Debates of August 21, 2007 (day 14)

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Menicoche.

Further Return To Question 171-15(6): Great Bear River Bridge Project

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I want to assure to the Member that the money that was designated for the Bear River Bridge did not get reallocated somewhere else. Well, the money in the bridge program stayed in the bridge program for our roads north up the Mackenzie Valley, Mr. Speaker. Of the $25 million from the Bear River Bridge, that had to be reallocated to three other bridges on our Mackenzie Valley winter road system, Mr. Speaker, and that’s where the allocations got reallocated to. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Once again, the Bear River Bridge is a priority in this government and we’ll work towards it and be constructive about finding funding opportunities and funding arrangements to get that bridge built. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank you, colleagues, for allowing me a few moments of your time here this afternoon. It just seems like yesterday that Members were gathered here as Members of the 15th Legislative Assembly to be sworn in and it’s just amazing how fast four years goes by. Before we go our separate ways, some seeking re-election, others new pursuits, I just wanted to take a few moments to speak today about the experience of being a Member of this House, what it has meant to me and to look ahead to our territory’s future, which, gentlemen and ladies, looks very bright.

As many of you know, my interest in politics began when I came to work as a Page in the Legislative Assembly when I was 12 years old. The Page Program that brings youth from across the territory to our Assembly is a program and an opportunity for young people from our territory to be exposed to how government works. Mr. Speaker, when you take the Page Program, our Youth Parliament Program and the Speaker’s Outreach Program, I believe we’re doing some great things when it comes to getting our message out there and involving youth in the process.

The new legislative broadcast solution coming soon will open up proceedings of this House to residents across the territory. I’m looking forward to that happening, Mr. Speaker, and we should also look at opening up committee proceedings to this broadcast as well.

Mr. Speaker, I will be forever thankful to the constituents of Kam Lake who four years ago gave me the opportunity to represent them here in the Legislative Assembly. I’ve worked hard on their behalf. I feel blessed that I am able to serve them in the fashion that I do. I enjoy the work. Most of all, I enjoy helping people. Mr. Speaker, it’s the best part of the job when you know you’ve made a difference in somebody’s life. I look forward to continue the relationships I’ve established with my constituents as things move forward.

I want to thank my family and all of my supporters for their help, their guidance and their advice over the past four years, especially my wife, Amanda, and my colleagues are well aware spouses play a special part in our lives.

---Applause

They are special people who put up with the demands that the job of being an MLA puts on our home life and they deserve special recognition from us. The job of an MLA is certainly not a one man show, Mr. Speaker. In order to be effective and to get anywhere in this building, you need to work well with other Members. You need to respect others and their views.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to say it’s been a pleasure working with all of my colleagues over the past four years and I wanted to especially mention my neighbours in the House, Mrs. Groenewegen and Mr. Pokiak. They’re both very great neighbours, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you.

---Applause

Mr. Speaker, the opportunity to travel to other communities is something that has been especially enlightening for me. I’ve enjoyed meeting people in Inuvik, Hay River, Tuktoyaktuk, Fort Smith, Behchoko, Norman Wells, Tulita, Colville Lake, Deline, Sachs Harbour, Paulatuk, Lutselk’e, Tsiigehtchic, Fort Resolution, Gameti and Whati. Mr. Speaker, this territory is a vast and beautiful land and its people are truly our greatest resource.

I want to express my thanks to our outgoing Premier, Mr. Handley, who has been a very hard working and dedicated Premier and a person who I've learned a great deal from, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Handley. I do wish both the Premier and his wife, Theresa, well in all their future endeavours.

Mr. Dent, you and I have certainly had some disagreements over the past four years. However, what happens in this House should remain all about having a job to do, and I do mean that. I have a tremendous amount of respect for Mr. Dent's steadfastness and his ability to stand up day in and day out and defend his departments.

And they need defending.

Whether they need it or not.

I want to wish Mr. Dent, his wife, Eileen, and son, Tyler, all the best as he enters a new chapter in his life.

