Wendy Bisaro

Frame Lake

Statements in Debates

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 20)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you, colleagues.

Who will help our communities be adequately prepared for any and all emergencies when this position is gone? Who will help our residents, following a flood or a forest fire, to access the federal funding they are due when this position is gone?

In closing, our residents, our voters, through their elected local governments are telling us to delay this budget — that it lacks analysis, rationale and that the proper consultation was not done. Sounds kind of familiar, doesn’t it?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 19)

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a couple of questions. I wanted to revisit the issue of nursing positions and the reductions in nursing positions. I think we’re clear on what’s been reduced at the North Slave Correctional Centre, but as I mentioned in my question that I didn’t get to ask earlier, the information the social programs received indicated that there was a $22,000 reduction in a nurse position at SMCC. As the Minister stated earlier, there is no reduction in nursing positions at SMCC, but there is a reduction in a maintenance position. Could I get an explanation for this $22,000...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 19)

Thanks for the explanation, but I think I’m even more confused now. These dollars in Work Performed on Behalf of Others — are they an expense or a revenue?

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 19)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I give notice that on Monday, June 2, 2008, I will move the following motion.

I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Thebacha, that the Speaker be authorized to set such sitting days and hours as the Speaker, after consultation, deems fit to assist with the business before the House.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 19)

On page 7-42, the Protection Against Family Violence program figures: the ’08–09 estimates are some $30,000 less than the ’07–08 Revised Estimates and the Main Estimates. I’m just wondering if I could get an explanation as to why that particular activity or program has been reduced by $30,000. It’s a major focus of this government. It was a focus of our priorities when we set them in October. I’d appreciate some rationale for this reduction.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 19)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I’d like to share with all Members the comments in regard to the budget that I’ve been hearing from constituents. Not many are positive, unfortunately.

My constituents are asking for justification in public to explain the job reductions, to show why certain positions have been targeted. Most feel that the departments and/or managers did not do any analysis prior to determining which positions should go. Some decisions seemed to be based on a narrow view of personal opinion. Some used the eeny, meeny miny, moe method. Others took advantage of the opportunity...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 19)

We’ll have to start calling you Mr. Bisaro, I think.

I thank you for the answer. I guess, since it is my understanding that the government at this point can add funds into the budget, or can add items to the budget, I am wondering why the Minister wouldn’t consider a motion to amend the Mains to add those federal dollars into this ’08–09 budget.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 19)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’d like to get an explanation. The Community Justice committees and projects amount in ’08–09 is $1.371 million, in ’07–08 it was $1.866 million, and I suspect the reduction is the $433,000-some that we were discussing earlier. But of the $1.371 million earmarked for these contributions, I’d like to know how much of that amount is federal dollars, and if I could also know where those dollars are reflected in the budget.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 19)

Thank you. I’d like to close debate here. I need to respond to some of the comments that have been made by some of the other Members.

I think the Social Programs Committee agrees that the Arctic Tern facility cannot continue in its current state, with the number of inmates compared to the number of staff members. It’s totally inefficient.

However, the Minister, to me, seems to continue to see only one option for that facility, and that’s to close it. As was mentioned by my colleague Mr. Krutko, there’s a definite opportunity to re-profile that facility. I want to emphasize that I don’t believe...