Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, when the 16th Legislative Assembly first met to decide on our priorities for this government, we produced a plan we called “Northerners Working Together.” It’s a title that reflects the realities of our consensus system and an ideal we all need to be trying to achieve on a day-to-day basis. More than that, the people of the NWT expect it of us. They expect us to be working together to set the direction and establish the plans that will best meet their current needs and lay the foundation for a better future. Sometimes it’s relatively easy to live up to that expectation, but when we are facing more difficult decisions it can be harder for us to find a way to work together effectively.
Mr. Speaker, we have some difficult decisions to make as a Legislative Assembly. There are no obvious or easy solutions to things like reforming the way we deliver programs and services or helping people with the high cost of living.
When we took office, we understood that we needed to make some changes for the long-term good of the people of the NWT. That’s what “Northerners Working Together” was about. We knew we needed forward-looking initiatives that will support the creation of thriving, sustainable communities and the development of healthy and educated people over the long term. We also knew
we had to take steps to ensure we could continue to afford the kinds of programs and services that we most need, now and in the future.
Fundamental change of that sort will have an impact on people and that may make us uncomfortable. We have to and will make sure that we do whatever we can to soften that impact. But as leaders, we can’t shrink from the difficult decisions in this House if we are going to be able to deliver on a better future for our residents.
I will be one of the first to agree with those who would say this government could be more effective in explaining and building consensus around our actions and initiatives. We clearly need to spend more time creating dialogue around our initiatives. We have already made some changes in this regard and will be investing more effort in explaining what we are planning and in listening to the views and concerns of Members, stakeholders and the public.
At the same time, I would hope that our discussions, here and with the public, will be positive and productive. We want input on the ideas and plans we have proposed and we will listen carefully to all your views, positive and negative. We need constructive criticism and are confident that it can help improve the work we do. But criticism that seeks primarily to preserve the status quo for its own sake should be taken as just that. We need to have the courage to change the things that need to be changed, even if they have served us well in the past.
We also need to be sure we are all participating in all the same discussion. As a government, we bring forward proposals at a variety of stages. Some proposals are fully worked out, some are more preliminary and conceptual. Our purpose in coming out with preliminary proposals is to generate feedback and debate on the “big picture” goals and objectives we are trying to achieve. We know that how we implement our ideas is important. But at the same time, when we are seeking input on preliminary ideas, we don’t want to get so consumed with debate on implementation that we lose sight of our overall goals.
Mr. Speaker, this government has put forward a number of proposals that have generated some strong public reaction and feedback. I expect we’ll hear a lot about one of them -- board reform -- today. We respect those views and are taking them into account. At the same time, we continue to believe that our plans are faithful to the goals of this Assembly. I hope that Members, stakeholders and the public will join with us in the spirit of working together to help us develop strong, workable plans for change that will make a positive difference for our residents today and for the future. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Before we go on, colleagues, I’d like to draw your attention to the gallery to the presence of Ms. Lena Pedersen, Member of the 7th Council and the first elected lady to office. Welcome to the Assembly.
---Applause
The honourable Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.
MINISTER’S STATEMENT 25-16(3):
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take the opportunity today to follow up on the statement made on February 16th by the Honourable Michael Miltenberger, the lead Minister on the Board Reform Initiative.
There is a great deal of interest in this initiative and people are expressing concerns over the government’s plans for board reform. As the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, I am hearing the concerns that people have about what this means for the education system in the Northwest Territories, including the schools and the people who work in the schools. I want to assure Members that we recognize all the good work that has been done over many years to help improve the education system in the Northwest Territories. We have more and more students graduating every year from our high schools and this is even more the case in our communities and among our aboriginal students. We have many dedicated educators and administrators, as well as many committed members on various boards who are working hard to ensure we have the best education system possible for our students.
Board reform will respect all the good things that have been done in education and will build on that success. This initiative focuses on governance structures through which we will work to find systemic and long-lasting ways of increasing collaboration and cooperation to meet the needs of students in a cost-effective and efficient manner.
