Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for the lead Minister responsible for refocusing government. A common question I’ve been getting from constituents and northern residents when it comes to board reform is why. What are we trying to fix? Today I would like the Minister to please tell me why Cabinet is proceeding with board reform and specifically what the problem is that we’re trying to fix.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Minister responsible for refocusing government, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d just like to point out initially that what was played in terms of my first comments this morning were from October 2008, followed at some point later by an interview with myself in Whitehorse. So that may have caused some of the concern for the Member for Great Slave.
The issue of board reform has been identified as a priority of the 16th Legislative Assembly. It has been worked on for over a decade. The social programs area was one that was determined to be, in our opinion, significantly over-governed with 70 boards for health and social services, education, and housing. We set out with an initial concept to try to rationalize that board structure, building on a regional structure that’s there. It’s been a priority that’s been with us for these two Assemblies.
Just as a note, when I made reference to the comments made they were actually from the comments made while in the Yukon, not the comments from October 2008. I didn’t really hear an answer as to what is the problem we’re trying to fix. Going back to the press release from February 16th from the Minister, as well as…Sorry. Based on the unedited Hansard and the Minister’s press release from February 16th where he confirmed the next steps in board reform, it sounded like Cabinet was not committed to a specific model. It sounded to me like there was recognition that regions have different realities.
Do you have a question, Mr. Abernethy?
The question is coming. Okay. So then today, and that’s what I made reference to before about the comments that he made while in the Yukon, it sounded like you’re still pursuing 70 to seven. To me this seems like a contradiction. Could the Minister please clarify the Cabinet’s position on this issue? Is 70 to seven Cabinet’s preferred model?
It’s the model that we’ve moved forward with to this point trying to do the work to prove how it could be done, the impact of it being done. We recognize that it’s going to require significant discussion, which is why we picked April as the milestone date to see and look at the work that’s been done and then decide on any changes that are going to be necessary and on the way forward with the broad issue of board reform.
So for clarity, the answer is yes?
For clarity, the answer is that’s where we started. We recognize that with the regional differences and discussion that’s going to ensue, that’s not necessarily where we’re going to end up. It was our starting point. We put it out there. We’ve been looking at if it’s doable and if it’s doable what will it look like. We’ve asked for feedback and we’ve been receiving that. We know that there are other options out there. April is going to take us to the point where we can have that discussion of how we move forward.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final supplementary, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Could the Minister tell me what other models for board reform they are currently investigating?
We considered whether we would look at going with territorial boards only, which is not a model that made sense to us in terms of removing control from the regions and communities. We agreed from the very start as an Assembly that the status quo needed improving. The one model we had been looking at that seemed to have applicability was the regional service model as it’s been set up over the years in Tlicho.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.
