Debates of March 13, 2025 (day 55)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker,

WHEREAS the affirmative action policy was established in the late 1980's;

AND WHEREAS the affirmative action policy was intended to support northern employment by creating and strengthening opportunities for northern Indigenous people;

AND WHEREAS the affirmative action policy was also intended to support and recognize long-term commitments of non-Indigenous peoples;

AND WHEREAS the affirmative action policy was intended to support women and persons with disabilities;

AND WHEREAS the affirmative action policy is a policy and requires periodic evaluation and updating from time to time;

AND WHEREAS the Indigenous employment policy has had a number of concerns highlighted by committees of this Assembly;

AND WHEREAS the Indigenous employment policy has received enormous negative feedback from the public;

AND WHEREAS the Indigenous employment policy has not been received by the public in a positive way;

AND WHEREAS, more than one committee has requested that the government not proceed with the Indigenous employment policy or, at the very least, to pause this policy until a clear consensus of Members has been reached;

NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the Member for Range Lake, that this Legislative Assembly calls upon the Government of the Northwest Territories to immediately halt any further advancement and implementation of the new Indigenous employment policy, also known as the IEP, and return to using the affirmative action policy without delay as the primary hiring guidelines of the Government of the Northwest Territories;

AND FURTHER, that the Minister of Finance engage with the Standing Committee on Government Operations, prior to any further changes to the Government of the Northwest Territories' hiring policy, to discuss and seek guidance that can improve the affirmative action policy which ultimately strengthens the Government of the Northwest Territories' hiring practices with the intent that supports northern Indigenous, long-term Northerners, women, persons with disabilities, as well as other marginalized communities;

AND FURTHERMORE, that the Government of the Northwest Territories provide a response to this motion within 120 days.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member from Yellowknife Centre. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member from Yellowknife Centre.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, there's been a lot of talk about this since it's been, in my humble opinion, rammed through. This policy change is quite frustrating. Many committees have already spoken against this and want it to be slowed down. Recently, one of the committees -- although I won't speak to it because it was an in-camera and confidential meeting, but I'll say it received a lot of feedback, and it was overwhelmingly concerned in the manner of the change and wanted the territorial's hiring policy stay as the affirmative action policy which we've seen for over 35 years.

Mr. Speaker, furthermore, the importance of it is no policy should go without review. I definitely believe in that. And there were changes, and I'd like to highlight one for the public's benefit to appreciate some of the changes that could have happened and should have happened and need part of the periodic details of what we're talking about.

So by way of example, Mr. Speaker, there is a -- within the current policy, which ends, according to the Minister and the government on April 1, if you were born in the Northwest Territories, you would be considered -- if you are non-Indigenous that is, and you would be considered a P2. And if you left the day after you were born here, you could come back any time of our lifetime and be treated as a P2. And for the public, that's priority number 2. But, again, most people will know what this means.

That said, Mr. Speaker, I think that misses the intent of what the policy was about. And it was about inspiring and finding ways to recognize the importance of northern people who have committed.

So first and foremost, no one I spoke to had any issues with Indigenous people from the Northwest Territories being treated as priority 1. As a matter of fact, the empowerment opportunity is absolutely critical to grow that. But there's elements that find the frustration where Northerners feel betrayed by this process. I have heard from people from the top of the North to the south of the North that there are ways we could have tweaked the current policy in a progressive way. I realize that there are certain overlapping Indigenous relationships that needed to be recognized. I too think that that's important.

What is problematic with the policy is I don't believe it's ever been used in the fullness of how it should have been used. That said, there are tweaks that could have been considered, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we need to understand the problems. The government will say well, we don't have enough Indigenous employment and it's not reaching the ratio of 50 percent of the North. That may be statistically true.

Now, what my experience has been around these types of problems is it always start with what do you want me to tell you on the statistics and we'll find a way to tell you the story through the numbers. In other words, we could have found any answer we really wanted to given the direction and the position. Also, Mr. Speaker, at the same time is we're not recognizing key fundamental foundational problems with the affirmative action program. It is a process of saving and -- saving and recognizing problems. So what am I saying?

Well, we have low education opportunities. We have high expectation of credentials. We have to find a gateway to create opportunities. We have communities where graduation rates are below 50 percent. That is the true critical problem of what's happening here. Creating a new IEP program, Mr. Speaker, isn't solving these problems, Mr. Speaker. It's just a fundamental shell game of trying to say, statistically, we need to raise these up. Mr. Speaker, when people want to work for the Northwest Territories and they are Indigenous, they are supported. And I support that. And I think that we have programs through -- and we certainly have exemptions through the Premier and Cabinet where we could do direct appointments. So if we need to improve the statistics, I'm certainly in favour of that. But opening -- kicking the door open wide and saying anyone from Canada, from whether it's Nova Scotia all the way to BC, is now hit a priority on this new policy is quite frustrating. As a matter of fact, again, it feels is the GNWT trying to save the national problem? Give it a local result? I'm not sure.

At the same time, Mr. Speaker, the government will tell you well, you know, it's always had legal issues. Well, I think there's always legal issues with a lot of policies. This one in particular, I'm not confident it's there. I'm not aware if it's ever been publicly challenged. In other words, tested in court, received any judicial guidance saying that.

Now, every Minister will say somebody in many the background says there's questions about it. Well, that may be true. There's question about our BIP. There's always questions about the BIP. And, you know what? Fundamentally, Northerners have grown to appreciate that and recognize they have limits, and sometimes it doesn't work out in their favour. That said, they do recognize how important some of these little nuggets of being a Northerner are represented and respected.

Mr. Speaker, the affirmative action program has been bought in for a generation or more -- if not We're getting close to two generations -- who have understood the importance of the value of that particular program. And to throw it out, again, feels likes a frustration.

Now, let's talk about other areas of aspects, Mr. Speaker, that are actually are foundational to this issue. So I've talked to mining companies, and they're frustrated too. They're hearing, wow, we have to hire more Indigenous people, which is fantastic. They go so if the GNWT gets to change its policy, how does it affect their socioeconomic agreements? You know, they're like, well, so if it's not good for the GNWT, is it good for us? Where is this fairness? Mr. Speaker, it's about fair application and reasonable application that respect Northerners' commitments.

The other aspect is, Mr. Speaker, not everyone wants to work for the Government of the Northwest Territories. I know there are a lot of people in various communities that don't want to work for the GNWT. And believe it or not -- I know this is hard to believe -- but the GNWT has long left the title or honour or pillar of opportunity as the employer of choice. It is no longer that. Yes, some people have enjoyed a great career here. Some have had great advancement. Some have, you know, had these dynamic experiences that all they do is talk about, you know, it's great going to work every day. I'm happy for them. But not everyone wants to work for the government. We have a federal government that's constantly competing for Indigenous people. We have Indigenous governments constantly competing for them. So it makes only perfect sense -- wait a minute, here's statistics again -- that Indigenous people are being hired in their community government organizations, which I think is incredible, but yet the GNWT is not getting those people applying there. So I think it's one of these narratives that you have to drill down and ask, what question are we really asking? Or do we already have the answer, and we're just trying to find the facts through the back door of statistics? I don't know.

Mr. Speaker, broader, now I'm going to speak, you have communities. And I've been to, like, every community of the North, except for Sachs. But I've been to every community of the North. And I can tell you jobs are tough in a small community. It's tough to find them. It's tough to find employment. And we don't do enough to inspire and create creative opportunities to get that. So if employment is the issue, why don't we have a jobs mandate, a war time mandate to say we're going to put employment and we're going to raise education standards and we're going to throw everything at these opportunities we can get. So back to where's the fundamental problem? We'll call these the cornerstones of this issue which is education and opportunities. And that's really what we're having here, is this -- and that's what was trying to identify new ways to advance.

