To the motion. Premier Roland.
Mr. Chairman, as the Minister stated, in making this motion and needing some more information…. I would encourage the Members, before we read the next motion if there is more to follow, let’s have that clarity or ask about the detail before we actually make the motion, because now we only speak to the motion.
Speaking to the motion, we can't support this action, as the Minister stated earlier. The integrated services delivery model has been in the works for many years. The department had worked on how it would deliver health care across the Northwest Territories, with Stanton being a Territorial facility and then, for example, Inuvik being another major facility and Fort Smith and Hay River also fitting into that integrated services delivery model — and Fort Simpson as well. It has all been part of the plan.
We've heard Members say, for example, when we talk about the dementia facility here in Yellowknife, that we're now keeping patients in the hospital here at a higher cost per bed. Well, the same scenario has been worked out with this facility — working with the community, moving some of those seniors out of that facility and going back north to the program that was developed for it and run it.
This has been many years in discussion. This isn't just as a result of last year’s budget exercise. This was even a few years before then.
So for the record, I just wanted to inform Members that this process has been in the works for quite a number of years. It addresses a plan that's been put in place and adopted by the Department of Health and Social Services. From there, the department has worked with each authority in this area as part of this master development plan for that community and region. That's been put in place.
A number of communities did not get agreement, so they were deferred in a number of areas until that agreement can be put in place.
This time the agreement has been signed off by the authority, and the department has advanced this to the stage where we're now ready to do the work that's required. It’s already existing — some work has been done — and this would continue on with that effort.
I would encourage Members to support moving forward with this, as the work has been done. It’s part of a plan. The Department of Health and Social Services can provide Members with a briefing, at some point, on the integrated services delivery model, as it has been discussed in previous governments as well.
To the motion, the Member from Tu Nedhe, Mr. Beaulieu.
Mr. Chairman, I too, along with others in the House, do not support the motion to delete. This was one of the greatest concerns in my riding as we talked about health and social services — people’s desire to keep people in their communities for as long as possible. This is what this one community is doing. It could be a model for the rest of the communities to be able to keep their elders in their own community for their entire life if they don't wish to be moved. I know of no elders who have been centralized, once they hit a certain age, because services cannot be provided in the communities.
The only question is, when it comes time for the department to look at the integrated service in the communities, they should look at all of the communities to ensure that people can be kept in their communities as long as possible.
To the motion, the Member from Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am firmly planted on the fence in regard to this motion.
I understand fully why this project should go forward, and I do believe that through the master plan of renovating this facility and the long-term care facility in Fort Smith, it will be of benefit.
My concern has to do with the timing. We were given to understand that the things in this particular appropriation were things which were required from a safety point of view, from a contract-in-place point of view — and I’ve forgotten the other one. My understanding is — and again it goes to the question of what the $853,000 has been spent on — that I don’t believe there’s a contract in place with this particular project.
My other concern has to do with — and I think it was raised by Mr. Hawkins — the concept of a regional hospital. Yellowknife has a territorial centre, Inuvik has a fairly large hospital, which could be considered territorial, and we need one south of the lake. Prior to reductions in the budget the question for me is: why are we approving this particular project as going forward prior to knowing what reductions need to be put in place to meet our target of $135 million in reductions?
I don’t doubt that the facility needs work, but I think that if possible, we should do an analysis of the Hay River and Fort Smith health centre capabilities and determine that there will be a fairly large either regional or territorial centre in one or the other of those two communities. I’m on both sides of the fence here. Thank you.
To the motion. Mr. Bromley.
Mr. Chair, this is obviously a very big project, and with the seven-bed dementia facility we’re talking, you know, $25 million. I certainly recognize the need for those facilities. I, again, would like to know sort of where this fits in the plan. Is there a regional centre? Is Hay River — not having a history here — intended to be the regional centre, or is Fort Smith meant to be the regional centre? Perspectives on that would help me on this decision. Thank you.
To the motion, the Member for Thebacha, Mr. Miltenberger.
