Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Thebacha, that Committee Report 72-19(2), Standing Committee on Government Operations Report on the Review of the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Languages Commissioner be received and adopted by the Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Introduction

The Standing Committee on Government Operations (Committee) has reviewed the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Languages Commissioner.

The Official Languages Act requires the Commissioner to prepare an annual report. The report includes information on the number of complaints filed. It can also include recommendations. The Speaker tables the report in the Legislative Assembly. Once tabled, Committee reviews the report.

As part of the review, the Languages Commissioner, Ms. Brenda Gauthier, appeared before the Committee on June 26, 2023. In the past year, the Commissioner has also engaged with Committee on two other significant projects - our statutory review of the Official Languages Act (Act) and our legislative review of Bill 63: An Act to Amend the Official Languages Act (Bill 63). Across all this work, the Languages Commissioner offered thoughtful input to enhance rights, especially for Indigenous-language speakers.

In her annual report, the Languages Commissioner offered four recommendations. Committee carefully considered each one. This report presents Committee's response to the Languages Commissioner's report, including two of our own recommendations to reinforce the Commissioner's advocacy.

Recommendations from the Languages Commissioner

Separating the Minister Responsible for Official Languages from the Department of Education, Culture and Employment

The Languages Commissioner recommended that the Minister Responsible for Official Languages be a standalone role within a different department. She believes some of the Minister's legislative duties, especially the duty to promote the use of Official Languages in delivering public services, “appear[] to be lost in the provision of providing education services.”5 She noted that residents are “not getting service in all 11 of the official languages [...] as required.”

Committee agrees with the importance of providing public services in each official language. In March 2023, Committee recommended that the government implement a right for each resident to receive services in the official language of their choice. The government responded by pointing out various initiatives currently underway to expand official language service delivery.

While Committee welcomes the work underway, the government should also review whether the Minister Responsible for Official Languages could more effectively carry out their mandate if they were not also the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment (ECE). Committee shares the Commissioner's concern about language and culture getting lost within a department that also handles early learning and childcare, K-12 education, income security, and labour development. The size and scope of ECE may not allow for enough focus as the Minister Responsible for Official Languages.

One alternative is making the Minister Responsible for Official Languages a standalone role within a department that serves a broader mandate. This approach was cited by the Languages Commissioner, who suggested it be more like the Minister responsible for the Status of Women. Another option is placing the secretariats for French and Indigenous languages within a smaller, more focused department. Nunavut, which has a standalone Department of Culture and Heritage, could be a model.

Committee therefore recommends:

Recommendation 1: That the Government of the Northwest Territories study separating the Minister Responsible for Official Languages from the Department of Education, Culture and Employment in the 20th Assembly.

Clarifying the relationship between the Languages Commissioner and the Minister Responsible for Official Languages

The Languages Commissioner recommended clarifying the Official Languages Act on whether she can make recommendations to the Minister. The Commissioner has previously said she finds her role to communicate with the Minister is “blurred.” Committee already endorsed this recommendation last year and put it forward to ECE. In response, the government said it believes the Act allows the Languages Commissioner to bring forward concerns and recommendations to the Minister.

Committee is satisfied with the government's response. Committee encourages and supports the Languages Commissioner in making recommendations to the Minister and suggests that she copy us on communications to the Minister. Committee believes such recommendations can enhance oversight for official languages in the Northwest Territories.

Reviewing official language service delivery

Section 29(a) of the Act allows the Official Languages Board to “review the rights and status of each of the Official Languages, including their use in the administration and delivery of services and communications by government institutions.” The Languages Commissioner recommended that the Board action this part of their mandate, with a focus on the nine Indigenous official languages. Committee does not know when the last review took place - none of the annual reports on official languages going back to 2006 make any mention. It is important for the Board to exercise all aspects of its mandate.

Committee supports the Languages Commissioner's recommendation. We note with some concern the issue of vacancies on the Official Languages Board. As of July 10, 2023, four of the eleven official languages did not appear to be represented on the Board. Any review by the Board would be more effective with full representation on the Board. We encourage the Minister to ensure all official language communities are consistently represented on the Board. The Board plays an important oversight role to ensure services are being delivered in each local Indigenous official language.