Mr. Speaker, I have more to say, and like most people know, I could probably go on for quite a while, but this is a very serious topic and it's very frustrating. And I've had people from all ranges of support so don't think it's just the P2 candidates that are mad. It's also Indigenous people that I've spoken to who feel that their recognition and commitment Northerners have made has been lost. And it's unfortunate that the way that these conversations get talked about, they could be misconstrued in other ways. And it's very frustrating, and it's very difficult.

I have heard from many GNWT employees who are afraid to comment because they're GNWT employees. Their democratic right to communicate to their elected officials, either written and even in sometimes verbal, are very frustrating for them because they don't feel that their voices could be heard. And so we may have received an enormous overwhelming amount of feedback at committee at the call of committee. But I wish we could have this public so the government could have that. I wish government employees could feel safe to say, you know what, I'm upset or frustrated by this. But we can't in this environment. And I wouldn't want anything else be betrayed -- portrayed -- sorry, just to be clear, portrayed, that people just feel left out by this government.

Mr. Speaker, I will be requesting a recorded vote when we do come to that particular time. And I think what's key to me here is the fact that this government can reverse this, pause it. I've asked them to halt it through the motion. I thank the seconder who's supported the motion to get it on the floor. I encourage people to continue to open their mind and see the opportunity that's being walked away from and respect people who have committed their lives, their families to the North, who invest in the North, who want this to be part of their future and by not -- by walking away from them, it's that empty feeling that your government is walking away from you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member from Range Lake -- or sorry, Yellowknife Centre. Member from Range Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in our sister territory Yukon, Yukoners are only officially known as Sourdoughs until they have survived a full winter. Here in the Northwest Territories it's a bit more complicated. You have to live half your life and then you become a P2. This has been -- for 30 years, this has been a cultural touchstone of the Northwest Territories, somewhat absurdly as well because there's plenty of people who don't work for government and, of course, plenty of people who do work for government who don't occupy that status but enjoy their careers anyway. But no matter what, that idea of, like, when you officially graduate and become, you know, a true blue Northerner, a true frozen Northerner, whatever we want to call it, so the idea to just take this away with the stroke of a pen after 30 years of this being, again, part of our culture, part of our workforce, part of our set of benefits that when Northerners think of themselves and think of the advantages they receive, this is one of them. SFA is another one. BIP is another one. The northern tax deduction. These are things that are cherished and people look to them as a competitive advantage to why we're here and why we stay here. Because it's hard, and it's getting harder.

Mr. Speaker, for 30 years, we've had a failed Indigenous hiring policy. That is not under debate. It hasn't been working. We have -- I think the last public service report, it had the worst -- the worst statistics we've ever seen. This is a problem that needs to be solved. But in trying to solve it when departmental staff spoke to the Standing Committee Committee on Government Operations just earlier this week, they acknowledged that the gaps that exist within this new policy, the Indigenous employment policy, have been creating brand new gaps that the old policy covered. And there's no plan yet to fill them.

The language that was used at the presentation was taking away affirmative action. And I don't know if that was intentional, Mr. Speaker, but I knew that -- do know that that is how so many Northerners feel, that something is being taken away. And the Minister disagrees that this is a benefit. I think Northerners would disagree. And they do feel like something's been taken away.

In an effort to fill the gaps and improve Indigenous hiring, we are creating new ones. People -- persons with disabilities, visible other minority populations are not being covered by the new policy, and that was one of the first messages I got from the public. And I've had many, Mr. Speaker. And it was someone who works for the government who has -- who is differently abled and was furious that this change was made without any consultation and implored MLAs to stand together and reverse the changes.

Mr. Speaker, advocacy groups, to my knowledge, were not consulted on these changes. The people who were consulted on these changes were given a broad set of a problem statement and ways it could be solved but not an actual definition of policy. The drive-by consultations, as my friend has said, in the past of -- of Yellowknife Centre -- were insufficient, insensitive, and wholly inadequate. Because that's what we heard, and that's what we heard from our partner Indigenous governments in particular. We're not making this stuff up, Mr. Speaker. There's a difference between a big P policy of government that governors everything we do here -- or everything -- sorry, not here, but everything we do in the public service and a framework. So the fact that a diversity -- a DEI framework is being pitched as a solution to these problems for the people who are left behind, a lot of those folks are not buying it because it's not -- it doesn't have the security that a big policy of government has. Hiring was iron clad. It followed these rules: P1, P2, P3. That was it. You couldn't get around it on paper. And we'll get into that, how have -- people have gotten around it. Because like I said, this has not been working.

Mr. Speaker, Northerners deserve to be put first by their government. They deserve priority access to jobs that allowed them to make decision for their territory and serve their communities. At a recent constituency meeting in the Range Lake riding, this was the number one topic of concern, and it was around P2s. And look, there are a lot of different opinions around this and around the P2 status, where it came from, is it constitutional, is it racist. But for members of our community, our northern community, we're all Northerners and we're all in this together. And no one there who was concerned about the loss of P2s and felt like it was an erosion of their identity as a Northerner said we don't want P1s. Everyone's okay with supporting each other and putting Indigenous people first because that's what our policies should do. But to take away P2 with nothing to replace it, that's something that has them concerned.

Mr. Speaker, in the Standing Committee of Government Operations, public engagement, they received 50 respondents. Normally, when we engage the public, if we get a dozen letters that's pretty good. And usually they're being written in by advocacy groups and stakeholders and people with a vested interest in communicating with committee. This case, it was driven by citizens, Northerners. Only one of those pieces of correspondence was supportive of these changes.

Mr. Speaker, the biggest issue was the elimination of P1s, followed by the elimination of P2s, and there was no support for prioritizing southern Indigenous people over Northerners. It's rare we get so much public commentary on matters before this House. So I want to share some of those stories today.

Before we began sitting, Mr. Speaker, I was approached by someone who's had 25 years in the public service. Never raised a complaint, never been to the union, never been to an MLA, completely content with working with for the public service, a career that made him feel proud and valued and even though it's challenging at some times, it was something that got him out of bed and motivated to do every day. When this policy was announced and there was no sense that it was coming, this was shocking to this individual, Mr. Speaker. They feel like they are no longer valued and they're being pushed out of the North. Now, I know that's not the intent of the policy. Let's be very clear. But we're not talking about what's written on the page. We're talking about the message it sends to our people and the message it sends to public citizens.

Mr. Speaker, I have a lengthier quote from a former GNWT employee who worked for the public service for 35 years. They were a manager when they left the GNWT for a secondment to an Indigenous government and at the end of the two years, this person resigned from the GNWT rather than go back. This individual says that they left the GNWT for many reasons. One was hiring and promoting practices in their department.

Quote: As a GNWT manager for three years, I had no issues with external competition. I was always reminded by my human resources representative assisting me with the competition that I was required to hire a priority 1 Indigenous person if they successfully passed the competition process. It was drilled into me. So I assumed that it was drilled into other hiring managers. The problems that I saw personally were the hiring and promotional activities that happened within departments when there was no human resources representative oversight. People who had the right attitude were selected for transfer assignments into positions for the appropriate time to allow for these persons to gain enough experience to allow them to, air quotes, "apply" on the job. There was a perception within at least my department that First Nations people made excellent support as frontline workers but were not suitable for promotion. Since my resignation, I have met with a lot of other former GNWT employees of First Nations descent, and this has been a running theme.

