Mr. Speaker, I think one thing we should be aware of is the fact that adoptions of any kind — and that includes custom adoptions — make an arrangement between a parent and child more like the natural parent and child relationship, in that once you adopt a child, you become responsible for all of their financial issues and other responsibilities that a natural parent would. The adoption process legalizes that relationship. This is a question that often comes up in cases comparing foster-parent situations to adoption. Once you adopt a child or if a grandparent adopts a child, a lot of financial support that might have been there in other circumstances will not be there anymore.
Mr. Speaker, custom adoption is nothing new to aboriginal people. They’ve been doing it for thousands of years, and I think it’s important to realize that that process still exists in a lot of our communities. The frustration that we’re having in the aboriginal communities is that because the way the legislation is drafted, a lot of people are losing the traditional ability to custom-adopt, of how it used to be in the past. So I think it’s important that as government we look at it to see if it’s meeting the measurement of aboriginal people on exactly what their expectations are, especially grandparents.
I’d like to ask the Minister again if she would get back to me on the possibility, dates and times, of whether there are going to be amendments made, along with the Minister of Justice, so that we can amend it to make sure that it takes into account those issues that I raised here today.
Mr. Speaker, I’m happy to make that commitment to look at the process to see what improvements, if any, could be made and whether or not it would require legislative amendments. It is my understanding that over the years we have gone a long way in improving and supporting this process, but obviously if there’s any room for improvement, I would be happy to look at that with the Member.
Question 99-16(2)
Public Service Medical
In my Member’s statement I pointed out that the Yukon government has a better way of ensuring that their employees receive their prescription drug reimbursement in a timely fashion. I pointed out that the G.N.W.T. puts unnecessary stress on its employees who are already sick and need their medication to get better, to stabilize their chronic illness so they can actually make it to work.
New in the mail to me I’ve got an update from the Public Service Health Care Plan, Mr. Speaker, indicating that they are working at getting us a pay-direct drug card, but they’ve put it off for another year, till sometime in 2009. I’d like to ask the Minister of Human Resources: can the Minister look at and work with the negotiation process to see if they can speed up the process of getting it implemented back to 2008?
Mr. Speaker, I’m very pleased that the Member asked that question, because we always want to make sure that our employees are well treated, and we don’t want to inflict any undue hardship on our employees. I’d have to get some more detailed information from the Member, because as I understand it, employees, on a monthly basis, fill out a declaration form with the drugstore of their choice or the pharmacy of their choice, and as long as they submit this monthly form, they only get charged for 20 per cent. Having said that, I’m certainly prepared to improve the system.
Mr. Speaker, there are still employees out there using their cash, and it’s being tied up in the health care system, and it’s much-needed cash, especially in these times.
Can the Minister tell me when he can get back to me with the information he’s committed to? I think he mentioned about some kind of form that they fill out. I don’t know if that exists. Maybe he can tell me about it. I think that the important thing here is that a drug care card will be a lot more efficient and effective for our employees. I’d like to know when the Minister will be working on this issue so that employees get it a lot sooner. Mahsi.
Mr. Speaker, we can check into that right away. I understand that in the communities drugs are provided at no cost and that in the larger centres that do have pharmacies, with the forms that are submitted, they are only charged 20 per cent. So we’ll undertake to look at which employees are falling through the cracks, and also we will work towards having a more efficient system.
Mr. Speaker, just in terms of implementing this pay-direct drug card, I’d like to know: what exactly are the issues? Negotiations have been underway since 2006. It’s been a couple of years now. What exactly is the issue that’s delaying it for another year, to 2009? Mahsi.
There are a number of issues that have to be dealt with. I guess the most critical one would be for the businesses or pharmacies that dispense the drugs to have the equipment and technology to be able to utilize such a drug card.
Secondly, how do you control costs or dispensing of drugs? It would have to be a system whereby only approved drugs would be dispensed, and there would have to be some sort of cost control.
Mr. Speaker, in my Member’s statement today I spoke of the Thebacha Campus in Fort Smith and the fact that we may not be meeting all the needs of our Northern students. It really is a question of safety and effectiveness. We cannot have a 67 per cent drop in our trades program without that raising a warning flag.
