Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the responses there. I just want to confirm the Minister of Finance’s information was that we were just shy of $1 billion. I suspect that we were under $1 billion at division and we adopted this $500 million at that time. If that’s the case, then obviously our budget has gone up probably much greater than 30 percent, with no change in our debt limit. Maybe I’ll stop there. Briefly, if the Minister could just confirm that I got that right.
Thank you. Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Madam Chair. In point of fact, we do have and will be going into our last year of a $75 million bump-up that we got because of the Deh Cho Bridge impacts. The budget shortly after division was very close to $1 billion. I’d have to commit or ask Mr. Aumond if he knows the detail of the $500 million as a loan limit, but that’s been there, to my recollection, for a good number of years. I’d ask Mr. Aumond. He’s indicated that he doesn’t have that information with him, so I’ll commit to get that information for the committee.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Anything further, Mr. Bromley?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I did note that Mr. Neudorf mentioned that the $1 million to complete the required planning was part of the resources for this year’s work on completing the planning for the Inuvik-Tuk all-weather road and that in the past we have reconfigured some of the resources, like, for the gravel access road and so on. I’m wondering what other resources proposed for the fiscal year under discussion are being proposed and where they will be coming from.
As we pursue the work on our borrowing limit, we’re also pursuing our discussions with the federal government about the $150 million. We’re trying to find out what the opportunities are in terms of how that money can flow and can their money flow before it first, as we sort ourselves out. Those type of questions have not yet been finalized. I would once again ask Mr. Neudorf if he has any further detail in addition to our own resources other than the million dollars.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Neudorf.
Thank you, Madam Chair. It certainly will take a lot of funding in order to plan for the project. It is a $250 million to $300 million project. We are taking a measured approach to that. We do recognize the fiscal situation of the government and want to be able to move forward, working with Finance and working with the others that require approval of the project in order to move it forward.
We also don’t want to start spending a significant amount of money, because we do have to continue the discussions with the federal government. They are a partner in the project and if we spend some money up front then we won’t be able to cost share those expenditures with the federal government. We just have to consider that as well.
Thank you, Mr. Neudorf. Anything further, Mr. Bromley?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I suppose one last one is, I’m again very appreciative of the Capital Asset Retrofit Fund program but it is quite a comedown, quite a modest effort compared to the extraordinary $15 million a year that we enjoyed for energy projects in the 16th Assembly as made available through careful planning and hard work, I’m sure. Is there a plan to seek those sorts of resources as our fiscal situation hopefully improves early in the term here?
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The actual money that was put towards renovating and updating and retrofitting government facilities was substantially less than the $15 million a year overall that we tried to put to the various alternative energy priorities. If you look at the actual number, which Mr. Guy could probably provide, the savings that we are realizing and the payback times are actually quite significant. The payback times are short. The savings for the amount of money we’ve spent I think are fairly good. If we get an adjustment to our borrowing limit, then we will be collectively, as I’ve indicated in other forums, having a collective discussion about the amount of room and the type of resources that we want to be able to collectively put to bear if we get the ability to borrow for strategic infrastructure requirements.
I would suggest that we’ve made a very significant commitment in the last Assembly of almost $60 million carrying over to this year. That is one area where there is a lot of momentum that we would hate to lose. I would suggest that, yes, we would have that discussion, should we be successful.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Next on the list for general comments is Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a number of comments. I’m kind of jumping around here but I’ll lay them out. I don’t have a lot of questions but I do have a lot of comments.
I’d like to also speak to the Inuvik-Tuk highway. I appreciate that it is a priority of this government and that we are putting some funding into it, and I know that the federal government has allocated some $150 million towards the project. Knowing that our debt limit is what it is and knowing the amount of borrowing – I should say our borrowing limit, not our debt limit – is where it is in the amount of borrowing that we currently have on the books and that we have to account for, it leaves us very little room to put any serious money into the Inuvik-Tuk highway project. I know that there has been some suggestion that we may be able to access the federal funding first and then when our borrowing limit and the gap of our borrowing and the limit has been eased somewhat, we could maybe access our own funds later on. That would be a question to the Minister: Is that something that the department is considering? Is it something that’s feasible that we could use the federal money, say, in the first two or three years, and then use our own money after that, so that would give us a little breathing room and enable us to move ahead on that project?
