Debates of June 1, 2006 (day 3)

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, that the Committee Report 3-15(5) be received by the Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. The motion is in order. Motion is on the floor. Motion is in order. All those in favour? Opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Committee Report 3-15(5) will be received by the Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole. The honourable Member from Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 93(4) and have the Committee Report 3-15(5) moved into the Committee of the Whole for consideration on Friday, June 2, 2006.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In April 2004, the Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight held a two-day operational planning workshop to review its mandate and set its priorities and objectives for the 15th Assembly. These plans were shared with our colleagues and the public in our first Report on Priorities and Objectives, which we presented to the Legislative Assembly on June 1, 2004.

The committee held its second operational and strategic planning workshop in Tuktoyaktuk from April 15 to 17, 2005, at which time we reviewed progress made to date on our priorities and objectives. A progress report followed on June 2, 2005.

The third annual workshop took place in Fort Simpson from April 10 to 12, 2006. This report summarizes our progress on priorities as we see it. It also outlines changes we have made to our priorities, including the adoption of a new priority: adequate support for frontline organizations.

The Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight includes all 11 Regular Members. Its mandate as set out in the Rules of the Legislative Assembly is to:

review issues which have government-wide implications, including the overview of the budget and fiscal framework;

review multi-year business plans, budgets and bills of the Department of the Executive, including the executive offices, the Financial Management Board Secretariat and the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs, and of the Department of Finance;

consider the budgets and financial management of any other boards and agencies that are outside the responsibility of any standing committee;

examine the reports on the annual financial statements and public accounts of the Government of the Northwest Territories and the report of the Auditor General;

review government reports on financial and performance results on program and policy evaluations to ensure anticipated outcomes are being achieved and accountability is maximized;

review, as necessary or appropriate, the annual and other reports of statutory offices of the Legislative Assembly, including the Commissioner of Official Languages, the Conflict of Interest Commissioner, the Information and Privacy Commissioner, the Equal Pay Commissioner and the Human Rights Commission;

coordinate House business, scheduling and planning in cooperation with appropriate Cabinet representatives; and,

consider any other matters referred by the House.

The vision adopted by the committee in April 2004 is:

a strong, effective consensus government that has the confidence of the people of the NWT.

Our mission is:

to take purposeful and unified action, where appropriate, to support, question or oppose government initiatives and to hold government accountable. We will also use our collective power to influence government to take action and/or to change its policies when in the public interest.

As we stated in our June 2004 Report on Priorities and Objectives, our key priority is:

holding government accountable to our collective 15th Assembly vision and goals.

The Standing Committee accomplishes this through a number of regular activities and, in particular, the annual review of the government’s draft business plans. In the fall of 2005, the committee implemented the first ever pre-budget consultations, which added a new element of public input into the planning and accountability for government use of resources.

The committee also holds government accountable through its input on policy, program and legislative initiatives, by organizing theme days on various topics, and by formal motions in the Assembly directing the government to take specific actions.

The committee continues to see our constitutional evolution and the negotiation of a fair devolution and resource revenue sharing deal for our territory as key to achieving our collective vision, and continues to support the principle that the people of the Northwest Territories should be the primary beneficiaries of the development of our resources.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I would now like to pass on the rest of the report to Mr. Braden. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The honourable Member from Great Slave, Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The following summarizes progress on committee’s other priorities.

Effective April 1, 2006, a new Department of Human Resources was created, with the committee’s support. The committee will continue to monitor the new department closely to ensure that it does result in a more efficient and accountable system. In particular, we would encourage the government to task the new department with re-examining the affirmative action policy and bringing forward options for discussion within the life of this Assembly.

The Joint Cabinet/AOC Working Group has now concluded its mandate and advanced a great deal of work on data gathering and preparing a new governance framework for boards and agencies, including a policy on boards and agencies. Mr. Speaker, the committee urges the government to implement the working group’s recommendations for additional resources to better coordinate boards and agencies.

Committee members have raised a number of serious concerns with the NWT Housing Corporation to which we have not received satisfactory responses from the Minister and government. This lead us to bring forward a formal motion on March 2, 2006, requesting a performance audit of the corporation by the Auditor General for Canada.

Public consultation was recently conducted on the NWT Housing Corporation’s mandate. The committee looks forward to the results of this consultation later this year.

The committee looks forward to reviewing the Auditor General’s report on the performance audit of the Worker’s Compensation Board.

