Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to return to item 5. Mahsi.

---Unanimous consent granted

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to recognize the Chief Electoral Returning Officer. Also, at the same time, I just want to say thank you to our translator, as well, Joe Tambour from K'atlodeeche First Nation, being the South Slavey translator for the duration of the session here. Mahsi. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. [Translation] Today is good. It seems like a new day for us. [Translation ends] [Microphone turned off] to stand in this House many times on behalf of the people of the Deh Cho riding. This truly is a special place of united people for the good of the NWT.

Four years have quickly passed. I have to say a few words of gratitude to some people I am blessed to have in my life. I must say that I am blessed with my children and my grandson. Yes, winter is dawning. I am grateful and appreciative from the support of my relatives and extended families throughout Deh Cho and Denendeh.

Mr. Speaker, I represent the most beautiful riding of the Deh Cho. The people and communities of K'atlodeeche, Enterprise, Kakisa, and Fort Providence are one of a kind, the Dene, Metis, and Mola. Thank you for your engagement and talks. Whether we agreed or not or just chit chat, mahsi for those moments.

I would like to thank my friends and colleagues of this House. Mahsi. I would like to thank Premier McLeod for his leadership and the Cabinet and the Ministers and the departments and the staff that make the wheels go around.

Yes, last but not least, my constituency assistant, Trisha Landry, and her family and the rest of the staff who worked behind the scene. Thank you to yourself, Mr. Speaker. Mahsi.

[Translation] I want to talk in Slavey, my language. It's pretty hard for me to speak it, but it's my language. I want to know that it's good to speak my language if I have to. Many times, I have been in meetings, and we will talk about our government, talk about our leaders, and an elder said that: whoever is the boss of this land, who you call the boss of the land, is he looking after all the land? How come you guys, we don't see them very often? If we speak in Slavey, in our language, we say that we're looking at the land, the boss of the land. All the time, we look at the government that way. When we say something is the boss, he's looking after something. Many times, if you're looking after the House, it's looking at people who are giving you money. In our language, that's how it is. We as Dene people, we should look at saying our own boss, us, we being our own boss; but in the community, the moms, the dads, the elders, all those are the bosses of the community. If you look in the past, whoever is the oldest, the elder, that's the one you talk to.

In the community, the band council, the Metis, the government, you look at this self-government. The council, you look at that, too. Many times they work together. We call them regions. Look at the Deh Cho region, for example. There are about seven communities working together. Over here in the Northwest Territories, we look at this. If we look at who's the boss, they all talk the same language, and when you're the boss for the Dene people, it's you who is the boss. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. [Translation ends.]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will be supporting the motion despite having some concerns. I'm not on the committee that oversaw at least the discussion on the overhaul of this piece of legislation, and I understand from my previous work that the big concern of Indigenous peoples was the idea of a free entry system where, if it exists on their traditional lands, industry could basically go in, explore, find a deposit, and basically own it. Whether it was your outdoor toilet behind your house, it could happen, and you don't have a say in that. That was the biggest common concern that I think was and still continues to be an issue, but there is a common effort being pulled together by Indigenous people to try to make some changes on that whole fundamental issue.

If there are any concerns, they are in regard to settlement areas as defined, which I sought clarity on yesterday with the legal counsel for the committee. It makes reference to settlement areas. It doesn't really specifically reference and stipulate areas that don't have settled land claims. They are basically not recognized. The Dehcho, for that matter, and the Akaitcho are not referenced in this draft, and for that matter, the Metis. Of course, that is a very serious concern. We try not to leave anyone behind in terms of major government initiatives, but in this piece of legislation, it creates "haves" and "have nots," which is not right.

The other interesting track about this is that it heralds section 35 rights, Aboriginal and treaty rights, and the interesting thing is that it upholds the territorial legislation. It enables the legislation. It's a fine balance. It's a house of cards. It's a framework of creating a climate for mineral resource development, and the major players, the mining industry, governments, the public at large, and Indigenous governments, had a hand. That's a presumption that everybody played a hand in developing this piece of legislation.

With that in mind and those points that I outlined, I continue to try to advance forward, and I will be supporting this. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wanted to highlight some comments. First of all, I wanted to thank the Members of the Standing Committee on Social Development, my colleagues, and of course, our committee was led by my colleague, Mr. Shane Thompson, the Member for Nahendeh. Also, recognizing the members of the public that attended the public meetings and wrote to the committee. Of course, last but not least is the Minister and the department and their staff, for working collaboratively with the committee. This discussion would not be possible without their cooperation and assistance.

In short, we received the draft LP that was referred to this committee. We did the public rounds of consultations, and what we found is that, if the department and committees work together collaboratively, things can happen. Good things can happen. Such was the case when we went through this stuff at the clause-by-clause and then doing the report, and here we are.

As my colleague pointed out, Bill 45, when it was first proposed, was an old legislation that needed to be updated, and my initial thoughts on that were that, basically, it will be a cut-and-paste exercise and that, in the end, the status quo will prevail. My expectations were such.

I am realizing, too, that being aware that most of the correctional institutions that we have, not only here in northern Canada, but all over Canada, the majority that are housed in those institutions are Indigenous people. With that in mind, too, I think, last winter, we also received letters of grievances and concerns from inmates. I think that we had to listen to those issues and bring them to the forefront and try to, at least, make a difference. That being said, we also are reminded of the Auditor General of Canada's report on the lack of programs and services for inmates in these institutions.

Juxtaposed with that, of course, we have the Truth and Reconciliation report that highlighted the sad and tragic legacy of residential schools and, at the same time, highlighting the whole tragedy of missing and murdered women. Largely so, if we observe the history of Indigenous people with justice, the system that we have now is very punitive. It takes a punitive approach with people who take on deviant behaviour or non-conformist behaviour that goes against society and basic law. They are incarcerated and experience the whole idea of shame. That is basically how we deal with criminals in society generally.

I am encouraged that this legislation, the exercise that I have seen with my own eyes, offered me a glimpse of hope that reconciliation indeed could happen with this government. What we have achieved to some degree is a level of public oversight on how inmates are treated, and it also offers some elements of regulations to ensure that we have a fair and transparent system in place for inmates, but most importantly, it is a model of collaboration between the committee and the department, and we worked together. There's a commitment and passion on both sides, and if you have that, some good things happen. I think some good things happened during this exercise, and I'm glad that I was part of this process, and I could proudly say that I think we have come up with a good draft that would shine a light on possibilities and hope for inmates who are incarcerated in all these institutions. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Has the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation considered any alternatives, like allowing applicants to use some of the funds they receive to purchase homeowners insurance, or what about organizing group insurance for low-income clients through the district office; perhaps the idea of a credit union? Mahsi.

Has the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation done any analysis to determine what its annual losses might be if it provided these programs to low-income clients without the need for homeowners' insurance? In other words, is the valley of investment so high that it is worth denying low-income clients who need home ownership assistance just because they don't have insurance?

The second question is: does the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation deny public housing applicants who do not qualify for tenants' insurance?