Robert Hawkins

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to recognize a couple of constituents in the gallery. First off, I’d like to acknowledge and recognize Dawn Lacey who’s up there, I just saw her a few minutes ago. I’d also like to recognize Brian Heppelle who’s here to follow our proceedings today. Of course, special to my heart and to the Premier’s obviously, Melody McLeod, who has been a wonderful lady to me for so many years. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to present a petition dealing with the matter of lifeguard services at Fred Henne Park beach.

The petition contains 412 handwritten signatures and 312 electronic signatures of Northwest Territories, Canadian and American residents. The petitioners request that the Government of the Northwest Territories act responsibly by providing lifeguard services at Fred Henne Park beach in Yellowknife. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In 1990 the founder of Gold Corp – his name is Rob McEwen – knew he was sitting on a fortune of gold but just didn’t know how to get at it. So he changed the world in an extraordinary way by putting the question about how could he get help from the world to find his gold in the ground. It drew out, I think, 110 quality submissions, but it drew out over 1,000 submissions at large. In essence, Mr. McEwen of Gold Corp was saying, I have a problem; can the world help me to find my solution? It was all based on innovation and how he was inspired by a product called Linux...

Publicly, I’ve spoken about numbers of value of prize. It’s not for me to say per se what is the right prize amount, but I think the federal government needs to be a partner in this solution, because as I pointed out, and it’s even been cited by the federal government that it costs $1.9 million to run that Giant Mine site in perpetuity to protect that arsenic trioxide so it doesn’t spill into the environment.

My question now to the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources is: Does he see an opportunity here to engage in this broader discussion about a possible solution on innovation with...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The public expects leadership from this government and many times they just don’t see it. They get frustrated when they see the marionettes in the bureaucracy pulling the strings of the political puppets. Many Assemblies have spoken about passion and forcefulness about how they can do things better. Those Assemblies, through them have risen Ministers who try to claim they are the leaders, don’t worry, we are the decision-makers, not fence sitters, Mr. Speaker.

The public demand something and when there’s a clear choice, some of these Ministers would rather sit by and...

That is fine, Mr. Chairman, I just thought it was important because it was an issue that came up, and as I mentioned, it’s surprising how many seniors watch our proceedings and certainly read our Hansard. I guess they just love watching us and following us, so maybe that’s…(inaudible)… But that said, on a serious note, that was a real question brought forward and I thought it would be nice to hear it from the department and officials. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m not going to spend a lot of time asking a bunch of questions, but a particular issue that has arisen, and I thought it was well dealt with both in committee and certainly by the department, which was one of the questions posed by our seniors community, of course, is the issue of having to do medical examination. Although I’m familiar with the answer, and I’ve taken the answer and accepted it, I do think that there are some people who are curious on the public record. Those who watch at home and, believe it or not, actually a lot of seniors do watch our proceedings...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The probability is unreachable in any realm to put a bet on this, but let’s put it this way. With the likelihood of the statement as highlighted by the Minister that it’s written by the unit of the childhood family services area, they are, as we can only assume, the same unit that would have responded to the Auditor General of Canada in their written response represented by the department. Is it not probable that those are the same people writing the Minister’s statement and the response to the Auditor General? Thank you.

Thank you. We could only assume that the department would inform the Minister as to what they’re doing. So, that said, when would the Minister have been informed that the department is responding to the Auditor General and, as such, as they prepared the Minister’s statement that was read into the House February 25th, in other words, the pre-work in advance of the Minister’s statement before the Minister read it? I assume, as he said earlier, clearly, that he’s on top of his job and he’s a smart guy, he said that he would have understood the statement he was going to read. Thank you.

I’ve read that report. I don’t need to be schooled by the Minister. The facts lay simply before themselves. The Minister’s statement on February 25th, the language is practically identical to chapters 39, 41, 19, 42 and 80, as oh, things are wonderful, but yet if you read the Auditor General’s report pointing to those sections, it’s similar. It only draws one conclusion of the everyday person: the department doesn’t want to be responsible for these things so they’re downplaying them upfront and then they’re going to use the angle, oh, but don’t worry we’re on the file, so let’s not get too...