Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Since May 20, 2014, the public has had an opportunity to go online and review existing devolution legislation. We have encouraged all interested parties and Northwest Territories citizens to take the opportunity to learn about it a bit and understand the new authorities exercised post-devolution by the Government of the Northwest Territories. We have had two advertising campaigns, in May and November 2014. The review period was extended to enhance the opportunity for citizens to examine and comment on the legislation. Thank you.
Thanks to the Premier for telling us what has been done. I asked what kind of a plan the government has going forward to review devolution legislation. It sounds from that, that maybe we’re done. I would certainly hope not.
These are very complex pieces of legislation. The education and the advertising campaign that were done, I think that’s great. We needed to advise people of that.
I’d like to know from the Premier, what consultation with groups has been done, or hopefully will be done, because I don’t think it has been done. So, what consultation is planned in order to gauge the interests of the public and organizations with regard to the changes that are required? Thank you.
There have been 2,091 legislative review website views. There have been 272 visits to the Q and A and comment page. Only two questions have been submitted for response. So in our view, the level of response, we don’t foresee any immediate changes to the legislation as a result of the review. Our expectation is that the responsible departments will review the 26 different married regulations and acts associated with devolution in the Northwest Territories. Thank you.
Thank you. So I gather we have no plan. We’re going to turn the legislation over to each individual department. They will do what they will do. I’d like to suggest, again, this is very complex legislation, and I would also like to suggest that not everybody has access to a computer and asking the question by the computer does not lend itself to making suggestions for amendments to a complex piece of legislation.
So can the Premier indicate to me, if we turn this legislation over to individual departments, what kind of a time frame are we talking about? Can he give me any idea as to when we can expect some sort of a schedule, or an estimated time frame for amendments to these seven pieces of legislation? Thank you.
I should point out that the advertising campaign was focused solely on northern papers. I should also point out that devolution has only been in place for 10 months and previous devolutions when we’ve devolved and evolved, normally it would take about a three-year period. I know that we do have a process already for dealing with legislation and I expect it would go through that process. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final, short supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the Premier, then I guess I would like to ask him to advise me and the public. I know there was a lot of concern about the legislation and that changes were needed. So can the Premier tell me and tell the public how they can get their views to the government, to individual departments so that legislation can be amended as necessary? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, we have already launched two advertising campaigns where we strongly laid out that the objectives of the review are to encourage the general public to better understand the legislative process associated with devolution and give them an opportunity to review the legislation and to ask questions of clarification.
We also have communicated an evolved process and the review was to gather initial public responses, questions and suggestions and also to provide the general public with an understanding of the legislative process for amendment of existing bills and development of new legislation.
We will be bringing forward a final summary report. So, all that information is available online. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The Member for Range Lake, Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today as a follow-up to a statement we heard in the House from one of our Ministers on corrections and on-the-land programs, otherwise known as wilderness programs. I do agree with the Minister that these programs do help our people heal, reconnect with their land and culture and values. But I’m saddened to hear that after all these years we’re still unable to select a qualified contractor. So with that, I do have questions for the Minister of Justice
It is well documented that the proponents who have offered wilderness programs in the past had serious issues with liability, liability in terms of safety of the inmates, safety of the providers and safety of the public.
Has the department considered all of the liability options from the past dealings with proponents and have there been corrective actions as we wait for an expression of interest? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. The Minister of Justice, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I mentioned earlier and again yesterday, we’ve had a number of proponents from around the territory that have expressed interest. That doesn’t necessarily mean it’s going to parlay into them being a service provider. At the end of the day, there are a number of things they have to have. The Member talked about liability, we have had camps in the past. We have learned from those experiences what we want to see happen and we are going to work with the folks that have expressed interest. The Sahtu was one region were we got four expressions of interest. We hope to sit down with these folks as soon as we can, sometime this month, in an effort to get the program up and running somewhere in the Northwest Territories this calendar year, and that is our objective because of the benefits that it brings to the inmates and the healing that can happen through a wilderness program and an on-the-land type of experience. Thank you.
I’m not sure if I got a response to that question. We are right now in a position of a holding pattern. We’re waiting for proponents to come forward. We’re looking at expressions of interest and it has been clearly documented that this government has an opportunity to review, during its so-called quiet period, those issues of liability, maybe better guidelines or framework of action or, in essence, a better framework in place so that when we do have proponents in place they can be operating at efficiency.
