Debates of March 9, 2005 (day 52)

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. McLeod.

Further Return To Question 582-15(3): New Roads In The Sahtu

Mr. Speaker, the reason we took some money out of a number of different locations in the last fiscal year was to deal with our problem that we were experiencing on Highway No. 1. There was some urgency to deal with the foundation and some of the drainage that was happening in that area as a result of resource development. So we had to find the money somewhere and, in this case, there was some flexibility in the dollars allocated to that road, but we did what we had to. I can’t commit that we won’t do that again. If there’s an emergency situation or there’s some urgency to invest on a piece of transportation infrastructure, we’ll have to be able to have that flexibility to reallocate. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Supplementary To Question 582-15(3): New Roads In The Sahtu

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, when you drive the winter road in the Sahtu there are drainage problems, lots of potholes, there are lots of creeks overflowing and I guess the Minister just skipped out $1 million into another region to fix their foundation. I’m asking again, in terms of the impact of the oil and gas activities on the region, if the Minister would commit to ensuring that our winter bridge project gets done on time and the people in the Sahtu can enjoy safe winter driving for next year. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. McLeod.

Further Return To Question 582-15(3): New Roads In The Sahtu

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don’t think there’s anybody more interested in seeing the winter bridging projects done on time and on budget than me. I certainly will do everything in my power and commit our department’s efforts to ensure that happens. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation.

Can the Minister please provide the numbers on uptake for the last three years in Yellowknife on the Expanded Downpayment Assistance Program?

Can the Minister please provide information on the amount each of the recipients received under EDAP?

Can the Minister please provide information on the reasons for any variations in the amounts received under EDAP?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the Minister of Justice.

Given the lack of support for the construction of a $42 million courthouse and concern that cost overruns, like those experienced with the construction of the North Slave Correctional Centre, could the Minister provide detail on how the $42 million figure was arrived at?

The Minister has indicated that the Department of Justice has paid for and will have to pay for additional court space in the future. Can the Minister provide detail on the costs for additional court space for the last five years and the projected costs for the next two years?

Can the Minister provide information on the number of court cases held in Yellowknife, for the convenience of the judiciary or court party, which could or should have been held in the Inuvik or Hay River Courthouse facilities?

With the construction of the proposed new courthouse, can the Minister provide information on the projected increase in operations expenses for running the new facility and any costs for increased staffing?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the Minister responsible for the Financial Management Board Secretariat.

Can the Minister provide this House with the total number of employees in the MAP program to date and which department have they applied from?

How many of the MAP participants are aboriginal indigenous northerners? How many are aboriginal indigenous women?

How many P1s applied for the program to date?

How many women applied for the program to date?

Thank you.

My question is for the Minister of Justice.

Could the Minister advise me what, if any, options his department has looked at that might help keep apartment rental costs affordable for our residents during this resource development boom time?

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to present a petition dealing with the matter of addiction treatment centres in the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Speaker, the petition contains 98 signatures of inmates at the North Slave Correctional Centre. Mr. Speaker, the petitioners request that treatment centres be opened in the Northwest Territories to help support the rehabilitation of the growing number of addicts. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the following document, entitled Public Utilities Board 2004 Annual Report. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the following document, entitled Act Now - A Report of the Workers’ Compensation Board Legislative Review Panel.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I give notice that on Friday, March 11, 2005, I will move the following motion: Now therefore I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Range Lake, that Mr. Robert McLeod, Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes, be appointed to the Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight.

Mr. Speaker, at the appropriate time today, I will seek unanimous consent to deal with this motion today and to waive Rule 58 to allow this motion to proceed. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I give notice that on Friday, March 11, 2005, I will move the following motion: Now therefore I move, seconded by the honourable Member for North Slave, that the Premier immediately communicate to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development the GNWT’s and this Legislative Assembly’s expectation that he will appoint one of the board members' nominees as chair of the Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. Item 14, notices of motion. Item 15, notices of motion for first reading of bills. Item 16, motions. The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Villeneuve.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to deal with the motion I gave notice of earlier today.

The Member is seeking unanimous consent to deal with the motion he gave notice of today and waive Rule 58. Are there any nays? There are no nays. You may deal with your motion, Mr. Villeneuve.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also request unanimous consent to waive Rule 58 to allow Motion 32-15(3) to proceed today. Thank you.

The Member is seeking unanimous consent to waive Rule 58 to allow Motion 32-15(3) to proceed.

Nay.

I would like to call Committee of the Whole to order. We have a number of things on our agenda. What is the wish of the committee? Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The committee wishes to consider Bill 17, Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act; Bill 20, Supplementary Appropriation Act, No. 3, 2004-2005…(inaudible)…Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Is the committee agreed?

Agreed.

Thank you. We will proceed with that after we have a short break.

---SHORT RECESS

I call Committee of the Whole back to order. The first thing on our agenda is Bill 17, Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act. If the committee is agreed, then I will ask the Minister responsible for bringing this bill forward, Mr. Dent, if he would proceed with his opening remarks. Mr. Dent.

Agreed.

Thank you, Madam Chair. We are here today to review Bill 17, Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act.

The bill we are reviewing today does not address marriage. The Supreme Court recently confirmed that it is the exclusive responsibility of the federal government to define marriage.

A few weeks ago, the federal Justice Minister introduced the Civil Marriage Act in the House of Commons. If passed, it will extend legal capacity for civil marriage to same-sex couples while respecting religious freedom. Until this legislation is passed or there is a court decision in the Northwest Territories, the current definition of marriage in the NWT remains as a union between a man and a woman.

