The legislation that was passed in the 15th Assembly with regard to the NWT Hydro Act specifically excluded the transmission lines to the diamond mines. The reason for doing that was because the power purchase agreements negotiated with the diamond mines would be negotiated and, obviously, the hydro proponents would be seeking the best rate in terms of making profits. With regard to the regulated side, the whole focus is to keep the rates as low as possible. As such, the legislation provides for preferential rates to be negotiated on the regulated side. Thank you.
Final supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I understand that the Taltson is being expanded and I understand the potential demand of the diamond mines, if that happens. But, Mr. Speaker, we make the legislation. Sure, the act was put in place in the 15th Assembly, but why could there not be an exclusion made as well to supply power for this sizeable customer in the South Slave? Why couldn’t the same principles of business and making a profit apply to some kind of a negotiation for power supply for Avalon Ventures?
I think it’s very important that we have an opportunity before us here to keep this secondary processing industry in the Northwest Territories. I think we need to get creative. We made the rules in the first place, we made the laws. That’s what we do. What can we do to accommodate a viable offer to Avalon to try and keep this very important industry, processing aspect of this industry, in the North? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With the will of the House I’m sure that anything’s possible. I just wanted to point out that on the regulated side, the cost of operating the power facilities has to be recovered. I believe that what Avalon is looking for are rates that are similar to what are being provided in Saskatchewan and Manitoba. In the Northwest Territories the commercial rate is 7.4 cents per kilowatt hour plus a one cent rider. That’s delivery. So that number is higher than what Saskatchewan Power charges Nico, for example. But certainly if we were to make an exception for Avalon, then we would have to change our legislation to find a way so that that doesn’t fall under the regulated power side. And, also, who would pay for the lower costs? I guess those are two main considerations that would have to be done if we’re going to change legislation. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Beaulieu.
Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, today in my Member’s statement I spoke about the Income Support Program. I have questions for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment on the Income Support Program.
Mr. Speaker, the Income Support Program should be delivered with the concept of putting people to work. I’d like to ask the Minister what is in the program that encourages people to go to work. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The honourable Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we do have people in the regions that deal with clientele. Yes, we deal with a computer system, but that’s just one piece of it. We continue to train our staff that they can have PR training into the communities, public relations. I think that’s the key. We have client service officers in most of the communities. For those without client service officers, we have dedicated individuals who go to the communities to deal with clientele. So there has been constant training that’s happening within our department. We will continue to provide those services, Mr. Speaker. Mahsi.
In the area of training, would the Minister commit to ensure that all client service officers are trained in the area of employment counselling? Thank you.
That is one area that we continue to focus on with our department. The client service officers take various training to deal with the subsidies, the program delivery, the client face-to-face interaction, public relations. That area can certainly be part of the training package that we continue to provide our services to client service officers as well. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Would the Minister look at changing the unearned and earned income exemptions so that there is an incentive for individuals to go to work as opposed to what appears to be a bit of a disincentive? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We did make some changes to our program back in 2007. We did a review of our programming. We have made some drastic changes from increasing benefits to Northwest Territories. Also, just adding $5.1 million into the program itself. Those are substantial changes. We continue to work with the unearned and earned income. We do provide various training programs as well for those individuals that would like to get off income support, a Productive Choices program, but we continue to create these programs so those individuals can work with us. Mr. Speaker, we will continue to provide that valuable information to clientele.
The Member is asking for another review. We just did a review. That might be something we may have to look at down the road. I think it is too soon. We just did one two years ago. With that, that is where we are at, Mr. Speaker. We made some drastic changes to that. Mahsi.
Final supplementary, Mr. Beaulieu.
Mr. Speaker, I think the review of the Income Support Program didn’t achieve desired results. I would like to ask the Minister if he could commit to reviewing the program with an emphasis on employment and using the idea of income support person going to work as a key component to the program. I was wondering if the Minister could commit to looking at that again. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, that could be part of the key component of discussions that we can have on a going forward basis. I can certainly commit to consider that as part of the discussions that we could have. Like I said, we just did a review and another review could be undertaken down the road, but I can’t commit today when that is going to happen. But I will take that into consideration and work with the Members on that. Mahsi.
