Wendy Bisaro

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are addressed to the Premier. I mentioned in my Member’s statement the other day that the Premier has a couple of times talked about regionalization of government. Yesterday — and I’m working from unedited Hansard from yesterday — he said that we have “initiatives that we have yet to kick off, which is the regionalization of government operations.” I would like to ask the Premier what is meant by that statement.

We’ve heard about this review for some time now. I had understood, though, when it was originally put forward, that it was going to be well underway at this point. It sounds now as though it’s going to be some time before we get anywhere. From the Premier’s last answer, it sounds as though the terms of reference are not out there. Can I ask when we might expect the results of this particular review?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are addressed to the Chair of the Ministerial Energy Coordinating Committee, Mr. McLeod. I stated in my Member’s statement that there needs to be a fundamental change to the NWT Power Corporation. We’re at the beginning of a review, as we’ve heard several times, that’s going to look at electricity rates, regulation and subsidies. But in terms of the Power Corporation itself, I’d like to ask the Minister: what kind of analysis is being undertaken for the NWT Power Corporation as part of this review?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There is a fundamental problem with the mandate of the Northwest Territories Power Corporation and the regulatory regime that it operates under.

Most of us do our best to reduce our power consumption for the benefit of both the environment — reduction of greenhouse gas emissions — and the consumer — less energy used means lower electricity costs — and we should be trying to conserve for both of these reasons. The more we reduce our energy consumption, the less power we use. The less power we use, the more NTPC revenues drop. The more their revenues drop, the more riders...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to my colleagues. Our capital infrastructure plan should not be set in stone from one year to the next. If necessary, projects should be dropped or added. For the deletion of projects that are in the 2008–09 capital budget but not in the ’09–10 budget, I saw and heard little evidence of valid reasons for the deletion. Members should be given information on deletions as part of the substantiation package accompanying any Capital Estimates document.

I appreciate this opportunity to provide my comments to the Finance Minister. I hope he takes these comments as...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I give notice that on Friday, October 24, 2008, I will move the following motion.

I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Thebacha, that notwithstanding Rule 4, when this House adjourns on October 24, 2008, it shall be adjourned until Wednesday, February 4, 2009.

And further, that any time prior to February 4, 2009, if the Speaker is satisfied, after consultation with the Executive Council and Members of the Legislative Assembly, that the public interest requires that the House should meet at an earlier time during the adjournment, the Speaker may give notice and...

The Minister mentioned a number of actions that are currently in place to try and determine an equitable distribution of dollars and projects. Again, I say there is certainly a perception that that is not operating as efficiently as it should, or certainly it’s not to the satisfaction of Members on this side of the House.

I guess I would like to know from the Minister what actions or what things are currently in place. What do they currently do when they are looking at projects? What do they do to try and ensure that it’s a fair distribution?

Thank you. My questions today are addressed to the Minister of Finance, and I would like to thank him again for the opportunity to tell him what he should be doing.

I’d like to ask a question of the Minister relative to the changes to this year’s plan and the opportunity or the possibility of an evaluation. I’d like to know if the Minister can advise the House, and me in particular, of any plans he has to evaluate this new budget process.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Now that we have closed the book on the 2009–2010 capital budget, I would like to provide my thoughts on the process.

First, the change in timing for the consideration and approval of the Capital Acquisition Plan is a positive step. There’s a better probability that projects will get activated and started early enough to take advantage of the summer construction season, but at the moment it only works in theory. It hasn’t yet been tested. There must be an evaluation of this new process after this year — say early 2010 — to see if the change in timing really does produce...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thanks again to the Minister. I guess I would like to suggest that perhaps his perception of how fair things are is not the same as what’s over here and not the same as my own. If there is a per capita cost to the projects within individual communities, it certainly isn’t even. I would like to suggest that there needs to be a better opportunity for Members to feel that the distribution is even.

I’d like to ask the Minister, as a last question.... I understand that individual years certainly can vary from one year to the next or that amounts can vary per community from...