Final supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.
I appreciate the answer not to my question, but it was an interesting answer which speaks to the long-term problem. I’m glad we heard that that’s the long-term focus. But the question really comes down to is there a zero tolerance policy that the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs adheres to, which is if someone’s a squatter, they have to remove their cabin or whatever it may be and then they must apply in that process.
We do deal with those out there that do not have the proper land tenure for occupation on Commissioner’s land and we’ll take the steps necessary. If it means having them remove their buildings, then I think that’s been done before. We are taking steps now to deal with those without proper land tenure.
The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for Mr. McLeod, the Minister of Transportation, in regard to the Mackenzie Valley Highway. I want to ask the Minister in terms of any of the latest updates on seeing this highway being constructed and progress on seeing some work being done in regard to starting the Mackenzie Valley Highway.
The honourable Minister responsible for Transportation, Mr. Michael McLeod.
Mr. Speaker, we’ve been putting a lot of attention to this initiative that has been supported by our government. We’ve done some very good work in terms of developing the project description reports that are required for the road all the way from Wrigley to Tuk. The federal government has, through the CanNor program, funded the portion from Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk. My discussions with the mayors from Inuvik and Tuktoyaktuk indicate that has now been concluded. It is being packaged as a report and that is coming forward. There has also been a submission for some dollars and a request for partnership arrangements with the federal government to complete the rest of the road from Wrigley to the Dempster.
Would the process in terms of this Mackenzie Valley Highway, I know there are discussions now between Tuktoyaktuk and Inuvik in terms of their ongoing process to see an all-season road made there. Would this process come down into the Mackenzie Valley in terms of connecting from the Dempster down to the community of Wrigley, or Wrigley up the highway in terms of project description funding and environmental assessment? I know the Minister has done an economic analysis of the Mackenzie Valley Highway in terms of the federal government coming forward and stepping up to the plate to support this House. He has asked for a motion in terms of a priority for this government here to construct the road.
We had intended to do two things in the life of this government. The first portion for the Mackenzie Valley Highway initiative is to have an economic analysis done on this whole portion of highway that we’re looking at. The second thing that we wanted to achieve was to have a project description report for the whole portion right from Wrigley to Tuk. We’re well on our way on the Tuk-Inuvik portion. We’re still working on the funding for the rest of it. Once we do have the resources, then we’ll be able to embark on that work. That includes surveying, the alignment, some of the economic scoping, and a little bit of the design that would lay out what the road would look like. The Minister of Indian Affairs will be here today and will be making some announcements. We’re anticipating those will be positive.
In terms of the resources, can the Minister tell me roughly the estimates of the resources and when possibly they could hope for some resources in terms of working on the highway from Dempster to Inuvik or Inuvik to Dempster, somewhere where we’ll start seeing some work in the Sahtu or even in the Gwich’in region?
Without taking the thunder away from the federal Minister’s visit, I can assure the Member that we have been working on completing the PDR for all of the Mackenzie Valley Highway. We had anticipated it would take roughly two years and cost approximately $8 million. The work that has been completed from the Inuvik-Tuk portion is proving to be a little more expedient than we had expected. They did the work on that stretch in roughly a six or seven month period. We expect that we’ll move a little faster than we had originally provided time for. But we’ll be having a get-together and some announcements made by the federal Minister this afternoon. So without having to provide too much more detail, I’ll just leave it at that.
Item 8, written questions. Item 9, returns to written questions. Item 10, replies to opening address. Item 11, replies to budget address (day 2 of 7). Item 12, petitions. Item 13, reports of standing and special committees. Item 14, reports of committees on the review of bills. Item 15, tabling of documents. Item 16, notices of motions. Item 17, notice of motion for first reading of bills. Item 18, motions. Item 19, first reading of bills. Item 20, second reading of bills. Item 21, consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters: Bill 2, Forgiveness of Debts Act, 2009-2010; Bill 4, An Act to Amend the Child and Family Services Act; Bill 7, An Act to Amend the Summary Conviction Procedures Act; Tabled Document 62-16(4), NWT Main Estimates, 2010-2011, with Mr. Bromley in the chair.
Thank you, committee. I’ll call the committee to order. What is the wish of the committee? Mrs. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The committee today would like to proceed with general comments on the budget legislation.
Thank you. We’ll proceed with general comments. First we will call a short break.
