Mr. Speaker, was this a position that, as to the aboriginal government not being party to the negotiations as we have,... Sorry; the draft agreement as we seen as a signatory to the agreement. Was this the position of the federal government in terms of a divide and conquer tactic in the Northwest Territories?
Mr. Speaker, the process leading up to this has been inclusive of all those who wanted to be at the table, who chose to be at the table and were funded to be at the table. They have been part of the working group at both technical sessions and negotiation sessions up to where we are today. They were informed of the process and the document in whole. We are now waiting to see their response to that document. Thank you.
Thank you Mr. Speaker, I take this type of scenario, like Mr. Premier has indicated, as the house. I look inside the house, around the kitchen table and see the father and mother and children there, they are talking and saying, okay, children, father and mother are going to negotiate a deal and whoever wants to sign on can be with us, depending on which side you want to go. This is in my sense that we need to look at the average. I want to ask the Premier in terms of between now and whenever we have a decision made as to sign or not sign, deal or no deal, how are we going to somehow include the average where they are satisfied.
I have documents in front of me that give me reasons why this is not a good deal for the average, especially for the land claim negotiations that are going in my region. I want to ask the Minister, do we have some time to have some discussion where we can all agree to move forward onto the next chapter of the history of the Northwest Territories.
Mr. Speaker, the Member, having experience as a chief negotiator quite involved in the land claims process within the Northwest Territories in his past life, is quite familiar. Once the chief negotiators initialled off and sent it to the parties for decision, that document is then decided upon as it goes forward from that draft agreement-in-principle towards a formal set of negotiations. That incorporates a whole new level of talks and all the players at the table as full partners. This joint letter that has gone out has invited the groups to be a part of our table and be full partners. This is not adult to children, this is all adults and making a decision about should we be at the table or not. We will respect their decision as they make it, if they want to be a part of it or not and hopefully as they see that final set of negotiations being done, the interest is let’s be at that table and let’s influence the outcome. Thank you.
Thank you Mr. Roland. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Certainly the Premier is correct in terms of my former role as chief negotiator. Also, when we did go through that process, when we did negotiate a document, we went to each household, we talked to each leader, we talked to everybody and said, now, do we want to initial to go ahead and do some further negotiations, that is another process. So, I mean, that is what I am asking about.
This government here, when...and thank God to CBC for publishing this important document so everybody could have a chance to read it. I made some phone calls, phone calls came to me, people in my riding did not know what was going on. Now they are reading and saying, what is going on? We need to have some time to get everyone on board. I am asking the Premier in terms of some flexibility, in terms of some leadership, in terms of how do we get the people to say yes, this is what we could do. That is effective, strong, powerful government. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
In my many years as a Member of the Legislative Assembly, I have heard about the fact that governments are not organizations, they are governments. Aboriginal governments are aboriginal governments. This government is treated and sat at a table in a scenario of government to government when it comes to aboriginal governments. We have helped fund those to be a part of our discussions as we go forward, helped influence what we should package together and how we go forward. Through this process and leading up to this, those that wanted to be at the table were at the table and influenced much of the work. In fact, Chapter 6 and Chapter 12 are much about the involvement from our aboriginal partners across the North that helped influence that document. As we go forward, as we decide we proceed to the next level, that opportunity to go out to the public and say, this is what it looks like and this is what we are starting our negotiations at, where do you think we are on this. At the same time, we have to be very careful of the processes that we are involved with and we will continue to do so in respect to all the partners that are involved in this. Thank you.
Thank you Mr. Roland. Item 9, written questions. The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Beaulieu.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to return to otem 6 on the Order Paper.
---Unanimous consent granted
The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. These people aren’t in the gallery, but I want to take the opportunity to recognize two Pages from Lutselk’e, Helena Marlowe and Alex Rabesca, and also their chaperone, Evelyn Marlowe. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I have pictures of the potatoes that we had grown in Norman Wells here.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I MOVE, seconded by the honourable Member for Yellowknife South, that, notwithstanding Rule 4, when this House adjourns on Thursday, October 21, 2010, it shall be adjourned until Monday, October 25, 2010;
AND FURTHER, that any time prior to October 25, 2010, if the Speaker is satisfied, after consultation with the Executive Council and Members of the Legislative Assembly, that the public interest requires that the House should meet at an earlier time during the adjournment, the Speaker may give notice and thereupon the House shall meet at the time stated in such notice and shall transact its business as it has been duly adjourned to that time.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. There is a motion on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called.
---Carried
Item 18, first reading of bills. Item 19, second reading of bills. Item 20, consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 4-16(5), Executive Summary of the Report of the Joint Review Panel for the Mackenzie Gas Project; Tabled Document 30-16(5), 2010 Review of Members’ Compensation and Benefits; Tabled Document 38-16(5), Supplementary Health Benefits – What We Heard; Tabled Document 62-16(5), Northwest Territories Water Stewardship Strategy; Tabled Document 66-16(5), NWT Capital Estimates 2011-2012; Tabled Document 75-16(5), Response to the Joint Review Panel for the Mackenzie Gas Project on the Federal and Territorial Governments’ Interim Response to “Foundation for a Sustainable Northern Future;” Bill 4, An Act to Amend the Social Assistance Act; Bill 8, Social Work Profession Act; and Bill 9, An Act to Amend the Tourism Act, with Mr. Bromley in the chair.
