Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for the Sahtu, that, pursuant to Rule 3.5, that the ordinary business of the House be set aside to discuss a matter of urgent public importance requiring immediate consideration; namely, the humanitarian crisis in the Sahtu, specifically in the town of Norman Wells, where the town council has unanimously declared a local state of emergency on October 15th, 2024. The people of the Sahtu urgently require an indication of the kind of short-term and long-term strategies that the Government of the Northwest Territories will employ to ensure that necessary support is provided to residents and businesses and is of territorial significance as local authorities do not have the resources required to provide the required humanitarian relief to the residents of the Sahtu. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member from Range Lake. Members, the Member from Range Lake is moving to set aside the business of the House to discuss a matter of public importance requiring immediate consideration pursuant to Rule 3.5. This is an extraordinary measure and will likely require debate on whether or not this is an urgent question. It is also the first time this provision has been used in the 20th Assembly. I will call a short break so Members can review section 3.5 before we proceed. Thank you.
---SHORT RECESS
Members, the Member is seeking to set aside the ordinary business of the House. I will allow him five minutes to make a statement explaining the matter to be discussed and the reason for urgency. Member from Range Lake.
Mr. Speaker, our rules permit the House to discuss a matter of urgent public importance requiring immediate consideration subject to the following conditions:
The Member proposing the motion shall give written notice to the matter proposed to be discussed to the Speaker at least one hour before the sitting of the house;
No more than one matter shall be discussed on the same motion;
The motion must not raise a matter of privilege; and,
The motion must not raise any matter which can be debated upon a motion with notice.
Mr. Speaker, you can be assured that the conditions pursuant to our rules have been met by this motion, but there are other tests that could be applied as the House considers this debate. For that, we can turn to a precedent in the House of Commons, in particular, the speakership of John Fraser from 1986 to 1996, who had to decide on 149 specific cases of motions calling for emergency debate. Although the House of Commons' practice is different than ours, there are commonalties that the House should consider when debating an extraordinary request for emergency debate.
On October 17th, 1986, Speaker Fraser wrote: In considering an application of this kind, the Chair must take three factors into account. In this case, I would say the House must take three factors into account. The issue raised must constitute a genuine emergency. The Chair used that word in the sense that it is something which is of such urgency, it calls for immediately for something to be done about it. It is not enough -- and I would ask the honourable Members to understand this -- that it be a matter of great importance. It is in the view of the Chair that the issue is of great importance, but the issue must call for immediate and urgent consideration. The Chair must also take into consideration whether or not there will be other opportunities to debate the matter and other opportunities within a reasonable period of time. End quote.
Mr. Speaker, it is without a doubt that the people of the Sahtu are in such dire straits with respect to the state of emergency that's been declared that immediate and urgent consideration is required. The community has reached the limit of their capacity to resolve the matter and is turning to territorial and, indeed, national authorities for help.
Mr. Speaker, in the House's consideration for this motion for debate, I ask us to consider the longstanding tradition in this House of government members treating motions as advice to government and; furthermore, responding in 120 days as grossly insufficient to provide an immediate and urgent disposition to the humanitarian crisis in the Sahtu. Yes, a Member might move such a motion within the time afforded by this sitting but the response from government would fail to meet the moment at hand. The people of the Sahtu are calling out for justice and relief at a time of great distress, and I submit that there are no other opportunities afforded by this sitting to adequately consider their needs and meaningfully respond but for an emergency debate.
Mr. Speaker, of the many examples in the House of Commons of emergency debate, most of -- or a select few have been about regional matters such as the cod fishery in Newfoundland or the takeover of Dome Petroleum by Amoco Corporation. These were all decisions handled by Speaker Fraser. These matters speak to urgent and immediate matters of public concern respecting regions of Canada that were then raised -- or deemed important enough to be raised to the national forefront in the House of Commons. The comparison to this motion at-hand with a region of the Northwest Territories hard hit by an issue of urgent and immediate concern should be viewed in the same light by this House. We cannot afford to wait a moment longer to leave this matter unresolved, and there is no other mechanism afforded to this House to adequately consider the emergency at-hand. I ask this House to give leave for this emergency debate and set aside the business of the day and to proceed without further delay. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member from Range Lake. Members, at this point, I will only hear debate on the question of whether or not the need for debate is urgent. That means why this debate must happen today and the regular business of the House be set aside. The House will then vote on the Member of Range Lake's motion. If the motion carries, I will then allow debate on the subject itself. If the motion fails, we shall continue on with the orders of the day. If the motion carries, the debate will continue until such time there is no one seeking to talk or we reached the hour of adjournment. If there is no one seeking to talk and we have not reached the hour adjournment, I will adjourn the debate and return to the orders of the day.