I am disappointed. I haven’t totally examined the budget yet, but I believe there’s very limited money in here for schools. I think the Minister says $11 million for school replacements and renovations. My belief is that it probably is $11 million going towards projects which are already in the works. The Inuvik school is not yet finished and I can’t remember what other schools we have on the go. There are several school projects which are already in progress and which need to be finished. I don’t believe there is any new money in the budget to address the needs of Yellowknife schools. I speak specifically of Sissons School and Mildred Hall School here in Yellowknife. There’s no funding to do the necessary…to finish the renovations at Mildred Hall and to do the much-needed renovations at Sissons School. I recognize that we don’t have a lot of room to add new projects in this particular budget year, but I’d like to serve notice that for sure Sissons is a school which is desperately in need of renovations and I’d like to see it on the capital plan, at least see it as a projected project within the life of this Assembly, because the school really shouldn’t be waiting much longer than it already has.
I am pleased to see the emphasis on small capital in the budget. I don’t know if the number is larger than it was in the previous capital budget, but I think it probably has increased somewhat and I think that’s a good thing. Particularly in the area of health, I remember from the previous Assembly that Health specifically spoke to us about the need for investment in small capital. They have huge amounts of technology that needs to be upgraded and updated all the time. I would hope that the amount of money that we have in small capital is going to address some of those urgent needs of the Health department.
I want to also commend whoever developed our document. The substantiation sheets are, in my mind, wonderful. They’re extremely thorough. I can’t say that I’ve read every one of them, but certainly if I had a question about a project, I could go to that substantiation sheet for that project and it pretty much told me everything I needed to know. I’d like to commend the Minister and staff for changing our process a little bit and for providing that background information to Members, because it certainly makes it easier to figure out what things we’re talking about and the background on them and gives us a lot more information.
I have a bit of a concern with ongoing needs in our communities. I know the Minister, in his opening remarks, mentioned there’s $28 million to fund community government, and I think he said earlier on in his statement that we are providing a stable source of funding for community governments. I agree that it’s stable, but I can’t agree that $28 million is addressing the needs of our community governments. I don’t know the amount but I know that the infrastructure needs of our community governments are huge, and I believe the funding we provide them and that they can get even through gas tax money and any other sources of funding other than GNWT funds only addresses some 60 percent of their community infrastructure needs. In my mind, we need to be well aware of the fact that, yes, we’re giving them a stable source of funding, and perhaps this year there’s no increase but we have to seriously consider increasing the amount of money we give to our communities for infrastructure, and not in five years’ time but in one year’s time.
I’m really pleased to see that there is a planning study for the Stanton Territorial Hospital. That’s a project which has been talked about for probably 10 years and a little more positively in the last couple of years, but there’s been no action on it and it’s a facility, as well, that desperately needs renovations and upgrading. It needs to be brought into the 21st Century, so to speak. I’m hoping that the planning will be done with all haste and that we can actually get some construction and design money into the budget next year and get started on this project. I’m not quite sure how we’re going to be able to fund it. The Minister has said previously that it’s a $400 million project. That may be a little high, but it’s still going to be many millions of dollars. But with the planning study done, we know what we need in order to get the project off the ground, and I think we can then start to try and find creative ways to fund it; creative but legal, by the way.
I am disappointed that there’s no money for Highway No. 7. I have to support my colleague Mr. Menicoche, in that Highway No. 7 is one of our highways which is desperately in need of some major revisions. We’ve covered off three or four highways, I think, in the budget, but Highway No. 7 is quite obviously missing any funding in this particular year.
Again, as with Mr. Bromley, I am really pleased to see the emphasis on deferred maintenance. I think it’s done us really well in the last three or four years where we have put an emphasis on deferred maintenance. I think it’s proven to be successful and I’m glad to see that we’re not moving away from that particular tack that we are going to continue to do that.
