Good afternoon, colleagues, Welcome back to the Chamber, I’d like to welcome our guests in the gallery today. In particular, colleagues, I would like to draw your attention to the presence of a former Member of this House, a former Minister, a former Speaker, a former Commissioner...
---Laughter
...and just when we thought he’d done it all, he has now been given the distinction of an Honourary Canadian Naval Captain. Welcome, Mr. Tony Whitford.
---Applause
Mr. Speaker, I would like to address a key element of the draft devolution agreement-in-principle: the net fiscal benefit that would accrue to Northwest Territories governments and residents once a final agreement has been reached and implemented.
Once devolution is achieved, 100 percent of the resource royalties that are currently paid to the federal government will stay in the Northwest Territories, However, our government’s transfer payments from Canada under formula financing will be reduced, but not dollar for dollar. The difference represents the net fiscal benefit. The draft devolution agreement-in-principle provides for a net fiscal benefit of 50 percent of resource revenues up to a cap.
This means that for every dollar of resource revenues received by the GNWT, 50 cents would be deducted from our formula financing grant. The cap would come into effect if the net fiscal benefit is
greater than 5 percent of the gross expenditure base set out in our formula financing arrangements, which stands in as an estimate of the GNWT’s spending needs.
The cap would amount to $61 million now, but would increase annually as the gross expenditure base grows, For example, if total royalties amount to $100 million, the net fiscal benefit would be 50 percent of that, or $50 million. If royalties are $200 million, the net fiscal benefit would be equal to the cap. Based on the royalties actually collected by Canada from the NWT over the last 10 years, we would have reached the cap only twice. In all other years, had we finalized a devolution agreement on the terms we have currently negotiated, the NWT would have received its full 50 percent share of resource revenues in addition to regular transfer payments from the federal government.
Therefore, no province receiving equalization receives better treatment for their resources than is contemplated in the draft devolution AIP. Newfoundland and Nova Scotia, over the years, have negotiated special time limited arrangements with Canada for revenues from the offshore. The draft devolution agreement applies to the NWT’s onshore resources, which, if they were in a province, would be subject to the equalization cap. Treatment of revenues from the offshore will be negotiated during future discussions with Canada.
The Yukon achieved devolution from Canada in 2003. Their net fiscal benefit provisions are different from those in our draft AIP, but not better. We have compared the results using the Yukon formula to the provisions of our draft AIP, under the number of NWT revenue scenarios, and the arrangements in the AIP always come out ahead.
Some provinces, like Alberta, keep 100 percent of their resource revenues, but this is because Alberta’s revenues are high enough that the province is not entitled to equalization payments and, therefore, there is nothing for the federal government to claw back. If, sometime in the future, the royalties received by the GNWT are high enough that we don’t qualify for formula financing, we will also get to keep 100 percent of resource revenues.
In the meantime, every year that passes without a devolution agreement means that we forego another year’s net fiscal benefit. Over the last five years, the NWT has lost $208.6 million in potential net fiscal benefit.
Finally, since we cannot know how the world might change in the future, the net fiscal benefit provisions will not be written in stone. The AIP contemplates periodic reviews of the net fiscal benefit. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Minister responsible for Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. The Department of Education, Culture and Employment has successfully established the social assistance appeal committees to serve all Northwest Territories communities. The committees hear appeals for income assistance and child care user subsidy programs. Getting these local appeal committees now ensures that Northerners have access to a fair and impartial appeals process within their home communities.
To date we have appointed 87 committee members to hear appeals. There are still spaces available for more committee members in some communities. I encourage the public and my fellow Members to support residents in applying and participating on the social assistance appeal committees.
This was not a small task. In three short months, staff were able to solicit nominations to appoint and train committee members. This involved the development of a train the trainer appeal committee manual and to travel to communities to deliver the training sessions. I also want to thank the departments of Human Resources and Justice for their assistance with processing the appointments. This ensures that department clients receive local and quick access to a fair and equitable appeals process.
I encourage Members to reassure their constituents that the community appeals process is available to review their claims in their home communities.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Minister responsible for Industry, Tourism and Investment, Mr. Bob McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In a modern world filled with laptop computers, cell phones and iPods, traditional life skills such as trapping and boat building that have served our people so well in the past are in danger of being lost. But the Government of the Northwest Territories is taking action to ensure this doesn’t happen and that is why I want to take a few moments to talk about the success of our Take a Kid Trapping Program.
