Thank you for that clarification, Mr. Minister.
Can the Minister provide an overview of the reinvestment segment of this fiscal strategy? How and when will the money be put back in?
Mr. Speaker, earlier today, in my sessional statement, I highlighted the number of areas that we are going to use as strategic initiatives that align themselves with the goals of this Assembly. As we find the revenues to reinvest, that would be combined through reducing overall expenditures of government — identifying dollars within departments that could be reinvested — our goal was to try to invest, starting this year, and building up over the life of this Assembly.
I’ll have to put a caveat on that. Depending on the choices we make and the quality or quantity of the overall number that we do get in our first year of reductions, that will give us the amount we can look at reinvesting. So if we find less in the first year, there’ll be less for reinvestment.
Thank you for that, Minister.
With the implementation of that fiscal strategy, I am wondering if the Minister can advise whether or not there will be a reduction in the number of public service employees.
Mr. Speaker, our goal in this area is to look at how we spend our dollars on programs, the value for the investments we are making and the results we are actually producing. We have to look at that type of investment.
When you look at the total overall number and our compensation benefits package and the people we have working for us, it looks to be almost half the overall budget that we have in the Northwest Territories. There will be some impact.
Our work is not to target a number of people; our work is focused on programs. As we make decisions on how we proceed, we will be working through the channels to inform all those affected, in a timely manner, so they have a lot of time to look at what options may be available to them.
I want to lend support to the Member for Mackenzie Delta with respect to the one-rate zone. That's a topic that's near and dear to myself and all the people in Nahendeh. We've been struggling a lot in the last couple of years, particularly the residents and the businesses. I don't know if the government is going to include this in part of their evaluation of cost savings and assisting us with the cost of living.
I want to know, perhaps from the Minister of PUB, where they're at with evaluating the one-rate zone, or levelized rate zones, for the Northern residents.
The question was to the Minister Responsible for the Public Utilities Board, but I…. Mr. Roland.
The question is best put to ourselves, or at least myself, at this point.
The Public Utilities Board will review under existing conditions and operations. At one point, questions were asked about the PUB and a one-rate zone. The PUB has put it on record that they're working with the existing rate structure that's in place. If we're to change that, it would have to be directed from this level, this Assembly. That is something that would be looked at.
We have a number of factors. One of those is the strategic initiatives committee on reducing the cost of living. That will be looking at a number of factors across the North — energy and how we deal with that. The refocusing piece is another piece. We also have an Energy Ministers committee that will look at a number of factors. There are a number of opportunities there that we can review as to how we direct the next stage.
I'd like to thank the Premier for answering that question. That's a very important one. We should examine that, because I do believe there is enough support from Members on this side of the House to be moving forward to some kind of revitalized electricity rate structure out there. We are living with an old, archaic system that I believe needs changes and needs reviewing, and I hope this government can look at that.
Once again, does the Premier commit to having a good look at our rate structure and reviewing it for this year?
In the process we would look at for doing that, there are potentially two areas: our energy committee of Ministers, as well as reducing the cost of living, which is an initiative underneath the plans. We would like to go with that plan. Those processes would involve Members. As well, recommendations from Members of this House back to us could help us in adding that to the work that's going to be reviewed.
Absolutely, you will get lots of support. As well, the Member for Mackenzie Delta did mention that we'll be moving a motion in this sitting of the House to help direct the government in that direction. Once again, it is hurting our communities; it’s hurting our businesses. In fact, in one of my smaller communities, Wrigley, a store shut down in the fall because they couldn't sustain the O&M from power rates. That’s something that needs immediate attention. Once again, I ask the government to have a serious review and look at this important issue. Mahsi.
The high cost of energy is a serious issue in the North for a lot of our communities, smaller communities, as well as the forced growth costs of the government that we deal with. It is an area where we will have to do a review. We’ll have to look at options, and options will be presented, whether it is in rate structure or structure of our power support program — all of those factors would have to be reviewed and the options presented to Members to see where we go in this area.
My question is for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.
