Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don’t think the Minister responsible for refocusing government has to wait for April to find out what Members think. I think very little research is really required to find out whether or not this side of the House supports going from 70 boards to seven boards. The Minister sat here today. He’s heard all 11 Members on this side of the House stand up and say we don’t like your policy, we don’t like your process, we don’t like the way you’re going about this. Why don’t you just save us all a lot of time and trouble and commit here today to take this off the table?
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Minister responsible for refocusing government, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The broad issue is board reform. If that is not the way forward, what is the way forward on board reform? If the decision of the House is that board reform is off the table in its entirety that is a significantly different and more fundamental issue than we don’t like a particular concept. But we think there’s some value to board reform and what is that direction going to take.
Any responsible government should always be monitoring for efficiencies and effectiveness in any governance model that they have. That would be an expected thing to do. I sat on the committee for Agencies, Boards, and Commissions’ review with the Minister and with Ms. Lee in the last Assembly. Somewhere between the research inventory of our boards and what has come forward now from this government there has been a strange quantum leap. Where did this Minister get this idea that going from 70 to seven was ever going to fly in the Northwest Territories?
---Applause
I’d like to call attention to the visitors in the gallery. We welcome you here. We hope you’re enjoying the proceedings. But I would like to remind you of the rules that there is not to be any applauding in the Chamber. I’ve been very patient today so far, but just a reminder and I ask for your cooperation. Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When we embarked upon this initiative it was recognized that there is a significant restructuring that is entailed in this particular initiative; that there was going to be, when there was engagement across the North, a lot of discussion about how to deal with board reform. We have put forward an initial suggestion. We recognize that there is a lot of concern. The issue of board reform is still a priority of the 16th Legislative Assembly. I’ve heard comments from a number of the Members that they don’t necessarily agree with this particular approach, but there is some type of board reform needed. It was hoped that in April we would be having that discussion. If it’s not this, what is it? If it’s nothing and board reform is going to be pulled off the table as a priority of this Assembly, then that’s a discussion as well that can be held.
The boards and agencies which currently exist in our communities and regions across the Northwest Territories took many years to evolve to the point that they did. They were intended to encourage participation from people more than us. Consensus government doesn’t stop at the doors of this building. Consensus government is a Territory-wide concept. What does Mr. Miltenberger say to those people who are contributing here in Yellowknife and in the communities around the Northwest Territories. What does he say to those people who have contributed so much to build this capacity and be involved for the work that they have done?
We appreciate the work that every board member has contributed over the years, but we also recognize that we have a system that has evolved without a lot of planning over the years, often by program area, by ministry, and we have evolved now where we have 150 boards for 42,000 people for a whole host of different program areas. We have 70 in health and social services, housing, and education alone. We are of the opinion that there are ways to provide enhanced decision-making at the regional community level at the same time as rationalizing some of the board structures.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is a very divisive initiative that this government has gone out with. It has not been costed. There are so many unanswered questions. It is causing people in the regions, in the communities, in the aboriginal governments to consider their confidence in this government. What can the Minister suggest that we do to dial back on this initiative and start again to look for efficiencies and effectiveness? What venue or process would he suggest going forward?
There are a number of options. If the intent is to have further and greater consultation within a specific time frame, there are committees in the past that this Legislature has struck special committees for different things with a specific budget and timeline and clear mandate to go out and do business, which is one way this Legislature has to take that matter into this Legislature. The mandate and all those things would be worked out is one option that comes most immediately to mind as I stand here.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also would like to ask questions of the Minister for refocusing government. I’m wondering what boards and agencies do we have that actually have elected members, democratically elected members. I know the two education boards in Yellowknife. Are there others in the Northwest Territories?
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Minister responsible for refocusing government, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Education has elected boards for the most part. The one exception I believe exists was the arrangements made in Fort Smith where the DEA patterned itself under the health board arrangement where there were two seats for the band, two for the Metis, and two for the general public. But for the most part education boards are elected and health boards are appointed. And the LHO boards, as well, I believe are appointed.
