MEMBER’S STATEMENT ON
GNWT CUSTOMER SERVICE
MS. BISARO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to return to the subject of government customer service that I discussed last week. I have brought up the issue of poor customer service at least once a year during my time as a Member. It’s an area where no one government person or department is really in charge of the issue, so each department and office operates on its own which, in turn, leads to inconsistencies in service for NWT residents.
The GNWT as a whole has no culture of customer service, no standards, no policies, no monitoring. So here’s an idea, as my colleague Mrs. Groenewegen likes to say: Why doesn’t the government centralize the responsibility for customer service in a department like, say, the Executive? We wouldn’t have to reinvent the wheel. We can look to our provincial counterparts for models that work. Ontario has spent a lot of time on this.
I gave an example of poor service last week, that of motor vehicle clients being unable to call and being able to talk to a real person and what I consider to be poor voicemail messages on their phones. There needs to be guidelines for all GNWT employees around returning phone calls and e-mails, how to answer, timelines and so on. There needs to be guidelines for employees dealing with clients face to face and through social media, how to greet people, how to listen, how quickly your response should be given to an inquiry. This applies whether they are internal clients, other GNWT employees or external clients, anyone outside the government.
All of these things are integral to good customer service. Private businesses who provide good customer service invest the time and money to properly train their staff. We need to do the same for our public service, Mr. Speaker. To do that well, we have to centralize the responsibility for developing a culture of customer service in our employees. We need to train GNWT public servants to understand excellent customer service and have the skills to feel comfortable and competent when dealing with clients.
We need policies, guidelines and standards that apply to all employees, and a small staff within the Department of Executive could provide the necessary leadership and develop the necessary standards and policies.
I need to make it clear, I do not advocate for more employees. We have more than enough. As I said the other day, a serious analysis of our current staffing will find us several employees who could transfer into a new position for customer service. If the will is there, Mr. Speaker, it can be done without spending any more money. The question is how important is customer service to this government. Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The honourable Member for Range Lake, Mr. Dolynny.
MEMBER’S STATEMENT ON
RETROFIT TO
STANTON TERRITORIAL HOSPITAL
MR. DOLYNNY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Once again, we are seeing a budget go wistfully by and, yet again, our potential territorial hospital has been bypassed. Let me say those words again, Mr. Speaker, territorial hospital.
We continually hear by this government that we have competing priorities, that roads are more important than territorial health and that an office building is more important than territorial health. Yet this government continues down a path of priorities where economics and practical sense collide.
A recent visit by the majority of Regular Members to our territorial hospital showed, clearly, a dire need for new facilities. This facility was designed for only 10,000 patient visits a year. We are now doing over 20,000.
The Minister of Finance, during our general comments on main estimates, admitted that this hospital is in need for a midlife retrofit. He is on record as saying it’s going to require $200 million to $300 million, yet we see no signs or signals in this budget to begin the planning for this.
The Finance Minister’s comments of “we’re on the road of taking care of that” leaves the average NWT residents wondering if they, too, can go down to their local bank and ask to withdraw some of this “taking care of that” money.
Sorry, Mr. Speaker, we’re taking care of that. What does that really mean? Unless this Assembly and the people of the Northwest Territories see it on the books as a priority within the budget line, there is no taking care of that and that is for sure.
If the Minister of Finance does not think we need to spend any more of our budget on health care, fine. He has every right to believe in a legacy of a fiscal restraint policy of don’t get sick. Let me remind everyone listening today, with our imminent landscape about to go into full throttle, our new $800 million shiny platinum Visa card is ready to be inserted into the chip reader and Premier McLeod has the PIN number.
So, back to the territorial hospital. While our health care providers are clearly working out of closets or having to trip over pallets of medical supplies in the hallway or having to eat their lunch outside because they just lost their coffee room for a new service, our government will be keying in the PIN number to withdraw funds that have nothing to do to ensuring the future of our health care. But not all is lost, Mr. Speaker, as I’m sure the voters will be taking care of that in the next election. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
MEMBER’S STATEMENT ON
FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION MANUAL
MR. HAWKINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m going to use today’s opportunity to talk about the Financial Administration Manual. I’m going to frame it around the administration and the conduct built around that.
The public is concerned, certainly as I am, about the accountability of this manual and the transparency that’s brought with it. So I’m not going to speak to any specific example whether we’ve had problems in the past or even in the recent situation.
I’d like to focus my concerns around the administration and our guiding book, our bible, as such when it comes to finances and economics of the NWT. What happens if there is an error or breach, Mr. Speaker? The public is unclear and wonders how the balance is worked out. Is it swept under the carpet or how is it weighed and measured in a transparent way?
Clearly, independence, or I should say unclear independence, seems to be one of the questions that is railing out there. People wonder, do the staff guide their reviews under the scrutiny of their bosses when they are, in some cases, reviewing these situations. What is the transparency of these guidelines that provide a reasonable atonement? It’s not necessary about getting a pound of flesh, but we all have to know what measurements and guidelines we are being held accountable to.
The choice, as the public sees it, if there is a problem in some way, really comes down to a few options. Do nothing and that becomes a real option, or correct the error of the breach, and do nothing and pretend the error never happened.
So the government is left with the choice of two lesser evils. Do we do nothing or do we pretend nothing happened? I will ask questions to the Finance Minister later today and get some clarity on how we weigh and measure the Financial Administration Manual in an open and transparent way. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The honourable Member for Hay River North. Mr. Bouchard.
Share with your friends: |