To the question of whether this debate is urgent. Member from Yellowknife Centre.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I will support the proposal for the emergency debate on the particular topic about the emergency in the Sahtu. Mr. Speaker, I agree with the Member who brought forward that the situation is urgent, time is of the essence, it is important, it is specific, the issue we are raising. This is why we need decision makers to talk about this. We need to talk about allocating resources and respond to public need on the basis of the public trust.
Mr. Speaker, in essence, there needs to be an urgency debate that facilitates the discussion that has to happen and including the inspirational work that we need to do that we need to remind people in the Sahtu they matter. That's why this discussion cannot wait.
Mr. Speaker, our audience may be here at this very moment, but everyone is listening far and wide. Even the Minister defined this as a crisis today -- and I haven't read Hansard, the specific wording. So if you're recognizing a situation in the Sahtu as crisis, I think it meets the goals and objectives of an urgent debate.
Mr. Speaker, speaking further to the motion of why we should have a debate, we cannot dull this urgent call by finding ways to turn this into a protracted process. As my colleague also mentioned earlier about Members do have options such as motions and Member's statements, but we must call into question the effectiveness of how they deliver the message and the effectiveness of the response. I am going to just elaborate a little further on what he had said.
When Members pass a motion, the government has up to 120 days to respond. Mr. Speaker, if they were kind and didn't use all of their time, they would respond tomorrow. But if they had to do a lot of work, which I respect would be required, the earliest that they may be able to respond to this urgent crisis would be February 5th. That's 110 days from now. Do the people in the Sahtu have 120 days?
Mr. Speaker, if the government took -- which isn't unnecessarily reasonable, depending on the case -- their full 120 days as prescribed, that means they wouldn't be back in the House responding officially to this problem not until February 25th of 2025.
Mr. Speaker, the people of the Sahtu need this discussion today because it is a real crisis. I've spoken to people who are asking themselves they cannot stay there so we need to show them -- sorry, stay there under the circumstances if there's nothing happening other than us sitting and waiting, Mr. Speaker. Nothing tells the world more they matter than us talking about their issue. And on that note, Mr. Speaker, it's easy to say this doesn't affect my riding but, Mr. Speaker, it's affecting every riding in one way or another. Hence, it's a territorial issue.
Mr. Speaker, I won't go through the measures of test such as time and urgency and whatnot, but I'll end with this pointing out the fact that the House of Commons, as my colleague has said, has talked about a number of subjects from fisheries, forestry, agriculture, fur trade, and they have all been judged acceptable topics for urgent debate, Mr. Speaker. Even grain, which probably doesn't change overnight, this situation is a situation that would change overnight, Mr. Speaker. Fisheries and all of those other subjects probably had time to deal with but tell me, Mr. Speaker, is cost of living, affordability, no gas, no opportunity, people can't buy food, is there a better reason why we shouldn't be talking about this subject? And I'd say I can't think of a more paramount issue that should be drawing the collective attention on the Members of the Assembly. And with that, Mr. Speaker, I genuinely believe this is a crisis we need to speak about. Thank you.
Thank you, Member for Yellowknife Centre. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour, would please put your hand up. Sorry? Something to clarify, Mr. Rodgers? Sorry, I need to clarify.
So what we're voting on is if this is a debate that we want to have the conversation. That's what this vote's calling for. Okay, so we all have a clear understanding? What's that? You want a recorded vote?
Member from Yellowknife Centre is asking for a recorded vote. To the motion.
Question.