Mr. Speaker, this story, this work experience, is not one of a failed -- of people failing to follow the policy. It's one of personal workplace biases failing to promote and support Indigenous people through career advancement. That is a much deeper problem, and I know the government is working to fix that through other mechanisms. But this policy was not broken. This policy was just not being followed well enough.

Mr. Speaker, more quotes from -- or more feedback from the public: As the mother of a non-Indigenous child, I do not believe this policy's a very good idea. We have stayed here in the North because of the opportunities for people who have lived here for most or all of their lives. With this new policy, there is no advantage to living or going to school in the North. People who have lived here should have the first opportunity over anyone who does not live in the North, no matter if they are Indigenous or not.

Mr. Speaker, another: I wholeheartedly support priority staffing for Indigenous staff and recognize that change is needed. But the other folks already living in the North having equal footing as a southern candidate is not the right approach in employee retention, succession planning, continuity of services, and fiscal prudence in our current environment.

Quote: This new proposed hiring policy seems like you're trying to achieve an Indigenous hiring quota without a plan to support northern people.

Quote: At a time of such economic uncertainty, why is the GNWT creating opportunities for people who aren't even NWT residents? This new proposed hiring policy seems like you're playing politics with my future to make a more positive government report.

Quote: We have stayed here in the North because of the opportunities for people who have lived here most their lives. With this new policy, there's no advantage to living or going to school in the North.

Mr. Speaker, quote: If the GNWT is committed to human rights, equity, inclusion, economic stability and workplace diversity, it should be expanding and strengthening protections for persons with disabilities rather than rolling them back.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, quote: The morale of your frontline providers has never been so low and many of us feel insulted and disgusted by this new directive. End quote.

What is especially frustrating about this, Mr. Speaker, is how it came through -- how this process came there. My friend from Yellowknife Centre mentioned that this -- he used the word rammed through. And I would tend to agree. This was pushed through a process with little concern for the role of Members of two standing committees, both as representatives of their constituents and active committee Members who play on oversight role to government. Twice the Standing Committee on Government Operations asked for the Minister to pause changes to affirmative action and continue working with committee. Twice the Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight asked the Minister to pause changes to the affirmative action policy and continue working with committee. Seven members took a major step of issuing a public letter to the Premier asking for the policy to be reversed and sent back to committee, the same thing this motion calls for. It was only after all of these actions and a public flogging in the media that the Minister decided to compromise the policy and bring back northern Indigenous hiring in a more limited capacity.

Committees must be respected if this form of government that we have is going to work, Mr. Speaker. Ministers should be listening carefully to the concerns of committees and not ignoring them. That is not consensus government. How this matter has been handled sets a bad precedent for the role of committees in the oversight of major policy decisions going forward, Mr. Speaker. Changes to significant policies are also -- this changes significant policy that, again, has so many people upset. It's not part of the priorities of the Assembly. It's not part of the mandate of the GNWT. And it's not present in the Minister's mandate letter. Certainly I did not run to represent my constituents in this chamber on that promise. And I don't recall anyone else in this chamber saying they pledged to do that on the campaign trail.

So why are we here, Mr. Speaker? Why have we spent so much time and energy on a policy that does little to improve the hiring of Indigenous people and is hugely frustrating to Northerners. No matter the Minister's intention, Mr. Speaker, the results are clear to Northerners: You aren't valued, you aren't wanted, and you aren't a priority to this government.

I didn't think this needed to be said but as this government continues to make decisions that erode the advantages our people have enjoyed for 30 years or more, let me be clear: Every decision we make in this chamber should have one goal - Northerners first. We are sent here to solve problems, not to create them. By leaving so many gaps behind and non-Indigenous Northerners behind, we are actively adding to the challenges Northerners face every day in our communities. Working people deserve better, especially those in our public service and those aspiring to join it.

If you value -- so if you value the work of committees, then you must support this motion. If you value accountability, then you must support this motion. If you value the concerns of dozens of working people who contacted their MLAs to reject these policy changes, then you must support this motion. If you value consensus government and working together and listening to one another, you must support this motion. And if you want to put Northerners first where they belong, you must support this motion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member from Range Lake. To the motion. Member from Monfwi.

Masi, Mr. Speaker. No disrespect, I sympathize with my colleague and I hear the concerns that have been raised. I believe this Indigenous employment policy will help Indigenous people in the NWT. The Minister has said 56 percent of -- 56 percent of employees currently -- currently categorized as P2 work in Yellowknife. Mr. Speaker, what I take from this is that most P2s live in the city or larger regional centre. Their family members will always have a job to apply for and access to good education. I have heard numerous times from former teachers in Tlicho region that once their children were old enough to start elementary school, they moved to Yellowknife for better options. However, Indigenous people, Indigenous young people, and families in small communities, do not have these options. We lack a lot of services in small communities. Some of our young people feel hopeless. Drugs are getting in, and the future generations is going to face addictions. I want change. I want to help solve these problems. I support a policy that is aimed at recruiting Indigenous employees from within present boundaries of the territory. So for this reason, I will not support this motion. Masi, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member from Monfwi. To the motion. Member from Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I too do have a problem with the GNWT affirmative action policy. It was created back when we were part of Nunavut and at the time it was done in a way that it catered to everybody that's working here in the Northwest Territories - P1, P2, P3. But my concern, Mr. Speaker, is that when this announcement came out when Cabinet made a decision, I was surprised to hear it as well that decision came from Cabinet. I got calls from my leaders, my community members, and members from different ridings of the Northwest Territories expressing their concerns about how could this be. When this announcement came out, they were going to say that aboriginal hires are going to be from people from southern Canada. So in other words, if the aboriginal person that has a degree in education come into Fort Resolution to fill a job in recreation, they get first priority. And our guy in the community who's been born and raised here would be left out for applying on that job. So I am concerned with that. But then when they went back and they made changes saying oh jeez, now we're going to change it. It's going to be that aboriginal people are going to be first hire and then southern people after that. I don't support this motion. I mean, I -- I don't support the idea of bringing forward an aboriginal policy. There are a lot of good people that I spoke to that created the GNWT affirmative action policy. And it's been in place for over 30 years. It wasn't perfect. There were problems, and I agree with that. There should have been an oversight on that. I know a lot of good people applied on jobs, and they were missed out on jobs because there was just -- just the way it was at the time where there were problems identified. And I've raised this on an issue.

In the 19th Assembly, I was on a committee that went up and down the Valley. My colleague from Monfwi was part of that committee. Cabinet Minister across the road there was on that committee. And we heard from our people in the Northwest Territories that to increase the aboriginal numbers in the GNWT, we have to take a look at these policies. So now this motion is here today. I keep thinking about it because I got calls from members -- I can paint an old car, even though it's broken down, everything, paint it, I'm going to try to sell it. It's still an old car. This policy, I'm deeply concerned. If we can't implement the affirmative action policy after 30 years and fix the problems, then what do you think we're going to do with this policy? Is it going to be any better? I don't think so. It's going to be another 30 years before we finally catch up, figure what the problems are.

I wish we had more time to talk about this, but Cabinet made a decision. There was no consultation or accommodation with Indigenous governments throughout the Northwest Territories or groups throughout the Northwest Territories. They have a right to be heard. So this policy that the Minister of Finance announced, I can't support that policy. My chiefs were never consulted. The leaders of the Northwest Territories were never consulted. Cabinet brought this forward in the 19th Assembly as well. It didn't go anywhere. So here today I support this motion. We could fix it but let's do it right.

