Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Item 8 written questions. Mr. Dolynny.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to return to item 7 on the Order Paper, oral questions. Thank you.
---Unanimous consent granted
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, colleagues. A key component in evaluating our Ledge Safety Policy is the Safe Advantage program administered by WSCC. The GNWT is no different than any other organization or company in the Northwest Territories. That is it must abide by the same rules and laws. On October 27, 2014, I spoke about this government lacking a safety culture. So I’d like to pick up where I left off to the Minister of Human Resources for some follow-up questions.
As we are aware, this government in the last couple of years faced some very stiff fines in failing a WSCC Safe Advantage evaluation. These fines and double fines exceeded well over $750,000 to which the taxpayers have to pick up the tab.
Sadly, the GNWT appears to have failed once again a questionnaire portion of the WSCC Safe Advantage program.
Can the Minister confirm this failing grade and inform the House what will be our fine this time for the taxpayers? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Minister Beaulieu.
Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. The Member has better intel than me. I have been advised by the department that a questionnaire submitted for October 31st has not received a score from the Workers’ Safety and Compensation Commission at this time. The 2013-14 claims, if there was any penalty calculated in that questionnaire, we will be advised by Workers’ Safety and Compensation Commission in June 2015. Thank you.
Thank you. Clearly, WSCC fines and the court fines all point to a lack of proper occupational health and safety programs. We clearly demonstrate a pattern of failure to provide a culture of safety for employees.
Can the Minister again inform the House how many safety officer positions do we have on payroll for our 5,000 employee base? Thank you.
Thank you. The departments have developed occupational health and safety committees in the various departments and headquarters and also in some of the regions in the departments that are the main contracting departments, such as Public Works and Transportation. However, I don’t have the information on how many safety officers, which are titled safety officers and are employed as safety officers, but rather people that work in the departments and scheduled as occupational health and safety officers and work with the committees. Thank you.
Thank you. I can provide that to the Minister if he’d like. The Minister, on October 27th, indicated that contractors that work with the GNWT have a safety program when on site, yet we do not have a contractor management system to support this. In fact, when I asked around, it appears that the main contractor questionnaire we most often use refers that if one is in good standing with WSCC. To be honest, this really only means that you don’t owe any money to the WSCC.
So again, can the Minister inform the House, is being in good standing with WSCC the default safety requirement to work for the GNWT under contract? Thank you
Thank you. Having paid WSCC premiums is one of the mandatory things that contractors have to have. My understanding, from and discussing this with the departments that are doing a lot of contracting with industry, is that they have to have a safety plan when they bid on jobs. I’m not sure that the safety plans are filed with anyone except with the department and the departments questioning whether or not the contractor has a safety plan in place when they contract with us. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My last question for the Minister should be a very easy and simple one.
Can the Minister produce and table a copy of the GNWT Safety Manual? Thank you.
Thank you. The GNWT employs lots of contractors. Many contractors, even to people who do our janitorial services and so on. We have, like the Member indicates, 5,000 employees doing various types of work. We have people that do nursing, 24/7 operations such as correctional facilities. I’m not sure that one safety plan could ever encompass all of the GNWT, so I don’t think I can actually table a safety plan for the GNWT per say. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. The Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the Minister of Lands today in follow-up on an earlier set of questions about financial security. We last talked about surety bonds being a promise to pay, a form of security, and I asked the Minister if he would agree that that’s not acceptable. He said we will ensure that we have security that’s, as the Member said, something other than a promise to pay.
Now, surety bonds, the point of discussion, Wikipedia defines surety bonds as a promise to pay. Is the Minister still sticking with this or is the media right that in fact we are taking security bonds for the Ekati Mine, $170 million of liabilities and accepting something less than irrevocable letter of credit? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister of Lands, Mr. McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A security bond is an instrument that is typically issued by an insurance company to pay one party a specified amount if another party fails to meet their obligations. So under the Waters Act, that is a sufficient instrument to use.
The Minister sounds like he’s changing direction here, and I would ask him to do some research in this area and provide to committee exactly what is going on here, without any input from committee, I might add, other than what we’ve had in the House, and obviously, that doesn’t seem to be holding any water.
I’ve heard officials from the Minister’s department and division that deals with securities indicating that the promise to pay will be accepted, so maybe I could just get a commitment from the Minister to start with, that he will come to committee with this before any final decisions and talk to us about what is acceptable and why we are not demanding, as in all the other ones on the list, the tabled document, an irrevocable letter of credit as the bankable instrument standard we want to meet.
