Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
WHEREAS pursuant to subsection 61.(1) of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act, the Legislative Assembly chooses a Premier and recommends to the Commissioner the appointment of Members to the Executive Council;
AND WHEREAS pursuant to subsection 61.(2) of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act, the persons appointed hold office during the pleasure of the Legislative Assembly;
AND WHEREAS many events have transpired that have eroded the confidence of the general public and Members of this Assembly in the performance of the Premier and Executive Council;
AND WHEREAS this Assembly is only 16 months into a four-year mandate;
AND WHEREAS it is essential that this Assembly has a Premier and Executive Council that acts in the best interests of the electorate we collectively represent;
AND WHEREAS the role of Regular Members in consensus government must be respected and full participation should be encouraged and seen as beneficial to the constructive functioning of government in the best interests of all NWT residents;
AND WHEREAS a full Territorial Leadership Committee meeting would afford the Premier and Executive Council Members a free and secret vote to confirm confidence in Members of the Executive Council;
AND WHEREAS such a vote would allow the 16th Legislative Assembly the opportunity to re-establish confidence in the Premier and Executive Council;
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, that pursuant to Subsection 61.(2) of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act, this Assembly formally revokes the pleasure of the Assembly from the appointments of the Premier and all Members of the Executive Council effective Monday, February 9, 2009, at 1:30 p.m. MST;
AND FURTHER, that this Assembly recommends that a Premier and Executive Council be chosen without delay and that the Commissioner be notified of the recommended appointments at the earliest opportunity.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. There’s a motion on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion. The Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have brought this motion forward as the chair of the Priorities and Planning committee. I do support the motion and, Mr. Speaker, yesterday I spoke quite extensively in this Legislature about where I feel the 16th Assembly has got to this way and it is today where the workings of this Assembly seem to be dysfunctional and not in the best interest of the people of the Northwest Territories. There is a great long list of junctures and incidents and workings that could be recited here, but I gave quite a lengthy list of those yesterday. What I would prefer to do today is allow Regular Members and Cabinet Ministers to speak to this motion and at the appropriate time, I will conclude debate on the motion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. To the seconder of the motion, Mr. Krutko.
Mr. Speaker, as the seconder of this motion, I have been here for some 14 years, four terms, and I’ve seen several incidents where the executive branch of this government has totally ignored and disrespected Members on this side of the House. In regard to the issues at hand, in regard to supplementary health benefits, income support, support reform, motions that were passed unanimously in this House by Members on this side of the House which directed the government to seriously deal with these fundamental issues that were affecting residents of the Northwest Territories and totally ignoring the issues on this side of the House.
Mr. Speaker, the conduct of the Premier in regards to this incident, we are all aware of the fundamental breach of confidence when it comes to the workings of this Legislature. We have three levels of government; the judiciary, the executive and the Legislature. Each of those play a very important role in regards to how we do our jobs. It is very sad to have to say here today and we are now having most of our meetings in camera without the clerks at our meetings because of the incident that occurred. For myself, that was a fundamental breach of what we are supposed to do. Those individuals play a very important role to assist us in doing our jobs.
We have a very important job in regards to the government’s committee to review the Legislative Assembly’s direction to review the language legislation after five years, in which the clerk at the time played a very important role in assisting the committee to do our work. Because of the incident that had occurred, it fundamentally undermined the committee’s work and responsibility of due diligence in ensuring that we do have a report that really makes a difference to this House.
Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of fundamental challenges that we face. Again, we as a Legislature, as I stated in my statement today, show that we really care for the underprivileged people in our society in regards to people who are struggling to heat their homes. They are struggling to even get eligibility for income support because of situations where they either did not go into an office, had an argument with an income support worker or because they basically had someone living with them taking care of an elder. I think it is fundamental as a government that we do have to show that we are providing good benefits.
