Results of the recorded vote: all those in favour, six; opposed, five; abstaining, seven.
---Carried
Item 18, first reading of bills. Item 19, second reading of bills. Item 20, consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 4-16(5), Executive Summary of the Report of the Joint Review Panel for the Mackenzie Gas Project; Tabled Document 30-16(5), 2010 Review of Members’ Compensation and Benefits; Tabled Document 38-16(5), Supplementary Health Benefits – What We Heard; Tabled Document 62-16(5), Northwest Territories Water Stewardship Strategy; Tabled Document 75-16(5), Response to the Joint Review Panel for the Mackenzie Gas Project on the Federal and Territorial Governments’ Interim Response to “Foundation for a Sustainable Northern Future”; Tabled Document 103-16(5), GNWT Contracts Over $5,000 Report, Year Ending March 31, 2010; Tabled Document 133-16(5), NWT Main Estimates 2011-2012; Tabled Document 135-16(5), Response to the Standing Committee on Social Programs Report on the Review of the Child and Family Services Act; Tabled Document 156-16(5), Supplementary Estimates (Infrastructure Expenditures) No. 5, 2010-2011; Tabled Document 157-16(5), Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures) No. 3, 2010-2011; Bill 4, An Act to Amend the Social Assistance Act; Bill 14, An Act to Amend the Conflict of Interest Act; Bill 15, An Act to Amend the Fire Prevention Act; Bill 16, An Act to Amend the Dog Act; Bill 17, An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act; Bill 18, An Act to Repeal the Settlements Act; Bill 19, Municipal Statutes Amendment Act; Bill 20, An Act to Amend the Evidence Act; Minister’s Statement 65-16(5), Devolution Agreement-in-Principle, Impact on Land Claims and Protection of Aboriginal Rights; and Minister’s Statement 88-16(5), Sessional Statement, with Mr. Bromley in the chair.
By the authority given me as Speaker by Motion 31-16(5), I hereby authorize the House to sit beyond the daily hour of adjournment to consider the business before the House.
I’d like to call the Committee of the Whole together. Colleagues, we have before us consideration of tabled documents 4, 30, 38, 62, 75, 103, 133, and 135, as well we have 156, 157, and we have Bills 4, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20; and Ministers’ statements 65-16(5) and 88-16(5). What is the wish of committee, Mrs. Groenewegen?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The committee would like to continue on with consideration of the main estimates this afternoon of the Department of the Executive; Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations; Finance; Justice; and the Legislative Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Is committee agreed?
Agreed.
Thank you. We’ll do that, but we’ll take a short break first.
---SHORT RECESS
I’d like to call Committee of the Whole back to order. We will proceed, as agreed, with the Department of Executive. I’ll start by asking the Minister if he’d like to bring in any witnesses.
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. I’ll ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to please escort the witnesses into the House.
I’d like to ask the Minister to please introduce your witnesses.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To my left is Penny Ballantyne, Cabinet secretary. To my right is Mr. David Stewart, ADM of Executive operations.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Committee, we’re on page 2-13, Executive. Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My questions are related to the voluntary sector. I know that MACA’s doing a lot of good work but I and other Members on this side of the House have been continually asking for a more centralized body that could sort of represent the GNWT across all sectors of the voluntary sector. Earlier today I heard the Premier talking about the sports side, the volunteerism going on at MACA. That’s clearly one side. The NGOs, or the non-government organizations, which cross responsibility across every department in this organization, are the other side of the voluntary sector, the voluntary sector being NGOs as well as the more traditional volunteer type organizations. We’ve been asking to have somebody within the Department of Executive identified as a liaison between our government and the entire voluntary sector, which clearly includes NGOs. To date the answer has been no, for the most part. There is significant value in having a contact person, a liaison, if you will, between us and these important organizations who deliver programs and services for us throughout the Northwest Territories. I’m wondering if we can get some feedback on the status of whether or not we’re going to see a liaison role between the Executive on behalf of the entire GNWT and the sector as a whole.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Mr. Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I know Members have called on us to establish an additional position to have for dealing directly with non-government organizations. We make a distinction between the volunteer sector as well as the NGOs. We have, in a sense, through the Department of Executive, been taking on the NGO file around the Stabilization Fund and dealing with the non-government organizations. I’ll ask Ms. Ballantyne to make some comments on this.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Ms. Ballantyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The deputy ministers, particularly of the social program envelope, have been meeting to discuss ways to improve inter-departmental coordination with the NGO and voluntary sector. What we’ve determined through those discussions is that program departments have very strong relationships with the organizations that they work with. It doesn’t appear to us at this point that Executive could really add a lot of value to those relationships other than doing what we’re already doing, which is the provision of some workshops for the NGO sector which the Member is aware of. The departments who have established relationships with the NGOs we feel do need to continue to be the primary contact for those organizations at this point.
