Robert Hawkins

Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a couple things to say on this matter. First of all, I support this initiative that’s coming forward. When I was in Fort Good Hope last year you could see that the housing need has reached crisis state and the Housing Minister has constantly talked about the need for housing, sensible housing throughout the Northwest Territories. I’ve been to a number of smaller communities throughout my northern career of almost 30 years here and you can see that there is a troubling state. This is one positive solution to work towards helping make that problem I should say...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think that was one of the best answers I have heard from this Minister in my three years of the Assembly. He is talking about bridging the gap, addressing forced growth problems, cost of living and including the requests. So I guess, all of that said, everything I needed to hear about what it was we are bridging the gap on. So the bottom line is, will wage parity be addressed in this business plan? I can guarantee you, there aren’t many people who are against this problem. Will he address it? Will he tell this House today that he is going to ensure...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. While I heard a great response there, we put a high value on the work that they do, we rationalize it and support them, and we are working with them. So I guess my question now to the Minister is, how are we going to rationalize, support and respect the high value of service that they offer when there is a $500,000 plus wage parity gap between what their employees as a collective receive and what they should be paid in fair market value throughout other government agencies? How is the Minister going to address this gap? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we need long-term security because these organizations benefit all our people of the Northwest Territories. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Over the course of this Assembly, I have repeatedly sounded the alarm about the impending crisis in the frontline agencies brought about by the overwhelming administrative burden and a lack of adequate funding. During our pre-budget consultations last fall, I heard from many NGOs about their inability to offer competitive wages and benefits that are absolutely essential to recruiting and keeping qualified staff. I’ve also heard convincing cases from where many well-established organizations, that the time has come to recognize their long-standing contribution and...

Mr. Chairman, from the Minister’s point of view, is that $3.5 million lost if we treat it as an interim investment to complete the renovations? In two or three years, can he just come back and say to renovate the building at 100 percent, as he has pointed out, is $12 million. Can we take the $3.5 million off that end total and continue to renovate the whole building, or do we have to start from scratch and it’s the whole $12 million? I want to know if we are investing in a long-term solution, or are we just throwing that money away? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think at this time my last question would be what type of schedule are we talking about and what would the time frame be affecting potential future usage? If this $3.5 million, and it’s very unheard of to have any estimate to come with a 25 percent contingency, which tells me that people are nervous who put a number on it to begin with. But the fact is, when does that start? So when does the potentially three years of life start on this building? When do the day renos start or does it start when renos have finished? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Minister, I appreciate those answers and it certainly feels as if the decision to do this was made at the last minute, whereas now we’re forced with a really tough decision. Do we spend a lot of money to save a community building that truly is the heart of the community, or do we look like bad guys and say that we’re not getting good value for money? The fact is, are we doing the community a disservice, because if we spend $3.5 million and if we get who knows how many years, I mean, some are saying two, some are saying four, but even if we get $3.5 million at three...

Thank you, Madam Chair. On the matter of the motion before us now, I won’t be supporting it. I see that we often complain about not delivering housing and meeting housing needs in the communities, and this is certainly going to cut them right at the heels and the delivery of the programs. I don’t think we are doing it any favours. Either we are in the housing business or not. If we start cutting half of this and half of that, we won’t have anything left over.

As far as identifying headquarters positions versus district positions, I don’t find that very responsible. I am not comfortable with...

Thank you, Madam Chair. I will be voting with the motion to delete that amount. What concerns me on this is it seems like a lot of money for investigation to a problem that I am not sure is our fault. The bottom line is if we have assumed an asset through whatever process, did we assume the liability with that knowingly? If we did, I guess we are on the hook for this money. On the hook, I should say, for the cleanup. As far as I am concerned, I don’t think that’s been satisfied at this stage to say that it should be our fault. I think this should be taken back through proper channels to our...