---SHORT RECESS
I’d like to call committee back to order and note that we have agreed to consider Tabled Document 62-16(4), NWT Main Estimates, 2010-2011, with a start by having general comments. I’d like to have a call for any general comments at this time. We’ll start with Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a number of comments and they are general. I am generally pleased with the budget as it has been presented.
I think, as I stated earlier in my Member’s statement today, I approve of the fiscal strategy that we’re following. I think that we did need to maintain our spending in the fiscal year that we’re currently in and I think that we need to maintain that spending over the next fiscal year to try and counteract the effects of the downturn in our economy nationally. I believe that we need to maintain the spending levels over this next fiscal year in order to do that.
This budget does project a certain amount of debt. It is not something which I would agree to as a general way to go. I acknowledge, again, because of the current downturn in the economy that we are encountering, that debt is something which is necessary. My only concern, and I think the Finance Minister has already said that he has stated and I agree with him, that debt should not become the norm. I think he has acknowledged in the budget of 2011-12 that we need to not incur any further debt and start working to reduce the debt that we do have.
I am somewhat concerned with the year-over-year increase in expenditures in this budget. I acknowledge that a lot of the increase is due to negotiated contracts with our employees and that has created an increase in our expenditures, but we have gone to approximately 7.5 percent increase in our total expenditures in this budget. I don’t think it is acceptable. I think we ought to be aiming for a lot less than that. My understanding was that, in May of 2009, we had a discussion. At that time, I thought we had agreed to keep our expenditures down around 4 or 5 percent. It does concern me that we are constantly going up in terms of expenditures. I know that we are getting revenue in terms of our grant. We are getting revenue in terms of our taxes and some increases in our taxes and fees, but from what I understand of the numbers in the budget, the extra revenue we are getting in this budget year of 2010-11 is less than what our expenditures are. We cannot continue to do that.
I am extremely pleased to hear that we are going to work to establish a heritage fund. I believe the Minister said that will happen before the end of the 16th Assembly. I would love to see it happen before the end of this next fiscal year. I encourage the Minister to get it established as soon as possible.
I am also extremely supportive to the change to the Public Housing Rental Subsidy Program. I stated earlier that it is long overdue and it was a necessary change. I think that it will be a program change which is only going to benefit our constituents. As long as we examine the policies surrounding that program and the policies surrounding Education, Culture and Employment’s subsidy programs, as long as we do that when we do this change, then I think it is going to be for the better.
I am somewhat disappointed that the budget doesn’t include any new revenues, although I don’t know if I missed it in our discussions or if it was sprung on us, but I do appreciate that we are having a cost of living increase to our sin taxes and to our fees. I think that we have tied increases on an annual basis to the cost of living increases is a good thing. I do want to say, in terms of revenues, that the Minister has held two roundtables. I think they have been quite valuable. I get the impression that we will see an initiative in terms of revenue in the budget for 2011-12. I would encourage the Minister in very strong terms that that is something we need. We have to start increasing our own-source revenues. We cannot continue to plan on grants from the federal government maintaining the levels that we have now.
One of the things that I am disappointed, a couple of specific things in terms of the budget, is that I don’t believe we have planning money in this budget to refurbish our one and only territorial hospital. It is a very old building and some 20-plus years old. The biggest problem with the building is it is an outdated design and has become very inefficient. It creates difficulties for the staff working and administering that hospital for them to do the job to the best of their ability. They certainly do a good job, but it could be a lot easier if they had a building that was better designed. The refurbishing of that building is something that is extremely important, in my estimation. The planning dollars for that refurbishment needs to be there.
Maybe it is picky, but I am really concerned that the budget does not consider operation and maintenance costs for new buildings when we put a new building into the capital budget. We don’t automatically then say we have to add these funds to the operations and maintenance budget for the same year. We seem to treat them as an initiative. To me it is hardly an initiative when you have a building that you have to run and the cost to run it, it is not an initiative. It is an operational expense. It is just a matter of how we look at it.
One of the other things that is, again, picky and I have expressed this before in the previous budget but the mains seem to have some items which are identified as other expenses with no explanation for what those “other” are. Just today I have received an explanation of what the “others” are. Unfortunately, to my dismay, I found that there are others under others under others. So we still have a few others which are unexplained, but I will bring more detail to that when we discuss the mains in some detail.
