Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's my day to be on oral questions, I guess.
With the Minister's comments around sorry, my questions are for the Minister of Infrastructure continuing along this line.
With the comments about there being a mutual conversation that needs to be had, that worries me, Mr. Speaker, because we don't have a lot of capacity in some of our areas to do this type of work, and I'm worried that the department is not going to be able to negotiate with this contractor in good faith in order to get this work done.
Can the Minister speak to what the contingency plan is should they not be able to come to an agreement with the contractor and proceed with them? Thank you.
Thank you sorry. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So like I said, my understanding is that the Department of Infrastructure is working with the Indigenous governments to be able to look more at a technical scope in how we move this project forward.
The the narrative that this project is behind schedule and that we need to forgo proper planning, project planning, as well as funding and technical review in order to meet the fiveyear project window is not true. We need to get negotiations done and start the work for these projects that are happening with the in partnership with Canada and as well as National Defence. Thanks.
Thank you. Now I'm super confused because it is my understanding that if this technical piece of the work, the trench, isn't completed within time, that there will be a delay.
So I'm not sure where this conflicting information is coming from. But can the Minister speak to whether or not if that trench is not dug this year, can it be dug next year with no delays? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, to be clear, I'm not prepared to negotiate this contract at the floor of this House. So I'm going to take notice. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a Return to Written Questions asked by the Member for Kam Lake on March 9th, 2022, regarding use of Indigenous languages on official documents.
1. Who sits on the Indigenous Fonts Working Group?
A Terms of Reference for an interdepartmental working group on Indigenous fonts and diacritical marks was approved in early 2020, to advance the work to support GNWT technical solutions for implementation of NWT Official Indigenous Languages on GNWT issued identity documents. Unfortunately, due to the response to COVID19 the working group has not met. The working group will be cochaired the Departments of Health and Social Services and Finance, and the Office of the Chief Information Officer. Membership on the working group includes representatives from all GNWT departments. The cochairs met in March 2022 to review the Terms of Reference, and the intent is for the working group to resume in April or May 2022.
2. What GNWT systems will be impacted?
Any information system that requires the individual's official name to be entered into the system, supported by a GNWTissued foundational identity document, such as a birth certificate, will potentially be impacted. One of the deliverables of the working group is to "assess the upstream and downstream implications of changes to the collection and sharing of information using Indigenous fonts and diacritics for affected programs and services to minimize disruption and impact to clients." This will determine the scope of affected programs, services and associated GNWT systems that will be impacted.
3. What are the technical needs of the Government of the Northwest Territories to see this change?
The working group's assessment of the scope of programs and services that will be impacted to minimize disruption and impacts to clients will be used to then assess technical needs. GNWT staff will review the technical requirements and financial implications of changes to the existing information systems. This will inform the next steps and timelines needed to generate NWT vital statistics documents with Indigenous fonts and diacritics.
4. How are other jurisdictions implementing Indigenous fonts on vital statistics documents?
At this time Indigenous fonts and diacritics have not been implemented on vital statistics documents in any of the provinces or territories. We continue to canvass and connect with other jurisdictions, on an ongoing basis, to be aware of any potential discussions or developments.
5. What impact will this change have on a national level?
The focus has and will continue to be on taking proactive steps to avoid unintended consequences for holders of NWT Vital Statistics documents, which are foundational identity documents. Without a coordinated approach, clients would potentially be adversely impacted when trying to access programs and services at the provincial/territorial, federal and international levels. Potential impacts may include, but are not limited to, access to federal programs such as Canada Child Benefit, Employment Insurance, Canada Pension Plan, Old Age Security, Social Insurance Numbers and Canadian Passports, accessing programs and services in other provinces and territories, transfer and receipt of electronic data with provincial and territorial partners, and impacts to services with banking and financial institutions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Your Special Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs is pleased to provide its Interim Report: What we Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Negotiating Agreements, and commends it to the House.
Mr. Speaker, the chair of the committee, the Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes, has asked me to read the executive summary today. But I would like to thank her, and all the members of this committee, for their work.
On October 29, 2020, the Legislative Assembly unanimously passed Motion 21-19(2) to establish a Special Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs. The Assembly tasked the Special Committee to seek and encourage discussion and recommendations on opportunities and challenges in meeting the Assembly's priorities.
The Special Committee began work on December 4, 2020, and has since held 15 hearings. Throughout 2021, Committee heard from legal experts, scholars, researchers, Indigenous governments and nations, and the Government of the Northwest Territories.
