Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Blake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In follow-up from my Member’s statement I have two questions for the Minister that I’ll just refer to the Premier. As the Premier might recall, there were on-the-land programs through Justice.
Did the department select a person or group to operate the on-the-land program in the Beaufort-Delta region? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Blake. The honourable Premier, Mr. McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m not aware of anybody being selected as of yet. I do know that they’ve gone out for expressions of interest, and I understand there are seven proposals that have been received, and I expect that very soon they’ll go to requests for proposal. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The requests for proposal ended in January. I’d just like to ask, is the department waiting until April 1st to begin this program? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My understanding is that there were two rounds of requests for proposal. The first round there were none that passed muster. With the second round, my understanding is that as soon as they review them and, if they qualify, they will start, I believe, very soon after April. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Member for Hay River North, Mr. Bouchard.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have questions for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment. I made a statement today on income security programs. I’d like the Minister to give us a little more detail on income… He indicated income assistance clients will receive more money for food and incidental expenses.
Can the Minister indicate what the level of increase will be and what the increases over the next four years will be? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Bouchard. Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. The increases are for food, clothing and other incidental expenses to ensure clientele receive adequate benefits to meet their needs and that it stays current with the high cost of living in the Northwest Territories. I can provide that detailed information to the Member on the actual cost of each factor and we’re willing to provide that to the Member. Mahsi.
Mr. Speaker, I’m wondering if the increases over the next four years that the Minister indicated, are those a percentage, like we’re seeing a CPI index there, or do we have a specific percentage that we’re expecting? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It is a combination. We’re dealing with the cost of living in the Northwest Territories and the high costs in especially the small, isolated communities. We felt that there’s a need for increase in our overall subsidy program with income assistance. It is based on a combination of a percentage of CPI within the Northwest Territories, and this is the feedback that we received from the general public and organizations, that it’s time for an increase. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
My next question is about the second part of the Minister’s statement about the market housing units that they’re going to be renting, I guess, for income security clients.
Can the Minister give me an indication, we’re transferring that to Housing, but that’s money that we used to provide to income clients? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The funding that has been allocated is to subsidize the rentals in the Northwest Territories. There are some units that are high costs to manage. We’ve had some challenges with having a public unit available. So, we are partnering and transferring our funding to the NWT Housing Corporation so we can have a coordinated approach to have these market housing units available in Yellowknife and surrounding communities, as well, for income support clientele. So, those are some of the discussions that we’ve been having, and we’ve joined forces and now we’re moving forward and delivering 75 public housing units into the Northwest Territories. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Bouchard.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My next question would be: Is the department looking at expanding this concept of the market housing into other communities, other than to regional centres and Yellowknife? Will they be implementing this into some of the smaller communities maybe on a request basis?
As you know, this is very preliminary. We need to do an analysis of the small communities as well. So far the transferring of the administration of the funding through the NWT Housing Corporation will give us an indication if it’s meeting the needs of our clientele. If it’s working successfully, then, by all means, we’ll be open to having discussions and possibly working with the Housing Corporation in other small communities as well. Those are just some of the discussions that we need to have down the road. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to follow up on the questions asked by my colleague Mr. Bromley, and I have some questions for the Minister of Transportation with regards to the piece of road between Niven Gate and 49th near downtown.
You know, the Minister explained how difficult this problem is, how complicated it is. I have a very simple solution for the Minister. The city and the GNWT have been talking about this stretch of road for many years. So, my first comment to the Minister is that there’s a simple solution to this very complex problem: fix the road, which is what needs to be done, bring it up to code, bring it up to standard, and turn it over to the city.
Is the Minister willing to do that before the end of the 17th Assembly? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister of Transportation, Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’re going to meet with the city, myself and the MACA folks. I’ve been sitting here arranging something where we can get together and sit down and meet with the city. We want to come up with a solution. I don’t want to stand here and say that the solution is for us to fix it and give the road to the city. That is something that I think we’re going to work on together. Thank you.
I can tell the Minister that that is the solution that the city is quite willing to accept. The issue of trails, the issue of lights, the city is willing to take that on. The city simply needs to have the road brought up to the proper standard, transferred from GNWT to the city, and the city will then take over and put in the safety measures that are necessary.
There have been meetings between the city and GNWT for quite some time. What is the holdup with the GNWT agreeing to do the necessary roadwork? Thank you.
I wasn’t aware that that was a substandard access road. So, the reason that we weren’t fixing it is because I didn’t know it was a substandard access road.