I guess the last thing that I am a little bit concerned about is carry-overs. It’s not mentioned in the Minister’s remarks, I don’t believe. We have had carry-overs every year in the last Assembly that I was here. Certainly the amount went down somewhat and, actually, I’m not surprised that we have carry-overs, considering the size of our capital budget. In 2011-12 it was huge. We took advantage of the federal stimulus money and it benefitted us greatly. But I guess I would like to know from the Minister whether or not we can anticipate that the carry-overs from this budget year that we’re considering now, 2012-13, whether or not those carry-overs are going to be somewhat less than what we’ve experienced over the last four years. I think we’ve gone down from 35 or so percent down to maybe 25 percent of our projects are carry-overs, but I would hope with a smaller budget dollar amount we would be able to reduce our carry-overs after 2012-13 to something a lot lower than 25 percent.
I think that’s it, Mr. Chair. I don’t have anything else on my list. Thanks very much.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As we indicated in a previous response, we are talking to the federal government about their commitment to the road, $150 million, and when it could flow and how it would be sequenced to see if we could, in fact, put their money to work as soon as we can while we sort our own circumstances out.
I’ve noted the comments on the schools in YK, but clearly, with a $75 million budget, there are far more needs than we have resources
The small cap budget hasn’t increased, but Health has made the case that there should be a separate amount of money put aside for their very specific and ongoing needs.
I would point out, in terms of your concern about the ongoing community needs, that they do have significant needs, but up until this budget their money that we committed to them has grown at a rate greater than all other government programming. But we, as well, share the concern that we have to continue to be supportive of them.
There is $1.6 million left in carry-over dollars, apparently, for Highway No. 7. Clearly not enough and it’s one of the items that’s on our red flag list. As our budget stays at these modest numbers, the amount of carry-overs will, I think, absolutely drop. The bigger the budget, the more challenge.
Once again, I appreciate the Member’s concerns but over the years with the changes we’ve made to the capital planning processes, we have, as well, seen a progressive drop on a percentage basis even with a $1.1 billion budget over the last three years. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Minister has presented us, I guess, an eye opener in terms of what our needs are in the Northwest Territories and what type of funding we are going to look at for the next year. We understand that our needs are higher than the revenue that’s coming into the Northwest Territories. We are very happy that the federal government is contributing to the Mackenzie Valley Highway, through their recent announcement of working on a portion north of Inuvik and they already started the Tuk to Inuvik road. We, as government, are supporting this process through allocating $1 million to complete the planning for that section. The work is starting. I think we need to continue to support that aspect of the Mackenzie Valley Highway just as much as when the rest of the regions are going to be going through their process of putting a proposal together once the PDRs are completed and environmental assessments are done when we need to secure money for the construction of the road up the valley to meet the Dempster. So we look for that type of support in the future.
I hope that there are some provisions with the upcoming appropriation act and under small capital planning to finally get the needs of the Colville Lake people met. Ms. Bisaro talks about bringing health into the 21st Century. I think Colville Lake is still in the 16th Century with the honey bucket system. This is utterly ridiculous in this day and age, where small capital funding could simply install proper washroom facilities at a public facility such as our health centre in one of our small communities. Why is it taking so long? I’ve been here eight years and I plan to be here another four more years. I hope to goodness that by the time I’m finished this 17th Assembly, Colville Lake will have a running facility like any other facility in the Northwest Territories.
For eight years I have been hearing nothing but excuses, excuses and excuses why we can’t simply replace the honey bucket system at the health centre. They have their good reasons and they have their good excuses, but that doesn’t do any good to my people in Colville Lake who, today, have to use that honey bucket system. That is not very good.
You could spend millions of dollars on other things that the government seems to move pretty quickly on. They build millions of dollars of infrastructure, but I don’t understand why it is taking so long to take the honey bucket out of the health centre and put proper washroom facilities in there.
I ask the Cabinet and Ministers to think about this and see what we can do for Colville Lake. I ask that they could consider that in their planning. Their money is being divvied up amongst the departments as to their funding. I ask this on behalf of my people in Colville Lake. I think it can get done. We could put $182 million into our bridge. I think we can put a simple little washroom in the health centre in Colville Lake.
At the same time, I want to speak about the honey buckets in our public school in Colville Lake. There are about 53 to 56 kids in that education system in two separate buildings. There is no proper air ventilation in the school. It stinks in there when you go in there sometimes. That is what kids have to go through. They have no other choice but to go to school, because they are like anybody in the Northwest Territories and the families support their children getting the proper education. But, Mr. Chair, could you imagine children sitting there and smelling their own sewage? That is not very good. I was in there last week. One of the portable units that they have for the school has 25 kids in there.
