I spoke to some elders in Tulita, Fort Good Hope and Colville Lake. The elders are afraid. They are afraid of the government’s policies because it violates their requirement or criteria to receive help from their family members. They are living alone. Some of them are old, they’re ill, they’re in their 70s and 80s. They’re saying if they have a family member live with them, they’re going to get punished because they’re not going to be eligible for some programs. That is so wrong. That is so against our culture, and our beliefs and upbringing. That’s what I’m asking the Minister.
Would he meet with his colleagues to change some of the requirements, for example, for the fuel subsidy and other subsidies that they are receiving? The government seems to pick on the elders. I want to ask, don’t pick on the elders, don’t pick on my culture. This is what is needed to help our elders. They have been there for us; we need to be there for them. I want to ask the Minister if he would look at those types of specific policy changes that he could work with the other Ministers and start making changes as soon as possible.
Yes, as the Member responsible for Seniors that is my intention, is to work with the Department of Education on the Seniors Fuel Subsidy Program. Sometimes – the Member is right – the individuals are living with the elder and supporting the elder, but because the policy indicates that they need to have a Revenue Canada form filled out to determine their income, the individual senior loses the fuel subsidy. Also in public housing, sometimes the seniors who are eligible for no rent in public housing will sometimes end up paying rent when they’re getting support from their family.
As the Minister responsible for Seniors, my intention is to have discussions with the Ministers of Housing and ECE and work with them to try to resolve that issue.
My colleague from Mackenzie Delta talked about increasing the home care workers in his communities, which I support. I think we also have a solution to help the Minister help this government saying if you can allow family members to live with their elders and take care of them, some of them are fragile – some of my own relatives – allow their family members to take care of them. That’s the way my culture has based its foundation on taking care of its elders. If not, they’re going to live alone, like somebody said in Colville Lake. There was an old man who died by himself. That put a lot of tears in the people’s eyes. That is so shameful. We should not have let that happen. That old man said if I allow somebody to live with me, I will be punished by this government.
For goodness sake, I ask this government to change those policies. Don’t work against my elders. Help my elders. I want to ask the Minister what type of policies now that he starts to look at to change these policies, so that I can go back, and anyone can go back to the elders and say your family members can help you, and live with you and stay with you without being looked over by the government. When will you do that?
As the Member said, there’s a requirement for increase in home care, but it’s just one area where there could be a decrease if the elders were allowed to have family members. We agree, also, that family members staying with elders do prevent elders from going into long-term facilities, which are very expensive. The alternative I think that this government needs to look at and will be looking at, is to make sure that program policies that prevent elders from getting assistance in their homes because of the risk of losing programs that they should be getting, and subsidies that they should be getting, will be looked at by the three departments mentioned earlier.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Final supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to ask the Minister when will his department work with the board that’s responsible for the Aven Manor Centre to look at the change of policies where the communities now can bring in traditional caribou food and moose, traditional meat into that centre. I have five elders or so that are just dying to eat their traditional foods. The policy right now says no, you can’t. I know they’re willing to help. When can we get that done so I can tell people you can send fish to this long-term care facility? Our people want to eat it right now. They are just dying to eat their traditional food. When can the Minister help me on this one here?
The department is looking at that now. We have already had communications from the Member that this was an issue. We looked into the storage of the food, the country foods and so on. I’ve asked the department, specifically Health and Social Services, to look into that issue at this time.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. I want to recognize the clock for oral questions. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was a little disappointed by the final answer of the Minister of Health and Social Services and I still don’t believe that they’re going to tackle the issue. I’m going to ask him in this particular manner regarding the challenges of the detox and addressing those types of issues. What is the Minister willing to do differently this term that has not been done any other term, to move this file forward? I can assure you, addiction problems have not decreased; rather, they have increased in the Northwest Territories.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The honourable Minister responsible for Health and Social Services, Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As indicated, the Member is referring to addictions. The intention is to move to prevention. That is different. We are tripling the amount of money that is focused in on prevention of addictions. That is different.
I’ve made many calls to Health and Social Services and their suggestion, if you have a crack problem or a meth problem, is to go to either the Tree of Peace or Salvation Army or even be sent to Nats’ejee K’eh in Hay River. You have to fail there first, before you can seek treatment in a southern facility that is appropriate to your specific illness to be addressed. I’ve never found that we’ve encouraged people to fail the right way before we choose to address their particular issue. Is there going to be a new, updated methodology as to who we deal with people with serious alcohol and drug problems rather than just telling them to go to a program and fail before we address it?