We also note the importance of having more Indigenous language speakers in the public service, especially in leadership roles and policymaking roles related to Indigenous language program - and service-delivery. Committee has expressed this concern before. We believe it is a key aspect to improving service delivery and revitalization in the Indigenous languages.

Committee therefore recommends:

Recommendation 2: That the Minister Responsible for Official Languages work with the Official Languages Board to enable the Board to carry out a review as prescribed in Section 29(a) of the Official Languages Act and report on the results. The review should evaluate the administration and delivery of public services in each official language, with a focus on the nine Indigenous official languages.

Responding to Recommendations from the Languages Commissioner

The Languages Commissioner repeated a long-standing recommendation regarding her ability to get responses. She asked for a formal process for the Legislative Assembly to respond to her recommendations.

A formal process already exists. Committee outlined the two processes that exist in last year's review report. Committee does not see the need for any new or additional processes.

However, Committee shares the Commissioner's frustration with the lack of action on her office's recommendations. Languages Commissioners have put forward dozens of recommendations over the last 20 years. Previous Standing Committees have reinforced many of these recommendations with reports and motions in the House. But many recommendations have not been implemented.

Improving legislation and administration regarding official languages is not only good governance; it's also a matter of rights. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples makes this clear. Article 13 commits governments to take effective measures to ensure Indigenous peoples':

“right to revitalize, use, develop and transmit to future generations their histories, languages, oral traditions, philosophies, writing system and literatures, and to designate and retain their own names for communities, places and persons.”

When the Languages Commissioner issues a recommendation, she is often advocating for the recognition, protection, and enhancement of Indigenous official languages. By doing so, the Languages Commissioner plays a role in bringing the government closer to fulfilling the rights outlined in Article 13 of the Declaration. The government needs to be more serious when considering and implementing recommendations from the Languages Commissioner and Standing Committee.

We are encouraged by recent steps by the Minister, who put forward Bill 63. That bill was the first legislation to improve the Official Languages Act in twenty years. The government has also expressed openness to additional, more ambitious legislation to improve the Act in the 20th Assembly. Committee urges the government to pursue this work and implement more of the Languages Commissioner's historical and current recommendations in the next Assembly. The government should consult the Languages Commissioner in this work.

Conclusion

This concludes the Standing Committee on Government Operations' Report on the Review of the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Languages Commissioner. 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.

Mr. Speaker, your Standing Committee on Government Operations is pleased to provide its report on the review of the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Languages Commissioner.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Thebacha, that Committee Report 72-19(2), Standing Committee on Government Operations Report of the Review of the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Languages Commissioner be deemed read and printed in Hansard in its entirety. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Thebacha, that Committee Report 71-19(2), Standing Committee on Government Operations report on the review of the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Ombud, be received and adopted by the Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Introduction

The Standing Committee on Government Operations (Committee) has reviewed the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Ombud.

The Ombud Act requires the Ombud to prepare an annual report. The report includes information on the number of inquiries and complaints received. It can also include recommendations. The Speaker tables the report in the Legislative Assembly. Once tabled, Committee reviews the report. As part of the review the Ombud, Ms. Colette Langlois, appeared before Committee on June 27, 2023.

The Ombud has released three annual reports since setting up her office in 2019. In that time, the Ombud has shown leadership in navigating the challenges and complexities that come with launching a first-time institution. Her dedication to the principles of fairness, competence at managing an increasing workload, and accessible communication have laid a foundation for an effective Ombud office that residents can trust. Committee commends the Ombud for her hard work and high standard of public service.

Ombud's Recommendation Addressed In Private Member's Bill

The Ombud made one recommendation in her annual report: To allow the Ombud to investigate complaints going further back in time, to April 1999.

The Ombud already made this recommendation in her first annual report, in 2019-2020. It was one of fourteen recommendations at the time. The Ombud prioritized repeating this recommendation because it impacts the public and whether she can accept their complaints. Committee also endorsed this recommendation in a previous review report.