The boards usually set the securities that are required, the amount. We negotiate with the proponent as to the instrument that we are going to use. A surety bond is an insurance bond that’s carried by major multinational insurance companies, which is an acceptable form under the Waters Act. I can update or I can give committee a bit of a briefing on the direction that we’re going so they can have some assurance that we are protecting, as we said we’re going to, the opportunities for cleanup and so we need to make sure that we’re protected, and I stand by that.
Thanks to the Minister for that. I also heard the department’s official saying that they have to balance protection from environmental liabilities with a supportive economic development as some sort of justification, I suppose, for accepting a lesser form of security. I think the Minister is well aware that that approach by the federal government has resulted in $8 billion in liabilities that the taxpayers of Canada will be paying, mostly from northern mining companies that have failed to clean up their messes. These are real things that we are talking about.
Is it the purpose of the Department of Lands to support the balance in favour of economic development, as the federal government has done to the tune of $8 billion in liabilities to the taxpayer, or is it to protect our land for everybody?
I can’t speak for what the federal government does. That’s their decision to make. However, we are now responsible for decision-making in the Northwest Territories and, of course, we want to protect the environment. That goes without saying. I mean, anybody in here can realize that. But what we want to do is, we want to have some sustainable economic development so our people can actually go work, get a job. But I can assure the Member, and again, it goes without saying, that of course we want to protect the environment and we do what we have to, to do that.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thanks for that commitment, I think. Just my last question here. The tabled document, the letter from the Environment and Natural Resources to the Wek’eezhii board. The Wek’eezhii board is saying they want to put some teeth into the legislation and require that securities for liability assessed be provided within 90 days, and the department is fighting this, and of course, the result is that it might take six months or a year. I don’t know. It’s probably been more than a year. It’s probably been years, in fact, for the Ekati Mine without providing this security. This leaves the public vulnerable. That’s a concern.
What will the Minister do to support the Wek’eezhii board and the representatives, the people that the Minister has put in place to do their work, to support them in getting this work done and not let the bureaucratic processes make the public vulnerable?
As I stated before, the security amount is set by the boards that review the applications. We then negotiate with the proponents as to the instrument. The Member says that it’s a lesser form. I would like to personally brief the Member on the surety bond that is covered. It’s basic insurance that’s carried by multinational insurance companies, world-renowned insurance companies, that we can call on demand. I’d be pleased to give the Member a briefing on that, and as I committed before, I would be pleased to brief committee.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Greatly appreciated. I have a question for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment. Some time ago there were some pre-employment programs funded through SFA, and this is where it’s unfortunate to say this, but we know that all school education programs are not created equal and some kids graduate without the skills to get into trades programming. There was a pre-trades program available for youth so we could help them move forward on their career to be part of society in a very productive way.
Can I ask the Minister, what happened to that program and how was it replaced, because we have many youth that want to continue on in their education to be solid providers and contributors to society but they need that little upgrading provided through these pre-trades programs, so it’s very important that they don’t fall through the cracks and miss out on these opportunities. I look forward to the answer from the Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The Minister of Education, Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. The pre-employment program and other programs have been very successful to date. There have been some changes in programming. Right now we are looking at the employment success through adult and post-secondary education and skills training. Those types of programs that existed before will definitely be captured in part of our review process, because we are engaging the key partners and also the stakeholders in the Northwest Territories on how best to deliver this particular program. We are re-evaluating our position on these skills and training programs.
Although I don’t know the exact phrase, but it’s something to the face of duty bound or obligation when we provide a program and it becomes ineffective, but yet we’re responsible because we do provide it. If we provide an education to people and they’re unable to get into programming afterwards, it begs the question are we not duty bound to ensure that they’re qualified to go forward in the future?
It’s been cancelled over three years, if I understand it. So I’m curious if the Minister has described, as he’s said in his words, very successful to date, what is he talking about that’s actually successful, and furthermore, has it been replaced with another program so I can point these young people into the right direction so we can give them careers so they can be responsible contributors to the future and certainly for their families?
When I speak to success, we refer to the 50th year anniversary. There are all these apprentices who have been very successful to date. We have journeymen ticket holders in the Northwest Territories, and we continue to push that forward and seeing the positive results. Those are the successes in the Northwest Territories. This particular program that may not be with us today, we will be discussing. Not only that, but other programming that potentially will come into play as we review this overall apprenticeship through adult and post-secondary education and skills training. It is under review at this point.
I’d hate to think the program was successful and that was why we cancelled it. Maybe the Minister can talk about the interim solutions we can offer these families who have young people who want to start their careers. They like the ideas of trades. I mean, the Minister is so focused in on the end portion where they’ve gone through the trades program and they’ve graduated and moved on. I’m trying to get people into the program who want a fresh start at life, and it’s our job to ensure that we give them a great start.