Again, I would ask the government to look at doing something with those facilities. Make it happen. I want to ask the government on behalf of the people, on behalf of the parents that send their kids to the school and we encourage them to go to school and to have a proper facility. It is unbelievable; in the same washroom area they also have a program where they are teaching children preventative measures on the dental hygiene care. I am going to raise it again until I know for sure that they have a proper running toilet, sink and that is taken care of with proper ventilation. I ask that under the capital plans and I will ask more questions later on.
I am just looking at the capital estimates. I know that the Minister talked about the bleak picture that we have in front of us and the great needs that are needed in the Northwest Territories. I am hoping that the Minister has good meetings with Finance Canada on some of the bigger issues, the debt wall, the borrowing and help us with our finances.
Colville Lake is also asking – and I agree with them – and some of my colleagues have spoken; they also are looking forward to seeing where in the planning we could look at a new school in Colville Lake. They are asking if it could be brought to the attention of the government to start putting it into the planning books for Colville Lake. It is overcrowded. If you ever watched the program, Mr. Chair, called “Hoarders” on TLC, they have junk everywhere, stuff in people’s houses. Well, the Colville Lake School is like that. It is so small and crammed up and they are trying to teach a proper Slavey class or the young grades class. They have books and stuff piled up. It is unbelievable. Those teachers should be given a medal for teaching in those types of conditions, with a honey bucket and the overcrowding. There are four grades in one room like this. There are paper wall partitions where they are trying to teach. Kids are just kids. They make a lot of noise. It is very hard to teach in those conditions. That is the reality of our school in Colville Lake. They really need a new school. Offer a facility to educate them. They need a new building. I am going to keep raising this to see where the government can work with us.
Colville Lake wants to work with you. Tell us what kinds of numbers you guys need to work with. They are independent, proud people and they will work with you. You give them a number. They will help you. They want the best for the kids just like any of us. We have friends and family ourselves who have children in their own classrooms. They want the best. They are no different than you and I on educating their kids. That is what I want to say to this government. I look forward to having further discussions as we go through this. Mahsi cho.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. We will go to Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I can recollect back over the years when Colville Lake… They moved out to Colville Lake because they wanted a traditional community with minimal trappings of civilization. Clearly, as we have been there over the years, there has been a growing concern about the fact of having some of those amenities. We are working on that.
There is, in fact – and I will ask Mr. Guy to confirm this – money and work being set up to deal with the actual infrastructure requirements to improve on the honey bucket system and to put in those types of amenities, but there is also another piece that has to be done before those can be made operational, and that is the lagoon and the disposal part of the process.
The issue of a new school, of course, will have to go into the capital planning process, keeping in mind at this juncture we are going to be looking at $75 million a year for the next number of years unless there is some type of change to our borrowing limit. Once again, if there is a bump-up to that, then we will have another discussion. There will be enormous pent up demand that we know is already there, red flag projects and projects that are already on the list as the Member knows, like the long-term care facility in Norman Wells.
So I will ask Mr. Guy maybe if he could speak to some of the particulars in regard to the Member’s impassioned plea about the schools and the health centre facilities. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Mr. Guy.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, the Minister is correct; we do have a project in this fiscal year to upgrade the washroom facilities at the Colville Lake school. That work is underway. A tank storage building is being constructed and it will be delivered on the winter road and the rest of the work will be completed so that that facility will be available for the fall school year in the fall of 2012. That is on the provision that the other piece of the work gets done by the community, that we need to have the sewage lagoon constructed and water and sewer trucks operating in the community so that we can put that work into operation that we are taking care of. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Guy. We are continuing on with general comments. Mr. Kevin Menicoche.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I know that while we did work hard with the capital estimates and trying to do the best with the limited resources that we had, but I am still very disappointed at the zero investment in Highway No. 7 for 2012-2013.
I was just recently in Fort Liard and I was speaking with the chief and the residents there, and one of our focuses, too, of the new Assembly is economic development and jobs and training, and the chief had actually said it’s no use talking about that if we can’t use the highways to get those investments here. So Highway No. 7 is very critical to Fort Liard and to the Nahendeh riding.
