-- you are the Minister.
I am the Minister but I am not the daily operator of housing. But we work together in partnership and collaboration, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister responsible for Housing NWT. Colleagues, our time is up for oral questions.
Mr. Speaker, I have a Return to Written Question 26-20(1) asked by the Member for Yellowknife North on February 6th, 2026, regarding the Application of Waters Act Provisions to the Sale or Transfer of Mining Assets.
The Member asked what legislation, regulation, policy, or best practice supports the Department's stated position that the applicability of financial testing under the Waters Act depends on whether a transaction is structured as an asset purchase or a share purchase.
Section 39(1) of the Waters Act is clear that financial testing only applies when there is "a sale or other disposition of any right, title or interest of a licensee in an appurtenant undertaking".
In a share purchase transaction, there is no sale or disposition of the undertaking itself, only the ownership of the licensee changes. As a result, a share purchase does not constitute an assignment of a water license.
The Member also asked the Minister to explain how Section 39 of the Waters Act is applied in cases where mining assets change ownership through a share purchase, including situations involving a change in controlling shares.
Section 39(1) of the Waters Act does not apply to any share purchase transaction even if the transaction results in a change in control of the company. The applicable land and water board is responsible for administering section 39 of the Waters Act when that section applies.
Further the Member asked the Minister to provide either publicly, or confidentially, to Members, any existing analysis by the Department on how Section 39 of the Waters Act has been applied thus far to sales or transfers of mining assets, over the last ten years.
Section 39 of the Waters Act is administered under the responsibility of the applicable land and water board. The Department is not aware of any existing analysis undertaken by the Board on how it has applied Section 39 of the Waters Act historically.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, your committee would like to report on its consideration of Bill 29, First Responders Workers' Compensation Amendment Act.
Bill 29 received second reading in the Legislative Assembly on May 29th, 2025, and was referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations for review.
Motions extending -- sorry, Mr. Speaker, it's just distracting with the loud voice in the chamber. Sorry, Mr. Speaker.
Bill 29 received second reading in the Legislative Assembly on May 29th, 2025, and was referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations for review. Motions extending the committee's review of Bill 29 were adopted by the Assembly on October 16th, 2025, and February 13th, 2026.
The committee completed its clause-by-clause review of the bill with the Member for Range Lake on February 25th, 2026. During the review, committee members moved four motions to amend two clauses of Bill 29. The Member for Range Lake conferred with each of those motions.
Mr. Speaker, the committee reports that Bill 29, First Responders' Workers' Compensation Amendment Act, as amended and reprinted, is ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member. Member from Range Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 8.2(7) and have Bill 29 moved directly to third reading later today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order on Private Member Bill 29, First Responders' Workers' Compensation Act. The point of order relates to Rule 1.2(i) of the Rules of the Northwest Territories Legislative Assembly and the parliamentary convention across Westminster-style Parliaments which prohibits Private Members' bills from requiring expenditure of public funds. I am rising at the first opportunity in the House now that the standing committee studying the bill has reported the bill, as reprinted, back to the House as ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.
To be clear, we support the principle of the bill. I rise at this point of order because Bill 29 would require the GNWT to pay a one-time liability payment estimated to be $4.3 million that is separate and distinct from any existing appropriation. This one-time payment is in addition to an increase of an estimated $409,000 to the annual rates that the GNWT pays to the WSCC.
Rule 1.2 of our rules defines what a Private Member's bill may not involve. This definition limits Private Members' bills to bills that do not involve the appropriation of public funds or the imposition of any tax. While Bill 29 does not expressly set out the appropriation of a specific amount of funds, over the course of the standing committee's review of the bill, it became clear that the effect of the change put forward in Bill 29 would result in the requirement to allocate new public funds which would need to occur by appropriation. These anticipated amounts go beyond incidental implementation costs that would fall under an existing appropriation.
Bill 29 proposes to change presumptive coverage of listed diseases for firefighters. Bill 29 also proposes changes to the minimum employment period for such coverage. While workers' compensation programs are typically considered as self-funded because the costs of the programs are covered by insurance premiums or assessment fees that are collected from the employers based on set collections in the Northwest Territories, presumptive coverages that are provided for in Act are a bit different. The Workers' Safety and Compensation Commission governance council approves the model for setting rates payable for workers' compensation coverage in the Northwest Territories.
