Report of the Independent Commission to Review
Members’ Indemnities, Allowances, Expenses and Benefits

March 2019

The Honourable Justice Earl D. Johnson, Chairperson
Mr. Ronnie Campbell
Ms. Nancy Karetak-Lindell
Mr. Keith Peterson

www.assembly.nu.ca

 Summary and Recommendations
The Commission was appointed by Speaker Joe Enook on September 24, 2018, and
directed to consider and review Members’ compensation in accordance with the scope
of the work set out in Appendix A. the Commission is composed of Mr. Justice Earl D.
Johnson (Chairperson), Ms. Nancy Karetak-Lindell, Mr. Keith Peterson and Mr. Ronnie
Campbell (Commissioners).
The Commission met once in Ottawa for two days in October 2018 and for two days in
Iqaluit in January 2019.
There were no responses from the general public to the advertisement inviting
submissions by January 25, 2019.
The Commission makes the following recommendations:
1. The Commission recommends that the present provision in section 35 of the
Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act (the Act), regarding cost of living
increases to the rates of pay of employees referred to in paragraph 55(5)(a) of the
Public Service Act, be continued for the indemnities of Members.
2. The Commission recommends that the current basic indemnity paid to all Members
should remain the same. However, as set out below in recommendation number 4, the
current constituency allowance paid to Members under subsection 31(1)(a) of the Act
should be rolled into the basic indemnity with income tax deducted.
3. The Commission recommends that there should no change to the additional
indemnity paid to the Premier, Deputy Premier, Ministers, Speaker, Deputy Speaker,
Deputy Chairpersons of the Committee of the Whole, Chairpersons of Standing and
Special Committees and Chairpersons of Caucus and Regular Members’ Caucus.
However, as discussed in section 10 below, we recommend that the responsibility for
setting Ministerial benefits and allowances be transferred to the Management and
Services Board (MSB).
4. The Commission recommends that the current constituency allowance paid under
subsection 31(1)(a) of the Act should be uncoupled from the GN duty travel (GNDT) per
diems and should no longer be referred to as an allowance. It should be rolled into the
basic indemnity with income tax deducted and called a constituency work benefit. The
Assembly may wish to consider whether it wishes to gross up the basic indemnity to
take into account the impact of income tax on the constituency work benefit.
5. The Commission recommends no change to the Nunavut Northern Allowance.
6. The Commission recommends no change to the Household Allowance.

1

 7. The Commission recommends that section 16 of the Supplementary Retiring
Allowances Act (SRAA) be repealed to remove the Fixed-Term Allowance (FTA).
8. The Commission also recommends that the 60-day time limit set out in section 10 of
the SRAA to make an election to participate in the pension plan should be repealed.
9.
(a) The Commission believes that the current formula for calculating the
transitional allowance is satisfactory and recommends it remain the same.
(b) The MSB currently encourages and facilitates Members to meet with the
pension actuaries prior to leaving the Assembly. In addition to encouraging
Members to seek out financial planning assistance and access to GN retirement
courses or courses in southern Canada, the MSB should actively organize its
own courses from time to time and strongly encourage Members to attend.
(c) The Commission is aware that, despite the payment of the current transitional
allowance, some Members are not prepared for life after politics, particularly if
they are defeated in an election. All Members, particularly those Members
contemplating retirement, should be encouraged to develop an exit strategy that
would cover this information along with any other relevant information that will
support the Members in their move from public to private life.
10.
(a) The Commission makes no recommendations on the content or
administration of the allowances, expenses and benefits paid to members of the
Executive Council under subsection 33.1(2) of the Act . However, to provide the public
with the maximum transparency on Ministerial benefits, the Commission recommends
that responsibility for the administration of sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Ministerial
Procedures Manual (MPM) be transferred from the Office of the Premier to the MSB.
(b) The Commission further recommends that the Assembly consider an
amendment to section 38(1) of the Act to change the composition of the MSB
from its current form to two Ministers and two Members with the Speaker as
Chairperson. The NWT implemented this amendment when it transferred
responsibility for Ministerial benefits to its MSB.
11.
(a) The Commission endorses the Assembly taking a similar approach to that
taken by the Government of Canada, where possible, to make the work of Members
more family-friendly.
(b) The GN policy on child care is that an employee can claim, with backup
receipts, up to $45 per day when on duty travel. The Commission recommends
that the Assembly adopt a similar policy. In addition, the Assembly may consider
providing enhanced temporary accommodation and laundry services.

2

 (c) The Commission recommends that the development and implementation of
these types of family-friendly policies be carried out by MSB and that care be
taken that the policies do not exceed the benefits provided by the GN or the
private sector.
12. The Commission recommends that the Assembly take the same approach to
transparency as that recommended at pages 18 and 19 of the 2018 NWT report on
Members’ compensation. The changes recommended about constituency allowances,
Members representing Iqaluit constituencies, Members representing non-Iqaluit
constituencies who declare the capital to be their place of residence for such purposes
as the payment of the Nunavut Northern Allowance, and the transfer of responsibility for
the MPM are consistent with more transparency because it allows the public to see the
full level of compensation paid to Members.
13. The Commission recommends that section 28(1) of the Act that authorizes the
payment of GNDT per diems to Iqaluit Members be removed from the Act.
14.
(a) Although the Commission recognizes that Ministers spend more time away
from their home communities and need more travel entitlements, it believes that the
current system is a little unfair to Regular MLAs. They should receive a minimum of 3
additional trips per Session and this should be done in a cost-neutral manner by
reducing the number of Ministerial travel entitlements available per year or removing the
Regular MLA entitlements from Ministers who already have access to Ministerial travel
entitlements or both.
(b) The Commission also believes that it is important to the have the entire travel
budget under one roof to provide maximum flexibility. That would permit the MSB
to create new policies to set up a system of travel points that is similar to the
system administered by the Board of Internal Economy for Members of
Parliament.

3

 1.0 Legislation, Commissioners and Terms of Reference
1.1 Section 37 of the Act authorizes the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly to
establish, after consultation with the Management and Services Board, an independent
commission to review and make recommendations regarding the indemnities,
allowances, expenses and benefits that are paid to members of the Legislative
Assembly. After the creation of Nunavut, the first Commission submitted a report dated
March 27, 2009, which was tabled in the Legislative Assembly on December 8, 2009.
On September 24, 2018, the Honourable Joe Enook announced the appointments of
four persons to the second Independent Commission to Review Members’ Indemnities,
Allowances, Expenses and Benefits (ICRMIAEB).

1.2 Commission Members
The Chairperson of the Commission is the Honourable Mr. Justice Earl D. Johnson.
Justice Johnson’s legal career in the North began in 1974. He was appointed Queen’s
Counsel in 1992 and sat on the Nunavut Court of Justice from 2002 until his retirement
from full-time service in 2015. He has been a Deputy Judge of the Nunavut Court of
Justice since December 2016.
The other Commissioners are Ms. Nancy Karetak-Lindell, Mr. Keith Peterson and Mr.
Ronnie Campbell.
Ms. Nancy Karetak-Lindell served as Nunavut’s Member of Parliament from 1997 to
2008 and as President of the Inuit Circumpolar Council (Canada) from 2016 to 2018.
Ms. Karetak-Lindell has held a number of management-level positions in the community
of Arviat, while also serving the community in a variety of roles. Ms. Karetak-Lindell
currently serves as a Member of the Board of Directors of Polar Knowledge Canada.
Mr. Keith Peterson served as Cambridge Bay’s Member of the Legislative Assembly
from 2004 until his retirement in 2017. Mr. Peterson holds the distinction of being
Nunavut’s longest-serving Minister of Finance. He also held a number of other
Ministerial portfolios during his tenure, including responsibility for Health, Justice and
Democratic Institutions. Prior to being elected to the Legislative Assembly, Mr. Peterson
held office as Mayor of Cambridge Bay and was the Secretary-Treasurer of the
Kitikmeot Corporation.
Mr. Ronnie Campbell served as an Assistant Auditor General of Canada from 2003 until
his retirement in 2015. In this capacity, he was responsible for the Office’s audits of the
Government of Nunavut. Prior to joining the Office of the Auditor General in 1985, Mr.
Campbell lived and worked in a number of Nunavut communities as a manager with the
Hudson’s Bay Company. Mr. Campbell currently serves as a Member of the Board of
Directors of the Qulliq Energy Corporation.

