Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Thebacha, that Bill 5, Legal Aid Act, be read for the second time.
Mr. Speaker, this bill repeals and replaces the Legal Services Act and continues the Legal Services Board of the Northwest Territories as the Northwest Territories Legal Aid Commission. Transitional matters provided for in Schedule A of the Financial Administrative Act are consequently amended to refer to the commission. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Bill 5 has had second reading and is referred to the standing committee.
---Carried
Item 20, consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 2-17(3), Commissioner’s Opening Address: Creating the Conditions for Success; Tabled Document 17-17(3), Supplementary Estimates (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 7, 2010-2011; Tabled Document 18-17(3), Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 4, 2010-2011; Bill 1, An Act to Amend the Student Financial Assistance Act; Bill 3, An Act to Amend the Human Rights Act; Committee Report 1-17(3), Standing Committee on Government Operations Report on the Review of the 2010-2011 Annual Report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of the Northwest Territories; Committee Report 2-17(3), Standing Committee on Government Operations Report on the Review of the 2010-2011 Northwest Territories Human Rights Commission Annual Report, with Mrs. Groenewegen in the chair.
By the authority given to me as Speaker by Motion 2-17(3), I wish to hereby authorize the House to sit beyond its daily hour of adjournment to consider business before the House. Thank you.
I’d like to call Committee of the Whole to order. The Speaker has listed the items that are before Committee of the Whole today. I would like to ask what is the wish of the committee. Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Committee wishes to deliberate Tabled Document 17-17(3), Supplementary Estimates, No. 7; and Tabled Document 18-17(3), Supplementary Estimates, No. 4. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. We will proceed with that after a very brief break. Thank you.
---SHORT RECESS
Committee, we will reconvene and come back to order. We are dealing with Supplementary Estimates (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 7, 2010-2011. Mr. Miltenberger, do you have opening comments for us?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I am here to present Supplementary Estimates (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 7, 2010-2011. This document outlines an increase of $8.5 million for capital investment expenditures in the 2010-2011 fiscal year for the Department of Transportation to provide appropriation authority to record the valuation adjustment on the long-term debt associated with the Deh Cho Bridge Project. I am prepared to review the details of the supplementary estimates document.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Do you have witnesses that you wish to bring into the House?
Yes, Madam Chair.
Is committee agreed to bring the witnesses into the House?
Agreed.
Thank you. Sergeant-at-Arms, would you please escort the witnesses in?
Mr. Miltenberger, would you please introduce your witnesses?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I have with me deputy minister of Finance, Mr. Mike Aumond, and Mr. Sandy Kalgutkar, the deputy secretary to the FMB.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. I will open the floor for general comments. Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I welcome the Minister and his delegation from Finance here with respect to the supplementary appropriation. This topic of discussion did come up when we had discussions regarding the 2012-2013 Main Estimates, when a similar item appeared under the term “other” under the amount of $8.076 million. Maybe when we get down to it and maybe if the Minister wants to do any conclusion to summarize it here, what will be the changes down the road in how this would be predicted in future main estimates, I think would be one of those questions that we’ll need to ask, or if they want to answer at the end of general comments. Impact on future budgets I think is going to be something of interest in terms of how we’re going to deal with this. I’ll leave my general comments really brief, but in essence that’s what I’m trying to capture.
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Are there any further opening comments? Mr. Miltenberger, do you wish to respond? Mr. Aumond.
Thank you, Madam Chair. In response to the Member’s questions, we would expect to see more appropriations in main estimates for this line item but not the extent that you’re seeing here today. We’re playing catch-up here since 2008 to the present day for the value of the bond. We would expect appropriations in future years to reflect one year’s worth of valuations.
Thank you, Mr. Aumond. Did you have anything further, Mr. Dolynny? Are we agreed we will move to detail?
Agreed.
Committee is just getting the document so I’ll give people a minute to get oriented. Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I do appreciate Mr. Aumond’s explanation here. Now that we’re in details here, can we get a more detailed explanation in terms of if this is a sliding calculator in terms of value that we’ll be seeing over the life of this bridge? What is the lifespan of this so-called long-term debt? I know it’s associated with the bond, so maybe a little bit of an explanation as to what this number and how this number will affect budgets moving forward.
