Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I said in my Member’s statement today, there seems to be a bit of a crisis out there where cars are more important than the safe access that some women want and deserve to their apartment building. That seems to be a real shame. I tried to highlight that narrative in my Member’s statement. I’ll have questions to the Minister of Justice about what he will be willing to do.
In this particular case my question is: What remedies are now available to the enforcement order of a rental officer when a landlord or tenant, as in this particular case, has trouble getting the order enforced and followed through by the landlord as issued by the rental officer?
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The honourable Minister responsible for Justice, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The rental officer has powers and authorities as identified within the Residential Tenancies Act. When a dispute occurs between a tenant and a landlord and cannot be resolved through mediation or discussion, the rental officer does have the power to make an order. Once filed with the court, that order does have the power of the courts. If one of the parties disagrees with the order, there is a right to appeal. The right to appeal is the cornerstone of the Canadian justice system and that cannot be ignored. When an appeal is filed, the Supreme Court has a couple of options. They can allow the appeal, dismiss the appeal, or change or cancel the order. If following the appeal the order is upheld, actions can be taken to make sure that the landlord and tenant comply with the order. Where an order has been made and is not under appeal and is not followed by one of the parties, a person or corporation can be charged with an offence. If found guilty, a person is liable to a fine of $2,000 and a corporation of a fine up to $25,000.
I appreciate that canned answer because it really structures part of the problem. The thing is, the rental office is really meant to be something simple. Somebody can go in, they have a dispute, it’s ruled on one way or the other whether they like it or not. It’s about follow-up and commitment on these particular orders.
We have a situation where the appearance of the order is not complied with and they continue to have trouble with that. That brings us to the question. The rental office has no follow-up power and enforcement power. Why do we need to send people to court? Why don’t we review the situation within the act?
The department is reviewing a number of issues with the legislation that were raised by the rental officer. One of the issues that was not raised was this particular issue about the powers and the orders and the enforcement of those orders.
However, recognizing the concerns of my two colleagues as well as people throughout the Northwest Territories, I have directed the Department of Justice to look at possible issues relating to the enforcement of orders under the Residential Tenancies Act. In this review we need to determine that there are actually issues that can be addressed through the legislation or whether there are some other means to address these enforcement issues. They will be looking into that.
I’m hoping to get back to committee with some sort of analysis and report, as well as the Member, this fall. I will take that to committee and we will have a discussion and we’ll figure out where to go from there to improve this service in the future so that this type of thing doesn’t happen again.
I’ll thank the Minister for scooping my third question, which ultimately only left me with the fact that is it anticipated that there will be amendments coming forward this fall? I’m just trying to get a sense of what he was after. Ultimately this issue needs to be reviewed. It sounds like that is what he was about to do. I want to make sure that it gets reviewed in a timely way so that we don’t put other people at risk. Is that what he’s saying? That he’ll bring forward amendment to regulation changes that can be implemented immediately?
I agree completely. We want to make sure that this type of thing doesn’t happen. What I’m committing to do is providing a bit of an analysis and report on what can be done to make sure that orders can be enforced and how they can be enforced. I’m not sure that’s going to require a legislative amendment. It may be policy, it might be regulation. We will do that research and analysis. We will bring it to committee. We will present it to committee and seek direction from committee and the Member as well. We will seek direction on how we want to move forward on that. It may be legislation; it may not be legislation. We will do something.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just want to recognize my colleague from Tulita and Kelsi Taylor, two Pages here. I forgot to say that. I want to ask the Minister of Education questions on the Colville Lake School. I want to ask the Minister where within his department, how soon could the people in Colville Lake look at the possibility, amongst the many other projects that we have in the Northwest Territories, that they can look at maybe a planning or discussions on building a new school for Colville Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Minister responsible for Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. The Colville Lake School has been addressed in the House on numerous occasions. It all depends on the allocation of students. We currently have, as the Member has indicated, 55 students. It’s allowable up to 62 students. At the same time the Member is asking when we can discuss this. The opportunity would be when we’re going through the capital planning process. We put forward any requests on capital infrastructure if it’s a real critical need for the Northwest Territories. We compile those capital planning and then decide from there which is the most priority for the Northwest Territories. There will be opportunity to do that during this Legislative Assembly.