The last sort of detail is that I want to say that in terms of an item in the Education budget which talks about spending some funds on a nutritious food study. In my estimation, it is not necessary. I would far rather see that funding put into a milk subsidy program, a pilot program even, but I don’t think we need to do another study to determine nutritious foods. There are organizations within the Territory that have done that work or that are doing that work. I think that we could quite easily take data that is already there and apply it to get to the end point that this study seems to want to go. Again, in general, I am pleased with this budget. I look forward to discussing some of the details as we go through the various departments over the next couple of weeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. We are moving now to Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would be happy to provide a few comments on the budget. I think in balance it is fairly good. There are a lot of good things that are coming forward. I will get a chance as we go through the various departments to talk a little bit more in detail about some of the concerns that I have.
One of the issues that I have with the budget is if I was a consultant or a former bureaucrat sitting out there listening to the budget address yesterday, I would be going like this with my hands saying there is a lot of work out there for consultants. There is a lot of work out there for former bureaucrats. I think we have a propensity as a government -- and I mentioned this many times in the past -- to rush out as soon as there is a strategy or plan or a study, rush out and hire a consultant to do the work. Mr. Chairman, we do that far too often. The issue that I have -- and my colleagues will hear me speak more about this next week -- is the fact that we sole source far too often. We sole source to former bureaucrats. We sole source to former employees. I will get into that a little bit more in detail next week. I don’t want to let the cat out of the bag, but there is a lot of stuff in this Government of the Northwest Territories Contracts Over $5,000 report from last year that somebody could spend a lifetime looking into. I plan on getting into that next week.
As far as the budget goes, I think the government has to be applauded, especially in the area of the environment and the money we are spending in that area. I think that is good. The Minister responsible for ENR has had a lot to do with that. I would like to thank him. I know he is also the Finance Minister, so I guess that helps in that regard.
Also, I think the other thing I would like to see the government looking at a little bit more closely is efficiencies. I know in the budget address we talked about moving the social housing back to the Housing Corporation, that responsibility back to the Housing Corporation from ECE. I know we need to have some sensitivity when it comes to the employees that are involved in that. That has to happen, but if we are spending over a million dollars more to deliver on that program than we were prior to it being transferred over to ECE, that is something the government has to take a serious look at. We have been spending a million dollars over the past four years that we didn’t really need to be spending. The sensitivity has to be there for our employees, but we have to be serious about efficiencies.
In the budget address also, we talked about merging administrative support functions. We talked about consolidating responsibilities for building maintenance and utility costs. We talked about this but I don’t see a plan on the human resource side of things, how that is going to equate into savings for government. We keep doing these mergers and consolidations, but really, at the end of the day, we are not freeing up any money to be spending on other areas of our operations. If we don’t do that in a comprehensive way, I think we are making a mistake. That is the way I see that.
I listened quite closely to Ms. Bisaro’s Member’s statement from earlier today. I share all of the concerns that she has with the program review office. It has been up and running for far too long to have not delivered some more information so Members and those of us who are interested in making decisions have some information to base their decisions on. I would like to see some more work come out of that office. I know they are working on a few other things, but get it in front of committee so that we can start making some decisions. I was very happy, by the way, with the comprehensive review on the general purpose office, the work that the program review office did in looking at Yellowknife in particular and government-owned versus lease-based in Yellowknife. That was some good work. I think we need to see more of that work so that we can make better decisions as we go forward.
The other thing, too, is we are starting this national marketing campaign. I am fully supportive of the initiative that the government is taking with Minister Bob McLeod and ITI and trying to attract people to move to the Northwest Territories. We have to get some kind of a grip on this $250 million that we are losing annually to migrant workers. That is a step in the right direction that the initiative to government is taking there. I think what is lost in all of this is the government’s inability to address the high cost of living here in the Northwest Territories.
The Strategic Initiatives Cabinet committee on the cost of living has been eerily quiet. We haven’t heard anything from that committee, nothing in two years. Given the fact that we are looking at this electricity rate review, the fact that the Deh Cho Bridge is under construction and in my mind the government has never proven to me that the cost of the living in the North Slave region is not going to increase as a result of that bridge being there, not just in the North Slave region but in every community that is serviced by air out of Yellowknife. The cost of living is going to go up because everything that goes across that bridge is going to be charged a toll. The trucking companies are going to pass that on to the retailers who are going to pass it on to the consumer. That is basic economics. That is going to happen. The government has yet to prove it. They couldn’t prove it. The last government couldn’t prove it. I know the Minister is saying one of the benefits of the project is going to be it is going to lower the cost of living. Well, if you are going to say that, prove it to us. Show us how that is going to happen, because I firmly do not believe that is the case. I would like to be proven wrong on that front.
