Debates of June 5, 2006 (day 5)

Thank you, Mr. Braden. The honourable Premier, Mr. Handley.

Return To Question 54-15(5): Update On The Progress Of The Northern Strategy

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As Members know, the Northern Strategy was an initiative that was undertaken jointly by the three northern Premiers and the Prime Minister of the day. There was an agreed need to take a long-term vision on northern issues as well as to deal with immediate issues. That strategy has resulted in the $40 million that was made available to our territory. Thirty-five million dollars has gone to the communities in community initiatives.

Mr. Speaker, with the new federal government, Minister Prentice has indicated that, yes, he wants us to work with him on what he referred to as a northern vision. He has asked us to provide him with some of our ideas about what should be included in this vision.

Mr. Speaker, even though the new government is only 100 and some days old, this initiative has been undertaken. We have provided them with some ideas. As it becomes more formalized, I would expect that we would see the same kind of consultative process happening. Again, that is in Minister Prentice’s hands right now. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Supplementary To Question 54-15(5): Update On The Progress Of The Northern Strategy

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess I would ask, is this really all in Minister Prentice’s hands? I think this is a process that all three territories undertook, as well, in good faith. We made investments in it and I remember considerable discussion among our committees and at levels of this Legislature. Do we have a new northern vision process under Minister Prentice, or is it, in reality, a continuation of the Northern Strategy process that we have already agreed to and already put significant investment in, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Handley.

Further Return To Question 54-15(5): Update On The Progress Of The Northern Strategy

Mr. Speaker, certainly our vision, from our government’s perspective or from northerners’ perspective, our vision of the North has not changed because the federal government changed. It is still the same vision. So when you look at the basic principles, those principles have not changed. We look at some of the main goals, whether it is on governance, protecting the environment or establishing a strong foundation for economic development, so those are the same.

Mr. Speaker, all of that information has been provided to the federal Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. It is now in the hands of the federal Minister in the sense that he will want to put his own vision together with those that we have provided to him and I think come up with a vision that is probably going to be very similar from our perspective, but yet will be a document between his government and our governments. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Supplementary To Question 54-15(5): Update On The Progress Of The Northern Strategy

Mr. Speaker, the $40 million that is now under review for investment, $35 million of which at the community level, was something that I believe was extended to this government and our sister territories really, Mr. Speaker, as a down payment toward the establishment of a new deal with Canada, not so much something that was going to be looked at as a payoff, if you will. Here is some money; take it and have some fun. This is a down payment, a promise toward a better deal with Canada. What are we doing to continue these negotiations, Mr. Speaker, and to make this a reality?

Mr. Speaker, the Member is correct; the $40 million was a down payment. The government-of-the-day agreed to provide $40 million to each territory to be able to deal with issues that were of greatest urgency in each territory. That is why we allocated to the community governments to allow them to determine their first priorities.

It has always been felt that resource revenue sharing and fixing the formula were a key piece of any northern vision. That is the piece that we have been focussed on recently with the two expert panel reports, the most recent of which was released today. Fixing the resource revenue sharing so more of that revenue stays in the North will enable us to be more self-reliant, self-determining ourselves. That has been our thrust up to now. Mr. Speaker, in doing that, we have laid out to the federal government a number of strategies saying here is what our priority is, whether it is on infrastructure or on social programs or any other areas. Clearly, the focus over the last few months and probably over the next few months will be on a new formula and new resource revenue sharing arrangements. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Supplementary To Question 54-15(5): Update On The Progress Of The Northern Strategy

Mr. Speaker, one of the key ingredients in this is the understanding, support and collaboration of the provinces in Canada. The report by the Council of the Federation really is a striking endorsement of our goals. I wanted to ask the Premier what his plan is for continuing to strengthen that relationship with the provinces, as he says we have done with the federal government, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Handley.

Further Return To Question 54-15(5): Update On The Progress Of The Northern Strategy

Mr. Speaker, I assure all the Members in this House that we are going to continue to work in cooperation with all of the Premiers. We met last week in Gimli. We did talk generally about this. This is the expert panel report. The Premiers all assured myself and the other northern Premiers that they are 100 percent on side with us. We are meeting again on Thursday. We will be talking about the territorial report as well as the provincial report dealing with equalization. We have full agreement that they are 100 percent behind us, that our situation is unique, that we shouldn’t be drawn into some formula that applies to the provinces, Prince Edward Island and Saskatchewan or something. Ours is unique.

Mr. Speaker, I will be taking every opportunity to make sure that we maintain that kind of solid support from all the Premiers. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of MACA on the Chipsealing Program. Could the Minister of MACA tell me if the plans for the Chipsealing Program in the Sahtu region is still as per schedule? We had some discussion last year on this issue. Thank you.

