Page 1-21, Activity Summary, Expenditures on Behalf of Members, Operations Expenditure Summary: $5.769 million. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The compensation and benefits amount from ’07–08 to ’08–09 has increased significantly, and I was just wondering why.
Mr. Chairman, most of that comes from pension expenses and an increase to constituency budgets. If we want to get some further detail on that, we’ll ask Mr. Lovely to expand on that.
Mr. Lovely.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. In prior years the pension expense was budgeted under Fees and Payments, and it’s more appropriately budgeted under Compensation and Benefits. In prior years, as well, the compensation and benefits for the constituency assistants were budgeted under contract services, but they are actually paid through our payroll system. So it was more appropriate to budget them up there to C&B.
Next on the list I have Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Lovely very efficiently answered my questions at the same time. Thank you.
Legislative Assembly, Activity Summary, Expenditures on Behalf of Members, Operations Expenditure Summary: $5.769 million, approved.
Moving on to page 1-23, Activity Summary, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer, Operations Expenditure Summary: $374,000. Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you. Mr. Chairman, just a quick question regarding…. Although the Chief Electoral Officer doesn’t oversee municipal elections, has there been any advancement on this issue to consider making the offer first to municipalities to oversee their elections through this office?
Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don’t know if there’s been any formal discussion on it yet. I know that the Chief Electoral Officer is an area that, now that the elections are over with, is going to do some investigating on and working with MACA and the possibility of doing that.
That’s the answer I’m looking for, and I’m glad to hear it. And, of course, I’m sure the Speaker will keep us up to date on the movement of that.
Mr. Chairman, that was actually a recommendation, as well, that was made by the Chief Electoral Officer, to look into that. We can expect some feedback on what her findings are there.
Okay, we’re on page 1-23: Activity Summary, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer, Operations Expenditure Summary: $374,000.
Legislative Assembly, Activity Summary, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer, Operations Expenditure Summary: $374,000, approved.
Next page, 1-24. Information item, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer, Active Positions. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have the same questions with regard to numbers of positions as I did in the previous section. I gather we’re eliminating a vacant position, but the numbers don’t change from last year to this year.
Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There was an error in your papers on the number of positions. That paper shows the Chief Electoral Officer as being a member of the public service, and it’s actually a contracted position. That number should read 28 instead of 29. On page 1-24 it should be two instead of three.
Ms. Bisaro. That’s good? Okay, we’re on page 1-24. Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Given that there’s an error here, shouldn’t we fix that in this book?
Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This was basically an information item only. It doesn’t affect the bottom line or the figures, so…. We can correct the page in the book if the Member wants a new page, but it doesn’t affect the amounts we’re talking about in appropriations.
We’ll note for the record that we’ll correct the number that’s been mentioned. Agreed?
Agreed.
Page 1-25, information item, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer, Active Positions — By Region.
Legislative Assembly, Activity Summary, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer, Active Positions, information item, approved.
Moving on to page 1-27, Activity Summary, Statutory Officers, Operations Expenditure Summary: $1.142 million. Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a matter that has arisen, not specifically with every commissioner in one of these positions, but as an issue with some, and it’s the issue of residency. This is an area that’s, of course, the establishment…. The legislation would fall under the appointment process provided by the Board of Management and the Speaker. I was just wondering if the residency issue will be taken on as an issue in this next coming year, through the Speaker’s Office, through the Board of Management, to potentially update.
Mr. Speaker.
The residency issue is one where we do our best, in our statutory officers especially, to have Northerners in those positions where we can. As far as residency for certain positions, there’s no requirement to have that. However, we would like to do that.
There are some positions in our statutory officers that sometimes we prefer to have outside the Territories, or it makes more sense to have them outside the Territories, strictly because of conflict-of-interest issues. However, with the Languages Commissioner, when she was appointed for a four-year term, she was a resident of the North. Her term is up in February, I think, and we will be looking at her position when her appointment is up.
Mr. Chairman, I think the Speaker has well described the issue. I’m not suggesting every specific commissioner position should be a resident, and I think it was highlighted that, well, it’s maybe conflict-of-interest issues that are more important to observe and that a non-resident would be more appropriate. As well, there’s an expertise issue that from time to time will surface. But, Mr. Chairman, the issue I’m strictly raising is that for some of these positions we’ll certainly have competent Northerners who are able to be there: attract them as Northerners and get them to stay here and hopefully fulfill their mandate in their period of appointment.
Therein lies the problem I’m raising, which is to ensure we have them as residents for the full period of their appointment. That’s the matter I’m more concerned about, although I want to underscore that I recognize that on every position that may not be appropriate or necessarily feasible. But it’s the issue of raising it so we can deal with it in the future, because if we have a commissioner who leaves the Northwest Territories, there is no mechanism to either retract them from their position or require them to return to the North as a resident. Then I think the Legislature looks a little silly, in the sense of someone being appointed, and then we have no way of dealing with them if they just pack up and move to another jurisdiction. That’s really my issue: that most recently we’ve had one who decided to vacate but not resign their position. There’s my concern.
