Mr. Speaker, I guess I would try to push the Premier to fast track this project if at all possible. It is obviously one that is very dear to everyone’s hearts, and we all feel it in our pocketbooks.
My last question. I don’t know whether the review is considering changes to legislation for the PUB, but I would like to ask the Minister what priority he puts on changes to the legislation for the Public Utilities Board.
Mr. Speaker, the PUB is, as well, part of this overall process that we would look at if there are changes that are required — again, the PUB as the regulator of the industry — and if we would look at any changes or how they would continue to, I guess in a sense, police the industry here in the Northwest Territories. That is one of the areas being looked at. We provide that to Members as to the direction we’re going in and seek either support or further work in that area.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Mr. Speaker, I’m all for, as I said earlier, leaving no stone unturned, but there is one stone you could turn over. Under it you would find the Robertson Report. We asked exactly these same questions seven years ago. We engaged the services of a gentleman named Jim Robertson, who is highly respected in the private sector and had been Chair and president of the Power Corporation when it was repatriated from the federal government to our territorial government.
I think what precipitated that review at that time may have been a struggle for the franchise. Maybe the NTPC wanted to take over the Hay River franchise of Northland Utilities, and I don’t think the good folks at Hay River were too keen on that idea. I shouldn’t say everybody; maybe some folks weren’t too keen on that idea. Anyway, the Robertson review was done. It answered a lot of these questions we’re still talking about today. How about getting it out and dusting it off? What was in there of substance? Did we act on any of the recommendations?
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Minister responsible for the Power Corporation, Mr. Roland.
Mr. Speaker, those types of reports have been dusted off and brought into this process. We don’t want to redo things and re-create things for further review; it’s taking the work that has been done. There were some substantial recommendations. Some of them have been acted on, but there are definitely more things that could be looked at as we progress here in the Northwest Territories, talking about next steps we would like to take. Reports like that are part of the review process.
I hope it will be a big part of it, Mr. Speaker, because to undertake a review of the scope and the comprehensive nature that is being talked about here today would be costly and time consuming. I think there were some very good recommendations in the Robertson Report that have not been acted on to date. I just hate to see redundancy and spending money if we don’t have to. Of course, there is always a bit of a political hesitancy on some of these things to make major moves.
I’d like to ask the Premier today if in fact, given the seriousness of the situation with the power rates out there in the Northwest Territories and the people who are struggling, you would make this a matter of absolute priority of this government to not.... Don’t leave anything off the list of things that we might be prepared to do or consider doing. Privatization of the Power Corporation — that’s almost a sacred thing, the Power Corporation. Nobody likes to talk about privatization. Will the Premier commit that we will look at any and all solutions, remedies, actions that could possibly alleviate the cost of power and the energy consumption in the Northwest Territories?
Mr. Speaker, as the Member stated, this area and the impact it has on the lives on individuals — commercial as well, when we talk about the small grocery stores in our smaller communities…. The cost of that energy generation is borne by the residents in that community. So, yes, it is a high priority. That is one of the reasons I have kept the Power Corporation as one of my areas of responsibility, to put the energy into it and push this along for a complete review. I will confirm for the Member that no stone will be left unturned when it comes to power generation and distribution in the Northwest Territories.
I do find myself in a strangely awkward position when it comes to talking about the NWT Power Corporation. The headquarters and many of the good folks who work at the Power Corporation are constituents of mine and of yours and we believe are trying to do the best they can under the circumstances, but the challenges are great, and as I said, I believe we need to look at every possibility.
To the suggestion that the Public Utilities Board may not be relevant in our jurisdiction: I wonder if I can get the Premier to comment on that. I believe that they do play a useful role. They are arm’s length from the government, and there has been a lot of talk today about the role of the PUB. I would like to get the Premier’s comments on that.
As we have in other cases looked at other jurisdictions, what they have done in the past…. Some jurisdictions have gone to deregulation, which got rid of their equivalent to the Public Utilities Board.
In our case, being a small jurisdiction, that would bring that decision-making to this table. I think Members will be under huge pressure — from the diversity of the territory and our constituents — in trying to deal with the Power Corporation rates in communities and management of that corporation. All we have to do is look at some of our other delivery mechanisms within the Government of Northwest Territories, and we are challenged in those areas.
I would say that we must be careful if there’s any consideration of, for example, removing any regulatory role in the Northwest Territories, especially when we’re going to look at the North and the future potential growth in the North when it comes to resource development in the Northwest Territories. I would be cautious in that area and say there is still a role for the Public Utilities Board in the Northwest Territories.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When the situation gets very grave in terms of rates in the communities, we have heard communities of larger sizes say, “We could go to another power supplier,” or “We could do better standalone. Let’s just get away from the Power Corporation.” To the issue of whether or not the Power Corporation holds the monopoly for the provision of power in the NWT community, we know that Northland Utilities has a group of communities that they service in distribution and in power generation. When it comes to larger communities like Fort Simpson, for example, and they say, “You know what? We can go to a service provider outside of NTPC,” what is in place right now to stop them from doing that? What have we done as a government to protect the NTPC as an asset of this government?
