Minister of Health and Social Services.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's my understanding that Nunavut, with a more homogeneous population, put together a proposal and requested federal funding. That's not the stage that I understand that we're at here. I'm not aware that this government ever says no to federal money, but I've never seen a proposal for this healing centre. I'm not clear where things are at. I want to say that there is no reason that the GNWT alone needs to take the lead on this. Indigenous governments and Indigenous government organizations could band together to create a proposal and work with the GNWT on that or not work with the GNWT on that. It's not only up to the GNWT to make this happen. There has to be engagement and leadership from Indigenous governments. Thank you.
Minister alluded to a proposal. She's waiting on the proposal. We need to be proactive as the GNWT to engage with the federal government, similar to Nunavut. Nunavut's been proactive, and here we are. Are we going to be missing out on almost $75 million from the federal government? I'm dismayed. I'm disappointed that we're at this stage after almost five years. TRC recommendation came out and here we are still talking. We should be putting those into actions. I have a question on the Nunavut's ability to, I guess, secure the funding. How is it that Nunavut was able to secure $50 million in federal funding for an addiction treatment centre and we weren't? Without delay we should be approaching Ottawa for the same funding.
I have no detailed information about how Nunavut created a plan to get the federal government to provide money for a healing centre in Nunavut. I certainly could find that out. I want to reiterate that it does not have to be up to the GNWT. Indigenous governments and Indigenous government organizations could band together to write a proposal for federal funding for a healing centre and to have some focus around what kind of services they want in that centre and where the centre will be located.
Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary, Member for Monfwi.
Masi, Mr. Speaker. When we ask questions to Ministers or Premiers, I guess the longer the answers, the more questions it creates for us, so I have some more questions here. Mr. Speaker, there are best practices already in place with Nunavut, over five years now. Obviously, our territorial government should be working very closely with Nunavut to gather that information. I am very surprised and shocked that our current Department of Health and Social Services does not have that information at hand. Passing on the buck does not sit well with me. We are representing the GNWT here, so I have a question to either the Premier or the Minister. Would the Premier or Minister provide us with an itemized response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's 94 calls to action, including progress made on each, especially on calls to action numbers 20 and 21? Masi.
What's truly surprising and shocking is that this issue did not come out during our mandate priority setting exercise, not a word about an addictions or healing centre at that time. The TRC recommendations are directed to the federal government. I understand that there is a role for all of us to play in telling the government what it is we want them to fund, so that is certainly work that could take place. Just to remind the Member for Monfwi, I have been the health Minister for eight weeks, and I have learned a tremendous amount. I have not had the opportunity yet to learn about the Nunavut healing centre. I am prepared to do that and return to him with information. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Deh Cho.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. My Member's statement alluded to the fact that the leadership of my community are puzzled by the fact that the Chief Public Health Officer has carte blanche, that is full discretionary power, to approve self-isolation plans of medical patients in order to return to their respective communities without any consultations or approvals with local leadership prior to CPHO granting the approval. I believe this process is also done for contractors who come from out of territory to conduct work in the territories, as the leadership have never ever been contacted. Can the Minister of health or the Premier provide an explanation as to why the approval process does not include prior consultation with local leadership, considering we are in a pandemic? Mahsi.
Thank you, Member for Deh Cho. Minister of Health and Social Services.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As a matter of fact, the Chief Public Health Officer has the authority to accept or deny applications for self-isolation. She has mandated, of course, that people isolate in the four hub communities, and there have been questions about exceptions so that people can go to their home community to isolate. I realize that that is the case in Fort Providence most recently. There is not a process that respects the privacy legislation, that allows the CPHO to contact the leadership and say: so and so wants to isolate; how do you feel about that? Rather, the advice that is given is that the individual himself or herself contact the community leadership, discuss their plan with the leadership, and achieve their buy-in as a way to ensure that the community is comfortable with them being there. The alternative is that they will of course isolate in the hub communities. Thank you.
There are grave concerns from my leadership that the virus could spread into our communities without a proven way to test each person for the coronavirus. There are confirmed cases in the Northwest Territories from people who have travelled out of territory. For the benefit of medical travel patients, which could mean a shorter stay at the isolation centre, and for the comfort level and certainty for local leadership, can the coronavirus testing be conducted on the travellers upon arrival to the NWT?
It is my understanding that the only travellers or essential workers who get immediate tests are people who are going into a healthcare setting, that other people do not receive those tests. That is primarily a function of our capacity, that, if we do not have people who are symptomatic, we do not really have a good test for them at this point. There is work going on to provide that kind of testing, which is not really testing; it's screening. That is coming down the pipe, but it does not exist now. The gold-star approach would be that everybody who comes into the NWT is screened to see if they have COVID, but unfortunately, we don't have the capacity to do that at this point. Right now, our goal is in the region of 500 tests a week. There are about 1,200 people a week who come into the NWT, so that is the gap we are looking at.