Right now, I come here to work for my people and my region, the communities throughout the Northwest Territories, and it seems like we have no voice because Cabinet continues to make decisions on the best interests of the people in the Northwest Territories with no consultation or accommodation. And do you think this policy now it's going to forward, aboriginal policy? There's going to be problems with it. Why were we sitting at a committee, go up and down the Valley to listen to people, and then we -- this policy comes out. Then what happens to all the hard work we did? It's out the door.

I'm not going to tell how my colleagues to vote on this one here, but I'm going to ask them to vote with your heart because at the end of the day I'm worried about my grandchildren and their other grandchildrens. So if we can't increase the aboriginal hire in government and then we change the policy and call it a different name, the issues are still going to be there. We should have an oversight committee independent on all the hire, on all the appeals. That's what I said in the 19th Assembly when we did the committee on the -- I can't remember what the bill number is, but we did the work. We did a lot of good work that time. So I'm deeply concerned that here we are today talking about this. And if -- if this thing goes ahead, then what does that say to all the work we do in committee? It's all for nothing.

So, Mr. Speaker, I'm going to support this motion on behalf of my constituents who have issues still trying to find jobs in government. And it's time that we start listening to the people here in the Northwest Territories and take their voices and their issues and their concerns when we make decisions in this House. But this decision came without the consent of our own colleagues here; it just happened. We were caught off guard on that. So, Mr. Speaker, I'm going to support this motion for my people in my riding. Thank you.

Thank you, Member from Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh. To the motion. Member from Yellowknife North.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot support a return to the old affirmative action policy. But I also cannot give me wholehearted endorsement of the new Indigenous employment policy because I do not believe it can achieve its intended objectives.

Mr. Speaker, if this motion is asking me to take a position on which one do I support, the affirmative action policy or the Indigenous employment policy, I will do neither because I believe we are having the wrong conversation entirely.

The few constituents who did reach out to me about the Indigenous employment policy expressed a common concern, and I think it was summed up well by one constituent who said, what I have not seen or heard is anything that addresses why the existing affirmative action hiring policy failed to improve the representation of Indigenous northerners. Changing the existing policy without addressing the reasons for failure would seem to miss the mark. Northern Indigenous applicants already are priority 1. That policy has been in place for over 30 years and has little to no effect. If the root cause is not addressed, a new policy has little chance of success.

My conclusion, Mr. Speaker, is that too much attention and airtime has been given to debating the government's policy on hiring priorities and not enough attention has been given to the biggest barriers that Indigenous people and other marginalized groups actually face in securing good jobs with the government. I want to talk about how we can support community learning, new approaches to K to 12 education, adult education that meets people where they're at, effective and culturally appropriate mental health supports at every age, innovative approaches to addictions treatment. I want to talk about how even when Indigenous individuals and people from marginalized groups get hired by the GNWT, there are barriers to them moving up in their careers, so many get discouraged and leave the government. I want to talk about more flexible and responsive professional development, mentorship, and mental health supports within GNWT workplaces. I want to talk about ways the GNWT can make its workplaces more welcoming and accommodating to people with disabilities. We should also be talking more about how lived experience and knowledge of Indigenous culture and northern communities is or can be accounted for in evaluating someone's qualifications when they apply for a job.

I also want to acknowledge that many Indigenous residents may not want to work for the GNWT regardless of how much the government wants them. Many are choosing to devote their talents instead to working with their own Indigenous governments or development corporations, and there's no reason that the GNWT should be trying or coming up with strategies to lure Indigenous Northerners away from Indigenous government employers.

I've also heard from constituents about a number of barriers facing northern-born students who want to return home to work, including sometimes specialized jobs are not available, sometimes salaries are not competitive. But, again, these cannot be solved by a priority hiring policy.

Mr. Speaker, this motion offers me a chance to take a position between going back to the affirmative action policy or accepting the Indigenous employment policy, and I choose neither. I want to have entirely different conversations. So for that reason, I will be abstaining on this motion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member from Yellowknife North. To the motion. Member from Great Slave.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I really appreciate my colleague from Yellowknife North's position. I share a lot of her sentiments when it comes to the underlying causes of why we don't see more Indigenous representation in our public service.

Mr. Speaker, if we keep what we have -- if we keep what we have always had, then we will keep getting what we've always got. I'm going to say a little bit of what I said at the briefing earlier this week because I had to rush through my comments due to time constraints; I don't have that here.

My colleague from Monfwi is relentless, with good reason, when she speaks about education for youth. Improving our educational outcomes are how you change the workforce in the long term. It's crucial we don't forget this. Systemic changes to education access and outcomes can easily become generational and doesn't allow the GNWT to aim for better Indigenous representation right now. It's my -- if my Indigenous colleagues on the whole are comfortable with this amended IEP moving forward, I support them.

What I do want to state unequivocally is that diversity, equity, and inclusion is fundamentally about prioritizing equity for underrepresented groups within the employer, especially underrepresented groups that have historical barriers to employment. That is what affirmative action tried to accomplish but failed and what now IEP seeks to address.

I think there is value of having long-term Northerners in the public service, but I do not feel that they are underrepresented as an equity group. To say that they are is disingenuous.

At the public briefing with the Minister this week, I highlighted my main concern, which is what I hear from my constituents, around the lack of an employment equity policy going ahead at this time. When affirmative action ceases to exist on April 1, so goes preferential hiring for folks with disabilities, for example. This work was originally in scope for the reworking of an affirmative action policy but was halted due to public feedback. I fully accept that many people are not comfortable around self-identifying various characteristics about themselves in the hiring process. Sometimes this is extremely personal information that they don't wish to share, and it seems invasive. I'm still confident that the work can be done to ensure hiring equity for historically underrepresented folks is appropriate and inclusive. I have heard from the Minister and her staff that they continue to prioritize this work and, most importantly, will work with stakeholders on this work. At this time, I'm satisfied that the GNWT is hearing that historical inequities need to be addressed. And if it means taking apart the functions of the original affirmative action policy and dealing with them one at a time, I am all right with this.

Back in January, I had a conversation after the letters from some Members to this -- to the Premier came out. And my friends told me this, and I want to share it with the House today: All equity work is frustrating. It triggers our most primal survival responses. When we are triggered, we are taught our options are flight, fight, freeze, and fawn. But we have another option, Mr. Speaker. Surrender. That seems to be a reoccurring lesson for me for the last few months. Surrendering is accepting what is and to give space to other people's stories, other people's truths. It is to know that my truth is not the objective truth. It's giving space for other people's stories to model for them how we give space for our own. The irony of race equity work is a constantly fighting not to become the very thing we're resisting. So I cannot speak to whether or not an Indigenous employment policy is right for Indigenous people. Only Indigenous people can do that, Mr. Speaker. And what I am hearing is they want to see this go ahead. So at this time, I will not support this motion.

Thank you, member from Great Slave. To the motion. Member from Frame Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I don't think there's much disagreement in this room about the problem that is trying to be solved through implementation of this new policy. In fact, I haven't heard any disagreement about that, the problem of underrepresentation of Indigenous persons in the public service.

So to give a little bit of history on this, the department during the last term of the Assembly went out and did engagement with the public on changing the affirmative action policy and fixing the issues that are at hand. What came back was quite complex. It produced a lot of results with a number of different recommendations. And I would say that there was not a clear path identified which put the department in a difficult position. And I would note that much of what was said in that engagement was spoken to by the Member for Yellowknife North just now.

