R.J. Simpson

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Finally, I would like to ask the Minister if he would commit to keeping me updated on any movement on this issue. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm glad to see that there have been some inspections. There are some sites that you don't really need to wait to see how things turn out. You know no one is going to buy them; you know no one wants them. So we can have plans in place for those lands, at least.

In the devolution agreement, there are clauses that absolve the Government of Canada of any responsibility to remediate sites. These are called released sites. Are there any released sites that the department has identified in Hay River or anywhere in the Territories?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, In my riding of Hay River North we have some beautiful waterfront property. Much of that property is owned or leased by NTCL, and unfortunately, too much of it is littered with old fuel tanks, barges, scrap metal, derelict buildings, and garbage. This mess is a constant eyesore for the residents of Hay River, works against this government's ambitious plan to increase the number of tourists, and does nothing to help attract new residents to my community.

We all know that NTCL won't be cleaning up these properties, so it falls on this government to take the...

There's a lot of work ahead, I can tell. Is there someone in the department who is tasked with the NTCL file, that is the expert on this, who is making the plans, who knows the acts, knows the devolution agreement, who is focusing on ensuring that this government is doing the right thing when it comes to NTCL lands?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Earlier I spoke about NTCL and their lots in Hay River. I have some questions for the Minister of Lands. When I brought this up before, the government didn't seem to be doing much, and so I was hoping they've been a bit more proactive.

Has the department done any inspections of NTCL's lands in Hay River or anywhere in the Territory to check for environmental and compliance issues, and what were the results of these inspections, if they occurred, and what future actions are they leading to? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. This House stands adjourned until Tuesday, October 25, 2016 at 1:30 p.m.

---ADJOURNMENT

The House adjourned at 5:23 p.m.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Is there followup on how positions, how things are going now? Are the staff who are picking up the slack, do they feel as though things are running smooth? He doesn't have to talk specifically about this office, but does that discussion happen afterwards? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm still unclear of how that works, if because of privacy concerns they can't ask maybe the regional managers or the office managers, how things would operate without these certain positions. So, to determine how this all worked out, is there a baseline? Do they know what the level of service is before the cuts, and do they know what the level of service is after the cuts? I'm just trying to get my head wrapped around this whole process.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So from the sounds of it, it's senior management, which I assume is above a director. I'm not quite sure what "senior management" means, but they identified positions that they feel as though could be filled by someone else or it won't affect the work being done on the front lines. So I just want to confirm there's no consultation with the actual office manager or a direct supervisor of someone's position who is up for the chopping block? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So what level in the government are these expendable positions identified at? Is it the office manager, regional manager, director, ADM, deputy minister, et cetera?