Also, I really would like to see the Stanton master plan get into a budget sometime in the near future. It is not in this one. I think it is very unfortunate. I guess that is the nicest way I can say it. It has to be there. I think that building is aging. This base heated utilization in there needs to be addressed. The services need to be addressed. I think the Minister has her hands full on that front.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I think those are some of the highlights that I saw. I think in general I can be supportive of the budget this year. There are some things, like I said, that I take issue with, but I have issues with every budget since I have been here, in one way or another. So there are little battles to fight but I think, like I said at the onset, in balance, the budget is a good piece of work. I appreciate the work the Minister has put into getting it before the House. I look forward to the debate that is going to play itself out over the next five weeks. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. At this point in time that appears to be all the… Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I’m going to make two sets of comments. The first ones today will just be sort of a brief overview of some of the things. I’d like to offer some long-term views and I’ll offer that at our next chance on Monday, which will be the next sitting date of our House.
For starters, I’m just going to work my way through the budget. I was very pleased with the balanced approach the Minister of Finance has taken on our long-term view. I appreciate his hands at the wheel on this particular file. I know it’s tough being the Finance Minister because everybody wants something. It’s a funny thing to have to be able to have to sometimes say no to people and yes to others and to figure out how do we make sure everybody gets something either in their constituency or which particular organization. When we look at things like the economy and where he notes about our 8 percent drop in 2008 and 17 percent drop. You know, one of the issues I keep raising is a stabilization fund for our revenues. When our corporate taxes or payroll taxes all seem to drop, I mean, it seems to put this government in a tailspin and in a panic trying to figure out how to deal with that.
Now, I know one of the discussions that keeps coming up in the background is this heritage fund, and I certainly welcome the development of that over the long term. But I still think a revenue stabilization fund could be created today with quite simple legislation that gives us the ability to respond to these types of things. We don’t have to go back too far in history when the issue of a corporate tax filer, you know, a prominent business decided that they were going to file somewhere else. And what did that do to this government? Well, the windfall taxes it had received years before all of a sudden now were being recovered. Of course, the strategy over the next number of years at that point was to figure out how are we going to pay that debt back owed to Revenue Canada, or I should say the federal government. Sorry.
Now, in this particular case, the economy had done a quick twist on us that… We’re in a difficult position to be able to prepare and be ready for the throes of how the economy can change so quickly. I mean, we’re quite fortunate to be, in some cases, the ward of the state when it comes to control by Ottawa because our revenues are relatively stabilized. I mean, they provide us, in approximate terms, three-quarters of our funding and we’re forced to come up with the other quarter. Ultimately, though, it has to do with a lot of creativity and some strategic thinking in order to balance year to year off. Of course, nobody really likes the concept of new taxes except those people who love taxes and certainly love other people paying them, that is. But the reality is that the cost of living here can only continue to handle so much. I mean, that seems to be the number one driving force of why people are leaving the Northwest Territories. It’s always about the economy. It’s always about what does it cost for a jug of milk. It’s always about what does it cost to heat your house. You know, it’s always those types of things. I mean, if we could sell the Northwest Territories just on the basis of opportunity, family relationship, quality of people, I mean, pristine wilderness, I mean, everyone would be marching to the Northwest Territories. But, I mean, even people who are able to find ways to get through the cold and say, well, but it’s the warm hearts that tie us all together and these wonderful relationships. So cold used to be the complaint, but it’s certainly not now. I think most Northerners just treat it as not just a fact of life, it is life here.
What it comes down to is the fact that the economy and the cost of living here continues to be the number one factor that our government is having trouble dealing with. I don’t necessarily expect them to pull out a magic wand and say, you know, well, we’ll make sure we can lower property taxes throughout the Northwest Territories, we’ll lower consumer taxes here, we’ll subsidize heating fuel. I know it’s not as simple as that. But I can tell you that when we do projects such as environmental investment, I mean, a lot of things that are going to help: our carbon emission, it’s going to help our contribution of lowering our GHGs. I think those are fantastic things. I like the way that the Hydro Strategy is going, and I think Northerners support that with full excitement, but a lot of these projects, when you’re cutting down to the nitty-gritty, don’t change the cost of living right now. I mean, I haven’t seen, at least I haven’t seen myself at least, one project where we’ve said that we’ve established a new way of doing business. What we’ve done is we’ve found a new way to make someone else pay and the cost has either been stabilized or has continued to rise. I mean, that keeps going back to our trouble, which is the cost of living. I mean, I think it’s at least the second year in a row, if not longer, that our population continues to decrease, and it doesn’t take a specialized consultant to tell us these types of things. I mean, all you have to do is talk to any industry out there to say why can’t you get more people working here. I mean, they’ll tell you on the street, whether you go to their offices, whether you meet them in the coffee shop, you don’t have to have a specialized announcement for a really great discussion. I mean, anybody will offer it, whether you’re at the Co-op or Canadian Tire; it’s the cost of living.
