Merci, Monsieur le President. The report on the Mineral Resources Act public engagement exercise is a "what we believe" document from ITI, rather than "what was said." Can the Minister explain why he promised that there would be more information made available from ITI's "crossjurisdictional reviews and expensive policy research," in this report, yet there's nothing on that subject in the document? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Merci, Monsieur le President. Tomorrow is Valentine's Day, and I am starting to get that feeling. I love mining, as long as it is properly managed and we get our fair share. Unfortunately, that is not what we got yesterday from the Minister of mining when he tabled the "what we heard" report on the Mineral Resources Act. Rather than a good summary of what was submitted, it is a classic example of regulatory capture. Regulatory capture happens when a government agency, created to act in the public interest, instead advances the commercial concerns or interests of the industry or sector it is...

Merci, Monsieur le President. Thanks to the Premier for that, of course. I'm not suggesting that that be the sole and exclusive focus of the document. I want to make sure that sustainability is incorporated into it. It's offered as genuine input, and I hope that he'll take me up on the offer of including that sort of information and perspectives into the document. It's not just about resource development, and nor should it be.

I have another question for the Minister: is he committed, then, to sharing drafts of the chapters as it is being put together with Regular MLAs and keeping us updated on...

I would like to thank the Premier for confirming that there was no public consultation with regard to the development of that statement. I have had a chance to look at it. It is supposed to be about sustainable development. You could actually take the word "sustainable" out and just replace it with "resources." There is nothing in the document, really, with regard to sustainability.

The classic definition of "sustainability" is to make sure that things that we do today do not take away from opportunities for future generations. It is about intergenerational equity. The Premier himself has...

Merci, Monsieur le President. Thanks again to the Minister for that, but we do not have a firm schedule from the Minister. He has admitted there is a lot of work that has to be done. We do not even have the results from the discussion paper consultations. He has to work with committee. He says he is going to talk to the public. Can the Minister commit to table a schedule of these sort of consultations leading up to the March 30th deadline in this House as soon as possible? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Apologies for not offering the question properly. I appreciate the response from the Minister. He did not really address the issue, though, of carbon pricing as an essential tool. Earlier today I tried to jog the memory of our Cabinet colleagues on the issue of carbon pricing. The public commentary for the discussion paper and survey closed on September 15th of last year. Can the Minister of Finance tell us if and when a "what we heard" report is going to be released and whether the written submissions received will also be released?

Merci, Monsieur le President. I'd like to start with something really simple: can the Minister of Finance tell the public whether our government actually believes in climate change and that carbon pricing is an essential tool to address this threat? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I would like to start off on the issue of the land rights negotiations. The Minister indicated that there is an additional $595,000 in this year's budget for it. That is likely a good thing, but this comes after two years of cuts within the department and its capacity to negotiate. It is good that we are trying to work towards that. I guess I'll have some questions about what that funding is really going to be used for.

The other thing I want to say about this is that there is a joint committee of Cabinet and Regular MLAs to talk about some of these issues, but it has never...

Merci, Monsieur le President. I will use my reply to the budget address to set out some of my thoughts on the following, as I did last year:

A quick summary of the 2018-2019 budget and fiscal context;

A review of what I recommended in my reply to the 2017-2018 budget address;

A description of the process for the 2018-2019 Budget and how it might be improved; and

The good and the bad of the 2018-2019 Budget as proposed by Cabinet.

Let there be no mistake, Cabinet continues to cut programs and services to fund surpluses that are being used to pay for large infrastructure projects such as the $67...

Merci, Monsieur le President. My questions are for the Minister responsible for Public Engagement and Transparency on his lengthy statement earlier today. He had to reach back in time to 20152016 and quote some figures from the main estimates, but can he tell me what is in the current main estimates of 20182019 in terms of royalties from minerals, oil, and gas extraction here in the Northwest Territories? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.