4

 1.3 Terms of Reference
The Commission’s Terms of Reference are attached as Appendix A.
The scope of the work of the commission was to make recommendations on the
following topics:
(a) Indemnities paid to Members of the Legislative Assembly and office-holders
under Schedule C of the Act;
(b) Taxable and Non-Taxable Allowances, including Constituency Allowances,
Living Allowances, Nunavut Northern Allowance and Housing Allowance;
(c) Retiring Allowances;
(d) Transitional Allowances;
(e) Allowances, expenses and benefits paid to members of the Executive Council
under subsection 33.1(2) of the Act; and
(f) Other remuneration and entitlements for Members;
(g) Practical and cost-effective ways to support the work of Members who are
expectant mothers or who are raising young children in respect to such areas as
child care and parental leave;
(h) The impact on Members’ remuneration of recent changes to federal income
tax legislation that were provided for in Bill C-63, which received Royal Assent on
December 14, 2017;
(i) The adequacy of public reporting and disclosure of Members’ indemnities,
allowances, expenses and benefits;
(j) The advisability of replacing the constituency living allowance currently paid to
Members under subsection 31(3) of the Act with a higher base rate of
remuneration;
(k) The appropriateness of paying living allowances to Members resident in the
capital; and
(l) The advisability of replacing the statutorily-prescribed travel entitlements under
section 30 of the Act with a Management and Services Board-administered
system of travel points that is analogous to that which is provided to Members of
Parliament under the authority of the Board of Internal Economy of the House of
Commons.

5

 2.0 Review Process
On October 2 and 4, 2018, the Chairperson met with John Quirke, Clerk of the
Legislative Assembly, Alex Baldwin, Director of Research, Policy and Library Services,
and Marc Rose, Director of Corporate Services, at the Legislative Assembly Precinct in
Iqaluit for a briefing. The Chairperson was provided with a large binder of relevant
documentation.
The Chairperson sent a letter to all Members of the Legislative Assembly dated October
2, 2018, which enclosed the Commission’s Terms of Reference and which requested
their comments by January 25, 2019. The staff of the Assembly also placed
advertisements in the local news media requesting public input by January 25, 2019
(included as part of Appendix A). The letter is attached as part of Appendix B.
With the assistance of the staff of the Legislative Assembly, the Chairperson arranged
for the first meeting of the Commission on October 17 and 18, 2018. The Commission
reached agreement on how to carry out the scope of the work and made a number of
preliminary decisions so that the Chairperson could start drafting the initial report.
Commissioners were given assignments to research different parts of the terms of
reference and a second meeting was held on January 6 and 7, 2019. Unfortunately,
Commissioner Karetak-Lindell experienced some health problems, and was unable to
attend the meeting in Iqaluit. She later tendered her resignation and the Commission
finished its work with the other three Commissioners.
Among these assignments was making personal contacts with many Members. See
Appendix B for the list of Members contacted.
There were no submissions received from the general public in response to the
advertisements.
The Commission was fortunate in having the benefit of the February 2018 Report of the
Yukon Commission and the October 2018 Report of the NWT Commission to draw from
for very useful background information. The Commission also examined the July 2017
reports from Manitoba and Prince Edward Island, but was satisfied that the best
comparators were the Yukon and NWT Reports. They both contained charts with
comparative information from all the provinces and territories. The written materials
provided to the Commission by the Office of the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly also
contained an April 2018 interjurisdictional comparison which listed the compensation
paid to members of the territorial, provincial and federal legislatures, as well as Cabinet
Ministers and other officers of the Legislatures. Attached as Appendix C is that
document.
The Commission also received helpful comments from the Clerk of the Legislative
Assembly and his staff. Following the January meeting in Iqaluit, the Chairperson
continued drafting the report and it was submitted to the Clerk prior to the March 31
deadline for tabling at the next sitting of the Legislative Assembly.
6

 3.0 Current Indemnities paid to Members of the Legislative Assembly and OfficeHolders under Schedule C of the Act
Member’s Basic Annual Indemnity:

$103,323

Additional Indemnities
Premier:
Deputy Premier:
Minister:
Speaker:
Deputy Speaker:
Deputy Chairperson of the Committee of the Whole:
Chairperson of a Standing or Special Committee:
Chairperson of Full Caucus or regular Members’ Caucus:

$ 95,198
$ 87,665
$ 80,134
$ 80,134
$ 20,665
$ 5,421
$ 4,669
$ 3,163

3.1 History of Creation of Westminster Model of Responsible Government in
Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut
As explained at paras 18 and 19 of NTI v. Canada (A.G.), 2008 NUCJ 11 (CanLII),
responsible government evolved in the Yukon and NWT as a result of a number of
letters from the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (DIAND Minister) to
the Commissioners of both Territories.
On October 9, 1979, the DIAND Minister instructed the Commissioner Ione Christensen
to accept the advice of the elected Council in all matters that were delegated to the
Commissioner in Council under the Yukon Act. By giving these instructions, the DIAND
Minister transformed the Commissioner into the role of a de facto Lieutenant-Governor
for the Yukon. The letter authorized the government leader to refer to himself as
“Premier” and his cabinet members as “Ministers”. Similar instructions were given to the
Commissioner of the NWT and responsible government was achieved in 1984 when the
Commissioner gave up responsibility for the public service to an elected Minister.
On May 25, 1993, the Inuit then residing to the east of the tree line of the NWT entered
into the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement (NLCA) with Canada. The NLCA identified the
geographical area of the NWT inhabited by these Inuit as the Nunavut Settlement Area.
On April 1, 1999, this area became the Territory of Nunavut, pursuant to the Nunavut
Act , S.C. 1993, c. 28. Unlike the Yukon and NWT the creation of Nunavut led to instant
responsible government shortly after the territory came into existence on April 1, 1999.
Nunavut acquired the same constitutional status as the NWT and all the legislation in
force in the NWT became the legislation of Nunavut until changed by the Legislative
Assembly of Nunavut.

7

 3.2 Public Service Collective Bargaining In North
Collective bargaining began in the NWT in 1969 when legislation was passed granting
the Northwest Territories Public Service Association the right to collectively bargain for
the NWT public service. Collective bargaining for Yukon public servants started in 1971.
The Nunavut Employees Union officially came into existence on April 1, 1999, upon the
creation of Nunavut and acquired the right to bargain collectively for the employees of
the GN. The initial collective bargaining agreements set the base for northern salaries
that were higher than in the south because of the higher cost of living and the need to
attract people to the north at a time that it was relatively isolated.
The subsequent collective agreements ensured that the salaries kept pace with the
south and inflation. Although the 2007 Yukon report expressed the view that it was not
advisable to link the salaries of the members to that of public servants, the 2018 report
stated that:
“… the reality is that MLA pay can never be ignored when actions are taken
respecting the remuneration of public servants.”
The initial starting point for setting the indemnities of members was public service
salaries as well the indemnities paid by southern legislatures.

3.3 Indexing of Indemnities
The indemnities set by the territorial Legislative Assemblies have kept pace with
inflation by using some form of indexing.
The Yukon Legislative Assembly accepted the recommendations of the 2007
Commission that the indemnities be adjusted on April 1 of each year by the average
change in the Consumer Price Index for Canada over the previous two calendar years.
Section 35 of the Act inherited from the NWT specified that there would be annual
economic increases to the indemnities based upon the global increase awarded to
members of the public service. The 2007 Nunavut Commission recommended that this
practice be continued and it was accepted by the Legislative Assembly.
The 2018 NWT report recommended that the Members’ indemnities be renewed on
April 1 each year, calculated on the current Yellowknife Consumer Price Index or the
increase negotiated by the Union of Northern Workers, whichever is less. As a result,
the indemnities established in 2007 in all three territories have kept pace with inflation.
The Commission recommends that the present provision in section 35 of the Act
regarding cost of living increases to the rates of pay of employees referred to in
paragraph 55(5)(a) of the Public Service Act be continued for the indemnities of
Members.
8

 3.4 Analysis of Members’ Compensation
All Members are paid a basic indemnity that is equivalent to a public service salary
compensation. An additional indemnity is paid to the Premier, Ministers, Speaker and
the chairpersons of the standing and special committees of the Legislative Assembly.
All Members are also paid a number of different allowances that are analyzed in the
section on Allowances. The constituency allowance was not included in the
interjurisdictional survey in Appendix C.
As discussed in that section, the Commission believes that this allowance should be
treated as a component of the basic indemnity.
Basic Indemnity
The basic indemnity paid to all Members pursuant to section 25 of the Act is currently
$103,323 as well as a $1,000 tax-free allowance. As can be seen in Appendix C,
ordinary member salaries range from a high of $127,296 in Alberta to a low of $72,569
in Prince Edward Island. In the Yukon, the salary is $77,927 while in the NWT it is
$105,513. Nunavut Members are the fifth highest paid in Canada.
However, there is additional compensation paid to ordinary members from Quebec,
Yukon, NWT and Nunavut that are tax-free and non-accountable that will be impacted
by Bill C-63. These are discussed below in the analysis of constituency allowances.
The comments on consensus government at page 12 of the NWT report, as well as the
comments at pages 23 and 24 on the factors applicable to determining a fair level of
compensation for Members, are equally applicable to Nunavut. They are attached as
Appendix D. Both territories have many similarities such as consensus government,
large geographical areas and the highest cost of living in Canada.
The cost of living in Yellowknife is 10% higher than Whitehorse (data sources linked at
Appendix F) and helps to explain why NWT members are paid more than members in
the Yukon. As noted at pages 4 and 7 of the Yukon Report, there are historical and
financial reasons for the Yukon being the lowest in Canada and the gap was too much
to reduce in one report. The Commission clearly recognized that further increases in the
future would be required to close the gap to reach the average member salary for all
jurisdictions of $101,589.
As held in RE: Maloney and Tagak Bankruptcy, 2008 NUCJ 7 (CanLII) the cost of living
in Iqaluit is three times more expensive than Yellowknife. Arguably, Nunavut salaries
should be the highest in Canada because of the substantially higher cost of living. At the
same time, the sitting days and committee work of Members is comparable to other
jurisdictions. Information supplied by the Office of the Clerk indicates that the average
number of sitting days per calendar year across Canada is approximately 55. Ontario
had the highest average at approximately 82, while the Yukon had approximately 54
and the NWT had approximately 41.
9