The chief and council of my community are upset that a nurse from the South is allowed to self-isolate at the local health centre where the residents of the community go for healthcare issues. I have also received another complaint of a social services employee returning from a visit to the east coast and is currently back on the job at the health centre. This is the health centre where all our people go who are the most vulnerable. There most likely was not any requirement for COVID testing. This again provokes the notion as to whether we are playing Russian roulette with the lives of the residents of Fort Providence. Can the Minister provide an explanation as to the arrangement for the nurse in question?
I would like to assure the Member for Deh Cho that we are not playing Russian roulette with the lives of anyone in the NWT, including the people who live in Fort Providence. It's my understanding that healthcare workers are in the exempt list, which means that they have very specific procedures to follow. They have to have a COVID test. They have to wear a mask. They are not allowed to socialize after work or leave the place in which they are staying. There are efforts to bridge the gap between providing the medical service required and keeping the population safe from this person who has recently arrived. I do not have specific information on the Fort Providence nurse, but I could certainly obtain that and share it with the Member for Deh Cho.
Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With my Member's statement today, this was no way, shape, or form about "us against them." It's about equity. Our Indigenous public servants are being told to answer phones, while working for the GNWT, in English and French. This has been in effect since 2015, when it was rolled out, a language completely foreign to them, at the same time not allowing for active offers in their own languages. Why are we as a government forcing Indigenous public servants to answer phones in a language that is not theirs? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just to clarify something right off the bat, if an Indigenous employee or any employee wants to make an active offer in any one of our Indigenous languages, they are not only allowed to, I encourage them to. I think we need more of that. There is no policy saying that people cannot make active offers in their own languages. In case there is any question within the departments, the Minister is telling them right now that it is allowed and that it is encouraged.
---Applause
The reason that these active offers are being made is that Section 11(1) of the Official Languages Act requires service in English and French, and active offers will let citizens know that they can receive that service. It is required in head and central offices, as well as in Hay River, Inuvik, Yellowknife, and Fort Smith, where the majority of the francophone population is. When you go to an office, there is often signage. When you call somewhere, you can't see that there is signage, and so that's why that active offer is made in French. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you to the Minister for that. I am aware of the training and the videos that went along with it, and there was never any part of saying that you could do it in another language. Will the Minister review whatever policy or whatever could be put in place to make sure that our Indigenous public service who answer phones in French and English be removed or be informed that, if they want, they don't have to, they can answer in one of their own languages, for instance?
Just to be clear, an Indigenous language can be added onto the English and French. We still need the English and French as part of the active service. It was my understanding that, during this active offer training, employees were encouraged to answer in any Indigenous language they are able to speak. I will look into that, and I will ensure that that is actually happening because the Member has different experiences or a different understanding of that. I will double check and I will get back to the Member.
The official languages guidelines are currently being updated by the Indigenous Languages and Education Secretariat in ECE. I believe they were last updated in 1997, and so this is part of the Indigenous Languages Action Plan. Through that update, we are going to ensure that these aren't questions anymore, that everyone knows these, because that's the direction we want to move in.
I get what the Minister is saying, but if I wanted to answer the phone as an Indigenous person in my government office and say, "Hello, drin gwiinzii" or "uvlaami," why would I have to say it in French if I'm saying it in two different languages? If a French person needs a service in my community, if a Muslim person, a Somalian person needs language, there is the translation service provided. They can request it. What I'm asking is: why do we have to make Indigenous people have to say it in French? What's wrong with saying it in their own language? It's another language. It's giving an active offer, saying we can provide service in another language.
There is nothing wrong with saying it in an Indigenous language, but the fact is that GNWT is a public government and Canada is a bilingual nation. Until Indigenous governments take over certain services and service delivery, those are the laws that we have to follow.
I don't think that answering in one language denigrates or reduces the value of another language. I was talking with my spouse about this the other day. She was saying her granny spoke many languages, and when I think back, my grandpa spoke many languages. He was from Fort Chipewyan. He spoke English, French, Chipewyan, Cree. I don't think there is anything wrong with offering service in a number of different languages. I think it's something that we can all strive for as opposed to resist.
Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess what I'm saying is that our policies have no teeth. Our Indigenous languages have no teeth. To say it's important, we have to add the French in. We don't have to add the Inuktun in. We don't have to add the Chipewyan in. We don't have to add all these other ones, but we have to add the French in. This is what I'm saying: why? I get it that, but again, it's not an "us against them." If we're saying it in whatever, we're saying hello, if somebody needs a service, but why? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The direction we're moving in is that, if you are answering a phone in a government office in a region where there is a number of Chipewyan speakers, then my hope is that, in the coming years, there will be a requirement to answer in that Indigenous language. Wherever there are sufficient numbers of speakers, I hope that there will be a requirement to answer in that language the same way there is with French in those four communities, where there is a significant number of French speakers.