Mr. Speaker, the issue that I have is the deterioration of respect that Members on this side of the House be involved in critical decisions such as the $34 million loan that was given, and under here there’s a $60 million loan that is being looked at, and then the application in regards to the power review of the $80 million purchase by ATCO Power with no involvement of this side of the House whatsoever and then full speed ahead on those issues, especially when it comes to board reform. Again, the land claim organizations in my region are negotiating self-government. The Inuvialuit and the Gwich’in are in the process of negotiating self-government to look at what type of structures they want to negotiate for themselves and not be dictated by a government telling them that this process is going to change halfway through negotiations. We will have a system that is basically a service board for the communities and be carrying that opportunity to those aboriginal organizations.
The other issue, Mr. Speaker, is the whole incident that has clearly occurred. The Minister clearly stated that April 1st the board reform issue will be implemented and the same thing in regards to the question of the supplementary health benefits. September 1st is the drop dead date and they are going ahead. For me, that is not the way a government should be conducting itself and also knowing that those issues could have been pulled over on government’s process and left here with the future governments or negotiations with First Nations government did not occur. Mr. Speaker, I will be supporting this motion today. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
Mr. Speaker, a democracy is about representing the people, giving them a voice and treating them with fairness and respect towards fair, responsible and responsive government. Being an MLA, a representative of the people in the Weledeh constituency, is a huge honour and a huge responsibility. But there is one thing I most fully appreciate. It is the privilege provided to me on behalf of my people to be heard and to have my opinions and perspectives justly considered by the government.
When MLAs are elected to the Executive, their responsibilities increase. These honoured and privileged people must shoulder the extra burden of trust. This trust is associated with the extra responsibility of knowing many things not commonly known and making final decisions to a lasting benefit to all of our people. Finally, with having to assume the leadership in treating our public with respect and with ensuring them their opportunities for direct input on issues. This last responsibility, ensuring public input, is done both through ensuring that the opportunities for meaningful input from Regular MLAs is constantly realized and through providing for thoughtful consultation via the flow of thorough information and analysis in which to receive feedback.
Much of this is a matter of communication, but we cannot assume that good communication is easy or automatic. It begins with the recognition of responsibilities in this area followed by a commitment to play in these obligations in an intentional manner. To do so brings substantial rewards of good judgment, good decisions and an engaged Assembly and a public. Failure on this front is what brings us to where we are today.
Examples of these failures are numerous by now; a sorry list that’s familiar to many: the Deh Cho Bridge, reductions in personnel and spending, Strategic Initiatives Committees that we heard our Premier mention this morning -- a group of committees that, overall, produced such gobbledy gook, such pact, that we did indeed refuse to participate in them -- review of boards and agencies, the supplementary health benefits issue and its impacts on our seniors and those with pre-existing conditions, et cetera, the Opportunities Fund and so on, others that are painful to mention. The angst, the fear, the painful frustration this government has engendered amongst our public is shameful. This at a time when people are dealing with the rising cost of living and now the recession and all the normal trials and tribulations of life to date.
Mr. Speaker, we did not have the confidence of our public when they realized we, their duly elected representatives to this consensus government, were turning to them for information on what our Cabinet was doing and deciding. Things have become so dysfunctional that the person on the street was better informed about significant decisions made by our Executive Council than their own representatives.
Mr. Speaker, the judgment of our Premier in relation to his relationship with our clerk reflects poor judgment. His inability to share the responsibility for this bad judgment further undermines my confidence in his ability to be our leader.
In our Premier and some Members of our Cabinet, they put trust that was given to them in this House and failed to engage the public on crucial issues time and again. We are required to react.
The motion we have before us today is not one that is put forward lightly, Mr. Speaker. As the Premier said this morning, we have repeatedly raised our concerns, but to no avail. I and my fellow MLAs have been trying to work with this Cabinet and have voiced our concerns over and over again, but despite the Premier professing to hear our pleas, we have seen no change.
Public accountability is the keystone of a democracy and this government has shown that they are accountable to none but themselves. If we allow this to continue, we as MLAs would be failing to uphold the principles we swore an oath to protect.