 Although the Nunavut average is approximately 36, the Assembly sat for 44 days in
2018. The basic indemnity at the time of the 2009 Nunavut Commission Report was
$81,143 and the current indemnity reflects modest cost of living increases since that
date.
The Commission believes that the current basic indemnity should remain the same. The
Member indemnities reflect salaries in the GN public service that, in turn, take into
account the cost of living in Nunavut.
Additional Indemnities
Section 26 of the Act authorizes the payment of an additional indemnity to Ministers,
Presiding Officers of the Assembly and the Chairpersons of Committees and Caucuses.
It specifies that these persons are to be paid the additional indemnity specified in
section 2 of Schedule C of the Act as follows:
Premier:
Deputy Premier:
Minister:
Speaker:
Deputy Speaker:
Deputy Chairperson of the Committee of the Whole:
Chairperson of a Standing or Special Committee:
Chairperson of Full Caucus or regular Members’ Caucus:

$ 95,198
$ 87,665
$ 80,134
$ 80,134
$ 20,665
$ 5,421
$ 4,669
$ 3,163

As set out in Appendix C, the highest paid Premier is in Nova Scotia at $112,791 and
the second highest is in Quebec at $100,849. The lowest is in the Yukon at $59,944.
The additional indemnity paid to the Premier of the NWT is $80,250 while the Premier of
Nunavut is paid $95,198. The additional indemnity for the Speaker varies from a high of
$80,134 in Nunavut and a low of $29,273 in the Yukon.
The highest additional indemnity for Ministers is in Nunavut at $80,134 and the second
highest is in Quebec at $71,778. The lowest is in the Yukon at 41,961. A Minister in the
NWT is paid $56,472. These numbers show that the additional indemnities for the
Ministers and Speaker in Nunavut are the highest in Canada and third highest for the
Premier.
The additional indemnities paid at the time of the 2009 Nunavut Commission were
$83,288 for the Premier, $70,109 for Ministers and $70,109 for the Speaker. The
reasons behind the 2009 levels is unclear but the Commission recommended no
Change. While the Nunavut additional indemnities are among the highest in Canada, it
is clear from this comparison that the increases since the last report are modest and
reflect cost of living increases. The Commission also recommends no change in the
level of the additional indemnity. However, as discussed in section 7 below, we
recommend that the responsibility for setting Ministerial salary, benefits and allowances
be transferred to the MSB.
10

 4.0 Taxable and Non-Taxable Allowances: Constituency Allowances, Living
Allowances, Nunavut Northern Allowance and Household Allowance
4.1 History of the Use of Tax-Free Allowances
In addition to the basic indemnity, three jurisdictions also pay Members a nonaccountable, tax-free allowance. It is $17,304 in Quebec, $14,984 in the Yukon and in
the NWT $7,484 or $14,968 depending upon whether one represents a constituency
within or outside Yellowknife. The Speaker and Ministers in the NWT also receive a
non-accountable entertainment allowance of $1,500.
Appendix C shows that Nunavut Members received a tax-free allowance of $1,000 as
specified in section 22 of the federal Nunavut Act. Ministers also receive a taxable nonaccountable entertainment allowance of $1,500. As explained at page 6 of the 2018
Yukon report, the payment of an expense allowance was authorized by section 39(3) of
the Legislative Assembly Act. It was “provided to a Member to pay for expenses
incidental to the discharge of the Member’s duties in that capacity.” No records or
accountability was required for the use of the expense allowance and it was not subject
to taxation. The authority to pay this type of allowance came from subsection 81(2) of
the federal Income Tax Act.
As noted at page 7 in the Yukon Report, these allowances became taxable on January
1, 2019, because of the passage of Bill C-63 by Parliament. To compensate for the
taxation of these benefits, the Yukon report presented a grossed-up version of the
expense allowance that assigns an additional value to the actual allowance that factors
in the tax savings gained from it being non-taxable. The calculation was done using the
Fidelity Investments Tax Calculator, which applied 2016 taxation rates for each
jurisdiction. When this exercise is carried out, the final figures are $118,864 for Québec,
$124,537 for the NWT and $97,404 for the Yukon.

4.2 Constituency Living Allowance in Nunavut
Although it appears that Nunavut Members only receive the $1,000 tax-free allowance,
the Commission learned from its review of the documentation and its research that a
type of tax-free allowance has also been provided to all Members through the
administration of section 31(1)(a) of the Act. That section states:
Constituency allowance and expenses
31. (1) In addition to the allowances and expenses referred to in sections 27 to
30,
(a) where a member engages in constituency work within commuting
distance of the member's place of residence, the member is entitled to be
paid a living allowance at the prescribed rate for each day that the
member is engaged in constituency work; and

11

 (b) where a member engages in constituency work that is not within
commuting distance of the member's place of residence, the member is
entitled to be paid
(i) the reasonable cost of the return transportation of the member
between the member's place of residence and the place to which
the member must travel, and
(ii) a living allowance at the prescribed rate for each day that the
member is engaged in constituency work or is absent from his or
her place of residence in order to engage in constituency work.
Written claim
(2) A member may claim a living allowance under paragraph (1)(a) or
subparagraph (1)(b)(ii) by filing a written statement with the Office of the Clerk
listing the dates and locations of the constituency work.
Maximum allowance
(3) A member may claim a living allowance under paragraph (1)(a) or
subparagraph (1)(b)(ii) for a cumulative maximum of 90 days in each fiscal year.
Living allowance for this section is defined in Regulation R-006-2003 as being the
applicable “Government of Nunavut Duty Travel Expense Rates, as may be amended
from time to time” [GNDT per Diem]. The current GNDT per diem is $169.90 per day.
All Members have been claiming and have been paid the maximum living allowance
allowed under section 31(3) of the Act without deduction for income tax. That
subsection caps the maximum claim for the living allowance at 90 days under either
section 31(1)(a) or section 31(b)(ii). The total amount paid out as at March 31, 2017,
was $304,511 or about $13,000 per Member. Multiplying the $169.90 GNDT per diem
by the 90 days produces a current figure of $15,291.00 for a fiscal year.
The Commission is satisfied that the payment of the allowance for constituency work
carried out away from the community where the Member resides is a rational objective
claim that is consistent with the claims made by and paid to GN employees who are on
duty travel. The Member is away from home and is incurring expenses for meals and
incidentals. This claim is for reimbursement of expenses incurred that accompany the
claim for travel expenses. The Member’s travel expenses will prove that he or she was
in the community on the days that are claimed for the living allowance. In other words
the allowance is accountable unlike the allowances paid in the NWT or Yukon.
However, claims paid under section 31(1)(a) are a peculiar allowance. The claim is paid
out at the same rate as the GNDT per diem, but the Member does not travel. The
allowance is not for reimbursement of expenses for constituency work because no
receipts are required. It should be noted that Members who actually incur expenses for
constituency work may claim under section 31(4) on the production of receipts.
Finally, it is not treated as part of the basic indemnity although it has elements or indicia
that are similar.
12

 The Commission believes that the allowance was treated by the Clerk’s Office as if it
was part of the Member’s basic indemnity. It was paid as if it was part of the
constituency work and Members were required to file a written statement listing the
dates and locations of the constituency work. However, unlike the basic indemnity there
was no income tax deducted and it appears that the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA)
treated it as expenses incurred in the course of employment.
In summary, the allowance has elements of a GNDT per diem, an allowance for
expenses and a basic indemnity. The Commission feels these payments are very
similar to the NWT and Yukon tax-free allowances and would likely be construed as
such by the CRA as currently administered. As a result they became taxable on January
1, 2019.
The Legislative Assembly has two options. It can make the allowance accountable by
requiring Members to provide receipts. This would require definitions of “eligible
constituency expenses” and “legitimate constituency work,” as well as a system for
review and approval of the claims.
The second option is to make it clear that it is a component of the basic indemnity of a
Member. This is how it was treated by the Clerk’s Office when Members were required
to provide a signed statement that the allowance was used for constituency work. If the
Legislative Assembly chooses the second option it will have to take into account the
impact of the taxation and possibly increase or “gross up” the allowances as noted in
the Yukon report. The grossed up value of this allowance when added to the basic
indemnity results in total compensation that is approximately the same as the NWT.
The Commission recommends that the current constituency allowance paid under
subsection 31(1)(a) of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act (the Act)
should be uncoupled from the GN duty travel (GNDT) per diems and should no longer
be referred to as an allowance. It should be treated as part of the basic indemnity with
income tax deducted. It has been paid to Members as part of their constituency work
which combined with committee work is a normal part a Member’s responsibility. It
should be referred to as a constituency work benefit and rolled into the basic indemnity.