Can the Minister indicate, has work been done to look at guidelines, look at framework, look at policies and look at regulations to make this system better? Thank you.
I thank the Member for the question. The answer to the question is yes, absolutely we have. We’ve taken this time that we’ve had to ensure that when we go forward with an expression of interest and we get to an RFP stage that we do know exactly what we’re getting ourselves into. I don’t have that level of detail here with me, but I’d be more than happy to share the work we have done with Members of the House. Thank you.
I appreciate the Minister’s offering on that. We know that from past use of this tool, which is an on-the-land tool, that the costs per inmate were quite substantive and it was quite variant in terms of as high as $1,500 per inmate to as low as about $500 per inmate per day. We know that the average costs for an inmate incarcerated in our corrections facilities is around $378 per inmate per day..
Does the Minister foresee that we’re going to be looking at a fairly large substantial cost should inmates start choosing this as an option and is his department prepared for that? Thank you.
Again, we’re working through all of these details. That is certainly one that we are paying attention to and I’m thankful for the Member bringing that up today. Again, as we get closer to working with a proponent on delivering this service in the Northwest Territories, we will be back having a briefing with the Standing Committee on Social Programs and Members that are interested in this to show them what we’ve come up with, who we’re working with and how this is all going to roll out. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the Minister’s reply on that. As we’ve been told, we’re waiting for an expression of interest from a number of proponents. We are not sure whether or not there will be a sure list of candidates or candidates at all.
Does the Minister have a plan of action should there be no succession planning in finding a proponent? Is the department prepared to take this initiative as a program themselves? Thank you.
Anybody that knows me knows I’m optimistic all the time. We are optimistic at DOJ that we are going to find a proponent to help us deliver this program in the Northwest Territories. We’ve got several who have expressed interest, five from the Sahtu and others. Until we get an opportunity to sit down and talk with them about our expectations, what they’re looking for, I’m sure we will find one of those groups that we will be able to work with and get this program back up and running in the NWT. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Member for Deh Cho, Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I raised concerns with regards to security at the seniors home in Fort Providence. My questions are to the Minister of Public Works and Services. Currently I wanted to ask the Minister if, within his portfolio, he’s become aware of an assessment of the seniors home in Fort Providence and the deficiencies including security considerations. The building was constructed in the mid-70s. I just wanted to see if there’s been an assessment of the building including perhaps an eye of assessing the security for shortcomings as well. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. The honourable Minister of Public Works, Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Fort Providence Senior Citizens Home is definitely in the inventory of government; however, it is in the inventory of the NWT Housing Corporation. I believe that the Housing Corporation does work with the Dehcho Health and Social Services Authority to provide some services. The senior citizens home in Fort Providence is not a long-term care facility. It’s an independent living facility. I’m going to have to get some information from the Housing Corporation on what type of security is provided to the residents there. Thank you.
Recent efforts have indicated because of the age of the facility which was built back in 1970, obviously this government will not make an effort to replace it, but make an effort to renovate it. Recently there was review of request for proposal submissions to renovate the facility as early as January 23, 2015.
Has a contract been awarded and when can the community expect an effort to make improvements to the facility? Mahsi.
The senior citizens home in Fort Providence does have a live-in caretaker who is on shift during the evening from 10:00 until 3:00 at night which provides some security. During the day, Fort Providence has some home care workers who do go into the facility. The home care services are provided primarily by nurses who come into the home and support from other professionals such as physicians and occupational therapists from time to time that go into the facility.
As far as the reconstruction or renovations needed at the home, I’m not aware of the status of that particular project at this time. Thank you.
I’d like to thank the Minister for making an effort in trying to reply. Initially I wanted to ask the Minister of the Housing Corporation, but obviously he’s not here.
My other question is with the budget plus the efforts of this government, there seems to be maintaining the status quo of the health and social services programs. We have an increasing aging population of people who want to continue living in their communities and in their homes. The Department of Health and Social Services has made efforts to maintain the status quo. The real effort should have been perhaps to increase and enhance the Home Care Program, so ideally you have health care professionals working with a team of local people to provide services to elders in their homes.
With that in mind, would the Minister agree to support the community’s desire to elevate the seniors home in Fort Providence from an independent care facility to specialized care, a Level III? Mahsi.
