Mr. Speaker, I should advise the Member and the House that this matter is within the jurisdiction of the DPW and WCB at the moment. They are doing studies of the level of asbestos in the building that’s suspected. Once these results are out, we’ll be moving to the next stage. The Department of Health and Social Services will become involved at that time.
Mr. Speaker, I don’t know if I can switch to a different minister on the same topic or not. I was going to ask the Minister of Public Works some questions on the same topic, but I’ll have to get back on the list again. Thank you.
In light of my statement in regard to the issue in Aklavik, where they’re testing the residents of the community for H. pylori, an infection of the stomach, there has been a high number of cases of stomach cancer in that community. There is an in-depth study going on right now with regard to Dr. Morris and a bunch of people from different universities in southern Canada who have taken on this endeavour.
I would like to ask the Minister, in light of the funding situation we’re in — and we’re looking at a possible new source of funding by way of the Building Canada Fund — if those funds will be earmarked for communities that have problems such as issues related to water treatment, water delivery, or even dealing with water disposal in small communities so we can access some of those funds to deal with these types of instances in the Northwest Territories.
I trust that question was posed to me.
There are a number of sources of funding that have been flowing to the communities up to now that deal with water quality, water supply and things of that nature.
The Member is right. We are discussing and negotiating a new source of funding with the Government of Canada called the Building Canada Fund. We’re also talking about an extension to the gas tax. Mr. Speaker, both these sources can be utilized for community infrastructure. At this time it’s really difficult to see how much of it will be earmarked for communities, but a portion, we believe, will be going towards communities.
In regard to the water treatment facilities, in the case of Aklavik, they do get their raw water from the Peel River which flows down from the Yukon. There are questions about contamination in that watershed.
I’m just wondering, as a government, these types of surveys that go on…. What role does MACA play in regard to following those surveys to see exactly what the implications of the outcomes could be for the government of the Northwest Territories by having to replace or upgrade our infrastructure in those communities?
Our government takes a multi-barrier approach to dealing with water and water quality in communities. It’s a real area of concern, as Members would agree. We have a number of different departments working on water supply to communities. We have the ENR, which works on the source of water. We have MACA, which has testing of water treatment plant and also does the training. We have the Department of Health which does the testing for health purposes, and Public Works which works on some of the infrastructure projects.
Mr. Speaker, there are a number of different departments and a number of barriers. We’re trying to make it so we so that we have safe systems across the board. That’s why we have so many departments involved.
Mr. Speaker, in regard to the in-depth review that’s going on in Aklavik, my question was more directed to what role this government plays in regard to that survey and the in-depth study that’s going on in that community. As a government, are we involved in giving input by way of providing information surveys and whatnot that’s been done? Are we going to be called so that when they do determine the source of the problem, we’ve given them as much information as we can so they can make a good decision, whatever the outcome is?
So my question is more in line of what government’s role is in providing information to this group that’s doing this survey.
Mr. Speaker, the question is beyond my responsibility as MACA’s mandate and jurisdiction. It should be directed towards Health and Social Services.
Mr. Speaker, I would expect that all departments are paying close attention to the survey and the evaluation that’s going on in Aklavik and will respond accordingly.
Final supplementary, Mr. Krutko.
Mr. Speaker, in regard to my final supplementary, I’d just like to get some assurances from the Minister of MACA that community infrastructure will be considered when you’re looking at setting your priorities for the Building Community Fund. In light of the area such as possible water contamination or problems with our water systems in our communities, those get top priority when it comes to distributing that fund from the federal government.
That’s an easy response. I believe we’ve already agreed that municipalities should be receiving some of this money. We’re having some early discussions with the local government association, and also we’re talking to associations in the communities about how can we distribute this money and what kind of dollars are we talking about.
We need to set some criteria, and we need to be able to decide how that money will flow. So those things are ongoing. I can assure the Member that it will get serious consideration from this new line of funding from the government.
Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment. It gets back to my Member’s statement from earlier today, where I talked about migrant workers. According to the last information I have, it’s 3,300 and counting — and these 3,300 migrant workers take with them $350 million per year out of our Territorial economy.
I’d like to start off with asking the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment if the government has a plan to address or mitigate the situation that we’re in today with the 3,300 migrant workers.
The issue of migrant workers has been a troublesome one for our government for some time. First of all, we have to recognize that we live in a democracy, so people are free to move and live wherever they want, as provided for under the Constitution of Canada.