I believe that the future of economic development is dependent on Highway No. 7 and the investment in projects like Canadian Zinc or any new emerging industries that may want to develop around Fort Liard and/or Fort Simpson. So I continue to highlight the importance of Highway No. 7 to the economic development of my region. I certainly would like to see more investment there.
I’m very pleased to hear about the $1.6 million worth of carry-over, and it’s work that should have been done this year. Despite that, at least it’s a little bit of investment for this coming year. I certainly would urge my colleagues and Cabinet and anybody from this House that this is definitely a priority as we move forward. I know that studies were done and proved that severe reconstruction of Highway No. 7 has to occur. However, we can at least start to piecemeal it. So that’s critical and I’ll continue to raise that.
In today’s Member’s statement I spoke about my smaller communities needing new schools. I raised a couple of issues about big megaprojects; I think it was the $100 million school in Inuvik, as well as $180 million bridge. I believe in our small communities. You know, we’re talking maybe a $4 million investment for a new school. It’s not very much money, and that’s why I believe that we can put it in the needs assessment or in our capital plan within the next five years. I truly believe that it is manageable to have investments in our regions and smaller communities. Their needs are just as important and they should be taken care of as well.
Another big emerging issue out of Fort Simpson is the planning study that was scheduled for the Fort Simpson Hospital. It may be in the O and M budget for 2012, but maybe the Minister can confirm that for me, whether it’s in the 2012-13 budget or else the 2013-14. That’s something that is critical. It’s another one of the infrastructures that you cannot defer much longer without getting into some serious issues up to and including even shutting down the hospital if need be.
As well, Trout Lake has always been wanting to get a snow blower for the existing airport. I believe that will assist their community. In fact, it will actually help them, I think, because they’ve had issues about the equipment taking out the runway lights. It’s very expensive to repair and they really believe that a snow blower will assist them in cleaning the airport and maintaining their current infrastructure.
Just in closing briefly, I know that any investment in Highway No. 7 has been red flagged, which means that if we do get any more capital dollars that they’ll certainly be highlighted, but there are other needs there. I’d just like the assurance of the Minister and of our government that if there indeed is any red flag money that Highway No. 7 definitely gets on it and this does not get punched over to red flag D kind of list there, Mr. Chair. I don’t believe that if we’re going to set up a red flag list, you don’t bump it over again if there are any resources that do come open. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. We’ll go to Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In regard to Highway No. 7 and the red flag list, I can assure the Member and this House that if there is an opportunity to put more money into capital through a bump up to our borrowing. We want to look at targeted infrastructure in the capital planning process and the committees will be fully involved. The work that’s been done up to date, the red flag lists will be put out there and we will have that discussion both in terms of the amount of money and how we move forward to put the money that we have available to work strategically. So, yes, I will confirm to the Member that that list will be there and the red flag is there because they’re next in line. So that will be part of the discussion going forward.
The Member raised his concern about the schools in Nahanni Butte and Trout Lake that have been ordered already. The planning study in Fort Simpson, I’ll just point out and I’ll ask Mr. Guy to confirm, but we have roughly about half a billion dollars' worth of health projects on the books. When you add them all in that we now have before us, including Fort Simpson, we do have our challenges when you look at a $75 million capital plan, and just health alone, let alone transportation could spend that amount of money and more to upgrade and maintain the road system we already have. But I’ll ask, Mr. Chairman, for your permission to get Mr. Guy to speak specifically to the health or the planning study for the Fort Simpson Health Centre.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. We’ll go to Mr. Guy.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. There was funding in the 2011-12 Capital Plan for planning studies and one of the planning studies that was identified in that funding is the one for Fort Simpson Health Centre. That work is underway right now and we’re anticipating having that done this fiscal year. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Guy. Continuing with general comments, I have Mr. Sonny Blake.
Thank you. As I mentioned before, I really disagree with the process, but I do realize at the end of our term we’ll be setting priorities for the next 18th government. So I just wanted to state that. I’m hoping that within the next year here, in the fall, we have the new school on our agenda for the community of Aklavik. As I mentioned, it’s getting close to 40 years old and I believe it’s well above the 28-year assessment needs.