Above all, we want to continue making progress in the education system. In order to make progress, we must be prepared to make change where it will help us make the progress we all desire.
Mr. Speaker, we have 33 divisional education councils that govern 49 schools in the Northwest Territories. Education authorities outside Yellowknife are organized under four divisional education councils and one community services agency. The commission scolaire francophone des territories du Nord Ouest is responsible for French first language schools in Yellowknife and Hay River, while schools in Yellowknife are governed by two district education authorities. In exploring new models of governance for education, we expect that schools will continue to operate much like they do today. Principals and teachers will continue to fulfil the responsibilities of delivering education programs to students. There will continue to be a need for senior administrators with education expertise to support the schools and to provide oversight responsibilities for ensuring quality program delivery. As Minister of Education, Culture and Employment I will continue to hold responsibilities for the education system in the Northwest Territories.
Board reform will not affect the education rights of anyone in the Northwest Territories. It is hoped that this Initiative will result in more efficient and effective governance of schools in the NWT.
We welcome input from people, not only to express their concerns but also to offer suggestions on how we can continue to make improvements in our overall governance structures. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Minister of Health and Social Services, Ms. Lee.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak to the issue of board reform from the health and social services perspective. As Minister of Health and Social Services I have heard concerns on what this board reform means to the NWT health and social services system. As my Cabinet colleagues have mentioned and I have stated all along, nothing is set in stone and we are looking for feedback on how to proceed.
In health and social services, we are always looking to improve service delivery for our clients while at the same time making sure our system is financially sustainable. The Board Reform Initiative is attempting to streamline those services and potentially reduce administrative costs. Coordinating services such as school counsellors, child youth workers and social workers will help better serve the needs of our clients. Integrated regional service boards will allow for better case management and help clients receive services in a one-stop approach.
Along with the Tlicho Community Services Agency, there are seven other health and social services authorities in the Northwest Territories. Two Authorities, Stanton Territorial Health Authority and Hay River Health and Social Services Authority, are managed by a public administrator, the other six have a board of trustees. Chairs of these boards sit on a committee called the Joint Leadership Council, which I chair as the Minister. All Members of this council find this to be an effective forum for identifying issues common to all boards, and provide strategic system-wide direction, which shows us how we can work together to manage a complex system.
I have called two meetings with the Joint Leadership Council on the issue of board reform and listened to some of their initial thoughts. Some good ideas were exchanged and suggestions on ideas we need to consider were offered. We have put these into our deliberations. I have also travelled to communities and regions at their invitations to have a dialogue and seek their input into this process. I have committed to meeting with the Joint Leadership Council throughout the consultation process. Similarly the deputy minister of Health and Social Services meets regularly with the Joint Senior Management Council, which includes CEOs from each authority. These initial information exchanges have and will continue to help build the foundation for future board reform consultation.
Mr. Speaker, to be clear, we are not looking at reducing the level of care we offer to residents of the Northwest Territories. In fact it is the opposite, our goal is to create a more effective and efficient system that ensures sustainability and to better meet the needs of NWT residents by integrating services and creating efficiencies where reasonable. This supports goals of the 16th Legislative Assembly, of “an effective and efficient government and sustainable, vibrant and safe communities”.
I would encourage everyone to read the supporting documents and partake in the consultation efforts with good will and open minds. Feedback from everyone will enable us to reach our goal. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Ms. Lee. The honourable Minister responsible for the NWT Housing Corporation, Mr. Michael McLeod.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to the issue of board reform, specifically how it will impact on the delivery of housing programs and services at the community, regional and territorial level.
As Minister responsible for the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation, my priority is to ensure that every community in our Territory receives support to improve its housing conditions. For nearly 35 years, local housing organizations have been the primary source of community input on housing matters and have been critical partners of the Housing Corporation in the delivery of programs and services. As other Members of this Assembly have noted, LHOs have done a commendable job throughout their history, and the commitment and service of board members and employees of these organizations need to be recognized.