I think these elections are important parts of our democratic process. I think also that particularly in education, the area the Minister has identified, this is a way we can find passionate and truly dedicated people. The statements I’ve seen by the Minister, the outright statements and insinuations, is that we would get rid of all these democratically elected positions and move to appointments. Does the Minister not agree that this would be a loss of engagement with our public? A loss of the civil input, civil society role for meaningful input and the passion that we really want in our education?
There have been no insinuations. I have stated clearly right from the start, and consistently, that the issue of elected versus appointed has yet to be determined. That the structure that we currently have has a mix and as we move forward with board reform, that would be one of the issues that would have to be debated and decisions made on the most appropriate type of structure. Are there other hybrid models? There’s some appointed seats, there are some guaranteed seats, there’s a number of options out there that have yet to be considered.
Perhaps I have been misreading the statements, as have many other people. I’m wondering, just for clarity, is the Minister equally interested in comments on elected versus appointed memberships on these boards and agencies and will he actively seek input on that specific question of democratic elections?
Going forward from April those questions would have to be discussed. The whole issue of all the work done to cost out some of the Collective Agreement issues, pension issues, would have to be looked at. The discussion about the concept and if that’s not the right concept what is the plan, there are a number of significant issues that would have to be addressed going forward. April is just one of the first milestone dates. We had given ourselves to 2010-2011 to work through the planning, design, and implementation. After April we will be looking at those decisions and further consultations.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final supplementary, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That hasn’t clarified the process here to me. Just for clarity, will the Minister be providing the public with the information necessary for them to be able to comment prior to April 1st or is our public to remain mute until April 1st and then they can look at the results and comment thereafter?
We’ve laid out the work we’re trying to get concluded by April so that we can have that fulsome discussion about next steps. The issue of the debate over some of these fundamental issues is yet to be had. The debate over and looking at some of the numbers and costs that are tied into some of the broader issues with collective agreements and implementation and the costing have yet to be had. So the assurance to the Member is that we look forward and plan on further consultation and debate on those fundamental issues, recognizing once again that there is going to be, in all probability, regional differences as there are regional differences that currently exist.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.
Mr. Speaker, the community that I come from, Tulita, I asked the Tulita Housing Association if they understand the Board Reform Initiative and if they do, whether or not they agree with it. The members of the housing association said no, they don’t understand it, and no, they don’t agree with it. So I’m asking the Minister here, in terms of his consultation policy, what it will take for him -- and he’s giving some indications by April -- as to how to go forward in terms of this reform initiative. This consultation process between now and April, just one community of Tulita -- I represent five communities -- the consultation process in terms of communicating with the people in their aboriginal language and in their second language of English, can the Minister assure me that this process will happen in the meaningful way that it’s intended to be?
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Minister responsible for refocusing government, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There are seven weeks left. I have asked them to lay out all the work that we’re going to conclude, the consultations that we’re going to try to undertake in the next seven weeks, taking into consideration as well that we’re going to be in this House until March 13th. We recognize very clearly going forward after April the next phase, once we decide on how we move forward, that there’s going to be more consultation required, probably broader consultation once we get things clarified in terms of general direction.
I would like to ask the Minister, the Tulita Housing Corporation said no, the Fort Good Hope community says no, the Sahtu Regional Health Board and education board have said no. What part of “no” on this board reform does the Minister not understand? The people in the Sahtu do not want…
---Applause
I ask the Minister what it will take for this House here to tell the Minister to cease and desist on the health board initiatives from the Sahtu people. What will it take?
We’re back to the fundamental question. If the Legislature decides that board reform is totally off the table for this Assembly and it will be dealt with at a later date by a different Assembly, that’s a very fundamental question. If it’s a question of board reform, but not this type of board reform, then we have to have that discussion about how to best move forward on the broad issue of board reform to not lose sight of that goal as a priority of the 16th Assembly. So this Legislature will be determining the next steps.
