Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday there were a number of Members’ statements and oral questions on revenue options identified by the Minister of Finance in September. Before I get into details, I want to acknowledge, first, that I know that the list of potential taxes proposed by Cabinet is not official. They are simply discussion points to help encourage us, Cabinet and the public to identify real and acceptable options to revenue generation.
What I don’t understand is why the Finance Minister would put forward options that clearly have negative ramifications, options that radically increase the cost of living for all Northerners, thus resulting in a mass exodus, or a potential mass exodus, from the Northwest Territories. These are options that most people, including many of the MLAs on this side of the House, will be unable to support. Why cause the unnecessary panic and frustration?
A territorial sales tax: it’s clearly a horrible idea. A hotel room tax: this doesn’t make any sense. Most of the hotel rooms in the NWT are being used by people from the NWT, and we would simply be recirculating money as opposed to bringing in new money. An airport departure tax: there is some merit to this, considering the number of non-resident workers who fly in and out of the NWT. Unfortunately, it also penalizes those of us who choose to live here. It is already expensive enough to travel out of the NWT. We simply can’t make it tougher.
The solutions to our financial difficulties should not focus on increasing taxes on our residents. Rather, they should be focused on finding ways to increase our population and ensure that we as Northerners get benefits from all the resource extraction that is current in the NWT. Has the Minister of Finance met with the diamond mines to ensure that they are meeting their obligations under the socio-economic agreements with respect to northern employment? Let’s reduce the number of fly in/fly out workers. Has Cabinet pursued the completion of legislation that will make it easier for local businesses to recruit international and foreign workers, workers who will move to and live in the Northwest Territories?
What progress has Cabinet made on getting the federal government to increase our northern tax credits? The rate for zone A has not increased in over 20 years. It’s time for an increase that will decrease the cost of living for all Northerners.
A resource tax: I keep hearing that we can’t get this done, that it can’t happen. Why not? It would be in the best interest of the people of the NWT and would bring in needed dollars from our northern resources. I keep hearing references to all the good things the government is doing to reduce the cost of living: $140 million in subsidies to help lower our cost of living. The problem is that these subsidies don’t help reduce the cost of living. Rather, they simply provide northern residents who are struggling with an ability to pay for the basic needs: housing, food and heat….
Mr. Abernethy, your time for Members’ statements has expired.
I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
Unanimous consent granted.
There’s not much left, Mr. Speaker; thank you. Has Cabinet pursued opportunities that actually reduce the cost of living in the NWT? If so, what are their options?
Mr. Speaker, during the last session the Members on this side of the House asked government to increase revenue in order to avoid cutting programs and laying off employees. Unfortunately, many of the revenue options introduced in September are not acceptable and should not be pursued.
Later today I’ll be asking the appropriate Ministers some specific questions on revenue options for the Government of the Northwest Territories.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I said yesterday, the problem with this government is it has a spending problem, not a revenue problem, and it continues to be obvious more so even today. I only wish there were a program like the Tree of Peace to send the Finance Minister to, to make sure he understands that, but we don’t.
So it’s about time this government realizes that you could lower the cost of living in government and do business better at the same time without raising taxes. We need someone over there on that Cabinet side of this building to understand that we don’t need new taxes.
Again, Mr. Speaker, we need imagination to solve this problem. This problem we face is no different from what I would normally call kitchen table economics. When money is tight in my house, we ask the question: what are we are spending it on? We take a look at the realities we live under, and we say: well, we can’t afford that; we’ll have to work around that. But this government does not take into account its spending choices and would rather consider laying off the public service and raising taxes than looking at itself.
The reality is here. This government has enjoyed the Dijon mustard lifestyle far too long, and it should start shopping at the Co-op, because that is just as good when times are tight.
Let me tell you again: good financial policies will encourage investments that will help grow our tax base in the North. They will encourage businesses to hire more employees. I hope the Finance Minister is listening.
Last week in my riding of Yellowknife Centre, the Shoppers Drug Mart opened up. It has hired 20 more people. That’s bread and butter economics that the Finance Minister should start to pay attention to, because those people will bring in new taxes and that’s additional grant money from the federal government. But, no, that’s too shocking, this new business trend to working with business and fostering this. We’d rather help subsidize, at a $140 million subsidy, than help people get jobs, because the system sometimes pulls them back into social programs instead of getting them up on their own two feet.
Mr. Speaker, where is the zero based program review? It’s been asked for, for about a year now, by this side of the House. It’s obvious that we wouldn’t want to rush into anything. Maybe the Finance Minister just wants to get to know about this good idea before he marries into it. Of course, we wouldn’t want to rush him on this issue. We’d rather tax first, from what seems to be obvious.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent at this time to conclude my statement.
Unanimous consent granted.
Mr. Speaker, we need a program review. Of course, it’s obvious we can’t review all the government all at the same time, but we could start, as other Members have said here, with two or three departments to see how we could achieve business by doing things better. It’s true that not all programs are bad, but let me tell you, a number are working properly.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, I don’t want to see us raise taxes just to bail out health boards to the tune of $217 million in write-offs without going to the taxpayer and saying: we tried our very best. We’re not trying our best. Pay attention, Finance Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Since most of us on this side picked on the Finance Minister yesterday, I figure that it’s my turn today.
Since The Publication And Promotion Of The Revenue Options Paper A Short While Ago, I Have Heard From Quite A Number Of People In Regard To The Proposed Options. From Their Comments Two Things Became Quickly Evident: the concern for the current high cost of living that they experience and a strong aversion to an increased tax burden on individuals.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The honourable Member for Hay River South, Ms. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also want to talk about the tax revenue options paper that was put out by the Minister of Finance — really quite an extraordinary waste of time. We might as well have been asked to go out and ask our constituents if they’d like us to poke them in the eye with a sharp stick.
Given the fact that the cost of living is at a historic, astronomical high level and we’re going into the winter season here, what a catastrophic waste of time to discuss this. If the government really had any ideas about a resource pact, then the time and effort would have been better invested in coming forward with something we could consider in that area.
Let me just read off a few of these here. Personal income tax, payroll tax, corporate income tax, capital tax, fuel tax, tobacco tax, insurance tax, liquor tax, sales tax, hotel tax, carbon tax, property tax, health insurance premiums, highway tolls, airport fee or tax. Mr. Speaker, obviously not a lot of thought went into this list. It was just throwing everything on the table, and now we’ve spent money bringing people in to talk about this.
Really, the only thing I’m concerned about now is that by putting such an untenable list on the table in front of us — perhaps when we have to react and respond in the predictable way that this is not going to fly — this government will then use our reaction, our response, to say, “Well, sorry; we can’t buy into any of these revenue options and any tax options,” which are completely unpalatable. Then we’re going to have to look at further program cuts. I hope that isn’t the sinister plot behind this discussion paper.
Let me state clearly for the record now that we aren’t going to be drawn into any such trap. We recognize that most of what you put on the table is a red herring. We’ve been down the road before on some of these taxes, and the Minister of Finance well knows that there was absolutely no appetite in the public. This is to add insult to injury at a time when we are trying to retain Northerners and recruit Northerners to our territory. Then to put forward even something as ridiculous as some of these suggestions…. Spend your time on something useful. Think what you can do about our resource tax.
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Item 4, reports of standing and special committees. Item 5, returns to oral questions. Item 6, recognition of visitors in the gallery. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
