Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Under the current Mental Health Act, the courts are the only recourse for people who wish to have a decision reviewed or appealed. This approach is expensive, inefficient and out of step with best practices elsewhere in Canada. The new

act will enhance patient rights by establishing a quasi-judicial review board for hearing complaints. Applications to the review board may pertain to such matters as involuntary admissions, findings of mental competence or objections to treatment. Every application will be handled by a three-person review panel consisting of a lawyer, medical doctor and lay person. In response to a stakeholder query, the committee confirmed that members of the review board will be paid for their services.

To enhance patient rights, the committee sought two changes pertaining to the review board. The first change requires the chair of the review board to appoint an elder as a cultural advisor where an applicant requests it. The purpose is to ensure that matters are handled in a culturally sensitive manner. The Minister concurred with this motion, but noted that the review panel already includes a lay person who will play a patient-advocate role and that the panel has the ability to call an elder as a witness at a hearing. The Minister cautioned that providing patients with the option to request a cultural advisor may result in delays or increased operational costs. The committee therefore agreed to the inclusion of a notwithstanding clause that will allow the review panel to continue its proceedings if, in rare circumstances, a suitable cultural advisor cannot be found. A second change pertaining to the review board provisions requires that the composition of the review board reflect the diversity and gender balance of the population.

The committee contemplated ways of enhancing patient rights in other ways too. Initially, it drafted a motion to allow a voluntary patient who disagrees with a doctor’s discharge decision to remain in the designated facility until the case has been considered by a review panel. However, the Minister explained that an order from a review panel would likely result in undue delays and hardship for the patient and unnecessary operational costs. He subsequently proposed to grant every patient – voluntary and involuntary alike – the right to a second medical opinion. The committee accepted this line of reasoning and introduced a motion to that effect. At the request of the Minister, a companion motion was introduced to ensure that notice of the patient’s right to a second opinion is conspicuously posted.

The committee also introduced a motion to facilitate greater involvement on the part of family members and other support persons. Recognizing that a patient’s right to privacy imposes certain justifiable constraints and, further, that some patients do not want their family involved, the committee introduced a motion that will impose a duty on the attending doctor to ask a voluntary patient if he or she would like someone to be notified of their circumstances. A companion motion was introduced to ensure that the doctor makes reasonable efforts to notify the person, and the Minister concurred with these motions at the clause-by-clause review.

In addition, the committee acted on recommendations from the Northwest Territories chapter of the Canadian Bar Association (CBA). The CBA explained that mentally ill people are criminalized whenever they come into conflict with the law and end up in correctional facilities instead of medical facilities. Individuals who suffer from psychiatric disorders, the CBA continued, are frequently subjected to apprehensions or periods of detention that are virtually identical to those resulting from criminal offences. To mitigate against these tendencies, the committee and the Minister settled on several additional provisions. First, a peace officer will be required to convey a person to a health facility without delay. Second, a peace officer will be required to inform the apprehended person, again without delay, of the reason for their detention and their right to legal counsel. Third, the peace officer will be required to facilitate the person’s access to legal counsel. Fourth, in the event of a necessary delay in conveying the person to a health facility, the patient will have the right to communicate with a family member, health professional or other person. Finally, in the event of a delay, the peace officer will be required to contact a health professional to discuss the person’s condition and circumstances. At the clause-by-clause review, the Minister indicated that these changes are consistent with Charter rights and the intent of the legislation.

With respect to the selection of substitute decision-makers, the committee acted on concerns of the Information and Privacy Commissioner and the Status of Women Council of the NWT. Because the original language in Bill 55 would only have allowed for an express wish to be considered after the selection process had begun, the committee introduced a change. It states that, notwithstanding the prioritized eligibility list set out in Section 30, if a medical doctor believes a patient is competent to participate in the selection of a substitute decision-maker, the patient’s express wish must be first in priority. The Minister concurred with this motion at the clause-by-clause review, but cautioned that the change will complicate the process of selecting a substitute decision-maker and place additional burdens on the department to establish practice standards and train health care providers.

Protection of Privacy

The Information and Privacy Commissioner provided a lengthy submission on Bill 55. The committee asked the Minister to respond to it and then deliberated on the issues. First and foremost, the committee determined that privacy issues pertaining to the Mental Health Act will largely be governed by the Health Information Act.

