Just on the due diligence that was done, due diligence was paid by Discovery Air. This is a loan that I think we should discuss with the Government of the Northwest Territories. This company is located in London, Ontario. The acquisition of loan is to pay out in Quebec. The Calgary helicopter base is closed.
My question to the Minister is, what are we really getting out of this high-risk move in terms of people in the Northwest Territories that see this $34 million bailout, investment, loan, whatever we call it? What are we really getting out of this high-risk move for the people in the Northwest Territories in our small communities?
Mr. Speaker, the due diligence was done by independent third parties that the Government of the Northwest Territories picked. The bill was sent as part of the deal to Discovery Air to pick up that tab, that they were hired by us and work for us. That was part of the arrangement.
What we get out of this, Mr. Speaker, in a very tight economic situation where we’ve had slowdowns at the mines, layoffs at Laurelton Diamond polishers. What we have is assistance and a good business investment to a business that has a strong name and presence and employs hundreds of people, that has business arrangements up and down the valley, that’s going to bring some jobs to the North -- value-added in those ways -- a helicopter school, which runs during the summer months as well. When we looked at all the pieces in the context that we currently are in, the decision was made that this was a good investment. Thank you.
Certainly, I can argue for a lot of good business in the Northwest Territories that could certainly be welcomed to see this type of Opportunities Fund to come to their availability to talk about jobs, employment. These are home-grown, northern aboriginal people in our regions that would certainly welcome this type of opportunity. My question is, are there any other proposals in play for accessing this Opportunities Fund? If so, what processes are involved that require Regular Members on this side to have some of their consultation, decision, input in terms of this new policy? Certainly, this didn’t happen with Discovery Air and that’s why this deal doesn’t look very good of what they’re hearing in the public.
There are some proposals that I understand are there. I’m not aware of any firm one currently being considered at this point. The intention, as we have moved from the passive to an active fund, is to make sure that the policies and procedures that used to guide that passive approach are updated to reflect a more active role we want to take, and the fact that the money that’s there, how do we make sure that it’s best put to use in a secure way that’s going to make sure that we can repay what the federal government is going to give us. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Part of the requirements, I understand that a society has to be set up to manage and administrate the funds here. My understanding from ITI, the Honourable Robert McLeod, was in terms of the revisions of a policy that would look at...Would the policy look at forming a society as part of the directors? Would you see directors being involved in the input? Can we see some regional input in terms of the society?
Mr. Speaker, the funds that previously existed -- Aurora I and II, I understand -- had a more arm’s-length board structure. In this case, given the passive nature of the fund, we will take a look at the structure as well as the move of adjusting the policies that are there for the passive approach, bringing them into line with the reactive approach. The issue of the board structure has not been finally dealt with. We do have the current structure at this point to keep us going in the interim. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.
I have some questions for the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment, Minister McLeod, and it gets back again to the Opportunities Fund. I want to stand up here today and say that I’m not trying to beat up Discovery Air. They provide valuable service to our residents here. They contribute a great deal to our economy. It’s not Discovery Air that I have an issue with, Mr. Speaker, it’s the process that allowed the government to lend money without any oversight or accountability. Like I said earlier, I’d be phoning the Auditor General of Canada to look after that aspect of it.
The question I have for the Minister of ITI is, I do believe -- and it’s easy to ask questions. We want to work with you. We want to come up with creative ways so we can stimulate the northern economy. I’d like to ask the Minister what type of ways will the Minister of ITI engage Regular Members in a discussion on how we can stimulate the local economy here in the Northwest Territories.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Honourable Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment, Mr. Bob McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We would like to work very closely with the committee as well. I’ve written to the chair of the standing committee and advised her of our decision on the most recent proposal, and indicated to her that we will be working with the committee and whatever other parties that we feel should be consulted with to develop investment policies and revised procedures. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, again it gets tiresome asking questions, asking questions. We want to be fully engaged with the Minister and with the government so that we can move some things forward here. This Opportunities Fund, the more I look at it, an opportunity here for us as a government to stimulate our economy would be to borrow some of this money ourselves and invest it in businesses here in the Northwest Territories, and get to work on stimulating our economy. Instead, decisions are being made without our input that we have to question. You know, we have to stand up here and question. It’s that adversarial and antagonistic thing that I don’t...You know, I’m starting to get really tired of that. I want to work with these guys. Will they work with us? Thank you.
