Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Standing Committee on Social Programs has completed its review of Bill 38, An Act to amend the Jury Act. The committee thanks the Minister and his staff for presenting the bill. The bill permits the sheriff to obtain names of prospective jurors for a French or bilingual trial from a jury list compiled in accordance with the regulations. It also exempts from jury duty employees of the Public Prosecution Services of Canada and the Department of Justice of the Government of Canada.
The public hearing on the bill was held on February 2, 2015. The committee heard from the executive director of the Federation Franco-Tenoise, who indicated general support for the bill. The committee’s clause-by-clause review was also held on February 2, 2015. Following the committee’s review, a motion was carried to report Bill 38 to the Assembly as ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.
This concludes the committee’s opening comments on Bill 38. Individual Members may have additional questions or comments as we proceed. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Moses. I’d like to turn our attention to Minister Abernethy if he has any witnesses he’d like to bring into the House. Minister Abernethy.
I do, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister Abernethy. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. Sergeant-at-Arms, if you could please escort the witnesses into the House.
Minister Abernethy, if you’d be so kind as to introduce your witnesses for the record.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. With me today are Emily Ingarfield, the manager of policy and planning on my left; and Kelly McLaughlin, director of legislation on my right.
Thank you, Minister Abernethy. Ladies, thank you for joining us here today. Committee, we’ll open up Bill 38 with general comments. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have a couple of comments here. At committee we did have considerable discussion about whether or not the changes in the Jury Act would mean that French-speaking residents would be required for jury duty more often than any other resident and there was a concern, which I think at committee we were comfortable with it at the end. But I just wanted to express that concern to say that it is out there, and I encourage the Minister and the department to make sure in the implementation of these changes to the Jury Act that there are safeguards in there that someone who is French-speaking and also English-speaking would not be required to be on twice as many juries, for instance, as someone who is unilingual. I think the department is considering that, but I wanted to give voice to it. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This was actually discussed in committee with the Minister of Justice. Just for the record, this type of jury trial, the requirement for a French jury is incredibly rare here in the Northwest Territories. In fact, there’s been one. That’s not saying it won’t happen, but it is incredibly rare here and the department is obviously interested in continuing to work with the French community, who have been active in this process, to make sure that we can provide jury trials in French here in the Northwest Territories. We also obviously want to be cautious that we’re not overburdening some of our residents, but I do want to be clear that this is an incredibly rare occurrence here in the Northwest Territories.
Thank you, Minister Abernethy. Continuing on with general comments, I have Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do want to thank the Minister responsible for bringing this bill forward in terms of making sure that we actually uphold and protect the rights and the laws of our residents of the Northwest Territories. I think this really strengthens the bill as we have it right now in terms of the bill before us, the Jury Act, so that there are no loopholes that result in mistrials and we protect the rights of residents, possible victims and the general public.
I just want to say that I’m glad to see this and we are unique in the Northwest Territories in that we do have a small population, but then you go further and our French-speaking population is even smaller. We don’t want to put a burden on the amount of times that our French-speaking population would be called to jury. I think that we’ve gone through that and we’ve worked out all the issues there, and I think that this bill is going to reflect that and ensure that our French-speaking population is not being called more times than not.
Also, I just want to make the comment from the executive director for the Federation Franco-Tenoise. He made a really good comment when he was presenting to committee in that he did say that not only for this bill or this department that they’d want to give input into but all departments within the government should go and seek the advice and support from the French-speaking community in terms of these kinds of things. I think that went well and I think committee heard him and want to utilize all our resources when we’re trying to make legislation.
I do agree with the Minister that such jury requests for a French-speaking jury for any trial are very rare, and I think that moving forward we’ve really strengthened the Jury Act and that’s going to be something that’s going to help protect our residents.
I want to thank committee, as well, who asked a lot of questions as we were pushing this forward. I’m glad to see it here in Committee of the Whole. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Moses. Minister Abernethy.
Thank you. I appreciate the comment, and we’re working with our partners, including the different French associations here in the Northwest Territories as we move forward.
Should this legislation be passed, it will take a bit of time, six to 12 months to roll it out. But to ensure that we are still able to provide French juries here in the Northwest Territories, we have agreements with three different provinces that will allow us to hold French jury trials in their jurisdictions until such time as we get our stuff in place in six to 12 months.
Now, as I’ve indicated, it is rare that this happens, but we have set up with I believe it’s Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec should we be required to provide a French trial in the next six to 12 months.
Thank you, Minister Abernethy. General comments. Is committee prepared to do clause-by-clause?
Agreed.
Okay, there are only nine clauses. So if committee is okay, we’re going to go a clause at a time. Committee?
Agreed.
Thank you. Committee, Bill 38, An Act to Amend the Jury Act, clause 1.
---Clauses 1 through 9 inclusive approved
To the bill as a whole.