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Just so the record knows where we are, I’ll read the page we are on. Page 5, Transportation, capital investment expenditures, highways, not previously authorized, $8.5 million, total department, not previously authorized, $8.5 million. Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Kalgutkar.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The amounts that Mr. Dolynny was referring to that were presented in the 2012-2013 Main Estimates were the amounts for the two semi-annual payments that the government is making to the bond holders. The valuation adjustment is going to be another adjustment that we’re going to have to make on top of that, and that’s this non-cash adjustment to reflect on the present value of the principal balance of the bonds as of March 31st. The intent is, once the bridge becomes available to traffic, the Department of Transportation will start taking over those bond payments, so we’re going to move the budget from Transportation into the Department of Finance and then we’ll incorporate that into the business planning process.
Thank you, Mr. Kalgutkar, for that response. Interesting enough here, the mention of a non-cash adjustment and the other variable is the potential opening of this bridge in this fiscal year. Does this change how appropriations might come forward to this committee moving forward for this fiscal year of 2012-2013 in relationship to other long-term debts?
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Mr. Miltenberger.
No, Madam Chair.
Thank you to the Minister for that response. So just so that we’re clear here, is this a sliding scale calculation that’s done annually? Does this decrease per year or is this a very stable adjustment that we’ll see because obviously these bonds are tied more to CPI than interest? Are we as taxpayers going to be seeing this number repeat itself or is there a declining sliding calculator that goes into this number?
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Mr. Kalgutkar.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I expect because we’re making such low principal payments at the start of the amortization schedule, that the valuation at the end of the fiscal year will be slightly higher every year and, if I recall, it peaks at around the 2017-2018 fiscal year, and once we start making higher principal payments, then it starts dropping after that.
One final question to that. Has the department made a complete calculation of exactly all long-term debt costs in relationship to what we do know today, which is that $202 million? Has the department made the full calculations of how much long-term debt would be associated with this infrastructure and could that number be shared with committee?
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Mr. Aumond.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have an amortization schedule that I’ve prepared related to this bond and I’m prepared to share that with committee.
Thank you. Any other questions? We are on page 5, Transportation, capital investment expenditures, highways, not previously authorized, $8.5 million, total department, not previously authorized, $8.5 million.
Agreed.
Does committee agree we have concluded the consideration of Supplementary Estimates (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 7, 2010-2011? Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that consideration of Tabled Document 17-17(3), Supplementary Estimates (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 7, 2010-2011, be now concluded and that Tabled Document 17-17(3) be reported and recommended as ready for further consideration in formal session through the form of an appropriation bill.
A motion is on the floor. The motion is in order. The motion is non-debatable.
Question.
Question is being called.
---Carried
We’ll move on to Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 4, 2010-2011. Mr. Miltenberger, do you have opening comments?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I’m here to present Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 4, 2010-2011. This document provides an increase of $5.754 million for operational expenditures for departmental over-expenditures in the 2010-2011 fiscal year.
During the year-end process to finalize the 2010-2011 GNWT financial statements, adjustments are typically made to departmental expenditures to ensure the statements are prepared in accordance with Canadian generally accepted accounting principles. The 2010-2011 year-end process identified a number of adjustments that resulted in departments exceeding their appropriation authority.
Section 36(4) of the Financial Administration Act states that the Minister of Finance shall submit an appropriation in the form of a supplementary appropriation bill to the Legislative Assembly to finance any departmental over-expenditures resulting from the year-end process.
Appropriation authority is, therefore, being sought for adjustments in the following two categories of over-expenditures:
Appropriation authority totalling $2.569 million to account for the reallocation of previously expended capital investment expenditures to operations expenditures. The net financial impact on government operations is nil as the transaction does not represent any additional outlay.
$3.185 million to fund departments who over-expended their approved operations expenditures appropriations in the 2010-2011 fiscal year and thus require appropriation authority for the over-expenditure as required by the Financial Administration Act. These over-expenditures result from accounting adjustments made after year-end.
I am prepared to review the details of the supplementary estimates document.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. I will open the floor for general comments. No general comments. Is committee agreed we move to detail?
Agreed.
We will move to page 3, Justice, operations expenditures, community justice and corrections, not previously authorized, $1.915 million. Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Again welcome back to the Minister and his delegation here. If we can get a little bit more explanation as to this appropriation and more forthcoming, how much does this appropriation have to do with Nunavut and with anticipated revenue?
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Mr. Aumond.