After the Ombud submitted her annual report, the Legislative Assembly passed Bill 61: An Act to Amend the Ombud Act (Bill 61). Bill 61 was a private member's bill sponsored by the Member for Yellowknife North. The Bill effectively implemented the Ombud's recommendation by extending her temporal jurisdiction back to April 1999. Committee supported this change, which came into effect in July 2023. Committee appreciates the Ombud's persistence in advocating for this change and the initiative from the Member for Yellowknife North for bringing forward this change.

In her presentation, the Ombud said she would “repackage” the outstanding recommendations from her first annual report in her next annual report, for 2022-2023. Committee welcomes this input and encourages the next Assembly to consider the recommendations. We note that the Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT) has also “agree[d] to a review of the [Ombud Act] in the first two years of the 20th Assembly.”

Suggestion To Look into Unfair Hiring Practices

During the 19th Assembly, Committee's priority has been to increase the representation of Indigenous people at all levels of the public service.9 A key aspect to that work has been to identify barriers to achieving a representative public service. In every community Committee visited, there were residents who felt that the GNWT's existing Affirmative Action Policy is not being followed consistently.

Committee discussed this issue with the Ombud at the public briefing. We asked what the Ombud could do to help Indigenous residents who feel unfairly treated in a GNWT hiring competition. The Ombud explained that she could not investigate whether discrimination is occurring because that work infringes on the mandate of the Human Rights Commission. But she said she can investigate other unfair hiring practices - such as whether the hiring process was followed properly, or whether enough information was provided to an applicant. The Ombud was open to a broader investigation on unfair hiring processes. She reported that hiring is the subject of 5 per cent of case files, a rate she characterized as “pretty significant”. Given these statistics and the public's interest in the issue, Committee encourages the Ombud to investigate systemic issues in the GNWT's hiring practices. We recognize the timing of such an investigation is complicated by the government's plan to replace the Affirmative Action Policy with a new Indigenous Employment Policy. Nevertheless, Committee hopes the Ombud will examine unfair hiring practices sooner rather than later.

Ombud May Need More Resources For Growing Workload

At the public review, the Ombud was concerned her office lacked capacity to fulfill its mandate. The office's current complement of three staff, including the Ombud herself, manages between 150 and 200 case files per year. They also initiate investigations and provide public education. However, due to capacity constraints, the Ombud warned that she may need to start “triaging” which investigations to pursue. The Ombud also indicated she has “no capacity” to accept referrals from the Legislative Assembly, municipal governments, or Indigenous governments. This duty has been mandated in the Ombud Act since January 2022.

Committee believes the Ombud's office should have the resources it needs to fulfill all aspects of its mandate. We note that the Ombud's capacity may be further strained with the recent coming into force of Bill 61. Bill 61 expanded the list of authorities that fall within the Ombud's mandate and allows the Ombud to investigate complaints going further back in time, to April 1999. Committee encourages the new Board of Management in the 20th Assembly to consider the Ombud's concerns.

Conclusion

This concludes the Standing Committee on Government Operations' Report on the Review of the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Ombud.

Mr. Speaker, your Standing Committee on Government Operations is pleased to provide its report on the review of the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Ombud.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Thebacha, that Committee Report 71-19(2), Standing Committee on Government Operations Report on the Review of the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Ombud, be deemed read and printed in Hansard in its entirety. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Thebacha, that Committee Report 70-19(2), Standing Committee on Government Operations Report on the Review of the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner, be received and adopted by the Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Introduction And Summary

The Standing Committee on Government Operations (Committee) has reviewed the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC).

The Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (ATIPP Act) and the Health Information Act (HIA) require the IPC to prepare an annual report. The report includes information on the number of files the IPC opens to review complaints. It can also include recommendations. The Speaker tables the report in the Legislative Assembly. Once tabled, Committee reviews the report.

As part of the review, the Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC), Mr. Andrew Fox, appeared before Committee on June 27, 2023. Committee appreciates his continued work to enhance the public's exercise of the right to access information and uphold the protection of residents' personal information.

