Déclarations dans les débats

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 4th Session (day 18)

I can only imagine what that will now cost.

---Applause

As you can see, the confusion continues. Mr. Speaker, we don’t have an endless pot of money, and I still think that the program initiative had foresight for the future as to what should really be going on. Mr. Speaker, ultimately our government should be supporting self-sufficiency and self-reliance, and having people go to one centre, a service centre of excellence to help people move forward on the initiatives that they need to get on their own feet was the best idea possible. It’s unusual for government to come up with a clear and simple...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 4th Session (day 18)

I appreciate the answer not to my question, but it was an interesting answer which speaks to the long-term problem. I’m glad we heard that that’s the long-term focus. But the question really comes down to is there a zero tolerance policy that the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs adheres to, which is if someone’s a squatter, they have to remove their cabin or whatever it may be and then they must apply in that process.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 4th Session (day 18)

If I heard the Minister correctly, he’s suggesting that the government is enforcing that the squatters now remove their recreational facility, if I may define it -- I don’t know what they put out there -- and had them go through the normal channels like everyone else. Is that the case? Because that is the concern from constituents in Yellowknife Centre who have cabins out there.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 4th Session (day 18)

I appreciate the Minister trying to stay away from specifics as well, only to avoid identifying the individual constituents, because there are only a few. She says there’s an ongoing day-to-day process. What type of strategy does the Department of Health and Social Services have, say, for example, if we’re always sending people to Edmonton to get an ear checked, a specialized service? Or for example, if we’re always sending people to get an eye specialization. Those type of things. What type of monitoring process do we have set up and organized that someone tracks this and says, well, we’ve...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 4th Session (day 18)

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Minister for making sure that question will be answered as well in the coming correspondence. I just want to make sure that the Minister is well aware that this is a territorial initiative, not a Yellowknife initiative. There are companies, construction, various other types of service type industries getting on board with the Certificate of Recognition through the Territory whether they are in Hay River, Norman Wells, Inuvik. It is quite a broad program involving large and small businesses. Is the Minister aware that it is a territorial program that several...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 4th Session (day 18)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In the October session I asked questions regarding the COR program, the Certificate of Recognition to the Minister of Public Works about implementing it into the territorial tendering process which would help raise standards in our tendering process. We would also get better and more proficient tenders that proceed on our government projects. Mr. Speaker, at the time, I had inquired with the Minister if he would look into that process to see if we could move down that road as, for example, the Yukon has, and start with large projects and work our way down to the smaller...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 4th Session (day 18)

I’ll agree with the Minister that there was an error in the report and that was the decision to transfer it back. I heard from LHO people that this was starting to straighten out. I heard from people on income support who were going through their housing application process that it made sense after a while. I heard from people administering the program that it was really at the end of the day an administration and communication problem was to make sure that the little boxes that got checked at income support fed on through to the folks at LHOs. Was the administration problem and communication...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 4th Session (day 18)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My oral questions today will be following my Member’s statement: the issue with the fact that income support is now transferring back the administration of the housing to the LHO.

I appreciate my colleague from Hay River South who stood up to speak against it. She clearly announced this morning that she would, so I knew she’d let my statement go before hers. But one thing she didn’t talk about is the fact that we’ve got 14 positions out there that were in this original transfer and the fact that it cost $1.5 million to carry this on. So she must be in favour of the fact...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 4th Session (day 18)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I stand today probably as the only voice for common sense to express my concern and opposition for the administration of the public housing where they’re going to switch it back from income support to the LHOs.

As we all know, there are challenges with any program, and when the government decided to switch the program over, the administration from Housing to ECE, it caused quite an uproar. Mr. Speaker, it also cost in the range of $1.5 million at that date to undertake that project. Mr. Speaker, now the government has announced, on page 14 of the budget...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 4th Session (day 17)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will not argue that the number one issue here is to protect to make sure that the livelihood of the caribou exists for people for many generations beyond, if not forever, but the fact is the board is the one that needs to be making the decision. Has the GNWT done anything to help support this board so they can meet in a timely way? Because this issue just didn’t fall in their lap in December or this month of January. This is an issue that’s been building for some time. So what has the GNWT done to support them? Thank you.