The program began in 2002, and from the beginning, it’s been built on one simple premise: learning by doing.
The program is a cooperative effort between the departments of Industry, Tourism and Investment, Municipal and Community Affairs, and Environment and Natural Resources.
It is often delivered through aboriginal organizations in schools, and our elders are an integral part of the program. They teach our young people the skills and knowledge that was passed down to them. In turn, these young people gain something you can’t put a price on. They gain a greater sense of pride in who they are and they learn how traditional life skills can be a useful part of their lives.
The program has clearly struck a chord with our people. Since 2002, almost 6,000 school-aged youth have participated in a variety of Take a Kid Trapping projects. Demands for these types of activities grow every year. In fact, we have now developed a sister program, the Take a Kid Harvesting Program, to help us meet the demand.
An example of some of the successful traditional life skills projects that took place in 2009-2010 include: a traditional moosehide boat project in Tulita and a birch syrup collection project held in the North and South Slave regions.
The work we are doing is also being recognized at the national level. In June, the Fur Institute of Canada announced the recipient of its Jim Bourque Award: Industry, Tourism and Investment’s very own Guy Erasmus. This is the most prestigious national award given in the Canadian trapping industry, and Mr. Erasmus was specifically recognized for his work in the design, development and implementation of the Take a Kid Trapping Program.
---Applause
I’m pleased Mr. Erasmus was able to join us in the visitors gallery today. Guy, you’ve done a great job with this program and so has everyone else who has been involved with it.
On behalf of the Government of the Northwest Territories, I want to thank you for the excellent service you have provided the Canadian trapping industry and the people of the Northwest Territories.
Mr. Speaker, the Take a Kid Trapping Program is an example of steps this government is taking in building our future, one of the five strategic initiatives of the 16th Legislative Assembly. Our work in this area is leading to a greater sense of pride among our young people in their culture and their heritage. It is assisting us in achieving our goals of developing healthy, educated people and sustainable, vibrant communities. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The issue that I’d like to speak on today in regard to the area of housing is the area of maximum rent rates in every community in the Northwest Territories. What we’re finding is that in most communities, their rates are different from one community to the other.
I’ll illustrate a situation I have in my riding in regard to the community of Tsiigehtchic. To rent a five-bedroom unit in Tsiigehtchic would cost you $3,700, which is the maximum rate. Yet, half an hour down the road in Fort McPherson, the same five-bedroom unit is rented for $2,500, a difference of $1,300 between two communities, yet they’re only half an hour apart.
Mr. Speaker, there are other situations through the Northwest Territories such as Paulatuk where you pay the maximum rate of $4,600 compared to, say, a rate in Hay River or even Yellowknife, which is around $1,700 or $1,800 for a five-bedroom unit.
Mr. Speaker, I think it’s time that we looked at this situation similar to how we’re dealing with the Northwest Territories power rates, where the power rates were previously based on a community-by-community rate, which was called a community postal rate, but again, through the discussions with Members in this House and the residents of the Northwest Territories, we decided to take that issue head on and consider community rates by way of diesel communities, hydro communities and, again, that is going to benefit everyone.
I think it’s important, Mr. Speaker, that we do the similar arrangement when it comes to rental of housing units in the Northwest Territories, and if that means we have to do it gradually, I suggest that we look at regional-based rates for housing units in the specific regions, either the Beaufort-Delta region, the Sahtu, North Slave, South Slave, and eventually work our way to a territorial rate throughout the Northwest Territories.
Mr. Speaker, we have some 2,200 units in the Northwest Territories that are operated by the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation and the local housing authorities, but again, we receive a subsidy for those units from CMHC to the tune of $28 million to operate those 2,200 units. So again, Mr. Speaker, I think it’s important enough that we seriously take a look at this issue. I will be asking the Minister questions on this later. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I want to describe the tragic consequences created by our housing policies by providing the experience in just one family’s life.