Mr. Chairman, I could provide some information, since I was involved in this going right back to 2000 or thereabouts. With the integrated service delivery model there is one territorial facility, which is Stanton. There is one regional hospital, which is Inuvik, and it services mainly the Mackenzie Delta area. They can do a more minor level of surgery and do C-sections and that type of surgery.
All the other health centres in the Northwest Territories are level C or less. Hay River and Fort Smith are what are considered level C facilities. We provide community care beds, where people are brought back to recover or they’re diagnosed and are shipped to Yellowknife. Both Fort Smith and Hay River are within an hour of Yellowknife, so there is no need for nor is it affordable to have another regional hospital. The priority is Stanton, Inuvik and the level C communities, which are Fort Simpson, Fort Smith, Hay River.
Fort Smith services the catchment area around the community, which is about 2,500 or 2,700 people, depending on when the schools are in session. Hay River services between 3,000 and 4,000 people in the catchment area that they are in the centre of: some of the folks from Deninu Ku’e, some of the folks from the reserve, some folks from Kakisa, Enterprise, in that area. There is no overlap. Both those facilities are in need of repair. The big difference is, as was pointed out, that there has been a master development plan agreed to in Fort Smith. I understand Hay River has agreed to theirs, yet surprisingly Stanton hasn’t. So Stanton is under some difficulty as well.
This project has been in the works. I’ve been an MLA for 12 years. This thing has been in the works for over ten years. There is nothing new here. This is a major issue, but the integrated service delivery plan, which was agreed to by this Assembly, by the government, is what is driving all these developments.
Therefore, I hope that information helps. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order. Is Mr. Miltenberger speaking to this as a Minister of the cabinet, or he is speaking to this as the MLA for Thebacha?
I know there’s a motion on the floor, but I’ve got to tell you that I don’t think I’ve ever heard a Minister in this House speak to a capital project in his or her riding in this kind of a forum. I understand why Ms. Lee answered the question; she’s the Minister of Health. I understand why the Premier spoke to it; he brought forward the bill. I am not understanding in what capacity Mr. Miltenberger is speaking to this. Not that I’m trying to deny him, but it’s a process question I have. I’ve never seen it before.
Mrs. Groenewegen, you do not have a point of order, since you didn’t specifically state your order. But to be fair to all Members, this motion is before the House, and every Member has the right to speak to the motion. To be fair to everyone, everyone has had the right to speak to the motion.
Committee motion not carried.
Health and Social Services, appropriation authority requested: $27,562,000.
Health and Social Services, $27,562,000 approved.
Justice, appropriation authority required: $1,610,000. We’re on Justice, page 6, supplementary appropriation. Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to talk about a couple of the expenditures planned and most particularly the fencing projects. I wasn’t too clear on the reasoning for it. I know that the North Slave adult facility perimeter fencing and the North Slave young offender security fencing are planned here in the appropriation. I’d just like to know more about why it’s got to be in this appropriation and what the urgency is of expending it in this appropriation.
Mr. Chairman, it’s perimeter fencing to ensure that the design work can be completed and that tenders of construction allow for summer completion. In both cases Minister Lafferty may have more detail to provide as to why this should proceed at this time. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, on the question of the perimeter fencing, at both the NSCC and also the young offenders facility at the present time the property is deficient at the current stage. We have incomplete or inadequate fencing currently at both facilities. As the Premier indicated, the requirement is to provide safety for the offenders, the staff and the public. That’s part of the reason we’re bringing this forward, so that the construction can happen this summer and then proceed with the fencing of both facilities. Mahsi.
Mr. Chairman, thank you to the Ministers for answering that. This didn’t really answer the why question, I suppose, because I’m still uncertain. I know there may be some safety issues, but I’m not really convinced that there are really deficiency issues here. If the Minister, I suppose, can give further detail on that, because I’m not convinced that it has to be in this appropriation. Once again, I’m just unclear about the purpose of the expenditures right now.
Mr. Chairman, for those who have had an opportunity to visit anyone in that facility, whether it be the young offenders or the adult facility, when you drive up, you realize there are no barriers to getting to the main facility itself. There are no gates, no fencing leading to the public area. If anything were to happen or someone were to manage to get out of the facility itself proper, there would be no barriers for them finding their way within the city. That is one of the concerns of addressing the fencing around both facilities. Thank you.