Five public presentations by experts and scholars are available on the Legislative Assembly's YouTube channel. Committee received ten in-camera hearings, including eight from Indigenous governments and organizations, and two from the GNWT.
We are not identifying individual voices in this interim report unless explicitly advised that we can share the information publicly. We respect the confidentiality requirements of ongoing negotiations and the confidentiality commitments of the Indigenous governments and nations.
The report is organized into four chapters summarizing what we have heard so far. Chapter one arranges the information received from experts and scholars and provides an overview of discussions around the implementation of the Declaration. Chapter two summarizes what we heard about existing key challenges in applying the Declaration in the NWT, and Chapter three encapsulates the key challenges in concluding agreements in the NWT. The final Chapter lists areas for potential future recommendations by the Special Committee.
Themes that emerged when Committee listened to experts, scholars and Indigenous governments and organizations reflected many discussions taking place in the Canadian context. These discussions included observing the Declaration as a minimum standard for human rights and as a tool for self-determination. The Declaration was acknowledged as designed to be a global benchmark, while some suggested that it was not intended to be a specific legal instrument to be directly implemented as law.
Committee heard implementing the Declaration's Articles should not be seen as the end goal but rather the beginning of the effort.
We heard that challenges arise when aligning the Declaration, an international human rights document, with domestic law. Adopting the Declaration in domestic legislation has been criticized as too vague and noncommittal. It has been described as misleading in that it would make promises that cannot be kept, thereby taking the risk of repeating the cycle of broken promises, particularly promises broken by governments.
Committee heard fundamental disagreement on whether the Declaration is legally binding. It has been pointed out that it is an aspirational document designed to be a global benchmark for Indigenous rights but is not considered law and, therefore, not legally binding.
Others noted that viewing the Declaration as aspirational ignores its intent: to guide action. We learned that customary international law applies directly unless expressly stated otherwise. Human rights treaties must be implemented through domestic legislation either implicitly or explicitly.
We heard that in the NWT, the Declaration might serve different purposes for different nations:
For those that pursue self-government agreements, the Declaration may serve as a replacement for the GNWT's Core Principles and Objectives.
Treaty holders may use the Declaration to identify and fill gaps in implementation. Committee heard that modern treaty implementation and self-governance agreements are at a critical point in the NWT, and processes to secure funding will require rethinking to ensure the treaties and the Declaration are fulfilled.
On the other hand, we heard that the Declaration may distract Modern Treaty holders from continuing treaty implementation and may impede further progress on a path that has seen considerable investment in the past.
For those without land agreements, the Declaration would allow land rights and self-determination. Nations without land agreements expressed the desire to develop their own mechanisms and processes to move land agreements forward.
Committee heard that openness is needed toward more progressive and contemporary co-management approaches that include renewable and non-renewable resources. The NWT's co-management institutions have developed from arrangements under modern treaties and may not be a workable model for areas without land agreements or reserve lands.
International human rights obligations and domestic law: We heard concerns about the fundamental compatibility of the basic principles of the Declaration with the existing jurisprudence in Canada. Different views exist on the future approach to address the complexity of section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982. We also heard about confusion amongst Indigenous rights holders about this section in relation to rights under other laws.
Options for Implementation: We heard that implementation may be more manageable if the Declaration was broken down into applicable sections. This process would avoid ambiguity, better allow incremental allocation of resources and would put meaning behind each Section with specific mechanisms.
Implementation by Law: Scholars have cautioned that confusion could arise if a divergent variety of implementation laws are developed in regions and across the country. Should all provinces, territories, and municipalities develop laws in addition to federal law that makes commitments to the rights of Indigenous people, the question would be how to ensure the process is harmonious. This would likely be more applicable to the Territories than to some of the provinces.
Co-developing legislation: Committee heard that co-developing legislation is the realization of reconciliation. However, how to arrive at the result of co-development is not entirely clear. For some, past examples of co-development of legislation in the NWT were not sufficiently inclusive and in compliance with the Declaration principles. Others regarded the process used to develop the laws as examples of consent implementation and government collaboration.
Legislation and Consent: We heard that the core question of the Canadian debate on consultation is whether, or possibly to what extent, consent would be needed to achieved before developing legislation to implement the Declaration which requires consent.
Consent and Self-determination: Consent has been accepted as a key principle of the Declaration, intended to enable Indigenous self-determination. In discussions about consent, we heard that the principle of free, prior and informed consent, known as FPIC, can be perceived as a vehicle to advance long-term relationships and allow for the coexistence of a plurality of legal orders. Committee was told not to underestimate the role of FPIC in establishing a different and positive relationship between Indigenous peoples and non-Indigenous segments of society.
