David Krutko

There was a program that was in place with the Tl'oondih Healing Society in Fort McPherson, where we were looking at developing a program which was implemented for, I believe, three clients who went through three different times with the program. The whole intention of the program was to reintegrate inmates back into their communities and to allow them to deal with some of their issues so that they don’t re-offend. But it also tried to make them aware, to be able to cope with society but, more importantly, to deal with their issues before they’re released from prison.

In regard to that program...

Mr. Abernethy.

The question has been called.

Motion carried.

Ms. Schofield.

Again, we’re dealing with the motion. At this time we can only discuss the motion. You can’t ask questions to the Minister. I’d like to ask the mover of the motion, Mrs. Groenewegen, to the motion.

Sorry, Mr. Hawkins. I’ll have to rule your item out of order. It’s already been discussed. We debated it, and basically we’re not going back to an item that’s been debated and voted upon. So I’ll have to rule your question out of order.

We’re on page 7-35, Community Justice and Corrections, Operations Expenditure Summary: $33.826 million. Mr. Bromley.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. I believe the motion that’s in front of us is clearly there for a reason. We have a lot of facilities that we’ve built in the Northwest Territories — young offenders’ facilities — regardless if it’s in Inuvik or Yellowknife or another place in the Northwest Territories.

We have to, at some point, assess what the use of those facilities are, what alternative uses we can get from these facilities, instead of building facilities for the sake of building facilities and then we find out later, “Well, sorry, you don’t have the numbers we want. We’re going to clean house...

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Mrs. Groenewegen.

I do not believe that we can debate a motion that’s already been dealt with in this House. We’ve discussed the motion. It was voted on; it was passed. The motion has been dealt with, and I don’t think it’s appropriate to just go over an item that’s already been dealt with.

If you’re asking for a particular position in regard to this item on positions, I think we can ask for clarification from the department, but we’re not going back to something that’s already been dealt with.

But again, on a similar argument of base-plus funding, I think they should have coordinators. If you want to have a program to run, you have to have someone overseeing it. It shouldn’t be simply given to them on the basis that if they don’t have a coordinator, they still get it. I think it comes back to the argument of having someone overseeing this program but also having it coordinated so that it’s functional and we’re seeing results.

I’d just like to again ask in regard to the base-plus funding…. I believe that in order for any program to function, you do have to realize that there are costs...