Right now legislation provides for franchise agreements. As well, commercial bodies out there can decide to develop their own power structures, which would take away the potential business, which would leave the rest of the residents of the Northwest Territories covering for the structure as it is.
It is an area of concern. The Power Corporation itself identified that even as far as a couple of years ago, looking at the commercial impacts of providing power to companies in the North, which then has the spinoff impact to the residents in the North. That is something that we are having to work with, and that is why we’re putting as much energy as we are into the Ministerial Energy Coordinating Committee and this line of work that needs to be done. I’m prepared to sit down with the Members and go through this in a thorough way.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In my Member’s statements from earlier I was saying how increasingly difficult it is for residents and Members of this House to continue to stomach the bonuses that are paid to senior managers at the Power Corporation. Last year it was close to $600,000. Given the fact that rates are rising again, will the Minister responsible for the Northwest Territories Power Corporation, Minister Roland, instruct the board of the Power Corporation to immediately put a halt to the bonuses paid to senior staff?
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Within the act itself there are certain arrangements that we work with. Even as the Minister responsible, there is a framework that I have to operate within in dealing with the board itself. The Public Utilities Board actually is one of the things that is reviewed, because that is part of the rate base and how they pay out those areas. The term being used with the Power Corporation is “at-risk system,” and the PUB, in fact, recommended that that level be reduced the last time it went forward.
The Government of the Northwest Territories owns the Northwest Territories Power Corporation. I think it is fully within our rights to instruct that board to stop paying out the $600,000 in bonuses like it did last year to senior officials at the Power Corporation, especially given the fact that many of our residents, especially in our smaller communities, cannot afford to pay their power bills. It is ludicrous that we allow that practice to continue to happen. Will the Minister instruct the Power Corporation board to immediately stop the bonuses paid to senior staff at the Power Corporation?
Mr. Speaker, the Power Corporation itself has undertaken a review from an outside source to look at the at-risk system. The PUB regulates that area and gives direction in that area, and they did the last review that happened.
The Member is right. As a Legislative Assembly we can give direction to the Power Corporation and make some movement in that area. We must recognize by doing that that it can have a fairly significant impact on their operation, as we would do as the Government of the Northwest Territories.
The other thing that residents in the Northwest Territories are going to have a very difficult time with is the fact that the current General Rate Application is premised on the fact that oil and world oil prices were $130 and $140 a barrel. That’s not the reality today, Mr. Speaker. I think the government has to instruct that board to revisit the current General Rate Application so that residents in the Northwest Territories are not going to be faced with these high increases in cost this winter. It’s not too late to say no to that GRA or at least revisit it, because those numbers that were included in the original GRA are not legitimate numbers today.
Mr. Speaker, the information that this has been filed has been put before the Public Utilities Board. They’re reviewing the information, and if they have concerns or questions with that, there’ll be further requests for backup information. Let’s be clear. The reason the rate rider has gone in is because it’s money spent. It’s not money that is about to be spent. We have already paid for a product that was higher than today’s price, and that is something that the Power Corporation is having to recover from.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That’s awfully hard for a resident in a small community to understand — that they’re paying more money today for mistakes or costs the Power Corporation incurred in the past. I think it has to be more forward looking, and I do believe that the current GRA that is in play right now needs to be revisited. It is premised on high oil prices and high utility costs today that just are not a reality. Can we open this up? Can the Minister instruct the board to revisit the GRA?
The General Rate Application has been put forward and is being reviewed. The numbers are substantiated, or if the request is for further substantiation, that would be done and provided for.
The area of just making an arbitrary decision from the political side can have far reaching consequences into the actual operation of our sole provider of energy in the Northwest Territories. There is another company that is into the distribution side, but that still comes from our Power Corporation. So we must be careful in setting an arbitrary target on a political basis. We need to back up our own information.
I’d be prepared to have the Power Corporation come before Members to give information on the General Rate Application — what it’s based on and why it’s gone forward — before we make any decisions.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Our time for question period has expired. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to return to item 8, oral questions, so I can have a question.
The Member is seeking unanimous consent to return to oral questions.
Unanimous consent granted.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have an oral question, and it’ll be for the Minister of Health and Social Services. It will be on the topic of medical travel.
