Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, your committee would like to report on its consideration of Bill 26, An Act to Amend the Public Service Act.
Bill 26 received second reading in the Legislative Assembly on May 26th, 2025, and was referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations for review.
The committee received briefings from the sponsor and stakeholders between June and September 2025. The committee also held a public meeting on September 23rd, 2025. The committee has also received 28 submissions from members of the public to date.
The committee has not yet conducted a clause-by-clause review of the bill; therefore, Mr. Speaker, in accordance with Rule 8.3(2) of the Rules of the Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Great Slave, that the review period for Bill 26, An Act to Amend the Public Service Act, be extended by 120 days. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member from Frame Lake. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? Opposed? Abstentions? Motion carried.
---Carried
Colleagues, the Standing Committee on Government Operations has received an extension of its 120 days review period. As a result, the Point of Order raised by the Member from Yellowknife Centre on Friday, October 17th, 2025, is now moot. However, I will refer the debate on the Member's Point of Order to the Standing Committee on Privilege and Procedures for review and, if required, to make a recommendation to the change of the rules.
Reports of Committees on the Review of Bills. Reports of Standing and Special Committees. Member from Frame Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, your Standing Committee on Government Operations is pleased to provide its report on the review to date of Bill 26, An Act to Amend the Public Service Act, and commends it to the House. And if you give me a second here, I'll prepare myself to read the report.
The Standing Committee on Government Operations reports on the review to date of Bill 26, An Act to Amend the Public Service Act.
Bill 26, An Act to Amend the Public Service Act received second reading on May 26th, 2025 and was referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations for review. Bill 26 is a Private Member's bill, brought forward by -- Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure if the report names the Member, is it okay to use the Member's name in the House?
Bill 26 is a Private Member's bill brought forward by Shauna Morgan, MLA for Yellowknife North. Bill 26 would make amendments to the Public Service Act to provide a process to authorize and de-authorize a separate bargaining unit for unionized nurses pursuant to a vote. This would apply to all public sector nurses registered with the College and Association of Nurses of the Northwest Territories and Nunavut, referred to as CAN in the rest of the report.
The main points of Bill 26 include the following:
Changing the definition of employee's association to include an association or other body that has been authorized to bargain collectively on behalf of nurses of the public service;
Adding a definition of nurse to the Act, which includes nurses employed by the Hay River Health and Social Services Authority, which only takes effect once Section 20 of An Act to Amend the Hospital Insurance and Health and Social Services Administration Act comes into force;
Adding that an application may be made to the Supreme Court for an order that authorizes an applicant to bargain collectively on behalf of nurses, which may be granted provided the Court is satisfied that all nurses had the opportunity to vote and that a majority of nurses who voted were in favour;
Adding, through a similar process, that an application can be made after six months for an order to decertify the nurse's bargaining agent;
Specifying that any term or condition of employment that applies to nurses as members of the Union of northern Workers, or UNW, continues until a new agreement is entered into by a new employee's association on their behalf.
The Act would come into force on November 7th, 2025.
This report outlines committee's engagement with the public, stakeholders, and the Government of the Northwest Territories on Bill 26. Both the sponsor of Bill 26 and the government provided substantial background information to support committee's review, which is included in the appendices to this report.
Committee sought feedback on Bill 26, with a call for public submissions on the Legislative Assembly website and through social media, in addition to targeted engagement with key stakeholders. Committee received 28 written submissions on Bill 26, which can be found in Appendix C. Committee correspondence related to this review can be found in Appendix D of the report.
Committee held public briefings with CANN, UNW, Public Service Alliance of Canada, and the Northern Territories Federation of Labour. Committee also received public briefings from the sponsor of the bill, accompanied by nurses in support of the bill, and the Minister of Finance. Presentations on Bill 26 can be found in Appendix B.
On September 23rd, 2025, a public meeting was held in Yellowknife for the public to present views on Bill 26. 17 residents attended, and five oral submissions were made to committee. Committee extends its gratitude to those who contributed their views during the review of Bill 26.
While committee largely supports the goal of nurses having the ability to choose their own bargaining agent in recognition of their professional workplace needs and in support of health care sustainability in the Northwest Territories, committee believes that the most appropriate way to address certification and decertification of any bargaining agent is through comprehensive government modernization of Section 41 of the Public Service Act, also known as Phase 2 amendments.
Phase 2 amendments would allow for the creation of a labour relations board or similar mechanism to certify new bargaining agents. This approach would address the operational concerns that some nurses are seeking and would ensure freedom of association consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Committee believes this work is crucial given the concerns raised by nurses and residents through the review of Bill 26, and the fact that the NWT is one of the last jurisdictions in Canada without a labour relations board, putting our residents at a disadvantage.
