Louis Sebert

I know the amendment application was filed on January 9, 2017; of course, the Sahtu Land Use Planning Board is independent of the Department of Lands so I can't really give a date as to when they will conclude their examination of this matter.

Mr. Speaker, payments under court orders are always subject to recalculation. In fact, we are attempting to develop a child support recalculation service that will avoid the necessity of going back to court in every case. Courts, however, always have the right to make changes to payments, and really, that is within their jurisdiction and responsibility. I do not think I could have any influence over that, particularly the courts of British Columbia.

Naturally, Mr. Speaker, we are always interested in improving the system; however, sometimes there are loopholes that cannot be plugged as the result of Charter or other privacy concerns.

Yes, I will look into it, and I think I can provide the Member opposite with some additional information. Of course, I can't directly affect the timing or the decision of the board. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Sahtu Land Use Planning Board is the authority for amendments of Zone 41, and I can advise that there is an application to make an amendment now that the final boundary for the Naats'ihch'oh National Park Reserve is established. So Lands is coordinating a cohesive NWT position to take to the board. Thank you.

Yes, without a doubt, it is difficult often to make collections of any kind from the self-employed because they are obviously working for themselves. For that reason, it is difficult often to obtain the kind of information the enforcement office needs to make collection of arrears. With respect to the other matter, clearly we should look into a faster method of getting payment to the creditors.

The maintenance enforcement office, of course, was set up many years ago so that parents did not have to deal directly with those who owed money under orders that were filed with the office. Of course, there are many things the office can do: they can garnish wages; they can seize property; and they can attach and sell assets. The Member opposite has raised an interesting issue which I am prepared to look into as to whether there are constitutional or Charter bars to obtaining the information she spoke of upon the person, or a possible creditor becoming employed. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I can advise that we have been having sessions with the public; we've had one in Fort Smith, and several days ago one in Hay River. So we're waiting to hear from the public as to what their concerns are and ideas are, and once we've accumulated that information we will be bringing forward a policy. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members will recall we met in the summer in the caucus retreat, at which time we discussed this very issue of the ombudsman. There were several options that were discussed, and I can advise that we will be coming forward with a legislative proposal by the end of the summer.

Thank you for the question. We will be visiting approximately another nine or 10 communities, and I expect that will take place in the next two months. So as soon as that process is completed and we've heard from the public we will be developing policy.