Disagreements exist on the achievability of FPIC in relation to rights under the Canadian Constitution Act. And while free prior informed consent is the tool intended to make self-determination happen, tensions exist between efforts of defining the terms and interpretations of the broader goal of Indigenous participation and protection of rights.
We also heard how consent could be operationalized through Declaration legislation. Examples of operationalization include creating leadership tables, secretariats, and joint cabinet-Indigenous committees. Other examples include processes outside of Declaration legislation such as modern treaties, the regulatory regime and assessment processes, Indigenous-led assertion and enforcement, or through the courts.
Committee heard that several Declaration articles might be contentious in their relationship to the Canadian Constitution Act, 1982. We heard that Articles 26, 32, and 46 have been particularly contentious.
Monitoring of implementation: There are no independent bodies to monitor how governments will perform in implementing and applying the Declaration. It has been said that this will lead to interpretation gaps in implementation.
Regional and inherited approaches: We have heard that some fear that the Declaration may interfere with existing agreements; others pointed out that the Declaration will help realize inherent rights and reconciliation. To understand the situation of Indigenous nations in the NWT, we were told to look at the historic treaties, and the extinguishment of rights and modern land agreements.
We heard that existing representative bodies may not align with current views of authority and self-determination, and existing agreements may not fulfil the views of land rights and self-government.
Indigenous nations perceive themselves as being stuck in a negotiation structure inherited from the past, with little room to move forward or break out of. The GNWT was described as having been inflexible in the past. All NWT witnesses agreed that governments need to get away from the fixed and predetermined principles at the negotiation table, be more flexible and not change core principles and objectives unilaterally.
Overlap in land use combined with the absence of land agreements, we heard, created an untenable and undesirable situation.
Finding a way forward: Despite, at times, the critical language describing the past and current experiences of negotiations in the NWT, we were inspired by the positive and forward-looking tone used by all witnesses.
We heard a deep sincerity in seeking and finding solutions to the challenges of the status quo. The diversity among NWT Indigenous governments and nations was noted as an opportunity to build on what has proven to already work in the NWT. Examples included existing collaborative models of governance and legislative co-development.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank all of the presenters of the committee and all of the committee members for their work. This is simply the interim report. We look forward to many (audio) and to future recommendations to this Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Yellowknife North. Member for Yellowknife North.
Mr. Speaker, I move, second by the Member for Thebacha, that the remainder of Committee Report 27-19(2) be deemed read and printed in Hansard in its entirety. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Yellowknife North. The motion is in order. To the motion?
SOME HON. MEMBERS:
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Any abstentions? The motion is carried.
---Carried
Committee Report 27-19(2) is deemed read and will be printed in Hansard in its entirety.
Committee Report 27 – 19(2):
Standing Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs Interim Report: What we Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Negotiating Agreements
Member for Yellowknife North.
One moment, Mr. Speaker.
Oh, Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Thebacha that Committee Report 27-19(2): Special Committee on the Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs Interim Report: What We Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Negotiating Agreements be received by the Assembly and referred to Committee of the Whole.
Thank you, Member for Yellowknife North. The motion is in order. To the motion?
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Any abstentions? The motion is carried.
---Carried
Committee Report 27-19(2) has been received by the Assembly and referred to Committee of the Whole. Thank you.
Reports of Standing and Special Committees. Member for Kam Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, your Standing Committee on Social Development is pleased to provide its Report on review of Bill 39: An Act to Amend the Post-Secondary Education Act and commend it to the House.
Bill 39: An Act to Amend the Post-Secondary Education Act (Bill 39) was first introduced by the Department of Education, Culture and Employment on November 24, 2021, and then referred to the Standing Committee on Social Development for review.
The Department proposed changes to the Northwest Territories' Post-Secondary Education Act that would add details on quality assurance review, correct errors, and ensure alignment with the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Bill 39 proposes changes to:
Remove a pre-condition to being recognized as an Indigenous institution;
Allow for the charging of fees and costs related to applications and quality assurance review processes;
Require a quality assurance review of an application for registration as a private training institution and for a renewal of that registration;
Clarify the role of a Post-Secondary Education Advisory Committee;
Give the Minister additional powers concerning the establishment of a committee and standards a committee must follow;
Allow for regulations to prescribe the quality assurance body to which a particular type of application is referred and to prescribe matters relating to that referral;
Allow the Minister to order a refund of tuition fees on suspension or revocation of an authorization;
Require specific Boards or other governing bodies to establish quality assurance processes for programs of study offered by an institution; and,
Improve the use of consistent language throughout the Act.