I would like to call Committee of the Whole to order. We have before us: Tabled Document 4-16(5), Tabled Document 30-16(5), Tabled Document 38-16(5), Tabled Document 62-16(5), Tabled Document 66-16(5), Tabled Document 75-16(5), and Bills 4, 8 and 9. What is the wish of committee? Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Committee wishes to consider Tabled Document 66-16(5), NWT Capital Estimates 2011-2012, and do the Department of Justice and Human Resources and, time permitting, Industry, Tourism and Investment.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you. We will continue with the Department of Justice and I will ask the Minister if he wishes to bring in witnesses. Mr. Lafferty.
Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Minister. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you. Mr. Sergeant-at-Arms, please bring the witnesses into the Chamber.
Okay, if I could ask the Minister to please introduce your witness.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. I have with me Bronwyn Watters, deputy minister of Justice. Mahsi.
Thank you, and welcome. We will continue on page 7-4, committee, Department of Justice, community justice and corrections. Questions? Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wanted to ask the Minister about the infrastructure in connection to the federal government’s new approach on getting tough on crime bill. That would possibly put some constraints on our capital infrastructure in terms of that bill and how the federal government sees programs or facilities right across the North. I want to know if we’re prepared to handle some of the fallout of this approach by the federal government towards the Department of Justice in terms of corrections and infrastructure as it relates to the get tough on crime bill. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. The new initiative on getting tough on crime has been talked about at the federal/provincial/territorial Ministers meeting as well. So we are closely monitoring the progress and we do have the capacity at this moment, but definitely this is an ongoing discussion that we will be having with the federal government.
At the same time, we’re really focusing on the preventative measures, as well, because it was said yesterday that we would try and prevent people from going to prisons or institutions. So those are the areas that we are continually focusing and monitoring, the preventative measures. Also, we’re working very closely with the federal Justice Minister and also Public Safety Ministers. Mr. Chair, Mahsi.
The questions I’m going to ask are on capital infrastructure. So they’re going to skate in between a fine line in terms of how the programs are associated; it’s a key component to my questions. So I want to ask the Minister, he said that they have the capacity and I know that there’s a high population of aboriginal inmates at the centres here and that they are housed in these, what we call pods, and sometimes there’s three inmates to a cell and these pods are beyond the capacity of holding the inmates in a safe manner. The Minister has indicated that they feel that they have the capacity, but for me it brings a safety concern in regard to the facility that they’re housing them in and I think that there’s other means or infrastructure that we could use, such as the wilderness camps and preventative camps, that would be more beneficial, I believe.
I want to know from the Minister about capacity and infrastructure in terms of what we have before us. It seems like we’re just managing and hoping that it doesn’t explode so that we might pay for it dearly in other areas. So can the Minister assure me that these pods in these facilities are not at critical mass in terms of safety reasons? Are we not looking at other infrastructure other than just housing them in a facility such as the North Slave or the South Slave institutions? Thank you.
We closely monitor our institutions in the Northwest Territories, especially when it comes to capacity within our institutions. There is room for growth, but at the same time we’re trying to take inmates out to on-the-land programs in the Sahtu region in the Member’s riding. Again, this has been very successful and we will continue to do so, and we’re opening that up to other regions that are interested as well. So, Mr. Chair, this is an area that, again, we’ll monitor. But I can assure the Member that there is room within our institutions and if we’re at a crunch, then definitely we’ll get back to the standing committee members to say we’re at a critical stage and we need to seriously look at these areas, but we aren’t at that point yet. When it comes time, then we’ll definitely give Members a heads up. Mahsi.
I certainly hope that the Minister, when he presents the budgets on capital infrastructure that we’ll see an increase in these wilderness camps, these so-called bush camps that would house inmates.
I understand that the facilities in the North are quite overcrowded and these wilderness camps don’t happen as much as we would like them to. They’re sporadic throughout the year and in the meantime we have capacity issues at these facilities.
Again, in these cells that these inmates are sharing, there are sometimes three inmates to a cell and there are different things that we need to ensure the safety of everybody in these facilities. So that’s why I’m asking that the Minister, when he comes before the House to look at more focus on wilderness camps, infrastructure, capacity. He talks about the preventative measures and I think the Minister is on the right path when he has that type of language in going forward with his Department of Justice to look at situations that we are faced with now in our institutions, especially our correctional institutions. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We’re talking about programming that will go into further business planning detail. I can provide more detailed information at that point, but at the same time, just for the record, the stats that we have, as far as my knowledge, there hasn’t been any three individuals in a cell, from the stats that we have in front of us. Also, there are talks of overcrowding. I did state that there is space available, but definitely we don’t want to fill it with individuals, but we want to take individuals out on the land more.
Again, I’d like to refer to the Sahtu and the successful pilot project that we’ve done in the past on-the-land program, and we’ll continue to do that and we’ll continue to invest in those areas. We feel that it’s important and we need to focus more on the preventative measures at the community level. Mahsi.
