Debates of August 21, 2007 (day 14)

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. It is time, Mrs. Groenewegen, to have a report of the Standing Committee on Governance and Economic Development, report on Bill 6, Workers’ Compensation Act, report of the committee. At this time, I would like to ask the Minister if he would like to bring in some witnesses.

Yes, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Can the Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms bring in the witnesses, please.

Thank you. Thank you, Minister Krutko. At this time, can you introduce your witnesses, please? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, to my right is John Doyle, the director of corporate services of the Workers’ Compensation Board. To my left is Mark Aitken, director of legal services, Department of Justice, and to my far left is Adrian Wright, WCB legal counsel.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. General comments on the bill? Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The bill before us now is like the one we just previously considered, one that has been long anticipated. I want to acknowledge that it was back in 2000 or 2001 when the comprehensive survey undertaken by a special panel resulted in the report called Act Now. So we know we have at least six years of work, review and anticipation involved in the bill that is now before us. Many people have had a hand in the matter that we are going to be considering today and one that I am very happy to be saying to committee, Mr. Chair, that I would be supporting.

In the past term, especially the last term that I have served here, I have come to know the issues of the WCB especially through the eyes of injured workers and those workers who have fallen through the cracks of our system. When they have been challenged with less conventional injuries, diseases or disabilities, our WCB has not been the kind of organization that I would have liked it to be. In other words, a responsive and compassionate organization, one that does not give away everything that is expected, anticipated or asked for, of course. There is very much an onus of due diligence and due process, but there were, Mr. Chair, a very large number of issues, as supported by the findings of our Supreme Court of the NWT, the Auditor General for Canada, where there was indeed room for improvement.

Mr. Chair, I know that the Minister and the Board of Governance, the executive of the WCB, has already engaged in making many of those changes. It gives me optimism that, combined with this new act, we will indeed have a Workers’ Safety and Compensation Commission that is going to be the kind of responsive, professional and compassionate organization that our whole labour sector needs. We must be able to rely on this and to expect the highest level of service and it is with those comments, Mr. Chair, that I welcome getting into the detail of the bill. I know this is not going to happen over night that our workers’ compensation system that we share with our sister territory Nunavut is indeed going to be one that we can all count on and rely on to deliver the kind of services that our workers, employers and especially our families require, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. At this time, I would like to recognize Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to welcome the Minister and his officials to the proceedings this afternoon. I want to start off by saying that it is a great thing that we are here today to discuss this Bill 6, new legislation for the Workers’ Compensation Board. It has been a work in progress for a number of years, as some of my colleagues have been here a lot longer than I have will know, going back to the Act Now reports.

I wanted to start off by thanking the Minister for working with our committee to see to it that the legislation was what we had intended it to be. He was very flexible in getting this legislation to the state it is in. I think he should be commended for that. In addition to that, I wanted to mention specifically Mr. Braden. He has been a champion of injured workers for a number of years here in the Northwest Territories. He is not a member of our Standing Committee on Governance and Economic Development but he spent a tremendous amount of time, effort and energy in seeing to it that the legislation met the requirements of both the injured worker and the employers here in the Northwest Territories. So I wanted to extend a special thanks to him and, as well, Ms. Lee who is not a member of our standing committee but she too spent a great deal of time and effort on this legislation. I wanted to thank her as well.