This report is an opportunity to reinforce previous Committee recommendations where the government has not moved as far as Committee has requested. Last year, Committee recommended four “upstream” access and privacy measures to reduce “downstream” complaints and costs. Committee found partial uptake and mixed progress in this area. We are hopeful that new recommendations to promote one key “upstream” measure - proactive disclosure - will help streamline the access and privacy regime.

This report also presents Committee's response to eight recommendations in the IPC's annual report. Committee carefully considered each one. Committee decided to endorse seven of the IPC's eight recommendations. We are pleased to advance these recommendations and hope the government will act.

Previous Committee Recommendations

More upstream measures to address surging reviews and investigations

In Committee's previous report on the IPC, we brought attention to the extraordinary growth in the number of files opened, a trend that has continued again this year. Since 2012-13, the number of files opened has increased twenty-fold, from 16 files to over 320 files. Much of this growth comes from files opened under the Health Information Act, which came into force in 2015-16. The IPC says that this surging workload “raises questions regarding the efficacy of privacy protection policies and processes governing health information custodians.”

Committee shares the IPC's concerns. In our earlier report, Committee made four recommendations for “upstream” measures and investments to the access and privacy regime to reduce “downstream” complaints and costs. Our recommendations addressed gaps identified by the IPC. Those recommendations, the government's responses, and recent developments include:

1. Making information privacy training mandatory for all government employees. The government declined this recommendation.

2. Updating the Mobile Handheld Devices Policy, by April 2023. The government agreed to this recommendation, but with a longer timeline. As of July 2023, the policy did not appear to have been updated.

3. Reinforcing accountability for reducing faxing across the health and social services system. The government provided an update on this issue and identified the barriers to reducing faxing. However, the government did not disclose associated metrics, targets, or timelines, as Committee recommended.

4. Reinforcing accountability for proactive disclosure. The government said it would implement proactive disclosure directives, as required by section 72(1) of the ATIPP Act, by early 2023. In July 2023, the government released the Proactive Disclosure (Open Government) Directive. The Directive identifies 14 categories of information that the government must make publicly available without request. Many of these categories were already being disclosed proactively.

Committee stands by the recommendations and encourages the government to implement further “upstream” access and privacy measures, noting that at this point, the government has only achieved partial uptake on those recommendations.

New Recommendations

Additional measures to promote proactive disclosure

Committee is pleased the government has released its Proactive Disclosure (Open Government) Directive. The Directive is a promising foundation to increase government transparency. Committee encourages the government to introduce additional categories of information for proactive disclosure, to meet residents' expectation for increased access to government records.

To ensure accountability for this work, the government should include updates in its annual report on the administration of the ATIPP Act. The most recent annual report, for 2021-2022, does not mention any work on proactive disclosure or implementing section 72(1) of the ATIPP Act.

Committee also encourages the government to increase the accessibility of already completed access to information requests. The federal government publishes a searchable list of completed requests and allows the public to ask for a copy of the records at no cost.10 Committee believes investing in a similar dataset for the territory would increase transparency. Having this information available by default would also reduce the number of formal requests and costs.

Committee therefore recommends:

Recommendation 1: That the Government of the Northwest Territories expand the categories of records that must be proactively disclosed under the Proactive Disclosure (Open Information) Directive. Progress on this and other work to implement section 72(1) of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act should be regularly reported in the government's annual report on the Act.

Recommendation 2: That the Government of the Northwest Territories take steps to make available, on a website, summaries of completed access requests and allow the public to request a copy of the records at no cost.

Endorsing seven of eight IPC recommendations

The Information and Privacy Commissioner made eight recommendations in his annual report. Committee carefully considered each one. Those recommendations, Committee's thoughts, and our decision whether to endorse each one, are as follows:

1. Time extensions for third-party consultation. The IPC wants the ATIPP Act amended to allow public bodies to extend the deadline to complete third-party consultation one time without his authorization. The IPC says he has no reason to deny the first request for extension and that this process is just a “rubber stamp.” Committee endorses recommendation #1. The government should formally consider this proposal during the next statutory review of the ATIPP Act, which must start within 18 months of the start of the 20th Legislative Assembly.

