Kevin O'Reilly

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Sorry for this. Would there be a requirement for every GNWT decision, action, to consider all of these criteria? Sorry. Would these criteria require their consideration the way this has been drafted in every single decision, action, taken by GNWT? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I mentioned earlier how the department, in carrying out the public consultations that went into the development of the bill, had said that they were contemplating the development of an environmental registry.

Ontario has such as registry already in place, and has had it in place for more than a decade. This is one place on the Ontario government website where any individual can go and find important decisions that are made with regard to the environment; proposals for policies, programs, new regulations, draft regulations; and there is an opportunity for the public to comment...

I want to thank the Premier for that information. There seems to be some confusion about what's covered and what's not, but I understand from what the Premier said that there is a review that may have started, failed efforts in the past to review the extended health benefits programs, including the specified disease condition list. I would like to ask the Premier: what's the holdup, and when will this review really commence?

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I think the Minister has misunderstood what the amendment is all about. As I understand it, this is not about making these criteria apply to any decision or action; it's about how the statement of environmental values is applied. Something has to be determined to significantly affect the environment; this is not about applying those criteria to every single decision that the government has to make. So I guess I would like to seek the advice of the law clerk in understanding how this amendment can be interpreted, whether it would apply to all decisions that the government...

Thanks, Mr. Chair. First off, I have a confession to make. I am passionate about this bill. This is the first time that the Environmental Rights Act has been through a review in 29 years. There have only been four requests under the act. It is not very well used; I don't think it's terribly well promoted. Of the four requests, there has only ever been one investigation carried out. I helped make that request with a friend, Chris O'Brien, about emissions from the Giant Mine.

Because this area of environmental rights is evolving over time, and certainly a number of other jurisdictions have...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that Bill 39 be amended by:

(a) renumbering clause 18 as subclause 18(1), and striking out "Minister of a department or" and substituting "Minister of a department referred to in paragraph 17(1)(a) or the" in that renumbered subclause; and

(b) adding the following after renumbered subclause 18(1):

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), in considering whether a decision might significantly affect the environment, the Minister or deputy head shall consider the factors set out in paragraphs 9(2.1)(a) to (h).

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Merci, Monsieur le President. I pointed out in my statement earlier today that there have been a number of instances in which serious and not uncommon medical conditions are not eligible for healthcare supports under the specified disease conditions list through the extended health benefits program. The latest instance brought to me of non-coverage was with regard to autism. I mentioned how the NWT Autism Society has produced legal analysis that claims that non-coverage of these conditions is discriminatory. I would like to know from the Minister whether his office has had a chance to review...

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I have no comments to make at this time. We read the report in yesterday. That is, I think, all we need to do at this point. Thank you.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. That is interesting, because there is now some significance criteria actually incorporated into the bill as a result of an amendment that the Minister accepted during clause-by-clause review. Clause 9 has now been amended, providing some criteria for the Minister to consider when determining whether something is likely to cause significant harm to the environment. They include, as now provided for in the bill, magnitude of the effect; geographical area of the affect; duration of the effect; degree of reversibility of the effect; nature of the effect; likelihood that the...

Merci, Monsieur le President. Members of this House have likely encountered the issue of NWT Health Plan coverage under the specified disease conditions list under the Extended Health Benefits Program.

Recently I brought forward another instance of lack of care supports because a constituent has a condition that is not covered. Recently the NWT Autism Society released a thorough legal review of how autism is not covered under the list of specified disease conditions and how this may be viewed as discrimination. When I raised this review with the Minister of Health and Social Services, the...