Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are addressed to the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment. I’d like to thank the Minister for tabling the fact sheet yesterday. There’s a lot of information in there. I think there are a few opinions, as well, but I would like to ask him a few questions about some of the statements in those sheets.
On the page that says “What Will JK Cost,” It goes on to say the total cost to offer junior kindergarten is projected to be $7.4 million annually. The cost will be absorbed by education authorities. On another page, the School Funding Framework page, it says, “The school funding formulas used prior year September 30 student enrollments,” and that’s to determine board contributions. But on one of the latter pages it says, “The Yellowknife Catholic schools will receive additional dollars when they implement junior kindergarten in 2016-17 and is actually offering the program, so I’m a little confused, Mr. Speaker. There are a couple of other statements, as well, that are contradictory.
I’d like to ask the Minister will, for instance, the Yellowknife Catholic Schools receive funding for junior kindergarten students in 2016-17 when the students first start, or will they receive that funding a year later when the September 30th enrollments are determined a year after the kids start?
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The honourable Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. This projected information that I tabled in the house, the fact sheets, it lays out every detail of information that is the most accurate between ourselves and the school boards in Yellowknife. Part of the plan, obviously, is the funding that the Member alluded to for 2016-17 will be happening at that time because they will be rolling out their program. The money will be provided to them as is stated in the fact sheets. As well, I believe above and beyond the 16 to 1, we are also contributing additional funding towards that. Mahsi.
To the Minister, thank you. I thought I heard the Minister say the funding will flow when the program first starts. I would appreciate him reconfirming that in his next answer. If that’s the case, that’s great, that’s what it should do, but I have been hearing from more than just the Yellowknife boards that they will not be getting any new dollars, and this is coming from their schools as well. They will not be getting any new dollars for junior kindergarten when it starts, for instance, in this next school year, September 2014-15.
So, Mr. Minister, why am I hearing from schools that there will be no new funding for them to implement junior kindergarten in 2014-15 when, according to the fact sheets, they are supposed to get that money when the program rolls out? Thank you.
Again, the fact package does cover that detailed information. In 2014-15 for YCS, $277,000 will be deducted from YCS budget out of the $7.4 million that we’ve been talking about re-profiling through PTR. In 2015-16 another $467,000 is meant to be deducted from their budget. In 2016-17 another $393,000 estimated to be deducted. So it’s a total of $1.137 million. This reduction will be offset with an increase of $960,000 funding from ECE through formula funding to support implementation of JK, resulting in an overall reduction over three years of $177,000. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thanks to the Minister for telling me the information I already know. That’s not my question. My question was I’m hearing that schools will not be getting any new funding when they start junior kindergarten in 2014-15. Why is that, if it’s supposed to be coming?
On another page titled, “How Will We Pay for Junior Kindergarten,” the statement is, “All education authorities are being asked to implement junior kindergarten with existing funding.” That seems to, again, contradict that they will get funding when the program rolls out.
One of the things that are required is resources for new programs, so how much money will a school receive in resources to buy things like sand tables and water tables? How much will each school receive in resources for their Junior Kindergarten Program? Thank you.
I can provide that detailed information at an appropriate time. We must keep in mind that we’re re-profiling the $7.4 million that the Member alluded to earlier. We are still under the PTR as we have been legislated to. I believe, over a 10-year period, there has been an influx of funding that came in to increase the PTR due to the fact of a surplus of funds within the GNWT, which we don’t have right now. Those are just some of the areas we’ve talked about. We’ve been working with the school boards to make that a reality and that’s where we are at today. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Final, short supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the Minister’s commitment to give me the information on resources, but again, I am hearing that schools will not get funding in 2014-15 when they start the program and I didn’t hear an answer from the Minister on that.
The Minister talks about the pupil-teacher ratio and, yes, we are still under the 16 to 1 pupil-teacher ratio in most cases.
I would like to know from the Minister: What is our current pupil-teacher ratio and once we have implemented junior kindergarten and after all three years, what will our PTR become following the budget cuts and the reallocation of funding? Thank you.
