Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The situation with the nurse practitioners that are being trained has been very difficult. The nurse practitioners have worked well in Hay River, as an example, where there’s a nurse practitioner there that they do a little more than the registered nurses. They’re able to do diagnosis and prescriptions. They’re valuable. We have a nurse practitioner in Fort Resolution and in Hay River. We have seven nurse practitioner positions in Yellowknife but a lot of what’s been happening is the nurse practitioners that are advancing from registered nurse to nurse practitioner through the program are ending up in Yellowknife.
We recognize the value of the nurse practitioner, especially in places where we are having difficulties getting doctors in the regions. We think there’s a valuable use for nurse practitioners at the regional level. Right now we have the doctors’ positions placed in the regional levels, and as I’ve mentioned in the House several times, it’s been almost impossible to fill doctors’ positions in the communities so we’re using a large amount of locums. The nurse practitioner position has been able to take some of that work that’s normally done by doctors, and the work that the nurse practitioner can do – they can’t do all the work of a doctor – but the work that they can do has been very valuable.
As a department we are proceeding with this whole strategy on physicians. Inside this strategy on physicians that I spoke to in the House where we’re trying to bring doctors as close to the people as possible, the first priority of course means that ideally, if we’re talking about Sahtu, we would have two full-time doctors working and living in Norman Wells. As it stands we have four locums, two very long-term locums that are doing the work in there, and we cannot seem to be able to fill the actual positions in there.
How we view the nurse practitioner position is that they’re very valuable to take a lot of that work, and so we see as we’re developing a strategy for physicians to be located within the NWT we want to use nurse practitioners and try to attract nurse practitioners into the regional centres that can travel into the communities from the regional centres if at all possible. But at this time the majority of our nurse practitioners are located here in Yellowknife.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. We’re going to go back to Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize to Mr. Yakeleya. He asked a question about energy and all the sunsets. In fact, as the Member pointed out, the end of March is the end of all that $60 million we’ve devoted to alternative energy over the last four years. One of the things we are as a government working on to be ready for business plans and for the main budget is to see, given our very tight financial circumstances, what we can do to look at the various initiatives that were underway. It’s the same with strategic initiatives. There are a number of initiatives that are sunsetting. We are looking at how do we manage to put money into these critical areas, given, as I indicated, some of the cost pressures we’re under. Some of the work that was done on strategic initiatives and in energy I believe everybody would concur needs to continue. Our challenge now is to be able to come forward through the business planning process with trying to identify funds, if available, and try to address some of those issues. That work is underway. It’s not concluded but we are gearing up to be able to have that discussion because those are two critical areas of concern and interest. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Your final question, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the Ministers for a good response to my questions. My final question would be for the devolution, what funds have you received from Canada to date on this issue here, and a comment to the Minister on the forest suppression needs for funding up front. Mr. Chair…(inaudible)…and I will have to apologize for my ignorance on this. The Minister talked about the aircraft services. Are we entering into new contractual arrangements with them or do we need to have that discussion yet? These funds are advanced. I understand why they need to be there in time for the forest fire season. My understanding is clear on that. I guess these are the types of things that we need to have some further discussions yet. I’m not going to stay too long on that issue here.
I do appreciate the Minister’s response on the nurse practitioners. They are a valuable piece of human resources that we need to have in the Sahtu communities, or the Beaufort-Delta, or Deh Cho, or Tlicho, or wherever we need to have that type of service of these nurse practitioners there. I’ll leave it at that there, and hopefully the Minister can help with these couple of other concerns I had.
I understand that some of the operations within NGOs or the government, they have entered into multi-year funding and contracts. That’s why some of them have to be honoured. We heard for many years that multi-year funding is the way to go with the NGOs, so that’s something that needs to be honoured also. I do think that should happen. The Minister does know about my concerns on these issues here, so thank you for allowing some flexibility on his part to explain it to me.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Final comments, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just quickly, in regard to the ENR fire budgets, as has been pointed out by Ms. Bisaro a number of times, we know from history that the fire budget will be almost fully expended by July regardless of what happens, and we’ll be coming back for supplementary appropriation. That’s a different discussion. But we do have some long-term contracts, fixed-wing and rotary, with Buffalo Airways, with Discovery, with some of the other aviation outfits. Hence the request.