Last Thursday a woman at my Dettah constituency meeting explained her situation this way: A mother of five children, aged two to ten, she and her spouse lived in public housing. Based on their combined modest incomes, rent was pegged at $1,200 per month, or 30 percent of gross earnings, equivalent to about 40 percent of take-home pay. Groceries are $1,200 a month for five kids and two adults. Add $1,200 for rent on a household take-home income of $3,200 and that leaves a family of seven with $800 a month for all the other necessities of life. These are the working poor and, not surprisingly, they couldn’t make it on this income.
When the Housing Corporation switched rent collection to what everyone in Dettah calls “the welfare office,” my constituent went every month to Yellowknife to personally deliver her documents. You can’t fax them in. She quit going when she got sick of “being treated like dirt.” That’s when arrears began mounting. She now owes $50,000. She has filed her husband’s last four years’ pay stubs with Housing and has been waiting since June to have the arrears rolled back. In the meantime, she and her spouse are both paying down arrears, taking $200 a month more out of their $800 disposable income. Based on her current deduction, she will clear her arrears in about 25 years.
So how did my constituent get by and provide for the kids? I will tell you. Despite her young children, she started working and moved out of her own home and is now living with a friend so that household income for the rental unit would drop, making her spouse eligible for a greater rent subsidy. The net result, Mr. Speaker, we forced a mother of five children to move out on her young family. We tore a family apart, made them jump through the only hoops available to keep a roof over their kids’ heads and food on the table.
This is beyond tragic. It is inhumane. I could go down the streets in my riding and find an equally desperate story at almost every public housing doorstep.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement. Mahsi.
---Unanimous consent granted
This isn’t about theory or process or policy reform; this is about misery and a broken home this government caused with poorly considered, ultimately destructive operational changes.
I will be asking the Minister questions on how any of us can hold our heads up and what we plan to do about this. I will ask the House to consider a motion later today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Following my colleagues, I, too, will be talking about housing.
Over the last year I have had an opportunity to get into a number of the communities. In pretty much every community we go to, one of the issues that comes up over and over again is housing, whether it is about affordability, accessibility or suitability.
There has been a lot of talk about arrears and vacant units and rent costs, as well as lack of flexibility within the Housing Corporation itself when it is delivering programs. To the Minister’s credit, I have heard some movement from the Minister. He is committed to getting rid of the vacancies, which I applaud. He is committed to working with the LHOs to find out whose arrears are real and whose arrears may not be real based on the move to Education and back. I applaud the Minister for that.
But one area I haven’t seen a lot of movement on, and I think there is certainly room for movement, is flexibility. I will give you an example of what I’m talking about.
Earlier this month I attended the Prospects North conference. While I was there, I was talking to an economic development officer from one of the smaller communities. He indicated to me that a mining company had been in touch with him. He was looking for 13 labourers to come and work for a three-week period. This mining company was going to pay quite well. The EDO officer went out into the community to find people and there were enough people to fill those 13 temporary jobs, but he couldn’t find anybody who was willing to take the jobs even though the money was good, because every one of them was concerned that if they took the job, the rent would immediately go up and they would be working for nothing or very little. Five dollars, $10 or even $100 to go and do three weeks of hard labour when you can stay home and watch TV and not be any better, or worse off, lacks common sense.
Our programs have led people to make these types of decisions, which is unfortunate. We need to be working with people to get them back out into the workforce, where appropriate and where possible.
Later today I will be talking more during the motions about flexibility that this government, this Housing Corporation, needs to put in place to ensure that we are providing incentives to people to go back to work, and we are encouraging people to go back to work even if that means we have to not do immediate collections once people start working or tier a payment system back into place. There is room for flexibility here. We need to find it and we need to work with our clients to help them get back into the workforce and get off public housing. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. The importance of this day is that we as Regular MLAs will let government know once again of how important housing issues are to our people.
Last week I spoke in the House about how residents are having difficulty being approved for NWT Housing Corporation programming. Many of my constituents are frustrated, because they cannot get assistance due to the eligibility criteria. To be eligible, a person or family cannot make too much money or too little.
This window of core need income threshold guidelines, I feel, is very small. The same problem exists for homeowners who want to apply for the CARE program, the repair program for assistance.
Mr. Speaker, our government made a firm commitment to addressing the housing needs of NWT residents. Studies show that families do better when they are living in suitable housing. That, in turn, strengthens the quality of life in our communities.
