Question.
The question is being called.
Motion carried.
We’re still on page 7-35. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’d like to propose a motion.
Mr. Chair, I move that this committee strongly recommend that the government take immediate action to reinstate funding in the amount of $85,000 for the proposed reduction and contributions to communities for Community Justice activities under the Department of Justice and under the Community Justice and Corrections Activity.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The motion is being distributed. The motion has been distributed. To the motion, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This government is supposedly about prevention. One of our goals is sustainable, vibrant and safe communities. One of our priorities is a focus on prevention by promoting healthy choices and lifestyles.
The lack of a coordinator, as was recently discussed, has not helped the situation. The communities are in a situation where they need some help. There are some obvious community capacity challenges. There is clearly an unequal distribution of income across the North, with our smaller communities especially — some of the areas where these dollars are most effectively spent — being on the short end of the stick.
It’s clear that if we’re going to really be effective and efficient in pursuing our priorities, programs such as this need to continue. If we get federal dollars, I’m sure we’ll be able to put them in, in addition to this, and increase the effectiveness of the program. But, Mr. Chair, we need to be at the plate here, especially when these are our self-identified priorities. And on that basis, I am strongly recommending this motion.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The motion is in order. To the motion, Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I, too, am strongly in favour of the funding staying in the department for this function.
In the little bit of interaction we’ve had with the Elders’ Justice Committee in Fort Resolution, it was positive for the whole community. They’re playing a positive role. It would be good to see the money remain there. Although I’m not sure that it’s exactly affecting that particular group, I’m sure it will be affecting other groups across the North.
The elders still talk about attending court and seeing first-hand and having a role in how justice is dealt with in a community. I think that without this money, it’s possible that justice will be taken outside the community. I think it’s important that people living within their own communities administer justice for the people in their own communities.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. To the motion, Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. This area will be offset by contribution funding received from the federal government through the Aboriginal Justice Strategy initiative, which will be a vested interest in supporting programs outside a formal justice system, onto the communities.
Basically, this puts back into this particular program that we’re referring to. We are highlighting areas where we need to be creative and where we can improve in certain areas and where we can be cost-effective with our program delivery. We are maximizing our efforts into the communities, especially with respect to the programming. That’s part of the reason why we’re putting this forward, because we are getting federal funding that does offset these costs that are before us.
Mr. Chair, I’d just like to highlight, for the record, that there is money coming in from the feds that do offset this particular cost. Mahsi.
Thank you, Minister Lafferty. Mr. McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. A couple of comments to the motion. I’ve been listening to the Minister’s last two comments he’s made to the motion previous and this one here. What I’ve heard in both is that we’re being offset by federal funding and that one position is vacant.
This is another example of miscommunication. When the department was before Social Programs, I did not hear that. I did not hear that this was being offset by federal money. I heard “reductions to community.” That’s the magic word: community. That’s a word I use a lot in here. We look at it as money being taken from the community and being put into ten new positions in Yellowknife. I don’t know where it’s going, but I continue to have a concern with that.
This is a prime example again of information that should have been shared with the committee at the time we had our discussions on the Justice budget. Had that happened, you would not see some of the motions that are coming before us here.
The more information that we have as a committee, the better judgment we can make and the more informed we are. It’s just miscommunication.
I admit that it’s some of the Members’ first time as Ministers going through the budget process, but still, the department has been there for a long time. They should share that information with the Minister so he could share it with committee, and we’ll avoid a lot of this stuff that we’ve had to go through the last couple of days.
It’s just another good example, Mr. Chair, of miscommunication. Telling us the information as we’re bringing the motions forward is too little too late, in my opinion.
Mr. Chair, I’m in favour of this recommendation, and I hope the government does seriously have a look at the recommendations that we’ve made, as 11 Regular Members, because it’s something that we all feel quite strongly about.