To my colleague Mr. Bell, who is widely rumoured to be pursuing other goals, I want to thank you for your advice and your guidance over the past year. Mr. Bell and I have known each other since we were teenagers, and when I was elected in 2003, it was a source of great comfort knowing that I had someone here who knew what it was like to be a Regular Member. I want to thank him for being a friend a colleague and I'm sure wherever life takes Mr. Bell, he'll be met with success.

Hear! Hear!

I wish him and his family all the best in whatever it is he decides to do.

Mr. Speaker, to my friend Mr. Braden, who is pursuing a new path in life as well, I want to thank him for all of his sage advice and guidance over the past four years. As Members will know, Mr. Braden and I sit next to each other in committee and it's very interesting how the two of us got along so well and it's perhaps because we're both there at 9 o'clock every morning.

Hear! Hear!

Bravo! Bravo!

---Applause

---Laughter

Mr. Braden, you will certainly be missed and I'll miss you.

I want to thank you all for your hard work in committees, especially Mr. Braden and his hard work in committees especially on the Liquor Act and the WCB legislation. Good luck and best wishes to you, Bill and Val and your family, as you venture off in a new direction.

To my other colleagues, I want to thank you for helping me be an effective Member of this Assembly. I'd like to wish you all the best in the upcoming election, those of you who are seeking re-election. Should my constituents give me another opportunity to represent them once again in this House, I look forward to working with you again after the election.

Our work here as Members is made so much easier by the dedicated staff we have in this building. I want to thank each and every staff member for all of their help the past four years. The Clerk of the House, Mr. Tim Mercer, is to be commended for the first-rate staff and services that this building has offered Members…

---Applause

…all the way from the Clerk's office, research, the library staff, security, corporate services, the cleaners and the cafeteria staff.

I just wanted to also thank my constituency assistant, Lynda Comerford, for her four years of dedicated service to my office. She has been truly a great employee and I'm very lucky to have had her as my constituency assistant.

Mr. Speaker, I'm very honoured to have been a partner in governing this great territory the past four years. The future is very bright. As a territory, we have so much to look forward to. We are moving ahead on devolution and resource revenue sharing negotiations and, as we know, this government has done a great deal in advancing our position and we are close to getting a deal done.

The next government is going to need to find peace with our regions and our aboriginal governments. We cannot afford to have differences that lead to inaction. We need to work together to achieve results for our people. We cannot work in isolation. We must work with one another because we need one another. We need to examine what public government is going to look like here in the Northwest Territories 10 years from now, 20 years from now. Mr. Speaker, my advice would be that we should not deviate from our current consensus style of government until all outstanding issues of land claims and self-governments are dealt with. My fear is any shift toward party politics will further alienate the Government of the Northwest Territories. Mr. Speaker, we will need to take a look at reinventing ourselves and including everyone in a discussion that will lead to a Government of the Northwest Territories that everyone will, and should be, comfortable with.

As the government moves forward, there are issues that will be need to be addressed. The first order of business for the new government should be a zero-based budgeting exercise so we get a grip and a handle on how effective our current spending patterns are. Also, the work must continue on the review of boards and agencies. The 16th Assembly must conclude this important piece of work. Also, work will need to be done to develop a new corporate capital planning program with more accurate cost and time estimates.

Mr. Speaker, the environment, of course, should and will be front and centre, with new legislation, hopefully coming in the 16th Assembly, like SARA, the Wildlife Act, and hopefully these things will be moved forward. The next government will again have to balance resource development and opportunities for our residents with protecting our environment. Mr. Speaker, I'm a big supporter of the whistleblower legislation that is coming forward and should be pursued by the next government. The next government will also have to come up with a plan to tackle addictions. We need to put more resources in place that will benefit those needing the help. Programming and education should be the primary focus of the next government's dealing with our addictions issues. The next government will need to continue to address the high cost of living and look for ways to help residents cope with that cost of living.

Certainly challenges lie ahead, Mr. Speaker; that is true. But our economy is strong; our people are getting stronger, and we must look to the future with great interest. The future of this territory and our people require all of us working together to ensure that opportunities are provided for anyone and everyone who desires them.