Like I said, we are going to meet with them. The Member is correct; this road has been discussed for a long time, since that development has occurred, and we’re all concerned about the safety of the pedestrians who are using that road to access the city. We want to sit down with the city and MACA and come up with a solution that will be feasible and will work for the safety of the people accessing that road. Thank you.
To the Minister: I have to express my surprise and my huge concern that the Minister is not aware that this stretch of road needs upgrading. It’s not an access road; this is a GNWT highway, a territorial highway. Albeit, it’s in the city of Yellowknife, but at the moment it’s a territorial highway, and if the Minister doesn’t know that it needs upgrading, it’s no surprise that we haven’t had any success.
To the Minister: he’s going to have this meeting. At this meeting is the Minister willing to commit to provide funds to get the repair work done that’s needed on this road? Thank you.
If that’s a new project, then it will have to come to the House for approval. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Final, short supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So that’s not going to happen for about five years, then, if we go through the capital process. It’s well beyond that. This is not a new project. It’s something that’s been on the books for quite a long time.
So, if the GNWT is not willing to do the work, will GNWT accept the bill from the city when they do the work and hand over the bill? Thank you.
Like I indicated, we will meet with the City of Yellowknife. If a solution is for the City of Yellowknife to improve the road, if it needs improvement and it’s agreed on this side of the House and that side of the House that we can do a supplementary appropriation to pay for the road that’s been rebuilt to standard by the city, then that’s the direction we’ll go. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On February 9th I asked the Premier a question on whether he forwarded on the motion to other Premiers. That motion was the one that was passed in this House regarding the missing and murdered indigenous women. Of course, the Premier says he acts on all motions passed in this House and said he would check on it. He offered to forward me all the copies of the letters. I said I don’t need all of the copies, I just need a note to say that they’ve done this. I also accepted that maybe if it had not been done at that time, to ensure it was done.
Mr. Speaker, I’ve waited a month, technically a month and a day to find out if this motion was ever sent. I am wondering what the Premier has done with that request from February 9th that goes back to the earlier motion that was passed in this Assembly to send the motion to other Premiers in Legislatures to encourage them to pass a motion of a similar type. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Honourable Premier, Mr. McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The letters have not gone as of yet and the planning for the Round Table on Missing and Murdered Aboriginal Women, the advice we received was that to introduce the concept of a motion at this stage would confuse and complicate the planning for the round table. So now that the Round Table on Missing and Murdered Aboriginal Women has occurred, we will be proceeding forthwith to send out the letters to all of the provincial and territorial Legislatures. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Just to be very clear, the letter will be sent out to all Legislatures and all Premiers. Will you be sending out our motion suggesting they do something similar? I just want to be clear on the record. Thank you.
That was my understanding. We will follow the direction that was outlined in the motion that was passed by this House. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I understand, and some days I like to think I’m reasonable in the area of things happening.
Can the Premier explain why it’s taken this long to address this matter that was directed by the House? Was there a technical issue? I didn’t quite understand the confusion part he was referring to when he gave his first answer about different directions. If we could get a clear answer about why it took this long, thank you.
In the planning for the Round Table on Missing and Murdered Aboriginal Women, it was felt that an interjection of this motion to all the provinces and territories would be a complicating factor, because if we sent it out to all the provinces and territories, some of them may think it would be sufficient to just pass a motion in their Legislative Assembly rather than participate in the Round Table on Missing and Murdered Aboriginal Women. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wish the Premier had let us know that earlier. My question and concern is who would have authority over the House authority to provide the direction? Would it be staff who said this? Has the Premier decided, or would it be multiple… I’m trying to appreciate and understand and get to the bottom of who would have the authority to override this House’s discretion and decision to pass a motion and encourage you to forward it on to the other Legislatures. It just seems odd without letting us know. Thank you.
As I indicated, we will be sending out the motion to all the provincial and territorial Legislatures. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment. For each horizontally fractured well in the Northwest Territories to date:
What was the source of the water used and how much was consumed?
What was the quantity of greenhouse gases emissions due to flaring, and how many days did flaring occur?
What was the amount and composition of each additive used during fracking, and how is the flow of unrecovered produced water tracked underground?
How much produced water has been recovered to date, what chemicals are in the recovered water, how is it being transported and disposed of, and what NWT communities does it travel through?
What monitoring of methane gas leakage from the well pipe stems was carried out and what has been the amount of methane leakage that occurred during and following the fracking operations?
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Item 9, returns to written questions. Item 10, replies to opening address. Item 11, petitions. Item 12, reports of standing and special committees. Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, your Standing Committee on Social Programs is pleased to provide its Report on the Review of Bill 42: An Act to Amend the Residential Tenancies Act and commends it to the House.