The rate setting model approved by the governance council for presumptive coverage for firefighters places all insurance liability for presumptive coverage for Northwest Territories workers with the GNWT. The Workers' Safety and Compensation Commission has estimated the proposed changes to presumptive coverage put forward in Bill 29, as introduced, would have resulted in a one-time insurance liability payment of $17 million. The amount of the liability payment for the bill, as modified in standing committee, will be lower but as mentioned is estimated to be nearly $4.3 million.
Mr. Speaker, if passed, this bill would come into force one year after the date the bill receives assent. This static coming-into-force date does not allow the executive council to have any ability to control incurring the costs associated with the bill.
Mr. Speaker, this bill would involve an appropriation of public funds necessary to implement the amendments according to the WSCC rate setting rules according to a timeline over which the government has no control. The one-time liability payment would be a new and distinct expenditure that is not contemplated in an existing appropriation. This makes such changes improper to be advanced in a Private Members' bill which cannot involve the appropriation of public funds.
Mr. Speaker, I should clearly state that this point of order is not raised about the merits of the changes of presumptive coverage presented in Bill 29. It is simply raised because we have a rule that limits what the Private Members' bill can do. If the effect of Bill 29 is that it results in new and distinct amount that will have to be appropriated, it does not appear to be within the authority of the Private Member to bring it forward. The authority for recommending spending of public money lies with the executive council. This is the source of the limitation on Private Members' bill as reflected in the rules.
As such, I believe this bill is out of order. I look forward to the Speaker's ruling which would provide clarification on the matter that will be of assistance to all Members going forward. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member from Thebacha. To the mover of the bill. Member from Range Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, Rule 1.2(i) states Private Members' bills are bills introduced by a Member who is not a Minister which does not involve the appropriation of public funds or the imposition of tax, which is the subject of the point of order.
I would point out, however, that when signing the Minister -- the Minister moving the point of order cited Westminster parliamentary traditions around Private Members' bills. It is very important to consider that Private Members' bills are different and distinct in each legislature in Canada and, indeed, in the Commonwealth as well, and our Rule 1.1(2) states: In all cases, not provided for in these rules or by other orders of the Assembly, the customs and procedures of this Assembly, the principles and process conventions of consensus government, the House of Commons of Canada, provincial and territorial legislatures, and parliaments and the Commonwealth shall be followed in that order.
So if we are to assess the parameters of a Private Members' bill, we need to look at our precedents first. And there are many precedents for Private Members' bills in this Assembly. So we don't need to look elsewhere because it wouldn't be a fair comparison because the House of Commons has very different rules that are spelled out in their standing orders, and we have different rules here, which I just quoted, Rule 1.1(i).
So let's look at that rule. So first, the test is, am I a Minister? No, I am not. I am a Member. The second is, does it appropriate public funds or impose a tax? It does not, Mr. Speaker. The bill does not speak to appropriating money the way an appropriations bill does. It does not seek to raise a tax the way we would in an appropriations bill as well or a financial policy instrument.
Mr. Speaker, any action by government will always come at a cost, whether it is the implementation of a Private Member's bill, a government bill, policy work, or programming work by departments. It is the responsibility of the government to make the necessary appropriations to meet their commitments and fund these activities. The coming into force date of this bill has been amended by the standing committee, as mentioned, with my concurrence, to give the government sufficient time to plan their appropriations for future fiscal years. It is 12 months from the day of assent which allows for an entire budget cycle to take place.
In the past, there have been numerous bills introduced by both government and Regular Members that have similarly created situations where subsequent spending was required. Our practice has never been such that a recommendation from our Commissioner for the appropriation of funds is required as long as the bill itself does not appropriate the funds.
I understand that in some jurisdictions, as I mentioned, a similar bill might require a Royal recommendation or Commissioner's recommendation, but that is not and has never been the case in our practices and precedents.
While the bill does not directly appropriate funds, it does strengthen the comprehensive workers' compensation coverage for firefighters and first responders, which is an employer-driven system. Employers will pay more going forward, and that is exactly how the system is intended to work for the benefit and protection of all employees in the territory. The notion that the Government of the Northwest Territories is required to fully and solely fund any outstanding liabilities of the Workers' Safety and Compensation Commission is outside the scope of this bill. It is a result, instead, of the policies of the Commission, the WSCC governance council and, by extension, the government. This is the reason why the coming-into-force date has been amended, to give our government and, indeed, the Workers' Safety and Compensation Commission, more than sufficient time to explore their policies and options, determine their liabilities, and appropriate any necessary funds through the regular budgeting cycle, Mr. Speaker.