Thank you again, Members, for your indulgence this afternoon. Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Replies to opening address. The honourable Premier, Mr. Handley.

Mr. Speaker, I request unanimous consent to return to item number 5, recognition of visitors in the gallery.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm honoured to recognize some guests who have flown and driven here for the NWT Dog Sledding Symposium this past weekend. None of them travelled by dog team, by the way, I don't think. Mr. Speaker, with us today are Dr. Caroline Griffiths, a doctor in veterinary medicine from Colorado; Dr. Tim Hunt from Marque, Michigan; his wife, Mary Hunt; and Cate Stronge from Logan, Utah. I don't see Chuck Gould who is from Minnesota. We lost him somewhere. Also, Carol Beck who travelled in from Kam Lake.

---Laughter

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For four consecutive elections and nearly 16 years I've been honoured to be selected by the constituents of Frame Lake to represent them in this Legislative Assembly. To this day, I am awed to have had that level of trust. Mr. Speaker, I want to make it very clear that even though I've got 16 years under my belt, I have no intention of trying to win the record for the amount of time on replies to opening address.

---Applause

I don't like to be called the oldest Member of the Assembly, because by age that's not necessarily true. I prefer the term "Dean of the Assembly," and I hope I can demonstrate some of the…(inaudible)…of that position.

Mr. Speaker, this system of government that we have is unique. It is significantly different than what most Canadians, in fact what most democratic societies, are used to. There are some who don't think it works well; but it works as it should. Over the 16 years that I've been here, I've seen quite a few changes, so I know that it is evolving.

Mr. Speaker, while I'm moving on and it will be up to subsequent assemblies to determine what consensus government looks like, I would like to take this time to reflect a bit on the operation of consensus government.

When I first got elected, I thought that we should move to incorporate some of the trappings of party politics to improve accountability. After just a while in the Assembly, I came to realize that there is some significant advantage to the system that we call consensus. In no other government with ministerial responsibility to a House, do non-government Members have so much power; so much information about how and when government decisions are being made. And that's an important point and I think it's one that many people, probably because they're used to our system, forget.

I had been active in party politics in the South before moving to the Territories. In fact, I was very active in my university for years so I understood how the federal and provincial governments worked. After getting elected here, I was astounded at how much information Regular Members were given. Nowhere else in Canada do Regular Members get to see a budget before it was presented to a House, and have the opportunity to press the Minister of Finance to make changes before it was introduced. Nowhere else did Regular Members have the opportunities to propose changes to legislation while it was under consideration, like we do here. In no other jurisdiction can Members support the government on one issue and the next day oppose the government on another. This is still true today. Other than Nunavut, there is no jurisdiction in Canada that comes close to giving non-government Members the power and independence and how they represent their constituents than they have in our system of government.

Hear! Hear!

As I said, Mr. Speaker, I think it's because we are used to it that so many of us forget it. But when I talk to Members of provincial legislative assemblies, they are astounded to hear about the power of Regular Members. When I tell elected officials from other jurisdictions that when I was Regular Member I worked with other Members to get the government to make significant changes to budgets, like adding $1 million to a program that all Regular Members agreed should be a priority, they're incredulous. In a party system, that could never happen. Members would not be able to vote according to whether a proposal or legislation was good for their constituency; all votes would be controlled by party discipline. I still don't think we need that in our small jurisdiction. We need to be able to work together in the interest of our constituents.

Some have called for open committee meetings, and I agree that government should do as much as possible in public, but there has to be some balance, of course. Budget issues will always have to be considered behind closed doors or it would be impossible for the government to disclose all the information.

So, Mr. Speaker, I have no doubt that our consensus system will continue to evolve over time. Subsequent governments will make decisions about what it should look like. Right now, the system we have isn’t perfect, but in my opinion it’s better than the alternatives I see across Canada.

Mr. Speaker, being a Member of this Assembly has been a great experience. Over the years, I have chaired and participated in many committees. I am proud of the achievements. There has been a tremendous amount of legislation that has been passed over the last 16 years, way too much to mention, but our human rights legislation is a very good model for the rest of Canada and I am proud of the role I played as a member of committee sitting on the other side and seeing that come forward.