I urge the Minister responsible for the NWT Housing Corporation to review the guidelines and procedures of the eligibility. We are turning away people who can afford mortgages and turning away the hardworking families who just fall short of the eligibility. Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to join my colleagues today in talking about housing.
Having been a Member of this House for the past several years, I must say I’ve been witness to some very bad and costly decisions that governments have made over the years. One of the most ridiculous and bizarre moves came when the last government decided to transfer responsibility for social policy and the $34 million to administer it from the Housing Corporation to ECE. The fact is, Regular Members in the last government told the government not to do it, but it didn’t matter because, Mr. Speaker, a funny thing seems to happen when Ministers travel south to F/P/T meetings. They come back with some ideas that their provincial counterparts are trying, and they think, wow, I’m going to try this out on the people back home.
The problem is, Mr. Speaker, oftentimes these ideas may work in southern Canada, but applied back here in our reality they are a complete flop. Mr. Speaker, make no mistake about it, this decision was a disaster and its shockwaves are still causing untold damage to many of our residents.
As if the decision wasn’t bad enough, Mr. Speaker, ECE had to hire 12 more people to deliver a program that was already being delivered by the housing authorities, and incurred an additional $1.2 million in operational expense as a result. Yes, it is still hard to believe any government, in their right mind, would have made that call.
Finally, this government has done the right thing and put responsibility for social housing back where it belongs. But, Mr. Speaker, this government has taken its time when it comes to reversing the damage the transfer has caused. The money was not immediately transferred back and I have yet to see an HR plan for dealing with the 12 positions that ECE had to hire to administer the program. This decision has cost this government millions and millions of dollars when it did not have to.
Mr. Speaker, this is consensus government. The last Regular Member’s Caucus told government not to proceed. Motions were passed and ignored.
Mr. Speaker, lessons need to be learned, responsibility has to be taken and in the case of the transfer of the Social Housing Policy, I sure hope Cabinet was taking some good notes. Mr. Speaker, they’ll have to listen to the wishes of the Regular Members because we speak for the people of the Northwest Territories and those who we represent. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As you can see, we’ve chosen today, as a group of resident Members, to talk about housing, the delivery of housing in the Northwest Territories.
Mr. Speaker, it is a daunting and big challenge to balance the interests of the people who need housing, with our policies, with trying to reward people who are diligent and who are trying their hardest, and those who sometimes are a frustration to the system, and perhaps even may I go as far as to say may abuse the good heartedness and the good policies of this government. It is trying to find that balance of rewarding the people who need housing with housing units and who are responsible and, at the same time, Mr. Speaker, having enough flexibility and enough balance in the system that we are good stewards of these resources as a government.
Mr. Speaker, not only is this a challenging task for the Minister and the folks at the Housing Corporation, but also when you get down to the local housing organizations. I know that people are doing their best, but these are challenging situations. Every tenant is an individual and their situation is individual. It’s very difficult to make across-the-board policies, because sometimes things happen. I’ve stood in this House many times and given examples of people who have moved away, who’ve come back to town, who have to now wait for the six-month waiting period to get into social housing. There are many, many instances where I believe we need to give someone, whether that is one person or our managers, the discretionary latitude to make judgment calls based on the circumstances before them. It is not all neat and tidy. As diverse as our clients are in housing, so are our communities.
I see the need in small communities where the Housing Corporation is the only landlord in town -- that is one scenario -- to market communities where people do have options and they require housing. But the policies in these two very diverse sets of circumstances in communities are also, in my opinion, not significantly enough taken into consideration with the creation of policy and how we deliver housing in the Northwest Territories.
These are challenging situations. I don’t pretend to have all the answers. I would like to thank the Housing Corporation for the work that they do and also the LHOs for the good work they do on the front line on our behalf.
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Beaulieu.
Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. [English translation not provided.]
I’d like to start by quoting some people across the NWT:
“Houses are built and sit empty, the system doesn’t work...”
“Housing is beyond frustration for small communities.”
“You are losing money just letting houses sit empty.”
“There seems to be a serious flaw in the approach, if it means housing, communities develop their own policies...that may be the best thing to do.”
“Maybe direct funding for First Nations from the federal government is the way to go.”