4.3 Nunavut Northern Allowance
Section 29 of the Act specifies that every Member shall be paid a Nunavut Northern
Allowance as set out in Schedule C of the Act. Section 4 of that Schedule specifies that
the allowance payable is that which is set out in Article 39 of the Collective Agreement
between the Nunavut Employees Union and the Minister Responsible for the Public
Service Act. The Commission recommends no change to this allowance.

13

 4.4 Household Allowance
All Members who own their own home or pay the full unsubsidized rental cost of a
housing unit are entitled to a payment of $400 per month pursuant to MSB ROD No.
#04-108. The Commission recommends no change to this allowance. Government of
Nunavut public servants are also entitled to claim this allowance.

5.0 Retiring Allowance
In December 2015, the MSB discussed removing the FTA option offered to retiring
Members under the SRAA. Members of the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut are
automatically enrolled in the Retiring Allowances Act (RAA), a pension plan which is
registered with CRA and, therefore, subject to the limits imposed under the Income Tax
Act (ITA). Members are offered a once-in-a-lifetime option to enroll in the SRAA which,
not being a registered pension plan, is not subject to any ITA restrictions. These plans
were modeled after the corresponding plans provided to the Members of the NWT
Legislative Assembly.
In the 1990s, there was a lot of public attention brought to the pensions being provided
to the Members of the Legislative Assemblies across the country. Attached as Appendix
E is an interjurisdictional comparison of SRAAs across Canada. The NWT Legislative
Assembly decided to close their SRAA to new members in 1996. With the creation of
Nunavut, Members of the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut entered into their own RAA.
After the NWT Legislative Assembly reopened their SRAA to new members in 2002, the
Legislative Assembly of Nunavut started their own SRAA.
While the Nunavut SRAA is modelled after the NWT SRAA, there are some differences
in the two acts. For example, the Nunavut SRAA provides a 3% benefit accrual, while
the NWT SRAA provides 2%. This translates to a 50% larger benefit being paid to a
Nunavut MLA compared to a NWT MLA if the Members’ service and remuneration is
equal.
In the NWT SRAA, when a member terminates, their entitlement must be received as a
lifetime pension. They have the option to begin a pension immediately, or defer pension
commencement to a later date. In both of these cases, a portion of the payments will
continue to a surviving spouse, should the member have one at death.
In the Nunavut SRAA, the member is offered these same lifetime pension options. In
addition, a Member may elect to receive their SRAA entitlement at an accelerated rate,
meaning the full value of their entitlement is paid over a period of 5, 10 or 15 years.
This arrangement is referred to as an FTA. The NWT SRAA does not provide any
option to receive the pension at any rate faster than a lifetime pension. As of April 1,
2014, 20 active Members and 19 retired Members participated in the SRAA. These
numbers are similar to the number of Members participating in the RAA. As of April 1,
14

 2014 there were 21 active members and 18 retired members. The Nunavut SRAA offers
more options to its members than the NWT SRAA. NWT members receive a lifetime
pension (deferred or otherwise). Nunavut Members have these options, plus the option
of receiving their entitlement at an accelerated rate. It is interesting to note that 11 of the
19 retirees have chosen a lifetime pension, while the remaining 8 have chosen an
accelerated payout. Three chose 5 years, 4 chose 10 years, and one chose 15 years.
It is clear that most Members have chosen to enrol in the SRAA. Additionally, while the
majority of retirees have chosen a lifetime pension, the other options have also been
exercised to some degree.
While more than half of the retirees treat the SRAA as a lifetime pension, others have
seen the value in an accelerated payout. Those who chose the quickest of 5 years were
younger than those who chose the longer payouts of 10 or 15 years. While several
jurisdictions provide a supplementary plan, the Commission is not aware of the reasons
that the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut introduced this plan. It appears that it was a
reaction to the NWT Assembly reintroducing such a plan. The arguments in favour of
the current legislation are that Members should take responsibility for their own
retirement, and should not be forced to take a lifetime pension if they feel they can
better manage their own retirement funds. Lump sum payment options, or the FTA, can
provide more flexibility to members in how they will ultimately receive income from their
pension plans. While these options are not as tax effective for members, they do
provide more money to members up front, and can assist members in providing for their
families or estates.
By providing a lump sum option, or FTA, members can invest the proceeds themselves
and use them to provide future income in the amount and manner that best suits them.
Lump sum payment options, or FTA, can provide more flexibility to members in how
they will ultimately receive income from their pension plans. While these options are not
as tax effective for members, they do provide more money to members up front, and
can assist members in providing for their families or estates. By providing a lump sum
option, or a FTA, members can invest the proceeds themselves and use them to
provide future income in the amount and manner that best suits them. Finally, while a
lifetime pension does provide spousal protection, if a member dies shortly after
retirement, the value of the survivor or dependent pension will likely not be as significant
as a lump sum at retirement, especially if the member has no spouse. So if a member is
concerned with providing for their family or estate, a lump sum or FTA would be a more
attractive option. It should be noted that in order to receive a lump sum or FTA, a
spousal waiver would likely have to be signed by the spouse acknowledging that they
understand that they are signing away the guaranteed lifetime pension. While this may
be a legally binding document, there may be some cultural aspects that may influence
the spouse’s decision to sign.

15

 The more paternalistic arguments against the current legislation permitting the use of an
FTA is that it is no secret that some Members have a difficult time transitioning into the
private sector after serving in public office. While a Member may become accustomed
to the lifestyle afforded to them by their compensation during their term(s), they may not
be able to find similar employment for some time afterwards. Some may view the FTA
as bridge income until they can secure their next employment, even if it means less
income in retirement.
In addition to the benefit of providing lifetime income, many organizations and pension
plan sponsors believe that there should be some restriction on a Member’s ability to
take a lump sum to protect the member from themselves. Again, the underlying belief is
that the purpose of a pension plan is to provide retirement income. By allowing
Members to receive their entitlement as a lump sum, especially in the case of the SRAA
when benefits are not locked in, Members can use the funds for any purpose. This can
lead to little or no retirement income from the plans when the Members are older, which
could lead to lower standards of living, poverty, and reliance on government programs
for income.
Even when a Member intends to use a lump sum or FTA for retirement income, there is
potential for a negative investment experience to adversely affect the Member’s ability
to do so. Providing a lifetime pension leaves the investment of assets to investment
experts, and not to the Member. Further, if the RAA or SRAA suffer negative investment
experience, the Legislative Assembly is required to increase funding to make the plans
whole. Members don’t have this same guarantee with their personal investments.
Finally, the lifetime pension option automatically includes a survivor benefit for a lifetime
spousal pension upon the death of the member. This means that if the Member were to
die before his or her spouse, a reduced pension (two-thirds) would continue for the
spouse’s lifetime, along with an additional amount to any remaining dependent children
as long as they remain dependent.
In contemplating whether to suggest a change to the current payment options from the
RAA and or SRAA, it is important to revisit the primary purpose of the plans. That is, are
the plans a tool to guarantee a lifetime of income after service, or should they simply be
a source of additional compensation to members?
The Commission believes that there is no need for a further transitional allowance,
given that such a benefit is already available to Members when they are no longer
Members. The Commission expects that there may be a negative reaction from some
Members with having their freedom of choice removed. On the other hand, the
Commission believes that the public will respond positively to the decision by the
encouraging members to be responsible with their tax-funded pension monies. On
balance the Commission recommends that section 16 of the SRAA be repealed to
remove the FTA option.

16

 The Commission also recommends that the 60 day time limit set out in section 7 of the
SRAA to make an election to participate in the pension plan should be repealed. The
learning curve for new members is steep and many need time to absorb all the
information they receive as they begin their duties. Members need some time to reflect
and obtain advice on whether to participate in the SRAA and there is no clear rationale
for forcing them to make a decision so quickly.

6.0 Transitional Allowances
Section 33 of the Act specifies that a member shall be paid a transitional allowance if he
or she is not elected or does not continue as a member. The amount of the allowance is
calculated as an amount equal to the salary payable to the Member for six weeks of
each year served at the basic salary plus six weeks of each year served at the
additional salary of a Minister, Speaker or Chairperson of a Committee or Caucus, if
applicable. The Commission is believes that the current formula for calculating the
transitional allowance is satisfactory and recommends it remain the same. The
Commission adopts the comments made at page 16 of the NWT report about the need
for Members to educate themselves, during their term in office, on the various financial
planning options once they cease to be a Member.
The MSB currently encourages and facilitates Members to meet with the pension
actuaries prior to leaving the Assembly. However, the Commission has been advised
that these types of advisors may not have been able to advise on the practical positives
and negatives of how to receive the pension income. In addition to encouraging
Members to seek out financial planning assistance and access to GN retirement
courses or courses in southern Canada, the MSB should actively organize its own
courses from time to time and strongly encourage Members to attend. The Commission
is aware that, despite the payment of the current transitional allowance, some Members
are not prepared for life after politics, particularly if they are defeated in an election. All
Members, particularly those Members contemplating retirement, should be encouraged
to develop an exit strategy that would cover this information along with any other
relevant information that will support the Members in their move from public to private
life.