We are re-profiling; we aren’t cutting the budget. So the $7.4 million, as indicated, it is being rolled out to all the school boards to implement junior kindergarten. Those are the areas we have been working with the school boards and we will continue to make that a success. The junior kindergarten has been under discussion through the Aboriginal Student Achievement Initiative, Early Childhood Development. This is where we’re at today. We’ve done a lot of research, and research is telling us this is the best way to go. The 16 to 1, at this point we are at 13.8 to 1. When we start implementing the junior kindergarten, we will still be...(inaudible). Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of ITI. In my Member’s statement I made a brief comment on the Canol Heritage Trail. The Canol Trail follows the traditional Shotagotine Dene trails through the Mackenzie Mountains and was used over thousands of years by the Sahtu Dene and Metis. Over the last eight years, 87 hikers have had a very intimate experience with the Canol Trial. Over the eight years these hikers have experienced the value of these traditional trails.
In order to help tourism and other people who are going to take part in hiking on the Canol Trail and hiking by themselves, is there any type of discussion about a handbook that will guide them through the trail, knowing which areas they should be careful in, what areas, as they are passing through, are very sacred and spiritual to the Sahtu people?
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Canol Trail remains within the authority of the federal government. It does have a number of sites along the trail that would, or could, cause issues for health and safety of persons travelling on that trail. That’s not to say we’re not continuing to move forward with discussions with the federal government on how we are going to make improvements. We have some capital dollars earmarked for improvements in the park, including cable crossing at Twitya River next year.
The Member has a very valid point about the guidebook for hikers on the Canol. It hasn’t been updated in a number of years and it’s something that for people who are interested in hiking the Canol Trail, we should have an up-to-date guidebook for those persons that are going on that trail. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, certainly the Minister has been very clear to use in the House that it’s still the authority of the federal government until other issues are resolved with the Sahtu Land Claim corporations and the territorial government. Once the authority comes to the territorial government, this park will be the largest territorial park in the Northwest Territories, and I continue to support the discussions. The territorial government can then work with the Sahtu Land Claim organizations on the operations, development and management of the Canol Heritage Park and Canol Heritage Trail.
I want to ask the Minister, given the importance of this trail here, what is being done in the interim to improve some of the key areas that will need infrastructure support?
He did talk about Twitya River, and we would certainly like to see a bridge crossing the river there.
Mr. Speaker, the Member is correct; we are looking at putting a cable crossing across the Twitya River. The good news is the remediation work will start next summer. The federal government has made a commitment to look at the remediation beginning next summer. That’s a period of approximately five years that they feel that they need to spend remediating the area. There are a number of waste sites, four in particular that were classified as Class 1 waste sites that would be targeted immediately for cleanup and remediation.
The beauty of that Canol Trail would certainly rival anything that Banff National Park has in Alberta, and it’s certainly a real jewel that we have here in the Northwest Territories. We have a very bright future ahead with the development of that park and we’re very optimistic about that park, that’s why we are… Even though we’re working with the federal government on the remediation and waiting for them to get started, we are continuing to move forward with plans, working with leadership in the Sahtu on how to put emergency shelters and a cable crossing in. So we are moving forward with some initiatives and we will continue to do that. As I said, it could be a real jewel for us going forward in our tourism efforts. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I certainly agree 110 percent with Minister Ramsay’s observation on the Canol Heritage Trail and Doi T’oh Park.
Given that we now have 87 hikers that hike on the Canol Trail, some of the hikers have hiked over 300 to 400 miles on that trail and they’ve been coming consistently. The average hiker walks about 25 miles and it’s said they become very intimate with the trail.
I want to ask the Minister, through his discussions, through what’s happening now with the Canol and the future infrastructure projects, is the Minister willing to look at setting up a management-type of community that we could look at projects that are going to happen on the Sahtu trail? We certainly want to make sure that our hikers are well informed.
I now understand that the Minister of Health and Social Services is going to be joining us on the hike this summer.