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

Return To Question 55-15(5): Update On The Chipseal Program For The Sahtu

Mr. Speaker, yes, they are.

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

Supplementary To Question 55-15(5): Update On The Chipseal Program For The Sahtu

Thank you. Can the Minister then tell me whether the plans are for communities in the region in terms of the Chipsealing Program? I may have to get a little more specific in saying Fort Good Hope. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. McLeod.

Further Return To Question 55-15(5): Update On The Chipseal Program For The Sahtu

Mr. Speaker, the plans haven’t changed from last year, so I will repeat the answer I gave last year. Mr. Speaker, we had done design and drainage studies. We have embarked on doing the changing of the culverts and also providing the solid base for the community. I believe that is going to be upgraded and some of the areas that were not completed during that year will be finished off this year. We intend to move forward with the Chipsealing Program, providing the budgets are still sufficient to do all the communities that we had intended to do. Thank you.

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

Supplementary To Question 55-15(5): Update On The Chipseal Program For The Sahtu

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Chipsealing Program in Fort Good Hope is the issue of the chipsealing and dust control in our communities. Does the government provide enough funding in the formula to do adequate dust control in our communities? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. McLeod.

Further Return To Question 55-15(5): Update On The Chipseal Program For The Sahtu

Mr. Speaker, we did some additional studies over this past fiscal year. We have done an analysis in each community. We have also looked, as part of this analysis, to see what would be the best method of applying dust suppressant, whether it is chipsealing, calcium or others. I would not be able to speak specifically regarding what would be the best mode of applying dust suppressant in Good Hope, but I would say that, with all the new dollars that are available with what is currently in the community government’s budget, I would be very comfortable in saying, yes, there are adequate resources to do dust control. Thank you.

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

Supplementary To Question 55-15(5): Update On The Chipseal Program For The Sahtu

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last year in Tulita, they had dust control. I think they did about 100 feet of dust control because that is all the funding they had. So everybody got into 100 feet of the air so there is no dust in that area. If the Minister can come into Tulita this summer or in the Sahtu communities and see for himself the kind of funding that goes into dust control programs so that the whole main streets in each of the Sahtu communities are adequately funded and to have proper dust control measures in there. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. McLeod.

Further Return To Question 55-15(5): Update On The Chipseal Program For The Sahtu

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There is a lot of new money that is flowing into the communities. Up to now the money that was earmarked for dust control was part of the formula that was calculated for community governments. The community had to set dust control as a priority. Since we have new funding this coming fiscal year, we have the community capacity fund that can be used for dust control, the gas tax, the definition in the agreement allows for greater flexibility, there’s allowance for this money to be used for chipseal or dust control. So there’s a lot of different things. There’s also the new capital formula that’s being unveiled and that will be able to have the flexibility of using those dollars for chipseal if that’s a requirement. So there are a number of initiatives, a number of new pots of money there. I think there’s more than enough to deal with the issue in the communities regarding dust. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for the Minister responsible for WCB and it’s further to my Member’s statement. Mr. Speaker, the basic rule of WCB is to have an insurance system that keeps the employers and the employees out of the core system. It’s very unfortunate that workers have had to go through the judicial system to get some relief. But if any, especially those suffering from chronic pain conditions, thought that the Supreme Court of Canada decision Martin or the Supreme Court of the NWT decision Valic were going to give them any relief and justice, I’m not sure if they’re not sitting there scratching their heads, especially in light of the Minister’s answer last week.

Mr. Speaker, my colleague Bill Braden has raised many questions, but the answers from the Minister were wholly unsatisfactory. Mr. Speaker, I have to ask the Minister what is the discussion, what are the instructions, what are the plans of the board in terms of dealing with changing its policy and operation in order to fit with the latest Valic decision? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. The honourable Minister responsible for Workers' Compensation Board, Mr. Dent.

Return To Question 56-15(5): WCB Policy Regarding Chronic Pain Syndrome

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe I told the House in February that the governance council would be reviewing its chronic pain policy and revising that in light of the decisions in the courts. Their intention now is to finalize that this month and once that’s done, they will refer the policy, the new policy, to the Supreme Court for reference to ensure that it is in compliance with the Charter and court decisions.