I’ll go a little further and say that we had a Social Worker program offered in that community. For two years in a row it had little or no attendance. It had to be cancelled and was moved to Yellowknife. There it was picked up, and it’s being subscribed to quite fully.
My question really comes down to safety and effectiveness. Would the Minister of EC&E be willing to commit to this House to do an independent survey of current students, and students from the past two years, to find out their concerns about the program being offered at the Thebacha Campus, and to make sure we can look into solving some of these issues?
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Yes, indeed, safety, effectiveness and efficiency are our top priorities as a government and, more specifically, the trades programs that we offer in the communities.
We do have campuses that deliver various programs in the communities — Inuvik, Fort Smith, Yellowknife — and in other smaller campuses at the community level. We do provide pilot programs as well, all leading towards certification or diploma programs, and also towards a teacher education program. We are very proud of the programs that we deliver on all campuses.
With regard to a review, there is one currently being conducted. It’s in the works as we speak, and our department is looking into that as well. Mahsi.
Mr. Speaker, if there's a review going on, I'd like to know what the review means. Does the review mean you're going to go to an independent survey? Does it mean you're going to create questions, or you're going to check with students? What is the definition of a review? Does it include the staff, the management and the bureaucracy of Aurora College, to make sure we're delivering safe and effective programs for our students?
Mahsi. Mr. Speaker, the Department of Education, Culture and Employment is working closely with Aurora College to perform a thorough review of apprenticeship and occupational certification programs. The review is being undertaken right now on a final technical report. There are surveys happening, and we're trying to get input from different sectors about what is working and what is not working. Then we will provide recommendations on moving forward. That is currently under review, and it will be brought forward for our department’s discussion. Mahsi.
Mr. Speaker, I heard nothing about review of students past and present to find out about the students’ safety. I heard nothing about — if I may quote from the Minister’s statement today: “Students are most successful when they have many supports….” I want to make sure we're supporting our students.
Would the Minister be willing to make sure that the terms of reference are provided to Members? Would the Minister be willing to accept more questions as to what type of survey questions should be out there, just to make sure that we're doing the right kind of review at this time?
Mahsi. Mr. Speaker, like I said, there is a review undertaken right now. The communities want to have some input into this review.
On the trades sector, the programs that are being delivered, the trade apprenticeship programs, the management programs and distance programs are out there. We want to find out what’s working. What kind of programs are we delivering successfully? We are getting input from the students and program staff about how to deliver effective programs to our communities. We are listening to people out there in the community. We serve 33 communities, and we are certainly taking into consideration all their recommendations. Mahsi.
Final supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.
Mr. Speaker, let me say it very clearly: MLAs want input on this survey. Rather than doing a survey without any consultation in this House…. It’s nice to hear that a survey is going on, but I didn’t hear when this was going to come forward. I didn’t hear about consulting MLAs or any details about that. These are some important issues that need to be decided in this House, and if we are going to do a survey, we should be having input from this side of the House to make sure it is effectively done.
Would the Minister ensure that MLAs such as myself have input on this survey? If this is done in isolation and we’re handed a report — and even if we are handed any reports — by that time there is no chance for input and there’s no way we can influence some of the direction it should be looking into.
Mr. Speaker, we accept recommendations and input from our Regular Members as well. We very much appreciate their input.
This review has been undertaken for just under a year now. It will be brought to the attention of the Department of Education, Culture and Employment. The results of these recommendations will be brought forward. Any recommendations and advice from Members will certainly be taken into consideration in our discussion. Mahsi.
Mr. Speaker, I want to ask some questions today to the Premier in regard to the Deh Cho Bridge project again. I listened with interest to the comments he made previously with Mrs. Groenewegen. Yes, he is right: the last government could have looked at rescinding the Deh Cho Bridge Act. But I disagree with him on his take on the information being free flowing between the last government and Regular Members. If it was so free flowing, why would Regular Members have to pass not one but two motions calling on the government to disclose an updated cost-benefit analysis, and also to let us know what was contained in the concession agreement? So I just wanted to get that out there.
I also want to ask the Premier today if he would look at striking a peer review of the financing of the Deh Cho Bridge project.
