Again, I’d like to tell the Member that in fact the evidence that is there would indicate that this is not a way to productively try to impact the cost of fuel in terms of affordability. The Conference Board of Canada has come to that conclusion, as have many esteemed economists, that in the long run there are major economic and social/political costs to that type of regime. At this point it’s not an area we have an intention of getting actively involved in.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for the Premier. They get back to my Member’s statement from earlier, where I spoke of the Premiers’ meeting in Montreal that took place yesterday.
As I mentioned, the Northwest Territories has fought long and hard to actually get a seat at the national table with the other Premiers from around the country. I believe it was in 1992 when former Premier Nellie Cournoyea became the first Premier of the Northwest Territories to actually sit with the other Premiers.
I was listening, like many Northerners, to Northbeat last night. The Premier was interviewed on why he chose to stay here in Yellowknife and not attend the meeting that took place in Montreal. The first question I have for the Premier today is: why was he not at this important meeting in Montreal?
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The Hon. Premier, Mr. Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the Member for that question. In fact, it gives me an opportunity to speak about the call I made to Premier Charest when the idea of the meeting first came together. I followed up with him yesterday after the meeting again to discuss some of the events that occurred and a direction being set and the call, in agreement with the Prime Minister, to hold a First Ministers’ meeting before Christmas. We’re hoping to get the dates on that soon.
The reason I didn’t make the trip initially…. As I’ve said, I confirmed with Premier Charest that I was hoping to make attendance at that conference depending on, of course, what happens in the House. As we know, in a consensus style of government, the Cabinet’s in a minority situation, and we must always weigh carefully the actions that are happening within the House. At that point, I decided my time would be best served here in our Legislature.
I thank the Premier for that. I’m glad he did get in touch with Premier Charest on the results of that meeting.
Like I said earlier, I think there is a good possibility that if the federal government starts running deficits, they’ll start choosing between deep program cuts and…. I’d hazard a guess that they would also take a look at axing programs. Possibly equalization might be included in that. Again, I want to make sure that the Premier understands the gravity of not being at this meeting.
I want to ask him again: what exactly warranted his presence in the House yesterday so that he couldn’t be in Montreal to discuss these key issues?
Mr. Speaker, I think the Member can answer that question by looking at the Hansard that was taking place, printed in this House, and what was happening. The fact is, in operating as we do, in a consensus style government we have to weigh the options of where we go and the influence we may have at a certain meeting. I kept in touch with the Chair of the Council of the Federation, Premier Charest, and followed up with him and will look to have another meeting with him directly in the weeks coming.
Mr. Speaker, I just want, maybe, to get the Premier to state on record: what exactly is his first priority? Is it the people of the Northwest Territories and the future of the Northwest Territories, or is it his constituents back in Inuvik?
Mr. Speaker, we know that once a Regular Member is elected to Cabinet, their constituents lose a certain amount of representation because of the new role that Ministers, including myself, play in representing the territory. The budget is a territorial document, and this House decides on that.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My final question. Given the gravity of the situation, the financial meltdown globally and the possibility that the federal government may look at cuts to equalization going forward, I’m wondering: why wouldn’t the Premier come to Members of the House and tell us, “I have to go to this meeting; I have to be at this meeting”? Why wasn’t that quoted to us? Why does the Premier make that decision on his own to stay in the House and not attend this meeting?
Mr. Speaker, in making a decision as to whether to go to any meeting, whether it’s provincial/territorial or FPT, in this situation one weighs all the options and tries to get as much information as possible. I was aware that there is going to be a First Ministers’ meeting with the same subject matter: the economy and the impact it will have on Canada. At that next meeting we will have the Prime Minister there, and that would lead to a more fulsome discussion about the initiatives that may be taken or may not be taken. That’s what I weighed.
In fact, as well, we had communications go down the hall to let Members know that I was intending to go to that conference. But again, Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, in weighing the actions that were happening within this Assembly, I had to make a decision as to whether to go or stay, and my decision was to stay.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I talked in my Member’s statement today about a concern about diesel fuel for transportation and the concern that shortage has caused. My question could apply to multiple Ministers, but I think maybe in this particular case I may ask the Premier for his perspective on the situation.
In this situation here we have a possibility of a shortage.... Well, actually, I shouldn’t say possibility. We know there’s a shortage in Western Canada. The question really is: when is this shortage going to creep up into the Northwest Territories?
I’d like to ask the Premier: from his perspective what can the Northwest Territories government, first, be informed about, what do they plan to do about it, and what role can we play in this situation?
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The Hon. Premier, Mr. Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We became aware even previously. Last year, for example, there was talk of a shortage across Western Canada. The announcement that the Member is speaking about was refinery issues in Southern Canada.
For our supply here in the North — for example, to our remote communities — that’s resupplied by our Petroleum Products Division. Their fuel is up to max on the diesel side. For example as well, within the Power Corporation, at the Yellowknife facility, we have surplus supply there. We’ve taken the necessary steps and actions to protect ourselves here in the Northwest Territories.