Second, the committee observed that points of disagreement between the Minister and the Commissioner focused largely on whether privacy provisions should be contained in the statute or in regulations. Recognizing that regulations can be more easily changed and brought into force without the scrutiny of the Legislative Assembly, the committee nonetheless concluded that privacy protections will have the force of law in either case.

Third, the committee took up the Commissioner’s concern about the bill’s failure to prohibit board members from disclosing information obtained in their role as board members. A motion to establish a confidentiality clause was introduced at the clause-by-clause review with the Minister’s agreement.

Fourth, in reference to Section 56, which authorizes the creation of a registry of certificates issued under the act, the committee noted that the Health Information Act expressly permits the creation of such a registry. The Commissioner asked for a statutory amendment to clarify the registry’s purpose, but the committee concluded that regulations are an appropriate place to specify this. Moreover, the committee was satisfied with the Minister’s explanation that the registry will be used to keep track of the number of involuntary patients and thereby assist in long-term planning. The Minister also offered assurance that certificates will be securely filed and that only relevant information from certificates will be entered into the registry.

Fifth, in reference to the concern about law enforcement’s access to certificates—and, specifically, access to the sensitive information contained therein, the committee confirmed that federal legislation protects personal information and places obligations on RCMP officers to respect confidentiality. The Minister further indicated that unnecessary information will be redacted from certificates, a practice consistent with the department’s obligations under Section 28 of the Health Information Act. These matters will be prescribed in regulations, and the committee concluded that regulation-making authority relating to the apprehension of persons will include the authority to prescribe how information is shared.

Mr. Speaker, I would now like to turn the reading of the report over to my colleague Mr. Moses.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s my next to last opportunity to address this House. My almost last chance to say what I want, how I want, with no worries of repercussions. Parliamentarians are so lucky to have the privilege we do in regard to speaking in the House. It seems a bit strange that I will not be back in this Chamber after tomorrow except as a visitor, but you should all know I am quite comfortable with that. I’ve made no secret that I am looking forward to retirement, and I will definitely not miss the 14-hour session days.

So I want to subject you all to a look back to my perspective on the good, the bad and the ugly from my time as an MLA, well maybe not the ugly. But where to start on my retrospective? There have been many positive moments and events, but I’d be lying if I did not also say that there have been times when this job and all that it entails has had a negative impact on me and on the Assembly.

I find it interesting that four years ago as the 16th Assembly was closing, I said this, “It’s been an interesting four years to say the least. I came to start this new job full of optimism and hope. I thoroughly enjoyed the strategic planning session and came away from that feeling positive, ready to tackle all the problems of the NWT and government. There certainly have been ups and downs during this Assembly’s life and I may not be so optimistic and positive today, but in general it’s been an enjoyable experience.” It’s very interesting to me that I feel much the same today after eight years.

I’d like to think that I’ve made a difference in my time here, whether it’s been small or large depends on the observer. So, what are the things I would change if I could? What are the negatives that I mentioned? Foremost and top of mind has to be the different understandings of consensus government by the executive and Regular Members. Not long ago I was frustrated enough to write an e-mail to the Premier, entitled “Are we still a consensus government?” Many decisions by Cabinet are made and publicized without any or adequate opportunity for Regular Members to provide input. Admittedly, we elect Cabinet Members to manage and oversee the work of government, but Regular Members deserve to be consulted enough in advance so that any input will actually have some impact.

An example: a brief comment in committee one day from a Minister that Cabinet would be considering a large subsidy for NTPC due to low water to a press release the next day advising it was a done deal. Not my idea of consensus.

As I wrote to the Premier last month, “Cabinet may not consider these omissions a big deal, but it clearly demonstrates the lack of respect for Regular Members that they feel. It clearly demonstrates the low regard Cabinet has for us as we go about our jobs. It says to me, “don’t worry, boys and girls, the government is in good hands, you don’t have to worry about a thing, we’ll take care of everything for you.” That’s a bit caustic perhaps. I was a little frustrated at the time, as you can imagine, but it conveys the message that if Cabinet wants to live the true spirit of consensus, they need to work harder at it. Consensus government is only as good as the actions of the people using it. Over the last year and a half, I’ve come to feel that Cabinet has little interest in real consultation.

