Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for whoever wants to answer them. I’m not sure if it would be the Minister of Human Resources or the Premier.
We talk often in this House about the growth in the public service at headquarters. I have talked about my experience on the occasional visit to an office in one of our ivory towers here in Yellowknife where I walk down hallways and through cubicles and try to find somebody that’s a receptionist or somebody that’s in charge. Let’s just say, there are hundreds and hundreds of public servants in Yellowknife here at headquarters.
We talk about decentralization, and we beg for a few crumbs in the regions, but I’d like to know what the process is for assessing when a position may become obsolete or is no longer required. Because let’s face it, in the government, there is no bottom line that we’re trying to adhere to. The people that are in positions of management are people that are telling the government we need these positions.
But whoever actually looks at the complement of staff and says, okay, you know what, there’s not enough going on here activity-wise to warrant a full-time position in this particular activity, and then maybe delete some positions, we never hear about that. We just keep hearing about the adding on and adding on and adding on.
I’m not trying to dis the public service, but I just wonder. In an operation this size, who is it that would actually look at that and who would come to a Minister and say, you know what, we’ve got people here that they don’t have enough to do. Is that the deputy minister’s job? Whose job is that?
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The Minister of Human Resources, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That’s done on a regular basis by the individual departments themselves. They always have to look inwards and make sure that the services that are provided are being met and that they have the staff complement to do that. The Department of Human Resources does offer advice and guidance with respect to organizational design and workloads and work flow, but at the end of the day, ultimately, it’s the responsibility of every department and the deputy head to do that analysis and make sure that analysis is done.
As a note, I think in the last vacancy report that was provided to Regular Members, it identified at least 180 positions that need to be deleted within the Government of the Northwest Territories as they are no longer utilized and are sitting vacant with no expectation to fill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Abernethy, in his fulsome answer, actually went on to some of the other questions I was going to ask, like when was the last time we actually identified obsolete positions within the public service. I’m not just thinking about those that are vacant. There may be some that are occupied that are obsolete, if that may be possible. The Minister is saying that it is the deputy minister’s role. From what we see of deputy ministers around here, they are pretty busy people. Deputy ministers are pretty busy folks. I’d like to ask if there is any other way of monitoring this to ensure that everybody that is in one of those government cubicles has enough of a workload to constitute a full-time job. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, the Member is absolutely correct; deputy ministers are incredibly busy. But in every structure, as everybody would know, there is a delegation of responsibilities and there are ADMs, directors, managers and line supervisors. All of those individuals are responsible for ensuring that staff is adequately resourced and that they have work to do. When they don’t have work to do, that’s an analysis that has to be shared up the chain of command so that the individuals at the higher levels can make informed decisions.
With respect to individuals in jobs that may no longer be required, we as a public service have an obligation and responsibility to our employees to keep them busy. If we can’t keep them busy in their jobs, they’re redundant, then we have policies and procedures to move people to different positions. But before we can ever delete a position like the 180 that I have previously referenced, we do have to have them deleted or vacant before we actually officially delete them from our system. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I will try and be more brief. I’m sorry. It doesn’t seem like there would be much incentive for directors or people in management positions to identify obsolete positions within their organization. Really, I don’t know what incentive there would be to report that because that means less people working for them. That might diminish their role as director. I know that sounds like kind of a sinister conclusion, but what incentive would senior managers have to identify positions that are no longer needed or not busy enough to constitute a full-time job? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I’d say that that’s one of the first things they’re looking at, especially in times of passive restraint or when we’re trying to make sure that we have the dollars to deliver programs. We need to make sure that every dollar we spend is being spent efficiently and effectively, so deputy heads would be pushing that pressure down into the bureaucracy to make sure the people are utilizing the resources to the best benefit. We have a lot of programs and services we have to deliver here in the Government of the Northwest Territories. The vast majority of our dollars are going to salary, so if we want programs, we have to look internally and where there’s no work, we have to make the hard choices to eliminate positions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Final, short supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Has the government and has the Minister ever contemplated an outside review of positions by department to ensure that we are not overstaffed in various departments? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, we already have the program review office which has reviewed different divisions and different sections and different functions, so they can provide us advice on eliminations if they think they’re necessary. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to use the occasion of oral questions today to reaffirm my concerns I highlighted in my Member’s statement, which were the cost of the royalties associated with the gravel cost. The issue is quite simple as far as I’m concerned. I would like the Inuvialuit to agree to waive their royalty fee. Now, that doesn’t mean they don’t get to charge for the gravel. I think fair market rate is fair in whatever they decide to do, but it is the royalty fee to be very clear. That would also, in my view, demonstrate two things. The first one, it would show that they have skin in the game on this particular project. To my knowledge they are not investing in this project. Second of all, this would be something so critical that we’d be putting the money into the construction of the road rather than paying for the royalty fee. It would actually cause me to sway towards supporting this particular highway initiative.