I do realize in history with this government the Mackenzie Delta is getting not very much in terms of projects. I know there’s a bunch of renovations planned. I’d like to see change before our February budget. It needs to match our priorities and I hope to see those changes. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Blake. We’ll go to Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The school in Aklavik would have to go through, at this point, the normal process in a very competitive environment with a limited amount of money. I appreciate the Member’s comment in that the terms of what’s going to happen in February, in February we will be doing an interim appropriation, which will be giving us as a government enough money to do business so that we can do the final budget debate and approval in May/June. The business planning process is now currently underway and we will be, right after Christmas, engaging fully with committees on reviewing all the business plans for all of the departments, which is for their O and M budget. There will be an opportunity there, which is why we’ve delayed things to have that fulsome discussion about all these program issues, some of which the Member has touched on. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Any other further general comments? I’d like to recognize Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think it’s been fairly clear in terms of the path that is before us, at least for the past couple of weeks that we’ve been here. It’s fairly clear that we’re challenged with limitations and fiscal resources. At the same time we’re challenged with continuing to deliver programs and services and links that are vital to ensuring that our citizens and residents of the Northwest Territories enjoy their lifestyle here in the North, and ensuring that they bring up their families and ensuring that we have a future for all of us to share this part of Canada. It’s been very eye-opening for the past couple of weeks in terms of the challenges that are before us.
At the same time there are still needs and wants that our communities bring up periodically. Quite often we hear that there needs to be infrastructure at least brought to the communities in terms of schools, roads and so forth. There are still aspirations of local communities to ensure that there are programs and services at the same time delivered to communities and residents. There are still needs of communities that are not really reflected in this whole initiative at this time. I realize that.
What is very interesting for me, at least from my perspective, is that some common themes I’ve heard from all of us thus far is that there is a need because we’re challenged with delivering the programs and services to our residents at the same time we’re challenged with creating new capital infrastructure projects. We need to try to make less; we need to do more with less resources at this time. Some common themes that I’ve been hearing is that we need to integrate. Perhaps we need to decentralize, or else we need to maybe look at better cooperation with communities and local governments, or regional governments and partnerships. Those are a few signals that I’ve been seeing thus far.
I like what I’m hearing. I think we’ve started off at the gates where we kind of took off and I see some positive signals that we’re undertaking. My hope and sense of optimism at this point is that all is not lost in terms of the communities that still aspire to get the services that they want. For example, in Kakisa they’re still very interested in a central heating system so that they have an alternative to the fossil fuels that they burn at this point. In Enterprise there’s still a need for them to realize their wish to see a school established in their community. On the reserve in Hay River – K’atlodeeche – they still aspire to create services for their youth. My hope is that those wishes of the communities will not be lost in the shuffle, that somehow governments and departments will ensure that in the spirit of trying to work with everybody that people will listen. At the same time, try to be creative and work with communities and local leaders, residents, to ensure that, yes, we are challenged with finding the funds that perhaps are non-existent at this time, but ensuring that we could perhaps make things possible by realizing the aspirations of communities by working together.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Once again, just to point out that the money that’s there, the $28 million for communities has been maintained, and over the years that I’ve been around, we’ve maintained the level of growth at a higher level than all other program areas, probably with the exception of health.
The Member talks about money while we talk about the struggles. We do have to keep in mind that we are still spending $1.34 billion across the North and we’re going to continue to spend that amount and probably more with all the growth pressures.
The other piece – and I have to take this opportunity to say it since the Member gave me this opportunity as we talk about the communities and their needs and wants – because we do not have a Devolution Agreement, we’re going to leave over $60 million on the table this year. The last five years, if you can visualize a pile of cash worth $300 million sitting in the middle of this Legislature that we’ve left on the table that we’ll never be able to spend to meet all the needs that we’ve just spent the last hour talking about, because it’s not retroactive. As we go forward and we talk the talk about the money for our communities, we have to walk the walk and we can get the money in one way that we know: through devolution.
Some other opportunities are not as palatable given our tough economic times, which are revenue increases and tax increases. We do know, year after year, $60 million and rising goes to the federal government that we don’t get to put into these varied services that we all so passionately talk about. We’re going to have an agreement hopefully within a year and implementation hopefully shortly thereafter, and then that money will flow to us and to the Aboriginal governments and will help us address some of those needs.