I had a constituent contact me yesterday, and interestingly enough, I had another constituent contact me again this morning regarding almost an identical medical travel problem. Mr. Speaker, that is about when you get a non-medical escort approved through the doctors’ process. Medical Travel in one of the cases has refused to allow that person, even with a doctor’s note, to bring a non-medical travel escort south. In the second case the department doesn’t seem to want to pick up the cost other than the plane ticket of the person travelling on that non-medical travel escort path.
I just want to seek some clarity from the Minister of Health and Social Services. First, if a doctor puts into writing the need to have a non-medical escort travel with someone to the South, do we pick up that cost? Furthermore, do we pick up the costs associated with their hotel room and any other reasonable and responsible costs involved in that process?
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The honourable Minister of Health and Social Services, Ms. Lee.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Member has brought this to my attention. At about 1 o’clock today I asked my department to take a look at that and see what we can do in that situation.
Non-medical travel is not always approved, but I do appreciate the circumstances that the Member has brought forward, and I will commit to the Member that I will get back to him, hopefully by the end of the day.
I want to thank the Minister for that answer. Just further on that answer, if Medical Travel approves a non-medical escort to go south because of a specific need and a professional has requested that, would it be conceivably considered reasonable that we would pick up the associated costs? If we’re willing to pay for the plane ticket for them to travel down with somebody who requires specialized care, would it not be conceivable that we would pick up the reasonable costs of things like a hotel and meals?
The short answer to that is that if a non-medical escort is approved, then all of the incidental costs would be approved.
Generally a non-medical escort is approved where a patient needs a family member for physical support or for language support, where there might be some interpreter services. I understand that in this circumstance it doesn’t fall into either of the two, but that is a general situation where the non-medical escort would be approved.
I don’t want to give too much detail, because it is a very specific issue, so I’m trying to be as vague as possible, but the Minister is fully aware of the case. In this particular case, the constituent has to travel south for a very specialized reason. Once they’re finished what has to be done to them, in a medical sense, they’ll require specialized drugs to help them through the process. In talking to Capital Health, there’s an assumption that the GNWT won’t cover these specialized drugs, recommended by the specialists after they’ve received this very specific treatment. That concern is real for this family through this travel process. Will they be on the hook for it? So I ask the Minister: is it normal for the family to be denied this, or can I ask the Minister to have someone look into this very specific case?
As I have committed already, I am looking into this; the department is looking into it right now. I will get back to the Member by the end of the day. Given the privacy and confidentiality of the patient, I think I’ll just have to leave it at that, and I will get back to the Member.
Thank you, Ms. Lee. Final supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.
Although the Minister has said it a couple of times and I believe her, I just have one more element to add to the scenario. In this particular case the specialist in their group will be recommending that the specific patient stays for a few extra days for follow-up, which I would like to think is normal. Because it is considered at their request, will the Minister look in to picking up those types of costs? Because it is based on specialists making a recommendation, not in the context of a perceived holiday or an unwillingness to return after everything’s done. It’s based principally and only on the fact that it’s at the request of the doctor.
There are a lot of details and facts to this; it’s a highly unusual situation. I will get back to the Member. Because this is a non-medical escort, there are some additional questions and facts that we need to look into. We’re doing that, and we’ll get back to the Member.
Thank you, Ms. Lee. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to follow up on some of my earlier questions on the Public Utilities Board, if I could. Specifically, I just want to start by confirming that it’s the responsibility of the Public Utilities Board to ensure the fair treatment of our citizens with regard to the safe and reliable provision of power and fair pricing of power. Is that correct?
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Minister responsible for the Public Utilities Board, Mr. Bob McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Maybe I could paraphrase that and say that the Public Utilities Board reviews the cost applications by the electrical providers to ensure that the costs are appropriate and relevant. They do that through a number of processes, including public hearings, interventions and making the public aware of these applications for increases.
I appreciate those comments. I’m wondering if the Public Utilities Board — and this again is following up on my questions earlier — has any comments on the structuring of the Hydro Corporation in relation to the Northwest Territories Power Corporation and the Energy Corporation. Are they commenting on that, and what is your perspective on that restructuring?
At the time that the legislation was passed, the comments of the Public Utilities Board were not sought.
I’ll just hope I get an answer to the question eventually. I did ask if they are commenting on that situation, not about the past.
I’m wondering if it’s the perspective of the Public Utilities Board that the Taltson hydro facility is a facility that has been owned and maintained by the NWT Energy Corporation. Is it still owned, or has it been transferred to the Hydro Corporation?
It’s still owned and is a subsidiary of those companies that the Member talked about.
If the Taltson plant is still owned by the Power Corporation — and, of course, that means it has been paid for by our citizens through their power rates and so on — is it likely that their power rates will directly benefit from any sale of additional power, such as to commercial enterprises?