My question is, of course, to the Minister of Transportation. At this point, what is the estimated royalty fee that the Inuvialuit would demand for the construction of this highway on the gravel fees? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The honourable Minister of Transportation, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The granular royalties are part of the Inuvialuit Land Claim. It’s their right to charge granular royalties on that material. Today we continue to try to work with the Inuvialuit on a royalty regime for the Tuk-Inuvik highway and we are trying to negotiate the best deal for both parties. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I’m trying to phrase this in a manner that makes the most sense. I’d like to support this highway. I’d like to have reasons to support this highway. We have clear issues. Last week the Minister of Transportation said we had a $299 million estimate for this particular highway construction. So the royalty fee must be built into that estimate as the cost of the highway. We have a $299 million estimate to build a highway, so we must know what the royalty fee is and that’s what I’m asking the Minister to lay before the House. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, the Member would know the answer to that question. He was at the briefing two weeks ago. Again, we are trying to negotiate with the Inuvialuit. We hope to get a discounted rate on the royalties that would enable the Member to be swayed to support the project. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, last week I was asking him questions, or maybe it was the beginning of this week. After five weeks the weeks and days roll together. The other day I was asking the Minister to lay this type of detail down in a public document, one that everyone can see, but the way it’s looking at this point is nobody is going to know the details of the information until the deal is done. How is that fair for public accountability? That’s why I’m asking once again. It’s the Minister’s right to put this number out in the public. It’s not a confidentiality issue with committee; it’s the Minister’s choice. Would the Minister finally lay this price out on the table so we know what we’re talking about in reference to the $299 million fee? What is he afraid of? I dare him to do it.
It’s a good thing it’s not truth or dare, Mr. Speaker. We have our Premier discussing it with the Inuvialuit. We haven’t got a negotiated settlement on the royalties. When we do have, we fully intend to make all of the information public. The Member was privy to the discussion at committee two weeks ago. As soon as we get a completed deal – we don’t negotiate in public, we don’t do that – we’ll share it with the Members, we’ll share it with the public, and everybody will know exactly what it is we are getting ourselves into. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m trying to demonstrate the public’s right to know on this particular issue. The Minister is the one who has coined the dollar amount at $299 million for this project. He’s now saying, oh, don’t worry, the details will follow. The problem is the details follow after the project has been approved and the wheels are already moving.
Again I ask him, tell the House the cost of these particular royalties and demonstrate what is the Inuvialuit’s skin in the game on this particular project. Because as it stands today, they have zero investment in this game and all the game. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, the Inuvialuit have significant skin, as the Member calls it, in this game. The road program goes entirely over ISR lands in the Inuvialuit Settlement Region. They have significant impact on this. They have a future need and requirement for granular materials. They have every right to charge royalties to people using granular materials from ISR lands. We, again, continue to negotiate with the Inuvialuit. We will get the best price. We’ll get a fair price. Like I said, hopefully the Member will be swayed by that price to support the project. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The Member for Range Lake, Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to let you off where the Member for Hay River North was going on here with the efficiencies in our public service sector. The Minister of Human Resources left off on the program review office as being an outside review means of the process.
Can the Minister of HR indicate by what virtue would the program review office be considered an outside source? This is manned by internal personnel. Can the Minister clarify that, please? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Minister of Human Resources, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I didn’t indicate that the program review office was an external, I said it was a means of view and that’s what it is. The program review office is designed to review or intended to review programs and services delivered by the GNWT, and it is a source for review. So that was my statement, Mr. Speaker.