As Minister Miltenberger indicated in an earlier statement, board reform is not about suggesting that the boards aren’t working hard to deliver programs and services. It is about reviewing how we serve clients who access multiple services from the GNWT. Public housing clients are often the same residents who access income support, education and career development services, and no matter what the final outcome of this review may be, the GNWT needs to better develop its case management approach to ensure that those residents who require support from multiple service areas are served in the most efficient manner possible.
It should also be pointed out that the delivery of housing at the community level is also being considered as part of our review of infrastructure services. As Members are aware, the Housing Corporation and the departments of Public Works and Services and Transportation are currently reviewing how infrastructure will be delivered in our communities. These efforts are intended to find areas where collaboration and better coordination can improve how we plan for, acquire and maintain roads, schools, hospitals and housing in our communities.
These are important linkages between the infrastructure review and board reform. Together, both processes will consider best practices for how we deliver housing at the community level, and decisions made within one review must give consideration to what is being discussed through the other.
Mr. Speaker, these reform initiatives are at the information gathering stage, and consultations with stakeholders are ongoing. I am pleased to inform this House that I will be meeting with the chairs and managers of all LHOs in March to gather their feelings on board governance and service delivery options. I am looking forward to a good discussion with these individuals.
Ultimately, Mr. Speaker, structural change of this magnitude deserves a full and open dialogue with all stakeholders prior to proceeding. Together with my Cabinet colleagues, I am committed to do just that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in every meeting we, as leaders, stop to say a prayer for guidance in the work that we do on behalf of our constituents. The prayer that we pray at the opening of every session day asks that we have constant recognition for the dignity and aspirations of those whom we serve. Today, Mr. Speaker, I would like to elaborate on that prayer in relation to the pressing issue before us. We are taught to pray by beginning and entering with our thanksgiving and then making our requests known. Today I thank God for our country, for the hard-fought freedoms, the freedoms of expression, the freedoms of religion, the freedoms to demonstrate, all of these freedoms entrenched in our Canadian Constitution.
Today, I thank God for this marvellous Territory that we all call home, for the richness of the people, for the diversity of our cultures and for the remarkable resources of our land.
I thank God for the heritage of our First Nations who were the original people of our Territory, for their perseverance through the challenging times, for their wisdom in dealing with the ever-changing pressures on their way of life, and for their forgiveness when they suffered injustices and for their sharing of their knowledge when newcomers arrive and made the North their home as well.
I thank God for every leader at the community, regional or territorial level who has embarked on service with the best interest of their people at heart, that they would never lose sight of the honour and trust there is in being asked to lead. Whether that leadership is on a local school board, a member of a parent action committee, a community or band council member, a community justice committee, I trust that they will feel validated for their contribution in leadership.
For those who serve at the front lines of our programs and services to our people, I pray for strength, encouragement and supernatural wisdom. For the teacher who stands each day before a class of young minds with the desire to bestow knowledge, value and guidance, even when they feel alone or overwhelmed, I pray they will feel the support of their colleagues and this government and the network of leaders who oversee the education of our youth. For the nurse at the local health care facility as they deal with the stress brought on by illnesses or the trauma and grief from the loss of a loved one through accident, illness or suicide. For the councillor who puts their heart and their hand out to victims of abuse or those struggling with addictions, that they would celebrate the small victories and it would give them inspiration to carry on.
I pray for us as legislators at this level of government that we would serve with humility and respect, never losing sight of the dignity and aspirations of those whom we serve from the most vulnerable to the strongest, from the youngest to the oldest, from the most lowly of means to the most successful. I pray that nothing that we do or say would be an affront to those who desire to serve and be involved through their life’s work or through their volunteering.
I thank God that His ways are higher than our ways, that His thoughts are higher than our thoughts and I pray that our leadership would demonstrate those values. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In October of 2008, my Member’s statement said that I believe that some consolidation of some NWT boards is necessary and I still believe that. Mr. Speaker, I also said that the Tlicho Services Board model is not the best option for board reform in the NWT and I encouraged the government to consider other options. I quote from the Hansard record of October 9, 2008, when I said, “There are many other combinations and hybrids of our current system open to us if we get creative. No option should be dismissed outright.”