Certainly, we’re very pleased and we want to continue to work with the committees. One of the things that we’ve looked at is investing the money in the government business programs. This is another area that we can look at, recognizing that the loans programs that we have with the government, there’s a loss ratio of about 14 to 20 percent loss, which we have to come to this Assembly to write off, so we take that into consideration.
We’d be very pleased to continue to work with the standing committees. We also have the Ministerial Advisory Panel on the Economy that we will be consulting with on all of our business programs and on how we deal with the economy.
I’d like to ask the Minister if it would be possible for the Government of the Northwest Territories to access a portion of that Opportunities Fund to set up a program that would stimulate local business here in the Northwest Territories. Is that a possibility and if it is, can we get to work on that immediately?
Other jurisdictions in this country are working diligently on propping up their economies and doing things in hard times that make some sense, and we should be doing the same here. Right now, I don’t think we’re doing enough and that might be an opportunity to get something done. Thank you.
The loan that we’re talking about is a northern company that we’ve invested in. We’re very pleased to and what we are trying to do is use that fund for that. We would be very pleased to work with the committee to do exactly that.
I should point out that the Opportunities Fund is funded through the Immigrant Investment Program and the $400,000 that was invested by the immigrants has to be repaid within five years. The type of investments that we think would work best are companies that can pay a fairly high rate of interest, that can pay it all back within a five-year period. Also, the federal government charges 7 percent on the money. They take it right off the top.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The process right now...I mean, really there isn’t a process, but what there is is not fair and it’s not transparent. What I’m saying is we need to come up with something that’s fair to everybody in the Northwest Territories. Like I said, it’s nothing against Discovery Air. I know they’re a good company. I know they’re going to do everything they can to pay this off at the end of four years. The fact remains, though, that we have to do more for other businesses and in this process that’s there, it just isn’t fair. That’s what people are saying and that’s what people want to have addressed. So I’d like to ask the Minister again, while we haven’t had a discussion on what sectors of our economy may be even more important than others, can we have that discussion? If we have to pay a bit of a premium on the interest rates to get some stimulus package out there for our residents, maybe that’s a discussion that we should have, but we should have it together, Mr. Speaker, not just Cabinet making decisions like this. It should all be all of us making these decisions together. Thank you.
We want to work with the standing committees and we also want to get out very quickly so we can find a way to come up with a revised investment policy that’s transparent, that meets everybody’s requirements, because we’d like to get this money out there and working. So we’ll get out there quickly to get it to the stage whereby we can get the money working. We definitely want to work with the Members.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
My question is for the Minister of Housing. As I mentioned in my statement, energy costs are down right now. We have an opportunity to move on this, and move in ways that keep energy costs down in the long run for us. One, of course, is the Housing Program, a cost-shared program. Housing has committed to doing an evaluation of a sample of houses to determine requirements to bring them up to meet the EnerGuide for Houses 80 standard. Given the recognition of a need for an economic stimulus and the availability of federal dollars not matching funds, will dollars be accelerated and the program be accelerated so those assessments, which were planned over a year, I believe, could be done very quickly and we can get on to actually reducing energy requirements through those renovations? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Honourable Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation, Mr. Michael McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The new housing trust dollars was announced a short time ago and we’re still working with our staff to come up with plans, and we’ll be drafting a letter that we’ll be submitting to the chair to request some time to make a presentation before we go out in the public as what we’re going to be doing. It’s expected that our dollars would be invested in the areas of homeownership in our public housing stock, and repairs and upgrades for energy efficiency. Thank you.
Again I repeat, the opportunity is there. There is also a Green Infrastructure Program that this program could be applying aggressively on. Is the Minister aggressively going after these dollars and looking at this program to recognize this opportunity and act on it to bring these houses up in a much more accelerated way through the economic stimulus packages that we have before us?
I like to think that I was actively pursuing dollars, as a result of this investment in our Territory. We’ve also had some success in a Home Repair Program that was announced recently. We’re calculating what our share would be, and I think there’s an additional three and a half million dollars. Yes, we are pursuing any additional dollars out there. We’ve been to Ottawa. The Premier has also been travelling to make that pitch to the people in the federal government, to help us with the situation in the area of housing and the high cost of living in the Territories. Thank you.