Another negative: in regard to legislation, two things: At the start of this and the 16th Assembly, Regular Members were asked to provide our priorities for legislative change and then all input seems to be ignored. I’ve also been disappointed with the glacial pace of government for amending of old and implementing of new legislation. There have been a couple of major pieces of legislation in government over four years, but in my mind, other than that, most bills that have come forward have been fixes, small bits, when I feel that there is so much real work on legislation that’s been left undone.

Talking of pace, the amount of time required to get a response on an inquiry from an MLA to a Minister could definitely be better. True, it’s as good as the Minister and his or her staff, but in general it takes far too long to get an answer on an inquiry on a constituent’s behalf and it’s often when the matter is seen as urgent by the constituent and doesn’t seem to be seen that way by the Minister.

Many times, committees and Members have asked the government to review all policies for conflicts between departments. The impacts that the conflicting policies have on our residents are huge, but we have yet to see any real change which will have an impact on the day-to-day lives of NWT residents. It is imperative that the government do that government-wide analysis on policies and amend policies accordingly.

On a personal note, there have been a number of issues that I have personally pursued or supported during my time here, issues that I did not see finished or accomplished either wholly or in part, and issues, which other Members championed, which I supported, but did not come to fruition. 911. I fully hoped that in the 17th Assembly, now it’s going to be the 18th, but I fully hoped in the 17th Assembly that we would see the establishment of 911 in the NWT and it’s been rather frustrating for me that we continue to see I guess it’s foot dragging or putting up of blocks on the part of the government to the establishment of 911. It should have happened in Yellowknife by now.

Access to information and protection of privacy legislation for municipalities is something else which should have happened by now. It has been called for by the Information and Privacy Commissioner for probably 10 years now, and yet, again, the government does not seem to want to move forward on it. We’ve done investigations, we’ve consulted I think probably several times now, and nothing. Again, I have to say that it is something that should have happened over the last eight years and yet it has not.

A standalone campus for Yellowknife for Aurora College. This is something which is desperately needed. It is something which all Yellowknife Members have spoken of in the last eight years and certainly well before that, but it is something which has yet to make its way to the capital budget. It doesn’t seem to be an urgent matter for anybody on the Executive because they’re the ones who present us with the capital budget and I sincerely regret that we weren’t able to get that project into the budget to get it at least on its way.

Homelessness. I pushed homelessness quite a bit for a period of time and I thank Mr. Nadli for speaking about homelessness today because it is an issue and it is increasing in communities outside Yellowknife. It’s definitely an issue here in my home community, but it’s an issue in other communities, as well, and I don’t think that there is enough of a focus from government on dealing with homelessness. It’s a housing issue; it’s an income support issue; it’s a health issue; it basically cuts across all departments because people are homeless for any number of reasons. It is something that needs to be addressed.

An ombudsman. I am sincerely sorry that we did not get an ombudsman act legislation put forward in this 17th Assembly. It is something which I firmly believe is necessary. I know the government says that there are lots of appeal boards, there are lots of opportunities for somebody to appeal, that you can go to court. I’ve said many times that’s not enough. We need to establish legislation for an ombudsman office and we need to get it established soon. I hope the provision of a draft Ombudsman Act to the Minister of Justice will enable the Minister of Justice in the 18th Assembly to bring forward that legislation as the first piece of legislation in that Assembly.

This is not something that’s reared its ugly head too much in the 17th Assembly, but in the 16th Assembly we had a huge, huge fight over supplementary health benefits and in the end not much changed, but we still have no supplementary health benefit coverage for some of our residents. They’ve been referenced as the working poor, a term that I hate, but we do not have all of our residents eligible for supplementary health benefits.

A hotel tax. That’s something else which I thought was fairly simple to establish. It didn’t have to be a change to legislation even. It could be something that could be set up or it could be a simple legislation to just apply to municipalities that wanted it. Again, we’ve investigated that I think to the nth degree and it has yet to come to fruition. It doesn’t have to be mandated for all communities, but for those communities that want it. Yellowknife wants to advance their tourism industry. Yellowknife wants to use the funding from a hotel tax to advance their tourism, to advance their conference industry and the opportunity has not been given to them.

A fairer policy on student housing for Aurora College. I think all of us, as Members, have probably heard from somebody at Aurora College, particularly here in Yellowknife, who have had difficulties with student housing. I pushed to get a policy amended. The policy was evaluated by the college and they came back and said that everything was okay, and I really regret that we could not have established a fairer policy for student housing for students in Yellowknife going to Aurora College.