What exists for these folks who need these pre-employment programs, these pre-trade programs? We must be able to do something. That’s what I want to hear the Minister say today, is this is how we can get them moving.
As I stated earlier, there are a variety of programs, subsidy programs that we provide to, whether it be training or small community employment programming. Not only that, there is a substantial amount of funding that we work with through the federal government, and that is Canada’s Job Fund. Those individuals that do not qualify for EI, those individuals, as the Member indicated, are in desperate need of sort of like a training that fall through the cracks. This particular program is geared towards that. Part of the focus of the federal government, obviously, is to train those individuals and fill those individuals with job opportunities upon the completion of the training program.
There is also the Labour Market Development Agreement that we are currently negotiating with the federal government. We want to improve every program as much as we can with the feds. Right now we are negotiating that as well. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to be able to be very clear on the record. When I ask this question, I want to be able to go back to these families who are struggling and trying to provide options for their children, and certainly these young people want to be productive.
My question is: If I ask the Minister, what is the name of the one program that is up and running today, what would that program be and how can I point them in the right direction so they can access it so they can get started on their career? By golly, they really want to be involved in something and the Minister can make that choice today by making sure they can be involved.
As I stated, there are a variety of programs within my department and it’s also on our website as well. I can provide that detailed information to the Members on what is available for those individuals that want to be trained. I stated there is a Canada…(inaudible)…Labour Market Development Agreement, there is the Apprenticeship Training Program and small community programming that we provide to the communities, the employers. We will continue to push that forward, but I will be providing those to the Members. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Item 8, written questions. Oral questions, Mr. Hawkins? Mr. Hawkins.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday MLA Dolynny talked about the resources of the firefighting season that we have just gone through. I’ve been speaking to a number of people about the recent fire season and I think what it really boils down to, a really good question that came over the weekend was: What type of public discussion will ENR be providing the public to come and talk to them?
A good public discussion could provide both education and understanding about the challenges that ENR had this summer and, as such, could go a long ways to going forward in the future.
Would the Minister be interested in facilitating a public discussion over this last fire season? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister of Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’ve received the text from the Member who got this suggestion from a constituent. I have sent it to the department. I know that they do meetings in the communities as a matter of course. As well, they look at the staff. I just want to get a better understanding; I am not clear what the Member is talking about. Is he talking about in Yellowknife, some major public gathering? Is he talking about gatherings in every community? The question needs to be refined. But we will definitely be sharing the results of the wrap-up and the debrief and what we see as areas that worked and things that we probably need to look at again. We will be sharing that information with MLAs as well as making it public. Thank you.
All very good questions by the Minister and I’m happy to answer them. Trappers and folks who own cabins are very concerned about the fire season. They are trying to understand why things, for example, resources weren’t used certain ways, why sprinklers weren’t accessed, why information wasn’t timely. The long and short of it is simply this: I think the suggestion is great, which is if ENR, for example, hosted a public meeting at the Legislature here, maybe in a couple of the communities where it is relevant, and welcomed input from the people who were impacted by the fires. The only thing that I will say is it is a very emotional issue and it’s very important that it is well moderated because, of course, emotion can sometimes take over. I don’t think people are mad; I just think it’s a very emotional issue and they would like to share their thoughts and express some of their opinions over this last season in hopes that it would be beneficial to the Department of ENR. Thank you.
We at ENR, as a matter of course, touch base in the communities where there is a need to and they will continue to do that. I have been Minister now for a while, of ENR, and we haven’t quite got to the stage of public sessions that the Member is talking about. I will check and confirm with the department what in fact is being done or being contemplated in Yellowknife if anything out of the ordinary. Thank you.
Would the Minister be willing to entertain this type of discussion that we could have our deputy minister, who is very well liked and very well respected in our community… That is Deputy Minister Ernie Campbell. He is a great guy, he communicates well with people and people like him. He could host an evening here with the Minister and ask people what they thought on these types of services, how did it work and what was their vantage point. We have lots of trappers, cabin owners and other people who use the land regularly and they saw different things that all could be a benefit of the Minister. Thank you.
ENR has a presence in almost every community and we represent and have an interest in working with all the communities and I believe we do that in an effective way. I am not, at this point, prepared to just have a special session because a Member got a suggestion to set up something in Yellowknife, accessible only to the people of Yellowknife. There’s going to be opportunities to look at that in probably in other venues, and I will just confirm that I will go back to the department, but we do have a process already in place that I think covers that issue. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.