Members continue to be concerned that they have heard little from government about the status of the rewrite of the Workers’ Compensation Act, which is needed to address several outstanding issues and complete the work begun in the 14th Assembly. The committee has communicated to the government that we expect them to introduce a bill in October 2006.

Members continue to believe consideration of such legislation is timely, both because of local issues and national trends toward increased accountability expectations from the public service, most recently evidenced by the “sponsorship scandal.” The committee has asked the government to bring forward a public discussion paper on whistleblower legislation prior to the October 2006 sitting.

The committee has communicated to government that we expect them to introduce this legislation in the October 2006 sitting.

The committee has communicated to government that we expect them to introduce a bill during the life of this Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, the committee has received the government’s cost/benefit analysis of the business incentive policy and is aware that there is a great deal of apprehension among northern business owners about its future. Members look forward to seeing the results of the government’s consultations before the October 2006 sitting.

The committee is concerned that progress on this initiative is not keeping up with the demand for land, especially for housing, Mr. Speaker. More coordination and streamlining of the land transfer process are needed if housing initiatives are to succeed.

While the future of the federal Day Care Program is uncertain with the recent change of government in Ottawa, the committee encourages the Minister to continue lobbying Canada for reasonable base funding for the NWT for early childhood development.

In addition to the lack of adequate program funding, many communities lack childcare facilities. This is something the committee believes the government can do something about now, by allowing surplus government infrastructure and public housing to be used for childcare programs. The committee urges the government to come forward with a childcare infrastructure policy to make these facilities available. Mr. Speaker, I would now like to ask my colleague, Mr. Ramsay, to continue with the committee’s report. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Braden. The committee was pleased to see the November 2005 “Connecting Canada Coast to Coast to Coast” proposal by the Government of the Northwest Territories to the Government of Canada and continues to affirm its support for construction of an all-weather road between Tuktoyaktuk and Inuvik.

The committee is frustrated with the government’s consistent refusal to act on our recommendations for additional drug and alcohol treatment facilities. With the recent release of the Chalmers report, the government appears to have dug in its heels even further in its determination to invest almost exclusively in community-based services. Members sincerely believe this is the wrong approach for the NWT, based on what we have heard from our constituents and on our own experiences. In the absence of regional, culturally appropriate treatment facilities, we fear that many residents will never have the support they need to win their battle with addictions.

The committee supported a motion on February 27, 2006:

That this Assembly reaffirms its motion of October 29, 2004, requesting that the government establish a centre dedicated to treating addictions to drugs other than alcohol, establish an addictions treatment centre specifically for youth and reopen residential treatment centres in Yellowknife and Inuvik.

During its pre-budget consultations, the committee heard from transition houses that are struggling to meet the needs of clients in crisis with inadequate resources for programming, staffing and basic infrastructure maintenance. Their concerns are outlined in detail in the committee’s October 2005 Report on Pre-Budget Consultations. The committee understands there has been some progress in shortening the amount of time it takes for shelters to receive their funding, however, we remain concerned about the overall adequacy of funding to transition shelters.

Years of fiscal restraint have left the NWT with a serious infrastructure deficit. Many communities are lacking facilities, while many existing public buildings are in serious disrepair. The committee is therefore pleased to see the amount of the GNWT’s resources as well as new federal funding now being directed to capital projects.

Committee members believe that elders have a great deal of knowledge to offer the government, particularly on issues such as climate change and wildlife management. The committee requests that the government initiate a formal consultation process with elders to ensure they are given appropriate recognition and respect in our institutions, and that their knowledge informs our policy-making.

The Standing Committee on Social Programs will pursue these priorities.

The Standing Committee on Governance and Economic Development will pursue these priorities. Mr. Speaker, I would now like to pass the report on to Mr. Menicoche. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The committee will also continue to pursue the objectives explicitly included in our mandate, which are:

the comprehensive overview of the GNWT’s budget and fiscal framework;

the consideration of bills, budgets and financial management of the Department of the Executive, including the executive offices, the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs, and the Financial Management Board Secretariat, and the Department of Finance;

examination of Auditor General’s reports;

examination of the reports of statutory offices including the Commissioner of Official Languages, the Conflict of Interest Commissioner, the Information and Privacy Commissioner, the Equal Pay Commissioner and the Human Rights Commission; and

coordination of House business scheduling and planning in cooperation with Cabinet.