Given the clear opportunity for improving lives, increasing revenues and reducing costs that improved literacy skills provide, and given cabinet’s recent meeting with literacy specialist Mr. Scott Murray, brought in by the N.W.T. Literacy Council, what changes are you proposing to support and enhance literacy education in the Northwest Territories so we can enjoy these returns?
Mahsi. I appreciate the Member’s question on this specific topic. It is very important to our government system and also to the N.W.T. as a whole.
I have met with Mr. Scott Murray doing data analysis and also a survey that has been conducted. There is really a lot of helpful information within the package. This is all preliminary. I just met with him last week. Certainly, this is a document that we as a department can work with, along with Mr. Bromley and other Members, to just move forward on this. We do provide various literacy programs and funding in the 33 communities we serve. We are looking into this.
Thank you for the question. Mahsi.
I am aware of the adult literacy and basic education programs in the communities. I understand that most of those positions are currently filled, which is great. That’s progress.
I’m also interested in what role this department will take in leading a coordinated response, which seems to be a core kernel of this opportunity. Coordination of both federal and industry roles has the benefits of sharing costs and program delivery, but again, I would like to see this government take a leadership role. We know our people. We know their needs.
What role is this department taking to ensure that that leadership is provided as well as the direct support for the programs?
We do have a strategy in place that’s been conducted since last year: the N.W.T. Literacy Strategy summative evaluation. It consists of our department — Education, Culture and Employment — and also Health and Social Services, Aurora College, N.W.T. Literacy Council, non-government organizations, literacy service providers, aboriginal organizations, and industries. There is a strategy in place that our department is pursuing, and recommendations are being brought forward. The target date for completion of the draft N.W.T. Literacy Strategy is April 2008. Mahsi.
I’m looking forward to that strategy. I realize it has been a five-year program review. This apparently is a huge opportunity for economic development and should catch the ear of this government.
What role will the Members on this side of the House have for input into that strategy?
As other Members would indicate, we value input from Regular Members on any initiative that we pursue as a government, because we are doing this for Northwest Territories. This strategy, as I stated, is in a draft format, and it will be coming through our department to review. Prior to that happening, this information will certainly be shared with Members, because we would like to share in the feedback they receive from the communities they represent. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Final supplementary, Mr. Bromley.
I understand that literacy programs can be most effective when they are targeted for particular groups of people. There are something like five or six different groups of people that have quite different needs. I want some assurance that the program will recognize those needs. It is sort of a new insight in the last few years, so I am looking for some assurance from the Minister that that sort of detail will be addressed in that strategy. Thank you very much.
Surely. That information will certainly be taken into consideration, as we do have different sectors on the committee. They provide various inputs from different jurisdictions, so certainly that will be available.
Mahsi.
During my Member’s statement, I talked about transparency and accountability, particularly related to the Deh Cho Bridge project. My question is directed to the Premier.
I am glad to hear that information related to the cost-of-living analysis is going to be coming our way — hopefully, by the end of this session — and I think that is a great first step, but it’s just a first step. I hear people in the community, residents, whether they support the bridge or whether they are opposed to the bridge, asking questions. They don’t even understand what is going on. And they are looking for the cost-benefit analysis as well.
In addition to getting it to the Regular Members, I would like the Premier to commit to sharing that information and communicating information around the bridge and the process that has been followed to date to the residents of the Northwest Territories.
Mr. Speaker, the information will be coming. It will be before the end of session. Hopefully within the next few days we will be able to get that into the hands of Members.
The other piece of information going out with it…. I am aware that the bridge corporation is planning to do some information sessions. I’m not sure just how they have structured that, but I am aware they are looking to get information out there about the project as well. We can have a discussion about the cost-benefit analysis that we provide to Members and see if we want to distribute that further.
Once again, to the Premier, it’s great that the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation is planning to do some of those information releases, but the government is still on the dime for this to a tune of $160 million. I think we have a responsibility as a government to share some of the information with the public, because they are asking us as well.
So once again, I’d like to get the Premier to commit to developing some sort of communications plan about our role in the bridge and the costs to the residents of the Northwest Territories and Yellowknife.
Mr. Speaker, we can provide, from our side, the information and get it out there. It would be those communities that are affected by a decision like this — Providence, Yellowknife and some of the other communities. We can share that information.
