Kieron Testart

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let's talk about the community government funding formula that currently has the $32-million gap. The Minister is committed to a strategy; that strategy has been committed to for quite some time. Can we get more details on that strategy and any costs associated with it? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Look, I have to compliment the Minister's honesty. It is hard for politicians to break promises on the floor of the House like that. This is our responsibility. This is something we must accomplish. Will the Minister commit to rebalancing this formula so it is a realistic formula, in partnership with the NWTAC? Will he commit to either doing that or fully funding this? There are only two options.

Thank you for that clarification. Okay, yes, I see that now. All right. What explains the increase? What was the additional spending? Thank you.

The Minister just mentioned the federal government's role in this funding. His predecessor also spoke of leveraging federal funds to close this gap. I would just like to get a better understanding of this. Is the Minister saying that this formula that has been developed isn't the responsibility of the GNWT to fill? Can he answer that question?

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair, and I think the Minister's response indicates, you know, a sheepishness around this activity. The actuals, if you look at the budget document, you know, the actual from 2017-2018 was $233,000, and it is down to $150,000. Clearly, the department took a look at this function and cut the available resources, and that might have been because of a fiscal discipline activity or an austerity measure. I am not questioning that. What I am questioning is our government's commitment to the Consumer Protection Act when we have less than a person working on this advocacy. We just...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My constituents want to know, and that is why I am asking these questions. Certainty is what we are looking for, is what they are looking for, what I am looking for. I appreciate the Minister is proceeding through the consultation, so, if there is a decision to implement a, what are we calling it, the "sugar-sweetened tax," when can this Assembly expect to see it? Thank you.

Thank you for that thorough description. I appreciate having a clear understanding of it, but what kind of advocacy is done, then, if as you said, there is no binding authority in the act? I mean, if a consumer feels that they have been treated unfairly, what can they do? Thank you.

Has the Minister learned anything from this consultation that he feels necessary to share with the House now, such as abandoning this unnecessary tax?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. That was an excellent response, and I am very satisfied with that. This is a big issue for me. Many people have told me that they share a similar perspective. If we are going to again diversify the economy, it is not just going to be with funding pots through ITI. It is going to be with big, transformative change like that. It is good to know that the department is there, standing beside our communities, behind our communities, and would help them make such a transition. If the Minister of Lands is listening, I will have questions around this topic when we get to that...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to speak on an issue which has left me and many Northerners with a bitter taste in our mouths, the sugar-sweetened drink tax. This government has stated that it wishes to address health outcomes in the territory and proposes to achieve this goal by the creation of a new tax. Let me be clear. The creation of a new arbitrary and regressive tax is not the course we should be taking right now.

This tax arbitrarily targets pop only from fountain drinks and pre-packaged cans and bottles. It exempts pop mixed with alcohol, the sugar in your coffee or tea, flavoured...