Kevin O'Reilly

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I can see I am not going to get anywhere with this because the Premier does not want to answer the question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. That is all I have.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. As we go through the pages here, I’ll have some comments on the revenues that we get as a government. Particularly with regard to tobacco tax license -- or, sorry, liquor revenues -- and how that compares to mining, oil, and gas royalty resource revenues that we’re able to keep now under the devolution agreement.

I have some suggestions about different forms of taxes that I’ll make to try to make sure that we capture more of the benefits of that. I’ll also be asking the Minister about any progress we’re making on indexing the Northern Resident Tax Deduction. I guess I’ll have...

Thanks, Mr. Chair. That is very helpful. Even the 2016-17 revised estimates, there is a two and then some very round zeros after that. I am not sure if that actually reflects the work that is done or is it just an estimate. Does it actually get reconciled in some way or does that happen through the public accounts? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. That is great that the Premier is looking to the committee for direction, but Cabinet itself has already changed the way the PUB operates by issuing this binding policy direction without bothering to consult the standing committee. Will the Premier commit to consulting with the standing committee before issuing further direction to the PUB? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I'll try one more time. So in forming this corporate services unit that's now going to serve what used to be four departments, now two, all of those people who used to be in their individual departments, were there any positions cut in forming this shared corporate services unit? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. It is on page 145, environmental liabilities. It is just a flat $2 million. Are we not assessing these sites so that we understand the liabilities better? Are we remediating the sites and getting these liabilities off our books? What is happening here? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I am not sure that was actually an answer, but I will try maybe a different way. There was very prescriptive direction in terms of how the Public Utilities Board is to deal with electricity rates that really limit the board's ability to exercise its jurisdiction. I am just curious to know if we are going to continue to do that Public Utilities Board, why bother having a board? Just get rid of it, and you can decide internally how to set the rates through ownership of NTPC or whatever. Why bother having a Public Utilities Board if we are going to continue to issue that...

Thanks, Mr. Chair. Well, I still remain concerned that we've got the smaller group of people serving maybe four departments, or what used to be four departments, now, and I think this is probably going to take away some focus and support for negotiations at the end of the day. I would be curious to hear whether anybody has anything further to add to that? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I appreciate that. Certainly, I was advocating for a heritage fund before the diamond "gravy train" had even arrived. In any event, let's move on to the Mackenzie Valley fibre link. It looks like the project is going to be substantially completed in 2017-18. I just want to confirm that with the Minister? Also wondering when we can expect to see revenues from it and where they might show up? Sorry. It's a complicated question, but there you go. Thanks.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. While we are on the subject of the Public Utilities Board, what is the long-term plan for this board? I know that fairly significant and prescriptive policy direction was just issued by Cabinet to the Public Utilities Board. Is it the plan of Cabinet to get rid of this board? Thanks, Mr. Chair.