Justice…. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’d like to address a couple of the items relative to Community Justice and Corrections as well.
Two items are listed: Inuvik Young Offender Facility foundation issues and North Slave correctional centre all-erosion drainage modification. From the title of those two projects I’m guessing that there’s some urgency, that with one the foundation of the building is at issue and that with the other it’s an erosion and a drainage problem in and around the facility, but there is no information that tells me that. I’m simply given to understand that the work has to take place this spring. If I could get an explanation from the Finance Minister, that would be helpful.
Mr. Chairman, with the young offenders facility in Inuvik, the foundation issues have been there, unfortunately, almost since the construction of the facility was completed. There’s a portion of the building that is still settling — I guess that is the term that is used — that is causing other problems within the facility itself. This is one of the buildings in that community that is on-grade; that is the term that’s used. It’s not with the piling foundation. It’s on a passive refrigerant system.
Unfortunately, the area they’ve built on didn’t allow for the freezing to occur — that’s some of the discussion that’s happened — and whether it’s going to be used for that or re-profiled, whatever, that’s an asset that cost a bit of money and still needs to be maintained.
On the North Slave Correctional Facility, the information provided is that without the work being done before spring run-off, it will cause more damage from erosion around that facility.
Thank you for the explanation.
Mr. Chairman, just a general comment about a number of items in this appropriation. It’s really helpful if we could have some sort of an explanation, other than the fact that it needs to be done, in order for us to determine whether or not these things are urgent.
I have difficulty with all of the items under Community Justice and Corrections. They all indicate, or we’re given to understand, that work has to go ahead this summer, but it doesn’t tell us why.
I’d particularly like to ask about the aboriginal healing and spiritual program area. If I could get an explanation of what this area is intended for.
Mr. Chairman, I’ll have to defer that to the Minister of Justice. I believe he has more accurate information than I could provide or even had provided the other day, so I’ll go to the Minister of Justice for that.
Mr. Chair, it is the outdoor spiritual and recreation program area that’s been highlighted here. It has been discussed, as has the need to have this area for this summer as the start of the project.
The specific area has been requested by the NSCC, the coordinator of the facility. A primary needs assessment has clearly identified the need for outdoors programs to address the spiritual, physical and recreational needs of the offenders. The intent of the program is to provide an expansion to these traditional recreation programs.
Currently, we do not have a facility — an area — specifically for aboriginal cultural and religious healing programs, so this is one area the department and Corrections want to utilize. That includes a trapper’s cabin, drying and stretching racks, elders’ cabin, tent, sweat lodge, feeding-the-fire structure and so forth. There are all these different projects within the time frame that has been outlined for the specific area.
Mr. Chair, I need to go back to the premise under which I had understood that items were in this appropriation. It doesn’t seem to be a safety issue. It doesn’t seem to be an already-in-progress contract issue. I question whether we should go ahead with the $225,000 expense when we have yet to determine how we are going to save $135 million. I would simply make that as a comment.
Mr. Chair, my questions on the Justice expenditures are similar. I still don’t understand why we have to build a perimeter fence. The $540,000 is a lot of money. I know the Premier tried to explain that, but why do we need a perimeter fence around North Slave Correctional Centre?
Mr. Chairman, the request from the Department of Justice is because right now anyone visiting those facilities has open access to the facilities. There are no gates or fencing that would stop people from entering or leaving, besides the actual structure. That is why it was brought forward in this manner. The Minister of Justice may have additional information to provide on these two projects.
Mr. Chair, we are trying to stay in line with other jurisdictions, to have secure premises for the safety of the public — just a security fence with a completely climb-proof upper section design, to prevent breaches of the security perimeter. This is one area that has been identified by Corrections as needed to prevent incidents such as escapes. Going to the facility, there are no gates or anything similar, so it’s a safety aspect for the public at large. Mahsi.
Mr. Chair, is this perimeter fencing to keep the people in or to keep the people out? Is it to keep the public out or to keep the inmates in? The correctional centre has been operating for quite a while now, and I’d like to suggest we should probably have a better system in place than a chain-link fence.