Thank you, Ms. Ballantyne. Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you for that. There’s clearly a definition issue here. In the research reading I’ve done, the terminology I’m using being voluntary sector does include NGOs. In most other jurisdictions that use the terminology “volunteer sector,” they’re talking about the more traditional volunteer organizations but also NGOs. For the point of this conversation when I refer to voluntary sector, I’m actually referring to the whole gamut.
I agree with you wholeheartedly that the NGOs that have a relationship with the departments, have to and must maintain that relationship. What we’re talking about is a bigger picture position. Somebody that when NGOs have a concept or issue with the government as a whole, such as how we formula finance or fund or things like that, and it’s a government decision who do they talk to. They can talk to a program department, but many of them are dealing with multiple program departments. Who is the ultimate body who’s sort of got the knowledge of where we stand as a government.? Who’s the ultimate body who can bring the direction and decisions of Cabinet to the mass sector as a whole? Right now there’s conflicting messages coming from different aspects or different departments.
I think the role or potential role that could exist in the Executive would have a real opportunity for consistent messaging, to work on territorial-wide initiatives like the formula financing from a position of some responsibility, in particular in the Executive. I think we’re missing an opportunity to help work with the sector as a whole and to give them that body that could be the key link for the bigger picture issues. Not the individual financing issues, the individual program issues, because clearly that must be the department that is funding them. But there are NGOs that are new and there are NGOs that are looking at maybe getting set up in the North. There are all those types of organizations. If they had a single body they could go to to explain this is how the Government of the Northwest Territories does business, these are the departments you’ll have to talk to but this is how our financing works, this is what we would expect from NGOs as far as accounting, reporting, blah, blah, blah. There’s a lot of opportunity here and I just think we’re missing an opportunity by not putting in some sort of liaison position.
I know MACA’s been doing some of that role, but MACA’s main priority in this area has been sports and recreation. They do a fantastic job of it. They are clearly one of the departments who should have personal links with NGOs in the voluntary organizations they are working with. I support that. As far as being the department that has the wherewithal and can speak on behalf of the government on issues like the formula financing and big picture issues, I’m not sure it’s the right department. I think visually and aesthetically -- maybe aesthetically is the wrong word -- but visually and conceptually the right department would be the Executive.
I still strongly encourage Cabinet to reconsider that in light of the definition we happen to be using on this side of the room for the voluntary sector being all-encompassing rather than breaking things up into little groups. There is significant opportunity. I think we can make some real progress if we were to do this. Not minimizing in any way, shape or form the important work that the departments themselves do and the relationships they have with their clients, if you will. Any thoughts the Premier has on that I’m happy to hear.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Mr. Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The non-government sector, we do have a difference of definitions, obviously. Clearly the non-government sector as we look at it, and that’s where you look at the multi-year funding aspect as contracting services by the Government of the Northwest Territories to these organizations. I would say in fact the Executive is already playing that role. When you look at the multi-year funding approach, that came through Cabinet. The work that we’re doing now on the Stabilization Fund, that’s come through Cabinet. As well, the NGO forum that’s put in place to pull the groups together, that’s still in place. It won’t stop, as was pointed out and I think the Member’s touched on it as well, the role that we have in having a unifying approach but still allowing departments to do their work. For example, if the Department of Health and Social Services is doing a review of funding and funding levels in certain areas, it would make sense that they look into that before entering into multi-year funding, because I know the organizations would not be pleased if they signed a three-year agreement and in the second year of it it’s reduced because of the changing role that’s being looked at, if a situation like that was to arise.