Mr. Chairman, other areas of concern that continue to be on the horizon that I’m not sure how we’re going to deal with are highlighted in the budget and it reminds me about the diamond crisis. But the diamond processing, the secondary processing is going to continue to emerge as a problem. In the rest of Canada it is showing itself as they’re trying to be more competitive than the Northwest Territories government can be, whether they can help set them up. I mean, when we’re competing against areas like Quebec who are willing to cover wages, help them with their transfer, I know it’s completely impossible for us to compete against that market. But yet it would be such a sad day for the Northwest Territories for our diamond cutting facilities to move out of the Northwest Territories when it was really here that opened it up to Canada. That’s such a profound thought that the Northwest Territories brought the diamond business to the world through Canada in a new way. I mean, the diamonds certainly surpass any other quality than I’m aware of that are found, mined, cut and produced, but I think that the territorial government still misses the opportunity of the valuation process and I think there’s a bourse process, I can’t remember the exact phrase to that. But, I mean, there are still a lot of developments that I think we need to remind ourselves what’s important. I’ve referred to it a number of times, but Israel doesn’t have diamonds, Antwerp doesn’t have diamonds; diamonds go there. The Northwest Territories is that sleeping giant in this network that why aren’t we taking control of this. I know it would take a significant amount of investment, but I think investors are out there.
Speaking to the issue of investors, I mean, the climate for investment here is very, very difficult. When you talk to the Chamber of Mines and they tell you in quite clear terms that it takes at least a good 10 years to go through a process to open up a new mine. You know, that tells me that our government should make that a priority, not just for them but it’s an economic priority to keep people working. I mean, it’s the same concern as Mrs. Groenewegen had today about how we’re not willing to bend over as far as we can and reasonably for Avalon. I mean, that will put people to work. People working are happy families. Happy families can afford to pay their mortgages, buy their kids the bicycle, put bread, milk, eggs, you know, you name it on those tables. I mean, they can take holidays, they buy cars, they watch TV, they heat their houses. I mean, people working are happy people. I guess it’s all about the strategy of how we wish to draw out and invest in a business in the Northwest Territories.
In my view, the power that’s flowing over the Taltson Hydro is not doing any good to anybody. As much as I support, and I certainly do support the extension of the power line off the Taltson to the diamond mines, because if we can make them more competitive, that means they will have more people working longer, and that darn right does support our economy. I think those are good things.
Again, back to people being self-sufficient. Working people are relatively happy people. It causes people to know where their focus is. So, Mr. Chairman, my time is running down and I have a lot of other issues that I’d like to discuss, but this go around I’m going to leave it quite short. As I mentioned, I’d like to think of my opening comments to the Minister’s address in two parts and I’ll certainly follow it up on Monday with some long-term concerns and issues that I’d like to see.
If I may leave on certainly a positive note, I think he has done a good job to meet many of our concerns. I know that Minister Miltenberger tries very hard to find wins for everybody in every sector, and there is that effort given there. As far as specifics that I want to leave off that I’m very happy about is the investment of the downtown health clinic. I think that is a clear if not an amazing foundation of a government saying we can do things better and we will do things better. That clinic in downtown Yellowknife will provide all the great services between testing to X-ray, will show efficient use of doctors and administration, and that’s the type of government I really believe in is finding new ways to do business smarter. In these times, that’s what’s expected.
So, Mr. Chairman, as I said, two parts to my statement and I’d like to leave that as the first part. I look forward to my conclusion to the second part on Monday at my next chance. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, committee.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I just want to share a few comments as well. The media said that was an all-encompassing budget. We all worked hard on it and we are to be commended to try to capture all the goals and wants and needs of all the regions and all the different interest groups, as well as bearing in mind, of course, the climate change and the green initiatives that in the long term should save us money.