The department is doing a review of the Nats’ejee K’eh Treatment Centre at this time. I’m expecting to be reviewing the report within the next couple of months. In as far as expecting that we have to have people fail at Nats’ejee K’eh before we send them elsewhere, I’m not sure that’s a policy of this government. What I do know is that we do have a committee that looks at out-of-territory placements for addiction issues that cannot be addressed at a treatment centre at Nats’ejee K’eh.
Maybe the Minister could explain to the House how Nats’ejee K’eh treats people who have pill problems, who have crack problems, who have meth problems under the present, or I should say under the current design and focus that Nats’ejee K’eh provides as the only treatment centre in the Northwest Territories.
I don’t know the specifics of how Nats’ejee K’eh deals with various addictions. All addictions and all individuals with addictions are pretty independent and very individualistic. Some people who have those issues can be assisted at the treatment centre in Hay River. However, some can’t. That’s why we have the out-of-territory placement committee and they will review those so that if there are people with addictions, that option is available to them to apply for a treatment facility outside of the Territories, and we have a committee that will look at that.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.
I’d like the Minister to provide the information, if he would, on how many people have gone to the southern placement of detox centres and how many people have actually applied and been refused to attend. What alternative methods have they been given as a particular recommendation? I would affirm or assert, in this particular case, that more people have been denied appropriate treatment than have received the focus they should have.
I’ll have the department put that information together for the Member and provide it.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the Minister responsible for the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation.
How many people in public housing units have been served with eviction notices in the last three years?
How many tenants are affected by the recent announcement on the moratorium regarding public housing arrears?
Will the Minister provide me with detailed plans, processes and procedures to assist people who have arrears, to start paying their housing debts?
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. I wish to table the following document, entitled “2010-2011 Aurora College Annual Report.”
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I give notice that on Monday, December 12, 2011, I will move the following motion: I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Thebacha, that the Speaker be authorized to set such sitting days and hours as the Speaker, after consultation, deems fit to assist with the business before the House.
I would like to move the following motion.
WHEREAS Bill C-10, Safe Streets and Communities Act, was recently considered by the Parliament of Canada;
AND WHEREAS Bill C-10 will restrict the availability of conditional sentences and impose new mandatory minimum sentences for certain offences;
AND WHEREAS the severity of these measures will lead to fewer guilty pleas and plea bargains, more trials and more appeals, resulting in additional court administration and legal aid costs;
AND WHEREAS these measures will lead to more and longer incarcerations, resulting in additional operational costs to the territorial corrections system and the need for new or expanded correctional facilities;
AND WHEREAS Aboriginal people are already disproportionately represented in our prisons, and mandatory minimums and restrictions on the use of conditional sentences will only worsen this situation;
AND WHEREAS these measures will lead to the incarceration of more youth, who, as a result of being fully immersed in prison culture and isolated from cultural and family support, will be more likely to reoffend;
AND WHEREAS there are well-established links in the Northwest Territories between crime and social issues, including poverty, inadequate housing, addictions, low employment rates, mental health issues and cognitive disabilities such as Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder and residential school trauma;
AND WHEREAS the 16th Legislative Assembly in August 2011 passed a motion recommending that the Government of the Northwest Territories begin research to examine options and potential benefits for introduction of a mental health court diversion program as an adjunct to the NWT court system;
AND WHEREAS, given these circumstances, diverting funding from measures aimed at rehabilitation and addressing the root causes of crime to measures aimed at punishing offenders will not ultimately make Northwest Territories streets and communities safer;
AND WHEREAS the Government of the Northwest Territories does not have the fiscal capacity to fund the costs of Bill C-10 without diverting funding from other programming aimed at rehabilitation and addressing the root causes of crime in our territory;
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the honourable Member for Sahtu, that this Legislative Assembly urges the Government of Canada to recognize the special implications that Bill C-10 will have for the Northwest Territories;
AND FURTHER, that this Legislative Assembly urges the Government of Canada to put in place measures to mitigate the costs of Bill C-10 to the Government of the Northwest Territories for additional court time, legal aid services, incarcerations and corrections infrastructure, and to provide funding for measures to address the root causes of crime;
AND FURTHERMORE, that the Government of the Northwest Territories act promptly to design, fund and implement comprehensive programs integrated across relevant departments to prevent and divert offenders that might enter the justice system in order to avoid many of the justice and other costs government and people must bear resulting from the impacts of Bill C-10.