I would say already within Executive we do play that liaison role. We just don’t have a specific person with a title of NGO. We clearly have that workload shared amongst our staff and we coordinate with other departments.
With respect to our definition of voluntary sector and NGOs, ultimately I think we’re talking about the same thing. We’re talking about these organizations that we’re working with who some provide services with us and others who do things for us and others who need support so they can do things on their own. I think we’re ultimately talking about the same thing and clearly we’re really, really close to being exactly on the same page here. We’re doing the things that we want you to do, but from a public point of view what we’re trying to tell you is there is that confusion about who is the person I should go to. Who should I talk to? Is it the deputy minister? Is it the ADM? Is it a director? Do I go to MACA? Maybe it doesn’t require a new position if you’re doing the work already, but we definitely need to somehow publicize and create some clarity as to who that contact person is. That person may in fact delegate some of those conversations or responsibilities to another person. It doesn’t hurt us at this point since all these things are being done to say from this point on X position is the contact and it may be deferred or delegated henceforth, whatever. But let’s help these people understand who the primary contact could be in these areas so that we can acknowledge the good work that’s being done in the Executive and MACA and help people focus their asks and their attention rather than being lost or confused, and let’s maximize all this good work you’re doing in the Executive. Let’s maximize it by giving them a contact person who is the primary contact and work may flow from there. We’re so close. I mean, it doesn’t necessarily mean creating a position. It may not mean creating a position, but let’s identify and create some certainty and clarity. That’s, I think, what we’re ultimately asking for.
The role the Executive has played is one of liaison and coordination, but ultimately we’re not going to take over the primary role of a contract that is with, whether it’s Education, whether it is Health and Social Services or Justice or whatever department’s out there. We do, in fact, I think, many organizations are quite familiar with the face and the name of our operations ADM who has been driving much of the work that’s being done and we’ll continue to operate in that manner, and of course, when those issues arise, that we look and work with other departments to see if there are issues that can be clarified. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Minister. The time is up. I’ll ask are there any others that want to comment on page 2-13? Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. From this point forward I’ll just refer everybody to Mr. Stewart that has voluntarily sector or NGO sector questions. Just for the record, I have no interest in having the Executive take over the responsibilities of the departments. I just want to be super clear on that. I totally support them doing the contracted negotiations for the services that they desire. I’m talking bigger picture stuff and from now on I’ll just refer everybody to Mr. Stewart. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Any comment or response, Minister Roland?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It has been Mr. Stewart who has been working with a number of the staff in our office to prepare the work and respond to many of the concerns that have been arising through a number of the meetings and the ongoing work as well. Short of giving his phone number out, he has been directly involved, and with an executive contact list, I’m sure they’ve already have got him on speed dial. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Committee, we’re on page 2-13, Department of Executive, activity summary, directorate, operations expenditure summary, $869,000.
Agreed.
Page 2-14, Executive, activity summary, directorate, grants and contributions, grants, $185,000.
Agreed.
Page 2-15, Department of Executive, information item, directorate, active positions. Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you. I know that the question is going to be asked at some point, so I’ll ask it now. You can provide us with a breakdown with the Department of Executive of the affirmative action statistics and I’m happy with getting that in paper and sharing it with my colleagues.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Premier Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will put it out there for now and will follow up with the paper. In the directorate side under total affirmative action: 67 percent non-indigenous; 33 percent, obviously. Again, this directorate is three positions. Department-wide we might as well deal with that now seeing as the question has come up. Total department of 69 positions. We have affirmative action of 62 percent. Of those, 26 are Aboriginal, 36 are indigenous non-Aboriginal. And the work, senior management, a total of 12 positions, 3 female, 9 male. We will follow up in writing. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. It’s not ever asked, but I will ask on this page: what are the numbers for persons with disabilities in this department? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have no persons who have declared a disability. Thank you.