The same can be said for the Protection Against Family Violence Act. Those two acts speak to what this Legislative Assembly and past Legislative Assemblies have seen as important in protecting the rights of individuals and those who may not have access to protection in other ways.

I have also been very pleased, Mr. Speaker, to be on Cabinet for two terms. Over the years, I have had a lot of different responsibilities. I am especially proud of the time I have had as Minister of Education, Culture and Employment. What I found really interesting in reading a study not long ago, Mr. Speaker, is that in Canada the average span of time that a person spends on Cabinet as an active Member in Canada is about four and a half years. So typically, a Cabinet Minister doesn’t have a long tenure, doesn’t have a long life as a Member of government. However, I have been really lucky in that I got to spend four years in the mid-90s as Minister of Education and then come back in this term as Minister of Education. So some of the changes that were instituted early on in the ‘90s, we are getting to see the results for now.

One of the most critical decisions that have been made by government over the years was to proceed with grade extensions. It was a controversial decision when it was proposed in the early ‘90s. There were significant arguments about whether or not they actually provide a good level of education in the smallest communities. But we are seeing now, Mr. Speaker, that it does work. We are seeing the grad rates have increased over the last 12 to 15 years to the same levels that what took between 30 and 50 years in other areas of Canada. We still have a long ways to go, but, Mr. Speaker, we have demonstrated that we are on the right track. We have seen tremendous growth in participation.

I am also really pleased that we have been able to achieve significant changes to the Income Support Program. Again, this is a program that provides assistance to those who are most in need in our society and helps to demonstrate the compassion this government has for those who are dealing with poverty issues.

Mr. Speaker over the years, I haven’t always been able to resolve issues for constituents, but on many occasions a quick phone call has resolved things while a few have taken longer. I have to say that my biggest regret in deciding not to run again revolved around two outstanding issues that have not been resolved: the transfer of the Con lands to the city and resolution of the infrastructure problems in Northland.

Mr. Speaker, I know that the Minister of MACA is interested in resolving the Con and Rycon situation. I know that residents there want ownership of their lots and I hope we will see the transfer process started before the election, but I know it’s going to take longer than four weeks to get done so it will not happen during the life of this government.

Mr. Speaker, I have also been very pleased by the recent actions of the City of Yellowknife to help the residents of Northland to develop a plan to resolve their water and sewer problems. I can only hope that the next MLA to represent Frame Lake will be able to see a joint response between this government, the city and residents to resolve that issue.

Mr. Speaker, in 16 years in this position, I owe a lot of people thanks. I have been here for so long I couldn’t possibly list them all by name or I would be getting close to that three hour and 20 minute record. Obviously, in a system like ours, you don’t do the work here alone. I have counted on the assistance and help of colleagues. It has been a tremendous experience over the years working on different committees with Regular Members, who worked, as I have, for two terms with Cabinet. I have really enjoyed the last four years working with this Cabinet and wish all of the Members well in their future for those who are seeking re-election and those who are like me and are moving onto other challenges.

I have also enjoyed a tremendous amount of support from the staff in this Assembly. Going back 16 years, there has been almost complete turnover in staff. I have seen almost every position filled by different faces, but the competency and the level of support either by the Clerk’s offices, research and library staff, administrative staff, they have all provided tremendous support to me and to others over the years and I thank them for that.

In the eight years I have been Minister I have also found that the public service is incredibly dedicated. I know it’s too often too easy for the public to take shots at the public service, but I know how many of my staff show up for work at 6:00 or 7:00 in the morning often seven days a week. I have been proud to have the people support me in the departments who have put in those extra hours and make sure things are done when they should be. Whether it’s clerical staff, directors, ADMs, DMs, I have been impressed by the work ethic we have by the public service. I would say that our public service in the North is second to none.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to take a moment to say a special thanks to those who have worked in my office while I was Minister. My executive assistants, especially over the last four years; Katherine Robinson and Alison Welch; the executive secretaries, Kathy Wind and Heather Bibby. Over the 16 years I have had more constituency assistants than I could mention, but Pearl Benyk has been the one who has been most recent and has lasted the longest. I thank her for the work that she’s done in helping me keep my constituents informed about the work that we do here.

