Mr. Speaker, again, that is a question we do get a lot. It’s one that I think, as a department, we would have to explore to see… Well, we’d have to weigh everything, the finances and all the other things that go with it.
I will commit to the Member that as a department we will have a look at this, and we’ll do a bit of research as to what areas are covered, what’s not covered. I know for commercial buildings they’re pretty well covered. I know for houses, through the NWT Housing Corp, inspection is covered. However, we do have very few private homes going up into the smaller non-market communities. So there’s a bit of a gap there and we’ll have to do some research. I will commit to reporting my finds to the members of the committee. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I just wanted to follow up on my Member’s statement and ask the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment why parents in small communities are, essentially, not allowed to decide where their students will go when they have to complete high school away from home. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. The students are encouraged to attend the local district school system. If not, if they go elsewhere, then the funding follows them. So if they’re in, let’s say, Yellowknife, St. Pat’s for example, based on enrolment, they will get additional funding for an additional child in the school.
We’re not saying no to the students who want to explore other schools, but it depends on the school enrolment, they funding they receive. So when the Deh Cho region receives funding, if an individual student decides to go to another larger centre, then they will lose that portion from the enrolment. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
I understand a bit about that, how schools are funded by each education authority. I guess my question was more related to home boarding. When students from small communities go to Fort Simpson, the education authority takes care of the home boarding and provides them a place to stay. But when the parent makes the choice to send them to another district – in this case to Yellowknife – why are we not supporting costs for home boarding in relatives’ homes or other areas? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, this has been an ongoing discussion that we’ve been having in this House about home boarding, and it’s all across the Northwest Territories. We are trying to deal with this matter as best as we can, dealing with the school boards.
At the end of the day, it’s the school board that makes the decision. If it’s outside their district, then obviously they won’t be supporting a student in Yellowknife. We give them the discretion to expend that funding to the best needs of the community, best needs of the students that are in their region. I will continue to work with the school board, all the school boards across the Northwest Territories that deal specifically with home boarding issues. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, in my Member’s statement I spoke about treaties and Aboriginal rights. We are responsible for Aboriginal education and if that student moves to whatever community, I feel that home boarding should be covered. Thank you.
Sorry, Mr. Menicoche. There is no question, but I will allow the Minister of Education, Mr. Lafferty.
Mr. Speaker, we are not denying students to be educated. We provide the facilities all across the Northwest Territories and the education system as well. We continue to provide funding to the school boards so they can have their children educated in their system as well. We will continue to enforce that on to the school boards. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Menicoche.
Mr. Speaker, thank you for your leeway in continuing debate with the Minister of Education. The parents know the value of good education and that’s why they are choosing other districts based on their own selection and guidelines that they would like for their children.
Once again, can the Minister explore home boarding not only in the district that the student is from but other communities? Also, I want to point out once again, the mitigating factor here is that there are Aboriginal rights and the federal government pays for that, and our government, therefore, is responsible as well. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we are exploring those areas where I just met with Beaufort-Delta on e-learning. E-learning is the way to go now, where students are taking on the courses that are not delivered in small communities. Those are, I believe, going to be something big that we will probably focus on as we move further along.
When it comes to the residence for those students, I still have to deal with the school boards, so I can relay the message on to the school boards. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
The honourable Member for Inuvik Boot Lake, Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I had to refrain myself yesterday from getting involved in the inclusive schooling discussions. Today, after listening to news reports this morning, looking at Hansard and following up, in my questions today I just want to get a little bit more specific answers to the inclusive schooling. My first question is for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.
Has the Minister and the Department of Education, Culture and Employment received the report from the Department of Executive with recommendations on pupil-teacher ratio and the inclusive schooling and the cost savings for the government? Has he received a review, a report, or some type of communication? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Moses. The honourable Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. There are various reports that my department receives. One of them is PTR inclusive schooling. We continue to review those files. Mahsi.