The proposed amendments focus on addressing gaps and inconsistencies as identified by the Department when drafting the regulations required for implementing the PSE Act. The Act received assent in August 2019 and is not yet in force.
The main changes proposed by the Standing Committee include:
Narrowing the powers of Post-Secondary Education Advisory Committees to quality assurance matters.
Requiring a minimum of half of the members to Post-Secondary Education Advisory Committees to be Indigenous.
Increasing consistency within the legislation.
The Standing Committee wishes to thank all those who participated.
The Standing Committee held a public engagement period from December 22, 2021, to February 4, 2022, and a public hearing in Yellowknife on March 24, 2022.
The Standing Committee received written submissions from Aurora College, the City of Yellowknife, and the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of the Northwest Territories.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would now like to pass the reading of the report to the MLA for Great Slave. Thank you.
Thank you, Member for Kam Lake. Member for Great Slave.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The PSE Act creates the structure for Post-Secondary education in the NWT and rules Post-Secondary education institutions to support the growth of the territorial Post-Secondary education system. This legislation will become operative once regulations are in place. Post-Secondary education includes universities, colleges and trade and vocational schools.
Aurora College welcomed Bill 39 as the critical piece in transitioning to a polytechnic university. The College is pleased that the changes proposed in Bill 39 do not impact the relationships as they develop according to the Aurora College Transformation Implementation Plan.
The City of Yellowknife expressed support for the updates to the PSE Act because the changes are considered to result in a more clearly written and well-functioning piece of legislation.
Submissions welcomed removing the additional step for the recognition of an Indigenous institution required in the existing legislation. Amendments to the definitions section and Part 3 of the PSE Act removed the condition that an organization must be recognized as a Post-Secondary institution before it can be recognized as an Indigenous Institution.
Aurora College welcomed the steps to expand the Post-Secondary education system in the NWT, including a new pathway for Indigenous institutions and expressed full support for the relevant changes in Bill 39.
We heard from Aurora College that the organization does not anticipate pursuing recognition as an Indigenous institution under the PSE Act.
The City of Yellowknife supported the removal of barriers to the establishment of Indigenous institutions but felt it could not provide comments because the process will be described in regulations.
Submissions welcomed the increase in clarity around fee collection. Aurora College recognized the importance of consistency and clarity around fees and welcomed changes in this area as proposed in Bill 39. The City of Yellowknife supported the amendment of the PSE Act to provide for the collection of fees and charges for quality assurance reviews.
Bill 39 proposes allowing the department to charge fees related to quality assurance processes for Indigenous institutions, universities, degree-granting institutions, colleges, and private training institutions.
The Standing Committee heard the concern that the amendments should be precise on the process for fees and charges. The City of Yellowknife requested an amendment to clarify in all applicable sections that a certain action will be undertaken upon receipt of an application and the prescribed fee.
Section 7 amends the power of the Minister to establish Post-Secondary Education Advisory Committees, provides for Ministerial appointments to these Advisory Committees, and section 66(e) allows the Minister to set regulations regarding the members' qualifications and duties of the Advisory Committees.
The quality assurance process under the PSE Act divides the responsibilities for conducting quality assurance reviews between an internal body and an external body. The external quality assurance body will be external to the Government of the Northwest Territories, reviewing all degree programs, universities and any institution that wants to deliver a degree program.
Bill 39 proposes that an internal body conducts reviews of vocational and private training institutions and colleges. This review body would be the Advisory Committee which functions as the internal quality assurance body. The Advisory Committee would include departmental staff and other subject matter experts according to regulations on private vocational training, private training institutions, and the act that establishes the college.
In Canada, educational institutions, including colleges, are generally required to review their programs to assure compliance with standards and quality requirements. Provincial legislation or policy would set these requirements. Quality assurance bodies in the Post-Secondary education sector are often review boards, panels or committees set up by departments to assess the program quality of institutions.
The department informed that it is in negotiations with the Campus Alberta Quality Council to be the external review body for NWT's degree programs and university reviews. It is planned that the Alberta Quality Council conduct the quality assurance review for the NWT polytechnic university in fall 2022.
In their submission, Aurora College has no concerns with the revised approach to assigning a quality assurance body through the Alberta Quality Council for degree-granting programs. The college notes that quality assurance requirements for all institutions are essential to maintaining students' and employers' confidence in the quality of credentials obtained in the NWT.