Adequate Support For Frontline Organizations

During its 2005 pre-budget consultations, the committee received presentations from frontline organizations in several communities raising concerns about the level of support they are receiving from government. Staffing is an especially acute problem for non-governmental organizations and will rise to crisis level if they continue to lack the resources to offer competitive wages and benefits in order to recruit and retain qualified staff. Additional concerns, which are outlined in detail in the committee’s October 2005 Report on Pre-Budget Consultations, included:

overall inadequacy of funding, particularly as this limits their ability to provide holistic programming to meet clients’ multiple needs;

the need for multi-year funding arrangements;

the administrative burden associated with having to apply to and meet the accountability requirements of multiple programs, particularly where programs have not been designed to fit clients’ actual needs; and

the need for more direct involvement of frontline organizations in the GNWT’s planning exercises.

The committee sees frontline organizations as key to the success of many of the Assembly’s goals: they are delivering some of our most essential services and have the best knowledge of their clients’ needs. Moreover, they are made up of highly dedicated people who are providing programs far more effectively and at far less cost than if government were to try to achieve the same results on its own. It is critical that we support their efforts and ensure they continue to be viable.

The committee understands that the government is developing and implementing new funding criteria and approaches for frontline organizations. We look forward to hearing from these organizations again during this year’s pre-budget consultations on whether they have experienced any improvements as a result of the changes made by the GNWT.

Over the course of the last year, the standing committee has continued to move its priorities forward through “theme days.” A theme day is when Regular Members decide to collectively focus on a particular issue in the House through Members’ statements, oral questions, and/or debate on motions. This provides an opportunity to raise the profile of a given issue with the government and with the public.

A motion during the formal Session of the Legislative Assembly is a proposal for the Assembly to do something, order something to be done, or express an opinion on an issue that is presented to the Assembly for a decision. Following the introduction of the motion, there is an opportunity to debate it and then a vote.

In addition to the motions mentioned in earlier sections of this report, the committee supported the following:

This motion, carried October 24, 2005, called on the government to develop comprehensive strategies to address energy costs and the overall cost of living, and to present those strategies to the committee in public meetings. As a result, public meetings did take place in November 2005 and January 2006, and a great deal of information presented at those meetings is publicly available on the government’s web site.

This motion, carried October 26, 2005, called on the government to delay implementation of the Beverage Container Recovery Program in every community without an approved depot until such time as a local depot became available. Although the government proceeded to implement the program territory-wide, the motion did press the Minister and department to come up with interim arrangements for several communities to ensure residents could receive refunds for their recycled containers.

This motion, carried on February 9, 2006, called for the Premier and Minister of Finance to begin working with their counterparts to lobby the federal government to increase the northern residents tax deduction and to index it annually in the future to keep pace with the cost of living.

With just over a year remaining in the life of the 15th Assembly, the Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight looks forward to seeing significant progress on several priorities between now and the end of 2006 and to working with the government to address the many outstanding priorities and objectives noted above.

The Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight recommends that, pursuant to Rule 93(5), the GNWT table a comprehensive response to this report within 120 calendar days.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. There’s a motion on the floor. The motion is in order. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Committee Report 4-15(5) will be moved into Committee of the Whole. Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 93(4) and have Committee Report 4-15(5) be moved into Committee of the Whole for consideration on Friday, June 2, 2006.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. The Member is seeking unanimous consent to waive Rule 93(4) and have Committee Report 4-15(5) be moved into Committee of the Whole for consideration on Friday, June 2, 2006. Are there any nays? There are no nays. Committee Report 4-15(5) will be moved into Committee of the Whole for consideration on Friday, June 2nd.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions today are directed to the Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs, the Honourable Michael McLeod. I just received notice that the community of Tulita is on water advisory notice and the water advisory has many facets, however one of the key indicators are the filters in the water plan system. Are there any backup filter systems in the small communities who may get these water advisory notices? How come these filters weren’t ready for the communities to be put in, so they wouldn’t have such an advisory given under the health centre? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Minister responsible for Municipal and Community Affairs, Mr. McLeod.

Return To Question 17-15(5): Backup Water Filter Systems For Tulita

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The community of Tulita has encountered some problems with the water treatment plant in the area of the filter clogging up. The community does not have a backup filter for this plant. However, it does still have the use of the old water plant that was left in place as the backup and the community is utilizing that facility. It does not have the filtration system that the new guidelines require. That’s why the community has issued the boil water warning. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Supplementary To Question 17-15(5): Backup Water Filter Systems For Tulita

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister inform the people in Tulita when they will be able to get these filters and where will these filters come from? Why didn’t they have the filters in place for such an emergency as this? Thank God for the old backup system in Tulita.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. McLeod.