All kudos to the Minister. He has been highly successful, and I recognize that. But today our public demands much more than just throwing dollars at issues. They want to know they’re getting good value for dollars. Where is the green infrastructure? Where is the cutting down our future expenses? What is this Minister doing to take those dollars and turn them into double the value through these energy efficiency programs?
We had a small window of opportunity before our dollar value, oil value goes through the roof for our expenses. When are we going to take advantage of this window on the energy efficiency with public housing?
Again, I’d like to have further detailed discussion through the committee process. But we intend to look at our current housing stock. We have 2,400 units and a lot of them are coming to the point where they need a midlife retrofit, they need to be looked at in terms of energy efficiency, and that’s what we’ll be doing. We’ll also be working with the homeowners in the different communities to provide programs that will help and assist upgrade and look at energy efficiency as part of the requirements. Of course, we’ll be looking at investing in Homeownership Programs.
We certainly have many areas that need investment and we need to have that discussion with committee. There is probably a need for another 2,300, 2,400 units across the Territories. That probably is going to be a real challenge at any point to build, because these dollars are not coming with O and M dollars and the focus has to be what we have currently in our public housing stock, with energy efficiency in mind. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final supplementary, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thanks for those comments from the Minister. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss these things, and I’d like to think that the Minister has made a commitment to discussing all the opportunities. Certainly, if we do deal with operation and maintenance costs in the short term, we’re going to have dollars for housing in the long term. We can no longer do business as usual. So can I assume that the Minister is committed to having discussions on ways to turn those dollars towards energy efficiency in ways that will give us many more returns than just building houses and business as usual? Thank you very much.
Absolutely. In the area of public housing, we really don’t have a lot of choice. We either have to look at lowering the cost of operating these units through energy efficiency or through alternate fuels or things of that nature or we really have to consider reducing our stock or raising our rents. Those are our options in front of us. The federal government has been reducing the investment and the support for operation and maintenance for public housing for many years. This year it’s three quarters of a million and it just continues to the point where in 2038 we will have no investment for operation and maintenance of public housing. So it is something we are looking at very seriously and any way we can save money or any way we can introduce projects or programs that will help us save so we can reinvest in the O and M, it would be beneficial for us. We are interested in all areas. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Members have the opportunity to speak once per session to any topic for as long as they wish or on any number of topics. As a senior Member of this Assembly, I am taking this opportunity today to speak about the state of the 16th Legislative Assembly. I do this with the hope to bring to light information and answers to questions that I truly believe are on the minds of many Northerners.
I am not sure that our residents who are watching the performance of this government would be able to fully articulate what the problems are. But through communications with constituents, through the editorials, letters to the editors in our newspapers, media feedback, it is clear that there is much angst about the direction or lack of direction in this government.
I find it pretty unbelievable myself, and I have seen a lot in the past 13 years. Much of what the public hears is portrayed through the media. I appreciate the role that media plays in the public and the democratic process of government, but much more goes on behind the scenes than most people ever want to discuss.
Governments evolve with heated eyes, in the early days of the federally appointed Members to our fully-elected Legislature, the reduction from 24 Members, including Nunavut, to the 14 post-division, to the 19 post-Friends of Democracy court challenge.
When I came into the Legislative Assembly as a working Member in 1995, I saw things that I thought were wrong and I did what I thought was natural, try to be the voice of people who expected accountable, transparent, honest and responsible government leadership. Representing and capturing the sentiment of public concern and opinion is just as important today. It is perhaps easier than people would expect for Members to lose focus on why we are here. It is not about us, it is about the people we represent. It is not about power, but it is about the trust that people place in us to keep their well-being at the core of all of our actions and decisions. We can easily slip into thinking that we know best, but while leadership is about making decisions, it cannot be done in the absence of constantly going back to the people who put us here, placing their confidence in us. It is a very serious trust that goes to the heart of our time honoured traditions of democracy. To this issue of the 16th Legislative Assembly, I offer my observations from my own vantage point, but hopefully these observations will resonate to the people in the public who are wondering how this government lost its way.