We have been attempting to address the issues through the negotiation of socio-economic agreements with the mining industry companies, specifically diamond mines, through the negotiation of a socio-economic agreement with the Mackenzie Valley pipeline proponents.
Now, it’s more difficult in the oil and gas sector, because that’s a responsibility of the federal government. The federal government, through the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, provides for benefit agreements with the oil and gas companies.
The way we looked at it, the best way to keep migrant workers living in the North is to make the Northwest Territories an attractive place for them to live. The best way to do that is to provide and make sure there is affordable housing and a lot of the benefits that we enjoy by living here. But the reality is it’s becoming harder to attract skilled workers. There’s a lot of competition for these workers, and the mining companies are finding that they have to offer these additional benefits.
Our plan is to go on the record and continue to express our concern about these activities to the mining companies. We hope to set up a process with the mining companies to work together to come up with solutions to this problem. We will certainly be communicating our concern to the federal government so they can take further action with regard to the workers involved in the oil and gas industry.
Specifically, I'd like to ask what campaign? When I gave my Member’s statement, I mentioned a scenario. That was just for construction workers. It wasn't skilled labour we were talking about. Out of the 40 employees, maybe five or six were skilled labour. The rest were labourers being trained, most of them from Newfoundland.
I'm wondering what type of campaign our government has to show industry and these migrant workers that there are communities here in the Northwest Territories that have affordable housing and that are livable.
For those areas of responsibility such as construction contracts that are awarded by our government, we will certainly follow up to make sure that the requirements of the various contracts are adhered to.
With regard to workers from Newfoundland who are brought in to do construction projects rather than hiring local citizens, we would have to bring this to the attention of the federal government, which has responsibility for labour standards.
The large pockets of unemployment in the Northwest Territories are located in our smaller communities. I'm wondering if the department and the government could work with communities to identify individuals in the small communities, guys who have skills and the ability to work. If we had a list or some type of avenue that would allow communities to get a list of individuals inside the community who wanted to work, it would make more sense to subsidize the airfare from here to Inuvik or to Fort Smith, rather than back to Newfoundland.
Is it possible for the department to look into setting up something like that in the communities on the ground level that is going to identify individuals for work in our resource sector? Thank you.
My understanding I that at one time, we did have such a registry of employees in the Northwest Territories. I would commit to finding out what happened to that registry. We may still have one. It only makes sense to do so.
In the oil and gas industry, there was a process whereby you expanded your area of coverage, so if you couldn't find people locally, you would go to the next level, which would be within the region, and then you would go to the Northwest Territories — sort of in concentric circles of employment. I would think that would be something that we would espouse.
I know that some of the smaller communities do have informal arrangements whereby they all know what skills are available. Then when they bid on jobs and contracts, they know who to get to, and they work together to make sure that communities get the benefits of contracts. Certainly, this is something that we'll be looking at.
Final supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.
One other question. When the payroll tax was first introduced, it was a way to try to get some revenue from migrant workers. It was increased a couple of years ago to 2 per cent.
If a company — a Northern company — subcontracts with a company in the south, and the payroll is paid out of the south, are we not getting the 2 per cent payroll tax? Because the payroll is coming out of southern Canada to these workers who are working in our backyard and not paying the payroll tax. I'm wondering if there is some slippage there.
That certainly was the intention of the payroll tax. It comes down to a question of monitoring and enforcement. Wherever we are aware of it, the Department of Finance follows up to make sure that the payroll tax is imposed. It’s more difficult to impose when the payments to individual workers are made outside of the Northwest Territories. That would be an area where we would have to look to see how we can improve the monitoring and follow-up and collection of payroll taxes.
Mr. Speaker, today I raise the issue of concerns I have with the Residential Tenancies Act. I know it’s coming forward eventually, and let’s hope it comes forward in this Assembly.
Mr. Speaker, the issue is about concern with protection, and the fact that I, not unlike in many other constituencies hereabouts in Yellowknife and throughout the Territories, have many rental units. It was told to me that someone was forced to sign a lease of…. I don’t want to belabour the circumstances, but it was like: you sign here and pay this much, or basically get out if you don’t like it, and the cost to leave…. People are being forced and squirmed into unusual circumstances that I don’t think are fair.