I appreciate the Minister now clarifying, because I think I was a bit perplexed that this was an outside review. Coming from the private sector, we look at things a little differently. We look at efficiencies and scales, and you look at actual savings and design. The question that I need to ask is: Why can’t the public sector look at outside review to find efficiencies in our public service sector, especially in the city of Yellowknife? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I think we’ve got highly competent professionals within the public service. We’ve got HR professionals, we’ve got technical analysts, we’ve got people who understand the business of government and do a regular risk, review and assessment to the services that we provide. Deputy heads are accountable and, at the end of the day, we bring the budget before this House, which includes all position counts, and the MLAs and the Ministers have an opportunity to talk about the positions, where they’re located and the types of works they do. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I don’t think the competency of our public sector or senior management is the question here. What we’re looking for, and the question, is the impartiality and the unbiased reporting structures. For example, time in motion studies is a baseline used in a lot of businesses to find efficiencies in design. The question to the Minister of HR here today is: Why are we reluctant to look at an outside source?
The program review office is no different than the police monitoring the police. That’s the question. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, in the history of the government, we have used external resources to help us review program areas and we will do that again. We may not have any currently happening, but it’s not something we’re adverse to. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At least we’re getting down to the heart of the matter, and I think the Member for Hay River South said it, is will we look at an outside review process that we can look at finding efficiencies in design in our public sector?
I have indicated that we have no problem doing that; however, doing one for a public service of 5,400 employees might be a little excessive. We might be more interested in doing certain program areas. That has been done in the past and we’d be happy to do that again. On top of that, we have competent staff that are doing it on a regular basis, we have the program review office and we have the Legislature. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I just wanted to ask Mr. Premier some questions that have been arising in the media lately about the application process for social insurance numbers, and it was raised in the Nunavut Legislature just recently as well. Apparently they had made a change that you can only apply in person at service centre offices. This would make a big impact on my constituency where we have only one service office in Fort Simpson.
I’d like to ask the Premier if he’s aware of this communication from the federal government. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. The honourable Premier, Mr. McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe I read the same media release/media reporting that the Member is quoting from. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I’m glad to see the Premier is well read. I guess the issue is that they have to apply in person. Can the Premier contact our federal counterparts and say this will have an impact in the Northwest Territories, especially for our fly-in communities, of which I have about two, and in the Nahendeh riding where we only have one public service office there? Thank you.
I will do that. This federal government is very responsive and I’m sure they will address this concern on a timely basis, but I will communicate that concern to them. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The old application process was easy. Everybody could just grab an application and mail it in, and that sufficed for us here in the North. That’s the issue, because it’s very expensive to travel to Fort Simpson from my outlying communities, so if you could convey that as well. Thank you.
I will convey that to them. With the Mackenzie Valley fibre optic link that will connect all of the communities through the Internet.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Public Works. When Minister Ramsay and I were in Fort Good Hope last Friday, we were notified by the leadership of a fuel spill at the tank farm. When I did more research, I noticed there were two fuel spills, one on February 8th and one on February 22nd. I want to ask the Minister, what’s the communication protocol to let us Members know when there are incidents like that that have a significant damage to the communities. What is the Minister doing to straighten up his department to notify the MLAs right away? Why do we have to wait a month for us being told? Worse yet, to go into the community and find out firsthand.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister of Public Works, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Like the Member, I’m not a big fan of surprises. After the Member and I talked about this particular spill in Fort Good Hope, I had a long conversation with the Department of Public Works and Services to make sure that we put in a protocol so that MLAs are notified at the earliest convenience of when services are going to be affected as a result of things like oil spills in their community. We’ve got that put together pretty much so that we can make sure Members aren’t going into their communities to any surprises related to oil spills. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I look forward to that new protocol, because it was about 11,500 litres spilled in Fort Good Hope due to the damage of one of the faulty valves that were leaking. I want to ask the Minister if this is the case in other tank farms across the Northwest Territories where this piece of valve was fitted into our tank farms.