As I said before, this government’s communications record is a crime against our people and it now begs some kind of final resolution. Mr. Speaker, I will be acting to perform my obligations by supporting this resolution. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Abernethy.
This is a sad day. It is unfortunate that we have to be here at all to consider a motion of this magnitude. It is unfortunate that this 16th Legislative Assembly had to get to such a negative place.
I was born and raised in the Northwest Territories. It is my home and l love it. There is no other place I would rather be. When I die, what is left of me will be buried in the ground here in the Northwest Territories.
I ran for MLA because I wanted to do good things for the people of the Northwest Territories and I still want to do good things for all of the people in the Northwest Territories. I believe in consensus government. I defend it every chance I get. Unfortunately, lately, my ability to defend it has wavered. I began to question consensus government as an institution. Can it be effective and can it work? Here’s what I know: It used to work.
As indicated earlier, I have lived in the NWT all of my life and I have paid attention to the government. I have been interested in how a consensus government works as long as I can remember. Prior to division, although there have always been minor hiccups now and again, it worked pretty well. Back then there were 24 Members. Of these, eight were appointed to the Executive Council and there were 15 considered Regular Members. With that particular division in numbers, it was critical that the Cabinet-of-the-day had to provide rational argument based on research and facts in order to get a consensus on any topic. They had to work pretty hard and engage Regular Members early on in the process, whether it was for legislation or policy development or any other political activity. As a result, there was a significant amount of two-way communication and healthy debate. Cabinet-of-the-day had to develop its policies that pleased the majority of the entire Legislature with what they wanted to pass. They had to get at least six Members to support their position or they were stopped.
Now, technically this is still true. However, since division, Cabinet only needs to get the support of two Members. As a result, they don’t have to work as hard. They don’t have to convince a large number of Members to support an initiative. It’s easy to convince two. Based on the ease of getting two Members to come to their side, it isn’t necessary for Cabinet to research the decisions and base their decisions on facts like they used to. If they want, they can simply base decisions on the desire and belief. Two Members can be brought onside to promises not even related to discussions currently at hand.
With the Members that exist, can consensus government work? I believe the answer is yes. However, it is hard work and takes commitment of all Members. All Members must agree to work with consensus government. Cabinet has to agree to do the research and the work required to make reasonable and informed decisions. They must then agree to share that information with the Regular Members and help them help us understand how Cabinet decisions are made so that Regular Members can also make informed and responsible decisions. Both sides need to agree to listen to each other’s points of view with respect. Both sides need to engage in healthy ways. The Regular Members need to think about Cabinet’s position and not oppose everything that Cabinet says just because Cabinet says it. We need to work to achieve consensus. Unfortunately, it is a lot of work and it takes a lot of time. It requires a lot of individuals to swallow their pride from time to time, and it is easier for Cabinet to ignore and do whatever they want; for example, supplementary health and board reform. Unfortunately, it is very clear that consensus government is not currently working at this time. In fact, I don’t think it has ever been in worse shape. There are clearly Members on both sides who let their emotions and pride get in the way of their better judgment or what is in the best interest of the people of the Northwest Territories.
I support this motion. I haven’t always. When I first heard rumours about it, I was completely opposed. However, some things have happened over the last couple of weeks that have forced me to support this motion. My biggest opposition to supporting this motion is that I feel that a number of Cabinet Members are good. I have a significant amount of respect for the Honourable Michael McLeod, the Honourable Robert C. McLeod and the Honourable Jackson Lafferty. Regardless of how this motion goes, they will continue to have my support. If the motion passes, I will definitely put my X beside their name should they choose to run for Cabinet. Having said that -- and I will get into it a little later -- I do have a couple of concerns that I will bring up later with every Member.
If I support some and believe in them now, how can I possibly support this motion? It is simple. I don’t support Cabinet as an entity.