We are definitely moving in the direction that the Member is talking about. ECE has the French Language Secretariat and the Indigenous Languages and Education Secretariat, and those two groups work very well together. The French language in the territory is strong. There is a number of French speakers, both natural-born French speakers and people who come through the immersion program. In response to that, the GNWT has really developed a robust French-language service regime in the territory. That is what we aspire to have, or that's how we want the Indigenous languages to be delivered in the future, as well. The two languages are working together. There is no "us against them." I know the Member points it out, but I just wanted to point it out myself because it's often seen as "us against them." It's a red herring. It seems to be taking money away, funds away, something away from Indigenous languages when we deliver services in French, but that's not the case. The case is to expand all languages, all official languages. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Great Slave.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the Minister of Health and Social Services. Does the department collect and compile statistics on relapse and recovery? If so, where are these available to the public, and how are they being incorporated into departmental work? Thank you.
Thank you, Member for Great Slave. Minister of Health and Social Services.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. What the department does collect is that people have finished their program. They don't go back to them to determine whether they have relapsed in their program. I will mention, however, that there is a survey that will go out early next year to people who visited the treatment centres to determine what has worked for them and what hasn't worked for them and try and build some best practices out of those responses. Thank you.
When can the public expect the department to create a comprehensive relapse prevention program, and will the Minister commit to providing Members with a plan for the new supports she mentioned earlier, including key performance indicators and timelines?
At this point, we don't have a relapse prevention plan, and I'm not aware that there is work being contemplated for this. A person can relapse for a lot of different reasons. They are not necessarily programmatic, that something was missing in their treatment or after-care. There are a lot of different factors that push people into addiction and pull them out of it. What we're doing is a range of supports that is providing people with after-care, with a way to hold onto their sobriety, but we don't have a relapse prevention plan that is called that.
What is the Department of Health and Social Services doing to reduce wait times for people who are seeking detoxification in order to enter treatment?
What we recognize is that we need a model that is more widely applicable in the NWT outside of the hospitals, to assist people with medical detox. We are working now, the department is working now, on creating a model that will make detox more readily and widely available in the NWT. For some people, of course, that's all they need. They go on without formal treatment, and they are able to achieve sobriety. Of course, for other people, that's a beginning step in a continuum of supports that would allow them to achieve sobriety.
Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Great Slave.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That's great to hear, that they are developing a model. It would be nice to have a time frame that went along with that. My last question is: will the Minister commit to developing sustainable on-the-land and residential detoxification and treatment centres for addictions and mental health in the North? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I always appreciate the opportunity to plug our on-the-land healing fund. It is $1.8 million annually. It is a very flexible program. People can use it for on-the-land, individuals, after-care, family-based treatment. It is allocated to Indigenous organizations. It is easy to get, and it is very much a community-based program where people can decide on their priorities and how they want them implemented, whether they want to hire staff and so on and so forth. This is on offer to all communities, all Indigenous governments in the NWT, and I encourage them to apply for it. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Thebacha.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would the Minister agree that on-the-land programs could be used for a form of after-care in the smaller communities and regions? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Thebacha. Minister of Health and Social Services.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm aware that Salt River First Nation had a very successful mobile treatment program with the Poundmaker's Lodge a couple of years ago, and I think that that was really a model for the rest of the NWT about creating a partnership with a southern addictions treatment centre and bringing it North, and bringing it directly to the people. I think there's a lot of potential in that, and certainly, I encourage people to explore that option for their communities if they think that would be useful. Thank you.
Would the Minister agree that some of the monies for the on-the-land programs could be used to hire and coordinate a program for after-care once the client returns home?
Absolutely. That is possible. One of the contemplated uses of the on-the-land healing fund is, in fact, after-care and family-based after-care. The Indigenous governments decide on the program. It is a community-based program, and they apply for the money to implement it in their communities according to their own needs. Certainly, the money could be spent on after-care.
Would the Minister agree, considering past problems, that external delivery of addiction services is more favourable for the client on the basis of anonymity, privacy, and the success rate is much higher than it was in the past?
As I've said, Mr. Speaker, in my return to oral question, Nats'ejee K'eh worked at a 38-percent capacity in the last three years it was opened, and we've been able to double the number of people who get residential treatment for the same money over the last six years.
What we understand is: the hitch at Nats'ejee K'eh and other northern treatment centres is confidentiality. I think we all know that everybody knows everybody, and they don't necessarily want to restart their sober lives in the NWT. We find that having options provides for a more responsive time to get in rather than longer wait times, which was the case at Nats'ejee K'eh. We also have gender-specific and co-ed programs, and Nats'ejee K'eh only had gender-specific programs. We also have locations in different parts of Alberta and B.C. and one in Toronto so people can choose where they want to go.
Finally, some of the locations are locations in which Indigenous values are driving, the values driving care such as Poundmaker's and Thorpe. We believe that what we have on offer now presents a wide range of options for residents of the NWT.
Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Thebacha.