In addition to that, I think the worker's advisor, Mr. Colin Baile, as well spent a great deal of time putting together briefs for us. I really appreciated the work that Mr. Baile put into that. After the Auditor General’s report in 2006, starting to work towards this new legislation, we also got to work closely with the Governance Council of the WCB. I think they deserve a pat on the back as well for their ability to come together with us. We had some meetings. We worked together on trying to get this legislation to where it is today. It is because of that cooperation and working together that it is what it is. So again, I know there is a new president at the Workers’ Compensation Board. There are going to be some changes here with the new legislation as it comes through. I really hope there is some continuity in the Governance Council as well, Mr. Chair, to see through the legislation as it moves forward. With that, I will leave it at that, Mr. Chair, but it is a good day for both the employers and the injured workers in the Northwest Territories. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I would like to thank the Members for their comments. I think it is important that we did build that working relationship. I think there have been several steps to this process. As we know, this process has been going on for some time in regards to the act. Now, the committee hearings that took place back during the 12th Assembly coming forward. Also, I would like to commend the Auditor General in regards to her staff and the work they did in regards to reviewing and assessing the workings of the Workers’ Compensation Board, but also in regards to the efforts that were made by the standing committee and the staff of Workers’ Compensation along with my colleague from Nunavut, Mr. Netser, in regards to being kept abreast of all activities that were taking place during these hearings and also in regards to where things were at. Again, it is with this legislation, it will improve what we have in place right now. More importantly, from the other actions that have been taken by way of the other interventions, like I mentioned, the Auditor General and other parties. I think, if anything, we will have better legislation. I think that the other jurisdictions across Canada are also watching us curiously to see exactly what we are going to come out with. I think this is probably one of the most advanced compensation legislation in the country right now. Because of that, we will be setting out not only a milestone for ourselves but I think for the rest of the country to look at. Again, I would like to thank the Members for their comments and look forward to clause by clause.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Next on the list for general comments I have Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I don’t mean to be redundant, but I don’t want to pass the opportunity to also acknowledge and say some thanks for where we are with respect to this new Workers’ Compensation Act and the work that has come before that.

Mr. Chair, I want to, first of all, thank the committee because I think that the report that the chair, Mrs. Groenewegen, read into the House this morning says everything about what we have been able to include in this legislation. I am hoping that the workers, the employers and anybody out there who had an interest in what is going on with respect to this legislation will take the time to read that. I think it really speaks well. It really speaks to a lot of work that has gone on in terms of I was listening to what we were being told about the things that needed to be changed, not just from the injured workers but all the stakeholders. I think that report just speaks for itself. I am really proud of what little role that I have had to play in that.

Mr. Chair, I also want to thank Mr. Braden. I guess when you choose to leave politics, you get more thanks than if you are not, so maybe everybody is thanking Mr. Braden because of it. But I have to tell you that things get pretty hectic around here and we are all juggling different priorities, but Mr. Braden is always there as the last man standing fighting for the last word to make sure that we go through all the highs and lows and the exciting parts and the boring parts. I have other duties in other areas where I couldn’t be there. I always knew that he would be there to make sure that the work gets done.

Mr. Chair, I also want to thank the committee because, as the chair mentioned in the report, this legislative review process tried a method of working through these changes, something that has not been done before, and that was the workshop that the chair, Mrs. Groenewegen, talked about. That was a really useful exercise. In that, we had the Minister, the board of the Governance Council; we had the CEO; we had all the staff. We had 12 or 15 people in there working out all the clauses. I think we should all be very proud of the work that we did in that regard. I think that also speaks to what Mr. Dent spoke of earlier about how we can do things differently as a consensus government to make laws, not in a confrontational and partisan manner, but talking about how we best build the line the best way possible. It is not a win-win or lose-lose scenario, but it is something that we can all work together to make as ready and as finished a legislation as we possibly can. I would like to really acknowledge that process.

I would like to, in particular, thank the staff of WCB. I know that, in this House, over the last eight years, Mr. Braden and I were there in 1999 when, for some reason, a lot of cases…We were both getting more WCB cases. We went through the Act Now, a consultation process under Mr. Handley when he was the Minister responsible for WCB. This is the latter part of that eight-year exercise. Of course, Minister Krutko was there throughout the process. In that process, I know that there were some pretty strong words spoken here. I know that the WCB staff that work at the WCB and all the people that work in our government structure, we know them personally. We go to school together. We use the same retail businesses. In talking to them personally, I know for some of them it was puzzling to them why the work that they do was not as clearly understood or criticized so much, but I hope that there will be enough communication from the management of WCB to explain to the staff and maybe if they saw the report that we have worked on in the new legislation, everybody could understand that we had to make the motions to bring the Auditor General in. We had to do lots of statements, motions and actions taken in this House to get us this far. It was all in the interest of the public interest that we serve here. I do really want to thank the new CEO and all of the other senior staff that was involved, as well as the medical and legal advisors.