The specific issues about the central heating in Kakisa, I know there’s work underway. I’d have to ask Mr. Guy if he has any specific information on that. I know the Member has raised the issue of the school in Enterprise, which would have to as well get onto the list. It’s not there yet. The services for youth sounds very specific about a very good subject to discuss through the business planning process as we look at the O and M budget. I would have to ask Mr. Guy, or do any of the Three Wise Men on capital have any… I see a shaking of heads. I’d have to commit to get some information on the central heating project that is underway in Kakisa. I know that there’s been work done and that there was some involvement of the government, but I’d have to commit to get that information for the Member.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Looks like one of our final general comments. Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a couple of comments here. Being back home in Inuvik on my last time out, I had a few constituents approach me about the lack of jobs in the community and how some of them had to take their pride into consideration and go on income support. Creating these jobs and putting people back to work will affect some of our social concerns that we have in the Northwest Territories and also help with a good discussion we had earlier today on the Anti-Poverty Strategy.
I’m really happy to see that there has been $1 million earmarked to complete the planning for the Inuvik-Tuk highway. It will go to use and a lot of people will benefit from that within our departments, social departments as well as people up in the Beaufort-Delta going back to work. I just wanted to congratulate the government on looking at that for this next fiscal year.
We spoke a little earlier, just listening to comments about if the government decides to go beyond its debt wall for the new fiscal year, we will be looking at the red flag projects. I would also like this government to look at some new possible projects that some of our new Members that have come into the Assembly might be bringing forth, that they not be put on the waiting list. Specifically one project that I made reference to in my Member’s statement is the Children First Centre in Inuvik. The community itself has invested a lot of time and energy, and when you have a vested interest like that, you know the community will go forth and do good with the project and make sure that it’s successful. If we get the government behind them, you know it will be a strong and good investment, especially with all these infrastructural projects that we have lined up for years to come. It would be very smart for the government to look at helping create that so when the new school opens and the existing facility is gone, professionals and people coming up to Inuvik will have a place for their children to go to school while they’re working and contributing to the economy of Inuvik.
We had some talks in terms of devolution, and personally, with all the social issues and money that we have and stresses that affect all our communities, we’ve heard it here over the last hour. Like you said, I’m really hoping that we can come to terms and get an agreement signed this year, because it is a lot of money that can be going to communities. I do look forward to being part of that and giving the best advice, and influence and encouragement that I can.
So you guys are doing a great job and I really look forward to this. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Moses. Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I do appreciate the Member’s comments, and just to reiterate the commitment that should there be a successful conclusion to our borrowing limit talks – and we do have some room to make additional strategic investments – that we collectively will fully engage through our processes to identify the amount of money and how and where it will be targeted.
I will point out for the new Members that they will quickly come to learn how interested and intense the discussion is about capital, given the long list of demands and the always short list of resources. I thank the Member for his comments.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Does the committee agree that that concludes... Mr. Moses, did you have further comments?
That’s fine. Thank you.
Does committee agree that that concludes general comments? Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I move that we report progress.
---Carried
I’d like to thank Minister Miltenberger for his presentation and his staff here today. I’d like to thank the witnesses for their participation here today and I’ll ask the Sergeant-at-Arms if he would please escort the witnesses from the Chamber. I will now rise and report progress.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Your committee has been considering Tabled Document 2-17(1), Northwest Territories Capital Estimates 2012-13, and would like to report progress. I move that the report of Committee of the Whole be concurred with. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Do I have a seconder? Mr. Bromley.
---Carried
Orders of the day for Thursday, December 8, 2011, at 1:30 p.m.:
Prayer
Ministers’ Statements
Members’ Statements
Reports of Standing and Special Committees
Returns to Oral Questions
Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery
Acknowledgements
Oral Questions
Written Questions
Returns to Written Questions
Replies to Opening Address
Petitions
Reports of Committees on the Review of Bills
Tabling of Documents
Notices of Motion
Notices of Motion for First Reading of Bills
Motions
First Reading of Bills
Second Reading of Bills
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters
Tabled Document 2-17(1), Northwest Territories Capital Estimates 2012-13
Report of Committee of the Whole
Third Reading of Bills
Orders of the Day