The various challenges that Indigenous persons and persons with disabilities, people in minority groups, face in terms of the barriers to their advancement within the government, to their entry into the workforce, education outcomes, which the Member for Monfwi has spoken eloquently about and I agree with completely -- and I have more to say about education outcomes in a different item that we're considering today -- and so the department was faced with something difficult. How do we get at this issue? And they brought forward what we saw as the first iteration of the Indigenous employment policy. And so committee responded to that, wrote to the Minister. It ended up as was pointed out by other members -- wrote to the minister multiple times. First sort of critiquing the initial attempt and saying we wanted to engage further and consider other options. And one of the things that committee pointed out, that I'm going to speak to a bit further in a second here, is that the new Indigenous employment policy as presented addressed three out of the 17, 17 recommendations, that came out of the What We Heard report of the department's engagement on this issue. And so there -- even with this new policy are a huge number of gaps that still need to be filled. Again, the Member for Yellowknife North spoke well to those gaps, and so I don't want to stand here and repeat those.

And so the other thing that committee did is that, you know, with the department, ultimately we got -- we came to a place where committee wrote the Minister asking -- asking her to pause this process and say, you know, we need to do more work on this. And the committee also went out to the public and said now that the policy's out, what do you think. And committee received a significant number of responses, far more than we usually do. We received 50 written responses from the public raising a number of different issues, raising issues with the way the policy was being implemented, concerns about it, but in particular, noting again, the gaps in education, the gaps that are not being filled with this policy and all the different elements that lead to barriers to advancement and barriers to entry into jobs with the government. And so my main takeaway right now is that there is still a lot of work left to be done. And I would note that when the Minister came before committee just the other day, staff acknowledged that fact, acknowledged that there's a lot of work to do, acknowledged that when it comes to diversity and inclusion, all the groups that have been left out of the new policy, there's a lot of work left to be done.

And so what I've come away with from this process is just I don't really understand why this had to be rushed, why it had to be done now, considering that this is a policy that's 30 years old, it's taken a long time for us to get here, and why the Minister couldn't take more time to work with committee, help build consensus around a new policy and a set of actions and changes that we can all agree on that comprehensively get at the various issue that is came up during engagement. And I think that's why we're having so much difficulty with this now, is that this policy as it stands alone doesn't solve all those problems.

And I want to acknowledge that there was some concession by the Minister. The Minister did change the policy to recognize that the real goal here, the real outcome that we're looking for is increased employment of Northerners, Indigenous Northerners in particular, from the territory or from groups represented in the territory if they didn't necessarily grow up here. And I don't disagree with that. I think it's a -- I think it's a good goal, and I think most people do. But where I do have concerns is all the folks who are left out and the 14 other recommendations that haven't been addressed by this particular policy.

Now, the Minister has ensured us, and the Minister's staff has ensured us, that work is ongoing on that and I appreciate that but, again, I still just don't understand why we couldn't bring forward something more wholistic that acknowledges all these issues, particularly the one that I think, you know, was highlighted by the -- sorry, Mr. Speaker. The name is -- but something that's been highlighted is the enormous education gap between Indigenous youth and non-Indigenous youth in this territory and the fact that education outcomes are so different. I think that that is one of the key issues. We have got to get at that. And I certainly hope that that becomes one of the next big priorities of the Assembly, is addressing that issue head on.

So that's really where I'm left here. And as chair of the committee that wrote to the Minister multiple times, I would just say, you know, I'm standing in support of this motion today in good faith with Cabinet in the sense that what I'm really trying to say here is we wanted to work with Cabinet on developing a more fulsome solution. We wrote to Cabinet and asked to do that and were not met with -- with that willingness.

Now, I want to acknowledge a few things. The Minister has reached out to committee and suggested we form a working group and that we work on this issue on a go-forward basis. I appreciate that and certainly look forward to doing that work. The other thing I wanted to know is, you know, some of the questions that I asked yesterday in had the house were about how this is going to affect students. And I would just note that I think it'll bring some of my constituents a fair bit of comfort knowing that students that go away and have been educated in the territory and go off to university still come -- will still be able to receive a form of preference hiring when they apply for the jobs in the Northwest Territories. And those are folks that I'm concerned about, people who are just entering their careers. So I appreciate that reassurance from the Minister. And, you know, I look forward in whichever way this goes down -- I look forward to working with the Minister further on this issue. We are certainly not done. There's a lot more work to be done as was highlighted by the Member for Yellowknife North, by Member for Monfwi, by all the Members who have spoken, that there's a lot more work to do. So I look forward to doing that work. And, again, I just say in good faith I support this motion asking for a pause as I had done as chair of the committee writing just saying, you know, we need to take more time to do this, and I certainly respect the Members who have come around and support the policy in its current form. Either way, always look forward to working with my colleagues. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member from Frame Lake. Member from Inuvik Range Lake -- or how about we try this, how about I moved Range Lake to Inuvik? Inuvik Boot Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we've had a lot of conversation around this issue. We've taken it back to our ridings for sure. I've had conversations with members in my riding. It ranged from agnostic, where it doesn't matter, it doesn't work anyway, to we want to see Northerners first, it should be about Indigenous people, and I've had also some people who are P2s coming in, and P2s, I've had a conversation with who have, by the way, been gainfully employed because they allegedly have letters after their name where they've got the education, they've been working in the North a long time and, indeed, helped build the North and have been paid to help build the North, and have done quite well for themselves and are going to stay here and enjoy the benefits of living in the North. But for me, Mr. Speaker, this has to be about Indigenous employment, period. That, for me, Mr. Speaker is what it's about. It's about having a policy and, more importantly, following that policy. Some of our issues around affirmative action, as again, we've had this thing for 30 years. It hasn't really worked. We have a 1 percent unemployment rate in non-Indigenous and a 14 percent unemployment with Indigenous. So something is not working. So we need to make a change. Do I agree 100 percent with the -- you know, with the new Indigenous employment policy? No. And I've had several conversations with the Minister about that. She's been kind enough to sit down and answer some questions.

One of the concerns I did have in my riding was that it has to be northern Indigenous first. That's a change that was made and that was a change that was explained when we had our public hearing on that earlier this week. That was, likely for me, Mr. Speaker, the number one issue that I had heard in my riding, that it has to be northern Indigenous first.

I don't know if the new policy's going to be better than the old one. I do know the old one hasn't been working. And we have stats to show that. I don't think this is going to have a huge impact on non-Indigenous. Again, the stats don't lie. If you look at the unemployment rate, surely you can see that. I do think there are gaps in our system, and I'm -- you know, for me, it's about equivalencies. It's about people that are working in the government, Indigenous people working in the government that have been in roles for a long time -- and I've said this before -- have equivalencies, so have done the job, but yet not gotten that additional promotion to get them at that next level, the senior level. Instead you've brought in other people to do that job. May or may not have been from the territory, may not have worked out. Again, the person acts in that position for a long time, but the equivalencies aren't being recognized either because the policy's not being followed correctly or there's lateral violence, there's things that happens within the workforce. But people, there's that gap that people are sat there, that should be promoted, that are Indigenous people that aren't, and that's likely the biggest concern for me, Mr. Speaker. That's where I see a gap that has to be filled and has to be looked at.

