Caroline Wawzonek

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So Mr. Chair, there I mean, the short answer is yes. But I'd like to just turn it over to deputy minister on that front. There were conversations had not only with Department of Finance but the Department of Infrastructure as well, and the deputy minister might be better placed to just give a bit of assurance in that regard. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, as I was just saying there's not a lot directly that the government can necessarily do. But what I would certainly be willing to look at is perhaps having the two departments come together and see if there's room through which the government can help advocate or room through which the government might be able to provide more information to small businesses, to the small business community, about what they might do to help influence their own rates. There may be information that is, you know, more readily available to some than to others, for example...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I mean, I and I appreciate the comment again. We certainly don't want to see a flood impact that's the size of $100 million as we did this year. Certainly I mentioned the year before, while devastating in the Deh Cho region and the Nahendeh region, the costs of that flood in 2021 were nowhere near what this one was. So there's by no means any certainty that we're going to be year over year seeing $100 million for what appear to be climate change impacts. That said, I take the point it is that, you know, there may need to be some looking at where this what kind of...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, Mr. Chair, I wouldn't necessarily characterize it entirely as that. Again, there's there is a new approach that we are using for the coming fiscal year, and that approach is meant to look you know, to bring a bit of that planning more strictly in at the front end. But there's going to still be occasions where projects don't advance for a variety of valid and reasonable reasons. But, you know so, again, I wouldn't necessarily characterize it all as that. But this review does give an opportunity to, at this point, again, bring it forward now rather than waiting until...

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I can say that I have not heard it raised, the idea of requesting specifically a GST rebate on heating fuel. So as I said earlier, I'm happy to take that forward. And more generally, I will acknowledge I've certainly been tasked by my colleagues to take the message to Ottawa given the impacts of climate change in the Northwest Territories that the increased costs and what that's going to do to individual residents and businesses is, as I say, a message that I've been tasked to carry forward and I certainly will do so. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I certainly can. So we start off the year just to remind the House, we start off the year with the $35 million supplementary reserve, and we right now are in a deficit of just over $42 million. The main reason for that is as a result of the costs of the flood for 2022, and that is yes, that is a significant reason for that overage. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, on my right I have deputy minister of finance Bill MacKay, and on my left the assistant deputy minister Terence Courtoreille.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, so it does still include that because the GNWT fronts the costs. But the Member is correct that because it has a different funding source from the federal government, we are expecting that those costs will be 100 percent funded as compared to the 90 percent under the disaster the disaster assistance policy. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I certainly will be able to release that and make sure that we get it to the Members, make sure we get that out to the public. And Madam Speaker, you know, to be very clear also there's a difference in terms of who's being impacted. Folks that own their home are likely to pay more because they pay their heating fuel. Folks that are in market rentals that are paying for their heating fuel are likely to pay more. Folks who are in social housing or affordable housing will not be paying simply because that's part of the costs that get paid for them. Or if...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So no, Mr. Chair, fortunately it doesn't work out that way. It really is just a way in which the funds are classified and where it's being reported upon. It's not a change to the funding arrangements or funding agreements that are in place but just a change in that it's being reported now as an appropriation whereas before, it was not. But it doesn't change money available to the government. It's just money that was previously being classified as money that was brought in to do work for others, federal government being probably the top of that list, as opposed to now...