Okay, thank you. So maybe I’m confused, but it begs the question to me why are we making the amendment? I thought we were making the amendment to make it easier for people to work off their fines and their surcharges and if that’s the case, we’re opening it up so that more offenders can work off their fines and their surcharges. Am I incorrect in that? If we have more offenders working them off is that not more work for staff? Thank you.
Thanks, Madam Chair. Prior to the amendments they didn’t have the ability to work off the surcharge. That’s the difference. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. General comments, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Just for clarification on this bill, is it flexible enough that the offenders would be in their home communities working off their surcharge in the Fine Option Program? So a modern chain gang type of a method here.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Ms. Kemeys-Jones.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Generally if the fine is given in the community then they would be working off the surcharge in their home community. There are times when someone is incarcerated and they have a fine and a surcharge, as well, and in those circumstances people in the facility would assist the inmate to work off the fine and surcharges prior to their release.
Thank you for the clarification, Ms. Kemeys-Jones. I want to ask about the Fine Option Program specifically in the communities that the offender then would work off their Fine Option Program through… Is it flexible enough that they could work it off through a community type of initiative? Say for example elders, they can go out to a fish lake; they can set the fishnets and provide fish for some of the elders and some of the older people for that type of initiative. So they would work it off and provide to the community as a whole to pay off their fine.
Yes. The program is flexible enough to allow communities to make decisions on what they would consider to be work in the community and a lot of times it is volunteer work in the community and much of the time that’s for elders.
Thank you, Madam Chair. No more questions. Let’s get this built fast.
That sounds good. Any more general comments?
Detail.
Detail. Okay, thank you. If Members could refer to their clauses, clause 1.
---Clauses 1 through 5 inclusive approved
To the bill as a whole.
Agreed.
Does committee agree that Bill 63 is ready for third reading?
Agreed.
Agreed. Thank you. Bill 63 is now ready for third reading. Thank you, Minister Ramsay. I will turn the floor over to Minister Ramsay.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to mention to the House that it’s the last time Ms. Kemeys-Jones is going to be appearing at the witness table at the Legislative Assembly. I want to thank her for all her work and I’m sure Members join me in thanking her very much for all her years of dedicated service to the people of the Northwest Territories. Thanks.
---Applause
Thank you, Minister Ramsay. I will ask the Sergeant-at-Arms if he will please escort the witnesses from the Chamber.
At this time, committee, at the Chair’s prerogative, we will have a break. Thank you.
---SHORT RECESS
Thank you, committee. Committee has agreed to consider Bill 64, An Act to Amend the Co-operative Associations Act. I will ask the Minister responsible for the bill for introductions. Minister Ramsay.
I am pleased to appear before the committee today as you consider Bill 64, An Act to Amend the Co-operative Associations Act.
The main focus of the proposed amendments to the Co-operative Associations Act is to address existing gaps and to clarify and revise outdated provisions. This will include amendments to eliminate overlapping responsibilities of the supervisor within the Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment and the registrar with legal registries, as well as amendments to enact requirements that correspond more closely with the rules governing other businesses operating in the NWT. The bill also includes a number of non-substantive amendments to ensure consistency with current drafting standards.
The Department of Justice and the Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment consulted on the proposed amendments with Arctic Co-operatives Ltd. on several occasions, as it operates as an umbrella organization encompassing many of the retail co-operatives operating in the Northwest Territories. The departments also provided a consultation draft of the bill with an explanation of the proposed amendments to all 19 existing co-operatives.
I would like to thank the Standing Committee on Social Programs for its review of Bill 64, including very constructive feedback and identification of a number of motions that improve the bill, which will be advanced this afternoon. I look forward to responding to any questions Members may have. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Ramsay. Now I will turn to the chair of the Standing Committee on Social Programs, Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Standing Committee on Social Programs conducted its public review of Bill 64, An Act to Amend the Co-operatives Association Act, on September 15, 2015. A clause-by-clause review was conducted the same day and the committee thanks the Minister and his staff for presenting the bill.
Bill 64 amends the Co-operatives Associations Act to define the essential characteristics of the co-operative enterprise and improve procedures for incorporation, naming, amalgamation and continuance of co-operative associations. The bill clarifies the responsibilities of directors and members and streamlines the regulatory requirements.
During the course of the review, the Minister agreed to consider the committee’s request for motions to be drafted to amend the bill. The intent of the motions amending each of subclause 26(3) and 34(3) is to accomplish the objective of ensuring that co-operative associations can avail themselves of the services of credit unions as well as banks.
The intent of the motion amending clause 13 of the bill provides limitations to the criteria set out in the bill under which it is permissible for directors to delay the redemption and repayment of monies owing to a person whose membership in a co-operative association is terminated. The committee felt, and the department agreed, that the addition of these limitations improved the bill by better balancing the interests of the co-operative association against those of a terminated member. It was agreed that these three motions will be moved today during our Committee of the Whole considerations of the bill. This was done to exponentially allow the standing committee a clause-by-clause review to proceed at the September 15th meeting without causing any undue delays.
Upon the committee’s review, a motion was carried to report Bill 64, An Act to Amend the Co-operative Associations Act, to the Assembly as ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.
This concludes the committee’s opening comments on Bill 64. Individual Members may have questions or comments as we proceed. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Moses. Minister Ramsay, would you like to bring witnesses into the House?
Yes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Sergeant-at-Arms, would you please escort the witnesses into the Chamber.
Thank you. Minister Ramsay, can I get you to introduce your witnesses, please.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. To my right is Mark Aitken, assistant deputy minister, Office of the Attorney General; and to my left is Mr. Gary MacDougall with legal registries.
Thank you, Minister Ramsay. Committee, I will open the floor to general comments on Bill 64. General comments. Does committee agree we go to detail?
Agreed.
Thank you. Does committee agree we will consider clauses in groups where applicable?
Agreed.
I will defer the bill number and title until consideration of clauses. Turn to page 1. Clauses 1 to 10.
---Clauses 1 through 12 inclusive approved
Clause 13. Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a motion. I move that Clause 13 of Bill 64 be amended by renumbering proposed subsections 13(3) and (4) as 13(7) and (8) respectively, and adding the following before those renumbered sections:
Notice of delay
(4) If the directors delay the redemption or payment under subsection (2), the member affected must be notified of the reason for the delay no later than 30 days after the time for redemption where payment has elapsed.
Continuing notice
(5) If the redemption of payment continues to be delayed, the member must be notified each six months of the reason for the continuing delay.
Payment when possible
(6) When the directors determine that the circumstances giving rise to the delay under subsection (2) no longer apply, the amounts owing to the member must be paid within 30 days after that determination.
Thank you.
Committee, the motions are on your desk. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. The motion has been carried.
---Carried
Clause 13 as amended.
---Clause 13 as amended approved
Clauses 14 to 25.
---Clauses 14 through 25 inclusive approved
Clause 26. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that subclause 26(3) of Bill 64 be amended by deleting “bank” in proposed subsection 33(4) and substituting “bank or credit union”.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Committee, the motions are on your desk. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. The motion has been carried.
---Carried
Clause 26 as amended.
---Clause 26 as amended approved
Clauses 27 to 33.
---Clauses 27 through 33 inclusive approved
Clause 34. Mr. Yakeleya.