There is a motion on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the motion points out, the federal legislation will have an even higher impact on our citizens than elsewhere. The NWT has the highest or nearly the highest incident rates of many minor crimes. Typically, we have worked with these first time offenders and small crime offenders to get them back on track, but now with the two-year minimums, there are serious consequences. Of course, one of the results will be, as mentioned in the motion, the loss of culture, the loss of these young people being embedded in their family and community life where they can develop responsibly and be put back on track, and, of course, they will be associating during long periods of time, with these two-year minimums, with criminals that have much more serious and complicated backgrounds that can again lead them down the wrong path over that two-year period that they are incarcerated.
The expectation of higher not guilty pleas than appeals, of course, will have major and direct costs. We know that, you know, you try to hire a lawyer to participate in GNWT’s justice system and it’s just about impossible these days. Legal Aid is always struggling to find legal expertise. The potential for soaring costs that will result from this aspect alone has serious potential to overload an already overloaded system.
The more and larger incarcerations have obvious direct costs. Our facilities are already burdened with full capacity and we don’t have additional capacity. We know that our fiscal situation is very challenging right now. We don’t have the potential or capacity to really put in place more facilities to deal with this burgeoning potential load of convicted offenders resulting from this legislation.
The Aboriginal people in the NWT already make up a disproportionately high number of those in our correctional facilities, in our courts and in contact with our police. Our correctional facilities are already filled beyond capacity. With no infrastructure money in hand, they can’t be expanded, and the point is, we don’t want to pack the jails as a solution to our social ills.
I also want to point out that this government is doing its part. As we heard from the Minister of Health and Social Services earlier today, there is a good effort – I believe the Minister of Justice has talked about this too – a good effort towards prevention and diversion of people away from the justice system to reduce the burden on the public purse and the toll of damage across society.
This motion calls upon the federal government to recognize the additional costs it will levy upon us, and to work in partnership with us to effectively handle the challenges that will be a consequence of this legislation by providing us with the resources to be able to do that.
In summary right now, I will be supporting this motion and the positive, cooperative approach it proposes. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. To the motion. The Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My comments are somewhat similar to those of my colleague. I feel that this motion is a necessity. As we’ve heard, Bill C-10 includes new mandatory minimum sentences and it includes tougher sentences, particularly for young offenders, among other changes there. It is expected that it will put more people in jail for longer and it will increase the cost of administering justice at both the provincial, territorial and federal levels. I feel that it will cripple an already overloaded court system. It will increase the number of people that are sent to jail. It will make our prisons more dangerous for both inmates and guards, and it will increase the length of sentences.
I am particularly disturbed with the minimum sentence component because it removes any flexibility on the part of the judge to treat the cause of the crime. It forces them to treat the crime only. As Mr. Bromley stated, I think, earlier, there is no ability to get to the root causes of the crime. That is what we need for our people. There is no opportunity to divert people at the court process from going to jail. A minimum sentence means they have to go to jail. There is no opportunity for us to deal with a person’s addiction. If the crime has been perpetrated because of an addiction, there is no opportunity to deal with that.
There is little evidence to support that this approach will show that it has shown to be successful and that it will reduce crime. There is not an opportunity to allow first offenders or people that have committed minor offences to attempt to be rehabilitated or attempt rehabilitation. We are going to have increased pressure on our court resources because there will be more trials in the NWT. We already have fairly stressed court resources, I think. Our government will have to redirect our inadequate resources which are currently going to essential programs and services for all Northerners, to building and expanding correctional institutions to deal with the higher incidences of people that are having to go to jail.
We have many federal prisoners who are kept in northern institutions so they can be closer to their family and their culture. So that is going to put an even greater strain on our correctional facilities. Our NWT correctional facilities are currently crowded. It means, because we are already crowded, more people means we have to build more facilities. We absolutely cannot afford to build more facilities than what we are already currently considering.
For me, I am really concerned because, at this point, we absolutely have no idea what the cost of this bill is going to add to the cost of this government. It is a large concern. A number of people have spoken out about this. I would like to quote from our NWT Senator Nick Sibbeston who, in the Senate a little while ago, stated: “Institutions that are not focused on substance abuse treatment, rehabilitation and education in a safe environment will increasingly resemble southern prisons where criminals are warehoused in overcrowded conditions, and where violence and danger are a way of life for both inmates and staff.”
Aboriginal people are already overrepresented in correctional facilities, both throughout Canada and here in the North. In Canada, Aboriginal people represent 4 percent of our population, but they represent 20 percent of our correctional facility population. In the NWT, again I would like to quote from Mr. Sibbeston: “It is well known that Aboriginal people are badly overrepresented in our prisons in the Northwest Territories. In 2008 and 2009 they represented 88 percent of the jail population. Mandatory minimums and the restrictions on the use of conditional sentences will only make this worse.”
