They are encouraged to disclose them all. What the discussion is, as we have heard around the table, is that they need to have the best practices possible. The issue of moving away from voluntary disclosure to mandatory full disclosure so that it is clear that we have the best practices, that is one of the things that we’re discussing and we’ve been talking about that industry knows is coming. In more and more jurisdictions in the United States, it is becoming a given, as well, that it’s not optional anymore. That issue is a very important one and it has been flagged by the government as we looked at these changes. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The transboundary water agreement with Alberta definitely looked at quantity issues. We are blessed with significant flows into the Northwest Territories and on through into the Mackenzie and into the Arctic Ocean.

The amount of water coming in the Slave River has been negotiated at about 1.9 percent of the water is

available for extraction between Alberta and the Northwest Territories. The other basically 98 percent stays in the river to feed the river and aquatic ecosystems and the Mackenzie Basin to make sure it stays healthy. It gives you a sense of the volume of the water that is going north. That 1.9 percent represents five times what Alberta’s most aggressive development needs were calculated to be. They looked at everything they had on their schedule and they multiplied that amount by five times. So there is an enormous cushion there in terms of the overall flows.

However, the issue of concern is quality, as well, and monitoring. It looks at not only flows but quality issues. We have built in requirements for quality, sharing information with Alberta, with the Northwest Territories, with the federal government what we are measuring for. We have spent millions of dollars within the Northwest Territories for community-based water monitoring, as well, up and down the Mackenzie River, to make sure that we work with communities so that they can have a certain degree of comfort that the water they are drinking is coming down to them is in prime, pristine condition as possible. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, every budget session, I have provided this House with an update on the progress being made under the Service Innovation Strategy. Today I want to tell you about a tool we have to measure how satisfied northern residents are with government service delivery.

The national Citizens First survey measures how satisfied Northwest Territories residents are with the Government of the Northwest Territories services they receive over the phone, in person and online. Since the survey began in 1998, it has gained international attention and recognition and

remains the “gold standard” in research on public sector service delivery.

The GNWT participated, for the first time, in 2014 in Citizens First 7, the seventh in this series of studies.

These surveys explore various aspects of a changing service environment, tracking perceptions of service quality and performance for a wide range of services offered by municipal, provincial/territorial and federal governments.

Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, the Yukon and Quebec have all participated in the survey. A combined telephone and mail/mail-to-online approach was used. Where appropriate, comparisons are provided to the overall national results and “Best Provincial/Territorial” results, which represent the highest score by participating individual province or territory. Four hundred three people were surveyed in the NWT.

The GNWT participated not only to establish a baseline for measuring progress but also to understand more about what our residents expect from government and what makes for the most satisfying service experience regardless of what channel Northerners access government services. The term “channel” refers to how you access the service. It can be online, in person, or on the telephone.

This first survey provided us with some very interesting information. The office of the chief information officer has been making presentations and sharing the results of the report and recommendations for improvement with all of the government departments.

What did we find out? • The NWT’s service reputation score is the

highest in Canada with a score of 66. The NWT’s score is higher than the national average and has the highest score of the participating provinces and territories. Your reputation score is indicative of the public perception of your services. I hope this is not just beginner’s luck.

• We also found out that NWT residents felt this

government was responsive to the needs of a diverse population, whether it be visible minorities or people with a disability.

• The NWT’s client satisfaction score, where

NWT residents are asked to rate a recent experience with a territorial government service, saw the GNWT receiving scores on par with the highest score among the eight provinces/territories participating in the survey.

We will not let those good scores go to our heads. We recognize there is room for improvement. An article in the May 8th Yellowknifer, entitled “Calls to

the GNWT go to the Birds,” Mr. Walt Humphries points out how both he and Ms. Cece McCauley

have found it difficult to find the information they needed from the GNWT.

Similar to the issues of the two Northern News Services columnists, the survey revealed the “findability” of information on our websites requires improvement, as does our telephone wait times. We also found out that we have challenges in solving problems, correcting errors and dealing with complaints, especially when a resident has to use more than two channels to solve their problem, or tell their story to multiple people.

In addition to providing some very valuable baseline information, the survey also summarized some priorities for improving services, like customer service.

The office of the chief information officer will offer service training for employees in June for front-line service providers and in October for certified service managers. The training will help employees and their managers become accredited in service delivery. It also aligns with the Service Innovation Strategy objective to improve government service delivery, and as departments look at putting more services online, they can look to these survey results for baseline information on where to focus their efforts.

This was just a brief overview of the Citizen First survey. I encourage everyone to read it in its entirety. It can be found on the Department of Finance website and I will table the survey results later today at the appropriate time.

We are pleased that we received positive results from our first survey and good feedback from residents about where we can improve. I want to thank all the residents who took part in the survey, because your feedback is very important to us. I also want to encourage everyone to take part in the next survey, if you are asked, because we are listening. Finally, I want to take the time to commend all of our public servants on the front line, and their managers, for always keeping our “Citizens First” in mind every day. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, that Bill 58, Supplementary Appropriation Act (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 2, 2015-2016, be read for the third time. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Great Slave, that Bill 57, Supplementary Appropriation Act (Operations Expenditures), No. 4, 2014-2015, be read for the third time. Thank you.

I appreciate the Member’s comments and fervour, and I want to reassure him on the communications side we’re not swimming in positions, and that’s one of the issues. One of the decisions that has to be made today by this Assembly is what trumps what in terms of as a government do we invest in the money to improve our services and systems or because there are process concerns separate from the validity of the request that would cause us to defer this for, potentially, at least a year or so. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As has been pointed out, we’re here at the will of the House. We’ve identified an issue that we think has some urgency in being addressed, which is why it’s here. There are a number of factors that caused us to get here, not get involved or inserted into the budget process. So, if this is not proceeded with, then we will be one year further behind in terms of addressing some of the key issues tied to improving our communications infrastructure. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just in terms of the timelines, it did come out in December. The budget for the fiscal year is closed off at the end of November. There was a significant amount of work that took place within the government, as Mr. Bromley pointed out, when there was an initial ask, potentially a recommendation of many dozens of positions. It required a lot of internal review and adjustment to come up with what we have come up with. We missed that window, and once the budget is set in the process for review, it’s very difficult after the fact to try to add things. By the time this was all said and done, the other process was too far along, hence this request for a supplementary process.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the Member’s comments and I would just make the observation that having been in now my fifth Assembly pre-division, post-division, pre-devolution, post-devolution, every Assembly I’ve been in there’s a struggle with communications. Having gone through all these big transitions and transformations and now compound that with the speed of light change to the infrastructure in a world and the demands of individuals, MLAs, the public, this is an issue that has been unaddressed for a long time. We would hate to lose another year because we didn’t want to make the investment today for process reasons, even though we recognize that there are improvements that are needed. Thank you.