Debates of June 2, 2006 (day 4)

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. The Minister mentioned a secretariat. Is there a lead department that is taking part in it, or is there an interagency committee that is coordinating the government directorates, particularly with the schooling and educational records that are kept by our government? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 43-15(5): Residential School Lump Sum Payments

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At this point, there is not an intergovernmental agency. Education, Culture and Employment is responsible for ensuring that student records are provided on a timely basis to applicants or the individuals who ask us for their records. They are doing that. I have committed to the House already in previous questions here or during this session that the Ministers of the social envelope or the Ministers of Social Programs committee will consider this request to work together. We will ensure that we are operating a coordinated response where that is appropriate. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Supplementary, Mr. Menicoche.

Supplementary To Question 43-15(5): Residential School Lump Sum Payments

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The government has indicated publicly as well that they will be clawing back any residential school payment program. Is this an actual policy that is already in place, Mr. Speaker? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 43-15(5): Residential School Lump Sum Payments

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Member is right; all income security programs will exempt the lump sum payments.

---Applause

The social assistance regulations require amendment in order to accommodate that. That amendment has not been completed yet, but work on rewriting the regulation is underway and will be done before the payments are issued.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Menicoche.

Supplementary To Question 43-15(5): Residential School Lump Sum Payments

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am very pleased to hear that the government is very receptive and supportive of the lump sum payment program. In particular, there will be many elders that do not need to be taxed or clawed back. Is there an office, a particular number or a contact in our government that can help anybody that is looking for details for this particular residential lump sum payment program? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 43-15(5): Residential School Lump Sum Payments

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Because this is a federal program, the best number to call is the Indian Residential Schools Canada helpline, which is 1-800-816-7293. I think that, for the public, is the most important number for them to call because they need to contact that number in order to find out how to access the forms, the applications and so on. Applicants do not need to have verification of attendance before applying for this compensation. The first call should be to the commission to make sure that they get their applications in. Once they file their application, then verification of attendance will be required. That is when they need to contact us to get the verification of attendance. In order to find that number, they can either use one of the regional offices to find the appropriate number or use our web site. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the question I have is for the honourable Minister of Human Resources, Floyd Roland. I wanted to ask the Minister in terms of the government’s policy regarding government employees who bid on government contracts. I want to know what the policy states. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Minister responsible for FMBS, Mr. Roland.

Return To Question 44-15(5): GNWT Employees Seeking Outside Employment

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, when an employee of our government wants to seek employment outside of their normal work, they would have to seek approval from the deputy responsible for their department and get the okay from that level. Before a government employee can work outside of their normal working hours, they need to seek that approval in writing from the deputy of that department. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Supplementary To Question 44-15(5): GNWT Employees Seeking Outside Employment

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the Minister’s response. What is the process for this government that may call into question in regards to the approval for that department to give their government employees the clearance to bid on government contracts? Will the Minister consider reviewing that policy, because right now it is a concern for one of my constituents in the Sahtu region? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 44-15(5): GNWT Employees Seeking Outside Employment

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this comes up from time to time. For example, in some of our smaller communities where we have some trained staff in the communities, whether it is to do with work with heating systems and homes or repairing vehicles, if there are no other contractors available in that community, then they are asked to do that type of work. That is where this provision comes from. Because it is available to all employees, it is as well used in the larger centres. What we would look at, for example, is if there is competition in the community or potential conflict with their workload, what they’re doing and the job that they’re seeking. So it’s something that each deputy would have to take into review before giving authorization for that employee to work outside of the government. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Supplementary To Question 44-15(5): GNWT Employees Seeking Outside Employment

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, there’s an issue here that, with this work being done in my region, that there is a health competition and there is no other contract or other kind of expertise done in this situation, which is totally against what’s happening in Norman Wells, in my region, in regard to a recent contract that has been awarded to two government employees that has taken away the livelihood of one person. Now, this is shameful. I would ask the Minister if he would consider this. It’s a shameful tactic on government. It’s a shameful excuse of this government to do this to one of my constituents. This is a sole income for this person here that’s given by a government people. It’s sensitive and I want to raise this today with the Minister. Will the Minister reconsider this contract that’s currently under review? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 44-15(5): GNWT Employees Seeking Outside Employment