Further Return To Question 17-15(5): Backup Water Filter Systems For Tulita

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we will have the filter in the community as soon as we can. The filter has to come from outside of the country. It comes from the United States. We don’t have a filter system in place. It wasn’t an area we thought would be a great risk. We do have a backup system. The backup system is the old water plant and that’s what is being currently used. Nobody has really been cut off from the water supply. There is the inconvenience of the boil water advisory and it’s working well.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Supplementary To Question 17-15(5): Backup Water Filter Systems For Tulita

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, thank God for the old backup system, I guess. People in our communities have been using this water thousands of years. I don’t know why all of a sudden we have this boil water system. Anyhow, I want to ask the Minister, in terms of these filters in our water plant system, why are they so elaborate to have to order them from outside of Canada? It must cost quite a bit of dollars. Does the community of Tulita or hamlets that have a similar plant system, are they adequately financed to get this filter system and are they checked on a regular basis? There are a few questions there. Mr. Speaker, thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. McLeod.

Further Return To Question 17-15(5): Backup Water Filter Systems For Tulita

Mr. Speaker, the system in Tulita was designed and put in place at the time when this type of filtration system, this type of plant, was only available from the United States. We have been working with the community to look at what backups are required. The old plant is still there and we do also have a portable water pump in the event of both plants going down. We are discussing with the community on a plan to carry some backup material, filters and equipment, so that we can avoid the situation in the future. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Supplementary To Question 17-15(5): Backup Water Filter Systems For Tulita

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That’s good government, Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Minister of Municipal Affairs, is the department willing to look at these filter systems? Is it the only one in the Northwest Territories or are there a number of filter systems like this in other communities to ensure that we have additional supplies of filters in our communities rather than rely on the old backup system. Sometimes that backup system needs major repair. Again, I want to ask the Minister in terms of an action plan that would be satisfactory to the people in Tulita. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. McLeod.

Further Return To Question 17-15(5): Backup Water Filter Systems For Tulita

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, yes, we will commit to doing that. We will have a discussion with Public Works and talk to the communities and see what some areas that may be requiring parts or filters that we should keep in the communities so we can avoid the situation. We will commit to doing that with all the communities in the Territories. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs with respect to Canada’s offer to the Dehcho First Nations. Aboriginal rights and the protection of lands that balance an economically prosperous future are all issues that I have taken to heart with my responsibilities as MLA for Nahendeh. Because of the recent announcement, Mr. Speaker, I was just wondering if the government, through the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs, had an opportunity to comment on the next steps this government will take with respect to this offer. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. The honourable Minister responsible for Aboriginal Affairs, Mr. Handley.

Return To Question 18-15(5): Next Steps For GNWT On The Federal Offer To The Dehcho

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, the Department of Aboriginal Affairs has had a look at the offer. We still have to do more analysis of it, but, at the first look at it, it appears to be an offer that is very similar in nature to the other settlements that have been achieved in the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Speaker, there will be a meeting with all of the parties on June 19th. At that time, they will jointly take a look at the offer. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Menicoche.

Supplementary To Question 18-15(5): Next Steps For GNWT On The Federal Offer To The Dehcho

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I do realize that clearly the GNWT is outside the process, but on the June 19th meeting, will the GNWT be there? For my part there, Mr. Speaker, shared ownership and jurisdiction of the entire region is still something key to our people. Is that something that our government can support when we are at this table on June 19th? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. There are two questions there. Mr. Handley, answer one or both.

Further Return To Question 18-15(5): Next Steps For GNWT On The Federal Offer To The Dehcho

Mr. Speaker, yes, the GNWT will be there on June 19th and on further negotiating sessions. With regard to our position on the various issues, Mr. Speaker, I would like to leave that to the negotiators. I don’t have enough detail to be able to enter that debate in the House. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for the Minister of the Housing Corporation in regards to the latest update on the ATCO Novel housing product. Mr. Speaker, we have just got the information that the size of this project has reduced quite a bit, from 1,400 housing units to about 830.