With regard to the devolution question and the federal contribution, I’ll ask Mr. Kalgutkar if he can provide the Member with some information. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Mr. Kalgutkar.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The federal government has committed to provide us with $26.5 million; $4 million of that is for the period between the AIP and the final agreement, and another $22.5 million from the final agreement to effective date. In terms of the first tranche of money, we have received in cash around $1.4 million and we do anticipate receiving the rest before the end of the fiscal year. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Kalgutkar. Does the committee agree we have completed general comments?
Agreed.
Thank you very much. Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I move that this committee resume consideration of item 11, Department of Transportation, contained in Tabled Document 1-17(2), Interim Appropriation 2012-2013, Summary of Interim Appropriations found on page 3. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. A motion is on the floor. It is being distributed now. The motion is in order.
Question.
Question has been called.
---Carried
We are going to go back to item 11, Transportation, operational expenditures, interim appropriation, appropriation authority required, $29.848 million. Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to thank my colleagues for their support as well as the Minister of Transportation for addressing my concerns with regard to improvements to the Liard Highway No. 7.
I am satisfied with the written commitment that the operation and maintenance concerns will be addressed and some of the carry-over capital funding to be expended with that. I’ve got no further questions or comments on this line item. Mahsi cho.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Any comments from Minister Miltenberger?
No, Mr. Chair. Sorry. Minister Ramsay I think would like to have some closing comments on this item. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Minister Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, colleagues. I just wanted to say that we appreciate MLA Menicoche’s determination in defense of Highway No. 7 and trying to address the concerns that are there for his constituents and for the riding of Nahendeh. We will do whatever we can as we move forward to identify funding to get the much needed reconstruction done on Highway No. 7. Again, I appreciate his efforts. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Ramsay. Item 11, Transportation, interim appropriation, 2012-2013, operational expenditures, appropriation authority required, $29.848 million.
Agreed.
Since this concludes the proceedings, thank you committee. We’d like to thank the witnesses here today, and if I can get the Sergeant-at-Arms to please escort our witnesses out. Does this conclude our consideration of Tabled Document 1-17(2), Interim Appropriations 2012-2013?
Agreed.
Thank you very much again to the Minister and to the witnesses. Mr. Menicoche, what is the wish of the committee?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that consideration of Tabled Document 1-17(2), Interim Appropriation 2012-2013, be now concluded and that Tabled Document 1-17(2) be reported and recommended as ready for further consideration in formal session through the form of an appropriation bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. The motion is on the floor. It is being distributed now. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called.
---Carried
As agreed, we will turn to Bill 1-17(2). Does the committee agree to turn to Bill 1?
Agreed.
Committee, we have agreed to consider Bill 1, An Act to Amend the Borrowing Authorization Act. I will allow the Minister responsible for Bill 1, the Honourable Michael Miltenberger, to introduce the bill.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am here to present Bill 1, An Act to Amend the Borrowing Authorization Act. The purpose of this act is to increase the short-term authority to borrow provided in Section 1(2) of the act from $175 million to $275 million.
The amendment is being proposed in order to provide the short-term borrowing authority needed to make a $65 million corporate income repayment on March 31, 2012. On April 1, 2012, the GNWT will once again be within the current limit when the GNWT receives the first Territorial Formula Financing payment for 2012-13.
The proposed amendment also recognizes the growth in government operations since 1995 when the limit was last increased. The current limit represented about 24 percent of revenues at division. Over the last 13 years, government operations and revenues have increased while the limit has remained the same and now represents only 13 percent of revenues. The proposed limit will make it easier to manage cash, especially if new infrastructure programs are announced by the federal government in the next three or four years.
Although this proposal increases the short-term borrowing limit, the GNWT will, under its current Fiscal Strategy, start to recoup cash resources over the next few years and actual short-term borrowing requirements will therefore start to decrease. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. I would like to ask the Minister responsible for the bill if he would like to bring witnesses into the House. Does the committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. I will ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to escort witnesses into the Chamber.