Again I’ll say that proper communication would have helped solve a lot of the problems that we have over on this side. We’ve seen it from the beginning of this whole budget process, where there wasn’t proper communication. When you get calls from employees that are saying they’re getting affected letters and we didn’t even know about it, is that communication? I don’t think so.
We made a commitment to work as all 19 Members of this Assembly, to try to bring some of our issues forward. I’m encouraging Cabinet not to forget that. It makes your job a lot easier, having us on board. It makes our job a lot easier, having the information that we can then pass on to our constituents and not have to answer after the fact.
I’ve heard the term “proactive” a few times. We talked about being proactive, proactive, but that’s not happening. That’s just a nice word that we decided to use, and I’m just as guilty as the next guy. We’re reacting to a lot of the information that we’re hearing, and it’s just misinformation, miscommunication.
I think today’s a good lesson in seeing that we’re going to have to change that. Otherwise, we’re going to be going in circles for the next four years.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. To the motion, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have to back up those comments and just say that my door is open. I’m sure all of my colleagues’ doors are open for communication on items such as this. So just to reconfirm: my perspective is that of Mr. Ramsay on the last motion, and Mr. McLeod. We need some better communication.
Unfortunately, this also takes a toll on people, and I hope, in this situation, the toll is less than in the last couple of things we’ve discussed. There could have been an avoidance of a lot of this sort of kerfuffle.
I just want to note again that the general pattern that I see in this budget, particularly with Justice, is a detraction from prevention while concentrating resources in the courts, which is putting people in jail. I don’t think that’s totally consistent with our priorities.
I just wanted to add those additional comments.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. To the motion.
Question.
The question is being called.
Motion carried.
We’re still on page 7-35, Department of Justice, Activity Summary, Community Justice and Corrections, Operations Expenditure Summary. Mr. Menicoche.
Mr. Chair, I move that this committee strongly recommends that the government take immediate action to reinstate funding in the amount of $265,000 for the proposed elimination of special projects contribution funding for Community Justice Activities under the Department of Justice under the Community Justice and Corrections Activity.
The motion is being distributed. The motion has been distributed. The motion is in order. To the motion, Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to get some more information on the….
You can't ask questions.
Speak to the discrepancy.
Okay. The total reduction in this area has been $433,000 just in these last three motions. The department had indicated to us that that was offset by the federal government. I’m only seeing an offset of $170,000. To me, it still seems like a fairly substantial cut, so I’m going in favour of the motion.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. To the motion, Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. This particular program, this special projects funding of $265,000, has been utilized to some degree in the communities — for instance, a skidoo trip to another community. But again, there is offset funding from the feds. The National Crime Prevention Centre has funding of $476,000 set aside for NWT projects. So this funding will certainly go towards these initiatives that are before us.
There is money out there that we’re tackling as the Justice department. Like I said earlier, we’re being innovative and creative, and going outside our Justice department and going after the federal government.
The federal government is more than willing to play a greater role in supporting the community-based programming. We did stress to them, through the FPT meetings, that we are unique in the North, and they are finally listening to us.
In reintegrating inmates into the communities — the On the Land Program — we've highlighted all that to them. Now they want to play a greater role, and we are taking advantage of that. We feel that the monies that have been committed previously can be allocated to more effective and efficient areas.
Mr. Chair, once again, just for the record, there is federal money that is being played here. The federal government is willing to play a greater role. I think we need to continue to take advantage of that offer from the feds and that we will continue to do that. Mahsi.
Thank you, Minister Lafferty. To the motion, Mr. Krutko.
I will be supporting the motion. I think, if anything, we can enhance programs by using federal money and our own dollars, and deal with justice issues, and allow the communities the ability to deal with systemic problems in our communities, from youth and justice, to issues in regard to apprehensions and around the whole community decision-making process, to allow communities to be in the decision-making process of Justice — not to leave it up to the courts, but trying to find solutions in our communities to deal with the criminal matters that we see systemic in our communities.