It’s not just mine, by the way; it’s a number of people in the constituency and in the community of Yellowknife who thought that was a bit of an anomaly and would prefer to see it addressed in some form or other. The issue I’m trying to raise here is: do you think it’ll be something you’ll be able to look at in this next coming year?
Mr. Chairman, I don’t know if there’s a way of making somebody commit when they’re looking at a four-year appointment. They show an interest in a position, and we appoint them for four years. I don’t know if we can make sure they’re going to be here for the four-year period. Sometimes if they make a move out of the Territories temporarily or for a short period of time, that’s grounds to revoke their appointment. Commissioners are statutory officers when appointed and become arm’s length from government, and we have found no reason to revoke her appointment. Also, the one we’re talking about has indicated that she is returning to the Territories to be a resident. However, that is something we will look at for sure and take into consideration in future appointments.
Mr. Chairman, I think it’s the issue of up and leaving residency. I’m not talking about going for prolonged holidays or personal reasons: if there was a need that drew someone away, that’s obvious and reasonable. It’s the issue of packing one’s bags, selling their house and establishing roots — whether it’s a job or whatnot — elsewhere. That’s the issue, really. It provides an element of a double standard, whereas if an MLA in this room picked up and moved their residence to Alberta or B.C., Ontario, who knows where, they would have been deemed to have resigned. That’s really the clause I’m suggesting
The Speaker is quite correct. It’s difficult to ask someone to commit to four years. But I look in this room, and there are 19 Members here who have committed four years of their life to a process and certainly a living experience in the sense of ensuring they’re part of the North. It’s the resignation process I’m stressing — I should say I’m requesting — be looked at, because again, you’re appointed as a statutory officer.
You know, in a lot of these I think it’s quite reasonable to assume you’re a resident of the Northwest Territories at the time of appointment. I think Northerners are capable of doing the job, and there’s certainly an interest. I would ascertain that from the public’s point of view it seems insulting to the system that a commissioner is appointed to one of these positions and leaves. That’s the issue: I’d just like to see if it would be raised in the context where appropriate. Again, I’m not suggesting that every commissioner position needs to have that as a clause, but I think it’s a reasonable suggestion from my point of view and from a number of people both in my riding and within Yellowknife.
Mr. Chairman, it’s something we will look at. There’s no legislative requirement for them to resign if they do move right now, so maybe even to put a clause like that in there we may need some legislative change. It’s certainly something we can keep in mind, and wherever we can fill those positions with Northerners, it’s something we want to look at.
I’ll accept that as a commitment from the Speaker to review that in the next while.
Okay. We’re on page 1-27, Activity Summary, Statutory Officers, Operations Expenditure Summary. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Under Program Delivery Details on page 1-28, the Human Rights Commission has two fairly large amounts compared to the other statutory officer positions: $335,000 and then grants and contributions of $425,000. I’m just wondering why there are two different amounts there and why they are so large.
Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, these are details on the finances of staffing and the director’s position. I would ask Olin Lovely to walk you through the detail on those.
The director of Corporate Services, Mr. Lovely.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The $335,000 is for the salary of the director and deputy director of the Human Rights Commission, and it also includes the honoraria for the commission members. The $420,000 is an amount appropriated and provided to the Human Rights Commission to undertake its activities and review on human rights cases.
Okay. We’re on page 1-27, Statutory Officers, Activity Summary, Operations Expenditure Summary: $1.142 million.
Legislative Assembly, Activity Summary, Statutory Officers, Operations Expenditure Summary: $1.142 million, approved.
Moving on to page 1-29, Activity Summary, Statutory Officers, Grants and Contributions, Contributions: $420,000.
Legislative Assembly, Activity Summary, Statutory Officers, Grants and Contributions, Contributions: $420,000, approved.
We can turn back to page 1-7, Department Summary, Legislative Assembly, Operations Expenditure Summary: $15.364 million.
Legislative Assembly, Department Summary, Operations Expenditure Summary: $15.364 million, approved.
With that, that concludes the Department Summary.
We’re going to Infrastructure Acquisition Plan, page 1-5, Office of the Clerk, Tangible Capital Assets, Total Tangible Capital Assets: $540,000.
Legislative Assembly, Infrastructure Acquisition Plan, Office of the Clerk, Tangible Capital Assets, Total Tangible Capital Assets: $540,000, approved.
Total Activity: $540,000.
Legislative Assembly, Infrastructure Acquisition Plan, Office of the Clerk, Tangible Capital Assets, Total Activity: $540,000, approved.
Total Department: $540,000.
Legislative Assembly, Infrastructure Acquisition Plan, Office of the Clerk, Tangible Capital Assets, Total Department: $540,000, approved.
Does the committee agree we’ve concluded with the estimates for the Legislative Assembly?
Agreed.
With that, I’d like to thank the Speaker and the witnesses. Sergeant-at-Arms, could you escort the witnesses out.
Okay. We can move on to Bill 11, An Act to Amend the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act. With that, I’d like to call on Mr. Robert McLeod, the Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes.