The people of Colville Lake have a dire need for basic services and programs in their community. This proposal, the majority of this Assembly says yes, we will look at a model, will the reform look at the community of Colville Lake to get basic care for dental, nursing, social workers, mental health workers as right now they’re fighting strongly for it. Will this do that for them? Because right now, the way it is, this structure here will certainly deter services farther from Colville Lake than ever. I have not yet seen any type of evidence in terms of how this proposal is going to help my people in the Sahtu.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just a few days ago we concluded the health budget. It’s over $300 million; about 25 percent of the territorial budget. This issue of board reform deals with administration, finance, and governance. The health programs and needs that the Member talks about, the requirements for further enhanced services are all issues that are being dealt with through the health budget, through the education budget for education issues, through the housing budget where there are additional funds. What this particular initiative concentrates on is trying to rationalize the governance structure and look for efficiencies when it comes to finance and admin. It does not detract from the importance of the issues that the Member is raising, but those will continue to be dealt with through the program and budgeting processes and business planning processes that now exist with the Department of Health and Social Services.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the Minister has alluded to, the Health and Social Services budget I know the majority of funding where it’s spent. We all just check the records where this money is spent in terms of funding for health and social services issues. I would ask the Minister in terms of this reform initiative here, in terms of going forward here, that the Minister has talked with the self-government negotiating tables in our communities in terms of what is it that he’s trying to do. We are trying to get power back to the people to make decisions in our communities for our people. This government here is taking power away from people. So it’s going against what we have been fighting for, for many years. Has the Minister talked to the self-government communities in terms of their self-government arrangements in terms of programs that we’re fighting for in our communities?
We believe that this initiative is going to affect with the clarity and efficiencies we think we will realize if the board reform is done properly in whatever the final configuration is should lead to better and stronger support of the community and regional level. We also acknowledge, and from the very start and continue to acknowledge, that as self-government discussions and negotiations continue and as they’re decided, then of course the structures in the regions where these agreements are negotiated will reflect the final content of the self-government agreements.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I listened to the Ministers’ statements earlier today and I was impressed that the three Ministers -- Housing, Health and Social Services, and Education -- actually broke their silence on board reform.
Finally.
Finally. I think it’s about time that they stood up and are held accountable for their support of this Board Reform Initiative. I want to begin by asking the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment if he’s not going to defend the interest of the DEAs that are out there, the school boards, the parents, and the children in our Territory, who else is going to defend their interests at that Cabinet table?
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Minister responsible for Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Certainly in my role as the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment I will be defending my department on a moving-forward basis, making sure that programs are not impacted. We are going to continue with the program delivery in all schools, all 33 communities that we serve.
The next question I have for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment is I would like to know who wrote his Minister’s statement today. Was it his department or was it the Refocusing Government committee?
---Interjection
Cheap shot.
I do have staff in my department that I monitor and work closely with. Even though they write the Minister’s statements for me, I go through it and do a double check. It’s not board reform that wrote the statement for me.
That’s good to know. In speaking to educators around the Territory, DEAs, school boards, and anyone, for that matter, people are having trouble understanding why the government is insistent in moving ahead with the Board Reform Initiative. By throwing education in with health, social services and housing we’re taking a huge gamble on our future. Our future is the children of this Territory. I’m wondering why the Minister is willing to gamble the future of our Territory and the children here in the Territory by supporting an initiative like this board reform. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, maybe the Member looked at it as gambling, but we look at it as cost efficiency and an effective way of operating. Just moving forward, we are compiling information. No decision has been made to date. That message needs to be clear. When April 1st comes along, that is the date that we will compile information and decide if we are going to move forward or not. The Members will be involved as well through the standing committee and the decision-making they will be involved in. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Final supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The last question for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment. I am wondering if, as the Minister of Education, he has heard from any school board, DEA, or educator across this Territory that is in support of the current initiative underway by this government. Thank you.