We know, as well, from some of the discussion that last year Inuvik had some problems with resupply and worked that out with the bulk agent there, or Imperial Oil, in fact. I’m informed now that they have a good resupply as well.
Mr. Speaker, I’m pleased to hear that the supply won’t affect the resupply process that happened already this summer. I mean, from a community perspective, knowing that you only get filled up once, maybe even twice a year if you’re lucky, you’re right: it has a significant impact. I’m glad that there’s stability there.
But, Mr. Speaker, there are things like food that have to be delivered to the Northwest Territories through the trucking system. There is home heating fuel that has to be delivered as well — things along those lines. That’s some of the issue that’s being raised here, the concern on the street.
I’m just curious. From the government’s perspective what can the government do to make sure that the food supply keeps moving if there starts to be a shortage that has an impact on that type of delivery?
Mr. Speaker, one of the things we’ve done in looking at the potential shortage is to make sure we’ve got our bases covered for our facilities and assets in communities. We would be prepared to work with the private sector if a scenario were to arise that there needed to be some movement there. Of course, we’d be working with that.
Mr. Speaker, the Member is talking about an “if” scenario, and it’s pretty hard to look at that option. We haven’t been contacted by any of the fuelling operations here — for example, in the capital — about any concerns.
Mr. Speaker, I guess it’s not so much of an “if” scenario as…. I mean, we plan EMOs for exactly these types of operations when something happens. I guess I’m really searching for the answer to how prepared the government is if this problem creeps into the Northwest Territories. Because, I mean, we get our food from places like Edmonton, Calgary and beyond, and that’s a reality if that’s a problem. If they can’t fill up their trucks there to drive north, it affects the reality we live in here.
Mr. Speaker, that’s the type of information I’m trying to get here. I’m not trying to embarrass anybody by any means. I’m just asking: are we prepared for that type of reality if this problem creeps up north, and is there any idea on how we deal with it?
If something were to happen, it may be a reality. The fact is we have looked at our areas where we have direct responsibility. In fact, when there was an issue about some shortages in the higher parts of the territory last year, the Department of Public Works and Services looked at routes Over the Top to look at resupply from other areas to ensure there was no shortage in the Northwest Territories.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday, I believe it was, in the House — or this week, at least — a couple of documents were tabled with respect to the Ministerial Benefits Policy and also a report respecting benefits to Ministers under that policy for the fiscal year ended March 31. Every term I believe that there is an independent commission struck to look at Members’ remuneration and benefits. I think that this commission allows for a cross-section of input and public participation for those who may wish to comment on Members’ benefits and pay.
The Members of the Executive Council actually are entitled to somewhat different benefits, and I was wondering if the Premier could tell us, please: how are those benefits and policies set? Who gets to vote on that?
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The Hon. Premier, Mr. Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Executive Council, as well as the Legislative Assembly Act, covers a number of areas. The Executive piece is following work that was done by previous governments and put into place, in fact, to kick in with this the 16th Legislative Assembly.
The work was done prior to this Assembly. It came into effect, and in fact, this tabling of this information is the first time we are putting it forward for information for the public.
I thought that the Cabinet actually made decisions on policies reflecting Ministers’ benefits. Anyway, moving on from there, I got the answer I thought was going to hear. I still don’t really know what the answer is. I don’t want to waste all four questions on the same topic, so moving on.
The capital living allowance for members of the Executive Council, I have no problem with that. Members are expected to live here on a full time basis, and that certainly requires a certain level of comfort and an amount of space. No problem. Home travel is absolutely reasonable. Members have got to go back to their constituencies when they serve on the Executive Council. But there are a few other benefits in here which I think are a little bit unusual. Cabinet Ministers are allowed to accrue sick leave and vacation leaves. I’d like to ask the Premier: what is the policy of this Executive Council with respect to actually paying people out for those benefits?
Mr. Speaker, we follow the same pattern as employees would have for annual leave, for example. Sick leave, though, is different. You can accrue that, but there is no payout at any time for that piece. Annual leave, there is payout for that, as there has been in previous Assemblies.
Certainly it did exist in previous Assemblies. Just to note the difference, though, Regular Members do not accrue vacation leave, and we certainly don’t get paid out for it at the end of our term, but Cabinet Ministers do.
Mr. Speaker, also under the Ministerial Benefits Policy there is something called an entertainment allowance. It is a non-accountable $1,500 annual allowance for duty related entertainment expenses. I would like to ask the Premier: is that over and above the already existing approximately $1,000 a month that Members receive? So they would get the Members’ $1,000 non-accountable plus the Cabinet Ministers’ $1,500 non-accountable expense for entertainment?
Mr. Speaker, maybe I should take a better look at my Members’ portion of benefits. The ministerial piece is $1,500 for the year, and it covers other expenses that Members who are Ministers would incur in their duties, whether it is in the capital or when they are travelling, to cover off some of the additional costs that one would run across.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.