Every one of the 19 Members of this Assembly were elected by their constituents and everyone must be willing to serve in whatever capacity contributes to a meaningful and effective leadership to our Territory. When we gathered here for the first time we chose from amongst ourselves those we believed to have the abilities, skills, motivation and experience to bring leadership in various areas of responsibility. We do not delegate those responsibilities unconditionally. We do so, with the confidence, that our voices, as the voices of our constituents, will be respectfully engaged. That is what capable and responsible leadership, especially in our consensus style of government, strives to do: engaging, hearing the voices of all Members, and harnessing the various and unique perspectives of Members from diverse regions and backgrounds. When this attention to the role of effective leadership is lost, the whole institution suffers, but, most importantly, the confidence of the electorate is evaded, balance is lost and things begin to deteriorate.
During good times of economic stability and opportunity, access to employment, quality health care and education opportunities, there is a sense of purpose and progress and often there is diminished focus on the workings of government. But when there are uncertain times as experienced recently in unprecedented proportion, people become much more acutely aware of the leadership and look to that leadership to bring sound judgment and stewardship to those difficult challenges. To that end, it is time to take stock of where the 16th Assembly has been and where it should be placing its focus and energies.
At the risk of sounding negative, I first need to articulate the events that have led me to lose confidence in the leadership of this government. When we elected our Executive Council I had high hopes for our four-year term in office. I supported Mr. Roland for Premier, as I told him I would, even before we were elected to the 16th Assembly, wherein his Premiership was contemplated during the 15th Assembly.
I want to talk about those early days in my attempts to get answers to pretty straightforward questions. I asked about the Deh Cho Bridge. Under repeated and pointed questioning, the Premier, for the entire first sitting of our Legislature, failed to disclose that the contract for the bridge had been signed off three days before the October 31st election. Further questioning about the details of the Concession Agreement and our government’s liability to that point were met with vague responses. I thought the undertaking of the largest capital project in our Territory’s history required publically aired scrutiny, but Mr. Roland’s leadership on this issue sadly failed the test of openness and forthrightness. I started to wonder then if we had made a mistake.
Today with the downturn of economic activity, I am very doubtful if the main forecasts that formed the basis of the business case of the Deh Cho Bridge will materialize in the near future, putting the financial responsibility for this piece of infrastructure, that few wanted or thought we needed, right into the lap of this government. Might I remind Members that it was $165 million?
As is the usual practice, Members of the 16th Assembly got together to develop a strategy to reflect the priorities we had so recently heard from our constituents. These priorities were detailed in our Strategic Plan: Northerners Working Together. Imagine our surprise when our albeit fiscally conservative newly-elected Premier started on the path of reductions and layoffs, that MLAs first heard of as word spread through the bureaucracy and onto the street. That is when Regular Members begged the Premier to be proactive in his communications and develop a strategy to explain the reasons for his assertion that we needed to reduce government spending by $135 million. A half-hearted resistant attempt was made at a press conference, but it was less than convincing.
Repeatedly, the Premier told Members that communications is not his thing. It still is not his thing and it has caused us untold problems. Commitments to inform Members of potentially affected employees targeted in the layoff exercise went unfulfilled, leaving the Regular Members to find out that letters to potentially affected employees went out the day after session recessed, as we met constituents on the street who found it barely believable that we did not know about the specifics of their notifications. Strangely, the Premier himself didn’t seem to know what was going on, or the actions of his staff in the more senior positions. These kinds of breaches in communication led to several face-to-face recitings of our concerns and how they affected the meaningful role for input from Regular Members.
After these talks we went away, hoping for the best, only later to find out that our concerns were either not heard, understood or taken seriously, we remained somewhat optimistic until the next failure to communicate; a pattern that emerged in very serious doubts about Mr. Roland’s capacity to lead this government.
His demeanour was anything but inclusive. He was defensive and he seemed unable to accept any criticism, even of a constructive nature, passing off attempts to communicate frankly at other Members’ political ambitions. In other words, get in line, stay quiet or you will be tarred as only driven and motivated by personal political ambition. This creates a very dysfunctional working environment.