Would the Minister please introduce his witnesses?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. From Finance I have with me Mr. Michael Aumond and Mr. Sandy Kalgutkar.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. I will now open the floor to general comments on Bill 1. Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to ask the Minister several questions. However, first I would like to make my comments to the bill right now.
This bill here, as the Minister indicated, hasn’t been increased for awhile. The Minister has said that this bill here, looking at an increase of $100 million from $175 to $275 million, it is increased to a short-term borrowing authority and that this money is needed to pay a $65 million bill that we need to honour to the federal government. The repayment is within a couple of months from now, March 31, 2012. I really don’t know what the financial impact will be on the federal government transfers. This money will be taken off the transfers. I am wondering, we have a $65 million bill and we are borrowing $100 million to bring it up to $275 million.
I am not too sure how this arrangement or the details or the numbers come out to state why we need to have this huge increase. We have always recognized growth in the government. Every budget that comes before us, we always account for forced growth, growth in the operations, growth in human resources. Somehow we seem to make it okay. Maybe I need a little more explanation on that.
Our revenues have been fluctuating up and down. The Minister states that we have only 13 percent of revenues. Our needs are great. It makes it, as the Minister states, easier for government to manage cash for new infrastructure programs. That will be announced by the federal government in the next three or four years.
Mr. Chairman, I want to raise these concerns with the government and how do we start recouping these cash resources in the next couple of years. Is that assumption on the fact that we have a couple of months to come to a devolution final agreement and then implement the final agreement? We are on a timetable with the devolution. We are going to receive a huge amount of cash if this government or Cabinet here says we are going to sign the final agreement. We already know there are a number of positions going to be coming to the territorial government. We don’t know where those positions will be located yet. We haven’t had those serious discussions. I wonder where the Minister is getting this magic pot that we are going to have some of this cash recouped. We haven’t been told yet or I haven’t been told yet. I may have missed some meetings.
So these are some of my comments here, Mr. Chair. The assumption is we’re going to spend. I know any time you borrow money, sometimes it’s good debt, sometimes it’s bad debt. There is such a phrase as bad debt. Sometimes there is good debt. But we’re borrowing on some type of promises that may not come to fruition. Is it on some assumption that we’re going to get money? I know the federal government has promised some infrastructure money on transportation for the Mackenzie Valley Highway. It’s stated in their budget. I read their budget. There was some transfer money being looked at. I’m not too sure how much in total to the Government of the Northwest Territories, health and some other programs. I don’t have it at my fingertips right now.
So this borrowing idea, this act, means that we have...and the government probably responded to our needs. We said we can’t do this, we have to borrow it. We have to pay a bill here, $65 million. We have to pay that or we’ll be penalized by the federal government. Besides, we’re growing. We’ve been growing since 1995. Why all of a sudden now do we need to bring in this act? We could have brought it in four years ago or eight years ago. Is it programs and pressure that we need to consider?
These are the types of things that make me think about some of the infrastructure in our communities. I hope we get some infrastructure in our communities if we are borrowing this short-term cash. That’s what it is. I’m not too sure what the government is banking this on. I’m just making the assumption, Mr. Chair, that when I read this, start to recoup cash resources over the next few years, I want to know what. How do you start recouping?
Right now the biggest thing on our ticket right now is devolution. We know how much money is coming to the North. Maybe there are some bigger things at play here that I’m not aware of or people of the Northwest Territories aren’t aware of. I’m going on the assumption that the government has a lot to respond to and this is what they’re trying to figure out. They’re saying hey, we’ve got to increase our borrowing limit. We’ve got to do this. Is there a hiring freeze on our people within the government? Why do they sometimes come to our communities and say we’ve got no money, we’ve got no money?
So tell me and tell my people. If you can’t put an RCMP detachment in Colville Lake, tell me. But you’ve got lots of money here you want us to borrow. What the heck is going on? If that is there, then certainly you can put a detachment in Colville Lake.
I’m confused. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This borrowing limit is, in effect, an operational line of credit. It’s up $75 million. We have a very specific need in this particular instance. As the Member has noted, it hasn’t been touched since 1995. The government has grown significantly as has our budget. The short-term borrowing cycles in and out, literally tens of millions of dollars a week moving in and out of government coffers and bank accounts as we manage the complex business of government.