Those were quotes from the Dene National Assembly this summer in Fort Good Hope. As you can see, the First Nations are not happy with the way things are run by the NWT Housing Corporation.
There was a lot of talk about communities developing their own programs, and programs that would work in their communities, and programs that would address housing issues at the community level. The communities do not understand why a senior on a fixed income well below $20,000 per year lives in a unit that’s deteriorating every year and the NWT Housing Corporation advises them there is no money, yet they see $300,000 homes the Housing Corporation has built sitting empty for years.
The NWT Housing Corporation must change its mindset and actually develop programs that will help people. The Housing Corporation must not be about spending money to build as many houses as possible. It should be about spending money to help people. The Housing Corporation must not develop policies and programs that do not work and stick with those policies and programs no matter what.
As you can see, the Housing Corporation can paint a house and change the windows even if the roof has blown off the house, because the program says to paint the house and change the window. In other words, the NWT Housing Corporation has removed common sense from their delivery and only follows a set of policies that do not work.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I also want to talk about housing in Yellowknife.
According to the 2009 Housing Needs Survey, there are 6,742 households in Yellowknife. While the city is often overlooked in discussions about housing in the NWT, I note that this is where most of the households are located in the North.
It is true Yellowknife housing is different from the housing issues in other NWT communities. The survey identified that 14 percent of Yellowknife households have affordability issues. That means there are 928 households struggling to come up with that 30 percent or more to help cover the costs of things like mortgage or rent, electricity, water, heating, and even property taxes. You can see that clearly Yellowknife has an affordability issue.
In Yellowknife there are 289 public housing units. I see in the proposed capital plan that housing is proposing to replace one multi-family unit and they’re looking at retrofitting 25 family units. These actions don’t seem to be targeting the affordability issue at all.
Some may wonder why should we care about affordability as an issue compared to other things such as suitability and, certainly, adequacy. However, we know that the lack of affordability in Yellowknife means that when someone was thinking about moving to the NWT -- it’s either for a job or to unite with family -- they can certainly be overwhelmed by the housing challenges and consider changing their plans. We all know that the cost of living is very difficult.
The same is true in small and regional communities. If a family from one regional centre with employment, perhaps maybe even at a mine, thinks about moving to Yellowknife and that becomes impossible because of the high cost, they can easily relocate to Edmonton or Grande Prairie because they can find affordable housing. Affordable housing, I say again.
Finally, I could go on at length about the accessibility to barrier-free housing here in Yellowknife and in the North for our seniors and disabled community. I am very concerned about the suitability and adequacy as to what we’re doing for the people of the North, because I think we are denying them a true, fair living of a much deserved quality of life. This challenge affects every one of us in this Assembly and in the North.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The honourable Member for Nunakput, Mr. Jacobson.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members of this House hear no end of problems with public housing. Every community in my riding hears the same story. What really gets me, though, is when this government discourages people from working. For example, if you live in public housing in Sachs Harbour and you get a job, you’re going to pay what they call economic rent. I don’t know what economic rent is all about, because hardly anybody can afford it. We’re talking about $3,000 a month plus electricity and water for a three-bedroom house in Sachs Harbour, which could add up to $4,000 a month for a four-bedroom unit. That reward, where you’re lucky enough to get your job, you’ll pay as much as public housing would pay for a $750,000 home in Yellowknife. That’s a shame.
I don’t know how this NWT Housing Corporation comes up with so-called economic rent for Sachs Harbour and the communities, but fairness and affordability don’t seem to have anything to do with it. People get a new job and this kind of rent does not pay. They literally cannot afford to work.
The big problem that results is sky-high rent in public housing more than people who are in arrears with the government, basically putting people in debt with the NWT Housing Corporation as soon as they go to work. We have to do something about this. We’re always preaching about creating jobs in our small communities. If the people want to keep working, we must have a reasonable rent scale.
At the appropriate time I will have questions for the Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Jacobson. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’ve heard already today from other Members how much housing in the NWT is in difficulty. There are lots of problems: inconsistent application of guidelines, policies which are fine in theory but do not work in reality, people living rent free who have the means to pay, people quitting good jobs so their income stays down and their rent stays at a workable level, people have accumulated huge arrears because their rent assessments are incorrect or unadjusted, people denied public housing when vacant homes exist in the community, people unable to access adequate housing when their apprehended children are ready to be returned to them. The list is endless.