Mr. Speaker, to be effective in this job, you need not only the support from your colleagues, constituents and staff, but even more you need support from your family. Mr. Speaker, it’s probably no secret to people who know Eileen, but my wife has never really been a fan of me being a politician.

---Laughter

Pretty well every election, she has said that she prefer that I not run. But once the race was on and the papers were filed, she was always a formidable part of the campaign team. I appreciate that.

Not only has she helped during campaigns, once elected, Eileen has always supported my political activities. She even had to take over running my business. That meant she had to run her jewellery store as well as operate a staff intensive 24/7 operation like a radio station. Then, after she started running two businesses, we had a son. So now she had three jobs and all of them full time. While, as she occasionally pointed out, just occasionally, I only had one job.

---Laughter

And this one job meant that I travelled a lot. So I wasn’t there when Tyler was sick and she still had the two businesses to run. It eventually got to the point where Eileen decided something had to go. Thankfully, it wasn’t me.

---Laughter

---Applause

It’s early!

I appreciate that she stuck by that decision. But her jewellery store, the business she started, had to be sold after 18 years of being her baby. Our son, Tyler, has also paid a price for my public service. I have missed a lot of his activities over the years and haven’t been there on many occasions when he needed me.

So, Mr. Speaker, I owe a deep debt of gratitude not only to my constituents and colleagues here, but to my family who have supported me to do this job. That’s a debt that I could never adequately repay, but it's time that I started trying. So after waiting 27 years, Eileen has told me that it would be a good start for me to finish the basement and that’s where I will start.

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure after the basement what the future holds for me, but I expect there will always be some element of public service involved. In spite of my white hair, I still feel that I am young enough to enjoy another career or two and Yellowknife is home. With all the opportunities that we have in the North, whatever I get involved in, I am sure we will be in the North and, undoubtedly, Mr. Speaker, it will be something interesting. Thank you.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Dent. I am quite sure I noticed all your colleagues evaluating your performance when you say you are leaving with only two unresolved issues.

Ohh!

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to provide the Report on the Review of Bill 6, Workers’ Compensation Act.

The Standing Committee on Governance and Economic Development is pleased to report on its review of Bill 6, the Workers’ Compensation Act.

The committee conducted public hearings on Bill 6 in Yellowknife on April 18 to 19, 2007; in Fort Smith on April 23rd; in Fort Resolution on April 24th; and in Hay River on April 25th. The clause-by-clause review of the bill took place on August 14th. The committee would like to thank all of the witnesses who made presentations or provided written submissions and, in particular, the worker's advisor, Mr. Colin Baile, who undertook a comprehensive analysis of the bill and provided detailed comments on several provisions.

----Applause

Mr. Baile’s comments ultimately led to many of the 37 amendments the committee brought forward during its clause-by-clause review with the Minister.

Because of the unusually large number of detailed issues raised during the hearings, the committee felt it necessary to conduct follow-up meetings with the Minister and representatives of the Governance Council, the Workers’ Compensation Board (WCB), the office of the worker's advisor, and the Appeals Tribunal to attempt to work out solutions jointly. The committee chose to do this in a workshop format, as the usual formal committee hearing process does not lend itself well to exploratory discussions. These meetings took place on June 4th and 5th in Yellowknife. Committee representatives took part in a follow-up meeting on June 19th with the NWT and Nunavut Ministers, the chair of our counterpart Nunavut committee, the chair of the Governance Council, and WCB officials. We are pleased that, through this process, we were able to come to a consensus on several amendments to the bill that we believe will make substantial improvements to the workers’ compensation system.

Although there was insufficient time for a full second round of public hearings on the amendments to the bill, the committee did advise employer and employee representatives of the two major changes under consideration that were likely to have a direct impact on their constituents. These changes, which are explained in more detail later in this report, concerned the structure of the Appeals Tribunal, and the standard of causation that must be met for a worker's injury or disease to be compensable. We would like to thank the Union of Northern Workers, the NWT Federation of Labour, the Public Service Alliance of Canada, and the NWT Construction Association for their written submissions in response to our letters.