7.0 Allowances, Expenses and Benefits Paid to Members of the Executive Council
under Subsection 33.1(2) of the Act
Subsection 33.1(2) of the Act authorizes the Executive Council (Cabinet) to:
“… establish policies for the payment and recovery of allowances,
reimbursement of expenses and provision of benefits to members of the
Executive Council that are in addition to those provided for in sections 25 to 33.”

17

 Acting under the authority of this subsection, Cabinet has produced a Ministerial
Procedures Manual (MPM). Currently, the MPM is administered through the Office of
the Premier and may be amended from time to time at the discretion of the Cabinet. It
has never been tabled in the House and is not subject to review by the MSB.
Section 9 of the MPM sets out the rules for Ministerial travel allowances that are
discussed below at section 13. Section 4 of the MPM sets out the rules for the payment
of additional salary and sections 5 and 6 authorizes Ministers to claim and be paid
housing allowances and reimbursement for the cost of temporary housing in Iqaluit.
The Commission makes no recommendations on the content of the allowances,
expenses and benefits paid to Ministers under sections 4, 5 and 6 of the MPM.
However, as set out below in section 13, the Commission is recommending changes in
the travel allowances for Ministers and Members that would, if implemented, result in
the repeal of section 30 of the Act and the transfer of the administration of travel
benefits currently covered in section 2 of the MPM from the Premier’s Office to the
MSB.
The Commission is aware that there were reports in the news media last year about
disagreement in Cabinet on the interpretation of sections 5 and 6 of the MPM. If the
Commission’s recommendation on the change in the administration of the travel
allowances contained in section 2 is accepted, it makes sense to also transfer to the
MSB the administration of sections 4, 5 and 6 of the MPM to avoid the problems
reported in the news media, as well. A new MSB structure would also assure the public
that Ministerial benefits are reviewed by Members because the MSB always reports to
the Full Caucus. In Full Caucus, all 22 MLAs are viewed as equals. The Speaker
appears in front of the Regular Members’ Caucus to present the Assembly’s business
plan, main and capital estimates. The Speaker also appears in Committee of the Whole
during sessions of the Assembly to defend the business plan and estimates. Since the
review is conducted in public, the news media and public should be satisfied that the
process is transparent and that all Members are being held accountable for their travel
and benefits.
The 17th NWT Assembly took this step and transferred the responsibility for their
equivalent to sections 2, 4, 5 and 6. The NWT Assembly recognized that the full transfer
of responsibility to the MSB for Ministerial pay, accommodation allowances and home
travel created an imbalance between the input of Cabinet and Members. The previous
NWT legislation was identical to the current wording of subsection 38(1) of the Act. That
section specifies that the MSB is composed of one Minister nominated by the Cabinet,
the Speaker and three members other than the Deputy Speaker nominated by the
Members. To rectify this imbalance, the NWT legislation was changed to specify that
the MSB is chaired by the Speaker and includes two Ministers and two Regular
Members. The Commission recommends that responsibility for the administration of
sections 4, 5 and 6 of the MPM be transferred from the Office of the Premier to the
MSB. While the Commission did not identify any problems with the current MSB
structure, the Assembly may wish to consider adopting the same structure as the NWT
18

 by amending section 38 (1) of the Act to change the composition of the MSB from its
current form to two Ministers and two Members with the Speaker as Chairperson. This
configuration did appeal to the Commission because it provides a balance between the
Cabinet and Regular Members on the MSB.

8.0 Practical and Cost-Effective Ways to Support the work of Members who are
Expectant Mothers or who are Raising Young Children in Respect to Such Areas
as Child Care and Parental Leave
Nunavut has 22 constituencies. There are 4 constituencies located in Iqaluit with the
remaining 18 spread over 3 regions and 3 time zones. Seven constituencies have two
communities and one has three. The constituencies that include more than one
community are spread over large geographic areas.
All communities rely on air travel for their contact with the outside world for much of the
year. Members representing constituencies outside of Iqaluit face additional challenges
because of the isolation of the communities in their ridings.
Members are required to travel to Iqaluit when the Assembly is sitting and to attend
committee and caucus meetings. Collectively, these job requirements mean that a
Member may be away from home for about 16 weeks per year. A long session of the
Assembly can result in a Member being away from home for as long as four weeks at a
time.
These realities make the work of Members from the more remote constituencies
challenging and stressful on family life. To ease the toll on family life, section 30
authorizes the Member and spouse to take additional trips during a session. The longer
the session, the more trips the Member may take.
Today, there are more Members of Parliament, as well as provincial and territorial
legislatures, who have young children. This includes some Members of the Legislative
Assembly of Nunavut. These Members face additional stresses in arranging for child
care while they attend to their duties.
The federal government has committed to working with Parliament to provide support
for Members by making the operations of Parliament more family-friendly. Attached as
Appendix G is a link to a copy of the Eleventh Report of the House of Commons
Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs on this subject.
The Eleventh Report of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Procedure and
House Affairs noted at page 6 that a childcare facility within close proximity of the
House of Commons had been made available to Parliamentarians since 1982. At page
7 of the Report, the Committee recommended that the House Administration proceed
with providing flexible child care services to be made available during hours when

19

 needed by Members and to attend to Members’ child care needs at the Members’ own
personal hourly cost.
The Commission endorses the Assembly taking a similar approach, where possible, to
make the work of Members more family-friendly. The GN policy on child care is that an
employee can claim, with backup receipts, up to $45 per day when on duty travel. The
Commission recommends that the Assembly adopt a similar policy. In addition, the
Assembly may consider providing enhanced temporary accommodation and laundry
services and taking a liberal interpretation of the use of the constituency work benefit.
For example, an MLA with young, pre-school children is elected to represent a multicommunity constituency like Quttiktuq, South Baffin, or Netsilik, but chooses to reside
primarily in the capital. The MSB could rule that an MLA in this situation would be
eligible to claim such expenses when travelling to the constituency for “constituency
work,” as opposed to “duty travel” when attending, for example, a Caucus retreat
outside of the capital. The Commission recommends that the development and
implementation of these types of family-friendly policies be carried out by MSB and that
care be taken that the policies do not exceed the benefits provided by the GN or the
private sector.
9.0 The Impact on Members’ Remuneration of Recent Changes to Federal Income
Tax Legislation that were provided for in Bill C-63. Which Received Royal Assent
on December 14, 2017
This issue was addressed in section 4.0 above.
10.0 The Adequacy of Public Reporting and Disclosure of Members’ Indemnities,
Allowances, Expenses and Benefits
At page 18 of the NWT Report, the Commission recommended that more detailed
information about Members’ expenses be published on the government website, as a
separate document, by June 30 of the following fiscal year.
It noted:
“There are clear examples of more accessible published information available at
the Federal, Provincial and Territorial levels. Similar expense information is
available on the Parliamentary website, that clearly lists expenditures (under the
“Expenditure Report” tab/link) of the member. This government has recently
started to publish detailed travel expenses for Cabinet Members. It was
suggested the same level of openness and accountability should be provided by
all MLAs. Providing increased transparency and access to information about
salaries, detailed expenses and entitlements is appropriate and aligns with the
18th Assembly’s commitment to accountability and transparency. Rather than
20

 requiring the public to sort through larger annual reports, the information should
be easily identified and available on the Legislative Assembly website. Having
clear information about salaries, benefits, allowances and expenses paid to
MLAs allows the public to be better informed.”
The Commission accepts that the same approach should be taken in Nunavut. The
changes recommended about constituency allowances and the transfer of responsibility
for the MPM are consistent with more transparency because it allows the public to see
the full level of compensation paid to Members.

11.0 The Advisability of Replacing the Constituency Living Allowance Currently
Paid to Members under Subsection 31(3) of the Act with a Higher Base Rate of
Remuneration
This issue is addressed in section 4.0 above.

12.0 The Appropriateness of Paying Living Allowances to Members Resident in
the Capital
Section 28 of the Act authorizes the payment of a living allowance to Members who are
required to travel from their residence to Iqaluit to attend sessions of the Legislative
Assembly, meetings of a standing or special committee, meetings of the MSB and to
attend caucus meetings.
Section 28 differentiates between Members who are within commuting distance of
Iqaluit [s.28 (1)] and those who are not [s.28 (3)]. Both are entitled to claim the living
allowance but those who are not within commuting distance are also entitled to be paid
for their travel expenses similar to the claim for constituency work. Claims under section
28(3) are rational objective claims for reimbursement for meals and incidentals that
result from the requirement to travel in the same way that GN employees are required to
travel as part of their duties.
However, claims under section 28(1) are not for reimbursement of expenses because of
a requirement to travel. The Member resides in Iqaluit and lives in his or her residence
and eats meals in their residence.
In practical terms, the Members representing the Iqaluit constituencies and those
Ministers and Regular Members who have established a residence in Iqaluit are the
only Members who might be eligible to claim under s. 28(1). The Commission believes
that payments under section 28(1) are in the same category as constituency payments
under section 31(1)(a) and are inconsistent with the payment of the living allowance.
The Commission recommends that section 28(1) be removed from the Act.

