency in Oral Preventive Care

Committee strongly agrees with the Member for Kam Lake's concerns about the lacking areas of oral healthcare delivery within the NWT. Committee supports the intent of Bill 80 and acknowledges that the Department has stated its support of the Bill's intent as well. Committee considers oral healthcare as an urgent matter that must be addressed by the Department sooner, rather than later. While the amended Bill sets fall 2025 as the deadline for a new designation and regulations for dental hygienists, the Department should aim to complete this work even sooner.

In addition, during the public hearing on Bill 80 the CEO of the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation (IRC) stated that their organization had recently established a Memorandum of Understanding with the Northwest Territories Health and Social Services Authority (NTHSSA) enabling IRC to employ their own practicing dental hygienist under the direction and control of the NTHSSA's contracted oversight dentist. Committee believes this type of arrangement is a great interim option to increase access to oral preventive care while the department works on designating dental hygienists a profession and creating accompanying regulations. Committee would like to see similar types of agreements as that between the IRC and the NTHSSA be established with other communities and organizations that deliver health services. Therefore, Committee recommends the following:

Recommendation 1: The Standing Committee on Social Development recommends that the Department of Health and Social Services increase efforts to improve oral preventative care in communities. This work should include:

• • • Providing interim options for dental hygienists to work independently of a dentist prior to fall 2025; and
    • Ensuring Indigenous Governments and other organizations that deliver health services are aware of other options to provide oral preventive healthcare.

CONCLUSION

On August 10, 2023, Committee held a clause-by-clause review. Committee passed a motion to report Bill 80, as amended, to the Legislative Assembly as ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.

This concludes the Standing Committee on Social Development's review of Bill 80: Dental Hygienists Profession Statutes Amendment Act. Typically, Committee includes a recommendation in each report requesting a response from government within 120 days. The recommendation is then moved as a motion in the House and Cabinet is required to respond. However, since the 19th Legislative Assembly will dissolve in less than 120 days, Committee has decided to leave out this recommendation and requests that the government provide a public response to this report, even of a preliminary nature, before the beginning of the 20th Assembly.