Mr. Roland seemed incapable of taking responsibility for any of these failures and the only excuse he could offer for his shortcomings was to only try to angrily beat down and counter any criticism. His utter disgust as Regular Members stood together to affect changes to the ’08-09 budget was physically obvious and not becoming of a confident and professional leader. The inability to directly and clearly answer questions with answers was, to say the least, tiresome. Case in point, the questions about the Ministerial Benefits Policy which will be debated hopefully later in this session, which he conveniently laid at the feet of the previous Assembly, seemingly forgetting that he sat at the Cabinet table as the Finance Minister in that government. Of course, now we have a better understanding why he was so distracted and inattentive, failing to provide leadership to his own Cabinet and staff as it became evident that the right hand didn’t know what the left hand was doing. Case in point is our government’s response to a very important report undertaken by the federal government called the McCrank Report. It would appear that after repeated requests to the Premier’s office for a report on the status of our government’s response the Premier’s office was unaware when, in fact, another Minister had responded on behalf of our government weeks earlier.
That is the kind of dysfunctional leadership that Regular Members have to deal with everyday in this government. I don’t imagine it’s very easy for Cabinet Ministers to operate under these circumstances either. I don’t accept that as an excuse, however, for the absolute mishandling of the consultation and communication surrounding the proposed changes to the supplementary health benefits. I was put on the spot in a chamber of commerce meeting before Christmas, again caught completely unaware of this initiative as a Regular Member of this government. The unbelievable, unnecessary stress this has caused is an absolute affront to the citizens in our society most deserving of our care and attention, those families caring for members with chronic and often serious conditions and seniors on fixed incomes in a time of escalating costs of living. Hopefully, due to the strident and organized efforts of the affected citizens, this situation will be addressed before it’s too late to convince people not to leave the North.
Another completely mishandled initiative to date is the Refocusing Government Initiative and the board reform proposed by the Minister of Finance. I’ve heard the interviews where there’s no doubt that Mr. Miltenberger has taken a high and heavy-handed non-consultative or informative approach to reducing the number of boards in our Territory. Quote: “We have 70 boards and we’re going to have seven boards.” I want to say here today, Mr. Speaker: I don’t think so. The consolidation of health, education and housing boards in all regions: I don’t think so. The cookie-cutter approach, whether in the Beau-del or the South Slave: I don’t think so.
Just when we think it can’t be any worse, if there is some consensus government we get a briefing on the Opportunities Fund. I will not speak to the applicant but to the process or lack of process laid out by our government. We had all heard of the Aurora Fund back in the late ‘90s, a fund derived from immigrants who invest in the country of their choice to which they immigrate. These funds were then distributed to Canadian jurisdictions and in the case of the Aurora Fund, managed then, arm’s length from government, by a society and a fund manager. This fund, at some point, became passive, merely collecting a modest interest until federal government insiders who knew of the fund shared the information with companies that they represented. So where is the policy that would have protected the good name of the applicants and the impartiality of the Finance and ITI Minister? Again, sloppy, arrogant leadership ownership that didn’t consult with Regular Members before decisions were made and didn’t create a transparent application-based process for loan approvals. The idea of moving the... Immigrant Investment Opportunities Fund from passive to active at this time of economic downturn is a good idea, but loaning $130 million to a couple of companies creates a perception of conflict and in reality of a liability to the resources of this GNWT. Heaven forbid that any recipients would get into financial difficulty, but in spite of all due diligence, if this were to happen, be sure that our government would be left with the option of either taking drastic measures to act on security pledge or find the losses from within.
How about diversifying the risk for the government and helping more than two northern companies. I told the ITI Minister that he would be a hero if he stood up in the House and announced to Northerners that our government was borrowing $100 million from that fund and making it available to business to get through some difficult times on an interest-free or minimal interest basis through some kind of a revolving fund.
The process, like the backing of the Deh Cho Bridge Project, is flawed and in that, although legislation exists enabling the establishment of these process, Regular Members have no ability to be included or involved in decisions that potentially put our limited financial resources at some level of risk even if the loans are secured.
The people of the Northwest Territories aren’t blind. They see what is going on with this government and I do thank many of them for the e-mails that have been coming in, both the positive and the negative. People are desperate for leadership and we have been trying to do our part on this side of the House in consensus government to provide that leadership. But, Mr. Speaker, sadly it has been one offence after another. There is fear on the part of some Members on this side of the House to stand up for fear of being branded by the people that we elected to Cabinet, the people that we elected branding us as politically ambitious. That’s a bit of a laugh for anyone who has any recollection of the scene that played out by two angry Regular Members who didn’t make it into the Kakfwi Cabinet. Their anger continues today. Our concerns are met with threats, intimidation and bullying.