Mr. Speaker, the Member has a lifetime of experience in that area and I know the last eight years he’s spent on the leadership hike with…(inaudible)… The Member and I have had a number of discussions of how best the department and the government can use the information that people who have actually been out, walked the trail, hiked the trail and have lived that experience can provide to the government in terms of what infrastructure is needed and where it’s needed. We talked earlier about the update guidebook for hikers. These are things that are tangible and things that… We need to look to the experts and people that have spent a lot of time out there who are certainly more knowledgeable in how best to put infrastructure in place in that park.
Again, I know our regional staff have met with folks in the past, and we will continue to work with the Member and people who have spent a lot of time out on that trail, so that we can get an update guidebook, so that we can get infrastructure put in place where it needs to be put. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to ask the Minister, given all that we know about the Canol Heritage Trail, the federal government is working with the work committee, the land corporation authority under our land claim, specifically Chapter 17, Protected Areas. That’s where we speak to some co-management decision-making development of the park and the territorial government’s mandate under the territorial parks with ITI.
Given all of this, I want to ask the Minister, can a type of co-management committee be started up and look at what needs to be happening to get this park in its proper place and get ready for the development of this heritage trail?
I look forward to the hikers this year. On July 2nd we will be hiking 25 miles, and I certainly look forward to Mr. Abernethy’s participation. I understand he’s getting in great shape.
Again, I thank the Member for raising the concerns today. It is important to note, as I mentioned earlier, that the federal government is looking at a five-year time frame for the remediation. They’re also looking at an additional five years for monitoring, after the end of that initial five-year remediation period. But we have to continue to move forward and seek the means to have that land transferred to the Government of the Northwest Territories. Once we do that, the Member is right; I mean, it has to be co-managed. That’s certainly a recipe for success that the Government of the Northwest Territories has acted on in the past and certainly something that we’re looking forward to achieving in the future. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Time for oral questions has expired.
Colleagues, I would like to welcome to the House today Mr. and Mrs. Nick and Betty Ball from Deer Lake, Newfoundland. Those are the parents of our Clerk, Mr. Ball. Welcome to the House.
Thanks, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources (ENR).
In March 2011, ENR was able to provide an update on funds spent on Wildlife Act consultations for the 2009-2011 fiscal years – response to Written Question 24-16(5). Please provide a similar update for what has been spent so far on consultations since the Wildlife Act was passed. As in the previous request, please indicate how much has been spent on the working group, on SWAAG and any other funds spent on developing regulations and implementing the act.
In addition to a financial breakdown, please provide an estimate of staff time spent working and consulting with the various groups involved in developing regulations to implement the Wildlife Act.
Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Item 9, returns to written questions. Item 10, replies to opening address. Item 11, petitions. Item 12, reports of standing and special committees. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Your Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures is pleased to provide its Report on the Review of the Auxiliary Report of the Chief Electoral Officer on Issues Arising from the 2011 General Election and commends it to the House.
The Auxiliary Report of the Chief Electoral Officer of the Northwest Territories on Issues Arising from the 2011 General Election was tabled in the Legislative Assembly on October 23, 2013. It is the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures’ responsibility to review the report and make recommendations to the Legislative Assembly.
The committee held public hearings with the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) in Yellowknife on February 27 and May 27, 2014. At the latter meeting, one witness, in addition to the CEO, made presentations to the committee and provided a written submission. The committee thanks everyone who provided their comments and attended the hearings.
The CEO’s Auxiliary Report includes a number of recommendations for amendments to the Elections and Plebiscites Act (the act) and other changes to improve electoral processes. The research and reasoning supporting these recommendations are described thoroughly in the CEO’s auxiliary report. The committee considered this information, public input and the views of fellow Members in reaching consensus on the recommendations included in the following summary.
The purpose of voter identification requirements is to ensure that only eligible electors cast ballots to protect the rights of voters and candidates to fair elections. The CEO was asked to provide additional research on identification requirements following his initial report on the 2011 election. The evidence shows that the electoral process in the NWT is sound and trustworthy.
Allegations of ineligible electors casting ballots are very rare in the NWT. In the past 15 years, spanning four general elections and one by-election, there have been just two complaints and no evidence of unqualified electors actually voting. This suggests that stricter voting requirements would be a preventative measure, not a solution to a burning problem.