My question to the Minister of Justice, who will oversee the update of this act, is: will he take that into consideration, in that we can help build modest increases to leases and rentals if they can be somewhat justified, as opposed to whatever they feel necessary?
Mr. Speaker, the Residential Tenancies Act will be given over to this House. It’s forthcoming. I did manage to meet with the Standing Committee on Social Programs on January 21 just to give them a brief on the actual changes to the act itself and to get some more feedback from the committee as well. We are at the point where the act is within our department. There are changes that need to take place, and we are still accepting recommendations to the act itself. I will certainly take that into consideration, to work with my department, and how we can fit into our current act that will be in place. Mahsi.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the Minister for that. But one of the issues I highlighted in my Member’s statement is that if somebody gets a job — and let’s say they’re a renter here in Yellowknife, and they get a job maybe somewhere in Nunakput, like my good colleague here — they have to break their lease. What if they’ve just signed a year’s lease? This isn’t a hypothetical question, because this actually does happen. So they’re forced to pay out the remainder of the lease if they want to take a great job advancement somewhere else. The protection doesn’t exist to allow them…. They only get out of the lease if there are good graces by that landlord. Those are the types of protections I’m talking about.
Mr. Speaker, can the Minister inform this House if he’ll take that into consideration when the review of this Residential Tenancies Act does come forward for a final decision?
Mr. Speaker, we will be taking into consideration what is brought forward here today, because the act is still in the works. It has been presented to the Social Programs Committee, and it will be brought to the House. I can certainly take those suggestions into consideration, work with my department, and see if we can integrate that through our discussion paper on the act itself. Mahsi.
I wasn’t 100 per cent clear on the Minister’s answers there. Did he say he would take into consideration those two areas of concern I raised: the way increases happen in the context of the amount; and further, about helping people get out of their leases if they’re built into contracts and they have to leave the normal municipality they live in?
Mr. Speaker, these leases the Member is referring to…. There are different areas, different avenues, whether it be private contractors or at the community level. But certainly those suggestions will be taken into consideration in my discussion with my department, and possibly integrating that through the act that will be proposed. Certainly this is an ongoing discussion with our department — the act itself — so that will be taken into consideration for discussion. Mahsi.
Final supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate what the Minister has offered to do there, and I’ll take his commitment on that.
Can I get a sense of the timeframe on when he expects that — updates, or the act to be made public — so we can have some public discussion on that? Further, can he assure me that he will deliver any updates on those suggestions to me as soon as possible?
Mr. Speaker, I am certainly hoping to give notice of introduction of the bill later on this week. Mahsi.
Mr. Speaker, climate change currently costs the Northwest Territories millions of dollars per year and a number of accidental deaths related to an increasingly unpredictable environment. Globally it is costing millions of lives and billions of dollars. Costs now extend to the loss of wildlife species, plants. It includes water contamination, infrastructure damage and so on. Clearly some provinces are moving forward aggressively and acting on this issue.
What commitments did our Premier make at the recent Premiers’ conference on climate change to act and provide leadership on presenting and adapting to climate change?
Mr. Speaker, the area of climate change, as the Member stated, is one that we had a discussion on, driven by the Council of the Federation of Ministers and Premiers. The Premier of British Columbia had hosted that climate change conference. We made a presentation on climate adaptation for the Northwest Territories. As the Member pointed out in his Member’s statement, we are feeling front and centre — although last week we seemed to be back into the days of cold weather in the North.
We have put forward a position that the country needs to recognize as we’re front line on the changes that are occurring. We need to have help in adapting to the impact as well as take a role in how we can lessen our footprints on the environment.
You know, I don’t doubt that we could use help, and everybody would like to minimize our costs and so on. But I think we have a huge potential to do lots of things ourselves. I am again looking for leadership on this issue. I am sure the Premier picked up a lot of things, with the sharing of ideas and so on.
What insights did the Premier pick up that will enable us to move forward with or without help from outside this jurisdiction, given that our population is quite concerned and the costs are accruing to us?
We have done a number of things. Past governments have, for example, replaced old appliances with more efficient appliances, the way we build our homes, the construction techniques that we use for public infrastructure, as well as some of our own transportation infrastructure. Mr. Speaker, I use the example of mitigating the impact of permafrost. We are putting SM insulation underneath tarmac in a number of our facilities across the North. We are trying to take those types of steps.
