MLAs pass motion calling on GNWT to create emergencies agency

NWT MLAs have passed a motion calling on the territorial government to reconsider rejecting a report’s recommendation that an NWT-wide emergency management agency be created.

The motion was passed at the Legislative Assembly on Thursday with nine MLAs in favour, six cabinet members abstaining, and no votes opposed.

Setting up a dedicated agency was one of 35 recommendations made by contractor Transitional Solutions Inc, or TSI, in a report released earlier this year. The GNWT has at least partly accepted all of the other 34.

The existing system – local, regional and territorial emergency management organizations that pop up when needed – “proved ineffective during a large-scale disaster,” TSI stated when its review was released in May.

In its response to that review, the GNWT said a separate year-round agency “would be costly, duplicative, and difficult to staff.”

Thursday’s motion seeks action from the GNWT by May 2026 to begin implementing the recommendation. Motions like this aren’t binding so, while the territory has 120 days to respond, it does not have to create an agency despite the motion passing.

Range Lake MLA Kieron Testart, who brought forward the motion, said the territorial government’s refusal to act on the recommendation undermines public confidence in how emergencies are handled.

“The findings of the report were very clear and, for me, the most concerning one is the lack of trust that northerners place in their government after that event,” Testart told the legislature.

“Trust is very slow to rebuild from governments or from anyone in a position of authority. It’s easy to lose and very hard to get back. We need to do everything we can as an assembly to ensure that the government is working to restore trust with the public.”

Testart explained that a standalone agency could take the lead on training, develop territorial and community emergency plans, and coordinate long-term recovery.

He pointed to similar agencies operating in jurisdictions like Alberta, Saskatchewan, and New Brunswick, adding those have been effective in ensuring public safety.

“We know things are going to get worse, not better, and even if we do have an ‘off’ season that defies predictions and there’s no evacuations, there’s no disasters, that doesn’t mean we don’t need this, because we need to be prepared when it does happen,” Testart said.

“The rejection of this one recommendation broke through the acceptance of the others, and that’s very true in the conversations I have with my constituents, in the conversations I hear in the community. That’s why it’s here on the floor today.”

Responsibilities ‘already being carried out’

Communities minister Vince McKay said he appreciated Testart’s focus on strengthening emergency management, but defended the present system.

McKay said the existing Emergency Management Organization, or EMO – which is activated as necessary – leads the territorial emergency response plan, supports communities in developing their own emergency plans, and coordinates multi-agency responses through the Territorial Emergency Operations Centre.

He noted other jurisdictions such as Yukon, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland and Labrador also include EMOs within government departments rather than creating independent agencies.

“The GNWT’s position is that the core responsibilities recommended in the after-action review are already being carried out in the current EMO structure,” McKay said.

McKay acknowledged that improvements are still needed, particularly in how the government communicates, coordinates, and integrates with Indigenous governments and local communities, and said these priorities are actively being addressed.

“The after-action review looked at the events from two years ago. It is looking backwards, while we are looking forward and moving forward,” he said.

McKay said the territorial government’s EMO follows a nationally recognized structure known as the Incident Command System, which enables operational decisions to be made by trained experts during emergencies while keeping elected officials informed.

He also highlighted improvements made since the 2023 wildfire season, which he said included updated emergency plans, enhanced communication protocols, increased surge capacity, and new regional emergency coordinator positions across the NWT.

But some MLAs who voted for the motion were unconvinced by the territory’s broader response to the review.

“This is not the only recommendation in the after-action review where there are problems with the government’s response,” Yellowknife North MLA Shauna Morgan said, adding this was a key reason for her support of the motion.

“In numerous cases, the government said it agreed or partly agreed, but then went on to explain how it doesn’t really need to do the recommended action, or explains what’s already happening, but that explanation doesn’t actually match what’s being recommended.”

Inuvik Boot Lake MLA Denny Rodgers said he was “perplexed when the GNWT flatly just rejected this recommendation.” Rodgers said the recommendation deserved serious attention, and urged the government to explore ways to implement it more effectively.

Sahtu MLA Danny McNeely said while he appreciated references to other jurisdictions, he felt the “spirit of efficiencies in fire management” rests with MLAs and it is their responsibility to learn from past experiences.

“We’re really fortunate we didn’t have any major fatalities but going forward, the voices of people in the community need to be heard through a process,” said Tu Nedhé-Wiilideh MLA Richard Edjericon, adding it was important to restore trust among people.

“Why do we make motions in the House, if the other side of the House are going to totally dismiss it? Then why am I here?”

Frame Lake MLA Julian Morse said he understands the desire for a swift response to the after-action review but emphasized the need to fully understand the issues before making major decisions.

Morse said coordination between organizations and understanding “the triggers of who does what” are potential areas for improvement. He expressed concern that the GNWT’s rejection of the recommendation for a stand-alone emergency management agency does not fully address the “structural weaknesses” identified following the 2023 wildfires.

Before the vote, Testart urged cabinet members – who normally abstain on motions of this type – to vote against his motion, because he would “rather have a vote against on the record, if they’re not going to respond to this in a meaningful way.”

“That’s the antithesis of what this motion is supposed to do,” Testart said.

“It is supposed to consider the clauses, evaluate them, and respond with an open mind – not a mind already made up.”