21

 13.0 The Advisability of Replacing the Statutorily-Prescribed Travel Entitlements
under Section 30 of the Act with a Management and Services Board-administered
System of Travel Points that is Analogous to that which is Provided to Members
of Parliament under the authority of the Board of Internal Economy of the House
of Commons.
Section 2 of the Ministerial Procedures Manual specifies that Ministers are entitled to
claim for 26 economy class return air trips between the Minister’s home community and
Iqaluit for constituency work as long as there are sufficient funds available in the budget.
Ministers who reside in Iqaluit are not entitled to claim for this benefit and there are
currently five Ministers who are eligible to claim it. Section 30 of the Act provides similar
benefits for all Members but they are far less generous and much more difficult to
administer. The Members who do not reside in Iqaluit may claim up to 3 trips per
session.
Currently there are 18 Members (including Ministers) who are entitled to claim this
benefit. The Ministerial travel entitlement is per calendar year while the regular member
benefit is per session and some sessions run for two years.
Unlike the Ministerial policy, the Member entitlement contained in the Act lacks flexibility
to make adjustments that are within the Assembly travel budget. For example allowing
some of the trips to be used for another “family member” within the meaning of
Legislative Assembly Retiring Allowances Act. Subsection 30 (3) only permits a spouse
or a designated substitute.
In summary, 130 round trip travel entitlements are available to Ministers (26x5) and 54
available to Members (18x3). Ministers can access both the 26 trips of a Minister and
the 3 trips per session available to a Member for a total of 29.
In the course of a 2 year session, Ministers whose residence is not in Iqaluit would have
access to 52 trips (26x2) plus the 3 trip Member entitlement for a total of 55. On the
other hand regular members would only access 3 trips.
Although the Clerk’s office does permit regular Members to “bank” unused trips during a
session, Ministers enjoy a greater benefit because they are able to utilize additional
“home travel” entitlements that are authorized by the Premier under subsection 33.1(2)
of the Act. While subsection 33.1(1) authorizes the MSB to adopt similar policies for
Regular Members, it has chosen not to take this step. The Commission assumes this is
because of budgetary considerations that must be initiated by Cabinet and possible
conflicts with subsection 30(1). Although the Commission recognizes that Ministers
spend more time away from their home communities and need more travel entitlements,
it believes that current system is a little unfair to regular members.

22

 They should receive a minimum of 3 additional trips per session and this should be
done in a cost-neutral manner by reducing the number of Ministerial travel entitlements
available per year or removing the Regular Member entitlements from Ministers who
already have access to Ministerial travel entitlements or both.
The Commission also believes that it is important to the have the entire travel budget
under one roof to provide maximum flexibility. That would permit the MSB to create new
policies to set up a system of travel points that is similar to the system administered by
the Board of Internal Economy for Members of Parliament.
To accomplish this, section 30 should be repealed and be replaced with new policies
that would specify the following:
(a) Establishing a maximum number of return trips between Iqaluit and the Member’s
community of residence per fiscal and/or calendar year and/or seasonal sitting within
the meaning of Rule 3(1) of the Rules of the Legislative Assembly of
Nunavut;
(b) Establishing a maximum number of return trips between Iqaluit and the Member’s
community of residence that can be “banked” during the life of an Assembly;
(c) Establishing attendance requirements on the part of Members to be deemed eligible
for the travel benefit;
(d) Defining “family member” to mean immediate relatives who have been designated
as dependants and/or spouses within the meaning of Legislative Assembly Retiring
Allowances Act; and
(e) Fostering a “family-friendly” institution by providing enhanced travel entitlements to
Members with infants or young children who have not been enrolled in full-time
schooling.

23

 Appendix A:

Commission Terms of Reference and
Public Invitation for Submissions

24

Terms of Reference: Independent Commission to Review
Members’ Indemnities, Allowances, Expenses and Benefits
Statutory Purpose
Section 37 of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act provides that:
Appointment of commission
37. (1) The Speaker, after consultation with the Management and Services
Board, may establish an independent commission to review and make
recommendations to the Speaker regarding the indemnities, allowances,
expenses and benefits to be paid to the members of the Legislative Assembly
and other related matters.
Reports of commission
(2) The Speaker shall cause any recommendations and reports made by a
commission established under subsection (1) to be laid before the Legislative
Assembly as soon as reasonably practicable and in any case before the end of
the session in which they were received.
Membership of commission
(3) The commission shall be composed of not more than five members, chosen
by the Speaker on the recommendation of the Management and Services Board.
Members not eligible
(4) Members [of the Legislative Assembly] shall not serve as members of the
commission.

Principles
In making its recommendations, the commission shall be guided by the following:




Individuals should not seek election to public office for purely financial gain;
The position of legislator is unique. Remuneration should reflect the significant
responsibilities and personal sacrifices that accompany elected public office, as well
as the inherent insecurity of holding elected public office; and
The system of remuneration for elected office-holders should be publicly transparent
and not unduly complex to administer.
25

 Timeline
The final report of the commission is to be submitted to the Speaker no later than March
31, 2019. Pursuant to section 37 of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act,
the Speaker shall table the report in the “Legislative Assembly as soon as reasonably
practicable.”

Authorities
In fulfilling its statutory mandate under section 37 of the Legislative Assembly and
Executive Council Act, the commission shall have access to the following:





Current consolidations of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act, the
Legislative Assembly Retiring Allowances Act and the Supplementary Retiring
Allowances Act;
Relevant policies, briefing materials, correspondence, interpretive bulletins and other
materials prepared by, or on behalf of, the Management and Services Board in
relation to Members’ indemnities, allowances, expenses and benefits;
Final report of the 2009 Independent Commission to Review Members’ Indemnities,
Allowances, Expenses and Benefits; and
Analogous reports prepared within the past five (5) years by other Canadian
legislatures.

Scope of Work
In fulfilling its statutory mandate under section 37 of the Legislative Assembly and
Executive Council Act, the commission shall consider and provide recommendations
concerning the following:







Indemnities paid to Members of the Legislative Assembly and office-holders under
Schedule C of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act;
Taxable and Non-Taxable Allowances, including Constituency Allowances, Living
Allowances, Nunavut Northern Allowance and Housing Allowance;
Retiring Allowances;
Transitional Allowances;
Allowances, expenses and benefits paid to members of the Executive Council under
subsection 33.1(2) of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act; and
Other remuneration and entitlements for Members.

26

 The commission shall also consider and make recommendations concerning the
following specific matters:







Practical and cost-effective ways to support the work of Members who are expectant
mothers or who are raising young children in respect to such areas as child care and
parental leave;
The impact on Members’ remuneration of recent changes to federal income tax
legislation that were provided for in Bill C-63, which received Royal Assent on
December 14, 2017;
The adequacy of public reporting and disclosure of Members’ indemnities,
allowances, expenses and benefits;
The advisability of replacing the constituency living allowance currently paid to
Members under subsection 31(3) of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council
Act with a higher base rate of remuneration;
The appropriateness of paying living allowances to Members resident in the capital;
and
The advisability of replacing the statutorily-prescribed travel entitlements under
section 30 of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act with a
Management and Services Board-administered system of travel points that is
analogous to that which is provided to Members of Parliament under the authority of
the Board of Internal Economy of the House of Commons.

The commission’s mandate is to focus on remuneration and benefits paid to Members
of the Legislative Assembly. The Management and Services Board of the 4th Legislative
Assembly completed a comprehensive review of constituency work expenses
prescribed in Schedule B of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council.
Consequently, the commission will not consider:




Constituency work expenses prescribed in Schedule B of the Legislative Assembly
and Executive Council;
Remuneration and benefits paid to Members’ Constituency Assistants; or
Constituency Office Operations and Administration.