We’re seeing more and more drug-related crimes in our communities. We’re seeing more and more young justice issues coming forward. If we can deal with these issues in our communities, trying to solve the issues at the front line, I think it will go a long way to saving government money in the long term. Also, it gives our communities the feeling that they are part of the justice system, by way of developing programs and services that meet their needs.
Every community is unique; every community’s different. I think it’s important that we do change the way we deliver justice in the Northwest Territories, and this is one of the ways that we’re looking at for doing that.
I, for one, would like to state that any time we get federal dollars, we’re able to enhance our programs, not cut our programs because we assume we're going to get federal dollars. Everybody knows, with the federal government having an election looming around the corner, that money is here today, gone tomorrow, and it all depends on what happens in Ottawa. So I don’t think we should put much hope in those dollars actually falling in our lap any time soon.
Again, I’d just like to state that I’m supporting this motion. But I think, if anything, if we can enhance justice in our communities and allow communities the ability to develop programs and services that improve the quality of life for the residents in those communities, we should do everything we can to assist them.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. To the motion, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Very briefly, I want to back up my colleague with additional remarks there.
In this government we developed a capacity, a community capacity. I think that's an agreed-on priority and way of operating in the North. But it requires consistency over time. I think that's recognized.
It would be nice to know, with these federal dollars, of course — had we been talking about them — how long they’re established for and so on, because I don’t want to see us undermining our capacity and that of the communities for a one-time federal program that might last two years and then disappear, and we’re left without capacity and the corporate knowledge to deliver those programs in our priority areas.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. To the motion, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. At the risk of being repetitive, I want to state again that it has been stated that there hasn’t been a full uptake on these programming funds for Community Justice. And at the risk of being repetitive, I want to state that without a coordinator, it’s quite understandable that the funds haven’t been taken up.
A coordinator will allow communities to have some leadership, to give them some guidelines to follow. And to reiterate what's been said by the two previous speakers, we need to start dealing with justice issues at a community level as opposed to a territorial and on a court basis.
I think Community Justice committees are the way to go. Deleting this funding is only going to make it more difficult, not easier, for us to advance that program.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. To the motion.
Question.
The question is being called.
Motion carried.
All right. We’re still on page 7-35, Justice, Activity Summary, Community Justice and Corrections, Operational Expenditures Summary, $33.826 million. Agreed?
Department of Justice, Activity Summary, Community Justice and Corrections, Operations Expenditure Summary: $33.826 million, approved.
We’re on page 7-37, Activity Summary, Community Justice and Corrections, Grants and Contributions. Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Can I get a breakdown on exactly the Community Justice committees and projects so that I can see exactly where the projects are and what communities are listed, and also so that I can understand which communities aren’t part of this process?
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. We do have some breakdown of per capita funding, with all the five regions: North Slave, South Slave, Inuvik, Sahtu and Deh Cho. I am not sure if you want to get into each community and how much they are getting. I can do that if the Member wants.
Just to be fair to the Members, as some of us are not part of the Social Programs Committee, it would be good if we could get that information. Just have it distributed in the House, and maybe before we conclude your department, give us an opportunity to look at that. Also, maybe if there is any information on the other programs listed on that page, it would be helpful.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. We can certainly make that available to the Members. Yes, certainly we can do that.
Thank you, Minister Lafferty. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’d like to get an explanation. The Community Justice committees and projects amount in ’08–09 is $1.371 million, in ’07–08 it was $1.866 million, and I suspect the reduction is the $433,000-some that we were discussing earlier. But of the $1.371 million earmarked for these contributions, I’d like to know how much of that amount is federal dollars, and if I could also know where those dollars are reflected in the budget.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Ms. Schofield.
Of the $1,371 million there are no federal dollars allocated within that amount. The funding from the federal government came to us late in the year, and therefore will be dealt with through supplementary appropriation.
Thank you, Ms. Schofield. Ms. Bromley. I mean, Ms. Bisaro.
I don’t know if that’s worse for Mr. Bromley or worse for me.
Laughter.