The City of Yellowknife, in its submission, supports clarification of the role and authority of the Post-Secondary Advisory Committee.
The Information and Privacy Commissioner raised questions concerning the Post- Secondary Education Advisory Committees and their relationship to the long-term vision of NWT's Post-Secondary educational institutions and the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
The Commissioner asked whether Post-Secondary institutions are listed as public bodies under ATIPPA, quality assurance bodies are identified as public bodies subject to the ATIPPA, the Advisory Committees' records are subject to ATIPPA, and the scope of duties of the Post-Secondary Education Advisory Committees is defined.
The Commissioner also asked that it be considered to determine in advance any limitation to rights of access to the records of the Advisory Committees.
The department explained that removing the condition to be recognized first as a post- secondary institution before being recognized as an Indigenous institution aligns the legislation with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, particularly Articles 13 to 15. The Standing Committee supports the removal of this barrier and understands that this change improves the act, prepares for a Post-Secondary education to have two knowledge streams and supports the Government Mandate by supporting the implementation of the United Nations Declaration
The City of Yellowknife requested an amendment to clarify in all applicable sections that a certain action will be undertaken upon receipt of an application and the prescribed fee. The amendment would add the words "and the prescribed application fee" when receipts of applications are issued.
The Standing Committee discussed this technical amendment. While Members understood the intent to clarify that the Minister cannot consider an application until the prescribed application fee has been paid, it’s not sure why the requirement would need to be reiterated.
The Standing Committee decided that the preceding subsection 9(1) is sufficient in requiring payment and agreed to not proceed with the proposed amendment.
I would now pass the reading off to my colleague from Hay River South. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Great Slave. Member for Hay River South.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Standing Committee determined that the description of the creation and functioning of the quality assurance Advisory Committees and assurance bodies in the Post-Secondary Education Act is unclear.
When the PSE Act was created as Bill 48 in the 18th Assembly, our predecessor Standing Committee on Social Development made the following observations regarding Advisory Committees in its report on the Bill:,
That Bill 48 was unclear about the role of the Advisory Committees in the quality assurance process, as was the distinction between the work of an advisory committee and that of a quality assurance body.
That as appropriate, the Department will use “homegrown" Advisory Committees, including for applications for recognition as an Indigenous institution, and in other instances that may draw on the expertise of quality assurance bodies established elsewhere.
Section 7 allows the Minster to establish more than one advisory committee. Bill 39 ensures the Minister follows regulations when appointing committee members (subsection 7(2)). In the current PSE Act, the Post-Secondary Advisory Committee is intended to provide reviews of Post-Secondary institutions operating in the NWT. However, the Act does not explain the difference between the Post-Secondary Advisory Committee and other quality assurances bodies. For Bill 39, the intent for changes to the language around Advisory Committees was to clarify the role of the Advisory Committee as a quality assurance body for non-degree-granting institutions, with further clarification to be set out in regulations.
Committee posed several questions on the work of the Post-Secondary Education Advisory Committee in correspondence with the department and learned that the Post- Secondary Education Advisory Committees carry out reviews and then advise the Minister after the reviews are complete, as is common practice across Canada. The Advisory Committees will review applications, develop recommendations, advise on findings, seek input from subject matter experts specific to the application under review, compile the information, and provide advice and recommendations to the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, but have no decision-making authority.
The Department informed the Standing Committee that the Terms of Reference for the Post-Secondary Education Advisory Committees would be completed when the Quality Assurance Regulations are drafted.
The Standing Committee found subsection 7(1)(b) challenging as it was positioned under the topic of quality assurance and did not refer to quality assurance but to administration. This was seen as a disconnect between the intention and what is expressed in the bill. The resulting creation of a very broad decision-making power was a concern for the Standing Committee.
Consequently, the Standing Committee developed Motion 1 to clarify that the focus of the Advisory Committee is on matters of quality assurance. The motion, as set out in Appendix 2, replaces paragraphs 7(1)(b) and (c) and relates both to quality assurance. Motion 1 includes a new subsection 7(2.1) requiring the Minister when appointing members,
to "make a reasonable effort to include members who reflect the unique and diverse values, histories and people of the Northwest Territories".
The Standing Committee had included this exact requirement for the Board of Governors when selecting members of the Indigenous Knowledge-Holders Council. This change was made via motion changing subsection 21(3) in review of Bill 30: An Act to Amend the Aurora College Act. We understand this change as contributing to ensuring consistency in legislation related to the Aurora College transformation toward a polytechnic university.