On January 28th the Minister of Health and Social Services was quoted in the Yellowknifer saying, “A vote of non-confidence against us won’t stop the policy from coming into effect.” She was talking about supplementary health benefits. She went further to say -- and she was referring to a vote of non-confidence against her -- “This is really about political ambition and political gesturing and that it wouldn’t make a difference because Cabinet has already made their decision and it won’t change.” To me, this confirmed what many of the public and on this side of the House have been saying and that I feared to be true. Cabinet as an entity doesn’t care what we think or say and we don’t care what the people of the Northwest Territories want or think either. They know best what is right and what is good. They are going to do what they want, when they want and how they want.
In my opinion, Minister Lee’s comment suggested that the entity which is Cabinet had betrayed consensus government, the Regular MLAs and the people of the Northwest Territories. Something needs to be done to restore our faith in this government. I am no fool. I know Cabinet is made up of individuals. I know that we have no idea what the issues they fight for are or what they stand for in that Cabinet room. It is really difficult to pick out an individual Minister for a decision of an entire Cabinet. We can’t. When they leave the Cabinet room, whether they have consensus or not, they speak with one voice and in one entity. Minister Lee’s comments came to the entire Cabinet at the same time and they must all be held to account. How can we separate out individuals when Cabinet direction and blind devotion to Cabinet solidarity is really the problem?
I and other Members have tried to get Cabinet to work with us in many different ways. I have met and talked with Ministers. I expressed the need for communication. I have asked for inclusion in decision-making. I have asked questions in the House, but to no avail. Nothing has worked. Something drastic that will hopefully get Cabinet Members to sit up and listen needs to be done; something of a serious nature to get them or the Cabinet Members who replace them to take Regular Members seriously, to take residents of the Northwest Territories seriously. To practice consensus style government that we all profess to believe in warrants support.
To me, this motion is the only thing that I believe they would take seriously. Anything with less potential impact would be soundly ignored by the entity which is Cabinet. The beast would go back to its old habits. Cabinet would go back to business as usual and continue to ignore us. For instance, they have continued to completely ignore motions passed by all 11 Regular Members; motions such as the motion to return the public housing subsidy back to the Housing Corporation; ignoring important motions passed by all 11 Members with not so much as a rational or at least an attempt to provide the Regular Members with the reason why Cabinet won’t listen or to act on the decision of the majority of the people in this Assembly. We speak on behalf of the people of the Northwest Territories. The majority speaks. Cabinet must listen.
I said earlier that there are three Members that I believe are good and work hard for the people of the Northwest Territories. I don’t always agree with their decisions, but I respect them for the way that they work and try to work with us as a Minister responsible for a department, not as a Cabinet Member.
There are two other Members that I am currently on the fence with, and I am deeply troubled by the Minister of Finance and the Minister of ITI for their involvement in the Opportunities Fund and their inability to help us understand how the decisions related to that fund were made and why. If this motion passes, I have a number of questions for each of them; hard questions that I will want answered before I consider putting my X beside their name. This motion will put ramifications behind those questions. If they can’t be answered, they won’t be getting my support. If this motion does not pass, asking them these questions will be meaningless to them and I don’t believe that we will get a sincere answer. Once again, I have no option but to support this motion.
For all five of the Members, I do have one problem which needs to be answered by each. Our Premier admittedly had an intimate relationship with one of our clerks of committee. I know some people are asking: What is the big deal? Here’s the big deal. Cabinet has their solidarity. The Regular Members have their committees. These committees are the only place where we can freely vent our frustrations about Cabinet and political issues and plan our daily business. It is supposed to be a safe place where we can trust that what we say won’t be shared with anyone. The clerk of committees that entered into that intimate relationship with the Premier attended all EDI meetings, Government Ops meetings and most Priorities and Planning meetings and is privy to all discussions. Regardless of whether or not she leaked the information -- and honestly I don’t know if she did or not and, for the record, information was definitely leaked -- it was definitely a conflict and the Premier is smart enough to know that.
