Merci, Monsieur le President. I want to thank the Minister for his enthusiasm and passion. It's clearly evident.

So one of the interesting takeaways of this jobs in demand report is that not many jobs seem to be found or will be created in the resource sector. So can the Minister tell us what, if any, adjustments are being made to teach training programs, such as Skills 4 Success, in light of the jobs in demand report? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Merci, Monsieur le President. The Minister's got me convinced. It's good. This is a good and useful report, and I commend it -- commend it to -- and those that prepared it.

In terms of educational gaps, a number of them come to mind between what our residents have currently achieved and what will be in demand. So can the Minister tell us how this report will influence our post-secondary education planning and work currently underway to close gaps between educational outcomes in regional centres and smaller communities? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Merci, Monsieur le President. My questions are for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment on the recent jobs and demand report. As I noted in my statement, there's a large gap between what will be required for new jobs and where our residents stand in terms of educational attainment. So can the Minister tell us whether the department has reviewed this new report and what is the plan to close our educational gaps for jobs in demand? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Merci, Monsieur le President. I have some family in the gallery today. Renee O'Reilly, my wife Suzette; they've had to put up with my ravings over eight years. So thanks for being here today, I and couldn't have done it without you. Thank you.

Merci, Monsieur le President. I am saving my mushy stuff for a little bit later.

The Department of Education, Culture and Employment has released a report Jobs in Demand - 20 Year Forecast on May 1st. It is full of interesting and information. The report is primarily broken up into categories of educational attainment that will be needed for projected types and numbers of jobs. These could be current jobs that need to be refilled because of turnover, retirement or death, or newly created jobs. By far the largest demand for new workers is for elementary school teachers, at 5 percent of new hires; nurses and secondary school teachers following closely at 3 percent each.

Examples of other leading occupations include doctors, lawyers, engineers, and financial managers. 27 percent of new hires will require university graduation. Trades make up 11 percent of future needs, with customer service occupations such as cooks, automotive mechanics, carpenters, and electricians leading the field. It is notable that it appears not many jobs are needed or will be created directly in the resource sector. The positions requiring college diplomas will make up 24 percent of total new jobs, and jobs requiring high school education or less comprise 38 percent of projected new hires. Now, compare these totals to current levels of educational attainment, and we are faced some unpleasant facts.

New jobs requiring university, college, and/or a trade certification will make up 62 percent of new demand. Today, only 49 percent of workers have attained this educational level, a spread of 13 percent whereas today, 27 percent of the workforce has trades, certificates or diplomas, the projected demand will be 35 percent of candidates to hold these credentials.

In all job categories requiring post-secondary education, Indigenous peoples' educational attainment is lower than non-Indigenous, sometimes dramatically so. Several conclusions come to mind.

First, we are not going to have enough NWT residents to fill occupations requiring advanced education. Many of these jobs will go to new hires from the south or will stand vacant thwarting well-being and provision of services for our residents. I'll have questions for the Minister of Education later today on this topic. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Yeah, merci, Monsieur le President. Again, I have to go on record as to why I'm going to vote against this bill. I've said, though, that there's good things in this bill like response to at least three independent reviews that were carried out. That work can and should have been done, quite frankly, years ago. So those are the good parts of the bill. The part that causes me a lot of concern is the name change. And I'm not opposed to the name change in principle. I don't personally think it's a great thing. But I think it's not a good -- I don't condone a process, Mr. Speaker, where we start off with a public engagement on one thing and then all of a sudden something's added into the bill that hasn't received any public engagement. And that's why there's a subtle distinction there. And I guess it's a principle stand, Mr. Speaker, but I can't condone that kind of process for doing public engagement for a bill, and then all of a sudden something props -- it just kind of comes up at the end. This is not about trying to meddle in what the board is doing. I want an independent board. But I'm just worried about the process that was used to develop this bill and having this jump out at the end. So that's why I'm going to vote against it. I have supported what BDIC has done. I said good things when they were here. I think they're heading in the right direction. That's all good stuff. I just can't condone the kind of process that led to the bill in the form that's before the House. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Merci, Monsieur le President. I recognize it's very late in the day, but I have to go on record as to how I'm going to vote so I believe that the bill was not particularly well crafted. There was a pause when it was -- the Minister kind of took it back and went back to Indigenous governments, tried to do some engagement. So I believe that there's really -- there was inadequate consideration of Indigenous rights in the development of the bill. I'm concerned that the bill doesn't bind the Government of the Northwest Territories, which is the largest contracting authority. What's the point of trying to do a bill that secures wages for contractors and employees if we don't bind this government? That's just wrong in my opinion, Mr. Speaker.

I also am concerned that municipal lands are going to be subject to seizure and sale. I don't think that's appropriate.

So as the Minister said at clause by clause, I prefer that it would actually go back and get redrafted so that it could be done properly. The motion to try to get a considered review of the bill also failed. Cabinet opposed that. So that was an opportunity to try to fix it up after a period of time.

So for all of those reasons, I don't believe this bill is the best that it can and should be to address the needs. And that's why I'm going to vote against it. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Merci, Madam la Presidente. I move that the chair rise and report progress. Mahsi.

Yeah, thanks, Madam Chair. Like my colleague, who serves as chair of the committee, we did talk about this and I'm not sure I can share my colleague's characterization of committee reports. Committee reports are from a committee. They're not from one or two Members. And believe me, I've seen the -- how hard the clerks work to make sure that there is consensus from committee, and if needs a majority vote, it gets a vote. Reports are not from one or two Members; they are from a committee. And that's the way it needs to be interpreted in this House so I don't feel very good about my colleague's characterization of committee work. But as it was said, this is really about, as I see it, a check on Cabinet's power. If they really want to call a bill, bring it to the House where we can have a formal debate and discussion about it and a motion to proceed in that manner, and then it's the will of the House. It's not kind of an amorphous discussion in Committee of the Whole about who's doing what. Thanks, Madam Chair.