Louis Sebert

Mr. Speaker, I think before I did that, I would have to receive more information as to the Philadelphia model. I will undertake to do some personal research into that area and also determine which other police forces in Canada are using that model and attempt to determine how well that is working. I am prepared to investigate it. Whether I bring it forth at an FPT, I am not prepared to make that decision at this time until I have looked further into the matter. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, when we went out for proposals, we were hoping that there would be more of a response. There was a pre-bid meeting with various possible bidders, and unfortunately none of them, including the bidder currently holding the contract, decided to put in a bid. At that point, we started looking further afield and went out to NGOs. As I say, that is an ongoing process, and I am hoping that I will be able to give some good news about that in the next several weeks.

As I mentioned in my response to this issue yesterday, when I read in the return to the written question, there are many things that the RCMP are doing. Clearly, enhanced training is part of it. There were quite a number of things that were identified in the curriculum for sexual assault investigation, and it appears that the police are, of course, treating this very seriously, as they should. It appears that, to me at least, the training is exactly what is required to sensitize the RCMP further on this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I don't think I could tell the House those numbers because I think they are essentially unknowable. How can you quantify those things? It is almost impossible, but you know that there were relatively few graduates of the program. I think we are up to 31, and our costs have exceeded $1 million. Thank you.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, the information provided to me by the RCMP indicated that 42 were third-party which were not proceeded with. I imagine the others were proceeded with because there was perhaps insufficient evidence or, possibly, the complaint was actually unfounded. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I am sure Members will recall, there was an extensive report on A New Day, which we tabled in November of last year. As a result of that, we have made some minor changes, I regard them as minor, to the program. The group therapy model and the curriculum are not changing. That will stay the same. What is changing is some of the administration around the program. That was seen to be an issue. The program will become more flexible, and efforts will be made to have more facilitators available to run the program more often. This would also assist us, should we decide to...

As I mentioned earlier in this House, I was informed by the RCMP that they did do an investigation of those past cases. I'm not sure of the extent of that investigation as to whether they examined the evidence. I do know that they did look at those files that were identified as unfounded in that six-year period. I'm not certain as to the exact nature of that investigation.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Monday, May 29, 2017, I will move that Bill 25, An Act to Amend the Residential Tenancies Act, be read for the first time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wish to table the following four documents entitled "Follow-Up Letter for Oral Question 571-18(2): Territorial Electrical Power Generation Asset Expansion and Replacement;" "Follow-Up Letter for Oral Question 611-18(2): Status of GNWT Open Government Policy;" "Follow-Up Letter for Oral Question 620-18(2): Sahtu Land Use Planning"; and "Follow-Up Letter for Oral Question 717-18(2): Land Lease Assessments and Consultations." Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Department of Justice continues to work with the RCMP to address the concerns of the small communities. I will bring this concern to the RCMP, but I certainly can’t guarantee that the coverage requested could be provided. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.