In the Colville Lake School it’s very difficult for the teachers to give the best attention to the students. Where in the capital planning process that the Minister can see that the Colville Lake students can have a chance to say yes, we could possibly get some planning studies done to put us on the capital planning projects to have a new school. Where?
This is an opportunity. We’re listening to the Member. We need to go through the process of selecting those individual capital projects that are important to the Northwest Territories. If we have a capacity of 62 and we have 55 students in there, that’s an area we’re also looking at. We’re closely monitoring those schools, Colville school and Trout Lake and other schools that have been brought to our attention. We’re going to work with that as part of the planning process for capital planning. Discussion will take place as to which priorities we should focus on. That is the process that we need to follow within the GNWT.
I want to ask the Minister who in this government would need to be convinced when you go to Colville Lake. I challenge any Member here to bring their students to Colville Lake, attend the school in Colville Lake, and see if that will help them get a new school. There are four classrooms in one building. There’s no privacy. Even though that number is there the Minister is rattling off, doesn’t quite fit the people in Colville Lake. Who within the longest system needs to tell the Minister that we need a new school in Colville Lake? This is not acceptable. Who do we need to convince?
The process itself is through the divisional education council, through the superintendent working with the principals and delivering that through the chairperson on to my attention as part of the process itself, then putting it into the system as well. Compiling with all the other capital projects. It is this Assembly that decides on those capital projects and we’ll continue to push that forward. The most critical needs in the Northwest Territories.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The people in Colville Lake want to know – at some point they were told that they were going to get a new school – why was that bumped from the capital planning project and they brought in the portable building. Why was that bumped in Colville Lake and they missed out on having a new school?
I don’t have any information on why, but we should focus on as we move forward. If this is part of the capital planning project, then we should pursue it and that will be a discussion that we will be having in this House as well.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Member for Inuvik Boot Lake, Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m going to make some questions today for the Minister of Justice on the document that he tabled a couple days ago, Analysis of Federal Bill C-10, Safe Streets and Communities Act: Impacts on the NWT Department of Justice. I didn’t get a chance to go through it in detail yet, but just some stuff from the conclusions that were mentioned. He’s talking about if our institutions should become full capacity, what is his plan with this impact on the justice system? What is his plan for inmates if they can’t get into our institutions?
Thank you, Mr. Moses. The honourable Minister responsible for Justice, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With the report, it identifies that we think we might see as many as 11 positions or 11 people in those facilities over a year, at a whole year duration, not actual days, which will put additional pressure on the facilities, absolutely. Right now we have an opportunity, given that we have Nunavut inmates as well as federal inmates in those facilities, and our first step would be to stop taking Nunavut inmates, which would leave us room for northern inmates. Thank you.
I forgot to mention, I just wanted to thank the Minister for tabling the document so that our public and our residents get an opportunity to see this and see the impacts that it’s going to have on our government and our communities.
In the conclusions, the Minister mentioned that there might be an extra pod for the North Slave Correctional Centre, as well as maybe the construction of a proposed women’s facility. When we were going through the process of Arctic Tern in Inuvik, can the Minister commit to looking at that facility, the Arctic Tern facility again and maybe, possibly making the right adjustments to it so that we can open it up should we need not construct a new building but use existing infrastructure, which we always preach about. Can the Minister answer that question? Thank you.
The most recent technical report on the Public Works and Services building still indicates that there are limitations to that building to be used as a secure facility for corrections purposes. That building has been turned over to Public Works and Services who will do some remediation work on it and have it ready for some disposal. Somebody will be able to use that building. Unfortunately, it can’t meet the criteria or the conditions for a secure facility.
We do need a female facility. The female facility we have in Fort Smith is not meeting the needs. It needs to be upgraded, and it is in the list of facilities that need to be reviewed and, hopefully, constructed over the life of this government. But we still need to have those discussions. Thank you.
The estimates that he’s got in this report are $32 million for the North Slave Correctional Centre, and then he’s got another $35 million in his conclusions for another building. We’ve got existing infrastructure out there and we have to look at how we can use those so that we don’t always put money into capital.
With that said, there’s also going to be an increase of, he states that more people are going to be wanting to appeal their sentences, so it’s going to put more stress on our legal aid system, which is already exhausted enough. What is his plan for the legal aid system should people start appealing their sentences? Thank you.