The committee shares concerns it heard that stringent federal identification requirements discourage qualified voters from casting their ballots. There is great disparity in the number of people with government-issued photo identification, depending on where they live. Eighty percent of Yellowknife residents have a driver’s licence or general identification card compared to 76 percent of residents of regional centres and only 44 percent of residents of the remaining 27 communities.
The smaller communities also have higher proportions of Aboriginal electors, meaning they would currently be disproportionately impacted by this type of identification requirement. This could be mitigated by a better system of issuing identification in our smaller communities and by implementing a robust vouching system that ensures both the rights of eligible voters and the integrity of the electoral system.
The committee endorses the following principles for voting requirement rules outlined by the CEO:
Consistency: Rules should be the same regardless of place of residence;
Integrity: Confidence in a free and fair electoral system is paramount;
Participation: It is better to punish an unqualified elector who votes than to exclude qualified electors from voting; and
Trust: The overwhelming majority of electors participate in good faith.
The committee also accepts the CEO’s recommendations with respect to voter identification requirements.
The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the act be amended to increase the number of times an elector may vouch for another elector from one to five.
The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the act be amended to prohibit candidates from vouching for another elector.
The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that Elections NWT and the GNWT work together to expand the coverage of government-issued photo identification among residents of the Northwest Territories.
Polling day is currently the first Monday of October. In his first report on the 2011 election, the CEO suggested that having polling day on a Monday presents challenges for election administration and candidates and may impede voter turnout. The CEO recommended that polling day be changed to a Saturday or a day later in the week than Monday or be declared a holiday. The standing committee requested additional research.
However, there is very little research on the relationship between polling day and voter turnout and what does exist is inconclusive. No province or territory holds general elections on weekends, although municipalities do in three provinces.
In the absence of research supporting the argument that voter turnout is lower on Mondays, the standing committee does not support a change to the polling day at this time.
The CEO was asked to identify options for clarifying the rules with respect to broadcasting. For example, current legislation bans a candidate from polling day promotion of his or her campaign on radio, but allows a newspaper ad to be published that day.
The committee believes that some limit on last-minute campaign advertising is reasonable and helps ensure the fairness of our elections. However, any limit should not be discriminatory, favouring one method of advertising over another, and potentially one campaign strategy over another. Moreover, the definition of election advertising must be clear, practical and easily applied, particularly in light of rapid changes in communication technology.
To these ends, the committee makes the following recommendations:
The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that Sections 104 and 299 of the act be amended to prohibit election advertising on polling day and the day prior.
The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the definition of election advertising in Section 237 of the act be clarified, as proposed by the CEO on page 13 of his auxiliary report.
The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that, for greater clarity and certainty, the term “campaign material” be replaced by “election advertising” throughout the act.
Mr. Speaker, through you, I would ask that my colleague Mr. Hawkins continue with the reading of the report into the record.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you, Mr. Bromley.
In the 2011 election, residents of 11 communities had only one opportunity to vote: on polling day itself. Residents of these communities are to be commended for the generally strong voter turnouts. However, all residents of the Northwest Territories should have comparable voting opportunity.
The committee requested that the CEO develop detailed recommendations for a new special voting opportunity to replace the provisions for advance polls in communities without a resident returning officer and populations of less than 500. The committee is convinced that provisions for all polls in these small communities can be replaced by a new voting opportunity that will allow electors in all communities, regardless of size, to vote before polling day if need be.
The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that Sections 152 to 162 of the act be repealed as well as all other references to an advance poll, and that the CEO provide the Assembly with detailed recommendations to establish a new special voting opportunity for communities without a resident returning officer, similar to voting in the office of the returning officer.
The CEO’s additional research on campaign financing in other jurisdictions was very informative despite the role of political parties in many instances. For example, partial reimbursement of candidates’ campaign expenses is done in all Canadian jurisdictions except Alberta, British Columbia and the three territories. Adopting such a system of public financing was proposed by Yellowknife resident David Wasylciw, who made both oral and written presentations to the committee. He pointed out that the cost to taxpayers would be quite modest.