During a public briefing to committee on Bill 26, the Minister committed to introducing a draft bill for Phase 2 amendments to the Public Service Act in the fall of 2026. Committee is pleased to acknowledge, as evidenced through the study of Bill 26, that both the government and union stakeholders are committed to collaborative work on addressing these amendments.
Bill 26 is contentious and is not a perfect bill, but committee members see value in pausing its review process for the time being, and to resume its review at a later date should the government not deliver on its promise of a legislative proposal for phase 2 amendments to the Public Service Act by spring 2026 and introduction of a bill in fall 2026.
To that end, committee urges government to make accelerated progress on the Public Service Act phase 2 amendments to ensure freedom of association consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Recommendation 1 of the report, Mr. Speaker:
The Standing Committee on Government Operations recommends that the Government of Northwest Territories complete the engagement and work necessary to bring forward a legislative proposal no later than May 2026 session and to introduce a bill to support phase 2 amendments to the Public Service Act no later than the October 2026 session in line with the timelines previously communicated.
Recommendation 2:
The Standing Committee on Government Operations requests that the Government of the Northwest Territories provide a response to the committee's recommendations within 120 days.
Conclusion:
Committee has not held a clause-by-clause review of Bill 26. Committee has paused its review of the bill and may resume its review at a later date in order to hold the government accountable for progress on a bill to address phase 2 changes to the Public Service Act.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I do note there is a dissenting opinion to be read.
To the report. Member from Yellowknife Centre.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I appreciate the -- what the chair of the committee's read in thus far. However, some different points of view, and I'll share other Members' points of view.
Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee on Government Operations (the committee) was tasked with reviewing Bill 26, An Act to Amend the Public Service Act. As a Member of the committee, it is important to note that while I agree with some of the concerns highlighted in committee's report on the review to date of Bill 26, there are several important reasons for preparing a dissenting point of view.
First of all, I call it committee process concerns:
I do not agree that the committee's decision to pause its review process for the time being and resuming its review at a later date should the Government of the Northwest Territories (the government) not deliver on its promise of a legislative proposal for phase 2 amendments to the Public Service Act by spring of 2026 and introduce -- introduction of a bill in the fall of 2026.
The first opportunity (October 16th) of 2025 arose after 120 days study period had passed, and committee did not report Bill 26 back per the rules, practices, and traditions of the Legislative Assembly. At the time of the draft of this report, this issue was outstanding, unclear. And as it all appears, Mr. Speaker, it may have technically been worked through.
At the end of the 120-day period, a study period of the bill by standing committee, or special committee, all committees are faced with three options:
Proceed to clause-by-clause review and be reported as ready or not for further consideration by the Assembly;
Return to the House and request more time to study the bill as we did today; and,
Report to the House and report that the bill was found wanting and not allow the House to consider its final direction.
Committee refused to formalize direction on Bill 26, which causes me concern. There is no transparency, explanation, similar to what is seen at the clause-by-clause stage as to why committee formally breached the rules of the Assembly on this bill. I believe this needs to be clearly explained, including the reasons. The current direction that committee has taken constitutes a break of its own rules and proceedings without addressing the formal requirements to report progress on the bill.
Committee, in my opinion, has not taken a formal position to avoid a judgment of Bill 26 and avoid a division (voting) by committee, including the subsequent follow-up in the House.
The refusal to proceed to clause-by-clause review, to openly ignore the Assembly's practice despite objections of some committee members, is concerning. By the time the public engagement period had closed, which tallied approximately 50 days, committee had zero public submissions on the record for Bill 26. All written feedback from the public came after the sponsor of the bill requested more time and after some campaigners in support of Bill 26 had informed some Members that they realized that no submissions had been sent in by that deadline.
Concerns about Bill 26 not ready:
It is my dissenting opinion is that Bill 26 should be reported as not ready and not in good form. My opinion is based on the following concerns:
Direction of intent:
Support for the nursing and health care industry continues to be unwavering but Bill 26 has been presented as solving the nurses' challenges but from the start, it appears to be centered around being a tool to deal with the internal labour politics. Bill 26 may mean well, but it does not address the issues raised by nurses, such as a nurse to a patient ratio, management concerns, shift premiums, etcetera.
Support for all health workers, Mr. Speaker:
As a Member of the Legislative Assembly, I have always stated that I would support a health care worker bill that would not exclude other nurses or health care workers. My position has always been no health care worker left behind. Teasing one group out of a larger collective group has the potential of creating upending effects and potentially setbacks that may cause serious damage to all groups, which will be lasting. Therefore, more time must be dedicated to consideration of its implications. This bill has been sold as a rosy picture in which the details will work themselves out; however, this has not proven to be the case.
There are a number of inherent risks if Bill 26 moves forward which, as highlighted during the committee review process, may prove to be a setback if not thought through, from voter rights to long-term setbacks in a new collective bargaining, etcetera.