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

Supplementary To Question 56-15(5): WCB Policy Regarding Chronic Pain Syndrome

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to be satisfied with that, but given the Minister’s answers in the House last week, which seems to suggest that this decision is not as far in depth and breadth as they should be, I think that this was quite a decision. The courts said that the board violated natural justice, basically saying the process was denied. The board failed to ask for rehearing when it should have. The board failed to give notice to Mr. Valic when it should have. A tribunal fettered its discretion, meaning it didn’t do its job. The tribunal did not look at the details of the case, and, also, the board policy violates equality rights under Charter in that it treats people with chronic condition differently than other conditions. So I’d like to ask the Minister, I think we…I don’t want to see the board and Minister narrowing its actions to the decision only. So I’d like to know what broad policy changes the board is willing to get into. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 56-15(5): WCB Policy Regarding Chronic Pain Syndrome

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The board has announced or said that they are not going to appeal the Valic decision. As I said, they are reviewing their policy. Their policy will be rewritten. They had, in September of 2004, issued a new policy for pain which dealt specifically with chronic pain and had felt that at that time that that policy would be in compliance with court decisions at that time. Now they are in light of more recent court decisions and they are reviewing their policy. So the understanding of the field has changed and the board is responding to that reality and will have a policy in place, as I said, later this month and they will check with the courts to make sure that policy is one that meets the test. Thank you.

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

Supplementary To Question 56-15(5): WCB Policy Regarding Chronic Pain Syndrome

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions to the Minister are dealing with not only the court decision and dealing with the tribunal process, but a lot of other things that have to go in. Mr. Speaker, one of the things that Justice Schuler has said is that this WCB continues to deal with chronic condition as a temporary measure. They look at it as an injury. You’re going to get treated and if you don’t, well, too bad, so sad. You’re not going to be entitled to permanent partial disability or the same treatment as everybody else would. So I’d like to ask the Minister, as a Minister outside of this court decision, what he’s doing to change this policy and the way the board treats people with chronic condition. I don’t think he should just leave it to the court. I think he should do something as Minister of WCB, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 56-15(5): WCB Policy Regarding Chronic Pain Syndrome

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The governance council has told me that their intention is to develop a new policy and to refer to the courts to ensure that it is one that meets all of the tests. That, Mr. Speaker, I think meets all the requirements that are set out in the recent decision on Valic and it shows a responsiveness to the situation. The decision in Valic does not at any point say that somebody was negligent on the board and how they handled things. It does say that they did not, the court did not think that they handled the case according to the Charter, but it doesn’t say that it was done with any sense of negligence. The appeals tribunal has independent legal counsel. It’s not the counsel from the WCB. They felt that they had competent advice and that they were following it. So it’s a situation where the board had made changes over time in dealing with chronic pain. If it’s found not to be acceptable, then it will be one that is going to be changed. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Final Supplementary, Ms. Lee.

Supplementary To Question 56-15(5): WCB Policy Regarding Chronic Pain Syndrome

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I reject everything that the Minister has said in terms of how the board understands this decision. It’s very clear in the Minister’s answer last week that he’s going by what the board is saying. I’m telling you, this decision is saying that the board, the tribunal, the appeals tribunal, and the reassessment team screwed up. Okay? I mean, people have done wrong things. So I’d like to ask the Minister, because I could see that this could, I think the only way to fix this is the workers have their own lawyers to go through the process. So I’d like to ask the Minister if he would consider setting up a legal fund for the workers who have to keep fighting the legal system to get the WCB to do the thing that they’re entitled to? Thank you.

---Applause

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 56-15(5): WCB Policy Regarding Chronic Pain Syndrome

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess as a Legislative Assembly we could have a discussion about the policy and whether or not we think that the no-fault insurance way in which the WCB has operated is the way that we want to do it. We could get rid of the WCB, bring in private insurance like they do in the States, and allow all sorts of litigation in order to see whether or not people get compensation. I think the system that we have, Mr. Speaker, is one that works well. There are some people who don’t feel that they’ve been satisfied and we have, with Valic’s situation, a case where the courts have directed that an applicant be heard again. That will happen, Mr. Speaker. But by and large the system works as it should and it is delivering a very good service to the people that it serves. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for the Minister of ENR, the Honourable Michael Miltenberger. It goes back to a statement I made in the House last February and one I made again today, that is my concern over the management of caribou in the Northwest Territories. The first question, and the concern is out there, is why hasn’t there been a meeting of all stakeholders concerned and that are involved in the management of caribou in the Northwest Territories? I’d like to ask the Minister that direct question. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Minister responsible for Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Miltenberger.

Return To Question 57-15(5): Coordinated Approach To Caribou Management

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, there has been extensive meetings and consultation across the Northwest Territories on the issue of caribou management. We just recently prepared and released an NWT Barren-ground Caribou Management Strategy that links all the pieces, the work that’s been done on the differing herds. As we speak, work is underway for a major gathering, what I have also been referring to publicly for the past couple months as a caribou summit. In the coming year, once all the information is in from all the various censuses that are currently underway, and surveys. Thank you.