This bill ensures that people living in different types of spousal relationships have the same rights, benefits, duties and obligations. People who live together as a family will have the same rights, whether they are legally married or not. This bill ensures that same-sex couples will be treated the same as heterosexual common-law couples who live together in similar circumstances.

All across Canada, there have been court challenges that have resulted in courts and legislatures confirming the rights and obligations of same-sex couples. In most parts of the country, their legal status is the same as heterosexual common-law couples. These changes will ensure our legislation recognizes their rights and obligations.

This bill also amends a number of statutes to provide previously unrecognized rights and obligations to those in heterosexual common-law relationships. These will apply equally to those in same-sex relationships. In several of our statutes, references to "spouse" only include married spouses. This bill updates those references.

Finally, I would like to inform Committee of the Whole that at the appropriate time, I will bring forward amendments addressing concerns we received from Egale and making minor corrections to this bill. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Normally at this time we have the chair of the standing committee that reviewed the bill offer the committee’s comments on the bill. At this time, I will ask Ms. Lee if she will read those comments for us. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Madam Chairperson. The Standing Committee on Social Programs conducted its public review of Bill 17, Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act, in Yellowknife on December 9, 2004, and February 16, 2005.

The committee would like to thank Egale Canada and Out North for their submissions and the Minister and his staff for presenting the bill. Bill 17 is intended primarily to remove discriminatory treatment of same-sex and heterosexual common-law couples from a number of NWT acts. The bill is similar to what has been done by other Canadian jurisdictions in response to a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada; particularly, the 1999 decision M vs. H. It does not address the definition of marriage, which is in the jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada. The majority of NWT legislation recognizes couples who have lived together for two years or more as common-law couples. The committee noted that the Workers’ Compensation Act does not recognize common-law couples unless they have lived together for three years.

This means, for example, that if a couple had been living together for 2.5 years and one of them was killed in a workplace accident, the surviving partner would not be entitled to any benefits. The committee would like to see the threshold in the Workers’ Compensation Act changed to two years to be consistent with most other NWT legislation.

However, because the NWT and Nunavut share the Workers’ Compensation Board, there is an agreement in place that legislation in both territories will be consistent. Therefore, it is not practical to make this change to the NWT Workers’ Compensation Act without discussion with Nunavut and an agreement that they will do the same. The committee would like to encourage the government to initiate discussions with Nunavut as soon as possible to have this change made. Members do not agree that this amendment should wait for the comprehensive review of the Workers’ Compensation Act, which could take several more years.

In their submissions to the committee, Egale Canada and Out North identified discriminatory provisions that were apparently overlooked in the drafting of the bill. One set of these provisions is in the Insurance Act, specifically in the schedule which refers to mandatory death benefits in motor vehicles insurance policies.

The existing wording clearly excludes same-sex couples from these benefits and is inconsistent with other amendments in Bill 17. Another set of provisions is in the Vital Statistics Act and related forms. These provisions which affect the registration of the names of the children of unmarried women assume that children have a mother and father. The act therefore does not allow for the recognition of a same-sex partner of a biological parent immediately on the birth of child.

Same-sex couples currently must use the Adoption Act to have legal recognition of a non-biological parent. There are similar issues with birth registration forms. The current death certificate forms present difficulties in that they do not recognize any common-law relationships. During the public review on December 9, 2004, the Minister committed to return with amendments for the committee’s consideration to address the issues raised by Egale Canada and Out North with the Insurance Act and the Vital Statistics Act. He also committed to consult with Health and Social Services on any necessary changes to the Vital Statistics Act forms, which can be amended by regulation without requiring the approval of the Legislative Assembly.

The standing committee decided not to proceed with moving any amendments during its clause-by-clause review of Bill 17 on February 16th in order to allow for discussion of any motions in Committee of the Whole during its review of the bill in its entirety, so that all Members can participate.

Following the committee’s review, the motion was carried to report Bill 17, Modernization of Benefits and Obligations Act, to the Assembly as ready for Committee of the Whole. This concludes the committee’s opening comments on Bill 17. Individual Members may have additional questions or comments as we proceed. Thank you, Madam Chairperson.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. If the Minister wishes to bring witnesses at this time, does the committee agree?

Agreed.

Agreed. Thank you. Mr. Dent, if you would like to bring witnesses.

Yes, Madam Chairperson, I would like to have witnesses.

Thank you. I will ask the Sergeant-at-Arms if he would please escort Mr. Dent’s witnesses to the witness table.

Mr. Dent, for the record, would you please introduce your witnesses.

Thank you, Madam Chairperson. With me, I have Ms. Lucy Austin, who is the executive director of the Legal Services Board; and Mr. Mark Aitken, the director of legislation division.

Thank you, Minister Dent. At this time then, we will ask if there are any general comments on Bill 17. General comments. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Madam Chairperson. I will make my comments brief. I cannot support a bill like this. Anything that has to do with changing anything except between a man and woman, I can’t agree with. I won’t compromise my principles, I don’t…I understand that this bill is probably going to need to pass, otherwise there will be challenges, but in all good conscience I can’t support anything like this. If it means not being in here, in the House when they are voting, then I will leave. That is all the general comments I have for now, Madam Chairperson. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. General comments, Mr. Menicoche.