Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Maybe we need to do a study on that to justify these initiatives if there are going to be some reactions to this initiative that are not positive, to date. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, is the needs assessment also looking at the cost associated with what I was discussing earlier, the recruitment and retention of our staff, teachers, especially, and nurses; the social costs of not having staff that are coming back year after year to teach our students, et cetera? Or are we just looking at the market in the community? The market in the community is important in my mind because the rent scale should be based on the market and not what will be created as a market. I'm afraid that if we use third party people to do this thing the cost will go up. If the cost goes up, the cost to the renters will go up. Any time the high cost of living in the communities, as we've demonstrated clearly that's the case, then we have to factor that in as well. Will it be the market of the community and not what it might mean to a private entrepreneur or private enterprise trying to make a buck here? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I must agree with this initiative. Since the government got out of staff housing I don't know how many umpteen millions of dollars it's cost this government in recruiting and retaining staff in our communities. We don't know the untold consequences on our students that have repeatedly, year after year, found themselves short of teachers. There's no continuity of teachers. Nursing professionals are not staying long enough to know the long-term care needed in the communities. I don't know how many lives that might have cost. We don't know what kind of effect not having the same teachers to teach the students over and over again have on the students and how the students turn out and what the net cost in the areas of the social envelope will be.

We've been outside the staff housing for a number of years and no private developers have taken on the challenge of providing houses in these communities. Now that the government's trying to do something to address that major problem, we seem to have some people who are concerned.

I would like to ask the Minister a question, though, regarding the needs assessment. When will this be done so that we can start ensuring that there are houses available for government staff working in our communities? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Members were concerned with the provisions which allow municipal officers to order people to provide labour, equipment or materials where there is an imminent and serious danger to public health and safety. The committee understands these powers were intended for emergencies such as structural fires and gas leaks. However, the committee noted that in the Civil Emergency Measures Act, and also in some municipal legislation elsewhere in Canada, there are provisions for people to be compensated in these circumstances. The committee and the Minister agreed to three motions during the clause-by-clause review of the bill which provide for municipal governments to pay reasonable compensation to a person ordered to provide labour, equipment or materials in an emergency, unless that person caused the danger to arise in the first place.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask that my colleague, the Member for Boot Lake, to conclude the report.

Bill 25 included new provisions setting out a procedure for municipal governments to apply to the Supreme Court for orders to require people to clean up their property. This created confusion because the Environmental Protection Act already gives municipal governments the power to make and enforce unsightly property bylaws. The City of Yellowknife interpreted the new provisions to mean they could no longer rely on their bylaws, but would have to seek court orders instead, requiring a great deal more time and expense.

The Minister and department advised the committee that their intention was to provide a process for municipal governments that do not have unsightly property bylaws to obtain clean-up orders from the courts. The intention was not to override or replace the provisions of the Environmental Protection Act.

Because of the time and expense involved in obtaining court orders, the committee does not believe these provisions would provide a reasonable process for municipal governments. Members expect that in most cases a council could draft and pass a new unsightly property bylaw more quickly than it could obtain an order from the Supreme Court. The committee concluded that the provisions are at the very least confusing, and is likely of little real value to municipal governments.

The committee passed six motions with the effect of removing the unsightly property provisions from Bill 25. The Minister concurred with these motions.

A provision of great concern to at least one presenter, Councillor Kevin O'Reilly of Yellowknife, requires that before engaging in any commercial or economic development activity, a municipal government must have a market disruption and conflict of interest policy. The provision further states that municipal governments may not engage in these activities if they would cause a serious adverse effect to existing businesses. There are no such provisions in the existing municipal legislation, and the committee understands there are no such provisions anywhere else in Canada either.

Councillor O'Reilly suggested that this is an "unreasonable and unnecessary intrusion into the affairs of the municipal order of government." He went on to point out that there is already an accountability mechanism in place, as municipal councils go to the polls every three years, and the public reaction will be swift if a council is supporting activities that stifle the private sector.

Councilor O'Reilly also advised committee that these provisions would create serious operational difficulties. It is not clear what municipal governments would have to do in order to satisfy the requirements of the legislation. Bill 25 does not provide definitions of "commercial" or "serious adverse effect." Councillor O'Reilly set out several scenarios that demonstrate the problems these provisions could create. For example, the city typically rents out the swimming pool for children's birthday parties. The privately owned bowling alley is also rented out for birthday parties. Is this market disruption? The city offers a variety of courses. If the city offers an art class or a cooking course, would this be a commercial activity? Would it cause a serious adverse effect on a business that also offers a similar course?

The department has not provided any guidance or draft policies to municipal governments, and was not able to explain the rationale behind these provisions to Councillor O'Reilly's, or to the committee's satisfaction.

The committee wishes to make it clear that it does not support municipal government activities that cause market disruption or compete unfairly against the private sector. It is likely a good practice for municipal governments to have market disruption policies. It may even be necessary for a council's political survival. The committee's difficulty is with placing a requirement for a market disruption policy in legislation, without making it clear what standard a municipal government has to meet in order to comply with the act. It may indeed be impossible to legislate a single standard for market disruption, and definitions for key terms like "commercial" and "serious adverse effect" that would be appropriate for all NWT communities. That is why committee believes the issue of market disruption is best left to local councils, and ultimately to local electorates.

The committee passed six motions during clause-by-clause review of the bill, which have the effect of removing the market disruption policy provisions. The Minister concurred with these amendments.

Bill 25 defined long-term leases of one year or more as "long-term financial commitments." Municipal governments must meet the same conditions before entering into such leases as they do for long-term borrowing. This means that Ministerial and/or voter approval could be required for these leases.

The City of Yellowknife and the Association Communities told the committee that this requirement would be extremely cumbersome for both the municipal government and the Minister's office. Leases for vehicles, computers and photocopiers would need the same approvals as borrowing for large capital projects such as arenas and roads. Mayor Van Tighem of Yellowknife and President Lyons of the Association of Communities both suggested the definition of long-term financial commitment should be changed so that it includes only leases for terms of five years or more. The committee agreed this was a reasonable approach. During the clause-by-clause review, the committee and the Minister agreed to three motions to make these changes.

Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. Bill 25 would have allowed municipal employees, other than managers, bylaw officers, or finance staff, to sit on council. The current Local Authorities Elections Act does not allow permanent full-time municipal employees to also be council members under any circumstances. Members and witnesses had a number of concerns about the conflicts that could happen in practice. Mayor Evelyn Storr of Aklavik gave the example of a clerk who receives payments for water bills on behalf of the hamlet, and who is also a councillor. As Mayor Storr said, "it all goes back to what the public sees and how the public looks at that...How could that person who receives cash from people for seven-and-a-half hours a day...the first person you see when you go into the office, sit on council and make decisions regarding the water rates?"

The committee eventually heard from the Association of Communities that all their members now agree no exceptions should be made to allow municipal employees to sit on council. During the clause-by-clause review, the committee passed and the Minister concurred with four motions which removed the provisions in the bill that would have allowed some permanent full-time municipal employees to sit on council.

Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, while I was attending the graduation ceremony at Deninu School on Friday, I, along with the deputy minister, Dr. Foley, met with the deputy chair of the DEA and they're very interested in returning to discussions to eliminate the gaps that are there for program and service delivery coming through the entire school and education system. I'd like to ask the Minister, if he's not willing to get into a pilot project that he get into a discussion to reduce or eliminate the gaps that exist in Deninu School right now with grade extension. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.