Administrative Matters
The Office of the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly shall provide all necessary
administrative services to the commission, including the engagement of staff and
advisors. In undertaking its work, the commission shall make reasonable efforts to invite
formal written submissions from Nunavut residents. The commission may, at its sole
discretion, invite submitters to appear before the commission.
The Speaker, on the recommendation of the Management and Services Board, may
approve the payment of honoraria and reimbursement of reasonable expenses for
commission members, in accordance with chapter 810 of the Financial Administration
Manual.
27

 Invitation for Submissions
Independent Commission to Review
Members’ Indemnities, Allowances, Expenses and Benefits

The Legislative Assembly of Nunavut has established an
Independent Commission to Review Members’ Indemnities,
Allowances, Expenses and Benefits. The Commission’s mandate
is provided for in section 37 of the Legislative Assembly and
Executive Council Act.
One of the Commission’s mandates is to support a family-friendly
institution by providing recommendations concerning practical and
cost-effective ways to support the work of Members of the
Legislative Assembly who are expectant mothers or who are
raising young children in respect to such areas as child care and
parental leave
The Independent Commission invites Nunavut residents and
organizations to provide written submissions.
Submissions will be accepted until 5:00pm (EST) on January 25,
2019. Submissions should be directed to:
Chairperson, Independent Commission to Review
Members’ Indemnities, Allowances, Expenses and Benefits
c/o Office of the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut
P.O. Box 1200, Iqaluit, NU, X0A 0H0
Tel: (867) 975-5000 Fax: (867) 975-5191
Email: submissions@assembly.nu.ca
28

 Appendix B:

Commission Correspondence and
List of Contacted Members and Former Members

29

October 4, 2018
All Members of the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut
Dear Members:
I am writing to you in my capacity as the Chairperson of the Independent Commission to
Review Members’ Indemnities, Allowances, Expenses and Benefits to invite you to
provide your observations, concerns and recommendations to the Commission as we
work to prepare our report to the Legislative Assembly. For your ease of reference, I am
attaching a copy of the Commission’s approved Terms of Reference, and I draw your
attention to our Scope of Work, which is detailed on page 3 of the document. My
colleagues and I welcome your input concerning these specific areas.
I also wish to advise you that the Commission anticipates contacting a number of
Members by telephone or other means over the coming months to conduct focused
interviews on the subject of developing recommendations for practical and cost-effective
ways to support the work of Members who are expectant mothers or who are raising
young children in respect to such areas as child care and parental leave. I thank you in
advance for your assistance in this process.
I ask that Members provide their submissions on or before Friday, January 25, 2019.
Submissions may be provided to the Commission through the Office of the Clerk of the
Legislative Assembly.
Yours sincerely,

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY

The Honourable Mr. Justice Earl Johnson
Chairperson
--Members Contacted:
MLA Pat Angnakak
MLA Jeannie Ehaloak
MLA George Hickes
MLA John Main
MLA Allan Rumbolt
MLA Joe Savikataaq
Former MLA Ron Elliott

30

 Appendix C:

Interjurisdictional Comparison of Members? Remuneration

31

Basic Salary
Tax - Free Allowance
Tax - Free Allowance-Non Capital
Speaker
Speaker of pro Tempore (Senate)
Deputy Speaker
Dep. Chair - Committee Whole
Dep. Chair - Committees
Assist. Dep. Chair - Cmte Whole (Hoc)
Prime Minister (HoC)
Premier
Deputy Premier
Ministers
Ministers without Portfolio
Minister of State (HoC and BC)
Parliamentary Secretary (HoC and BC)
Legislative Assistants
Secretaries of State (HoC)
Govt. House Leader
Leader of the Gov't in Senate (Senate)
Deputy House Leader
Deputy Leader of the Gov't in Senate (Senate)
Government Whip
Deputy Government Whip
Government Caucus Chair
Deputy Government Caucus Chair
Leader Official Opposition
Off. Opp. House Leader
Deputy House Leader of Official Opposition
Deputy Leader of the Opposition
Off. Opp. Whip
Deputy Official Opposition Whip
Off. Opp. Caucus Chair
Off. Opp. Deputy Caucus Chair
Leader 2nd Opposition
2nd Opp. House Leader
2nd Opposition Deputy House Leader
2nd Opp. Whip
2nd Opp. Deputy Whip
2nd Opp. Caucus Chair
Permanent Chr - max per year
Permanent Vice Chr-max per yr.
Temp. Chair of Standing Committee (Quebec)
Member of Office of the National Assembly
All Party Committees
Other Committees
Government Committees

Jurisdictional Survey Members' Pay, (prepared by the Legislative Assembly of Alberta - Human Resource Services based on responses from all jurisdictions) - April, 2018
PE
NL
YT
NU
BC
AB
SK
MB
ON
QC
NB
NS
$108,105.35 $127,296.00
$96,183.00 $94,513.00
$116,550.00
$95,704.00 $85,000.00
$89,234.90 $72,569.00 $95,357.00
$77,927.00 $103,323.00
$17,304.00
$14,984.00
$1,000.00
$54,052.67

$63,648.00

$48,969.00

$51,745.00

$36,364.00

$71,778.00

$52,614.00

$49,046.51

$42,638.00

$48,665.00

$29,973.00

$80,134.00

NT
$105,513.00
$7,603.00
$7603.00*
$45,926.00

$37,836.87
$21,621.07
$37,836.87

$31,824.00

$14,311.00

$10,677.00

$17,249.00

$33,496.00

$26,307.00

$24,523.25

$21,319.00

$12,166.00

$11,989.00

$20,665.00

$7,430.00

$15,912.00

$7,156.00

$7,626.00

$12,704.00

$5,421.00

$4,460.00

$97,294.81

$79,560.00

$79,201.00

$92,424.00

$100,489.00

$79,000.00

$112,791.20

$78,815.00

$65,168.00

$59,944.00

$63,648.00
$28,644.00

$51,745.00
$43,614.00

$49,301.00
$22,378.00

$71,778.00

$52,614.00
$39,500.00

$49,046.51
$49,046.51

$50,711.00

$48,665.00

$41,961.00

$95,198.00
$87,665.00
$80,134.00

$80,250.00

$54,052.67

$69,954.00
$55,964.00
$48,969.00

$13,674.00*

$37,836.87
$16,215.80

$16,667.00

$14,311.00

$10,677.00

$21,329.00

$71,778.00

$10,506.00

$21,329.00

$23,926.00

$5,253.00

$21,329.00
$14,569.00
$14,569.00

$33,496.00
$19,141.00
$23,926.00

$26,307.00

$5,253.00

$8,000.00

$10,506.00

$51,745.00
$7,626.00

$64,336.00
$21,329.00
$10,489.00

$71,778.00
$33,496.00
$19,141.00

$55,300.00
$8,000.00

$49,046.51
$10,506.00
$5,253.00

$50,711.00
$4,738.00*

$6,103.00

$16,317.00
$10,489.00
$14,569.00

$28,711.00
$19,141.00
$21,533.00

$19,730.25

$5,253.00

$3,984.00*

$8,000.00

$10,506.00

$43,614.00
$41,608.00
$6,103.00 lis

$33,496.00
$23,926.00

$19,750.00

$19,141.00

$2,500.00

$24,523.25
$10,506.00
$5,253.00
$5,253.00

$12,732.00
$9,552.00

$54,052.67
$21,621.07

$63,648.00
$15,912.00

$21,621.07
$16,215.80
$21,621.07

$9,552.00
$7,632.00

$27,026.34
$10,810.53

$28,644.00
$12,732.00

$14,311.00
$7,156.00
$14,311.00
$7,156.00
$24,484.00
$7,156.00

$10,810.53

$7,632.00

$7,156.00

$4,578.00

$14,685.00

$7,156.00
$14,311.00
$7,156.00

$6,574.00
**$4,578.00
**$3,816.00

$13,170.00
$16,317.00
$9,324.00

$10,810.53
$16,215.80
$10,810.53
$200.00/mtg

$14,311.00
$7,156.00
$14,311.00
$7,156.00
$48,969.00
$14,311.00
$7,156.00

$7,626.00
$6,574.00

$6,574.00

$111/day No add'l pay No add'l pay

$23,926.00
$19,141.00
$14,356.00
$14,356.00
$125 per diem No add'l pay

$111/day No add'l pay No add'l pay

No add'l pay

Change
3.5%
reduction from
2017 expired
March 31;
Change
April 1 reflects
2.10 % April No Change return to 2016
Changes
2018
0% April 2018
rates.