Nobody in their right mind would allow or support the hiring of a spouse or immediate family member of any Member of the Executive Council into the position of clerk of committees. It would be seen as a clear and obvious conflict of interest. The Premier having an intimate relationship with the clerk is no different. It is still a conflict of interest.
After meeting with the Premier in December at Caucus, I met with him one on one and asked him to resign. In my opinion, the relationship constituted a clear conflict and demonstrated poor judgment on behalf of the Premier. The only thing and the right thing for the Premier to do would have been to resign. I was told no by the Premier. I know that the majority of Members on this side of the House had exactly the same conversation with him. They were also told no. So that is my problem with all of the Cabinet Members, including the ones I respect. They didn’t appear to do anything other than stand blindly behind Cabinet solidarity and support their Premier. Bad form.
The Premier created a serious conflict situation and should have been asked to resign by you, the regular Cabinet Members. It has happened in the past. Cabinet has asked Premiers to resign in the past. There is precedent. It should have happened this time. I was deeply disappointed that the entity that is Cabinet didn’t feel the same way and was willing to stand behind this serious conflict of interest. It puts a negative light on this entire Assembly.
So why didn’t the honourable Members ask the Premier to resign? If he refused, why didn’t the Members tell him to resign and make it happen? As a Member of the Executive Council, each Member swore an oath that he or she would duly and faithfully and to the best of their abilities, skill and knowledge execute the powers of trust imposed in them as a Member of the Executive Council of the Northwest Territories. I trusted the Executive Council to do the right thing: live up to the standards of their office. Each Member swore to execute the powers and the trust that I and residents of the NWT placed in them.
I have a lot of respect for the Premier. He’s done a lot for this Territory and he’s been a strong advocate for the North and his constituents. He’s been a good MLA. In the 15th Assembly he was a solid and respected Minister. He’s definitely capable and would be a good Regular Member, if that’s the way things end up. Unfortunately, he’s made a bad decision and he needs to stand up and take responsibility for his mistake and the damage that it has done to this Legislature. Unfortunately, he’s unwilling, so it looks like we’ll have to do it for him.
As Members -- and this is to all of us -- we all need to be cautious in our behaviour and our actions. As politicians put in office by the people, we have a duty and a responsibility to behave in a decent and an upstanding manner. We have to give up some of ourselves in the best interest of our office and oath that we’ve all sworn.
In closing, and again, I support this motion because it has teeth and I hope that it will make the entity known as Cabinet listen. Hopefully it will also make the individual Ministers think that as well, even the ones that I hope put their names forward and get back onto Cabinet. This is consensus government. It takes a lot of work, but it’s worth it. The people are worth it. The NWT is worth it. Let’s revitalize it and get back to work. We owe it to the people of the Northwest Territories.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
At the outset I have to say that I’m dismayed that this motion has come to the floor. But it’s nothing that I take lightly. It was a long time in coming and I think I want everybody to know that this is not something which was a spur of the moment decision on anybody’s part. I had hopes that we as the 16th Assembly could have found a different or better solution, but there is none to be had.
I feel that I am driven to this step for a number of reasons, and these are my own personal reasons, my own views, my own opinions, my own feelings. Primary among these reasons is a loss in confidence in the Premier and Executive Council as a group. Some Ministers have performed well; some Ministers poorly. Similar to Mr. Abernethy, I feel that some Ministers belong in Cabinet and were the opportunity given to me, I would put them back there.
But I want to emphasize that for me it is a loss of confidence in the group. I am concerned for our Territory. I am concerned for our residents. I don’t feel any comfort that this Executive is working for the best interest of the whole of the NWT. The culture of this Cabinet and its Premier is insular, adversarial, and inward looking. I’m sorry to have to use those words.
