Michael Miltenberger

The debate over the Norman Wells royalties and access to them have been going on for years throughout this process. There was a settlement made out of court with the Sahtu and the Gwich’in in terms of a one-time cash settlement over the issue of access to royalties. As we go forward with the AIP and negotiate a final devolution deal, there’s nothing to preclude us from continuing to raise that issue, hopefully to our satisfaction. Thank you.

We will get 100 percent of the royalties but there’s a 50 percent offset against our territorial formula financing. We can keep up to the cap of 5 percent of the gross expenditure base.

I would point out, as well, I just saw a news story on CBC where the folks over in the Yukon were already making arrangements to see if they could start renegotiating their agreement because what they’ve seen on the table for the Northwest Territories is considerably better than what they were able to negotiate.

The other thing to keep in mind as the AIP goes forward and the final agreement is signed, there will...

Mr. Speaker, we had set the target, as the Member indicated, to cap it at 3 percent net of compensation requirements. We are going to bring it in at 2.

We all must recognize there are very many things out there that continue to drive our costs that we don’t control, but we also know, and we’ve already heard from some of the Members, in fact quite a few of the Members, about the things that we should add in addition to what we’ve already put into the budget as we struggle to contain the costs. I point out in the budget address the demands and levels of expectation of Northerners is very high...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That’s a very significant what if. There’s work underway. We are looking at coming to, we hope, a new and better understanding with the federal government about the borrowing limit. To ask me what would happen if we had to book it, that’s a hypothetical that I think is premature. We are fully confident that we’re going to come up with a resolution to this issue that will allow us to incorporate this, meet the requirements that Finance Canada says we have to meet with the Opportunities Fund as it ties into the overall determination of our borrowing limit as a government.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It depends whether it is going to be on contract or whether it is going to be using one of our own employees, I would suggest.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Opportunities Fund is sitting there. It is not being used. There is over $120 million in it. We have one load out. As we do the work on the borrowing limit, that issue of how the Opportunities Fund fits into that will be part of those deliberations which we are intending to have completed by April. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, the health costs are, indeed, a pressing issue. If we start first with the personal responsibility, the simple things of diet, exercise, don’t smoke and don’t abuse alcohol would diminish in a very dramatic way our health costs, and we have not yet been able to come to grips with how to encourage Northerners in all communities, wherever they may live, to make those right personal choices. In the meantime, we continue to invest millions of dollars in counselling programs, addictions programs like Nats’ejee K’eh. We have community programs that are being funded...

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated in my budget address, the Minister of Housing, Mr. Robert C. McLeod, would be speaking to the House about the work that was going to be happening, moving forward with housing, the things that they are doing, how the review will be undertaken to address some of the issues that the Member has mentioned, the issue of community concerns with housing issues, the difficult decisions we have to make about trying to offset the CMHC funding that is diminishing yearly, what creative ways can we come up with to address some of those needs. We still have the challenge of $20...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I indicated in the budget address, there’s going to be $925,000 put in for an employment program through the Rural and Remote Communities. I know the Member was fully supportive of this. We have a Small Community Student Employment Program for $350,000 as well.

Also, we have beefed up the SEED money so that businesses or small communities and entrepreneurs in communities have more opportunity to possibly get help. We have a whole raft of improving skill areas with labour market literacy, mobile trades training, additional support for apprentices, other training...

I will look at the wording of the question so it’s clear exactly how the Member sees us doing this. For example, if we’ve budgeted to save $100 million over the life of the lease of the office building in Yellowknife, if that’s the kind of math we use, or will that not be satisfactory to the Member. So I’ll have to check Hansard to see how we could best respond. Thank you.