Sandy Lee

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions to the Minister are dealing with not only the court decision and dealing with the tribunal process, but a lot of other things that have to go in. Mr. Speaker, one of the things that Justice Schuler has said is that this WCB continues to deal with chronic condition as a temporary measure. They look at it as an injury. You’re going to get treated and if you don’t, well, too bad, so sad. You’re not going to be entitled to permanent partial disability or the same treatment as everybody else would. So I’d like to ask the Minister, as a Minister outside of this...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for the Minister responsible for WCB and it’s further to my Member’s statement. Mr. Speaker, the basic rule of WCB is to have an insurance system that keeps the employers and the employees out of the core system. It’s very unfortunate that workers have had to go through the judicial system to get some relief. But if any, especially those suffering from chronic pain conditions, thought that the Supreme Court of Canada decision Martin or the Supreme Court of the NWT decision Valic were going to give them any relief and justice, I’m not...

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a note of caution to the Minister. The provisions, as he’s just read to us, are pretty broad and it really leaves a lot of room to the judgment of the parks officers. That’s okay, but sometimes we may need narrow confines in the interest of the parks officers, so if anybody challenges them, they have the force of the law or regulations that they can refer to and present to the people who may object to being fined or charged because they are interfering with the natural environment. I guess this would be a whole new area for the parks officers to get into once...

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A few general comments and some questions, Mr. Chairman. Obviously it’s not too difficult to support the intent and the content of what this bill is trying to achieve. I think that I don’t know exactly what incident or incidents may have given a rise to this amendment in a way that it had to be done in a very expeditious manner. I wasn’t purview to the GED committee who probably got some more detailed information, but I can think of situations that have happened in Yellowknife at the Fred Henne Park last summer that could probably speak to the merits of such a bill...

...arts and crafts industries. Mr. Speaker, I am very serious. Look at this building; look at this Chamber. When people come and visit, what do they remember? I don’t think they remember who is sitting in these chairs. They remember the beautiful artwork. They do remember that. Everywhere we go around the world people talk about how beautiful this Legislature is, because it’s more than a building. It’s a work of art and why can we not create that in every place that we build? Technology is there and it’s about matter of will and matter of priority. It doesn’t have to necessarily be a...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I reject everything that the Minister has said in terms of how the board understands this decision. It’s very clear in the Minister’s answer last week that he’s going by what the board is saying. I’m telling you, this decision is saying that the board, the tribunal, the appeals tribunal, and the reassessment team screwed up. Okay? I mean, people have done wrong things. So I’d like to ask the Minister, because I could see that this could, I think the only way to fix this is the workers have their own lawyers to go through the process. So I’d like to ask the Minister if...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to be satisfied with that, but given the Minister’s answers in the House last week, which seems to suggest that this decision is not as far in depth and breadth as they should be, I think that this was quite a decision. The courts said that the board violated natural justice, basically saying the process was denied. The board failed to ask for rehearing when it should have. The board failed to give notice to Mr. Valic when it should have. A tribunal fettered its discretion, meaning it didn’t do its job. The tribunal did not look at the details...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I wish to speak in regards to the WCB’s policy toward those with chronic pain syndrome and the implication of the Valic decision.

Mr. Speaker, from my reading, this is a groundbreaking decision that requires substantial changes to the WCB policy and its failure to allow for permanent and partial disability to those with chronic pain syndrome at all levels of adjudication. It is not a good thing in administrative law, Mr. Speaker, to be told that a decision body was patently unreasonable, violated natural justice, it's fettered its discretion and it has...

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I may just squeeze in another question on that, could the Minister provide information on what in the Territorial Parks Act…I am understanding that this amendment will allow the parks officers to issue tickets, but I am understanding that they are going to do that on the basis of what’s already written or are we writing regulations that would state what the offending acts are; for too much partying for all hours or going to the next camp. I don’t know. Perhaps unruly or drunken behaviour, violence, either graded system of behaviours that would fall under these...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to accept that, but I have to be alarmed by that because we were told by the officials from the department saying that we’re getting calls from all over the place, but none of them work, none of them will work, we’re not going to look at it. That is a very irresponsible thing for the government to do for a $200 million project. I need an objective analysis to make sure that we’re spending $200 million well. So would the Minister tender this project? At least do a request for proposals. What does he have to lose? If this project could stand on its own, it...