$61,300.00
$25,200.00

$84,000.00

No Change
0% April
2018 (Frozen
until 2020)
** $197/mtg.
No Change
which
'0% April 2018
member
presides + Frozen until at
least April,
Change 2%
50%
2019
April 2018

n/a

$17,200.00
$175,600.00

$56,472.00

$84,000.00

No Change
0% April
2018

No Change
0% April
2018
Frozen all of
2018

$84,000.00

$3,984.00*
$3,163.00
$48,665.00
$24,330.00

$20,241.00

$24,330.00
$12,166.00

Change
1.5% Apr
2018
*Provided
the Member
is not
receiving
additional
salary as in
another
position

$39,800.00

$4,669.00

No add'l pay
No add'l pay

No Change
0% April
2018

$39,800.00
$12,100.00
$6,000.00
$7,000.00

$9,702.00

$25,200.00
$7,000.00
$3,100.00
$6,000.00

$17,983.00

$12,166.00
$9,300.00

$6,596.00*

$3,292.00

$41,961.00

$3,163.00

$10,506.00
$2,101.00
$525.00

n/a

$43,400.00
$17,200.00

$84,000.00
$17,200.00

$4,578.00

$21,621.07
$16,215.80
$21,621.07

HoC
$175,600.00

$19,141.00

$14,311.00

$7,156.00

Senate
$150,600.00

'Change
1.5% Apr
2018

$6,583.00

$12,100.00
$6,000.00

$62,800.00
$82,600.00
$17,200.00
$31,400.00
$12,200.00
$12,200.00
$84,000.00
$43,400.00
$17,200.00
$30,900.00
$12,200.00
$12,200.00
$59,500.00
$17,200.00
$6,100.00
$12,200.00
$6,100.00
$6,100.00
$12,200.00
$6,100.00

No add'l pay
No add'l

No add'l pay

Change
1.6 % April
2018
* - only
members
No Change
beyond
0% April 2018 commuting
Nunavut
distance to
received 2%
the capital
October 2017 are eligible

Change
1.7% April
2018

'Change
1.7% April
2018 sessional
allowance/
salaries
rounded down
to nearest
hundred

 Appendix D:
Excerpts from the 2018 Northwest Territories
Review of Members’ Compensation and Benefits Report

33

 “… The Northwest Territories is one of only two jurisdictions in Canada with a
consensus system of government instead of one based on party politics. In this system,
all Members of the Legislative Assembly are elected as independents. Shortly after the
election, all Members meet as a Caucus to set priorities for that Assembly. The Caucus
remains active throughout their term as the forum where all Members meet as equals.
Members who are not in Cabinet are referred to as Regular Members. They become the
“unofficial opposition.” They are responsible, through questioning in the House and the
work of standing committees, for holding the government accountable and responsive to
the people of the Northwest Territories.
Compared to the party system, there is much more communication between Regular
Members and Cabinet. All legislation, major policies, and proposed budgets pass
through the Regular Members’ standing committees before coming to the House.
This gives Members a chance to make changes and put their “fingerprints” on initiatives
before they’re made public, unlike in other systems. This influence comes at a price for
Regular Members: they often get advance notice of announcements and issues before
the public does but can’t tell their constituents. The 11 Regular Members also hold the
balance of power, as only seven Cabinet Ministers are elected. A Cabinet that ignores
the direction favoured by the majority soon runs into trouble. Even so, consensus
government does not mean that unanimous agreement is necessary for decisions to be
made, motions passed, and legislation enacted. A simple majority carries the vote.
Once elected, the Members hold a territorial leadership meeting at the Legislative
Assembly in Yellowknife. The first order of business is the election of the Speaker by
secret ballot. This reflects the importance of the Speaker, who presides over the
Assembly as a whole and enforces the rules. The next task is electing the Premier.
Members have many discussions behind the scenes as candidates measure their
support leading up to the election, which has been held in public since the 12th
Assembly. Candidates are nominated and given 20 minutes to present their platforms.
Then the floor is opened for a limited number of questions from each Member, and a
secret ballot vote is held. Sometimes it takes several ballots before any candidate
receives more than 50% of the votes.
The election of six Cabinet ministers comes next. In order to have fair and equitable
representation, Ministers are generally selected from across the territory – two from the
north, two from the south and two from the central part of the territory. There is also
discussion about the structure of cabinet, such as having representatives who are
female or Indigenous. Again, candidates are nominated and outline their platforms in
public before a secret ballot vote takes place.
After meeting with his or her team of Ministers, the Premier assigns them to head up
one or more departments. Some Members choose not to accept nominations to Cabinet
because they prefer to be free to ask tough questions of ministers in the House and
before standing committees.

34

 They feel they can better represent their constituents as Regular Members. It rarely
happens, but the Premier and/or Cabinet ministers can be removed by passing a motion
of non-confidence in the House.
Motions of censure are a less extreme measure that can put a Premier or minister
under considerable public pressure. Compensation for MLAs needs to be generous
enough to attract competent, capable and committed individuals from all sectors, yet not
so generous to be the primary motivator for prospective members. To attract the best
people to seek office is to appeal to those motivated by a desire to serve. For some,
pursuing politics as a career will involve a financial sacrifice; MLAs salaries cannot
compete with those offered in the private sector. However, compensation should not
deter desirable candidates from serving due to unreasonable monetary sacrifices.
Compensation should also be commensurate with the duties, responsibilities and
importance of the role of an MLA.
This creates a unique position of fairly compensating an MLA and the challenges
associated with attaching a salary to that position.
The underlying motivation for running for office must be to serve and improve the wellbeing of people of the Northwest Territories. Collectively, MLAs represent and advocate
for the will of the people. They set public policy and spending of public funds
responsibly.
They can be voted out of office, if the public does not feel their performance has met the
anticipated mandate. The opportunity to run for office is open to all NWT residents 19
and over. The concept that members’ remuneration be decided by an independent
(arm’s length) process is formally recognized in the Legislative Assembly and Executive
Council Act (s.35.1).
One of the guiding principles found in the Terms of Reference for the Commission is
that “the system of remuneration must be transparent, open and provide an easy to
understand system of remuneration to the members of the
Legislative Assembly and members of the Executive Council while providing a high
degree of accountability to the people they serve”.
This left the Commission to answer the question, “What is the fair way for MLAs to be
paid?”
The Commission members appreciate the demands and the intensity of the job of an
MLA. The recommendation for the Member of the Legislative Assembly salary was
reached after considering information from the MLAs, the public and a review of MLA
salaries across the country.

35

 They factored in the state of the economy when discussing the adjustment to members’
wages. They assessed how government employees, as union members, are paid with
an assigned yearly step increase. MLAs do not have steps built into their salaries. They
also noted that current MLA salaries are at a level above the average income level in
the NWT. And, they have the fourth highest salary of the provinces and territories in
Canada (See Appendix C, Members’ Salary Comparisons – 2017).
It is important that political salaries are adjusted using an external measure that is not
subject to undue political interference. For example, tying political salary increases to
government labour contracts salary increases can create a conflict of interest for MLAs
in approving labour agreements. Recommending that MLAs receive the CPI or union
increase, whichever is less, ensures the MLA never receives a greater increase in
compensation than that of the largest employer in the NWT.”

36

 Appendix E:

lnterjurisdictional Comparison of
Supplementary Retiring Allowance Plans

37

Canadian MLA Plan Comparison

Plan

Pension Formula
Type 

Ea?y

Vesting Rule

Portability Options

 

Date Registered Supplemental Combined Retirement Member
Jurisdiction Closed Maximum Reduction Contributions

DB 3.5% limited 70% HAE3 65 60 6% per year 11%



Alberta 1993



Saskatchewan 2002

. . . 2.0% 7% (increasing
0 0 0
Manitoba DB DC 2.0/0 limited Ii it 70/0 HAE5 60 55 3/o per year 

ario DC 

1996
1.75% 4.0%
limited unlimited?
TB 6% from 55-60; 8.75%f11.95%

runswick 2014 limited" 65 3% from 60?65 

so DB 100% FE 60 50 3% per year 9% limited

P.E.I. DB 2.0% limited 3.5% limited 62 50 3% per year 9% limited

Nova Scotia DB 2.0% limited 3.5% unlimited 70% HAE3 60*? 50 6% from 50?55 10%

Newfoundland DB 2.0% limited 3.5% unlimited 70% HAE3 55 50 6% peryear 9%


Yukon DB 2.0% limited 75% HAE3 55 3% per year 9% limited
unlimited

N.W.T. DB 2.0% limited 2.0% unlimited 75% HAE4 60 3% per year 9% limited

Nunavut DB 2.0% limited 3.0% unlimited 75% HAE4 6O 3% per year 9% limited

of earning up to the YMPE and 2.0% of earning in excess of the YMPE. subject to the DB Limit of that year
?The Supplemental bene?t is designed such that the aggregate pension is equal to the shown percentage.

Earliest of age 60 or age 55 with 80 points

of 4.1172014: Members contribute 7.5% of earnings up to the YPME and 10.7% in excess of the YMPE.

Aon
Proprietary 8? Con?dential December 3 4, 2018

6 years

1 year

Immediate

2 years

Registered: Immediate
Supplementary: 5
years and >1 Assembly

2 years

5 years and >1
Assembly

6 years

4 years or 1 Assembly

4 years or 1 Assembly

161

Locked-in CV under age
60

Yes

Locked-in CV under age
60

Yes, if <40% of YMPE

Registered: CV under age
50

No

CV under age 50

Shortened Life
Expectancy

RAA: CV (one-time)
SRAA: No

RAA: CV
SRAA: FTA

Empower Results?

Appendix F:

Links to Territorial Bureaus of Statistics

39

Nunavut
http://www.stats.gov.nu.ca/en/home.aspx
Northwest Territories
https://www.statsnwt.ca/index.html
Yukon
http://www.eco.gov.yk.ca/stats/stats_subject.html

40

 Appendix G:
Link to Eleventh Report of the House of Commons Standing
Committee on Procedure and House Affairs:
Interim Report on Moving Toward a Modern, Efficient, Inclusive and
Family-Friendly Parliament

41

  1/

 

42