2. More resources for the Access and Privacy Office. The IPC wants public bodies that depend on the Access and Privacy Office (APO) to ensure it has enough staff and resources. The IPC heard of departments and agencies blaming lack of capacity at the APO for missing statutory deadlines. Committee endorses recommendation #2. Committee is alarmed that in 2021-22, one third (32%) of access requests were considered late.15 This means there was no legislative authority under section 11 of the ATIPP Act to exceed the statutory deadline. The Department of Finance and the Department of Lands have particularly poor track records - over half of their access requests were considered late. Committee reminds the government that it is departments and agencies, and not the centralized Access and Privacy Office, that are legally required to meet deadlines set out in the ATIPP Act. The government should consider a chargeback model, like the approach to the Technology Service Centre (TSC), to internally manage the access and privacy regime. By treating access and privacy as a core government service, this approach could support departments and agencies in meeting their statutory deadlines.

3. Discretion to extend IPC timelines. Until July 2021, the IPC had 180 calendar days to complete a review. Amendments passed in the 18th Assembly have now reduced that time to 90 business days. The IPC says it is “unlikely” that he can complete most reviews within 90 business days and wants the ATIPP Act amended so he can have discretion to extend the deadline.

Committee rejects recommendation #3. The Legislative Assembly recently shortened the review period and Committee continues to support this change. When the IPC cannot meet a deadline, he should still provide notice to all parties that he needs more time. The government should also ensure that the IPC has the resources he needs to fulfill his mandate and meet deadlines.

4. Reporting on implementing recommendations. The IPC wants health information custodians to be required to report to him about implementing recommendations - either through a government policy or an amendment to the Health Information Act. The IPC noted that oversight and legal obligation are lacking for information custodians to implement recommendations. Committee endorses recommendation #4. The government should formally consider this proposal during the next statutory review of the Health Information Act, which must start by October 2025, 10 years after this legislation came into force. In the meantime, this recommendation should be implemented through a government policy.

5. Reducing or eliminating faxing. The IPC repeated a long-standing recommendation for health information custodians to reduce or eliminate the use of fax machines. He is not aware of any government plan to meet this goal and emphasized that faxing remains a significant source of privacy breaches.19 Committee endorses recommendation #5. Committee has not been satisfied with the government's previous responses to recommendations on this topic and wants to see more reporting in this area, potentially in the government's annual report on the ATIPP Act.

6. Ensuring privacy training for employees in health and social services. Despite the Department of Health and Social Services' Mandatory [Privacy] Training Policy, the IPC has found that lack of training is a significant cause for persistent privacy issues. He wants to ensure proper implementation of the Mandatory Training Policy. Committee endorses recommendation #6.

7. Earlier requests for privacy impact assessments. The IPC wants requests for privacy impact assessments to be submitted earlier so he has enough time to review, and organizations have enough time to consider the results. Committee endorses recommendation #7.

8. Extending privacy impact assessments to health information. Right now, privacy impact assessments are only required in the ATIPP Act. The IPC wants an amendment to section 89 of the Health Information Act so that privacy impact assessments are also used for health information. Committee endorses recommendation #8. The government should formally consider this proposal during the next statutory review of the Health Information Act, which must start by October 2025, 10 years after this legislation came into force.23

Committee has endorsed most of the recommendations in the IPC's annual report.

Committee therefore recommends:

Recommendation 3: That the Government of the Northwest Territories implement, or commit to time-bound plans to implement, recommendations #1, #2, #4, #5, #6, #7, and #8 in the Information and Privacy Commissioner's Annual Report 2021-2022 - Tabled Document 711-19(2).

Conclusion

This concludes the Standing Committee on Government Operations' Report on the Review of the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner. 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.

Halfway, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, your Standing Committee on Government Operations is pleased to provide its report on the review of the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Thebacha, that Committee Report 70-19(2), Standing Committee on Government Operations Report on the Review of the 2021-2022 Annual Report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner, be deemed read and printed in Hansard in its entirety. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.