Other factors, Mr. Speaker: we have even initiated some work to be undertaken by Ministers within this government. Minister Miltenberger is the lead with ENR on climate change initiatives, including a number of departments. We are looking at the hydro potential in the Northwest Territories, and Minister McLeod is the lead minister on the energy file. We are taking those types of steps.
The Member talked about looking at the options out there. There are a number of jurisdictions out in front of us. Quebec, for example, talked about a carbon tax. We are looking at those types of initiatives here in the Northwest Territories as well.
Thanks to the Premier for that response. It’s great to hear about those things, and I am sure our public will be on board to help out with those initiatives.
I don’t want to cloud the issue of prevention or mitigation with adaptation. When we are spending money to change the way we build airport strips, that is adapting to the changes that are happening now. We need to balance that with efforts directed at preventing further climate change. So I’d like to keep those distinctions there.
I appreciate the moves that we’re making to adapt to climate change, but adaptation is basically spending a lot of money, because climate change is happening. Obviously the preference is to prevent that. So again, I appreciate those responses.
What aggressive action are we taking to take full advantage of the federal programs that are out there? By way of example, I had the opportunity to work with the community of Whati. I suppose over two or three years, that community had enjoyed about $750,000 to $1 million of support from the federal government. The early bird gets the worm. How are we being that early bird and getting support from the federal government on the issues of climate change?
Mr. Speaker, through our departments we’re working with the federal government on a number of fronts trying to take advantage of the dollars that are out there, and how we look at the developments or how we take part in trying to lessen our footprint here in the Northwest Territories in the sense of the impact on the environment. We’ve got our own greenhouse gas strategy and are building on that. The Department of ENR is, again, doing its work. As we set out our strategic initiatives, it’s another avenue where we as the 16th Assembly can further look at the initiatives that we want to undertake as a government.
Final short supplementary, Mr. Bromley.
Again, I appreciate all the initiatives that I’m hearing about here. Probably the biggest single thing we can do is levy a carbon tax or some way of pricing our carbon emissions so that our industry, especially large industry, will get on board. Are the Premier and his cabinet contemplating that move?
Mr. Speaker, along with the fiscal environment we find ourselves in, we also need to look at revenue options. As I stated earlier, we are looking at a number of those options. A carbon tax is one of those on a list that we would have to come back to this Assembly with to see if there’s support for bringing something like that forward.
Mr. Speaker, I’d like to follow up on my statement in which I talked about using our employees as a resource. I’d like to ask the Minister of Human Resources what mechanisms currently exist for staff to provide input into our annual budget process?
Mr. Speaker, we certainly recognize that human resources are our biggest asset, and we always try to get the input of individual staff and employees, because we find that they’re the ones that work with the programs and services that we deliver. Generally they come up with some of the best ideas that we have.
We have developed, as a government, a communications strategy and approach for dealing with our budgeting process. We have requested our deputy ministers to send information to their managers, and all managers are familiar with the process.
I would suggest to employees that have any suggestions or comments and want to have input into the process, to raise them with their supervisors or managers. We would welcome their comments.
So I take it from the Minister’s answer that there are no formal mechanisms and processes in regard to input for the budget.
I would ask the Minister whether or not there are any mechanisms in place, apart from the informal system that he’s already outlined, for an individual or for staff to provide input into…. Sorry. Should they see that there are efficiencies to be gained in an operation or savings to be gained, is there a mechanism for them to have input into the department’s operation?
As a government, we have a number of employee recognition programs in which we recognize employees who have provided service above and beyond the call of duty and have made recommendations or suggestions that have resulted in savings or improved efficiencies for the government. We have long service awards, we have Premier’s awards of excellence, we have ministerial awards, and we have deputy minister recognition awards. We used to have a program whereby we would have financial rewards for employees, where they were reimbursed a nominal amount for any suggestions that resulted in real financial savings for the government. But that program is no longer in existence.
Mr. Speaker, having heard the Minister’s answer, I’m sensing that there is not a strong formal program at the moment for input from staff.
Two questions, I guess. Maybe I’ll ask them one at a time. The first one is whether or not the Minister can advise if there’s any real input from staff, any real savings, any real efficiencies that come from the various recognition programs that he outlined.
I guess the best recognition is the performance pay that employees receive. If they perform well, they receive performance pay. I think the Member is looking for “dollars for ideas” type of programs. We don’t have that, but we do have formal employee recognition programs that are provided on a regular basis.
Final supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.
