Thank you. Members, the motion is being distributed on to the floor.
The motion to amend the motion under consideration is in order. Members, we will consider the motion to amend the motion under consideration prior to returning to the original motion. I know this is confusing, so we're going to consider the motion that the Minister's put forward before we consider the remainder for the motion that the Member for Kam Lake has put forward.
So at this time, debate should focus on the motion to amend from the Minister of ECE versus the Member for Kam Lake. So I will go to the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment to speak to the motion to amend, then we'll allow any other Members an opportunity to speak to that motion. Okay? So Minister of ECE.
Thank you, Madam Chair. So what this motion does is amend the motion to allow for child care centre or day home operators to disclose the identity of a complainant in certain circumstances. And so that would be when they would like to retain legal counsel to help them navigate this complaint, help them deal with the complaint, or alternatively, I recognize that not everyone wants to hire a lawyer. And really, this complaint process is not, you know, that administratively burdensome that you would necessarily need a lawyer. The later appeal process is perhaps the time when you might consider that but for this process, you might not need a lawyer and so there's also the opportunity for the director to authorize an operator to reveal that identity to someone else to assist them deal with this complaint. Thank you.
Thank you. To the motion? Member for Great Slave.
Thank you, Madam Chair. And I appreciate the willingness of the Minister and the department to try and rectify the issue that we had raised and clearly was listening to what our concerns were. Again, though, this I don't necessarily, though, agree with 3(b) as authorized by the director. And the reason I have concern there is further to what I was saying yesterday about the way that this is going to be set up that it does allow for there to be an arbitrary GNWT employee who is making decisions about people's livelihoods in an industry. And I just don't see that we have a lot of that type of overreach in other departments sorry, or industries, and so I have to question why we would be so prescriptive in one like this. I mean, if we were in the construction industry and somebody was mad at one contractor, there would be nothing to preclude them from speaking about that to others in the industry. So I feel that this is too prescriptive, and, again, it's giving power to a GNWT employee that is not impartial necessarily. I have, I mentioned yesterday, heard complaints about vexatious complaints being followed through from in the department. And that is the perception, I'm not saying whether it is the reality, but that there is an impression that certain people are targeted and therefore how could I in good conscience agree to allow a director to be making this type of decision with no policy or anything or guidance around and no investigative process outlined ahead of time. So for me, I can't support this change. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. To the motion? Member for Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I was not part of the committee, and so I'm just trying to catch up on where we're at with this. But I want to note that the act, where it's starting a new complaint process does the director first has to decide whether to even disclose the identity of the complainant to the operator. And I would say in many cases, you probably don't want to do that. And if I'm going to file a complaint against my day home, I'm probably going to ask to remain anonymous. And I know that anonymous complaints processes are often used in other jurisdictions in day homes to protect the identities of people involved. So we're now in a debate where it's after the director has made that analysis in cases where they find it appropriate to disclose the identity with the summary of the complaint, whether then that day home operator can further share that information. And I am sympathetic to the motion that it certainly should be shared with legal counsel. I think they probably have that right regardless, but I don't want to get into that debate. That being said, I appreciate where committee is coming from so I will be abstaining on these motions. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. To the motion? Member for Kam Lake.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And thank you very much to the Minister and his desire to meet committee halfway here. But there are still concerns that were raised in committee that this motion does not acknowledge. One of the concerns that was raised by committee was the ability of a complainant to disclose the identity sorry, the ability of a child care provider to disclose the the identity of a complainant to legal counsel or to another person assisting them in defending against the complaint. So while this allows somebody to disclose to a lawyer that they've retained, sometimes people don't always have the dollars to access a lawyer and having somebody have to go back to a director and leave that to the discretion of a director is probably not a natural human behaviour when you are potentially a, you know, a an early in business individual who is simply looking for advice from a peer who works in the industry in order to be able to defend yourself or work through a situation.
And that brings me to my next concern, and a concern that was heard at committee, was really the ability of people to participate in normal human behaviour, which is, especially in the Northwest Territories we often have a very small territory where we're all one community, where people know people who are in the industry who have different skill sets or who are trusted advisors. You know, when we all leave this building, we'll probably call upon some of our colleagues as trusted advisers in our life that will help us through some challenges that we either encounter professionally or personally going forward. And so my concern is that this legislation would actually potentially make natural human behaviour illegal. And so it seems to me that in a sense this clause actually seems to address a fear of unprofessional behaviour and that to me calls into question is unprofessional behaviour illegal? Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. To the motion?
Question.
Question has been called. All those in oh sorry, no, you didn't request a recorded vote. So all those in favour
Okay, so what we are voting on right now is the amendment that Minister of ECE has made to the motion that Member for Kam Lake put forward. So we're voting on the amendment, okay. So all those in favour of the amendment to the motion? Thank you. All those opposed to the amendment of the motion. All those abstaining?
All right, so the motion is defeated. The motion has been defeated.
Defeated
Members, we will now consider the Member for Kam Lake's motion. To the motion.
Committee, as chair, in case of a tie, I cast the deciding vote. By convention, I vote in a way that allows further debate. So in this case, I vote to defeat the motion to amend the motion as the amendment could be brought forward in further debate in third reading.
All right, so now we will go back to the original motion. To the motion? And this is the motion that was put forward by Member for Kam Lake. To the motion?
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour, please raise your hand so that we can make sure I can count.