Over the last several years, Members have participated in many discussions with WCB officials, Ministers and, most recently, the Auditor General of Canada, about communications and other operational concerns that we believe ultimately originate with the corporate culture of the organization. Although Bill 6 as introduced did include a preamble, the committee felt strongly that a purpose statement, which is contained in the body of the act itself, was necessary. During the clause-by-clause review of the bill, the committee moved, and the Minister concurred with, amendments to delete the preamble and replace it with a reworked statement of purpose. In addition to the principles already contained in the preamble, the new purpose section adds the concepts of openness, fairness, compassion, respect, and accountability, which we believe are critical for the workers’ compensation system. While it is impossible to legislate corporate culture, the committee believes that a strong purpose statement at the outset of the act could go a long way toward guiding the attitudes and actions of all persons involved in the workers’ compensation system. We urge all officials and employees to consider this statement carefully and to make every effort to align their work with it.

Also, in considering the purpose of the act, the committee did not believe that the term “safety fund” accurately captured the reason for the fund’s existence. During the clause-by-clause review, the committee and Minister agreed to amend the bill to change the name to the “Workers’ Protection Fund.”

The issue of governance, and in particular the respective roles and responsibilities of the Legislative Assembly, the Minister, the Governance Council and the WCB administration, has been a source of confusion and frustration for many years. Although the workers’ compensation system must be allowed to function at arm’s length from government, it is an important public body and needs to be accountable not only to its stakeholders, but also to the Minister and the Legislative Assembly. While Bill 6 did go some way to better explain the roles of the Governance Council and administration, the committee did not believe it adequately addressed the need to clarify the role and authority of the Minister. The Minister himself expressed concerns about this during the public hearing process.

During the clause-by-clause review of the bill, the committee proposed, and the Minister agreed, to amendments giving the Minister explicit powers to direct the Governance Council to consider any issue that is, or could be, the subject of a policy, and to require the Governance Council to report on any matter requested by the Minister within the time specified. The intent of these new provisions is not to allow the Minister to intervene in individual cases, but to allow the Minister to provide very high-level direction to the Governance Council, and to have access to information needed to meet accountability requirements.

Other governance-related amendments agreed to during the clause-by-clause review of the bill: removed the requirement for the commission’s headquarters to be in Yellowknife; reinstated the requirement for the Governance Council to establish a consultation process for its policies; clarified the provision respecting the information the commission must provide to the committee on its annual report; and added a requirement for the Minister to table the worker's advisor's reports.

As mentioned earlier in the report, the committee advised several employer and employee stakeholder groups of its intent to consider a change to the provision that set out the standard of causation that determines which injuries and diseases can be compensated. Subsection 13(3) of Bill 6 as introduced provided that an injury or disease that appears to have more than one cause and that is prevalent in the general population is only compensable if work is the “dominant cause” of the disease. Members were concerned that this would leave some workers without any compensation where work played a significant, but not dominant, role in their condition. The committee proposed a more inclusive provision based on the approach taken in several other Canadian jurisdictions, including Alberta, Ontario, Quebec, Saskatchewan and the Yukon.

None of the stakeholders contacted raised objections to this change. The NWT Construction Association, Union of Northern Workers and NWT Federation of Labour all expressed support for it in their written submissions.

During the clause-by-clause review of the bill, the committee proposed, and the Minister agreed, to an amendment that removes the concept of “dominant cause” and provides instead that diseases and injuries will be compensated as long as work contributed in a material way.

The committee proposed, and the Minister agreed to, several other amendments to improve the provisions on claims and compensation. Four of these amendments removed the term “invalid” from the bill, as this word is considered by many to be outdated and offensive. Another amendment reinstated a provision in the existing Workers’ Compensation Act that establishes a presumption that certain severe injuries, such as the loss of both hands or the loss of sight in both eyes, constitute a permanent and total disability. This provision had been left out of Bill 6 to avoid perpetuating negative stereotypes of persons with disabilities. While the committee appreciates the intent of avoiding negative stereotypes, we believe this concern is outweighed by the benefit of making it easier for people with very severe injuries to get compensation.