Right now we have just completed the drafting of a new Legal Aid Act, which will be coming in front of committee soon, hopefully. We’ve also been having discussions in Cabinet and with committee about enhancing or providing some additional resources to the legal aid unit, and we will continue to have those discussions and find a way to enhance the services being provided in that area. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Your final, short supplementary, Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Knowing what he knows here and the report that’s in there, can the Minister provide Members on this side of the House a detailed plan of how he’s going to start implementing the effects of this report that he put out, a plan that’s going to allow us to know what’s going to be coming in future business plans? Thank you.
We only have 36 minutes and I don’t think anybody wants me to use that entire time up. What I’d like to offer is I can certainly meet with committee to go through some of the things that we’re planning and build upon the discussions that we’ve already had on the business plan and walk through some of the details of this report. If the committee wants that, I am happy to provide the Member and committee with a little bit more of a briefing on this topic. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are addressed to the Minister for Justice. I’d like to follow up on my Member’s statement.
I’d like to thank the Minister for his responses to my colleague Mr. Hawkins, and he’s addressed a few of my concerns, but the Minister mentioned that there is an issue. He also mentioned that he’s trying to improve service. For me, the issue is of costs to the individuals. When an individual who has an order and the order is not being enforced, they must go to court. I’d like to know from the Minister, in terms of costs, I guess, does the Minister have any idea of the costs to individuals through the courts for rental officer decisions that have been ignored and have not been agreed to and followed up on. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The Minister of Justice, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. No, I don’t.
I’m not sure I want to thank the Minister, but I guess I’d like to ask the Minister whether or not he would be willing to provide that information. I think one of the things that we have to realize is that taking an issue to the Supreme Court is not cost effective for our residents. We have many, many people who are so totally intimidated about going to court that they wouldn’t even think of doing that and taking that action.
I appreciate that the Minister is going to look at the act, and I appreciate that we will get some kind of action. I’d like to ask the Minister when we might be able to get the information that he’s referencing. He may have given a time frame and maybe I missed it, but when can we look to see the results of the review that he says he’s going to do? Thank you.
I have directed the department to have some results ready for discussion with committee and Members in the fall. Thank you.
I’d like to ask the Minister whether he has any information in another area. The rental officer, as he advised us and as most people are aware, can quite rightly assign fines for noncompliance of rental officer orders. It’s $2,000 for an individual. It can be $25,000 for a business. Can the Minister advise us how many rental officer orders have been ignored and how many fines have been assessed in 2010-2011 fiscal year? Thank you.
I don’t, obviously, have that information with me today, but I will commit to getting that information from the department and providing it to the Member. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Your final, short supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don’t have anything else that I can ask and get any answers for. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The Member for Hay River North, Mr. Bouchard.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In follow-up to my Member’s statement about dredging, we are concerned about the sediment buildup in the Hay River area.
My first question to the Minister of Transportation is: Does the territorial government and the Department of Transportation have any dredging programs planned for the Hay River area this year?
Thank you, Mr. Bouchard. The Minister responsible for Industry, Tourism and Investment, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the Member for the question. We don’t have responsibility for dredging. What we do look forward to doing this summer is organizing with NTCL, the Canadian Coast Guard, and I believe Midnight Petroleum is also involved in the little bit of work that is going to be conducted in Hay River this coming summer. But, certainly, the port of Hay River hasn’t had a full-fledged dredging program since 1994, and a lot of sediment and silt can certainly build up in that port over almost a 20-year period. It’s of great concern to the department. We continue to raise the issue with the federal government at every opportunity. Thank you.
The Minister has indicated that industry is interested. I’m wondering if the Minister will commit to assessing the Hay River harbour and the full dredging needs in working with all the proponents, whether it’s industry or whether it’s the federal government, to build a needs assessment for the dredging in the Hay River area?
I think at some point this summer I would like to be in Hay River to have a look at the port of Hay River, to discuss with operators, fishermen, people who use that port on a daily basis the needs on the dredging side. Again, certainly, I think we have to come up with a business case and continue to impress upon the federal government the need to put some money into dredging the port of Hay River. It’s estimated it could be as high as about $12 million to $15 million to dredge the port of Hay River.
Thank you. Back in December I asked some similar questions about dredging in Hay River and the federal government’s responsibility. The Minister indicated that he was going to begin negotiations and discussions with the federal government on this project. Can the Minister give me an update on has he had any meetings on this issue with the federal government?