There is a lack of cohesiveness amongst this group. Each of the seven Members of the Executive seem to operate independently of the others. Actions are taken by one Minister that the others are unaware of. An example: For the last four to five months I’ve been asking the Premier’s office for the NWT government’s response to the federal government in regards to the McCrank Report. I was assured several times that it was being developed, that coordination was required because several departments were involved, and that I and other Members would get a copy once it was complete. Imagine my surprise when I was told two weeks ago by the Premier’s office that a letter of response about the McCrank Report had gone to INAC’s Minister Strahl in early December of 2008 from the Minister of ENR, apparently without the Premier’s knowledge. If this is the government’s considered coordinated response, why was the Premier not involved?
This example is indicative to me of the “every man for himself” attitude that permeates this Cabinet. Not only have I lost confidence in this Premier and Executive, but so has the public. For months now I’ve been hearing from constituents and members of the general public that they see the government as inadequate and ineffective. They don’t believe that this government is taking us anywhere; that we are as a ship adrift at sea on an aimless journey, no visible charted course.
On the flip side I feel that the long-term goals of this Cabinet and its Assembly are good, but the short-term actions are sorely lacking. On the negative side there’s this comment from a constituent: “For every action there is an equal and opposite government program.”
A second reason is in my short time as an MLA I’ve perceived a distinct lack of leadership from the Premier and the Executive and I feel that the leadership has to come from that group of seven people. I elected seven people to positions of authority and accountability, expecting that they would take charge of this Assembly’s goals and objectives and those goals and objectives that we set as 19 Members back in October 2007. I expected they would take our goals and objectives and lead us forward. I expected them to fill the sails of our ship with wind and move us purposely to the harbour. I don’t see that leadership, nor do I see that purposeful forging ahead that I anticipated 16 months ago. We need to make some personnel changes to get the leadership and the attitude that this Territory needs to forge ahead.
Thirdly, the communication from this Cabinet has been woefully inadequate and ineffectual. I mean communication to both our residents and stakeholders and to us as Regular MLAs. Comments made in the press by Ministers have been contrary and unnecessarily blunt. Ideas and actions put forward by Cabinet have been presented to constituents and to MLAs as a fait accompli, a done deal. What I hear that’s telling me from Cabinet is, don’t bother telling us what you think; we don’t care and we’ll do what we want no matter what. Unfortunately, perception is nine-tenths of the law and the public perception is that this Cabinet is running a dictatorship, not consensus government.
The word “consultation” does not seem to be in the vocabulary of this Executive Council. Witness the presentation of the Board Reform Initiative and the Supplementary Health Benefits Program policy. In both cases the model has been predetermined by Cabinet. That model to be implemented is not in question or for debate, only how it will happen. That’s hardly consultation, in my view. Where is the openness to other ideas? Where is the openness to the consideration of a different way of implementation?
I am constantly amazed at the reticence of this Cabinet to use the considerable collective wisdom and experience of the Regular Members’ P and P committee to vet their initiatives and significant policy changes before making a Cabinet or an FMB decision. This group of 11 has a lot to offer. Why do you persist in ignoring a thoughtful, willing and cost-effective sounding board?
We’re at a point in the life of this Assembly where a review of our Executive Council is due. We could wait for the halfway point of this Assembly -- that would be October upcoming -- but I feel it would then be too late. The review must occur now. This motion provides that opportunity; the opportunity for a review of the Premier and all Members of Cabinet. It’s an opportunity for Members to reaffirm their confidence in those Ministers whom they feel deserve their confidence. Who those people are depends on each of us as Members. We all have different experiences which colour our opinions and feelings, and thus there are differing views on the worth of each Minister.
Should this motion pass, a Territorial Leadership Council will be held. I hope that all the current Ministers will submit their names for a Cabinet post. I think they all should. The Leadership Council process will allow us all to consider the record of Ministers over the last 16 months, and any Minister who has the confidence of this House will be reinstated to their post.
To conclude, this motion may seem like a drastic measure, but it is, for me, a necessary one. I regret we couldn’t find another way to send our message to those across the floor and I regret that I must support this motion.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.
