Debates of March 9, 2017 (day 67)

Date
March
9
2017
Session
18th Assembly, 2nd Session
Day
67
Members Present
Hon. Glen Abernethy, Mr. Beaulieu, Hon. Caroline Cochrane, Ms. Green, Hon. Jackson Lafferty, Hon. Bob McLeod, Hon. Robert McLeod, Mr. McNeely, Hon. Alfred Moses, Mr. Nadli, Mr. Nakimayak, Mr. O'Reilly, Hon. Wally Schumann, Hon. Louis Sebert, Mr. Simpson, Mr. Testart, Mr. Thompson, Mr. Vanthuyne
Topics
Statements

Member’s Statement on A New Day Program Request for Proposals

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, two days ago, the Department of Justice released a request for proposal for a revamped A New Day program. At least, that is what the title says. However, those familiar with the current A New Day program might only recognize it as a gutted and sterilized approximation of the program they know.

A New Day is the NWT’s only healing program for men who use violence in their relationships. It was developed after two years of research and investigation led by the Department of Justice, and included staff and leaders from Health and Social Services, the John Howard Society, the Status of Women Council, the Native Women’s Association, the Salvation Army, the Tree of Peace, the Yellowknife Women’s Society, the YWCA, and the RCMP. The program provides flexible individual and group counselling services that are respectful, collaborative, and hold people accountable. It is delivered by permanent, full-time staff who provide culturally-appropriate counselling based on traditional knowledge, and with the assistance of elders. Perhaps most importantly, Mr. Speaker, it is accessible. It is easy for those seeking help to get help. These qualities are why the program is successful, why it fulfills dozens of requirements of the TRC Calls to Action, and why it is a Public Health Agency of Canada Aboriginal Best Practices program.

The Department of Justice was determined to end the program, but the Regular Members recognized the need for a men’s healing program, and we rallied together and ensured that the program would remain until there was something equivalent to take its place.

Well, Mr. Speaker, the RFP that describes what that “something” is has profoundly disappointed many of those who were engaged in designing the original program. Its contents came as a surprise to them, as their consultation was not sought this time around.

The result appears to be a program stripped of all of the qualities that make it successful; its accessibility, flexibility, outreach, cultural components, and the ability to allow for trusting relationships between clients and counsellors to develop. The first point of contact for clients will now be a GNWT coordinator, who will determine whether or not those who want to enter the three-phase program will be allowed. If they are, they will be assigned to facilitators, who are on non-exclusive, when-and-as-needed contracts. Facilitators are not required to have a background in issues of domestic violence, Aboriginal culture, or intergenerational trauma. Instead of fostering opportunities to build trust, clients may be assigned to a different facilitator for each phase of the program. Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.

---Unanimous consent granted

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My apologies. Further, facilitators must not have pre-existing professional relationships with clients. That virtually eliminates the ability of the current provider, as well as many of the others in the community, to participate in the program.

These are just a few of the issues that have been raised, Mr. Speaker. I will have questions for the Minister, to see if these concerns are just the result of a poorly written RFP, or if A New Day is really “A Completely Different Day.” Thank you, Mr. Speaker.