When we do work like we have done here, I am very proud and I think we should all be proud. This doesn’t get done without a lot of people being involved. I think this was a really good exercise. It is different than any other way we have done in making laws. We should all be proud of that.

I just want to finish by saying I have been trying to explain to some of the injured workers that I have been working with, about the changes we are making. While I am very proud of what we have done and I think we have gone a very long way in addressing some of the deficiencies, I am not sure that this will ever be enough. I guess the real essence of it will be when this legislation comes into effect and how it is implemented. It has been said often that we cannot legislate corporate culture or lots of actions that we do. We could do a lot of good with or without legislation. If we don’t have the intention to do good, no legislation could make you. But I am very confident that this legislation could achieve that. From the perspective of injured workers, I think that is yet to be proven. I just spent, two nights ago, 77 minutes on the phone with somebody who was convinced that there was nothing we could do anything good about WCB legislation. I am hoping that not with the WCB legislation but the whole compensation system, even that individual will give us a chance and give us an opportunity to have this implemented. I’m very confident that this is a new beginning for all of us and it’s a culmination and it’s a good conclusion to all the work that we have done. I forgot to thank the worker's advisor, but he was thanked very loudly earlier. So later on I’m going to have some specific comments to make on some clauses, but I’d just like to end there. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Ms. Lee. Next on the list for general comments I’ve got Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. One of the problems about following a whack of people means most of the stuff has already been said. So I won’t be as long as they are. I’ll try to be succinct, though, in my own way.

As we all know Act Now, someday we thought this is going to turn to "Act Soon," and then I think people were even begging, up until a couple of years ago, "Act Some Day," and certainly some day is finally here before us. It’s taken a lot of years, as we all know. I don’t think we need to go into length on how long, but the fact is that what we have before us today is a new step in philosophy and I think it really is putting the workers first and I think that’s a new step forward in the way we should be doing business. I also think it’s a good balance all the way through.

A lot of people have come through a lot to get this act before us. As mentioned before, the Minister has been very flexible. The staff have been reasonable. They’ve worked well with our committee staff and researchers to make sure that committee opinions were heard and understood. I think we have a better product. I think it’s certainly very important to highlight the work Mr. Baile has offered committee and sort of to the whole process as a whole. We have him here, fortunately, in the gallery today. I don’t think he can get enough credit for how much he did for committee. He provided plain language information, real life experience and sort of helped us interpret sort of how this really works. So to Mr. Baile we owe a great thanks from a committee point of view.

Hear! Hear!

Mr. Chair, protection of the worker and falling in the direction of the worker when it’s sort of a judgment call needs to always be a philosophy and this act works to achieve that direction. I won’t go into length about some of the adjustments, but some of the changes that we’re now making new strides are we’re now putting money into expert medical advice, legal advice. WCB has become sort of an innovator, I’d like to say, because as presumption of occurrence and diseases have changed, I mean dealing with conflicting medical opinions is a new stride on how we are moving forward.

So, Mr. Chair, without me of course reading the whole act, I just want to cite in closing here that we have a better product before us. It doesn’t say enough, but putting the workers first always needs to be highlighted because it’s their lives that have taken the beating and it’s the unfortunate circumstance when they need to call upon this legislation to be there for them. It’s our jobs, as legislators, to make sure that we have a good product and an understanding product that we’ll hear their concerns and deal appropriately.

