Statements in Debates
Mr. Speaker, in the wisdom of this government, they developed a unit called shared services for financial transactions and procurement in the wake of implementing the new financial system.
When the government announced this initiative, they said it would be a positive benefit that would flow from this model such as the department being able to focus on core business and people will be able to receive high quality and timely services. They also said employees will benefit from a shared service organization by clearly having the career progression path developed for them and they can enjoy...
Maybe just a follow-up on another perspective to Mr. Dolynny’s question. I think the Minister had pointed out we bill and we get paid for it. I guess he’s going to provide some type of spreadsheet information on what’s billed and what’s covered. Can he also include what is billed and refused on this stuff? Thank you very much.
Just changing gears, same kind of concept though. I understand we have a team that does an amazing job at fixing that equipment over at Stanton, that tech crew. I’m not sure what the exact name is and I almost feel embarrassed that I don’t know the name of it, but the tech crew there that works on all the fancy equipment in Stanton certainly provide regional support and they get out to our regions. In essence, do we bill for other regions on that? Do we bill across authorities on that? Who picks up the cost of that? One of the Stanton folks who is a tech, who is an expert in fixing some of...
Thank you. I’m going to say maybe broadly I don’t disagree with the philosophy then that if we don’t make money other jurisdictions don’t make money that, in essence, we’re covering costs, I understand that philosophy and perhaps maybe in the wash it all works out in the bigger picture.
The issue I’m really trying to boil down to here – and I’m going to try to directly put my finger on it – is what type of cost analysis do we look at? For example – I’ll use it by way of example – we sent a physiotherapist to, say, Cambridge Bay and I’m hearing that we’ve covered the costs of the flight to...
So, in essence, out of this $180,000, what would the territorial government be reimbursing through its processes then? It just seems odd to me. I understand why we have to count it as revenue. That’s fine, that’s not the question, but it’s based on how much would we actually be paying through people putting their application in because we agreed to cover their professional fees, which seems a bit of a weird process, but obviously for accounting. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I actually have a question on 8-7. We blew by that page pretty fast. I’m thinking I could probably deal with my questions later on, but I just have some general questions. I’m happy to wait for Members to finish on 8-9.
I’m missing the first part for my first round, which is do we pay it? For example, do we pay doctors’ professional fees? I guess the other thing is, is it affected by vacancies, and if so, what vacancies would this be attributed to? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That’s why this motion is so important, because we have to reconnect what these things are doing. Rather than following along blindly of what’s being served up, we need to support this motion. Don’t be afraid, Cabinet. Don’t be afraid, Premier McLeod, or as Mr. Bouchard says, don’t be afraid, McLeod government, to release the shackles of Cabinet solidarity and vote with us. It’s true, because you want to deep down inside, and I can tell. I can see it right now. Be honest with yourselves. Don’t accept what the federal government’s had.
Mr. Bromley has presented an option...
I understand what assets are and donated are and timing. I hate to say this, but could you boil this down to an MLA level and a little bit of English, because some of us aren’t accountants here. Maybe you can give us an example. One example would be fine – you don’t have to give me 25 – and make it an MLA level, I’m sorry to say. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Is the Premier saying in this House – and I’d like him to be crystal clear about this – after the affected employees are sent off for re-programming, retraining or reclassification, whatever you want to call it, will he guarantee them positions after this? They are told they are out on their own after they have been retrained and good luck. That’s the message they are being told. The Premier is trying to tell me something different in this House. I want him to be very clear. Will these employees be offered employment after their training program has been done? Thank you...