In numerous meetings with NWT Housing Corporation Ministers and staff over my time here -- three short years, but sometimes it feels like three very long years -- I and other Regular Members have consistently asked for flexibility in the Housing Corporation’s approach to the application of their programs and policies. I know that on more than one occasion I have asked the Minister to do an all-inclusive review of the corporation’s activities and policies.
In the 2008 Auditor General’s Report on the NWT Housing Corporation, Ms. Fraser was quite critical of the corporation. The NWT Housing Corporation presented a response to the Auditor General’s findings and I was hopeful that some comprehensive evaluation and review of the corporation’s policies and practices would come to fruition. There has not been any move in that direction and it is desperately needed, even more so since the responsibility for rent assessments was transferred back to the Housing Corporation from Education, Culture and Employment.
I did a search of Hansard and it turned up two commitments made by the Minister for the Housing Corporation made in this House, one from February 11th of this year to review programs, and later a second from May 20th to review rent scales. Both are necessary but they’re only part of what is required.
The Minister and the president of the NWT Housing Corporation must acknowledge that a thorough and comprehensive analysis of the programs, policies and procedures is overdue. They need to test the suitability of each of those for our residents. They must determine if they are still relative and appropriate at this stage of the evolution of our Territory. I believe many are not working as they should and if something’s not working, changes must be made until it does work.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to take this opportunity to recognize in the gallery some LHO managers, some tenant relations officers, some assistant managers. I had the opportunity to meet with them yesterday. I’ll tell you one thing, they’re not shy about sharing their views. That was much appreciated and it helps me do my job a lot better.
Joining us in the gallery today are: from Ulukhaktok, Sadie Joss; Elaine Blake, manager in Tsiigehtchic; Jim White from the Yellowknife Housing Authority; Stephan Folker from the Yellowknives Dene First Nation; Agatha Laboucan from Lutselk’e Housing Authority; Veryl Gruben from the Tuktoyaktuk Housing Association; Elizabeth Ann McKay from the Fort Resolution Housing Authority; Melanie Louie from the Hamlet of Fort Liard Social Housing; Kim Olsen, manager of the Fort Smith Housing Authority; Donna McLean is a manager of the Hay River Housing Authority; Roland Rogers is the manager of the Aklavik Housing Association; Keith Dowling is the manager of the Paulatuk Housing Association; Ms. Rosemary Vandell is the manager of the Fort Providence Housing Association; Betty Firth is the manager of the Fort McPherson Housing Association; Eleanor Mitchell-Firth, also here from Fort McPherson Housing Association; Rose Dryneck here from Behchoko. We also have with us Angela Grandjambe, manager of Fort Good Hope Housing; and Phebie Kenny, manager of the Deline Housing Association. I would like to welcome you all to the gallery and I hope you’re enjoying the proceedings.
The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Beaulieu.
I’d like to recognize Agatha Laboucan and Elizabeth Ann McKay from the local housing organizations in Lutselk’e and Fort Resolution.
The honourable Member for Monfwi, Mr. Lafferty.
I would like to recognize the second-year Aurora College social work students coming in for a tour. Recognizing them and welcoming them to the gallery, to the Assembly. Amanda Anthony from Yellowknife; Stefany Bulmer from Yellowknife; Billi-Rai Driscoll from Yellowknife; Fay Erasmus from Behchoko; Stephanie Hiedl from Yellowknife, and Inuvik, I believe; Christine King from Yellowknife; Bianca Kotchea from Fort Liard; Melissa McDonald from Inuvik; Savanna McKay-Larocque from Hay River; Julia Naedzo from Behchoko; Jaleesa Paulette from Fort Smith; Elizabeth Purchase from Yellowknife; Pamela Weeks-Beaton from Yellowknife and formerly Behchoko; and Bruce Stewart, instructor of social work at Aurora College. I would also like to recognize one of my constituents, Rose Dryneck from Behchoko.
The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
It’s my pleasure today to recognize Mr. Jim White, who is representing the Yellowknife Housing Authority. We all have housing in our Yellowknife ridings, so I know he works on our behalf. I’d like to thank him for that.
Following up on your welcome of Mr. Whitford, I’d like to say it’s good to see you here again.
