Robert Hawkins

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I can’t speak with 100 percent certainty, but I don’t recall the words in the May/June session noting somewhere in the middle that thank you for approving this money and, by the way, we’re going to be asking for more money very quickly to make this happen. Maybe that was just foolishness on our part that we did not foresee that there would be additional costs or whatnot, but again, as I’ve said before, I could be mistaken on this particular part, but I don’t recall the Minister or anyone saying that a further submission specifically related to Legal Aid would come...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess again thinking through, the Minister said June and I guess it is kind of perplexing. Whereas we approved money for bodies in order to put new legal aid personnel out there, then at that time, why did we not approve a particular chunk of money for the office? It seems like we did one element while not foreseeing that the other element would be required; seeing that chances are we’d have to go out and do this process. So I think -- and the Minister I have no doubt will correct me -- the Minister did mention that the original submission went out in June, he had...

Thank you, Madam Chair. I guess my question would still stand because I don’t think it was answered. My question was when was the government anticipating to get acquisition of this property in order to operate out of and as I said earlier when the tender closed on the 27th, I suspect we didn’t anticipate to take it that afternoon. So when did the government anticipate or work towards with an RFP to close or actually take lease control of the space? Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. You know I would consider myself relatively new to this process, and find it quite unusual that we would have a special warrant issued for the closing of the RFP and whatnot. Is this a normal practice, considering even on the 27th we don’t know who is responding to this particular tender and whatnot? If I understand, the closing date is August 27th, and the FMB approval, I should say the final approval by the Commissioner -- let me say it that way -- was on the 22nd, six days before the closing. It may be possibly even the official evaluation. Is this considered a...

Thank you, Madam Chair. For my benefit, could the Minister go through significant timelines again, I stress again, the day of the issue of the RFP, the day the RFP closed, the day the RFPs were evaluated and then they decided to enter into the next step? Can I get those timeline dates, please, Madam Chair?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I say thank you to all my colleagues. Mr. Speaker, out there we have NGOs dealing with mounds of paperwork when they should be dealing with social issues they are signed onto. They should be doing program delivery, which they are supposed to do.

Mr. Speaker, long-term multiyear funding would provide stability for these organizations rather than getting them to deal with the stress that is created fighting for year-to-year funding. Mr. Speaker, this is not good for these organizations.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I will say where is the hallmark of this Assembly? Long...

Question is being called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

The Minister’s statement for the NWT Housing Corporation will be moved into Committee of the Whole, Minister’s Statement 68-15(3).

Mr. Speaker, I would like to move the NWT Housing Corporation Minister’s statement into Committee of the Whole. Thank you.

Thank you. I guess from a Member's point of view, it certainly would have been nice to deal with this issue in the May-June session. I can appreciate that FMBS may have screened it out, but this is a decision before the House and I would have thought that hearing some of the timelines of the organization in May, how we were able to get our numbers together for the bodies portion, the workers portion for the May session. I find that almost kind of strange not to have been brought to us in May. I’m sure there is a reason why it wouldn’t have been brought to Members for a full discussion...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess maybe my next stage is more a comment. I just find it very unusual. I am in favour of the expenditure. I’m in favour of the clinic. I’m in favour of it in almost every sense, except for the special warrant process. The special warrant process doesn’t provide me any comfort. Just looking and trying to understand some of the timelines and the fact that this wasn’t brought to the House, it feels like it kind of slipped under the radar before it was brought to Members. I don’t agree with arguing it on the principle of the costs. I think the principle I’m...