And just to demonstrate this, in the life of this Assembly, Bill 8 received assent on November 1st, 2024. That bill, moved by the Member for Yellowknife Centre, require -- lifted the total funds available for SFA. The government subsequent -- although -- and that was not an appropriation, Mr. Speaker. It was changing a policy. It was changing the limit of those funds. The government subsequently came forward with a supplementary appropriation to fund that change by enhancing the total amount available to SFA funding.
When Bill 8 passed through second reading, committee review, and third reading, the government did not rise a point of order to that bill despite the fact that it followed a very similar path and created very similar obligations on -- you know, according to the logic behind this point of argument.
As for timing, the government -- the bill received first -- Bill 29 received first and second reading in May of 2025, approximately nine months ago. No concerns regarding order or procedural matters were raised when the bill was introduced and read into the House. In fact, when the bill was read a second time on May 29th, 2025, the responsible Minister spoke favourably about it, even stating that Cabinet was in support of the principle. And at that time, no Member of the executive council raised a point of order questioning procedural matters related to the appropriateness or properness of the bill as it relates to our standing orders.
Mr. Speaker, if they're prepared to support -- the government that is -- the government Members to support the principle of this bill and have even suggested in correspondence and conversations that they would bring forward an equivalent piece of legislation to make similar changes, that it stands to reason that the government is, indeed, prepared to appropriate this money. The amendments made by committee, as I said, extend the coming-into-force for 12 months. That's a year of time, Mr. Speaker, plenty of time to manage the appropriation and assess those obligations, as much as they did with Bill 8.
Mr. Speaker, one more thing. The policies of the WSCC -- I want to state this very clearly -- are a decision of the WSCC. They are making a decision on how to fund liabilities, on what those liabilities are. These are policy decisions that they can make and change and assess as circumstances change. It is not required by Bill 29. Bill 29 does not speak to liability costs. Bill 29 does not speak to employer fees. So it is not an appropriation bill, not in any sense of the word, Mr. Speaker. And, again, I disagree with the Minister. He had plenty -- he had an earliest time to raise concerns with the bill, and that was at second reading. The financial obligations, as he said, were initially assessed at $17 million, and when the WSCC came before standing committee they brought detailed facts and figures and projections. They were well aware of the financial implications of this bill at the time it was read a second time. That was the earliest time to do so.
Mr. Speaker, for these reasons I believe this point of order is not a question of procedure. Rather, it is a question of politics.
In this chamber, we resolve those questions through decisions. And I recall a conversation I've had with the previous clerk who says -- who's told me, in consensus government, when I was a young Member, procedure is a means to an end not an end in itself. It should not be used to resolve questions that should be resolved through the decisions of Members by way of voting. Accordingly, I ask that you dismiss the point of order and allow this Assembly to decide on the merits of Bill 29 for what they are by voting on it.
I look forward to your decision, and say mahsi cho for allowing me to speak to this question of order. Thank you.
Colleagues, I thank both the government leader and the sponsor of the bill for their debate on this matter. I will take this matter under advisement, allowing myself time to thoroughly review the transcripts here today, as well as undertake some additional research, as it is something very unique. And I will return my ruling at a later date. Thank you. We will now continue orders of the day.
Reports on the standing committee -- actually, colleagues, being in recognition of the time, we will have a brief break.
---SHORT RECESS
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, Your Standing Committee on Government Operations is pleased to provide its Report on Bill 29, First Responders Workers’ Compensation Amendment Act, and commends it to the House.
Bill 29: First Responders Workers’ Compensation Amendment Act is a Private Member’s Bill that originally proposed substantial amendments to the Workers' Compensation Act, including establishing presumptive coverage for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) for frontline emergency workers and expanding presumptive coverage for firefighters to include all cancer types and heart related conditions, subject to a minimum two-year employment requirement. These changes were proposed to take effect on October 27, 2026.
Given the breadth and potential impacts of the bill, the committee undertook an extended
and comprehensive review. This work included engagement with the bill’s sponsor, the
Minister responsible for the Workers’ Safety and Compensation Commission, the Minister of Finance, key stakeholders, specifically the International Association of Fire Fighters Local 2890, and the public.
The committee’s study focused on the importance of timely and accessible compensation supports for first responders and firefighters who face elevated occupational health risks. The Committee examined the operational, financial, and interjurisdictional implications of expanding presumptive coverage, including the potential financial impact on the Government of the Northwest Territories and impacts on the shared workers’
compensation governance framework with Nunavut.