Can the new policy do that? I mean, I hope so. For me, we have to try and do something different. And it's a policy, and I appreciate that the -- you know, the Minister has talked about a working group that we can work on this together with committee, with Cabinet, with the Minister's department, to find out, indeed, if this is working, if something can work better than the policy that we know hasn't worked for 30 years. I think everyone in this room has either mentioned that or agreed to that, that what we had has not been working. And so to try something different -- and if the new policy doesn't work, then we go back and we try something again. But, again, I -- you know, for me, it's about Indigenous employment. That's the goal here. It's what we're trying to do here. That's what I've heard in my riding, that people want to hear, it's about how do we -- and we're just talking in the public service here of course, Mr. Speaker, how do we increase Indigenous employment in public service. The policy we have hasn't gotten us there.

So, Mr. Speaker, I mean -- and, again, like, we need workers. I mean, listen, if -- to be a nurse or to be a teacher or to be a doctor or to be an accountant, to be a lab tech, you have to have those qualifications so it doesn't matter, you know, who you are, Mr. Speaker, you have to have that. We're not talking about positions -- and we need those in every jurisdiction right now. We know that. I mean, we're looking to bring people in. We're bringing agency nurses in. We're -- like, we need -- we need people. We have, you know -- so, again, for me, our focus has to be in the public service on Indigenous employment.

Mr. Speaker, as my friend from Monfwi had said, I'm willing to give this a shot, the new policy. I think committee needs to work with the government on this to ensure that if there's an opportunity in the IEP that we're taking full of advantage of that, that we're actually implementing and following up on the policies as they are presented. Because, again, I think, Mr. Speaker, that's been one of the things that we haven't done a good job within the past. So willing to give that an opportunity.

I appreciate what my colleague from Yellowknife Centre, Yellowknife -- Range Lake as well. I mean, yeah, and I've heard some of those -- some of those concerns in my riding as well. But the overwhelming thing I heard in my riding was that it has to be Indigenous northern first, and that's the change that the Minister has made, and I'm willing to give this a shot, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

Thank you, Member from Inuvik Boot Lake. To the motion. Member from the Sahtu.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This policy is a revised policy from the 30-year-old one. And I've seen a number of changes in the positions, northern Indigenous positions, in the Sahtu. I recall years ago we never had a regional superintendent from the region. Now we do, so that tells me that things have changed since way back then. However there's always room for improvements on efficiencies, and certainly similar to this policy and every policy that this government has, it's only good as the implementation. And if you want to measure that success, then we can do a survey, an analysis on the improvements to measure the policy is actually working, whether it's this one or others. And certainly, Mr. Speaker, this policy has really created an opening door of reviews and efficiencies and What We Heard engagements from the public. We've got that. As previous speakers mentioned, there's parts of recommendations that are identifying missing gaps. So to that, moving forward for the remaining term of this Assembly, opens the doors for further collaboration on efficiencies. And I'm also mindful that the multi-jurisdictions of our Northwest Territories is different in the Sahtu, similar to the other three neighboring settlement areas, have various provisions of government benefits to the beneficiaries of the land claim. So given that, and also being respectful on what we had said the beginning of this Assembly, there's going to be days that we are here today, making a decision on what you think is right for the people that put you in this House. But, also, I'm mindful of outside the land claim. This policy is a territorial one, not a land claim one, but it also applies to the jurisdiction I represent.

Now if we look at efficiencies and reviews and say okay, well, can we improve that, as my colleague from Boot Lake mentioned okay, you got 1 percent and you got 14 percent. Okay, those are numbers to sit back and say okay, let's analyze this; why isn't this working. So there's certainly room for improvements. To make my long presentation short, I'm willing to give this new policy a chance. However, I want a midterm review to the remaining term of our Assembly. We can say midterm, or we can say an annual review; is it really working come next fiscal year. Let's look at it. Don't develop a policy and put it on the desk and it stays there. So for the record, I'm willing to give this new revised policy a chance, and let's tweak it, let's improve it, and let's move on. Thank you.

Thank you, Member from the Sahtu. To the motion. Member from Yellowknife South.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, a policy whose purpose is to improve equity must focus on areas where there is inequity. To be effective, we need to ask ourselves who is not being treated with equity if we're going to make a difference. And so, Mr. Speaker, that is now the focus of the new Indigenous employment policy. It is focusing on those persons who we know have not been -- historically and systemically been treated with equity in the Northwest Territories and also in Canada. The policy, though, is and always has been about hiring for the GNWT for the Northwest Territories, and it has focused always, and intended always, to benefit support Indigenous persons living in the Northwest Territories. Some of those Indigenous people who live here, who reached out to the GNWT during the course of our engagement, are not Members of the Indigenous Nations who find themselves -- Indigenous First Nations and Inuit and Metis who are within the present boundaries of the Northwest Territories. Some of them are from communities that may straddle the boundary. Others have moved here or maybe were born here and are Members of Indigenous Nations from elsewhere in Canada. And the Indigenous employment policy, after the engagement sessions, was meant to capture that in a very simple and focused way.

And so, Mr. Speaker, we went through a fairly extensive engagement process. It did not begin this Assembly. Arguably, it did not even begin last Assembly because for 30 years, perhaps for the reasons we are all here speaking today, this policy has been political and not one on which it is easy to find consensus. So back all the way in 2005, work was done to try to review the policy to update it because we're out of step with the rest of Canada. No one else is doing affirmative action policies anymore. But we just can't seem to change this one. 2014 it comes forward again. Just can't get it over the line. Can't agree, and it gets ended, it gets stopped.

So we move it forward last government and did an extensive engagement. There were special theme days in this House about human resources and hiring of Indigenous people, I believe not just once but more than once. It was one of the hottest topics in this building in the last government about hiring Indigenous people into the public service. And so the engagement process that we embarked on involved Indigenous -- the NWT Council of Leaders, the IGC Secretariat, multiple in-person sessions in multiple communities, the Indigenous Employment Advisory Committee, multiple outreaches directly to myself as well as to other Members. Mr. Speaker, one of our standing committees in the 19th Assembly also engaged, at length, in human resources, examining how they could better match the fact that we are not representing the Northwest Territories in the government's public service. Members of this room are -- were on that committee. And that brings, of course, to where we are today and the What We Heard report and looking at how we were going to try our best to find a path forward on something that is not easily agreed upon because it does touch on a deep inequity in our society that is reflected in the public service. But that inequity is much deeper than just the public service, and this public service hiring policy will not fix it by itself. But we can be honest about it.

And so, Mr. Speaker, we did almost a year ago, in fact, March of last year, go with this new Assembly to standing committee and presented on the proposed changes, received letters. And, Mr. Speaker, I don't actually want this to be about the back and forth of that. I am -- I've been to committee now several times and have noted and will say here I regret the falling out that we have had on this policy. It didn't have to be that way, and I acknowledge that. And it shouldn't be that. That is, in fact, very rare in terms of how this House and all 19 of us speak and collaborate. Whether it's about policies, legislation, the budget, it is not generally how we do things, that there is such a deep divide between us. I am regretful that that's the situation we find ourselves in. But we did go back and the department I believe made efforts to answer the concerns that were being raised about the policy, because the concerns that are being raised about the policy are not just about the words on the page of how we screen in candidates to be in public service. The bigger issues are about education, education outcomes, schools, training, racism, unconscious bias, cultural training, language. Those are the really big issues, and they're difficult. So we did appear again and tried to provide detail about the Indigenous recruitment and retention framework because that, along with the diversity and inclusion framework, with the human resources -- the strategic plans, the cultural training, the context that we are trying to create -- the culture that we are trying to create within human resources has changed, and I hope is changing. There is an entire suite of things that we are rolling out over the last few years. This is now but one policy, not the only policy, that is meant to govern and direct how we behave and how we act in human resources vis-a-vie the creation of a public service that is more inclusive, more diverse, and more reflective of the public that we serve.