A further amendment establishes a clearer process for resolving conflicting medical opinions, which have been at the heart of many disputes between claimants and the WCB. The amendment requires that the Governance Council establish a policy that sets out the procedure for seeking third party medical opinions; provides that the selection of the third party physician and questions to be determined by that person are based on written submissions from the medical advisor, the worker’s health care provider and the worker; provides that both the medical advisor and worker’s health care provider may make submissions to the third party physician; and provides that the worker will be examined by the third party physician when requested by the worker.

The committee also brought forward amendments: to strengthen the provision that makes it an offence to obstruct a claim; to require that the commission provide financial information to claimants who request lump sum payments in the place of a pension, and offer to pay for them to obtain independent financial advice; to change the requirement that workers cooperate with “suitable productive” employment to “suitable meaningful” employment; and, to ensure that claimants receive the full amount of any pain and suffering awards ordered by a court before the WCB recovers its own legal costs. The Minister concurred with all of these amendments. At the Minister’s request, a further amendment was made to exclude mental stress as a result of labour relations matters from the list of compensable injuries, in keeping with recent case law on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask Mr. Ramsay if he would carry on with this report.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As indicated at the outset of this report, the committee advised stakeholders in late June that it was considering a change to the structure of the Appeals Tribunal. The Ministers currently make appointments to the tribunal with the requirement that there be a balance between members recommended by employer representatives and members recommended by employee representatives. The Ministers also appoint public interest representatives. Appeals are heard by panels of three, which must include at least one member from each of these three constituencies.

Over the last several years, Members have heard several complaints about the length of time required for appeals to work their way through the system. The committee understands that one of the reasons for these delays is the difficulty in scheduling hearings that require the availability of three panel members who live in different communities and have other employment. A solution proposed by the worker's advisor was to shift to a model where only one adjudicator hears each case, similar to what is currently in place under the Human Rights Act as well as several workers’ compensation appeals tribunals across Canada. In this system, tribunal members would have to be appointed based on professional qualifications, rather than the recommendation of labour or employer groups to avoid perceived or actual bias.

In response to the committee’s letter, the NWT Construction Association expressed support for this change. The NWT Federation of Labour, Union of Northern Workers and Public Service Alliance of Canada all stated their opposition to the change, and requested that the current system, which they view as more balanced and transparent, remain in place. As alternatives to changing the appeals system, they suggested appointing a full-time chair, better resourcing the tribunal with staff support, and appointing more members, possibly including a vice-chair. The Public Service Alliance further suggested that the GNWT should relax restrictions that make it difficult for its employees to participate on tribunals.

After carefully weighing the comments of all the stakeholders who provided their views on the structure of the Appeals Tribunal, the committee decided to pursue the sole adjudicator model. The committee proposed, and the Minister agreed, to an amendment that requires the chair of the tribunal to designate one member of the tribunal to hear each appeal, while allowing the chair to convene a panel of three members if the chair considers this more appropriate, for example, if a case is especially complex. The committee and Minister also agreed to amendments adding transitional provisions for the change from the existing tribunal to the new one, and requiring that the chair and vice-chair of the tribunal be appointed by the Minister in consultation with the Nunavut Minister rather than on the recommendation of the tribunal. The committee intended to make an additional motion to amend the bill to remove the requirement that the Minister appoint tribunal members representing the respective interests of the public, employers and employees, with a requirement that tribunal members have either five years' experience as a member of an administrative tribunal or court, or five years' good standing as a member of a law society in Canada. However, as the Minister advised the committee that he would not concur with this amendment, the committee did not pursue the motion at that time.

Many of the delays in the appeals process are outside the control of the tribunal itself and involve, for example, difficulties scheduling the parties or expert advice. One factor that is within the tribunal’s control is the length of time required for decisions to be rendered once all the evidence has been heard. During the clause-by-clause review of the bill, the committee moved, and the Minister agreed to, an amendment which will require the tribunal to render its decisions within 90 days of a hearing.