Thank you. I said, Mr. Chair, that when we talk about capacity and we talk about infrastructure, capital, sometimes you just need to wade a little bit into the program, and certainly I would welcome a sit down with the Minister to talk about programs; that’s not an issue. The Minister is actually very good to me in terms of talking about program issues. I’m happy to sit down and talk with him.
I’m talking about facilities, capital infrastructure, when it comes before us, that programs like the Sahtu, like he mentioned, is a great success and we wish it to be more successful by increasing the capital dollars into programs. I don’t see anything right in front of me in terms of capital infrastructure. We’re still at the same spot we were four years ago. Things change in the wilderness camps. Just like institutions, as he’s indicated here, need fixing, so do our wilderness camps need fixing. The machinery needs fixing. Those are capital dollars just like they have in the system here. That’s what I’m talking about. He can talk about this, but gee whiz, get some structured capital dollars into those camps. I haven’t seen anything since those wilderness camps started up in the Sahtu. Same budget every year. That’s what I’m talking about. That’s what I want to let the Minister know. Programs we can talk about until the cows come home. But right here I want to see some changes. Hopefully the Minister will do that in the future.
Again the program in the Sahtu region under the leadership of the elders there has been very successful, but we haven’t really seen or heard anything on the breakdown of the equipment to date. Definitely if there is a concern that may have been brought forward, I’d like to hear that concern or those suggestions. We’re always open to improving our programming. If there are problems or issues with certain equipment, definitely we need to deal with that, because safety is the prime factor and we need to deal with that right away.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Next on my list I have Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to raise once again the issue of community policing, especially in the community of Wrigley in my riding. I know, of course, that the government supports two of the smaller communities getting a full RCMP detachment and it would, of course, have given me great pleasure to have seen that in our capital plan. I know that I spoke with the Minister in the House last week and he spoke about being at the Justice Ministers federal/provincial/territorial meeting. Maybe the Minister could just advise me of some of the deliberations that happened and speaking with the federal Justice Minister where exactly the detachments or the capital for the detachments would come from. I’m pretty sure it would be a federal responsibility there. What’s the timing like? When can we expect, here in the North, fully operating detachments in the community of Wrigley and as well as I believe Gameti was the other one that this government certainly supports?
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Couple questions there. Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chairman. This particular subject, the two detachments that we’ve committed and we continue to commit ourselves to as the GNWT, we provide policing already to Wrigley and Gameti, policing out of Simpson. To deal with Wrigley and Gameti is based out of Yellowknife, working closely with Behchoko detachment.
When it comes to a detachment, of course it’s a federal responsibility. At the same time I did address that with two federal Ministers last week -- Minister of Justice and Minister of Public Safety -- the importance and how critical it is to have these two detachments as they’ve been slated for 2011. We want to proceed further. We want to follow through with it. We informed the two Ministers that we’re already providing policing services but the detachment is still an obstacle in a way. Could the federal department fulfill their obligation?
I’ve got a lot of support from the small jurisdictions, as well, northern jurisdictions of the provinces. Our two territorial counterparts, Nunavut and Yukon, are very supportive as well. This is an area that we’ll continue to follow through.
We’re just drafting up a letter to Minister Vic Toews, Public Safety, and follow through with what we’ve discussed last week and with my two territorial counterparts. We’re going to meet with them and discuss further the importance of having these two on the budget that was highlighted.
We are also, just for Members’ information, looking at other options as well. We’re waiting for the federal, but what can we do in the meantime? Those are options we are working on with the communities and we’ll continue to do so.
I will be going to the Member’s riding. We’re still working on the dates, I believe in December. Those are the areas we’ll continue to stress, and we’re very passionate about that as the territorial government. The federal government is still discussing that.
Just for my reference, was there any indication from the federal Ministers as to the timing of the detachments? I understood, talking with our Member of Parliament, that it may actually be in the capital plan. Has the Minister seen anything like that? Is he able to at least give a round, an estimated date of when the federal government may seriously consider providing the capital dollars for the detachments in these communities?
There’s been a lot of talk, whether it’s with the MP or Ministers. We also asked specifically, too, if it was in their capital plans. All the information that was given to us was there, was money identified, but some are in future years. Until we see the actual confirmation from the federal Minister, we’re at a stage where we want to get more detailed information, more concrete information from the Minister. That’s why I want to follow through with the actual meeting, to meet with him one on one. I’m hoping to get some sort of concrete answer from him on where it stands.
For Members’ information, I’m also working with other colleagues within the federal government to push this further as well, other departments. I think we are making some progress, but our meeting coming up, hopefully in November, we’ll find out more detailed information. As it stands, it just states future years.
I’ve got nothing further to add. I just urge the Minister and our government to continue to press the matter. I don’t know, the Minister sounds like there’s a meeting in November. I’d be pleased to be given notice about that.
The other one is, I don’t know if and when we do our NWT Day it might be another opportunity to raise that issue as well.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Just a comment there. Committee, we’re on page 7-4, Department of Justice, activity summary, community justice and corrections, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, $626,000. Agreed?