I also said that the consolidation of boards in Yellowknife would be almost impossible and encouraged significant in-person consultation with stakeholders. It is now February 2009 and where are we? The amalgamation model was decided without genuine consideration of other possible options; in my mind, definitely without consultation. One definition of consultation says it is a discussion aimed at ascertaining opinions or reaching an agreement. That would be prior to any decision, not after. There was no opportunity for stakeholders to provide comments or input and that’s a shame.
Mr. Speaker, MLAs, board members and residents have yet to be told how the decision on the model was made. It’s now February 2009 and where are we? In-depth analysis of the impact of the proposed changes on our residents, our board members, our staff, our systems is still lacking or unavailable. Where is the proof for the research to show that the proposed model is the best one working successfully elsewhere and suitable to all regions of the NWT? It’s now February 2009 and where are we?
The Minister has presented board reform as an issue already decided. His high-handed attitude and remarks to the media have shown a clear disregard to the importance of all NWT residents who are concerned about this change. He’s dismissed them outright, Mr. Speaker, and that may not be his intent, but that’s the message he’s transmitted.
In a statement made by Mr. Miltenberger on Monday, he indicated that the government took a considered approach to finding a solution for board reform and that they used three principles as a basis for their decision. I agree with that approach and the principles are valid and acceptable, Mr. Speaker, but the problem and the principles should have been presented to our public along with a blank page and a request for input to help create a model that will really work.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted
Thank you to my colleagues. Working bottom up, not top down, Mr. Speaker, will garner buy-in to a problem from all participants. At this point, Cabinet has not sold their bill of goods to anyone except themselves. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am frustrated that once again we have taken a good policy opportunity with good intentions and turned it into an attack on the mood of our public whom we are meant to serve. We simply cannot continue to unleash public assaults and threats such as the current Board Reform Initiative. In fact, policy ideas such as this should first go through an internal process of maturing by being substantiated with representation from different perspectives and departments and with some cold hard facts to ponder. Only then, with a clear iterative public consultation schedule identified should we begin to engage our public in a responsible way.
Mr. Speaker, the clear suggestion to throw out the entire existing system is causing undo upheaval, but it also threatens to throw out the baby with the bathwater. A good example of where the system is working is our two education boards right here in Yellowknife. Both boards operate within budget year after year and achieve a standard of education amongst the highest in Canada. These are democratically elected boards of passionate parents who by their very nature, are the most qualified people to be making decisions about children’s education. We need to recognize this success up front. This does not detract from the need to look into ways we can ensure cooperation between boards when required.
The reason the housing authorities were created was to have operations at the community level. A good example of what can potentially happen when we remove this community-based approach and replace it with a bureaucratic approach is a transfer of the housing from the housing authority to ECE. This move is a failure costing our people more problems and our government more money than the system it is replacing. This is a classic example of forced and ineffective reform and should speak to the Minister.
Stanton Territorial Hospital Authority delivers good services, but has experienced management problems and budget deficits most years since division. Loss of the public board exacerbated these failures. There are now indications that Stanton is finally improving with significant personnel changes and hard decisions.
Yellowknife Health and Social Services Authority continues to be effective and within budget, however, there may be opportunities for some productive thinking, for improving efficiency of health operations of these two authorities in Yellowknife.
I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted
The biggest folly here is that we are force feeding a model on a number of systems, some of which are functioning very well and some of which are not. There seems to be no attempt to differentiate these or consider inherent regional realities to help focus and facilitate productive discussions and input.
Government’s proposals have generated more than some strong public reaction and feedback, as our Premier has said today, but they have done more than that; they have generated outright rejection. Surely we have learned our lesson by now and we realize good communications makes for good policy. If so, I would ask the Minister to show us.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Beaulieu.
Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. Today, like my colleagues, I would like to talk about the proposed board reform and its potential impacts at the community level. The residents of Tu Nedhe are concerned that the new administrative process associated with board reform will create a new state of confusion at the community level. Also, we will see a loss of authority at the community level. Included in this is a loss of decision-making, which is a critical component in managing these areas. The consideration and evaluation of important community factors and other equally important intangibles can only be made possible by those living in the community.