So in closing, Mr. Chair, I’m happy we’re bringing this to the House in my time and happy to see the product that’s been produced by both the staff at WCB and, again, committee, as well as with Mr. Baile’s solid advice. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Minister, any comments to those general comments?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I think it’s crucially important that we do develop legislation that’s not only there to enforce the law but, more importantly, it’s got to be workable. I think by the comments of the Members, that also we have to put a human face on the legislation and make sure it does serve the people it’s supposed to serve. Again, more importantly, to assess versus the people that are implementing this legislation and working along with the workers and the employers to improve a system that has been some time in coming, but again, I think we’re there. So with that, I do look forward to clause by clause.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. We don’t have anybody else on the list for general comments. What is the wish of the committee? Detail?

Detail.

Thank you, committee. We’ll turn our attention to Bill 6, Workers’ Compensation Act. If we start, committee, on page 16, Bill 6, Workers’ Compensation Act, part 1 is the interpretation, purpose and application. Clause 1.

Agreed.

Perhaps we can read a few clauses at a time. Does committee agree with that?

Agreed.

Thank you. So to clause 1.(1), clause 2, clause 3 and clause 4.

Agreed.

Thank you. Page 22, clause 5, clause 6, clause 7.

Agreed.

Thank you, committee. Page 23, clause 8.

Agreed.

Thank you. Page 24, clause 9, clause 10 and clause 11.

Agreed.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that clause 12 of Bill 6 be amended by renumbering paragraphs (a.1) to (c) as paragraphs (b) to (d) respectively. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The motion is in order. To the motion.

Question

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion is carried. Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen.

---Carried

Thank you, committee. Clause 12, as amended.

Agreed.

Thank you. Clause 13. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this is a clause on causation, which obviously is one of the crucial components in this new legislation. As was indicated in the committee report, there have been amendments to this legislation to make the standard of proving cause as being something that’s dominant in the workplace. I’m wondering, regarding dominant causes of workplace injury, and I’m wondering if, for the interest of those who are listening to this, the Minister or his staff could explain how this would be implemented in the real cases? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Minister Krutko.

Thank you. Mr. Chair, I’ll have Mr. Doyle answer the question.

Thank you. Mr. Doyle.

This particular amendment or this change to this clause will require some policy changes by the Workers’ Compensation Board. What it does is it changes from using a dominant cause to a material cause. So in doing so, it still requires that the work related cause of injury is not a trivial cause but is still a material cause. So it should not cause a large change in the way we do business, but, at the same time, it may actually reduce some of the administrative effort in trying to determine what the dominant cause is of the injury.

Thank you very much, Mr. Doyle. Ms. Lee.

Thank you. I think my question might have been confusing, so I just wanted to get more. I think I would like to hear some more specifics from Mr. Doyle. I guess how the bill was written and presented to the House, it suggested a dominant cause to be a factor in determining cause of injury. We have changed that. We have done away with that dominant cause and we have made it, I think to my mind, a lesser burden to say if there's a material cause to workplace being the case of injury or diseases, then one would be compensable. Now, that's how I read it. I'm willing to be corrected if I'm wrong in that. I am interested in hearing, from either Mr. Doyle or any of the panel members, as to how this will be different than how it has been done before without this law being there. Mr. Doyle mentioned that he didn't think there was a whole lot of difference, but I'd like to think that there is still a difference in terms of how the causation is determined. For the record and for the interest of those who are listening to how we are changing this legislation, I would like to hear what the change will be. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Krutko. Mr. Doyle. Sorry, Mr. Doyle.

The best answer would be that, yes, it is a lower threshold the worker has to achieve in order, from his standpoint, to show that the injury is compensable, and that is the intent of the change.

Thank you, Mr. Doyle. Ms. Lee.

Okay. For the record, I'd like to say that these changes were supported by not only the PSAC, UNW and NWT Federation of Labour, but also the NWT Construction Association, and that was, I think, mentioned in the report. Let me just say this again. From what I understand, if someone gets injured in a workplace, if they could prove that that happened in the workplace, doesn't have to prove but there's enough through medical opinion or whatever that the work had something to do with it. That doesn't have to be dominantly work, but if work had something to do with it, then you will be compensated. Am I correct in understanding that in a simple way? Thank you.