Mr. Speaker, let me just start by saying once again that I believe that ATCO Novel is a good product. It is a clever idea. It is a company that could stand on its own. The issue here is whether or not this government and this territory and people of the Territories are getting enough advantage in getting into a contract with this government with this company. So far we have not a good enough deal, as far as I can see. I would like to know, Mr. Speaker, as I stated in my Member’s statement under Affordable Housing Strategy, the Minister plans to spend $100 million over the next three years to build 530 homes. Under the latest project on the ATCO Novel, the government is planning on spending over $200 million and yet we would only get 830. For $200 million, we should get at least 1,000. I would like to know where this great deal is that Novel is going to give us that warrants them as to be a lobbyist for them and have our own ADM when I don’t see any deal. So what is the deal? What is the advantage we are getting? Where is the beast, Mr. Speaker?

---Laughter

Thank you, Ms. Lee. The honourable Minister of Housing, Mr. Krutko.

Return To Question 19-15(5): Costs Of Novel Housing Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we are talking about two different projects. The affordable housing initiative will put some 530 houses on the ground, but half of those houses that are going to be delivered are multi-configured construction. So they are going to take less land to put that many units on the ground. On the other areas that we are looking at is the Novel housing which are single dwelling units, which you are going to have to develop some 830 lots to put that many more houses on the ground. Also, with Novel, there is also going to be a project management cost associated with this major development for land and lot development which is not the case in the affordable housing project.

Again, Mr. Speaker, the price that we are looking at in which in Novel is, we are looking at putting out almost half of those units to be sold on the public market. We are hoping to recover some $40 million out of the $200 million cost. Again, we are going to have dollars coming back to this project, which is estimated at about $160 million after we recruit those costs by selling off the units. Again, Mr. Speaker, we are talking about two different projects. We are talking about two different ways of constructing our units, multi for the affordable housing units, 530 houses. The 800 units for Novel are single dwelling units where we have to develop some 830 lots. That is where the major difference in this cost is. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Supplementary, Ms. Lee.

Supplementary To Question 19-15(5): Costs Of Novel Housing Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let me just get really simple on this. What I am hearing from the Minister is that instead of this government getting advantage and getting a better deal by buying these used workforce housing, we are actually paying more. The Minister is saying that we have to do what Novel wants, which is that they want individual lots instead of its restricting our options of going multi lots which could reduce costs. I would like to know why it is that we have to pay $28 million in premium for buying this Novel trailer and paying $71 million to convert, and yet we end up with less housing units for $200 million than what we would if we would have had our own plan under Affordable Housing Strategy and extend that by six years for $200 million instead of paying it to buy these used trailers and spending $200 million to convert them. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Krutko.

Further Return To Question 19-15(5): Costs Of Novel Housing Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, if someone can buy a home these days for $130,000, I think they got themselves a good deal. The majority of the costs associated with Novel, $77 million of that is land development costs which, again, is not associated with the affordable housing program. The biggest cost associated is land development. These lots and whatnot have to be developed in communities. We have to ensure that the infrastructure is there to handle it by way of power poles, roads and the other infrastructure it needs, but, more importantly, there is going to be a project management cost associated with this project which is not in the affordable housing program. Right now, it is administered through our office by way of tenders. There is also a $22 million financial arrangement where we have to finance at the front end to develop these lots so that when Novel does come on stream, we are ready for them. Again, there is a difference between these programs. We had a presentation to committee this morning. We have laid it out. We tried to explain it the best we can. Again, there are still some concerns out there. Again, this program is not completed. We are still in the process of evolving to a time and place where we will have to make a final decision on this and see exactly how the numbers come out and exactly what the difference is between the cost of the Affordable Housing Strategy and Novel. Right now, Novel is coming in at cheaper costs than the cost of stick-built today. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. I would like to remind Members on both sides of the House that the Speaker would like the…(inaudible)…Member the opportunity to ask questions today. So I will remind you to keep your supplementaries short and answers short, please. Ms. Lee.

---Applause

Supplementary To Question 19-15(5): Costs Of Novel Housing Project

Once again, Mr. Speaker, I am really trying to shorten my question. I have not heard an advantage. I think my question is very clear, Mr. Speaker. Under Affordable Housing Strategy, we are spending $100 million and it will get us 530 units. Under the Novel housing strategy, we are going to spend $220 million plus to buy used units, clean up the yard for Imperial Oil, and we are going to end up with 830. Where is the math? Mr. Minister has not answered that question. It is pretty straightforward, especially when he has a whole person working in his office doing nothing but answering these questions.