A lack of greater provisions of housing for seniors and residents in transition from homelessness to their own home. We definitely need, in these two areas, as I spoke in my statement today, we need housing in a number of areas and we need housing in general across all of the Territories. Here in Yellowknife, the seniors’ housing situation is pretty desperate. Here in Yellowknife the transition housing situation is pretty desperate and I regret that we weren’t able to put the infrastructure in place or to put something in place to allow these people to go from homelessness to transition housing to get themselves established and then from transition housing to get into their own home, or seniors who need to go from their own home to supported living or to independent living or perhaps to extended care. It is something which has been talked about a long time but we haven’t, unfortunately, seen the advances we should, particularly here in my home community.

I am very regretful that we did not end up with a better formula for funding for inclusive schooling. There was a review, albeit I have to grant the department kudos for holding a review. After all the work that was done, after all the input that they got, they said, “No, we’re going to stay with what we have,” and it unfortunately does not fund education boards as it should in terms of students that are being inclusive schooled. Particularly the magnet communities, and Yellowknife is a magnet community. We have services here that don’t exist in other communities, so people with disabled students or students who are intellectually challenged bring their children here and we have people moving to this city to take advantage of the services here and to take advantage of the schools here and yet the magnet schools and magnet communities are funded to the same level as any school anywhere in the territory and it’s unfair. It’s something which I’m really regretful we weren’t able to change.

The amount of action we’ve had on renewable energy projects, in my mind, is regrettable. In eight years I expected we would have a major energy project, something like a community biomass heat and electrical system somewhere in one of our communities in the territory. I think it was seven years ago we had a delegation that went over to Europe and came back and said, “These things are all over Europe,” and I thought, oh great. Yes, we can do it here. No, it hasn’t happened and we are still talking about projects. I admit, yes, there’s a little bit of progress, but by now we should have had a major energy project. We all know the cost of our power is pretty horrendous and it has a huge impact on our cost of living.

I need to talk about land claims. There’s an absolute need to settle our land claims and I don’t imagine anybody in this House would disagree, but it is beginning to impact our economy. It’s beginning to impact our governance and it’s something which definitely needs to be done sooner rather than later. A tough job, but it needs to be done.

I must also comment on climate change and the lack of action that we’ve taken on climate change in recognizing that climate change is an issue and recognizing that we need to put money into it and in recognizing it is a policy issue that we have to take everything we do and look at it in the light of climate change. We’re not doing that, I don’t believe.

So, some of those things are big, some of them are little, and I regret that they didn’t get accomplished, but I hope somebody in the 18th Assembly will take up each and every one of those and as, Mr. Speaker, you would say, “get ‘er done.”

Mr. Speaker, I have deplored the lack of effectiveness of Regular Members of Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning in this 17th Assembly. We can accomplish so much through cohesiveness and support of each other, but it was not to be in this Assembly. But, being the optimist that I am, I hope that the 18th Assembly Priorities and Planning committee can wield the power that they have in an effective manner and for the betterment of our residents and our territory.

A few words of advice to the next Assembly: please take more time when setting up standing committees. The division of committee work amongst Regular Members was not evenly done in the 17th and some Members felt the strain of that. I know it impacted my work and my attitude of my colleagues.

But enough of the negative; it’s not been all bad. There were a number of issues that I pursued and I have a good sense of accomplishment about those. First and foremost for me is the Donation of Food Act. It was a private member’s bill that I brought forward in the 16th. I really had no idea what I was doing. I was really new at the game, but with the help of staff and with the help of my colleagues, we established the Donation of Food Act which was pretty much the “let’s get going” for the Food Rescue Program which operates here in Yellowknife and it had a huge impact on them. I have no idea now how many hundreds of thousands of tons of food we’ve saved from the landfill, but it’s a lot.

The NEBS legislation was another positive for me. In 2007 when I was campaigning, I stopped at the door of Mr. Dennis Adams and sort of said, you know, the usual, “Well, I’m campaigning and have you got any issues and what can I do for you and I want your vote,” and he said, “Yes, there is something you can do for me.” He, at that time, was the executive director for NEBS. “You can get legislation for us that’s going to take us out of the situation that we’re in.” I said, “Oh sure, fine. I’ll work on that.” Well, it took us until – where are we, 2015 – from 2007 to 2015, but it’s done, Mr. Speaker, and it is an excellent piece of legislation and I want to thank the members of the Standing Committee on Government Operations for the work they did. The same for the committee in Nunavut who did the same work and it ended up being a very long process but I think we came out with a very good piece of legislation.