Agreed.
Does committee agree that Bill 38 is ready for third reading?
---Bill 38 as a whole approved for third reading
I’d like to thank Minister Abernethy, Ms. McLaughlin and Ms. Ingarfield for joining us today. Sergeant-at-Arms, if you could please escort the witnesses out of the Chamber. Thank you.
Committee, on committee’s wishes, we’re going to continue on Bill 41, An Act to Amend the Partnership Act. Again, we’re going to go to the Minister responsible for introducing the bill for opening comments. Minister Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to be here today to speak about Bill 41, An Act to Amend the Partnership Act.
The Partnership Act governs the relationship between partners in a business partnership, including limited partnerships and limited liability partnerships, as well as the relationships between a partnership and those they deal with.
The primary focus of the proposed amendments is to improve the outdated registration requirements of the act. The bill includes amendments that require, in almost all cases, partnerships and business names be registered before the entity operates in the Northwest Territories and that the registration be renewed every four years. It will also add restrictions to the names that may be registered and amend administrative provisions of the act to correspond more closely with similar provisions in the Business Corporations Act.
The department consulted in respect of the proposed amendments with the Law Society of the Northwest Territories, which in turn made consultation materials accessible to all of its members, and also with the Northwest Territories Chamber of Commerce. A consultation paper, including the provisions of a draft act, was also posted on the department’s website, inviting public input. In addition, the Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment provided constructive suggestions that are reflected in the bill before you today.
I would like to thank the Standing Committee on Social Programs for its review of Bill 41 and would be pleased to answer any questions that Members may have regarding this bill. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Abernethy. At this time I’ll go to the chairman of the Standing Committee on Social Programs, the committee that reviewed Bill 41, for comments on the bill. Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Standing Committee on Social Programs has completed its review of Bill 41, An Act to Amend the Partnership Act. The committee thanks the Minister and his staff for presenting the bill.
The bill clarifies registration requirements, sets restrictions on the registration of new names, aligns administrative procedures with the Business Corporations Act and allows for judicial review of a registrar’s decision. The bill also specifies offences, sets new maximum fine amounts and makes minor amendments to improve readability.
The public hearing on the bill was held on February 2, 2015. The committee’s clause-by-clause review was held the same day. Following the committee’s review, a motion was carried to report Bill 41 to the Assembly as ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.
During the hearing a member asked for clarification on the clause pertaining to judicial review of a registrar’s decision. After the hearing and review had concluded, the Minister indicated his agreement with the member’s concern and prepared an amendment to improve the wording of the clause. A motion in support of that amendment will be brought before Committee of the Whole.
This concludes the committee’s opening comments on Bill 41. Individual Members may have additional questions or comments as we proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Moses. Minister Abernethy, do you have witnesses you’d like to bring into the House?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, I do.
Thank you, Minister Abernethy. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. Sergeant-at-Arms, if you can please escort the witnesses into the House.
Minister Abernethy, if you could please introduce you witnesses for the record.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. With me on my left is Gary MacDougall, who is the director of legal registries and, on my right, Ian Rennie, who is legislative counsel responsible for this piece of legislation.
Thank you, Minister Abernethy. Mr. MacDougall, Mr. Rennie, welcome to the House again. Nice to see you folks.
Committee, we’re going to open up Bill 41 to general comments. Is committee prepared to do clause by clause?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. Clause 1.
---Clauses 1 through 32 inclusive approved
Clause 33. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a motion. I move that Bill 41 be amended by deleting proposed subsection 106.1(1) in Clause 33 and substituting the following:
106.1(1) Subject to this section, a decision by the registrar under this act is final.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. We’re just going to circulate this motion. One second.
Committee, the motion is on the floor and the motion is in order. To the motion. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. As Mr. Moses mentioned in his opening comments, we did have a discussion at committee on this particular clause. The original wording in Clause 33 on Section 106.1(1) stated that a decision by the registrar under this act is final. Then further on under the same section it talks about that a decision by the registrar could be reviewed. It seemed to me at the time when we were discussing it that the one section was contradicting the other. We discussed it at committee, and as was stated, committee went away and thought that things were done, but in their wisdom the Department of Justice looked at this and determined that for better clarification there’s a few words added to subsection 106.1(1) and it simply says, “subject to this section.” So a decision by the registrar is final, but it then allows for a review of the decision by the court through a judicial review.
That’s why this motion is coming forward. I just want to say thank you to the Department of Justice for reconsidering and for making this clarification. I think it makes the act a little bit better. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. The motion is carried.
---Carried
Clause 33 as amended.
---Clause 33 as amended approved
Clause 34.
---Clauses 34 to 40 inclusive approved
Bill as a whole?
Agreed.
Does committee agree that Bill 41 is ready for third reading as amended?
Agreed.