We should have a Premier with a proven track record of experience and the skills needed especially during this difficult time ahead. What are the Premier’s reasons for being in that office? When it came to light before Christmas that the Premier was having an affair with one of our clerks, he should have done the honourable thing then and resigned. With all due respect, I didn’t out the Premier, but if I had, I didn’t know that it was my duty as a Regular Member to keep secret from the public the Premier’s affair with our staff.
Some would say that this is a time for stability, and I agree. But how can we have stability when so many Northerners and so many Members, including me, have lost confidence in this Cabinet? I don’t mean all this Cabinet, Mr. Speaker, but some kind of review process has to take place in order to reconfirm our confidence in those Members that we support. Why hasn’t anyone involved in this Cabinet stepped forward to say that they know the difference between right and wrong? We have lowered the bar so far as to allow this Premier to stay in office. We are heading into rough waters in terms of our economy and we need leadership that will turn their full attention to the needs of our constituents and not be preoccupied with their own personal problems.
There is still two and a half years left in the term of this government. How much longer can we carry on in this state of dysfunction? The Premier and the Finance Minister don’t get it. The real issues facing our constituents need to be met with leadership that is able to listen and able to respond to those needs. The cost of living is a major concern and there is no reason why this government can’t deliver affordable short-term assistance to mitigate these pressures. The large, long-term, multi-million-dollar mega projects are well and good, but people in all of our communities are looking to our government for much desired leadership that affects them where they live.
I hope that this statement today helps the public to understand my frustration as a Member. These are only a few of the instances that I have listed that we have encountered in this first 16 months and although there are several hardworking and capable Ministers, the lack of leadership and the demeanor from the Premier and the Finance Minister has brought us to a very sad state of affairs.
It’s a good time, I mean it is not a good time. It is a sad time for consensus government. I, for one, will not stand by and say nothing as certain Members bring contempt to the commitment we all make as honourable Members. You can sweep things under the carpet but it doesn’t take away the smell.
It is my job, Mr. Speaker, to ask questions, even the hard questions, and I could just coast along here and not care about this government, but I do care. I care about the government, I care about the North and I care about the issues of the people that we serve. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t be here. I don’t want to see us lower the bar any further, Mr. Speaker, and I felt it was time for me today to clearly put on the record what my concerns are as a Member of this Assembly.
Mr. Speaker, I’d like to present a petition dealing with the matter of seniors’ health benefits. Mr. Speaker, the petition today contains 1,306 signatures of Yellowknife residents. Mr. Speaker, the petition is a request that the GNWT continue to support the current Extended Health Benefits Program, Specified Medical Conditions Program, Additional Drug Assistance Program and Indigent Health Benefits Program, and that the GNWT not restrict eligibility to income testing and not reduce benefits provided through the above programs in order to fund extension to the supplemental health benefits for other segments of the NWT society.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.
I’d like to present a petition dealing with the matter of seniors’ health benefits. This petition contains 427 signatures of Northwest Territories’ residents from Inuvik, Fort Smith and Yellowknife. The petitioners request that the GNWT continue to support the seniors’ Supplementary Health Benefits Program and that the program be kept as it is. The petitioners do not want to see seniors lose their benefits, and request that the GNWT recognize the value of senior citizens and leaving the Health Benefits Program unchanged.
---Applause
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I hope I didn’t short out the whole sound system by knocking over my water. I wish to table the following document titled Northwest Territories Main Estimates 2009-2010; $1.3 billion of good progress.
---Applause
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Item 17, notices of motion. Item 18, notices of motion for first reading of bills. Item 19, motions. Item 20, first reading of bills. Item 21, second reading of bills. Item 22, consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 7-16(3), Ministerial Benefits Policy; Committee Report 2-16(3), Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures Report on Matters Referred to the Committee; Tabled Document 11-16(3), Northwest Territories Main Estimates 2009-2010, with Mr. Krutko in the chair.
I’d like to call Committee of the Whole to order. We have three items: Tabled Document 7-16(3), Committee Report 2-16(3) and Tabled Document 11-16(3). What is the wish of the of the committee? Mr. Beaulieu.
Committee wishes to report progress.
---Carried
I will rise and report progress. Again, just for the record, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Mr. Chairman, I move that we report progress.
---Carried
Can I have the report of Committee of the Whole, please, Mr. Krutko.