And so, Mr. Speaker, the Indigenous employment policy now is one that focuses on equity, but it is, again, not one that is meant to focus only on southern hires or one group -- or one group of Indigenous persons. It really is now focusing, with amendments, on, of course, firstly and foremost, those Indigenous people who have the tie to a community or a group or nation within the present boundaries of the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Speaker, I've had questions about why that back and forth. Again, we were trying to be inclusive of all Indigenous people in the Northwest Territories and just be simple and direct, but I recognize, and we should all recognize, that we have treaty obligations. We have treaty obligations to nations within the present boundaries that we are in, and we're going to respect them and we're going to put those as being a priority tier. But then we wanted to make sure that there's all the other people who are Indigenous Canadians living here who may not be members of those groups but who we still want to see reflected in had the public service.

And, Mr. Speaker, the most recent public hearing that I had the opportunity to attend just a few days ago with my colleagues from the standing committee, after which I did receive feedback from the public service, from a member of the public service directly to me, who is a member of the public service, who is an Indigenous Canadian, who is not a member of one of the groups from the present boundaries of the Northwest Territories. So I want all of the folks who may find themselves as Indigenous Canadians living here in the Northwest Territories to consider applying to the public service and to hopefully see that we want to prioritize their presence within the ranks of the public service.

Mr. Speaker, this is why we are implementing this policy. We want to be laser focused. We want to ensure that we are focusing on a group that has not seen equity and that has not benefitted.

There are some who have benefitted from the old affirmative action policy where there was priority given to women in nontraditional roles and, in this respect, the policy was successful. The percentage of women in the Government of the Northwest Territories has risen from 59.3 percent back in 2000 to now 65.5 percent of the public service are women. Since 2007, women's representation among senior management has nearly doubled. We are now at 61.4 percent women in the senior management. So it is fortunate, from that perspective, that this is no longer a group, and has not been for some time, that requires an equity approach in order to achieve equity. That's never to say that we don't want to continue to look for diversity and inclusion, but there are different tools that we can use to ensure that we maintain these gains.

And so, Mr. Speaker, it is interesting if we look too at the labour force. So women are actually slightly less than half of the labour force but make up almost two-thirds of the public service. They're not underrepresented. And so the affirmative action policy may have played a role in changing those numbers around over the last 25 years, but there's certainly no likewise improvements for people who identify as Indigenous Canadians.

But similarly, Mr. Speaker, there's no evidence to suggest that non-Indigenous Northerners are disadvantaged or in need of the priority hiring in order to gain employment within the public service. In 2024, the unemployment rate for Indigenous residents averaged 12 percent. It was at around 2 percent for non-Indigenous residents. Residents and employees are also, of course, now, we note, who may be having other identity features, who maybe have a -- maybe have a marginalized or a vulnerable group, maybe from a minority group, this is now a group that we do want to ensure see themselves focused upon, that there are other more modern tools by which we can achieve that, and that's the diversity -- the work of the diversity and inclusion unit within the Department of Finance. And, again, Mr. Speaker, the landscape that we operate in truly has changed and we hope will continue to change within human resources.

So we -- I would also take this chance, Mr. Speaker, to note that the duty to accommodate begins at the time that a person is applying for their position, not after. At the time that they are applying. Anyone who is qualified for a position should be able to apply for that job, feel themselves have that opportunity, have the ability to receive whatever accommodation might be necessary so that they can show that their skills, abilities, and qualifications meet the needs of the position. There should not be -- if we are truly a public service that is representative and inclusive, then we should be able to provide those accommodations in a proactive and positive way and not wait for people to have to self-identify.

There's work still to be done here, Mr. Speaker. There's no denying that. But that's the path that we want to be on. These are the values that we haven't to have in the Government of the Northwest Territories as our public service.

I also want to acknowledge that there are a number of processes to get at, again, some of the challenges that have been raised which is how we value and recognize the contribution of northern residents and northern knowledge. It's not necessarily determined by how long someone lives here. What we are doing now which has not been done in many the past, certainly not in a widespread or organized fashion and certainly not made as public as it is now, is changing some of our processes to reward and to categorize and prioritize northern knowledge as one of the skill sets that we would hire for. Northern values, northern experience, northern languages. We have 11 official languages, Mr. Speaker, and we could do an awfully good job now in recognizing that as a skill when we are hiring to build a workforce of people who appreciate the significance and importance of this territory, and it doesn't necessarily matter how long you've lived here. But we can include provisions when we begin our hiring for local knowledge in the job description. We can have a geographically limited competition if there's a concern around making sure that someone has a very specific knowledge and specific commitment and connection to a community. These are all tools that we can start to use.

And, Mr. Speaker, I know I've answered this many times, but if people are tuning in today, the summer student program and the intern program is open to people who are ordinarily resident. Doesn't matter how long but at least ordinarily resident when they're coming back. Similarly, the SFA program is one that is also open to ordinary residents. So there are advantages for young people who may not -- may just be entering their career stage.

The new Indigenous employment policy does involve mandatory reporting as does the Indigenous recruitment and retention framework. There are targets that are broken down by division, by types of positions. And Mr. Speaker, that's a much different type of approach than just a blanket -- just a blanket decision about who -- how many numbers we want to get. We are trying to do a better job now, Mr. Speaker, of looking at the workforce, looking who is out there looking for work, who different groups may be, and when we do reporting and set targets, to do so in a much more measured and targeted way.

We will continue, Mr. Speaker, to engage Indigenous governments. Certainly over the last few months, I've had myself many conversations, personally I have the officials in the Department of Finance with representatives of Indigenous governments, about the importance and the value of prioritizing those groups who are here within the Northwest Territories first and foremost. And that is the amendment that was made and approved by Cabinet and that's now set to go out on April 1st.

But, again, Mr. Speaker, it is a whole package of cultural shift that we are putting forward, this being but one part.

I'm pleased to hear some mention of the offer that we've made to collaborate with the Standing Committee on Government Operations. As I say, I would like this to be something as we roll out, given the importance and the value of speaking about representing Indigenous people and getting to a place of equity with people who have been systemically disadvantaged and discriminated against, that we do that as a collective, that we have the opportunity to share and to learn, and that some of the various tools that I'm describing and discussing don't have to be unknown. They should be better known, and we should be held to use them. That is the ideal, Mr. Speaker. Don't need to wait 30 years for review. Happy to do this over the course of the life of this government. Couldn't agree more. Being held to account for it can only be a good thing.

Mr. Speaker, my own riding is one that has a lot of public servants. It is one that is, I strongly suspect, not a majority Indigenous Canadian, Mr. Speaker, and I've heard from my own residents on this. This notion that something's being taken away from them, Mr. Speaker, saddens me because it's not, in my view, what defines us as Northerners whether or not you have access to a priority attempt to maybe get a job. Mr. Speaker, it is not what defines us as Northerners. What defines us as Northerners is our connection to this place, our connection to the land, our connection to friends and to family and to neighbours. That's why -- certainly why I think most people live here and why they have opportunities here, why there's such a strong connection by many here.

Mr. Speaker, I had yesterday the opportunity to meet with the Arctic Economic Council that was visiting here in Yellowknife, and they were asking about, you know, why people are living here and what their connections are. Mr. Speaker, from what I was hearing, and certainly from the reaction that most people would give, it's not because there's the possibility that there might someday be the advanced screening on a GNWT public servant's job. Mr. Speaker, I hope that we don't get to that place, that's the reason people are living here. There's so much more in the North to keep people here, to bring them here, and to bring them home.