I’m quite proud of the fact that I pushed the 16th Assembly to establish Caucus Protocols and Conventions. They have shaped how we work, how we govern ourselves, how Caucus works and how consensus kind of works. Consensus is a very strange animal. It helps that we have these guidelines to move us along. They are guidelines, right, so we don’t always obey them. But consensus, our consensus, is a work in progress and I hope that it continues to develop protocols and conventions as things crop up.

I’m very happy that we finally, and we’ve now just had a second set of amendments to the Motor Vehicles Act with respect to distracted driving. I feel extremely strongly that we have a major portion of our population who don’t yet realize the dangers in driving and texting, and I urge all Members, if you ever see anybody texting and driving, pull them over and tell them to stop. They are accidents waiting to happen and we are lucky we haven’t had anybody killed because of it – yet. So I’m very pleased that we were able to get… Initially the act was changed to put in fines and then just recently we’ve increased those fines and added suspensions, as well, so that’s awesome. I’m very glad for that.

I’m pleased that I was able to take a small part in establishing the Anti-Poverty Action Plan. The Anti-Poverty Coalition enlisted me to present their petition to the Premier in the 16th Assembly. I would have been happier if we had had anti-poverty legislation, but the fact that we have an Anti-Poverty Action Plan and that we’re getting updates on that, I’m very pleased with that. We’re started down the right road. I would hope that legislation would be the next step.

The Child and Family Services Act: that consultation when we reviewed that act and the consultation for the Mental Health Act. Both those consultations were probably highlights in terms of bills and reports that I was involved in. They were both extremely involved. They were both really quite emotionally draining because we were talking about people’s lives, but I’m very pleased that we were able to get excellent recommendations to the Child and Family Services Act, some of which have happened. Lots more needs to be done, but we’ve had some take place, and the Mental Health Act, which we’re going to be discussing later, is going to be a huge improvement on the Mental Health Act that we have at the moment. So I was very happy to be part of those.

The establishment of the Order of the NWT… It was a great ceremony today and we had great recipients today and, for me, I was pushed by a constituent to bring that forward and I was pushed, probably three or four times; every three or four months I’d get this e-mail or question, “Where’s it at, where’s it at?” So I took it to Caucus, and Caucus, in their wisdom, decided this was a good thing that we should do. It has now been established and it is an excellent addition to the awards that we have within our territory.

Devolution, how could I forget devolution? That we have devolution is an excellent accomplishment and I supported it and I have to give kudos to the Premier and his staff who managed to get everybody on board to get devolution to happen.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, it’s been my honour to represent the constituents of Frame Lake these past eight years. The constituents’ concerns that regularly came to my office fall into four categories and I’m sure it’s pretty much the same for all of us: their health, social services, housing, and income support, and being able to help people with those kinds of problems is very gratifying. I very much enjoyed that part of being an MLA. I very much enjoy being able to help people to fix their problems, sometimes. We run up against roadblocks quite often and it goes back to the policies which inhibit us from helping people as opposed to assisting us to help them.

Mr. Speaker, I like watching people – and goodness knows there’s lots to watch here – in committees and hearings, in the House. The relationships that develop here, or don’t, are quite fascinating. I appreciate the friendships and relationships I’ve made during my time here. I appreciate the opportunities I’ve had to travel our beautiful territory to get to know it better and to meet many of our people, as Mr. Yakeleya would say.

I wish each of you in this House success in your upcoming job interview. You need to know that I will be watching with interest on election night to see how you do. Thank you to the people of the NWT for letting me have such a great last job before I retire. Thank you to the Members of this and the 16th Assemblies for your support, your counsel and your friendship. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thanks to the Minister. It is gratifying to know that we may be able to offload this, since I don’t think it’s our responsibility if push comes to shove.

I’m trying to determine for assessments, in general, where we’re at in terms of assessments for all the developments for which GNWT is now responsible. Have they been done, and if they are not done, when do we expect that we will have an assessment of the liabilities that we are responsible for?

That kind of helps. With regard to all the developments and the potential liabilities that we have, I know that there is a listing of those, because through devolution there was a listing of everything in the territory, what the GNWT would take over and what would remain with the feds.

