Charles Dent

Thank you, Mr. Chair. What this amendment is intended to do is to address the concern that conflicts of interest may well arise where couples live together for less than two years. The fact that they lived together may give rise to the perception of a conflict of interest. This amendment applies both to heterosexual couples and same-sex couples because, right now, for instance, in the Conflict of Interest Act, if a heterosexual couple were to be living together for six months in a conjugal relationship, the same act wouldn’t apply to them even though there may be the implication of a...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I didn’t say that it was a waste of time to develop programs to encourage children to be in school, nor did I say it was a waste of time to encourage families to make sure that their kids attended school. But there’s a big difference between finding a family that isn’t sending a kid to school because he hasn’t got any shoes and finding a way to support getting some shoes on the feet of that kid so that he is comfortable coming to school.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As outlined in the opening comments by the chair of the standing committee, there were a number of issues that were raised in the review with the standing committee and a commitment was made to come back with amendments during the standing committee process. But when we appeared before the standing committee with the amendments, the suggestion by the standing committee was that we deal with them in Committee of the Whole. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Yes, Madam Chairperson, I would like to have witnesses.

Mr. Chairman, I move that the following be added after clause 8 of Bill 17:

Wildlife Act

8.1. Paragraph 30(3)(a) of the Wildlife Act is amended by deleting “wife or widow” and by substituting “spouse or surviving spouse”.

Mr. Chairman, this motion adds a new clause to the bill which will provide an amendment to the Wildlife Act which presently permits the wife or widow of a general hunting licence holder to hunt in a wildlife preserve in certain circumstances. The reference to wife or widow excludes men, women who live in heterosexual common-law relationships and same-sex spouses of either sex...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Keeping people from coming back to jail is one of the major focuses of the corrections department. Yes, we will work with inmates. I think it’s important to remember that right now Nats’ Ejee K’eh is one of the resources that is also used, as is the Salvation Army. We do have residential programs available. We’re going to have to take a look at a petition the Member says he’s going to table. We’ll have to have a look at that and try to figure out exactly what area the inmates feel that there is a shortage of space, because right now we’re not filling up Nats’ Ejee K’eh...

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Whether the federal government actually changes the definition of marriage or not we should still proceed with this legislation. Even if the definition of marriage isn’t changed, we should proceed with this. The Member just agreed that heterosexual common-law couples shouldn’t be discriminated against simply because they’re not legally married. That is supported by the courts. Well, the courts have supported the exact same thing with same-sex couples. You can’t discriminate against them simply because they’re not legally married. You can’t say they’re not a couple. So...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I said, we’re trying to use more and more of a case management approach. It’s taking some time to get that worked around, but, yes, the Department of Health and Social Services and Education, Culture and Employment are brought into the counselling as necessary. If you have somebody who’s dealing with an individual to try and find where their challenges are, then other resources can be brought to the table as necessary. As I said, we’re in the early stages of this, but that’s the goal with this programming is to try and improve the availability of counselling from all...

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, we are in many of these clauses saying that spouse includes people who are not married but co-habit. I don’t expect the Member would think that we would continue to prohibit that definition from being changed. That’s one of the things that we are recognizing. There is no discussion of marriage in this act. As I said in my opening comments, until the definition is changed by the federal government or a court decision is made in our jurisdiction, then the definition of marriage remains the same. But a spouse doesn’t have to be somebody who is legally married to...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We certainly can examine that as we go through the whole review of the income security policies that we have. The National Child Benefit was a benefit proposed by the federal government to assist working parents, to encourage people to take that step from income support into the world of work where that was possible. All jurisdictions across Canada agreed that nobody on income support would be worse off, and we have made sure that is in fact the case in the Northwest Territories. We have increased benefits to people who are on income support since the National Child...