Those are the same needs that I share for my constituency. We have grassroots organizations that are interested in green alternatives from geothermal to biomass initiatives, and I’m glad to see that in the budget. I will be working with the communities and groups, once the budget is approved, on trying to get some of these initiatives, some of the work done to get these projects up and running.
At the same time, government is to be commended for the capital items that are happening in the Nahendeh region. As well, I’d like to thank committee members for their support in moving forward on some really, really big initiatives like the Trout Lake Airport and the highway improvements that will be coming in the new fiscal year. I continue to be concerned about getting the contracts out early. I know that last year we had some really good capital projects, but because of capacity issues, we weren’t able to deliver them. My commitment to my residents and my constituents is that these contracts will get out of the gate early, like the chipsealing from the Providence junction and about 80 kilometres towards Fort Simpson, the completion of the highway from the B.C. border to Fort Liard, getting that reconstruction completed.
I just wanted to bring up another issue that had little mention in our budget, which is of course aboriginal language initiatives. It had little attention in the budget. As chair of the Government Operations committee, we spent considerable time in reviewing the Aboriginal Languages Act, and we delivered an all-encompassing report. I do see, of course, the need for government to completely and accurately assess all the recommendations that were in the report. However, Mr. Chair, it was my hope to see, at a minimum, a return to our interpreter translator or aboriginal language teachers be given support in the 2010-11 budget year.
At the appropriate time I will ask the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment perhaps, if there is attention in the specific line items. But at the same time, waiting for government’s response means that some of the recommendations, and very important recommendations about aboriginal language recovery, will have to wait until the 2011-2012 budget year and that is kind of disconcerting to me. Anyway, I’m hopeful that there is resources in this fiscal year and I’m hopeful that there is planning. Actually, I did hear there was some ongoing internal committee work in the department looking at how to best introduce and revitalize aboriginal languages. I’ll be paying attention to that this coming budget and I hope to see the strengthening and some resources in this fiscal year as we move towards strengthening our aboriginal language resources, our aboriginal teaching programs, that we can strengthen our languages and hopefully build towards that.
I’m pleased to see that I’ll be co-chairing with the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment at our language symposium that will be held in March. It’s going to be a huge event. There will be national and even international participation in this and how we best address our 11 official languages and support those languages. I know that our front-line workers are doing their best and they’re to be commended, but we do have to dedicate more resources. Hopefully we can do it in this fiscal year and not wait until 2011-2012 for the bulk of the restructuring of our delivery of our language services.
Those are just a couple of brief overview comments that I’d like to share at this time. Mahsi cho.
Thank you very much, Mr. Menicoche. Seeing no other general comments on the slate, perhaps I’ll call on Mr. Ramsay for any motions he might be considering.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that we report progress.
---Carried
Can I have the report of Committee of the Whole, please, Mr. Bromley.
Mr. Speaker, your committee has been considering Tabled Document 62-16(4) and would like to report progress. I move that the report of Committee of the Whole be concurred with.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. A motion is on the floor. Do we have a seconder? The honourable Member for...(inaudible)...
---Carried
There will be a meeting of the Economic Development and Infrastructure committee at the rise of the House today.
Orders of the day for Monday, February 1, 2010, 1:30 p.m.:
Prayer
Ministers’ Statements
Members’ Statements
Returns to Oral Questions
Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery
Acknowledgements
Oral Questions
Written Questions
Returns to Written Questions
Replies to Opening Address
Replies to Budget Address (Day 3 of 7)
Petitions
Reports of Standing and Special Committees
Reports of Committees on the Review of Bills
Tabling of Documents
Notices of Motion
Notices of Motion for First Reading of Bills
Motions
First Reading of Bills
Second Reading of Bills
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters
Bill 2, Forgiveness of Debts Act, 2009-2010
Bill 4, An Act to Amend the Child and Family Services Act
Bill 7, An Act to Amend the Summary Conviction Procedures Act
Tabled Document 62-16(4), Northwest Territories Main Estimates, 2010-2011
Report of Committee of the Whole
Third Reading of Bills
Orders of the Day
Thank you, Madam Clerk. With that, I’d like to thank the Pages for serving us here this week. This was a formal introduction to the Legislative Assembly. I wish you well and thank you again.
---Applause
This House stands adjourned until Monday, February 1st, at 1:30 p.m.
---ADJOURNMENT
40 p.m.