The amalgamation of these boards into a regional board will create a loss of focus and expertise in each of the three areas of housing, health, and education. As an example, housing allocations; will the proposed regional boards result in housing allocations being made outside the community or will it mean that the local housing staff will now be taking on additional responsibilities, including making the important unit allocation decisions themselves? Does this mean new and revised job descriptions? Would this mean new positions? Would this mean a raise in pay? Does this mean all housing association and authority staff will now become GNWT staff?
Another example could be medical travel; an activity that hits close to home and an activity that has personal and economic impact on many families in our smaller communities. How will this be impacted by the new board reforms? There is a danger that regional boards will be more concerned with the bottom line than the welfare of individuals when making medical travel decisions.
Probably the most important concern with the amalgamation of the various boards into the regional, all-inclusive board is combining different mandates. In other words, the mandate of education is to increase the viability of an individual to provide opportunities for improving one’s skills and abilities and to do so over an extended period of time. On the other hand, the mandates of housing and health are primarily concerned with addressing serious and almost always immediate concerns and the basic necessities of life, personal health, and shelter issues.
I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted
Amalgamation of these mandates will not only result in a loss of expertise in these areas, but there is a danger that one will take precedence over the other. This is not good when all three are critical and must be treated as top priorities. All of these must be examined thoroughly and carefully, and due consideration must be given to those that will be directly impacted by this proposed change.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The board reform process has totally undermined the constitutional rights and obligations we have to First Nations people. The Inuvialuit in my region settled their land claim in 1984 and the Gwich’in in 1992. They presently have two self-government tables being negotiated in the Beaufort-Delta region: one for the Inuvialuit and one for the Gwich’in. The Inuvialuit are negotiating for a regional government structure. The Gwich’in are negotiating what the obligations are under the treaties they signed in 1921 and the modern treaty they signed in 1992.
Those agreements give the aboriginal groups the right to negotiate self-government agreements, to take over programs and services that are presently provided by this government. The First Nations people throughout the Northwest Territories and the rest of Canada have a fundamental right to self-government and to be accommodated under those self-government agreements to negotiate framework agreements to take on public government programs, such as housing, health care, education, policing, justice, cultural rights, and also those aboriginal rights that are still enforced under Treaty 8, which was signed in 1898, Treaty 11 in 1921, and the modern land claim agreements which have been signed in the last 20 years.
As we all know, the Tlicho have signed their agreement. Yes, they have a Tlicho Government, they do have a Tlicho Regional Services Board. But the Tlicho had the opportunity to negotiate what they feel will work for them. The other aboriginal groups in the Northwest Territories must have the same opportunity. Regardless if it’s the Inuvialuit negotiating their regional government structure and developing the regional structures they want in regard to development of their programs and services or the Gwich’in in regard to negotiating their rights, the same thing applies with regard to the Sahtu communities where Deline has negotiated a community-based self-government agreement and the community of Tulita is in the same process. The same thing applies to the people in the southern part of the Northwest Territories of whom we all know the Dehcho are negotiating a regional government for the Dehcho people and the Dehcho Nation...
Mr. Krutko, your time for Member’s statement has expired.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted
Like I stated, the Dehcho are negotiating a regional government for the Dehcho government and the same thing applies to the Akaitcho, who are also negotiating their treaty rights with regard to Treaty 8.
I have to say that this government hasn’t done its homework when it comes to consultation that it has to impose upon aboriginal people and aboriginal governments to ensure that this does not interfere with those negotiations that are presently going on in the Northwest Territories and in the regions throughout the Northwest Territories.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I was listening to the issues of board reform and the information that’s been provided to me about board reform I was thinking about a time when in the Sahtu region we had something like a board reform. Finally, after many years of good politicking and the leaders in the House Assembly, this Assembly here, we finally have an educational divisional board. Several years ago we had a health board. Now we have a district office of the housing authority in the Sahtu region and we are just getting used to having this kind of authority in our region. Now this government is proposing to take it away again. The people yet have not really fully benefited having full authority in the region in terms of these types of boards that the Minister is suggesting that we go towards a super board in the Northwest Territories.
