Bill Braden

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have an amendment to move. I move that Bill 6 be amended by deleting clause 57 and substituting the following:

57. A prosecution under this act may be commenced at any time within two years after the day the offence is alleged to have been committed or within six months after the day on which evidence, sufficient to justify prosecution for the offence, comes to the knowledge of the association or another appropriate authority.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am, of course, standing here today in favour of the motion. You know, Mr. Speaker, there are a few points I would like to make, but I would like to perhaps pick up from where my colleague, the Member for Kam Lake, left off. It is a plea for Ottawa to hear the message, but it is also a query, a concern about who is going to take that message. I would volunteer, Mr. Speaker. As we have been talking about this afternoon, will it, should it really come down to one person, one messenger? I would argue that it is really a collective, Mr. Speaker, a collective of...

Mr. Speaker, are negotiations in fact underway at this time? We're now two days into the disruption of service there, and what steps will we take, Mr. Speaker, to ensure that what I would say is an essential service is restored as soon as possible, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In general, Mr. Speaker, what is the nature of the contract or the relationship that our government has in terms of funding and supporting this society?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For those First Nations that do not yet have a settled claim, recognizing that situation, respecting it, should we be considering that as a reason for us all not to join together? Is that in effect a deal breaker, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. Speaker, the Premier also said earlier today that he would like to see a target or time frame on achieving this at the end of the fiscal year. It’s more or less consistent with what he said a few years ago that perhaps four months was an achievable time frame for this. I’d like to ask the Premier, Mr. Speaker, just why is he choosing this time frame? What is significant about it? How is it going to be achievable within that time frame, if not less, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This afternoon I would like to continue questioning Mr. Dent, the Minister responsible for the Workers' Compensation Board, on the file that Mr. Ivan Valic, an injured worker who for some 19 years now has continued to pursue what he believes and what the Supreme Court of the NWT has shown to be discrimination on denying his benefits, Mr. Speaker.

The Supreme Court of Canada some three years ago decided -- and I think this is what is quite well known as the Martin case -- that workers who suffer from chronic pain are entitled to the same benefits, including long-term...

Thank you, Madam Chair. Of course, I too will be voting in favour of this amendment. Madam Chair, I will not repeat my comments earlier, but to reiterate what I believe was a good recommendation made to this Assembly by the boundaries commission. It reflects that there are changes going on within our society and our communities and our demographics, and that it is incumbent on us to recognize those and strive to do the best we can to ensure that the idea of proportional representation is done to the best of our ability with the obvious considerations that we have, which we already gave to...

Mr. Speaker, is the WCB afraid that if something goes sideways for them again in this Appeals Tribunal that it’s going to cost them a lot of money? Is that what they’re doing, Mr. Speaker? Are they trying to protect the fund instead of doing what is right for injured workers?

Mr. Speaker, the Minister yesterday advised that in relation to Mr. Valic’s long and valiant struggle to get to the court-ordered appeal, newly constituted Appeal Tribunal, that "the WCB has not applied to take an adversarial point of view at all in the Appeals Tribunal hearing." I’m quoting from unedited Hansard of yesterday. Mr. Speaker, I understand that the board has indeed applied for standing at Mr. Valic’s tribunal. I wanted to ask the Minister, if indeed he said yesterday that the WCB has not applied to take an adversarial point of view, why has it applied for standing in Mr. Valic’s...