Bill 42, An Act to Amend the Residential Tenancies Act, makes substantial improvements to the Residential Tenancies Act. The Standing Committee on Social Programs commends the Minister for presenting the bill. It is the result of extensive consultation with stakeholders and the public.
Bill 42 will amend the act in a number of ways, including: allowing decisions of the rental officer to be enforced as an order of the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories; allowing for early termination of a tenancy where family violence has occurred; establishing that termination procedures for public housing apply to monthly tenancies; requiring landlords to provide rent receipts on request; providing a remedy for improper termination resulting from a notice of rent increase; and clarifying that a condominium corporation may make applications to the rental officer.
Bill 42 was referred to the committee on November 6, 2014. The public hearing was held on February 2, 2015, and the clause-by-clause review was held on March 9, 2015. During the clause-by-clause review, the committee passed two motions to amend the bill, with the Minister’s agreement. These amendments are discussed below.
The committee heard from 10 stakeholders, including the Northwest Territories rental officer and the deputy rental officer; the Northwest Territories Information and Privacy Commissioner; Northern Properties Real Estate Investment Trust; the Salvation Army; the Northwest Territories Human Rights Commission; and a handful of private citizens and community advocates. While stakeholders indicated broad support for the bill, they also raised concerns. The remainder of this report addresses these concerns and recommends several courses of action.
Public consultation on proposed amendments to the Residential Tenancies Act took place in 2013. One prominent theme was the act’s failure to adequately support the enforcement of orders of the rental officer. While the act allows for orders to be filed with the Territorial Courts, these courts lack the broader enforcement powers of the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories. Separate legal steps are often required if a landlord or tenant fails to obey an order filed with the Territorial Court. This results in additional work and delays.
The committee is pleased that Bill 42 will strengthen enforceability by allowing any decision of a rental officer, including an eviction order, to be filed with the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories.
However, the committee urges the department to address the potential for increased costs by, first, creating a separate fee schedule for enforcement of rental officer orders and, second, ensuring that Supreme Court fees remain in line with existing Territorial Court fees.
The Residential Tenancies Act does not apply to certain types of accommodations, such as transitional housing, hotels and assisted-living units. In such arrangements, landlords and tenants do not have rights, obligations or protections under the act.
The committee found that stakeholders were divided in their views on transitional housing, including how to define it and whether to exempt it from the act. The Salvation Army’s written submission recommended an exemption for transitional housing. This would give transitional housing providers clear discretion to ban individuals who pose a safety risk. On the other hand, the rental officer and one community advocate argued that transitional housing tenants should be protected just like market housing tenants. The community advocate further noted that facilities such as Bailey House and YWCA shelters charge substantial rent and use formal rental agreements, yet tenants must comply with very restrictive rules.
The committee subsequently asked the department to clarify its position on transitional housing. The department’s view was that transitional housing should be exempt from the act. It noted that subsection 6(2) effectively exempts transitional housing because it excludes shelters that house people temporarily and housing used for therapeutic or rehabilitative purposes. In other jurisdictions, the department continued, exemptions for transitional housing are common.
The department explained that transitional housing tenants who wish to seek redress can bring complaints to any of the following: the provider of the transitional housing; the Human Rights Commission; Members of the Legislative Assembly; the Minister responsible for funding the provider; or the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories.
The department also advised against including a definition for transitional housing, providing three reasons: first, it would require further consultation with stakeholders; second, it may have unintended consequences such as reducing the level of support individuals now enjoy; and third, the act, in its current form, already effectively exempts transitional housing.
The committee ultimately determined that any amendments pertaining to transitional housing were outside the principle, or scope, of the bill. According to parliamentary convention, the committee is bound by the decision of the House in favour of the principle of the bill at second reading and is unable to amend the bill in a manner that is inconsistent or beyond the principle or scope of the bill.
However, the committee agreed to put forward three recommended actions pertaining to transitional housing. First, the committee is urging the department to provide a definition for transitional housing in the next round of statutory amendments.
Second, the committee is urging the department to establish a definition for transitional housing under the regulations. As an interim measure, this would assist the rental officers in the course of their duties and eliminate ambiguity for transitional housing providers and the people they house.
Third, the committee is urging the department to provide protection for transitional housing tenants outside of the Residential Tenancies Act. The committee believes it is not fair that transitional housing tenants pay market rates, or close to market rates, and yet are not protected against unreasonable restrictions on personal freedom and arbitrary evictions.
Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to pass the report on to my colleague Mr. Dolynny.