Mr. Speaker, people in the Sahtu, and I spoke to them and asked the leadership if they support the Board Reform Initiative. I have received letters and phone calls saying no, they do not support the board initiative at this time. There is no type of real genuine consultation that has gone on with my people in the Sahtu region. We have land claims, self-government negotiations that are being negotiated as we speak. This has an impact on the board reform. We, in the Sahtu, want the same rights in terms of education, health and housing. We brought to the community level as close as possible where authority and decisions can be made. We have experience where education decisions, health decisions and even housing decisions were made out of the Sahtu region.
I will tell you what. It is not a good feeling when you are living in the region in communities where decisions are made at headquarters and regional levels. They tell you and they dictate to you, but they call it consultation. But it is really a dictatorship in terms of telling you what to do, how you are going to do it and what you should be grateful for. We know in the Sahtu region that this is the price you pay for being in a democratic society, the Northwest Territories, where the federal government has given the right to aboriginal people to negotiate aboriginal governments.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted
In closing, the people in the Sahtu agree with the Members here that board reform needs to be stopped and really looked at. Otherwise, this government here is going to feel the wrath of the Sahtu people.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.
Today I share my colleague’s concerns and I, too, will discuss the Board Reform Initiative. Also, welcome the many teachers, concerned citizens and youth in our gallery here today.
---Applause
The Ministers have proposed some very big changes. We would need to have some very clear and important reasons to understand why we should make those big changes. The Ministers have not yet been able to clearly explain to me what important and urgent problems they want to solve with these new regional services boards. In my riding of Nahendeh, the Dehcho Divisional Education Council is organized, efficient and within budget. The Dehcho Health and Social Service Authority is operating efficiently and effectively. The local housing organizations function well and as well they can relate to people’s circumstances. We have capable administrators, financial managers and chief executive officers. We don’t have many issues with case management. Our agencies and staff currently work together for the betterment of our people.
I initially supported a review of our boards and agencies. However, the GNWT’s rollout package indicates that government is now actually proposing the merging of organizations and administrations. This now has the interest of my constituents and is developing into an issue of great concern. Mixing of health, education and housing is not a good combination. I liken it to the mixing of apples, oranges and bananas. There is just no way to make them the same.
It seems like the Ministers are proposing to make changes that would cost a lot of money and, in the end, would not make very much difference to the people. I understand that there would be large HR costs to bring new people into the public service, transfer their pensions. I also understand that there would be significant computer costs so that everyone could be on PeopleSoft and the government’s new financial systems. And then there would be offices that would have to be rearranged and moved. We, as MLAs, would be surprised if we were able to review a carefully prepared estimate of these costs. I would expect that number could be in the millions of dollars, Mr. Speaker.
I would also seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement. Thank you.
---Unanimous consent granted
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much, colleagues. Effective and efficient delivery of our public services is all that our people ask. I believe that our current system is effective. I also believe that the proposed changes will not provide improved services to our people. I am not in favour of the proposed Board Reform Initiative. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. The honourable Member for Nunakput, Mr. Jacobson.
Today I would like to talk about some real issues facing our local housing organizations in Nunakput. I really think these issues get lost when the government identifies its own priorities and diverts everyone’s attention to the topic of board reform, the way we are trying to improve services offered by local boards. No one really thinks that a super board is going to make any difference to the ordinary person in the community. Everyone knows talking about a super board means going to many meetings and discussions of a super board and will only take away from local organizations in the effort to manage and deliver local services.
In Nunakput, the Inuvik Housing Authority now manages services in Paulatuk and Sachs Harbour. This means now everyone takes longer because of the community who can help sort out our own problems. We all know it takes a while for income support processes and assessments. Now it takes longer for housing to organize their rental charges to their tenants. Now there are more people being evicted because of the rental arrears. Let’s do something real for our residents. We need to provide better services so they could live happier and more productive lives. You can’t convince me the changing of managers and the board members will have any real affect in Paulatuk and Sachs Harbour to improve housing and income support services. Let’s start to really fix the problems and things that matter to the people. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Jacobson. The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Abernethy.
