Kevin O'Reilly

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I guess I would like to call on our law clerk to help me understand the effect of this clause. If an individual came forward to the Ombud, and the beginning of their journey, their concern about administrative issues, administrative conduct, started before January 1, 2016, would the Ombud have jurisdiction to look at that complaint? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I don't want to drag this out. I think there is a real difference of approach and opinion here about this matter.

This is not just coming from me as a Member. We heard this from members of the public. We heard it from the godmother to this bill, Ms. Bisaro. This is not good drafting. I don't think it is consistent with what I had hoped for coming out of this bill. It is not what the public has said to the standing committee, and I think that this should not be supported. Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I thought the whole purpose here of this bill was to try to avoid going to court and that this officer would help investigate, or perhaps resolve, what complainants perceive to be unfair administrative conduct. This is not a legal process. I'm trying to understand the rationale for setting, or basically restricting, the mandate of the Ombud to only be able to look at conduct that comes in after the commencement of this act. This really would have a very severe consequence in terms of limiting the ability of our residents to access the Ombud. Can the Minister provide some...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I, too, will support this. I think it helps clarify the mandate of the Ombud. I also wanted to say that this issue was brought to the attention of the committee by more than one presenter. I attended the public hearing that was held here in Yellowknife, and I did review the submissions, so this is responding to the public comments that were received by the committee, as well. For the average person reading this, I think this will help clarify the understanding that they can take away from this bill. I urge everyone to separate this. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Merci, Monsieur le President. I have tried very carefully to choose my words here today. I take the issue of removal of a Cabinet Minister very seriously.

There is nothing personal in how I have arrived at my decision on the two Ministers up for review. This is about getting results for NWT residents and whether we have the right team in place for doing this for the remainder of our term. I personally like the Minister under discussion. I believe he brings valuable experience to this Assembly and has made a valuable contribution. However, I must assess his progress objectively on mandate items...

Merci, Monsieur le President. I think I differ with the Premier's assessment of the state of the industry and our capacity to regulate it. My statement also mentioned the inadequacy of consumer protection laws. Here, tourism officers of course cannot sit around and read to see what kind of advertising and services are out there. It's important that we have a vigorous system to receive and investigate complaints and provide restitution where appropriate, and that includes, of course, the ability for tourists to hear back about complaints, even while they are here, in town. So can the Minister...

Recent years have seen an explosion of tourism, and I believe the Minister talked about that in his statement earlier today, and a lot of this a related to aurora viewing. Can the Minister give us some idea in the growth in the number of Yellowknife operators and licences in recent years?

Merci, Monsieur le President. My questions are for the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment; and my apologies, well, I can't.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the assistance of the law clerk. I still think that this is going to create some uncertainty and may lead to something being marched off to court, where the better solution is to just remove any temporal restriction on the mandate of the Ombud.

I am concerned that this will still act as a deterrent to individuals who wish to bring forward complaints. I guess I want to go on the public record as saying that, whoever the Ombud is, if this passes, I would encourage them to take the broadest possible interpretation of their mandate, that anything that has started...

I think there may be a motion coming forward on this. The last point I want to make is that this kind of restriction on the mandate of the Ombud sends out all of the wrong signals to the public, and I think it will deter people from coming to this officer for trying to resolve their issues with our government. I just don't think it serves the public interest. Thanks, Mr. Chair.