The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In the October session I asked questions regarding the COR program, the Certificate of Recognition to the Minister of Public Works about implementing it into the territorial tendering process which would help raise standards in our tendering process. We would also get better and more proficient tenders that proceed on our government projects. Mr. Speaker, at the time, I had inquired with the Minister if he would look into that process to see if we could move down that road as, for example, the Yukon has, and start with large projects and work our way down to the smaller ones until all our projects reflect in that regard. Of course, at the time I had asked the Minister to be kept up to speed and whatnot. I haven’t heard any updates for quite some time. I am just curious as today stands, where is the development of the implementation of this COR recognition program in our government tendering process and does Public Works still support this initiative? Thank you.
Minister of Public Works and Services, Mr. Michael McLeod.
Mr. Speaker, we did commit to providing correspondence to the Member. I apologize if that hasn’t happened. My information tells me that we have had some discussions on jurisdictions. We have had some discussion with some of the NGOs. We have to commit to have that information compiled and provided to them. I don’t have that all with me today. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I will accept that humble apology from the Minister, although rare but certainly welcomed. I wish more Cabinet Ministers could follow that direction. Mr. Speaker, I just want to be clear from a departmental point of view, does the Department of Public Works still support this process, moving along with this initiative by supporting the concept and program the COR into their tendering process? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if that was something that we had indicated in our response to the Member at the time. I believe we had discussed the merits of the program. I had raised that there were some NGOs that were raising concern and that we needed to further investigate. That is where the situation still stands, from my standpoint. I would have to have further discussions. We will provide correspondence to the Member. Thank you.
Time for oral questions has expired. I will allow the Member to conclude his supplementary. Mr. Hawkins.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Minister for making sure that question will be answered as well in the coming correspondence. I just want to make sure that the Minister is well aware that this is a territorial initiative, not a Yellowknife initiative. There are companies, construction, various other types of service type industries getting on board with the Certificate of Recognition through the Territory whether they are in Hay River, Norman Wells, Inuvik. It is quite a broad program involving large and small businesses. Is the Minister aware that it is a territorial program that several businesses are investing in the certificate program and they are doing a large focus to make sure that they could be on board just like every other jurisdiction is? Is the Minister aware of this? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I, unlike others, can see past Yellowknife. We have, of course, recognized that this is an initiative. It has a bearing on companies across the North, outside of Yellowknife. It is an initiative that is receiving a lot of attention. A lot of other jurisdictions are buying into it. We are also looking and reviewing what is being done in other areas. The short answer is yes, we are looking at it from across the board standpoint. Thank you.
Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request agreement to go back to item 7 on the orders of the day. Thank you.
The Member is seeking unanimous consent to go back to item 7, oral questions.
---Unanimous consent granted.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to follow up with a few more questions about the Joint Review Panel process and the government’s plans. I am squeezing these in on a Friday because there is a very aggressive table. It is a schedule that is laid out by the Joint Review Panel for the public to participate in the response. My first question is to the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources -- and this is following up my Member’s statement -- will the GNWT prepare a financial analysis of the implementation costs of the Joint Review Panel recommendations? Thank you.
Minister of Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Part of the assessment process and response process is going to be to look at the cost of the recommendations and our response to what that may cost so that we, in fact, know what the bill will be if we are going to recommend a certain course of action. Thank you.
Thanks to the Minister for that. Can the Minister commit to making this financial analysis public, especially before a Cabinet decision is made on the Joint Review Panel recommendations so that the public can have some input and response to the government? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, in due course, that information will be public. I can’t at this moment commit to making anything public before it has gone through our internal process. Thank you.
Final supplementary, Mr. Bromley.
Does the GNWT intend to file a submission with the National Energy Board on or before February 11th, 2010, that responds to the Joint Review Panel report and recommendations and, if so, how will we involve the MLAs and the public in the preparation of this submission? That’s February 11th. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I’ll take that question as notice.