Mr. Speaker, this morning when I was walking into the Legislative Assembly I saw two signs stuck in the snowbank. There are now dozens out there. One of the signs said, “super boards is super bad.” The other said, “one board does not fit all.” I have to say that I agree with these signs. The protesters who placed those signs outside of this Legislature are right. They hit the nail square on the head.
Over the last several months, there has been a lot of concern raised about this Cabinet’s direction to move forward with board reform focussing on going from 70 boards to seven using the Tlicho model as basis. In my opinion, that blind devotion to this model for every region in the NWT is a huge mistake. Fortunately, on Monday, February 16, 2009, the lead Minister of the Strategic Initiative Committee on Refocusing Government seemed to backtrack from that position. According to the unedited Hansard of February 16th, Minister Miltenberger said, “Board reform is a work in progress. The issues are complex and it will take time to develop our plans and to implement any changes. We have stated in the past that this may end up taking on different forms in different regions.”
To me this suggested that Cabinet was finally moving away from the preconceived model from 70 to seven, which is what I wanted to hear. This message was strengthened by comments by Minister Lee in today’s Yellowknifer where she indicated that this is a work in progress; nothing is predetermined. To me, these comments from the Ministers suggested that they might be open to a healthy debate, that they might be willing to see reason and listen to the people in the NWT who are concerned about the dedicated direction the Cabinet is taking with respect to board reform.
Unfortunately, the good feeling didn’t last long. This morning while driving to work, I listened to an interview on the radio with Minister Miltenberger. I was incredibly disappointed to hear the Minister tell the reporter that we think we can go from 70 to seven and we are prepared to have a discussion. We want to meet towards that, but how we get there and let’s get some consultation and feedback on that. Mr. Speaker, these comments fly in the face of the Minister’s comments on Monday. They are completely contradictory. What is the real message we are trying to send? To me, the message is clear. The Minister is still committed to going from 70 to seven. The decisions have already been made. The preferred model has been selected regardless of facts or research.
Once again, the voices of the people and the Regular MLAs aren’t being heard. It’s Supplementary Health Benefits Program changes all over again. When will Cabinet realize that they are here to represent the people of the NWT, not to do whatever they want, when they want and how they want? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
---Applause
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to speak today, as well, on the issue of the government’s plan to reform boards in the Northwest Territories. I spoke numerous times about my belief that the government has not done adequate or meaningful costing, research, consultation or analysis as it pertains to board reform. Mr. Speaker, no one can debate the fact that efficiencies need to be found. This continues to be a priority of the 16th Assembly. We seem to have gone from finding efficiencies, which is a noble pursuit, to potentially gutting our education, health and housing boards. The edict that we go from 70 to seven boards from Minister Miltenberger is not what Regular Members envision. This is not what we wanted. You cannot point your finger at the Regular Members. This is Cabinet’s plan plain and simple. In my opinion, the move to regional super boards will do nothing to address efficiency. The Minister has yet to articulate exactly what the problems are. These super boards will add another level of bureaucracy and be located, staffed and administered in regional centres. Mr. Speaker, will there be a corresponding loss of jobs in other communities? Absolutely. What the government is moving toward is an erosion of ministerial and legislative responsibility and accountability. With these super boards administering close to 70 percent of our annual budget, why would we even need 19 MLAs when the responsibility and oversight of close to 70 percent of our budget is done by what very well could amount to be appointed boards and chairs?
Mr. Speaker, we should be looking at ways to increase the responsibility of Ministers so accountability in our government can be maximized. Mr. Speaker, this government needs a lesson in consultation and what it means to engage the stakeholders and the public in a meaningful way. To date, they have failed miserably in consulting, researching and explaining what it is that they’re trying to do or to fix. The style of this government in its short time is to intimidate, to bully and to push around those most vulnerable in our society. Mr. Speaker, this abusive power has to stop somewhere. Mahsi.
---Applause