I would like to also quote from the Ottawa Citizen in mid-November: “I can definitely say that the root of the crime in this city is not evil people we need to lock up, it is people with addictions, and history of abuse and mental problems who need treatment. These issues are not going to be cured with incarceration.” This was said by Stephen Mansell, the president of the Nunavut chapter of the Canadian Bar Association. He is a member, as well, of the Iqaluit City Council and he was talking about his own home community, Iqaluit.
I agree with the Government of Canada that we need to get tough on crime for serious crimes and for serious offenders and repeat offenders. Particularly, in my mind, drug offences and sex-based crimes are particularly important that we come down hard on people who commit these crimes, but I don’t feel that we should be bearing down hard on first offenders and people who are doing things like a 16-year-old who gets caught with a marijuana joint.
I would like to quote once more from the Winnipeg Free Press in early December: “The federal government is not only ignoring the Supreme Court of Canada in its own research but is ignoring what all Canadians know: that poverty, lack of housing and clean water, and education and training, and the fallout from residential schools all contribute to crime within Aboriginal communities. Instead of putting money into improving living conditions and rehabilitation programs, the government appears content to make jails the residential schools of the 21st Century.”
The whereases in this motion say it all for me. The operative clauses are a plea to the Government of Canada, in my mind, to recognize the NWT’s unique situation, to recognize the implications that Bill C-10 will have on the NWT, and it is a plea to the Government of Canada to help us with the implementation of Bill C-10. It is a fact. It is going to be coming, but we need assistance.
I urge all Members to support this motion. We need the assistance of the Government of Canada to help us mitigate these costs. I urge the Government of the Northwest Territories to listen to the last clause and put comprehensive programs in place to deal with root causes of crime. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. I will allow the seconder of the motion to speak on the motion. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I agree with the mover, the Member from Yellowknife, Ms. Bisaro, talking about the importance of the federal government here in the Northwest Territories on the impact of this crime bill in the Northwest Territories and the realities that it will have on us in the North here.
Looking at this crime bill, the scary part is that the bottom line is that it means people who offend will have longer times in correctional institutions and more people will stay in there. Little will be done to educate them, work with them on rehabilitation into society. It is taking them away from their culture. It means that is going to be harder for the youth and it means that nothing much is going to happen in our communities. This government here will possibly be left to look after the children. Do we build more houses or health centres, or nurses or doctors, or do we really have to build these facilities to house our people? It speaks to a bill that doesn’t look at the realities of the Northwest Territories.
Shame on the federal government for doing stuff like this. Is this the one way for us to look at in our communities to the devolution deal where they say, well, if you sign the devolution deal, you should deal with the impacts of Bill C-10?
We need more money coming to the Northwest Territories, but then, because we have a legal obligation, it doesn’t mean that now we have to build more correctional institutions.
I don’t know. This bill is not very good. I hope the Minister can work with his colleagues to convince the federal Minister to say we need to look at other alternatives to this crime bill. It is not going to work in the Northwest Territories and it is not going to work in the future. We need to make some changes. The residential school days are over. You cannot take the people again in a legal process away from their culture, and from their families and their teaching. Those days of punishment are over. Some people will continue to be in this system and they will stay in the system, as much as we try and work with them. There are other ones that could make it out. We need to work with the young ones. That is the reality.
This bill here needs to be looked at. I hope the Minister will take this to the federal Minister and talk about the hard impacts it is going to have on my people. I fully support this legislation. I ask the federal government, just because you have the mandate, you have the votes in the Senate, you have the votes in Parliament. It doesn’t mean you need to ram this bill here that is going to have severe impacts in the Northwest Territories.
I ask Members and I ask the Minister, along with his Cabinet colleagues, to really look at this bill and the impacts. I am really afraid that if it is coming down to not following this or not building schools or more houses or other facilities, that we are going to make some tough choices. We have to follow the federal legislation. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. To the motion. Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to support my colleagues in this particular motion. I understand very well, and in some respects I acknowledge the need for a conservative agenda where it is a law and order type of government.
There are issues of crime that need to be tackled, and tackled harder, but it’s very difficult out there who believes on a typical process, everyday process, that more jail time, longer jail time really solves the root causes of crime. Very few people would argue that particular situation.
I agree with colleagues that have said serious crime needs to be addressed differently and perhaps even longer or in a harsher sense. That probably does make sense. I’m not a believer that bigger jails, tougher jails solve the crime problem.
As I highlighted in my questions today, addiction is a real problem. That is a solution right there. If the government refocused its efforts on tackling the root of crime rather than punishing people at the end of the process, we would be doing a true service in a Canadian fashion. One with heart, one with empathy, rather than, as I said, in a punishing sense and the law and order type of government we have in Ottawa now.