While subsidizing the cost of running a campaign might lower a barrier for some candidates, reimbursing candidates’ expenses is not a simple matter in our system. Running as independents, candidates for our Legislature typically raise funds in their constituencies and must account for those funds as required by the act. Many candidates also contribute to their own campaigns in varying degrees. This raises the issue of how a reimbursement to a candidate would be administered and monitored.
Absent evidence to the contrary, committee members are not persuaded that the cost of campaigning is a significant barrier to potential candidates in the NWT as it may be in more populous jurisdictions. In addition, reimbursements would unnecessarily increase the complexity of administering elections, which affects both candidates and Elections NWT.
The system of campaign financing in the NWT is currently fair, transparent and independently regulated, as it should be. This does not mean there is no room for improvement. For example, to ensure full transparency and accountability, anonymous donations to candidates’ campaigns are not allowed in half of the Canadian electoral jurisdictions. Some that do allow anonymous contributions limit the total amount a candidate can collect. The committee agrees with this approach and suggests that a limit of $1,500 be imposed per candidate. This is equivalent to the maximum allowed by a single contributor.
The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the campaign financing provisions of the act be drafted in plain language, with a view to improving their logical consistency.
The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the current limit of $100 remain for each anonymous donation, but that each candidate be limited to a total of $1,500 in anonymous contributions to his or her campaign.
The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the types of expenditures that may be incurred by a candidate, rather than the official agent, be expanded to allow minor, practical expenditures.
The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the act be amended to require candidates to include statements from accredited financial institutions for campaign accounts in their financial reports to Elections NWT.
The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures directs the Chief Electoral Officer to provide additional research on the regulation of third-party election advertising for future consideration.
In the event of an investigation of an alleged breach of election law, the CEO currently lacks the power to summon persons to appear, produce documents and give evidence. This can be a serious impediment to thorough investigation.
In the past, the committee has several times called for more active or enhanced enforcement of the Elections and Plebiscites Act.
To address this, the CEO recommended amending the act to grant the CEO the same enforcement powers as a board of inquiry under the Public Inquiries Act, or by conferring appropriate specific powers. These powers are similar to those available to CEOs elsewhere in Canada, including the Yukon and Nunavut, and have already been granted in the NWT to the administrators of the Human Rights Act, Residential Tenancies Act and Electoral Boundaries Commission Act. The committee agrees that thorough investigation of complaints is essential.
The Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures recommends that the act be amended to strengthen the enforcement powers of the CEO, by conferring the specific power to summon persons to appear, produce documents and give evidence under oath.
Mr. Speaker, this brings me to the end of reading of the report and MLA Bromley will read out the conclusion. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. To conclude the report, I’d allow Mr. Bromley
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you, Mr. Hawkins.
Members of the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures believe that taken together, the recommendations stemming from this review will help clarify, modernize and strengthen the NWT’s electoral system. It is a strong system, founded on fairness, transparency and accountability. We thank the Chief Electoral Officer for his diligence, and all those who provided public input or attended the committee’s hearings.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called.
---Carried
Committee Report 8-17(5) is received by the Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole for further consideration. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 93(4) and move Committee Report 8-17(5) into Committee of the Whole for consideration today. Mahsi.
---Unanimous consent granted
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wish to table the following document, entitled “Results Report (2013-14), 20/20 A Brilliant North, NWT Public Service Strategic Plan.” Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Mr. Miltenberger.
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Section 32.1(2) of the Financial Administration Act, I wish to table the following document, entitled “List of Inter-activity Transfers Exceeding $250,000 for the period of April 1, 2013, to March 31, 2014.” Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In response to Motion 12-17(4) of the Legislative Assembly, the Standing Committee on Government Operations wishes to table a document, entitled “Establishing an Office of the Ombudsman for the Northwest Territories.”
The Standing Committee welcomes public comment over the summer and anticipates further discussions during the fall sitting of the Assembly. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. Mr. Hawkins.
