Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Members have the opportunity to speak once per session to any topic for as long as they wish or on any number of topics. As a senior Member of this Assembly, I am taking this opportunity today to speak about the state of the 16th Legislative Assembly. I do this with the hope to bring to light information and answers to questions that I truly believe are on the minds of many Northerners.
I am not sure that our residents who are watching the performance of this government would be able to fully articulate what the problems are. But through communications with constituents, through the editorials, letters to the editors in our newspapers, media feedback, it is clear that there is much angst about the direction or lack of direction in this government.
I find it pretty unbelievable myself, and I have seen a lot in the past 13 years. Much of what the public hears is portrayed through the media. I appreciate the role that media plays in the public and the democratic process of government, but much more goes on behind the scenes than most people ever want to discuss.
Governments evolve with heated eyes, in the early days of the federally appointed Members to our fully-elected Legislature, the reduction from 24 Members, including Nunavut, to the 14 post-division, to the 19 post-Friends of Democracy court challenge.
When I came into the Legislative Assembly as a working Member in 1995, I saw things that I thought were wrong and I did what I thought was natural, try to be the voice of people who expected accountable, transparent, honest and responsible government leadership. Representing and capturing the sentiment of public concern and opinion is just as important today. It is perhaps easier than people would expect for Members to lose focus on why we are here. It is not about us, it is about the people we represent. It is not about power, but it is about the trust that people place in us to keep their well-being at the core of all of our actions and decisions. We can easily slip into thinking that we know best, but while leadership is about making decisions, it cannot be done in the absence of constantly going back to the people who put us here, placing their confidence in us. It is a very serious trust that goes to the heart of our time honoured traditions of democracy. To this issue of the 16th Legislative Assembly, I offer my observations from my own vantage point, but hopefully these observations will resonate to the people in the public who are wondering how this government lost its way.
Every one of the 19 Members of this Assembly were elected by their constituents and everyone must be willing to serve in whatever capacity contributes to a meaningful and effective leadership to our Territory. When we gathered here for the first time we chose from amongst ourselves those we believed to have the abilities, skills, motivation and experience to bring leadership in various areas of responsibility. We do not delegate those responsibilities unconditionally. We do so, with the confidence, that our voices, as the voices of our constituents, will be respectfully engaged. That is what capable and responsible leadership, especially in our consensus style of government, strives to do: engaging, hearing the voices of all Members, and harnessing the various and unique perspectives of Members from diverse regions and backgrounds. When this attention to the role of effective leadership is lost, the whole institution suffers, but, most importantly, the confidence of the electorate is evaded, balance is lost and things begin to deteriorate.
During good times of economic stability and opportunity, access to employment, quality health care and education opportunities, there is a sense of purpose and progress and often there is diminished focus on the workings of government. But when there are uncertain times as experienced recently in unprecedented proportion, people become much more acutely aware of the leadership and look to that leadership to bring sound judgment and stewardship to those difficult challenges. To that end, it is time to take stock of where the 16th Assembly has been and where it should be placing its focus and energies.
At the risk of sounding negative, I first need to articulate the events that have led me to lose confidence in the leadership of this government. When we elected our Executive Council I had high hopes for our four-year term in office. I supported Mr. Roland for Premier, as I told him I would, even before we were elected to the 16th Assembly, wherein his Premiership was contemplated during the 15th Assembly.
I want to talk about those early days in my attempts to get answers to pretty straightforward questions. I asked about the Deh Cho Bridge. Under repeated and pointed questioning, the Premier, for the entire first sitting of our Legislature, failed to disclose that the contract for the bridge had been signed off three days before the October 31st election. Further questioning about the details of the Concession Agreement and our government’s liability to that point were met with vague responses. I thought the undertaking of the largest capital project in our Territory’s history required publically aired scrutiny, but Mr. Roland’s leadership on this issue sadly failed the test of openness and forthrightness. I started to wonder then if we had made a mistake.
Today with the downturn of economic activity, I am very doubtful if the main forecasts that formed the basis of the business case of the Deh Cho Bridge will materialize in the near future, putting the financial responsibility for this piece of infrastructure, that few wanted or thought we needed, right into the lap of this government. Might I remind Members that it was $165 million?
