Louis Sebert

Thebacha

Statements in Debates

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 44)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We do provide support under the Rural and Remote Housing program.

Just a little bit further onto what our president and CEO had mentioned on the previous question, we are also closely working with the federal government to hopefully finalize shortly. We are very encouraged with the discussions on our bilateral agreements moving forward, and the co-investment fund, to see how we can all work together to address getting some new builds and building infrastructure in the communities as well. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 44)

Yes, we'd be prepared to do that, and also, to appear in front of committee if requested. Thank you.

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 44)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I can advise that three land specialist positions have been filled or about to be filled, one in Inuvik, one in Fort Simpson starting November 5, 2018, and the third will be starting in North Slave on November 13, 2018. Thank you.

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 44)

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I know this is a long-standing concern to certainly the bar and bench. I can advise that we are working on a business case. That should be available by the end of November, at which point we could appear in front of committee and share that with them. Thank you.

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 44)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. While not exactly like Guthrie House, it really is based on the Guthrie model. As I mentioned, my understanding is the staff, who are, of course, all, I would assume, from the community, have seemingly bought into this concept of changing the facility over. No, I don't think I've received any direct communications from the town one way are the other on this, but I would imagine the town would be aware of it since all of the staff or virtually all of the staff that works there would be from the community. I think this issue has been raised in the House before, so it's not...

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 44)

I don't have a chart or something along those lines, but common sense tells me that it's not necessarily the length of the sentence that determines which designation you would fall into. It's probably the type of offence, the record, are likely a major part in deciding which category incoming inmates fall into. Thank you.

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 44)

Yes, certainly, as the security enhancements take place, we could house inmates that are higher security. Thank you.

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 44)

I think I'm told that that's to align the office security with the acceptable standards of 2018. Thank you.

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 44)

Yes. I think the point is that we want to make full utilization of the building, and we are not very sure of the numbers that might want to go there strictly for addictions. Perhaps Mr. Goldney could assist further. I think the important thing is: we are contemplating some large capital costs here, but we want to make sure that the building is utilized properly. Mr. Goldney.

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 44)

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Although minimum security generally are those that receive shorter sentences, that's quite correct. There certainly would be some, I imagine, that would be minimum security that would receive four months or more. Perhaps not that many, but there would be some. Thank you.