Bob Bromley

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would like to follow up on the Premier’s/Minister’s statement yesterday on devolution as well. The Premier updated us on the status and process for devolution or assumption of authority for land and resource management. This government and our public are on record for decades as serious concerns over the federal legislation now in place. But the Premier said we are considering two approaches of taking down the legislation. We have to weigh the pros and cons. Could the Premier lay out some details on the comparative advantages and disadvantages of the two approaches...

Thanks to the Minister for those remarks. I can’t say I’m that clear yet. I understand that this is IAB land typically or that it occurs in communities which are surrounded by IAB land and that apparently, if I heard correctly, the Housing Corporation requires a BCR that provides a 99-year lease to a potential tenant. Then what? That means the tenant can’t get a mortgage? So I don’t see that as a huge challenge, a BCR, and band councils are generally willing to help their members that way. So what are we waiting for? What’s our ask of Ottawa that we’re waiting for? What’s the hiccup there...

Thank you, Madam Chair. I’m wondering if this is where the program for men who use violence is housed and also the early intervention for non-violent offenders. There is a program that I believe was being tried out last year. Are those relevant on this page? Thank you.

Madam Chair, I guess that’s good to hear. Maybe we could indicate that this is a Sahtu commitment or something like that rather than an MGP commitment, that would clarify. That’s just an administrative suggestion there. Thank you. That’s all the questions I have on this page.

Thank you. Just to add to that a little bit, Mr. Chair, the tenant is paying six cents, going to be nine cents. The government is paying an average of a buck fifty, so it seems like there is an awful lot of room for incentive there to get beyond that modest three cents or nine cents to get the tenant to conserve electrical power and still be a net gain for the government. I’ll just leave it at that. Just a comment. Thank you.

Madam Chair, I’m trying to compare the two. On page 27 there’s a reduction of about $170,000 and here there is a reduction of about $316,000 in community justice. I’m just wondering, for clarity, are those territorial dollars on page 27 and federal dollars on 28, or do dollars on page 28 compose part of the effort under community justice at the bottom on page 27?

I just have a question with the process. Is that normally a decision that would be brought to committee for some input, or is that sort of a contract obligation and here is the money, you can do what you want with it to the RCMP? Thank you.

Thanks for the Minister’s comments again. That wasn’t exactly where I was headed. I think, when we have able-bodied people who are paying $32 per month or whatever the new amount might be, who are unemployed but willing to work, it seems legitimate to either require their participation if there is a way we can responsibly ask for them to contribute, and in a way, I’m thinking almost like an informal apprenticeship program or something, that both contribute to the maintenance of our housing infrastructure and the development of our tenants’ skills for those that are willing and able.

Another...

That’s to be expected. Recognizing that this really is about crime prevention first of all, and then early correction second of all, I suppose, I’d say this is a real opportunity, based on what we are learning, and it might be something the department could look into and consider. That’s all I had. Thank you.

That’s great. It’s good to hear. Will the department play a role in making knowledge about this available throughout our communities? Will there be a helpline for NGOs? How does that work? Thank you.