The question is being taken as notice. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to ask a few more questions of the Minister responsible for the Executive in relation to the program review office. The Minister mentioned in one of his responses that Regular Members did not take advantage of the opportunity to sit on the Refocusing Government committee and I have to say that I’m dismayed to hear that any sharing of information is contingent upon the fact that Members are not part of that committee, but that shouldn’t be the case, Mr. Speaker. Whether or not there are Regular Members on that committee should not inhibit any sharing of information.
I’d like to ask the Minister in relation to the program review office, he stated that it was established late in 2008-09 fiscal year. So it’s been in operation approximately a year, if I take that as an actual fact. So in that time, I believe contingent on this budget was some investigation that was done relative to a reduction in the provision of funds for inclusive schooling to education boards. I’d like to know whether or not the program review office did any investigation in regards to inclusive schooling and funds that are allocated for boards in the ‘10-11 year. Thank you.
Mr. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just to be clear, the Members were involved in the refocusing initiative, but then decided that they did not want to take part in that process. So we’ve gone back to our traditional way of doing things. As we collect the information we will present to standing committee, with a dialogue in committee to look at what initiatives go forward.
Specifically in the area of inclusive schooling, the program review office has been involved with that area, but none of the information has affected the development of this budget that’s in front of the Assembly today. The work that is going forward will need to go through the process, as I said earlier, where the Minister leading the Refocusing Government initiative will be before standing committee and present the information and the work that has been done to date. Thank you.
Thank you. We could argue about the participation on the Strategic Infrastructure committees all day and I’ll leave that one for now, thank you very much. Perhaps the Minister and I could have a conversation later.
I’d like to ask, relative to the work of the program review office in the past year, if the work they’ve been doing in terms of education has not had an impact on the budget, I also understand there’s been some work in terms of medical travel and so on. I’d like to know whether or not that has had an impact on the budget. Thank you.
Thank you. The ongoing budget program initiatives of the Government of the Northwest Territories are something that we continue to do. The program review office has taken the initiative to look at those areas that we see the highest growth in as a Government of the Northwest Territories, it is reviewing that information. So the initial work had to be pooling the information together, then looking at it to see what those initiatives had accomplished and from there going forward. The initiatives underway, aside from the one that has been mentioned on the office review, is the work that is going to lead into the next year’s process. So, again, Minister Miltenberger will be able to come forward with the work that’s been done to date.
There are quite a number of areas, a large volume of work that has had to be undertaken to do this work and I’m sure when Members see that they will be able to get right into much discussion about where it should go from there. Thank you.
I thank the Minister for his response. He’s mentioned that there are a number of projects underway and I guess as an aside I have to say that I find it difficult to believe. I know there’s a lot of work that’s required when you investigate a particular program area and I appreciate that the background work is being done, but it’s hard for me to believe that there’s only been one project in the last 12 to 13 months which has come to fruition. But I’d like to know, the Minister has mentioned that there are a number of things in the works and he’s suggested that they’re going to have an impact on the 2011-12 budget. Can he tell me what those areas are that are being looked at?
Thank you. Instead of getting into, it’s a large volume of work and trying to respond in answer here, the Minister has got time with committee, will present the work that’s being done and start the dialogue in that fashion as we go forward. So I would say that that is the avenue that we should continue to honour and work with, otherwise I’ll give a little snippet here and cause concern to people out there without full information. So again, I would say let’s defer it to the meetings that have been set up and the full information will be provided to Members at that time. Thank you.
Final supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess I would like to change course just a tad. I’ve expressed a concern that we are probably going to see a reduction in our revenues over the next year to two years and I think the federal government, with a $60 billion deficit, is likely to take our grants and reduce them and I anticipate that’s probably going to start happening next year. So I would like to know from the Minister whether or not the program review office is taking that kind of an approach to reducing our expenditures. Are they considering that our revenues will probably be down and what are they doing in regard to that kind of a mentality?