Mr. Speaker, I’m glad to hear that he did see the report, possibly. I didn’t really get a concrete answer there, but he did mention PTR and inclusive schooling.
In terms of recommendations, what is his department doing to address those recommendations made from the program review office which is supposed to make our programs and services in the Government of the Northwest Territories more efficient and more effective in spending our dollars? What is the department doing to act on the recommendations from the program review office that he said his office has received? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated in the House yesterday, there is a review of the inclusive schooling. There is a linkage with the early childhood development and it all falls into play. We want to assess inclusive schooling. How is it being delivered? Is it exhausted in all schools to the best of its ability to assist those students? That’s what we’re doing, based on what we’ve heard from the communities, what we’ve heard from the standing committee and other stakeholders out there. That is based on that. We decided we should move forward on re-evaluating our inclusive schooling, so that’s what we’re doing. Mahsi.
Mr. Speaker, I’m glad that the Minister mentioned that he’s reviewing the inclusive schooling again, because that is something that I heard on the radio and I heard it brought up many times yesterday during question period. Was the review process from the Executive not sufficient enough to move forward in the program review office that this department has to do a second review and spend dollars to review this program again when the program review office has already reviewed it and brought recommendations forward? Can he justify why they’re reviewing a program that has already been reviewed from an internal source for the government? It just doesn’t make sense, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, today we are reviewing our inclusive schooling. We want to reach out to the stakeholders. We heard yesterday that we should be talking to those front-line teachers. We should be talking to those students, the teachers, the professionals, the educators. So that’s what we are embarking on. We are doing our own research, as well, across Canada, across the United States and various places. We want to have a product that will be best suited for Northwest Territories, and based on what we’ve heard and what we will hear from the general public across the Northwest Territories. We are pursuing that and we will be delivering that to the standing committee once it is available. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a few questions here. Does the Minister know if the last review from the PRO did not address those or go to the same stakeholders? Whose decision was it to go and review this inclusive schooling again? Who made that decision to review a program that has already been reviewed previously? Who made that decision? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, as you know, inclusive schooling falls under the Department of Education. I am the Minister responsible for inclusive schooling, so I pursued with my department, gave my department instruction to re-evaluate that inclusive schooling. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to direct my questions to the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources and focus on the Giant Mine Remediation Project. Aboriginal Affairs Northern Development Canada, GNWT’s partner on this remediation project, has filed a water licence application to carry out demolition of the roaster complex at the Giant Mine, requiring removal of 700 tonnes of deadly arsenic trioxide and 90,000 cubic metres of waste, but there are serious concerns with the federal government plan for site. Most disturbing is a lack of a comprehensive dust management and air quality monitoring component. The demolition is metres from the Ingraham Trail and boat launch, and upwind from the city.
Why has this proposal gone forward without rigorous dust control and air quality monitoring provisions, and will the Minister consult with his co-proponent to correct this deficiency? Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Member of Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Member has raised a very specific concern. I will commit to consult with my ENR officials first, and then we will look at what steps need to be taken up to and including the recommendation by the Member that we talk to our federal partner on this. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, thanks to the Minister. This is a very serious concern, obviously, dealing with arsenic trioxide.
The water licence applications submitted under the auspices of an emergency, which excuses it from review process and so on, contains additional provisions to carry out work underground. So this work will not be regulated by environmental conditions governing the overall remediation project. AANDC argues the underground work is urgent, but YKDFN, the Yellowknives Dene First Nation, doesn’t agree, and others question the work qualifies for the emergency exemption required to go ahead now.
We have some very capable individuals that are at that table representing our interests. So they have collectively come to that decision, but the Member has raised, once again, another specific issue and I will check back with the officials at ENR to look into the specifics of that concern. Thank you.
I appreciate the Minister’s response again. I think we really want to use those emergency provisions only when there is an emergency, otherwise it needs the oversight. Now, these problems could have been avoided if we had an effective community-based mechanism for independent oversight. Yet, despite six drafts of an oversight discussion paper and eight drafts of an Environmental Agreement, the working group hasn’t met since last August.