Members of the Standing Committee feel strongly about affirmative action and want to be ensured that Post-Secondary Education Advisory Committees have appropriate Indigenous representation. In communication, the Department had maintained that it prefers flexibility in the composition of quality assurance Advisory Committees. We learned that depending on the type of institution applying, the composition of the Advisory Committees could change.
For example, with a review of an aviation school, such Advisory Committee would likely include membership from within and the outside of the GNWT, and likely aviation experts. In addition, the quality assurance process for Indigenous institutions will require an Advisory Committee under section 7 of the PSE Act. It is anticipated that such a committee would have significant Indigenous membership.
To this effect, Standing Committee developed Motion 2 requiring a minimum of Indigenous members to the Advisory Committee. This motion is captured in Appendix 2 and adds 7(2), stating that "at least one-half of the members appointed by the Minister to an Advisory Committee under subsection (2) must be Indigenous residents of the Northwest Territories".
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will now pass it over to the Member for Monfwi.
Thank you, Member for Hay River South. Member for Monfwi.
Thank you.
The Information and Privacy Commissioner asked the Standing Committee to clarify whether Post-Secondary Education Advisory Committees and their documents would be subject to the Access to Information and Privacy Protection Act (ATIPPA). The Commissioner asked to clarify
•
If Post-Secondary institutions are listed as 'public bodies' under ATIPPA
•
If quality assurance bodies are identified as 'public bodies' subject to the ATIPPA
•
If Post-Secondary Education Advisory Committees' records are subject to ATIPPA
•
And determine in advance limitations to rights of access
•
The scope of duties of Post-Secondary Education Advisory Committees.
From the Department, the Standing Committee heard that the quality assurance bodies would not be considered a 'public body' under ATIPPA. Currently, Aurora College is listed as a public body in Column 1, Schedule A to the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Regulations, as are the various Education Authorities and Councils created under the Education Act. Private education institutions are not subject to the ATIPPA.
The Standing Committee had identified that in other jurisdictions, quality assurance bodies are subject to their provincial privacy protection legislation. For example, as a public body, the Campus Alberta Quality Council is subject to the Post-Secondary Learning Act, the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and the Programs of Study Regulation in the province of Alberta.
The Ontario Post-Secondary Education Quality Assessment Board requires Board Members to adhere to the intent and requirements of Ontario's Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, 1990, which applies to all information, material, and records relating to, or obtained, created, maintained, submitted, or collected during a review.
The Standing Committee determined that since no 'public bodies' that would be subject to ATIPPA had been created yet, this question would lie outside this bill's scope.
Bill 39 proposed to change wording in section 17, dealing with NWT Developed Degree Programs, and section 28, dealing with Private Training Institutions, to make the language around authorizations consistent. The Standing Committee suggested with Motion 3, set out in Appendix 2, to make the same change to section 21, dealing with the Letter of Authorization, to make the legislation internally consistent.
Now I pass this on to Kam Lake MLA. Thank you.
Thank you, Member for Monfwi. Member for Kam Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The clause-by-clause review of Bill 39 was held on March 25, 2022. At this review, the Standing Committee moved three motions. The Minister concurred with two motions. The Minister did not agree with the motion on the composition of the Post-Secondary Education Advisory Board.
The Minister concurred, and clause 3 has been amended.
The Minister did not concur. The amendment will not take effect.
The Minister concurred with the motion. Clause 15 has been amended.
The Standing Committee on Social Development's review of Bill 39 resulted in three motions. The Standing Committee thanks the public for their participation in the review process and everyone involved in the review of this bill for their assistance and input.
Following the clause-by-clause review, a motion was carried to report Bill 39: An Act to Amend the Post-Secondary Education Act, as amended and reprinted, as ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole. This concludes the Standing Committee's review.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Great Slave, that Committee Report 28-19(2): Standing Committee on Social Development Report on the Review of Bill 39: An Act to Amend the Post-Secondary Education Act be received and adopted by the Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Kam Lake. The motion is in order. To the motion?
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Any abstentions? The motion is carried.
---Carried
Committee Report 28-19(2) has been received and adopted by the Assembly.
Health care Staff Recruitment. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Tabling of documents. Minister responsible for Justice.
Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the following document: Plain Language Summary for Bill 48: Arbitration Act. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Tabling of documents. Minister responsible for Infrastructure.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wish to table the following document: Government of the Northwest Territories Response to Committee Report 1719(2): A Report on Bill 23: An Act to Amend the Public Utilities Act. Thank you.