I want to as well speak briefly that there are no hiring freezes. If folks are saying there’s no money, then it probably means whatever the circumstance, they’ve expended their budget allotments for that year and they have to manage their money to get to the end of the fiscal year. We’ve made every effort and have been successful at protecting programs and services and we’re going to continue to do that.
There is not going to be a huge windfall with devolution. We are going to get money for positions moving north to our A base. We have three hundred and some positions. We are going to get some resource royalties; about $60 million roughly a year and growing, tied to our gross expenditure base. That money will be split between ourselves and the Aboriginal governments.
As the Member well knows, we are constantly beset on all sides by forced growth pressures or pressures for additional programs. So that $60 million in our share will go partway to help bear some of the cost pressures and deal with some of the cost pressures. But this particular request is for an operational line of credit. I will ask Mr. Kalgutkar if he will lay it out for us a bit the way the money moves and why we need this type of capacity to manage the complex government operations. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Mr. Kalgutkar.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. As the Minister referred to this, the purpose of this amendment is twofold. The primary purpose is to address immediate need to make the $65 million on March 31st, and on April 1st the GNWT will be back under even the current limit when we get our first payment from the Government of Canada on our territorial financing grant.
The second element of this increase is just to recognize the growth in our operations since 1995. They’ve essentially doubled since then. The volume of cash that flows in and out of our Consolidated Revenue Fund is quite significant and it’s become harder and harder to project what our year-end cash flow needs are going to be. So all this amendment is doing is providing the authority to manage that cash more efficiently. We’re certainly not planning to utilize that full amount.
As the Minister also referenced, our current fiscal strategy does start to recoup our cash balances by the third or fourth year of that strategy. We won’t be anywhere near this limit. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Kalgutkar. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have a couple of questions with regard to clarifying some of the intent of this particular motion or bill. I understand that it is for short-term debt, short-term borrowing, but I would like to know from the Minister, I have some concerns and I’m sure from the previous questions that the Minister has heard from Members that there will probably be some lack of understanding on the part of our residents with regard to this particular bill.
We talk a great deal about our borrowing limit and our debt, the government’s debt, and the fact that we’re close to our borrowing limit and the impact it has on us as we go about our business and spend our money and so on. I would like to know from the Minister and basically to provide some education and information to those of our residents who are listening or who are reading Hansard, will this change to the Borrowing Authorization Act have any impact on our long-term debt.
The other question I have in sort of a larger picture is relative to our fiscal strategy. The Minister has talked often about our fiscal strategy. Will the fact that we are increasing our Borrowing Authorization Act have any impact on our fiscal strategy? Is it going to require that we make some change to our current fiscal strategy? Will it make it easier, will it make it harder for us as we go forward?
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. No, this will not affect our long-term borrowing or debt. Our current fiscal strategy will remain in place. All this gives us basically is a tool that allows us to manage the $1.4 billion that flows in and out of government in its very many different ways through the Consolidated Revenue Fund, as Mr. Kalgutkar pointed out. Recognizing how long it’s been since the last increase with the growth in government and the amount of money that now flows through there and some of the pressures that we’ve been managing as of late just with the economic downturn and a lot of the other projects and unanticipated events that we’ve been managing. I hope that clarifies it for the Member.
I think so. Thanks to the Minister. The other concern that’s been expressed is that we are making a very large repayment of our corporate income taxes. I think it’s $65 million that is coming due. It is, though, a corporate income tax overpayment on the part on the federal government from quite a number of years ago. I think I’ve lost the actual year in my brain. I’d like to know from the Minister why we are making this balloon payment at this point. Is the fact that we’re having to make this income tax payment the reason that we have to change our borrowing act or is there another reason why we’re making the change?
People looking at this from the outside, it’s a simple amendment, I think, is the way it’s been described, but we’re increasing borrowing from $175 million to $275 million. One hundred million dollars is a lot of money. Why is this balloon corporate income tax repayment happening now? Has it been to our benefit to have had this money for this long or is it an oversight on somebody’s part? All of those questions, if I could get them clarified that would be great.