The committee weighed these factors alongside the need for a consistent, evidence-based approach to presumptive coverage that is informed by national standards while maintaining the integrity of the workers’ compensation system. These considerations informed the committee’s four motions to amend Bill 29 to limit presumptive coverage to 23 cancers to be set out in regulations, to separate the eligibility
criteria for presumptive coverage of heart disease and heart injury from those for cancer, and to change the coming-into-force date to be 12 months from the date of assent.
The committee also presents four recommendations to the Government of the Northwest Territories addressing future work on presumptive coverage and legislative initiatives. I will summarize those now.
The Committee recommends that the Government of the Northwest Territories improve its responsiveness to public and stakeholder requests for legislative reviews and amendments to ensure its legislation remains modern, reflective of the needs of residents, and aligned with other jurisdictions. Enhanced responsiveness would also reduce reliance on Private Members' bills, which do not undergo the same comprehensive planning and development processes as government-sponsored legislation.
The Committee recommends that the Government of the Northwest Territories conduct detailed public and stakeholder engagement when proposing any future changes to regulations related to firefighter presumptive coverage.
The committee recommends that the Government of the Northwest Territories undertake a review on providing presumptive workers' compensation coverage to wildland firefighters similar to other jurisdictions in Canada, given that the Northwest Territories is experiencing more frequent and severe wildfires, which may have a corresponding effect on the health of wildland firefighters.
The Committee recommends that the Government of the Northwest Territories provide a response to this report within 120 days.
And with that, Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Great Slave, that the remainder of Committee Report 36-20(1), Standing Committee on Government Operations Report on the Review of Bill 29, First Responders' Workers' Compensation Amendment Act, be deemed read and printed in Hansard in its entirety. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
*ed: Committee Report 36-20(1) is available here.
Thank you, Member from Frame Lake. The motion is in order. 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 carried.
---Carried
Member from Frame Lake.
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Great Slave, that Committee Report 36-20(1), Standing Committee on Government Operations Report on the Review of Bill 29, First Responders Workers' Compensation Amendment Act, be received and adopted by the Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member from Frame Lake. The motion is in order. 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 is carried.
---Carried
Member from Frame Lake.
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 from Frame Lake. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? All those abstaining, please raise your hand. Motion is carried.
---Carried
Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the following document: Additional Information for Written Question 30-20(1): Northwest Territories Health and Social Services Authority Action Plans. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister of Health and Social Services. Tabling of documents.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Monday, March 2nd, 2026, I will move the following motion:
Now therefore I move, seconded by the Member for Yellowknife Centre, that this Legislative Assembly calls upon the Government of the Northwest Territories to establish a Contingency Support Fund to assist Northwest Territories businesses experiencing financial losses due to power outages, including compensation for verifiable outage-related losses and support for preventative measures such as surge protection and continuity planning;.
And further, that the Government of the Northwest Territories expand and revise existing electricity rate subsidies to mitigate the escalating cost of power for both residents and businesses, recognizing the disproportionately high cost of electricity in northern and remote communities;
And furthermore, that the Government of the Northwest Territories direct the Minister responsible to work with utilities, Indigenous governments, and federal partners to create a territorial grid reliability and modernization investment plan to address upgrades to aging transmission and distribution infrastructure and invest in reliable and alternative energy sources to reduce diesel use and long-term costs;
And furthermore, that the Government of the Northwest Territories invest in emerging and proven technologies that reduce power costs, increase system efficiency, and improve grid reliability, including but not limited to community-scale battery energy storage systems and advanced artificial intelligence-based energy management solutions to ensure sustainable, affordable, and resilient energy delivery for all residents;
And furthermore, that the Government of the Northwest Territories respond to this motion in 120 days.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I give notice on Wednesday, March 4th, 2026, I will present Bill 45, Civil Forfeiture Act, to be read for the first time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I will now call the Committee of the Whole to order. What is the wish of the committee? I'm going to go to the Member from Inuvik Boot Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the committee wishes to consider Committee Report 35-20(1), Standing Committee on Public Accounts Report on the Review of the Auditor General's 2025 Audit of Protected and Conserved Areas in the Northwest Territories. Mr. Chair, the committee also wishes to consider Tabled Document 448-20(1), 2026-2027 Main Estimates, the department of EIA.
Okay. Thank you. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you. Committee, we have agreed to consider Tabled Document 448-20(1), 2026-2027 Main Estimates. We will now resume on consideration of the Indigenous intergovernmental relations key activity of the Department of Executive and Indigenous Affairs on page 142. Does the Minister of Executive and Indigenous Affairs wish to bring witnesses into the House.