The Minister stated his support for independent oversight at a March 2012 workshop. So will the Minister direct his department and encourage our federal partners to get to work on independent oversight moving to conclusion? Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Bromley.
Music to my ears. Thanks again. Given the imminent and long sought powers of devolution, we could ensure Giant Mine is the last massive liability dumped on the taxpayer. This government introduced environmental security requirements for activities on Commissioner’s land. What is the government’s plan for moving swiftly to extend these requirements to new legislation through devolution to use of the land we’ll be taking control of following devolution?
Thank you. I didn’t quite catch the whole question. So I will take it as notice, I’ll check Hansard and I’ll get back to the Member. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to ask the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment what he’s doing about holding the mines to account on their economic agreements and perhaps even inviting the opportunity of having the mines – let’s be very clear – subsidize a northern workforce to come south to work at those mines. So, in short, what is the Minister of ITI doing with regard to Section 10 of the socio-economic agreement in having ensured it’s implemented and fulfilled? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We continue to work with industry. We work with the mines. I also work closely with my counterpart at Education, Culture and Employment who are responsible for mine training in the Northwest Territories, and Health and Social Services through Minister Beaulieu. We meet regularly with the mines and we have to continue the dialogue on the reasons why the numbers aren’t what they should be and we will continue that dialogue. It does us good to continue to work together on finding solutions to getting our people employed at those mines. Thank you.
I could have sworn that was an answer from the Minister of Education; we need discussions, discussions, meetings and more discussion. For the record, Section 10 is about remedies where, if you cannot reasonably meet those commitments, you put in a formal written statement that talks about how you can achieve them and how can you.
So now to Section 9, how is the Minister holding these mines to account under Section 9 of the socio-economic agreement that puts Northerners to work?
Thank you. The three mining companies were before the Member’s committee last fall. These concerns weren’t raised at that time with me from the mines. Again, we meet with the mining presidents, we meet with industry at every opportunity. We just recently had a meeting between the three Ministers and the mines here in Yellowknife not too long ago. We need to find a way forward, and in this case it does us little good to be fighting with industry, in the case of De Beers, a company that’s going to invest close to $1 billion into this territory and provide many more job opportunities here in the NWT. Thank you.
More job opportunities for the southern workforce as I describe as tourists just visiting. Section 8 of the socio-economic agreement speaks to remedies. I have not heard any solutions other than let’s talk, let’s trade dialogue, let’s have meetings. Who is defending the northern person who needs a job, who is opening up opportunities? It doesn’t sound like this Minister, and if he is, then let’s hear concrete facts and commitments on how he’s doing that, because I haven’t heard anything to date. Thank you.
Thank you. Again, we continue the dialogue with industry and working with the other Ministers I spoke of earlier. I’d be more than happy to sit down with the Member – he’s the chair of the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Infrastructure – and come forward with a plan together. I mean, we need to be working together on solutions on how we can arrive at more employment numbers here in the Northwest Territories, and I extend that offer to the Member as the chair of the standing committee and his committee to sit down with you. We’ll bring the mining companies back, we can have that dialogue, we can chart a course forward together. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.
Mr. Speaker, I’m not the problem. The reality is the mine isn’t meeting its commitment. It barely meets 50 percent of northern Aboriginal workforce, just barely over 50 percent northern workforce, 64 percent of our workforce in total is coming from the South. You know, those tourists, just visiting, working here.
I have not heard anything on what concrete actions can he take to get Northerners working at this mine, because the way the commitments are written in the socio-economic agreement they’re not fulfilled, Section 10 is ignored, Section 9 is ignored, Section 8 is ignored. Who is responsible and who is taking responsibility for this? Thank you.
---Applause
Sorry, Mr. Ramsay. Let’s have a little bit of decorum in here, a little bit of respect for Members’ replies and questions here. Mr. Ramsay.