Mr. Speaker, once again in this debate, those are actions of the 15th Legislative Assembly in terms of those motions that were passed. But in the life of this government, the 16th Assembly, the information has flowed. We’ve showed that information. We know where the dollars are. Those dollar marks haven’t changed since the last update to Members.
With the request for a peer review, this project…. The lenders have been involved with our lawyers and looking at all documentation; the process has undergone quite a review in the sense of where it is required to go.
Yes, the Member quoted the cost-benefit analysis, but let me say that as the Government of the Northwest Territories, if we used that business case for all of our communities, many of our communities would have shut down, because we would not have afforded to build in our communities. The Mackenzie Valley highway is something that at least a number of us were talking about in the 16th Assembly. It would never get built. Highway expansion in the Northwest Territories would never happen. So we are going to have to look at other ways of doing business as the Government of the Northwest Territories, and look at other options available to us.
I don’t know what it would require to do an active peer review on the financing of this, but we have had some of the largest lending agents in Canada, the Ontario teachers’ association, as well as the Sun Life Group. They are the largest lenders. They’re doing due diligence along with us. So do you want a peer review of what they’ve decided, if they decided to proceed or not.
The Members of the 15th Legislative Assembly put a lot of faith in what the government was telling them at the time. The former Premier said he would come forward with information that was going to be contained in that concession agreement before it was signed off. That never happened. The concession agreement was signed on September 28, 72 hours before the election, Mr. Speaker.
I want to ask the Premier if he is aware of whether or not the former Premier and cabinet had access to the cost-benefit analysis when Regular Members first found out any information — a little bit of information — on November 17 of last year.
Mr. Speaker, all the Member has to do is look at the date when that report was published, and he can answer his own question.
Mr. Speaker, I believe the date stamped on that thing was December of 2007, which would lead me to believe that the government — the 15th Legislative Assembly — signed a $160 million deal on behalf of the people of the Northwest Territories without that cost-benefit analysis, which says that we’re going to go from a positive $38 million impact to a negative $50 million impact. Is that true?
Mr. Speaker, once again the Member wants to debate what the previous government did, what the previous Premier did; I’m talking about the 16th Assembly and what we’ve done. We’ve provided all the information Members have asked for. They may not like it, but they’ve got the information. We’ve committed to and honoured the delivery of what they’ve asked for, and I say let’s now get on with business.
Mr. Speaker, given the fact that the previous government was signing on to a $160 million infrastructure deal, I’m wondering what role the Finance Minister would play in that. The impact that’s going to have for 35 years to come is $242 million. The former Finance Minister is still the Finance Minister, and I think he has some explaining to do, Mr. Speaker.
I don’t know if that question is in order or not. I will allow the Premier to answer, if he would like.
Mr. Speaker, as Finance Minister for the 16th Legislative Assembly, the requirements that have been made upon myself to provide information have been provided. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, we face many challenges getting women’s voices to the table because of the way we have set up our society of the day. We have some opportunities to do that a little better in this government. I’d like to ask the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women: does this government have a policy in place that ensures that a gender lens is brought to the development of public policy?
Mr. Speaker, first I’d like to thank the Member for the statement, which sounded like music to my ears.
Mr. Speaker, on the question the Member is asking, I have to say that my understanding…. I don’t have all the detailed information with me on the gender-based analysis, but it’s something that has been going on in many different jurisdictions. Also, there has been some work been going on by previous governments. I’m going to have to make a commitment now that I’d be happy to look into that and come back to the Member to see where we are with that.
Mr. Speaker, thank you to the Minister for that response. I’m well aware of the Minister’s personal interest in this issue — and appropriately so, of course.
I would also like to know if the government will look into bringing gender-based analysis in on all of the legislation that we contemplate, as well, as a routine matter?
Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that there has been quite a bit of work and analysis that has been done on this and on how the policy could come about, how that would be implemented and how we could lay that out. I have to get the details of that to see what work, exactly in detail, has been done and where we are with that. I just haven’t had the time to look into that further.
But I do want to assure the Member that a lot of work has been done on this issue by this government. I’d just like to look into that further, get back to the Member and then maybe we could have more discussion at that time.
Thank you again to the Minister on that. It’s good to hear that there has been a lot of work done. I’m looking forward to hearing the results of that. I think we are early in our four-year term. It would be great to see this put in place as early as possible so that it could become a routine part. We’ve got lots of legislation, I’m sure, that we’re contemplating. So thank you for that response.