Many of these concerns raised at the beginning of the Bill 26 review process focused on internal matters. In other words, the Legislative Assembly is being brought to address union versus union issues. This bill was never designed to address the health care concerns raised by the nurses which is based on why this group wants to break out of the Union of Northern Workers (UNW).
The collective of nurses has stated over a lengthy period that their issues are with management, shift premiums, workloads, and more. I know that nurses are very articulate on their issues. The sponsor of the bill is trying to give the impression that nurses are being ignored.
Structural failures in the process may be there as claimed -- sorry, may not be there as claimed. Sorry, Mr. Speaker. Bill 26 is meant to be a catch-all. My focus continues to be on the health care industry. No health care worker left behind matters to me. There are many complimentary skills, talents, and rules that work together with nurses. Why put one forward a health care provider bargaining unit rather than a nurses’ unit specifically? Teasing one group out of a larger health care group might not be the best solution. I am concerned that the bill is causing a divide in the nursing community. If the bill moves forward, I'm concerned that there will be ancillary services who will be asking for the same thing.
The justification for the breakaway has been that nurses have not been heard. The UNW and sponsors say no one is listening; however, nurses have been very articulate in their position, wishes, and needs. There is no evidence to show that Bill 26 will fix the concerns such as ratios, vacancies, shift premiums, agency nurses.
How it will guarantee that these issues will be addressed:
The purpose of the bill claims to empower nurses, but there is no evidence that it will do that. I have concerns with the validity of the survey done by the College and Association of Nurses of the Northwest Territories and Nunavut (CANN), albeit well intended. I understand that the sponsor of Bill 26 refused to meet with the UNW. I would rather see the union sort their own house out before coming to the legislature. I'm concerned it is not the appropriate vehicle at this point in time. If Bill 26 passes, government may be immediately responsible for extra costs and extensive obligations. We need to appreciate the long game rather than the short game (Bill 26). I worry about the costs that we keep creating, including if we are putting more money into boots on the ground or administration of the legislative process.
Government has limited resources and the decisions such as these becoming significant choices that we have to address in order to meet the challenges. Meanwhile, the issues of a new labour relations board is a hanging concern left unanswered. The government has committed to finding a way through this after the upcoming Public Service Act amendments have been considered. The union and government have some form of discussion to resolve these matters and have committed to working together.
Further concerns, Mr. Speaker:
I worry that if we pull one brick out, the rest of the system may tumble. For that reason, we need to know what is being agreed to before we agree to it If we need to appreciate the risks and the ripple effects. The guarantee of a collective agreement freeze may exist in Bill 26, but it does not mean it will be the foundation of the next collective agreement. The potential for a lesser agreement exists. Section 6 of the bill appears to be a natural assumption that everything will be the same. Don't worry, it'll be fine. But it cannot be the same unless the employer concedes that it will be. It does not present a guarantee what the future will look like. The content of the first collective agreement for nurses is wide open. Further, the provision's actual effect is open to the final interpretation -- final ruling on the interpretation, sorry. There are too many unknowns at this moment, Mr. Speaker.
So in conclusion, for the reasons noted above, I do not, as well as other Members, agree with the pausing of committee's review of this bill is the most important or effective approach. Bill 26 is flawed; therefore, my dissenting opinion is that the committee should respond according and report the bill is not ready. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
And, lastly, even though it's not part of the note, it did change -- the tone of the report did change based on the motion just earlier; however, the substance of the principle should still stand. Thank you.
Thank you, Member from Yellowknife Centre. Member from Frame Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Great Slave, that Committee Report 25-20(1), the Standing Committee on Government Operations Report on the Review to Date of Bill 26, An Act to Amend the Public Service Act, be received and adopted by the Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member from Frame Lake. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. All those abstaining, please raise your hand. Motion has carried.
---Carried
Mr. Morse.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Great Slave, that pursuant to Rule 9.4(5)(a), the Government of the Northwest Territories table a comprehensive response to this report, including all recommendations, within 120 days or at the earliest opportunity subsequent to the passage of 120 days. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member. To the motion. Question. Member from Yellowknife Centre.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It just seems weird that the government would be responding to something that we're just creating a delay. So it just seems odd that we'd be asking the government to respond to a report in this manner. So anyway, I just want to point that out. If they want to respond, it's up to them. We've seen the responses. They're usually pretty canned anyway which is -- it is what it is. So I just find it unusual that this motion would be in order in this particular case. Thank you.
It is a procedural thing; the recommendation is in order. To the recommendation.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? Opposed? Abstentions? The motion is carried.
---Carried
Reports of Standing and Special Committees. Colleagues. In recognition of the time, I will call a brief break to give the translators a break. Thank you.
---SHORT RECESS