So, Mr. Speaker, with that, this a policy of the Government of the Northwest Territories. It's a policy of Cabinet. It has been reviewed at length. It's been reviewed at length by many years, including by this Cabinet. And, again, we appreciate the feedback that was had since December to now, and that's why the changes were made as they were to reflect our northern Indigenous context and the treaty obligations and connections we have to treaty -- northern government. But with that, Mr. Speaker, in light of it, Cabinet will be voting against this motion. Thank you

Thank you, Member from Yellowknife South. To the motion.

Question.

Question's been called. Does the Member from Yellowknife Centre wish to conclude debate?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, I was quite shocked by the last statement by the finance Minister that Cabinet was going to vote against this motion because, I mean, tradition has it that when we provide motions, they're treated as advice and they abstain from motions. So this is clearly a sense of maybe -- I don't know, is it a new form of working as a party? I mean, they never vote against motions. And it's very -- it's a disappointment. So when they talk about working together, this would have just been heeded as advice. And the Premier can laugh all he wants about this but, I mean, maybe this is an impression of what maybe party politics is happening under the skin or under the guise or under whatever; I don't know.

Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Yeah, there we go.

Member from Hay River North has a point of order. Member from Hay River North.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. What it sounded like to me is the Member was imputing motives stating that, you know, this is an attempt at party politics and we're working as a party. I will let you know that I will never in this Assembly work as -- in a party system or strive to work in a party system or support a party system. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member from Hay River North. Member from Yellowknife Centre.

Well, I appreciate the Premier's creative imagination, but I wasn't formalizing there's a party politics. I was talking about the guise of the government collaborating together in a manner that they never do. So the Premier does have an imagination on this particular guard, I didn't specifically make that illustration clear enough, and I didn't say the party of one that already acts like that. I mean, I am making a clear point of the impression. So he can be creative in his thoughts and his imagination but he's completely wrong. Thank you.

Thank you, Member from Yellowknife Centre.

Colleagues, I'm going to have to review what was actually said with the Hansard and that before I make a formal decision on this. But, colleagues, please remember when we're in this House debating that we are respectful to one another and that we move forward in a positive manner so that we can have honest debate here. Thank you. Member from Yellowknife Centre.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I look forward to your ruling when it does come, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the latest revision of this particular policy by the government has eked out seven Members of this side of the House spoke against it. Guess what happens? The typical going down the hall or whatever the calls are made, I mean, how do you describe this (audio) --

(audio) on the motion. Thank you. Member from Yellowknife Centre.

And hence, Mr. Speaker, we have the policy now before us and that's why this motion is coming forward. Mr. Speaker, I have asked different times at committee when did they review the affirmative action policy. They have not. There's no answers. That's why this motion exists. Mr. Speaker, the Premier and everyone else can talk about the impacts on these people -- on folks, but there are equity groups that are being impacted by this. That's why it needs to go back to committee.

Mr. Speaker, this isn't the -- there was at least four letters that said slow down, have consultation. That's what this motion's all about.

Mr. Speaker, as the motion and my colleagues have said, many Indigenous governments feel steamrolled by this process, this drive-by consultation. Back in 2022, there was never a detailed consultation as to what you're getting. That's why this motion is being sent back, Mr. Speaker.

At the heart of the issue, as I said in my original comment, this is about problems with education, as people mentioned the credentials, job opportunities, and even, let us not forget, not everyone wants to work for the GNWT.

Mr. Speaker, the affirmative action program wasn't meant to solve every problem but what worked in it allowed -- there were things that could have worked, and we could have modified the current policy to fix the small gaps. And, sure, there may have been larger gaps; that's true. But we wouldn't know because it's never been reviewed.

Now it's often been brought why it needs to go back, brought up as the issue of it needs to go back because oh my goodness, if we don't follow the new direction of the government, it's unconstitutional, yet unproven other than a statement, Mr. Speaker.

So specific to committee comments, you know, the policy may never have been perfect but, ultimately, the affirmative action policy was an important foundation in the North. That's why it needs to go back to committee to talk about it. The EIP program isn't making things better. It's just a reinvention of something that I'm not sure what's happening.

Mr. Speaker, sure, I agree that we could do better. We've heard people say that their Indigenous colleagues, they want to follow their direction. Some have said yes. Some will say they support this motion going back to committee. Mr. Speaker, much work has to be done, as pointed out by Member for Frame Lake, hence it needs to go back to the committee.

Mr. Speaker, this isn't -- this current policy of the affirmative action program hasn't made things worse. The problem is is the application hasn't had the reviews and statistics and measurements as my colleague from the Sahtu has pointed out are key. So, Mr. Speaker, that's why it needs to go back. Mr. Speaker, the Minister says this isn't an -- or equity policy. Yes, you know, if it was, then we'd be talking about something different. She's right that there might be Northerners who are Indigenous but not Indigenous to the Northwest Territories who are impacted by the current policy of the affirmative action policy. But there's nothing stopping us from editing that and making that contribution acknowledged.

Mr. Speaker, I like the fact that she pointed out that women -- statistics on women in the government employment sector have increased. Fantastic. Empowering people. Mr. Speaker, taking away P2s is not disenfranchising Northerners because they came after them. So this new policy rendition doesn't change anything. It doesn't fix anything either.

Mr. Speaker, she highlighted in 2005 -- in 2014, which actually I happened to be there at the same time, I can tell you right now that everybody fought for the recognition of long-term Northerners, and even the finance Ministers of those days were Indigenous fighting for long-term Northerners to ensure that they get appreciated.

Mr. Speaker, the finance Minister pointed out this work was, you know, some of it or maybe largely or whatnot or you can say it's a continuation, but it's a lot of work was done last term. So back to my point my colleague from Range Lake had said, there was no mandate. So are we just simply doing the work of the last term because the Minister didn't get it through in the last time? I mean, it sort of makes you wonder what's the value of elections if the Cabinet's going to just keep dredging up old work that used to be done. We had a reset a year and a half ago. And, again, it wasn't in the mandate as pointed out. It wasn't in the Minister letters that isn't pointed out. It wasn't even on the campaign trail by anybody, Mr. Speaker.

There's frustration abound. That's why this needs to be done. There have been many P1s who have told me that they don't want to see this lost. I agree there are ways to fix the current policy which is exactly why it needs to go back. My colleague from Tu Nedhe, you know, brought up the issue of what's the point of committee advice if it's just going to be ignored? It makes you wonder what is happening.

Mr. Speaker, to wrap up this is that what it does is it creates a new format that we're trying to solve southern Indigenous hiring problems. I support northern Indigenous empowerment hiring opportunities, whether it's education or jobs. I've always held the line that I would do what I can to be a champion of the causes and certainly a champion of their success. And that doesn't change today. To my last breath, I'll be working to support the North, its people, its Indigenous people. But it feels like when we have such overwhelming criticism, it makes you wonder are we not following the direction of the people, or are we following the direction of the finance Minister and Cabinet?

Mr. Speaker, the people of the North don't like this. The finance Minister likes this. The Cabinet likes this. And it's been tweaked in a manner that a few of my Indigenous colleagues feel like at least their groups are protected. And I'm glad it can be. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on that note, I will heed your advice and finish with this is frustrating, this is divisive, and it's been led by the government, and our committee colleagues wanted to be part of the solution. This is how we get it back on track, working together. Thank you very much.