Of course, following the formula, when might the Minister get back to me with the details on that?
We’ve been very busy with a lot of things. One of the things we are working on is some new initiatives and new ideas in time for the next business plan process. As a new Minister in a new government and Minister Responsible for the Status of Women, it’s something that I’d like to look into further. Hopefully within the next two or three months we can have some documents to review and discuss.
I came into this Assembly with rose-coloured glasses, thinking I could make a difference. After a week I left them outside. It’s frustrating, sometimes, Mr. Speaker, hearing from constituents who run into one road block after another. It’s equally frustrating because it seems like there’s nothing you can do about. You can bring your concerns to Members across the floor, who’ve all shared our concerns before. They’ve heard these before, and I’m sure a lot of them have spoken to our issues before.
I don’t know what’s changed. You’re in a position now to provide direction to the departments. You know what it’s like being on this side, so start providing that direction to the departments so the constituents will be the first people we look after, not the departments.
I’d like to direct my questions today to the Minister of HR. I’d like to ask him if the regional offices are the ones that determine the qualifications for job ads that go out.
The departments determine the qualifications for the job.
I’d like to ask the Minister if there are standard requirements across the N.W.T. so that an admin assistant in Hay River or Fort Smith would need the same qualifications as an admin assistant in Inuvik.
Our job-evaluation system and process does provide for that. At one point we had a great number of job-evaluation committees. We’ve now reduced the number so we would have more consistency between the different regions for similar jobs. We regularly undertake reviews and clarifying exercises.
I think that’s part of the problem. I’d like to ask the Minister if he would commit to looking into the review and having the standards…. I know there are a lot of jobs where the qualifications are different in each region or for each job. That’s not what I’m questioning. They are some where the standard requirements could be the same across the N.W.T.
I’d like to ask the Minister if his department would consider having the job requirements for certain positions standard across the N.W.T. so, like he said, there can be some consistency.
I would be pleased to do that. Also, it would help us immensely if the Member would make us aware of the job categories or positions that he had concerns with.
Final supplementary, Mr. Robert McLeod.
The reason we bring our concerns to the floor sometimes is because we’re not getting the answers we think constituents deserve. I’d like to ask the Minister… I’d be happy to sit down with all seven of you over there and give you my concerns as to what could be changed, what needs to be done. Whatever you do with them would be up to the department.
I’d like to ask the Minister if his office reviews all job transfer assignments and job applications or job ads.
This is a priority that we’ve undertaken. We review all job ads for consistency. We also try to reduce our costs as much as possible so that we can facilitate the hiring process.
Mr. Speaker, the Premier has sort of inferred that he doesn’t like the idea of this debate. I can certainly understand why. It’s not a debate that he could actually win, because he says that we did not ask for the updated cost/benefit analysis and we didn’t pass any motions in this House asking for the concession agreement.
I’m looking at Hansard from May 10, when Mr. Ramsay states that it is very important that the government shares the information with the Members of the House so that we can ask questions so we can access the risk to the government, speaking of the Deh Cho Bridge project. That was on May 7. At that time the former Minister of Transportation, Mr. Menicoche, said “Yes, we can provide that to the Member and to the committee at the appropriate time.” Well, the appropriate time was about two weeks ago, and this was in May 2007.
How can the Premier stand here today and say that they were forthcoming with information as a government when we asked in May and we just got the agreement two weeks ago? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, maybe I’m having a dream and I’ve woken up in the 15th Assembly. This is the 16th Assembly. Members have asked for information, I’ve committed to that information, and we’ve provided that information. Thank you.
Let’s talk about what’s happened in this Assembly. We got elected on October 1. We came back here and stood up in this House and asked question after question after question about the Deh Cho Bridge project. The Premier stood up and answered those questions, and not once did he mention the fact that the concession agreement had already been signed on September 28.
I don’t know exactly how stupid he thinks we are. However, I want to tell you that I wouldn’t even have asked him the questions if I had known a concession agreement had been signed on September 28.
Yeah, let’s talk about the 16th Assembly. When did the Premier think he might tell us that the concession agreement had already been signed after we asked all those questions at our very first sitting of this Legislature?