I was wanting to know if it is over and above what Regular Members receive. I have to assume that it is, that the $1,500 is separate and for ministerial entertainment, as opposed to MLA expenses in that area.
Mr. Speaker, these questions went all too quickly, but do Ministers also have access to the departmental budget, credit cards, allowances for such things as entertainment?
Mr. Speaker, if a Minister — I’ll use ENR as an example — deals with a department issue and has a group of individuals or a conference, the department would pick up those costs on that side of it. The ministerial piece would be if the Minister himself were to meet with Members, for example, or Ministers from other jurisdictions on other related matters. But if a Minister is specifically meeting and that has been set up to deal with the department or deal with counterparts across the country on files within the department, the department would cover those costs.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to follow up on my Member’s statement on the Energy Priorities Framework by asking the Minister who is the lead for energy about why transportation was completely missed out here. We spend hundreds of millions of dollars every decade subsidizing highways, highway transport, and costs are continuing to soar. Greenhouse gas emissions are continuing to increase. What are we doing outside the box? Why aren’t we thinking outside the box, trying to lower our costs, coming up with low intensity greenhouse gas emission ways of transport and some long term solutions? Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. I guess I’ll go to Mr. Robert McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have a number of initiatives underway that deal with the issue of energy initiatives and also mitigating climate change, reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The greenhouse gas strategy that is being developed by the government would be looking at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We all know that transportation is probably, as the Member indicated, the largest sector in terms of producing greenhouse gas emissions, so that is the area we would be looking at.
I’m afraid I cannot thank the Minister for that; I didn’t hear an answer there. Clearly, this is a source of greenhouse gas emissions. We are talking energy issues here. This is probably the biggest single source of increasing the cost of living; let’s put it that way. What are we doing to come up with new ways of transportation that do not require hundreds of millions of dollars of investment every decade in highways and so on and that can actually reduce our costs? What are we doing outside the box that is creative and is actually going to decrease our costs and emissions from transportation?
Mr. Speaker, we do have the ecoTrust. That was the program whereby we provided incentives to NWT residents to reduce their costs. In this case we were providing incentives to people who were purchasing vehicles that were fuel efficient, and certainly that is one area where we are helping people. The Energy Priorities document, we sent it out for discussion. We are seeking input from the general public, and certainly if it is seen as a gap, we would look at it. I should point out to the Member that with the ecoTrust program and energy conservation, our focus has shifted more to energy conservation within the home. That is where we are looking at providing most of our incentives.
Mr. Speaker, thank you to the Minister for those comments. I don’t want to detract from the Energy Priorities Framework, because I think there is some very good stuff here. I think the Minister has pointed at the home environment and buildings. There are some very good things happening there. But as he has pointed out, transportation is the biggest source of many of our problems with our cost of living. So I’m hoping that some real outside the box thinking can be done there, some fundamental solutions.
One of the things I found missing was the development of local expertise on implementing some of these energy solutions that are a bit new. Perhaps the Minister could comment on what sorts of programs we will get going to make sure that communities have access to expertise for putting up solar hot water heaters or what have you. So I will just leave it at that and let the Minister use his imagination to come up with his ideas.
Mr. Speaker, that is an area…. We’re at a disadvantage. There are shortages, but we have been working with the Arctic Energy Alliance, which has been providing a significant number of programs to fill that gap. As part of our energy priorities this is an area we want to look at. As well, we will be working with the municipalities and the NWT Association of Communities so we can find ways to provide that expertise. Certainly through some of the federal programs there are a number of initiatives that could assist.
Mr. Speaker, thanks to the Minister for those comments. In the area of natural gas to communities for energy supplies, I’m wondering if the Minister would commit to giving serious effort to working with communities to come up with some sort of ultimate solutions rather than these interim fossil fuel solutions that could prove to be very expensive — leapfrogging, as many communities are choosing to do, to a renewable energy source — or at least giving that some thought and investigation.
Making natural gas available for communities is an area that we’ve been pursuing for some time now. Right when we first heard about oil and gas coming back to the Northwest Territories and people talking about pipelines, we commissioned studies to look at the potential for conversion to natural gas. Through the environmental assessment process we’ve indicated the need for the pipeline to provide for outtake so that we can convert communities along the pipeline right-of-way to natural gas. This is something we’re interested in. Plus we’ve updated our studies that were done approximately six years ago, so we have more current information.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. A final short supplementary, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thanks for the comments on that. I realize that they are narrowly economic, but I think we have many more win-win situations we could find here.
My final question is on the Power Corporation. Would the Minister commit to leading this government and doing a comprehensive and thorough review of the Northwest Territories Power Corporation, their work on the energy front, the possibility of restructuring and so on, to address many of the fundamental issues that we hear so much about from our constituents?
The Ministerial Energy Coordinating Committee is already working in that area.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.