I’d like to know, at this point, have we done assessments on the majority of the developments that we are responsible for or that we hold? One of the examples that comes to mind for me is the Ptarmigan Mine out on the Ingraham Trail. It’s been sitting there for a very long time and nothing has been done with it. It needs to be cleaned up. Do we have an assessment of what that would cost, for instance, and do we have an assessment of all the developments in the Northwest Territories?

If I could presume, and I will ask the Minister to confirm, would we expect that it will cost about $30 million to reclaim and to clean up that mine?

I’d like to try and understand from the Minister, about a year ago there was an announcement that we were establishing a new division in lands, a liabilities and financial assurances division. That was about a year ago, last November. I’m trying to understand the difference between who does assessments for mines of the liabilities of a mine or any other development, and who actually handles the securities. My understanding is that Lands handles the securities but I think maybe ENR does the assessments. I’d like to get some clarification on that.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m not quite sure where to address my questions today. I want to follow up on some of the questions I asked on Monday about the North American Tungsten and the Cantung Mine and some of the liabilities and securities. I’m confused whether I should be dealing with the Department of Lands or the Department of Environment and Natural Resources.

I talked to the Lands Minister on Monday and I’m going to try and talk to the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources today to see if I can get some clarification on who does what with regard to these liabilities.

It would seem, in talking with the Minister of Lands the other day, that we have taken responsibility for the development at the Cantung Mine, that we’ve taken responsibility for that development without any idea of the liability that we are accepting. In June the securities required, I gather, was up to $19 million, but we only hold $11.6 million, apparently.

My first question would be to the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources. If we have required the mine to provide securities of $19 million, how does that compare with what the actual liabilities for cleanup of that mine will be?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When we discussed the NWT Housing Corporation during the capital budget deliberations last week, I expressed concern about the number of public housing units available in the NWT, especially in Yellowknife. Not only do we need public housing but there’s a well-documented need for transition housing, seniors housing and disabled persons housing.

Last year the YWCA in Yellowknife, a provider of transition housing in Yellowknife, reported a lengthy waiting list for their units. This year, in spite of an addition of 18 new units at Lynn’s Place and 55 places moved from Education, Culture and Employment to the NWT Housing Corporation public housing, there’s been little change in those long waiting lists.

As we heard yesterday from Mr. Bromley, the Y’s Rockhill Family Housing Facility has 100 families on their waiting list. That’s families, Mr. Speaker, not people. Lynn’s Place has 50 people on their waiting list and Yellowknife Housing Authority has a list of 152 singles or families looking to get into a public housing unit.

It’s not just individuals and families who need housing help. The need for seniors housing in Yellowknife and the NWT is well known and acknowledged by both the Yellowknife NGO Avens and the GNWT Health and Social Services. The government is taking some action to alleviate the need for seniors housing outside of Yellowknife, but as we’ve heard many times over the last year, it’s not enough.

The number of homeless people in Yellowknife is estimated at 150 and I have no idea of the extent of the problem in other communities, but I know that it’s there. As we heard yesterday many times, the housing needs of NWT disabled persons are urgent.

If we want productive, effective, contributing NWT residents, we need to ensure that housing is available, affordable and accessible to all. Increasing the accessibility of housing to all NWT residents is a huge need in our territory. It must be made a priority for the 18th Assembly as it was for the 17th. We have made some progress in this Assembly in meeting housing needs, but not nearly enough. We need a coordinated across-government strategy to deal with housing needs across the continuum of housing. I hope Members here returning in the 18th Assembly will see that that happens. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that we report progress.

---Carried

Thank you, Mr. Chair. My comments are similar to those of my colleague Mr. Moses.

My experience has been that the child and family services committees have not worked, much as the department tried quite valiantly at the beginning of this Assembly to try and get them going. They are a great idea, but if they’re not working, we shouldn’t have them. When we were in a hearing with the Minister, the suggestion was made that maybe we shouldn’t have child and family services committees, to which the Minister responded and this bill is the result of that.

I think there needs to be some monitoring as we make this change. I think there has to be a watchful eye, I think, kept on things by the department to ensure that something, some kind of I don’t want to say program, but that something replaces the child and family services committee or what they were intended to do. We can’t just take them out and not replace it with something or other. But certainly the committees weren’t working, so I’m pleased to see this has been brought forward.

I guess I’d like to also echo the comments about thanks to the Minister and to the staff for getting this done before the end of this Assembly. Thank you.