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as I stated, the issue of the employee of the Government of the Northwest Territories seeking employment outside of their responsibilities, ultimately a decision is made by the deputy of that department to give them the okay. Once that’s granted, they're free and clear until an issue may come up that has to be addressed again. It’s a case-by-case review by the deputy. I will provide the actual policy, to be clear to the Member, that deputies would have to use. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Supplementary To Question 44-15(5): GNWT Employees Seeking Outside Employment

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister then inform the deputy that has to again allow his employees to look at it? It is sensitive, however, it hits right at the crux of a constituent and it does tear away from one solving one issue. It’s going to create a problem for the Department of Education, Culture and Employment by having one of my constituents in an income support situation. That’s just terrible. So would the Minister again inform the appropriate deputy that he reconsider on this issue, this policy? I know it’s sensitive, so I’ll just leave it at that. Would the Minister talk to the deputy in charge to look at this policy again? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 44-15(5): GNWT Employees Seeking Outside Employment

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would have to speak to the Minister of the specific department and deal with them through the Minister. Thank you.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I’d like to pick up where my last questions left off, and that was before the Minister of Public Works and Services. I listened closely to him and I’m having a great deal of difficulty trying to understand what one Minister, the Minister of Health and Social Services, is saying in terms of the relocation of TTC and the disposition of the Dene K’onia facility in Hay River and what the Minister of Public Works and Services is saying. So on the one hand you have the Minister of Public Works and Services admitting that an error occurred in the ad going out, and on the other hand you have the Minister of Health and Social Services saying it was undertaken in good faith by regional Public Works staff that the ad went out. So what is it, Mr. Minister? Mr. Speaker, thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Minister responsible for Public Works and Services, Mr. Roland.

Return To Question 45-15(5): Change In Scope To Dene K'onia Facility Renovation Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, again the Member likes to work in generalities of issues that don’t seem to work in the way he’d like to see them work, I guess. I know it’s a politically sensitive area. The fact is, this Assembly agreed in the House that this project be transferred to another community. With all the issues around it, it still had the approval of this House. Ultimately, once that project was redefined in the sense of where it was located, the department came forward then to follow the next step of the work that had to be done. Public Works did a report, sent it back to the department for their decision on the options that were provided. At that point what should have happened, there was communication issues, it’s been raised already by the Minister of Health and Social Services, as well, as I’ve stated. When the decision was made, the process would have been then to go to the Minister of Health and Social Services. He would come to FMB, raise the issue there. Once there was a decision made at FMB we would advise of any changes to the committee. A letter was written to the committee; I believe May 26th a letter was written. Meanwhile, we pulled that tender back because it should not have been issued. If we felt that it should have been, we would have gone forward, but we still had to go through FMB on the changes to that. But we followed the process. When that error was realized it was pulled, rescinded and at this time the options are still being reviewed as to how we would proceed with that project. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Supplementary to Question 45-15(5): Change In Scope To Dene K'onia Facility Renovation Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I see things as right and wrong, black and white. I don’t make generalizations. I read what’s given to me, I listen to what the Ministers tell me, and I make my mind up, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to just mention to the Minister, we weren’t consulted last year, we weren’t consulted this year, and I want to ask the Minister why Regular Members of this House were not consulted on the move to demolish Dene K’onia in Hay River. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 45-15(5): Change In Scope To Dene K'onia Facility Renovation Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the decision that the Department of Health and Social Services arrived at to proceed to replacement instead of renovation was something that then had to follow through the process. The process wasn’t followed, so we pulled the tender back. The issue was brought back to the FMB table. A letter was written to Members. But the fact is that when you look at our documentation and requirements, the scope of the project, the $3.1 million was identified, that was transferred already and voted on by this House. The decision then for whether renovation or whatever is a decision that we made. As long as it remained within that scope, it’s in the same community, the dollar figure hasn’t changed. The Minister brought that back to the table, we’ve informed Members, and we’re deciding on how that would move forward. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Supplementary To Question 45-15(5): Change In Scope To Dene K'onia Facility Renovation Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, if you use the same rationale the Minister just mentioned, they would have informed us and consulted with us last year when the money was transferred from Yellowknife to Hay River, and they didn’t. That’s the point I’m trying to make, Mr. Speaker. The Minister did not answer this question: Why were Regular Members of this House not advised? You’re going to demolish a piece of public infrastructure and it doesn’t matter what community it’s in, the scope of the project changed. We’re fed one story last year and had to force feed another story this year. Why weren’t Regular Members advised of this change? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 45-15(5): Change In Scope To Dene K'onia Facility Renovation Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as I stated earlier, the information was brought to the House. Some Members disagreed with the decision made of relocating that facility. It was brought to this House, it was voted on by this House, done. We are now at the next phase of looking at that, as we would with every project. When Public Works was drawn into it we would provide the department that’s in charge of the project with options whether it’s the best value for money. In this case, options were given to the department, the decision was made, and inadvertently, by error, a tender was released that should not have been released because we had a number of steps to follow yet. We’ve pulled that back. No construction, no tender is out there, no tender has been awarded, no demolition is happening at this point. We’re going back and looking at whether in fact this is the best option that’s there and looking at the parameters of the project. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Supplementary To Question 45-15(5): Change In Scope To Dene K'onia Facility Renovation Project

Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Minister still didn’t answer the fundamental question here. That fundamental question is, why were Members of this side of the House not informed of the change in this project? Mr. Speaker, if I could, last year we were told that a key factor to relocating that program to Hay River was the fact that there was a facility there. That has changed. It’s fundamental; it’s simple to see, Mr. Speaker. Why were Regular Members not advised, Mr. Speaker? That’s what I’d like to know. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 45-15(5): Change In Scope To Dene K'onia Facility Renovation Project

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the fact is that the dollar value of the project remains the same, the community remains the same, the purpose of the facility remains the same and we’ve informed Members. As we said, a tender was issued in error; it was withdrawn. We’ve gone back to Cabinet, a letter’s been sent to Members, and a final decision. If the project changes in the sense of a higher dollar value, or changes the community again, that would have to come back for a vote in this House. The rest of the steps we’ve proceeded with and followed. Whether Members disagree with the information they were provided, before that initial decision came to this House we had Members saying that was a good idea. But when it came to this House for decision, all of a sudden it was a big surprise. So I mean we’re not going to go back there, Mr. Speaker. The fact is, we followed the process, we’re informing Members, there was an error, we’ve withdrawn that tender and there is no tender issued. Thank you.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, a lot of our smaller communities, you know, and our elders and people with respiratory ailments like asthma, the coming of summer means the coming of dust; the lack of dust control in these small communities. With the recent removal of $738,000 for dust control from the Municipal and Community Affairs main estimates it bereaves me to tell these people that, hey, you know what, the dust control issue is no longer a Municipal and Community Affairs priority. It probably never has been under control. The government has spent numerous amounts of dollars looking at ways to control the dust in the smaller communities. I want to ask the Minister, whose ultimate responsibility is dust control now in our smaller centres? Thank you.

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

Return To Question 46-15(5): Delivery Of Dust Control Programs For Small Communities

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the responsibility for dust control in the communities lies with the community governments. The community government formula includes responsibility for that portion. We have in the last while included in our business planning some work to do an analysis of what type of materials would be best used in terms of application for dust suppressant and I’m pleased to announce that we have an increase in our budget of $156,000 for this coming year. We are also continuing to work on our Main Street Chipsealing Program. There’s been eight communities involved in the plan. We’ve finished the work in four communities and we continue to move forward on that front. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Supplementary, Mr. Villeneuve.

Supplementary To Question 46-15(5): Delivery Of Dust Control Programs For Small Communities

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don’t have a problem with the community governments taking over their own dust control issues. Is this government going to provide an adequate amount of funding to these community governments to address their dust control issues? Through the EBA report on dust control, there’s a lot of recommendations in that report, and is the government going to implement some of those recommendations? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. Mr. McLeod.

Further Return To Question 46-15(5): Delivery Of Dust Control Programs For Small Communities