Michael Miltenberger

Everything about energy provision is engineered. It has to be engineered the proper way; it has to be engineered for efficiency for economy and for practicality. What we’ve done with the rate restructuring was to, in fact, bring a greater clarity, streamlining to the rate systems. Instead of 33 rate zones, we have two. We’ve pegged the rate of residential power across the North to the Yellowknife rate. Yellowknife has some challenges, but we have to keep in mind the whole Northwest Territories and these improvements have benefited all Northerners. Is there still work to do? Absolutely, which...

I do appreciate the opportunity to discuss these important matters in the House with the Member. It’s always an interesting discussion. I have laid out in my previous answer a significant amount of work that we’re doing on the issue of energy and providing a lower cost of affordable energy, not only to residents but to businesses. One of the things we are focusing on, of course, is conservation. We have any number of rebate programs to assist people to convert to energy-efficient appliances, biomass, all the things that will help them save money as they go forward and cut their use of power so...

Thank you, Madam Chair. Once again it’s the issue of putting any restrictions on a right. There is an interest of the Aboriginal governments to work out, through regulations, the mandatory reporting, because we all agree, you can’t manage what you can’t count. So the intent is to do that.

In terms of consequences, there can be penalties, which will be sorted out in regulation, but we can’t deny a licence. Thank you.

We are different than the Bakken in many ways. The intensity of development, the speed and pace of development are different; we have a different regulatory regime that requires environmental work to be done prior to any project proceeding. We have a lot of monitoring done in the area of groundwater monitoring and mapping in the area of where they plan to work, wildlife baseline information needs to be taken. We are going to make sure, through the best practices, that we allow and account for what the topography and geography is going to look like, including permafrost. The big issue for us is...

We have been working on this bill for years. We’ve had agreement with committee. Now we have this one motion. I have been in this business long enough to know one word can be important. While we appreciate the intent and will live with the will of the House, our concern is that the issue of the public meetings versus the ability of the groups to have a meeting that may require in camera sessions, others sessions that are tying their hands, we have committed to a public process, transparent process, but getting down to the level of telling them that you are required to have…you are going to...

We’re currently in the exploration stage. As we move forward and if the Sahtu oil play proves out and becomes a producing field, those discussions, on an ongoing basis, will be there. In the meantime, there will be monitoring throughout the approved projects, the requirements that they have to adhere to in terms of the monitoring, the disclosure, the information that they have to share, the issue of fracking fluids. All those are going to be addressed in a way that fits industry best standards. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I have with me Deputy Minister Ernie Campbell; director of wildlife, Ms. Lynda Yonge; and Ms. Kelly McLaughlin, director of legal division. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I once again rise on a point of order under 23(k) and (l).

Mr. Speaker, yesterday in this House you ruled on a point of order that I raised in this House last week, in which you found that I did have a point of order and Mr. Hawkins was asked to withdraw his comments.

It has come to my attention and I am rising on the first available opportunity and I will table this document at the appropriate time today. It has come to my attention that a Facebook electronic missive was sent out of this House literally minutes after your ruling, that says, “Well, the NWT Speaker ruled...

That number, we can discuss now, but it’s actually part of the O and M supp that’s going to come following this particular deliberation on these two very specific capital items. If it’s the wish of the Chair to blend the two together, we can have that discussion.

Mr. Speaker, we would be more than willing and interested to appear before a committee to lay out in detail the specifics of the payroll tax as we have it set up now and the work that we’ve done in looking at alternatives and options to increasing. We have, in fact, done that in the past and it may be time to have another look at it. I would be interested in looking at the Parkland Institute paper, to see if there is something new that hasn’t been contemplated. As well, I think the big issue is the leakage and what is the best way to prevent that leakage of all that money going directly south...