As is the usual practice, Members of the 16th Assembly got together to develop a strategy to reflect the priorities we had so recently heard from our constituents. These priorities were detailed in our Strategic Plan: Northerners Working Together. Imagine our surprise when our albeit fiscally conservative newly-elected Premier started on the path of reductions and layoffs, that MLAs first heard of as word spread through the bureaucracy and onto the street. That is when Regular Members begged the Premier to be proactive in his communications and develop a strategy to explain the reasons for his assertion that we needed to reduce government spending by $135 million. A half-hearted resistant attempt was made at a press conference, but it was less than convincing.
Repeatedly, the Premier told Members that communications is not his thing. It still is not his thing and it has caused us untold problems. Commitments to inform Members of potentially affected employees targeted in the layoff exercise went unfulfilled, leaving the Regular Members to find out that letters to potentially affected employees went out the day after session recessed, as we met constituents on the street who found it barely believable that we did not know about the specifics of their notifications. Strangely, the Premier himself didn’t seem to know what was going on, or the actions of his staff in the more senior positions. These kinds of breaches in communication led to several face-to-face recitings of our concerns and how they affected the meaningful role for input from Regular Members.
After these talks we went away, hoping for the best, only later to find out that our concerns were either not heard, understood or taken seriously, we remained somewhat optimistic until the next failure to communicate; a pattern that emerged in very serious doubts about Mr. Roland’s capacity to lead this government.
His demeanour was anything but inclusive. He was defensive and he seemed unable to accept any criticism, even of a constructive nature, passing off attempts to communicate frankly at other Members’ political ambitions. In other words, get in line, stay quiet or you will be tarred as only driven and motivated by personal political ambition. This creates a very dysfunctional working environment.
Mr. Roland seemed incapable of taking responsibility for any of these failures and the only excuse he could offer for his shortcomings was to only try to angrily beat down and counter any criticism. His utter disgust as Regular Members stood together to affect changes to the ’08-09 budget was physically obvious and not becoming of a confident and professional leader. The inability to directly and clearly answer questions with answers was, to say the least, tiresome. Case in point, the questions about the Ministerial Benefits Policy which will be debated hopefully later in this session, which he conveniently laid at the feet of the previous Assembly, seemingly forgetting that he sat at the Cabinet table as the Finance Minister in that government. Of course, now we have a better understanding why he was so distracted and inattentive, failing to provide leadership to his own Cabinet and staff as it became evident that the right hand didn’t know what the left hand was doing. Case in point is our government’s response to a very important report undertaken by the federal government called the McCrank Report. It would appear that after repeated requests to the Premier’s office for a report on the status of our government’s response the Premier’s office was unaware when, in fact, another Minister had responded on behalf of our government weeks earlier.
That is the kind of dysfunctional leadership that Regular Members have to deal with everyday in this government. I don’t imagine it’s very easy for Cabinet Ministers to operate under these circumstances either. I don’t accept that as an excuse, however, for the absolute mishandling of the consultation and communication surrounding the proposed changes to the supplementary health benefits. I was put on the spot in a chamber of commerce meeting before Christmas, again caught completely unaware of this initiative as a Regular Member of this government. The unbelievable, unnecessary stress this has caused is an absolute affront to the citizens in our society most deserving of our care and attention, those families caring for members with chronic and often serious conditions and seniors on fixed incomes in a time of escalating costs of living. Hopefully, due to the strident and organized efforts of the affected citizens, this situation will be addressed before it’s too late to convince people not to leave the North.
Another completely mishandled initiative to date is the Refocusing Government Initiative and the board reform proposed by the Minister of Finance. I’ve heard the interviews where there’s no doubt that Mr. Miltenberger has taken a high and heavy-handed non-consultative or informative approach to reducing the number of boards in our Territory. Quote: “We have 70 boards and we’re going to have seven boards.” I want to say here today, Mr. Speaker: I don’t think so. The consolidation of health, education and housing boards in all regions: I don’t think so. The cookie-cutter approach, whether in the Beau-del or the South Slave: I don’t think so.
