Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The NWT Senior Citizen Supplementary Benefit is a fixed payment of $196. For those who are eligible, either receive it, or they don't receive it. So the benefit itself would not be reduced other than being reduced to zero if the person is not eligible for Old Age Security and Guaranteed Income Supplement.

The eligibility criteria for the NWT Senior Citizen Supplementary Benefit are the same as for the federal Guaranteed Income Supplement. And so if someone is not receiving the Guaranteed Income Supplement from the federal government, they are not receiving the NWT Senior Citizen Supplementary Benefit. They may see a reduction in their GIS. I've heard of that. But they are still receiving that supplementary benefit from the NWT.

Every year we have around -- well, last year we had around 1500 people receive the benefit. The year before that, about 1400 people. The year before that, 1300. This year we're already at around 1500, and we're only partway through the fiscal year. So for the most part, we aren't seeing a decline in those people who are eligible and who are receiving the benefit. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. What we're talking about today is stripping constituents of their MLA, stripping a person of their livelihood, this motion places a heavy burden on the Members of this House. And we have to weigh that against the heavy responsibility that we have to uphold the integrity of this House and to maintain the public confidence and trust in our system.

The Members who have spoken so far have laid things out very well, and I agree with all of the comments I've heard so I won't repeat them. But I want to, you know, put a fine point on why I'm supporting this motion. I've spent a lot of time thinking about this, like many Members I watched countless hours of testimony of the public hearing, and the one thing that stuck with me, the one thing I go back to, the one thing I keep thinking about, is the intentional misleading, the intentional lying to the public, knowing that the Member did not follow the rules and told the public he followed the rules. But more than that, Mr. Speaker, it is the callous way in which the Member misled public health officials who were attempting to do contact tracing. They wanted to know who did you come in contact with. We need to contact them to make sure they're not sick, to make sure they know that maybe they had to self-isolate.

They do that to stop the spread of COVID-19. That's how we have gotten this far. That's why we don't have the mass casualties that we otherwise would. That is key to maintaining public health. That's key to keeping people alive, keeping people healthy, keeping businesses open, keeping kids in school. And I couldn't imagine myself holding that information back from public health officials. That's what I think about the most, and that's why I have to support this motion because that is not the kind of representation that the people of the Northwest Territories deserve.

I don't see this behaviour ending, Mr. Speaker. I think that if we don't see this motion through, this will continue. As Members have said, there is a lack of accountability, the Member hasn't taken responsibility, and there's no end in sight. So it doesn't give me any joy but I have to support this motion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Wednesday, November 24th, 2021, I will move that Bill 39, An Act to Amend the Post-Secondary Education Act be read for the first time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Wednesday, November 24th, 2021, I will move that Bill 38, Miscellaneous Statute Law Amendment Act 2021 be read for the first time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Wednesday, November 24th, 2021, I will move that Bill 37, an Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act be read for the first time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Wednesday, November 24th, 2021, I will move that Bill 36, an Act to Amend the Territorial Court Act be read for the first time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the following three documents: Government of the Northwest Territories Response to Committee Report 13-19(2), Report on the Review of the 2019-2020 Ombud Annual Report; Government of the Northwest Territories Response to Committee Report 15-19(2), Report on the Review of the Auditor General's 2020 Audit of Early Childhood to Grade 12 Education in the NWT; and Additional Follow-Up for Oral Question 497-19(2), Corrections Workplace Assessment. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I just want to keep us on track. So right now, we're discussing a point of privilege related to threatening comments that have been made, and we're not discussing the motion in the report as you had just mentioned. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I am speaking in support for the Member from Thebacha.

These types of comments I don't think would be appropriate at any work site - if you do your job, I'm coming after you. I think that this is probably the most clear a case I've seen where there's a breach of privilege. It's not very -- there's not a lot of gray area here. This is very black and white.

You might think that the comment is a little vague, and it is. It's not clear what it's referencing but, you know, other Members have commented that if you look at the timeline, it is right before the sole adjudicator's inquiry and so I think it's easy to connect those two.

I think we also have to consider the fact that we have, for the first time, an Assembly made up mostly of women. And in the Northwest Territories, we have a rate of violence against women that, you know, is incomparable to the rest of Canada. It is so high in the Northwest Territories. I don't think it's unreasonable to think that a comment like that directed at a group of women might be taken in a certain way. I don't know what everyone's personal history here is. You know, we've heard women today say they have a history of violence. I think it's reasonable to think that a comment like that is likely to intimidate, and for myself as well. Does this mean that someone's coming for me? I'm going to get a punch in the back of the head as I walk down the hall? Does it mean that's someone's lawyer's going to write me 19 letters? I don't know. Nonetheless, both of those are things I don't want to have to deal with. They're both headaches.

So I think, Mr. Speaker, that this is a pretty clear case, and I think that the decision that you make, we have to take that and then, as an Assembly, figure out how we are going to deal with this because this type of behavior isn't appropriate in any workplace, let alone the Legislative Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.