Mr. Chairman, I think this is a matter of both scenarios: containing those who are incarcerated in the facility and, in some cases, keeping people away from those who are in the facility. Part of their mandate is the safety of both inmates as well as the public. What they have provided for information is to secure the environment around those facilities.
Mr. Chair, I can’t support it, not when we’re looking for 135 million ways to save money. I can’t support $540,000 for a fence, but I will vote when the time comes.
Mr. Chair, this capital is in my riding. I agree with some of the previous speakers. The jail has been in operation now for a number of years, and I haven’t heard of anybody escaping from the young offenders unit or the North Slave Correctional Centre any time lately.
Maybe I could ask the Justice Minister: how many escapees have we had from the North Slave Correctional Centre? Or I could ask the Premier: how many escapees have we had from the North Slave Correctional Centre and the young offenders unit since they opened?
Mr. Chairman, I don’t have that detail. I have to go to the Minister of Justice for that.
Mr. Chairman, I don’t have the specific detailed information on the escapees, I guess you could call them, but I can certainly provide that information at a later time. Mahsi.
Mr. Chairman, I’ve had a tour of the North Slave Correctional Centre. It’s in my riding. It’s not Bowden and it’s not Drumheller. You know, we’ve gone to more of a holistic approach with Corrections. I don't know if having a fence built around the young offenders unit and the North Slave Correctional Centre is necessary. Somebody might be able to convince me of that at some point, but not today; not when we’re faced with the reductions going on.
I would be interested to hear how many people have escaped from the North Slave Correctional Centre and the young offenders unit, because when something like that happens, you usually hear it on the radio, and I just haven’t, probably going back about ten or 12 years to when the old YCC was there in the corner of Kam Lake and Old Airport Road. Somebody escaped from there, but that was a long time ago.
I also would be interested in that information, but I’d be even more interested in the number of attempted break-ins into the jail facility.
This is certainly an expenditure that could be postponed, at least, if not deleted. My understanding is that the people who are incarcerated are those with sentences of less than two years, so I don’t think we are dealing with maximum security or anything like that. I have to agree with my colleague Mr. Ramsay. In a long-term sense it might be something to think about, but given our fiscal situation, I would have trouble supporting this.
Mr. Chairman, you’d be surprised to see how many repeat offenders end up going back into the facility at different times of the year.
Probably more important is the fact that with such an open environment, items can be exchanged between those who might consider helping their friends or associates, and those who are now incarcerated. That is something that one must look at as part of the scenario that must be reviewed.
The department has put it in here as needing to be done, but we will respect the wishes of the Assembly. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I have one other question. I know the facility was fraught with cost overruns, but if you are going to look at perimeter fencing of a facility, that should have been included upfront in the initial capital investment cost.
I’m wondering if it was taken out at some point because of the cost overruns, and the Department of Justice said, “Well, maybe we can do the fencing another day” and now they’re back, looking for the money for the fencing.
This is just a continual expenditure, so I’d like to ask that question.
Mr. Chairman, I don’t have that detail with me. That could be a reality, but I don’t know if the Minister of Justice has that level of detail with him now.
The Member is right. When this facility was being constructed, there was quite a concern about the cost, and cost overruns. Some steps had to be taken to try to mitigate those cost overruns when it was being constructed, but I don’t have the detail as to whether the fencing was a piece of that, or whether some of the aboriginal healing and spiritual programs were also a result of that.
Mr. Chairman, I move that $540,000 be deleted from the Interim Appropriation Detail booklet amount set out in schedule 2, Capital Investment Expenditures, item No. 5, Justice, on page 6, for the project North Slave Adult Facility Perimeter Security in North Slave, Young Offenders Perimeter Security Service Entrance.
Motion is being circulated. Motion is in order. To the motion. Question is being called. All those in favour of the motion?
Agreed.
Opposed?
Agreed.
Dissentions?
The vote is eight to eight. Since the Chair gets to make the deciding vote, I vote against the motion to allow due process. You will have another opportunity to make this motion at another time.
Committee motion not carried.
Justice, appropriation authority required: $1,610,000. Mr. McLeod.