I’m just trying to get up to speed on the situation over there. The senior citizens home has gone through some review and there has been the determination that more services could be provided. The Housing Corporation has issued a request for a proposal for a design required for the changes that are necessary. At this time, the Housing Corporation is looking at the RFP submissions. We were hoping that sometime close to the end of last month they would be able to review those proposals to see how they were going to proceed with any design changes that may be necessary to accommodate the people at the senior citizens home in Fort Providence. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wanted to understand the Minister of Public Works and Services in terms of the aging inventory of capital assets that the government maintains throughout the communities. In this particular instance, we have an aging seniors home. There have been efforts to perhaps renovate it.
What is the policy of this government, especially the Department of Public Works and Services, of these aging buildings? Do they become, at some point, just not usable and the government has to demolish it? At what point would the government engage with the local community to determine the fate of these buildings? Mahsi.
Most of the buildings designed in the communities right across the Territories that are owned by the government usually go through a retrofit during their mid-life. The retrofit is designed to double the life of the facility at that point. The funds that go into the unit are looked at for amortization. We re-amortize the building to the end of the building. After that reaches the end of its life, the government will do an evaluation and at some point determine the building goes beyond economic repair. Once a unit is beyond economic repair, then we go through the regular disposal of that asset. We use a policy that Public Works has where we offer the building to other agencies or other departments that may want to use it, or community agencies for disposal one way or another. That is the process. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Blake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a few questions for the Minister of Justice. As you know, policing has been an ongoing issue in Tsiigehtchic and I’d like to ask the Minister, since the commitment to overnight in Tsiigehtchic, how many times have the RCMP overnighted in the community? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Blake. Minister of Justice, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the best of my knowledge they are still trying to work with the community of Tsiigehtchic to identify accommodations so that the members can overnight in the community of Tsiigehtchic up to eight nights a month, but they have to first identify suitable accommodation in the community and they’re working with the community to do that.
From what I understand, the main problem here is that the detachment is looking for an in-kind service. It was stated a couple of days back that we just have a $3.8 million increase in the Justice department.
Will the Minister ensure the detachment in Fort McPherson has adequate funds to secure accommodation so they can overnight in the community? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
If that is the case, I’ll go back to the department and we’ll have a discussion with the RCMP on that topic. That shouldn’t be a hurdle to having members overnight in the community of Tsiigehtchic. If it is, we’ll try to correct that. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have questions about the Public Service Alliance of Canada union in Hay River which represents the workers of the Hay River Health Authority. Mr. Bouchard and I have a constituency meeting tonight and questions continue to surface in the community.
There are two things afoot right now. One is the move to a new hospital facility, the other is the establishment of a territorial health authority board that’s territory-wide. Those are two things that have caused people to wonder if our government has given further contemplation to the price and their willingness, or any plans to incorporate the Hay River Health Authority employees into the same union as all other Government of the Northwest Territories employees. I’m not sure whether the Minister of Finance or the Premier could answer that for me. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Premier, Mr. McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In our government’s restructuring of the board authorities, where we’re moving to one health board to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the health system of the Northwest Territories, part of the planning is also to look at the Hay River Health Authority and to examine the feasibility of bringing it into the public service at the appropriate time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MRS. GROENEWEGEN:
So, would it be correct to characterize that this is not imminent at this time and could I also ask if there’s been any recent costings of what the price tag would be to our government to do this? Thank you.
The Minister of Health has identified this as a priority and we’ve realized that if this had been done some time ago, it would have been a lot cheaper. I think when it was first looked at it was going to cost about $7 million; I think it’s more than that now. We do have information available and we can get it and provide the latest estimates to the Member. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yes, I’m aware of what that price was. When we met with the union in Hay River, I don’t know, 15 years ago, they were talking about this, and Mr. Miltenberger probably remembers that meeting as well. It has grown; the price tag to this has grown substantially and I would suggest that putting it off for many more years is just going to continue to see that price tag grow.
So, thank you for that information. I will pass that along to the folks who will probably be at our constituency meeting tonight and tell them that the government is continuing to review it and we will have more information in the near future. Thank you.
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On January 8, 2013, the headline in the Yellowknifer said, “Deepak International to reopen dormant diamond factory plants – Minister David Ramsay heralds rebirth to the industry.”
So, first off I want to acknowledge the Minister’s expertise and gestation. However, noting that the incubation period of the diamond cutting company has taken over two years to show results, can the Minister tell the House what benefits did the government receive by striking a deal over two years ago and how long are we locked into this deal? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment, Mr. Ramsay.