Committee, page 2-15, Executive, information item, directorate, active positions.
Agreed.
Page 2-17, Department of Executive, activity summary, Ministers’ offices, operations expenditure summary, $3.597 million.
Agreed.
Page 2-18, Department of Executive, activity summary, Ministers’ offices, grants and contributions, grants.
Agreed.
Page 2-19, Executive, information item, Ministers’ offices, active positions.
Agreed.
Page 2-21, Department of Executive. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a number of questions here. Initially I want to follow up on my colleague Mr. Abernethy’s comments with regard to the volunteer sector. I am totally supportive of his comments. I fully believe that we lack coordination of the voluntary sector across this government. I did want to point out, although it’s a matter of semantics perhaps, whether or not NGOs are a voluntary sector, I would think that, I can’t guarantee, but I would imagine 100 percent of non-government organizations are run by volunteer boards, and in my mind that makes them part of the voluntary sector.
I note with interest that on page 2-20, at the top under the strategic planning, the description says that this office provides support for cross-government planning activities. I think that’s a perfect description of what’s required for those organizations and the people who do volunteer within our Territory and that provide services for our residents through contract with the government, but also we have any number of volunteers who work not on a contract basis but simply provide services, and coaches are one example that provide services to our residents through their goodwill.
The other point I wanted to make, in terms of support for cross-government planning activities, is the initiative that’s being worked on right now and that’s the Anti-Poverty Strategy or framework, whichever title it is. It’s well placed in the Department of Executive because it is an initiative that does encompass every department within our government. I want to reiterate that. I know that the department is working on it. I have my concerns about what kind of a discussion paper is going to come out at the end of this period of consultation, but I’m willing to wait and see. I really hope that we’re going to look at anti-poverty or look at actions to fight poverty. I hope we’re going to look at those across every department because they totally overlap each other. Housing, health, education, ITI, they’re all interwoven, and if we don’t look at all departments when we look at this particular initiative, it’s going to be a waste of time and money.
I mentioned in my opening remarks that I’m glad to see that the single-window service centre is working well and I heard from the Minister that it seems to be a successful initiative. I look forward to hearing more about that particular initiative whether, as time goes on, that it still is seen to be as successful as the Minister says that it is at this particular moment.
I do have some concerns with the non-government organization Stabilization Fund and I have sort of expressed those to the Minister. I know that the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning has also expressed some of those concerns to the Minister by letter.
The word “stabilization” to me indicates that the funding should be provided to assist an organization that is not stable and the criteria for this particular fund, in my mind, allows for activities which enhance an organization but it doesn’t actually stabilize an organization. Two of them that I can think of off the top of my head are website development, which, to me, doesn’t necessarily stabilize an organization, and training and so on for board governance. I agree that those things are absolutely necessary, certainly the board governance more so perhaps than website development. To me, those are both ongoing operation and maintenance expenses. They are not something that is out of the ordinary. I would sincerely hope that the department would look at re-evaluating the criteria for the NGO Stabilization Fund. I think it ought to be used for those organizations which are in danger of failing, crumbling, disappearing into oblivion, because most organizations are relatively stable, although they struggle from year to year to get their funding and they might hit me in the back of the head for saying they are stable, and that is why I use the word relatively. If they get their funding on an annual basis or multi-year which is far better, then they are relatively stable, but certainly circumstances intervene quite often. It makes life difficult for some of them. It will cause some of them to actually cease operation. That, to me, is where the NGO Stabilization Fund should come into play.
I guess I am kind of carrying on, but I would like to first of all ask the Minister whether or not there is any appetite to review the criteria for the NGO Stabilization Fund for next year’s distributions. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Roland.