Just when we think it can’t be any worse, if there is some consensus government we get a briefing on the Opportunities Fund. I will not speak to the applicant but to the process or lack of process laid out by our government. We had all heard of the Aurora Fund back in the late ‘90s, a fund derived from immigrants who invest in the country of their choice to which they immigrate. These funds were then distributed to Canadian jurisdictions and in the case of the Aurora Fund, managed then, arm’s length from government, by a society and a fund manager. This fund, at some point, became passive, merely collecting a modest interest until federal government insiders who knew of the fund shared the information with companies that they represented. So where is the policy that would have protected the good name of the applicants and the impartiality of the Finance and ITI Minister? Again, sloppy, arrogant leadership ownership that didn’t consult with Regular Members before decisions were made and didn’t create a transparent application-based process for loan approvals. The idea of moving the... Immigrant Investment Opportunities Fund from passive to active at this time of economic downturn is a good idea, but loaning $130 million to a couple of companies creates a perception of conflict and in reality of a liability to the resources of this GNWT. Heaven forbid that any recipients would get into financial difficulty, but in spite of all due diligence, if this were to happen, be sure that our government would be left with the option of either taking drastic measures to act on security pledge or find the losses from within.
How about diversifying the risk for the government and helping more than two northern companies. I told the ITI Minister that he would be a hero if he stood up in the House and announced to Northerners that our government was borrowing $100 million from that fund and making it available to business to get through some difficult times on an interest-free or minimal interest basis through some kind of a revolving fund.
The process, like the backing of the Deh Cho Bridge Project, is flawed and in that, although legislation exists enabling the establishment of these process, Regular Members have no ability to be included or involved in decisions that potentially put our limited financial resources at some level of risk even if the loans are secured.
The people of the Northwest Territories aren’t blind. They see what is going on with this government and I do thank many of them for the e-mails that have been coming in, both the positive and the negative. People are desperate for leadership and we have been trying to do our part on this side of the House in consensus government to provide that leadership. But, Mr. Speaker, sadly it has been one offence after another. There is fear on the part of some Members on this side of the House to stand up for fear of being branded by the people that we elected to Cabinet, the people that we elected branding us as politically ambitious. That’s a bit of a laugh for anyone who has any recollection of the scene that played out by two angry Regular Members who didn’t make it into the Kakfwi Cabinet. Their anger continues today. Our concerns are met with threats, intimidation and bullying.
We should have a Premier with a proven track record of experience and the skills needed especially during this difficult time ahead. What are the Premier’s reasons for being in that office? When it came to light before Christmas that the Premier was having an affair with one of our clerks, he should have done the honourable thing then and resigned. With all due respect, I didn’t out the Premier, but if I had, I didn’t know that it was my duty as a Regular Member to keep secret from the public the Premier’s affair with our staff.
Some would say that this is a time for stability, and I agree. But how can we have stability when so many Northerners and so many Members, including me, have lost confidence in this Cabinet? I don’t mean all this Cabinet, Mr. Speaker, but some kind of review process has to take place in order to reconfirm our confidence in those Members that we support. Why hasn’t anyone involved in this Cabinet stepped forward to say that they know the difference between right and wrong? We have lowered the bar so far as to allow this Premier to stay in office. We are heading into rough waters in terms of our economy and we need leadership that will turn their full attention to the needs of our constituents and not be preoccupied with their own personal problems.
There is still two and a half years left in the term of this government. How much longer can we carry on in this state of dysfunction? The Premier and the Finance Minister don’t get it. The real issues facing our constituents need to be met with leadership that is able to listen and able to respond to those needs. The cost of living is a major concern and there is no reason why this government can’t deliver affordable short-term assistance to mitigate these pressures. The large, long-term, multi-million-dollar mega projects are well and good, but people in all of our communities are looking to our government for much desired leadership that affects them where they live.
I hope that this statement today helps the public to understand my frustration as a Member. These are only a few of the instances that I have listed that we have encountered in this first 16 months and although there are several hardworking and capable Ministers, the lack of leadership and the demeanor from the Premier and the Finance Minister has brought us to a very sad state of affairs.
It’s a good time, I mean it is not a good time. It is a sad time for consensus government. I, for one, will not stand by and say nothing as certain Members bring contempt to the commitment we all make as honourable Members. You can sweep things under the carpet but it doesn’t take away the smell.
It is my job, Mr. Speaker, to ask questions, even the hard questions, and I could just coast along here and not care about this government, but I do care. I care about the government, I care about the North and I care about the issues of the people that we serve. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t be here. I don’t want to see us lower the bar any further, Mr. Speaker, and I felt it was time for me today to clearly put on the record what my concerns are as a Member of this Assembly.