When we talk about the overall project of $165 million, when you look at the government’s piece of it outside of the O&M cost…. When you look at that additional cost, at the end of 35 years the additional investment would be more in the area of $70 million, and tolls would be paying for the rest.
I do support the concept of a one-rate zone. I spoke before on the power rate increases in Inuvik again. Luckily we have a subsidy from the government that helps to offset some of these costs; otherwise, we’d all have to move out of the Northwest Territories.
I’d like to direct my line of questioning today to the Minister Responsible for the Public Utilities Board, who oversees the applications that come in for rate increases. I’d like to ask the Minister: once the decisions are made, does the Minister have to sign off these decisions?
Mr. Speaker, the Public Utilities Board is an arm’s-length board from the Government of the Northwest Territories. As the Minister Responsible for the PUB, I can appoint board members to the board, but I don’t sign off on any decisions the board makes.
That’s where I would like to go next. These are decisions affecting people that we represent, so I think we should have a say in the decisions that are made.
I’d like to ask the Minister what we would have to do to have decisions that are made by the Public Utilities Board endorsed by the Legislative Assembly, because it does affect all the people that we represent. I believe we need to have a say in the decisions that are made from now on.
I think it’s important for the public to understand the role the Public Utilities Board plays. The board reviews all applications for rate increases by a regulated power body. If the Public Utilities Board were not there, there would be no opportunity for review and for input by the public, and by affected sectors, to examine rates that have been put forward by utilities and corporations. Over the years the Public Utilities Board decisions have probably resulted in savings to the average consumer of a significant amount.
If there were savings to the average consumer, then I wouldn’t be asking these questions. There is a frustration out there that too many of these applications are rubber-stamped by the Public Utilities Board. I understand the need to operate at an arm’s length, like I said.
The Public Utilities Board seeks public input into the applications. Are they required to hold public hearings so the public can put their input into these decisions? I am sure they would hear the exact opposite of everything else that is out there. They’ll give them their feedback into the proposed rates and how it is going to affect them. So is there a requirement to hold a public hearing, and if there is, is there a cost to it?
The Public Utilities Board, once it has received an application for rate increases, holds a public hearing and also provides for intervener funding. The hearings play a large part in the rulings by the Public Utilities Board.
My experience is that the Public Utilities Board doesn’t take the applications and rubber-stamp the approval; it takes its responsibilities very seriously. In its most recent applications, the Public Utilities Board has in fact ruled to reduce the amount that had been applied for. So I think the Public Utilities Board is a part of the regulatory function of the Northwest Territories.
I should also point out that with the approval and acceptance of the 2007 N.W.T. energy plan, we do have an electricity rate review that is undertaken that is provided for through the energy plan. One of the key principles that we are working towards with the energy plan is affordable power for all residents. This review will look at the regulation of energy, the provision of subsidy and the way in which rates are determined.
Final supplementary, Mr. Robert McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the Minister for that.
The significant savings that he may be speaking about here…. There was a $2 million shortfall that the NWTPC asked for three and a half months to recover. The Public Utilities Board said, “We’ll give you 12 months.” They are still going to recover the shortfall, so really, in my opinion, it isn’t a significant savings to the general public.
I would like to ask the Minister again. This is something that is affecting people that we represent, so I think we as an Assembly should have some say into some of these decisions. So I’d like to ask the Minister again: is it possible for this Assembly to have approval over the final decisions that are made or recommended by the Public Utilities Board?
Part of the review that is being undertaken…. My expectation is that we would come up with options which would entertain exactly what the Member is putting forward. And that would be one of the options that we would look at.
Mr. Speaker, this is concerned with all the media regarding the cutbacks. Local community government seldom errs, but they have been asking me to ask: is this going to affect the new deal with these cutbacks?
Mr. Speaker, as we’re aware, there’s been a lot of work done by the department and Department of Community Affairs in building that program and giving more authority and increasing budgets to communities. We haven’t made a decision as to the full impact of decisions we’ll accept as areas of reduction or areas of reinvestment. So at this time it’s difficult to say what impact would be felt in any department at this point. Departments have started their work, started evaluating, have been submitting that back. That review is ongoing at this point.