Probably what’s becoming apparent is I clearly don’t agree with the approach taken by the federal government. In this particular case we see yet another colonial example, where they are going to offload a direction and probably quite a financial burden on all provinces and territories across this land. I could be mistaken, but I have not heard how this government, be it territorial or any other provincial government, is going to pay for this particular program.
So it’s like coming up with a new solution, a new format with no plan on how to implement it other than the fact that we are coming up with stiffer fines, longer jail times, we are going to put more people in jail and we are going to figure it out as we go along.
I have yet to hear – and if there’s only one, I still say I have yet to hear – but I haven’t really heard a lot of people in favour of this from a provincial government point of view or a territorial government point of view. Who is the loud majority on this particular issue that says we need more jails, and longer jail sentences and more punishment?
I think this sets us back away from the type of people we want to be. We want to be a very humane type of people and I think this sets humanity back, in a Canadian context.
I think this government needs to draw a line in the sand, whether we do it nervously or with some courage and confidence, but this government needs to draw a line in the sand with some courage to say we will refuse to pay these extra costs unless the federal government supports us in these particular efforts, because these are not costs directed by our own choices. These are costs directed to us. This is not developed here for the people of the Northwest Territories by the people of the Northwest Territories. It’s being told to us in a prescriptive sense, you will now do this, you will now punish people harder and I don’t think that’s right. I don’t think that that’s the solution.
I just want to tie it together and finish off by saying this: Many amendments have come forward to make alternative solutions through an amendment process as options to this bill, but they were all refused. The question is: Are they leading with a future in mind or are they leading with the fact of a lot of unknowns? Canada is barely keeping itself up, due to good prudent management that we’ve had for decades. It’s keeping us off the cusp of falling into a recession, which many countries find themselves going towards.
By burdening provinces and territories with a huge amount of costs that are still so unknown, this is not good fiscal management for the Canadian books, for the Canadian taxpayer, for the territorial taxpayers. So I would urge caution to the federal government that if they do proceed on this particular process, they have to come up with a plan to pay for it. I consider it clearly and definitely unfair that the territorial taxpayer could be on the hook for this federal initiative that we do not want. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. To the motion. Minister of Justice, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We understand the sentiment of this motion. The department itself has expressed some concerns with Bill C-10 and the cost that will be downloaded to the Government of the Northwest Territories once Bill C-10 becomes a reality. To that end I have set up a meeting with the federal Minister of Justice for this Monday. I’m going to be bringing forward the concerns of the department and the Legislature at that meeting and we will be working to try and find some opportunities to mitigate some of these costs here in the Northwest Territories. In addition, I will be meeting with committee later today to discuss these potential implications of Bill C-10 so that I can take that information with me, as well, when I meet with the Minister on Monday. However, given Cabinet convention and that there is a specific request of the Government of the Northwest Territories on this motion, we will be abstaining. I and my Cabinet colleagues will be abstaining from the motion.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. I will give a final, short supplementary to the mover of the motion. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This new legislation removes flexibility for how best to deal with an offender. They all essentially become the same under the new law, especially new offenders and young offenders. It brings additional costs that detract from our resources and capacity to deal with the more fundamental need of supporting our people towards a healthy lifestyle that helps divert offenders from the costly justice system.
This new legislation will exacerbate the already overrepresentation of Aboriginal people in our correctional facilities. It will lead to burgeoning costs in many ways, as detailed by my colleagues. This legislation presents us with some realities that need to be faced, however. Support from the Government of Canada will help us meet these realities.
We are clearly committed to doing our part on the prevention and diversion in track. We need a partnership on meeting the impacts of this legislation on the people and Government of the Northwest Territories.
Some of us disagree with Bill C-10 but we recognize the realities of its impending implementation. Let’s support our Minister as he heads to Ottawa in seeking cooperative work to deal with the new costs of Bill C-10.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The Member is seeking a recorded vote. All those in favour, please stand.
Mr. Bromley, Mr. Yakeleya, Mr. Dolynny, Ms. Bisaro, Mr. Nadli, Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Moses.
All those opposed, please stand. All those abstaining from the vote, please stand.
Mr. McLeod – Inuvik Twin Lakes, Mr. Abernethy, Mr. McLeod – Yellowknife South, Mr. Lafferty, Mr. Ramsay, Mr. Beaulieu.
Results of the vote: all those for, seven; opposed, zero; abstentions, six.
---Carried
Item 18, first reading of bills. Item 19, second reading of bills. Item 20, consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 2-17(1), Northwest Territories Capital Estimates 2012-2013, with Ms. Bisaro in the chair.