Clause 131 of Bill 6 as introduced would have allowed the Governance Council to order the Appeals Tribunal to rehear a matter more than once until the Governance Council was satisfied that the tribunal had properly or reasonably applied policy and legislation. The committee was concerned this provision would have compromised the independence of the tribunal and could have put some appeals into an endless cycle of re-hearings with no prospect for a final decision. The committee and the Minister therefore agreed to an amendment that limits the number of re-hearings the Governance Council may direct to one.

Also in keeping with the need to reinforce the independence of the tribunal, the committee and Minister agreed to delete a provision that would have allowed the tribunal to ask the commission to determine whether a Governance Council policy applied in a given case. This type of determination should be made by the tribunal itself.

Finally, the committee also passed two motions to amend the gill to remove the one-year limitation periods for requesting reviews and appeals of commission decisions. The committee was of the view that these limitation periods would cause unnecessary hardship to some claimants. The Minister did not concur with these motions.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask the deputy chair of the Governance and Economic Development committee, Mr. Villeneuve, if he could conclude the report.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Villeneuve.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. During the public hearing in Hay River, Mayor John Pollard voiced concerns with clause 160 of the Bill, which continues the requirement for municipal governments to notify the WCB of building permits for projects in excess of an amount prescribed by regulation, which is currently set at $10,000. In his view, this provision places an excessive burden on municipalities. When the committee raised this issue with the WCB, they replied that they had not received any complaints from municipal governments that the provision is too onerous, but that a potential solution would be an amendment to the regulations to raise the amount that triggers the requirement for the municipalities to notify the commission of a building permit. The committee urges the Governance Council to initiate discussions with the NWT Association of Communities to determine what, if any, changes should be made.

Another concern raised at the public hearing in Hay River was the commission’s involvement in safety, both because of the additional cost to employers, and the potential for conflict when the same body that provides safety advice to employers is also investigating compliance and enforcing the act. As safety matters are addressed in other legislation and fall outside the scope of this bill, the committee did not investigate the possibility of amendments on this issue, but did research practices in other jurisdictions. We found that WCBs across the country have a mandate for safety education and promotion, and also have an investigation and enforcement role in British Columbia, New Brunswick, Quebec and the Yukon. As this issue is of concern to at least some employers, the committee encourages the government to initiate consultations with stakeholders on the appropriateness of continuing to have the safety investigation and enforcement function remain with the commission.

Bill 6 is the culmination of several weeks of work…

Years.

Years of work, sorry, which began in the 14th Assembly with the Act Now report and first set of amendments to the act. The committee believes that the bill as amended represents a significant improvement over the existing legislation and will pave the way to addressing many longstanding concerns of employers, workers and Members, including those highlighted in the 2006 Auditor General’s report.

During the clause-by-clause review, the committee and Minister agreed to four amendments of a minor and technical nature in addition to the amendments already referenced earlier in this report.

Following the clause-by-clause review, a motion was carried to report Bill 6, Workers’ Compensation Act, as amended, as ready for consideration by Committee of the Whole.

This concludes the committee’s opening comments on Bill 6. Individual Members may have questions and comments as we proceed.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That concludes the report of the Standing Committee on Governance and Economic Development on the review of Bill 6, Workers’ Compensation Act. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, that Committee Report 5-15(6) be received by the Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole for consideration. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The motion is on the floor. The motion is in order. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Committee Report 5-15(6) is received by the Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole for consideration.

---Applause

The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 93(4) and have Committee Report 5-15(6) moved into Committee of the Whole for today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the following document entitled Take a Kid Trapping Program Report 2005-2007. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I give notice that on Thursday, August 23, 2007, I will move the following motion: Now therefore I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Yellowknife South, that Mr. Ted Hughes be approved by the Legislative Assembly as a sole adjudicator.

I will call Committee of the Whole to order. What is the wish of committee today? Mr. Lafferty.

Mahsi, Madam Chair. The committee wishes to consider Bill 15, Liquor Act, and Bill 6, Workers’ Compensation Act. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Is committee agreed?

Agreed.