Mr. Speaker, to the Minister, just to let you know…. I mean, for the riding of Nunakput, we say tough love, but we have it tough enough. Really consider that in your deliberations with your caucus, and remember, not everybody lives in Yellowknife. We live on the Beaufort Sea. And the people…. This is a shortfall to my people, and it’s going to affect everybody.
I didn’t hear a question there. It’s a statement.
question 12-16(2)
Mr. Speaker, I think some of my constituents in the last little while, over the Christmas season…. The issue of the Northern residency tax deduction has come up a couple of times now.
Mr. Speaker, as we all know, when you’re in the opposition party and when you’re proposing a new idea or a new initiative to the party that’s in government, we know that they respond to you like you’re a little mosquito, even if it is a good idea. They sort of say, “Good idea, but shoo!” You know, Mr. Speaker.
So instead of taking up this issue with our MP, who’s actually in the fourth party — or, I should say, our third opposition party — would the Premier consider taking this issue up with the other Northern Premiers, Premier Fentie and Premier Okalik? The fact is we’re going to get a much stronger, clearer voice from a non-partisan perspective brought forward to Ottawa. I wonder if it would be received much more efficiently and effectively if it were done in that type of proposal.
Mr. Speaker, in fact, that work has been done. In my role as Finance Minister I’ve contacted Northern Premiers and then went beyond to other Finance Ministers across the country. At the meeting we had before Christmas with the Minister of Finance for Canada, Minister Flaherty, I put that on the table as well as followed up with a letter to him, and I’m waiting for a response.
Mr. Speaker, it’s pleasant news to finally hear it live, here in the flesh, for the first time. I’d encourage the Premier to make sure he articulates these groundbreaking movements on subjects like this to all Members.
Mr. Speaker, is he also seeking other support from maybe our Senators and other MPs like this? The fact is the Premiers are the big issue. What type of information and support is he really getting from them? Is it one of those “Good idea, but we’ll just sign on so it looks good on the letterhead”? Or is he getting real support, whereas then they’ll break some real ground on this issue?
Mr. Speaker, the fact is…. To focus, we need to put our energy where we’re going to get the results and then working with other Finance Ministers — territorial, provincial — and bringing it to the table of the federal Finance Minister, seeking his input and, hopefully, his support. We’re waiting for his response at that point. It’s my understanding they’re looking at their budget process now.
Well, I’m just going to leave it at that, but I want to highlight the fact that it’s being brought up by a lone opposition member again, in a party that’s not recognized as the Official Opposition, so it’s going to be treated as a far-down priority.
The fact is that we all know there’s a looming potential election coming up, and even if the Conservatives return, it’s a good time to start putting a full-court press on this issue. Maybe we can get some serious commitments in advance of a potential election. It’s good to continue citing or screening this issue toward southern candidates so they realize the difficulty. How many times have we heard about the power rates, the cost of food and whatnot being raised in this House? Would the Premier be willing to crank up the pressure on this issue so it’s on the national agenda?
As I stated earlier, I already approached my Territorial colleagues, and I approached the provincial Finance Ministers. We addressed it at the Finance Ministers’ meeting before Christmas, and I followed up with a letter, so we’re waiting for their response. I’ve been to the federal Finance department to see if they would be looking at it.
As well, for the record, as is pointed out by the Member, we’ve had our MP in Ottawa make mention of this, address it in Parliament. Unfortunately, the result from that process was not a positive one, and I’m not sure if that will have an impact on our approach.
Mr. Speaker, I want to ask some more questions of the Premier in regard to the Deh Cho Bridge process and project. It gets back to what I believe is a fundamental foundation for the reason for the project going forward during the life of the last government.
On a continual basis the Members of the last Assembly were told that benefits would accrue to the community of Fort Providence via the $5 million equity stake that the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation would have in the project. It was a guaranteed rate of return, Mr. Speaker. That money was going to do some good things in Fort Providence, so the last government told us. That situation has changed, and I’m wondering if the Premier could elaborate a little bit today on what the current disposition of that equity arrangement is with the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation.
