Debates of October 26, 2004 (day 28)

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Time for question period has expired, however, Mr. Villeneuve, I will allow you your supplementary questions. Mr. Villeneuve.

Supplementary To Question 314-15(3): Taxation Of Financial Support Provided To Post-Secondary Aboriginal Students

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess I don’t know what would be better, a remissible loan or pay the tax on your grant. I’m not sure which, where the student would come out on top. The Minister said he has had some dialogue with the federal cohorts on this taxation issue. I’m just wondering what his department, as the Minister of Education for all our youth, aboriginal and non-aboriginal alike in the NWT, is doing to assist and help these treaty people to get a point across to the federal government that this is a treaty right and should be non-taxable. Whether it is a remissible loan, grant…

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 314-15(3): Taxation Of Financial Support Provided To Post-Secondary Aboriginal Students

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we’re not experts on treaty in the Department of Education, Culture and Employment and don’t claim to have that expertise. We would expect that it is in the interest of Canada and Canadians to make sure that the cost of education is kept as low as possible, and we would hope that that is looked at. But in terms of defining treaty, it isn’t something that I think this government is in a position to do, and I think that we want to be cautious about getting ourselves into that argument. As I’ve said, we have made sure that we are offering students the opportunity to choose whether they receive the money through remissible loan, in which case it doesn’t have to be paid back, so that if they get 100 percent of the dollars and never wind up having to pay it back, they can choose that method; or they can choose a grant and then their argument is going to be with CCRA over whether or not they have to pay taxes. That’s not one that we can intervene on directly, because it was one between the individuals, but it certainly is in the interest of all of us to see as much money as possible getting into the hands of students. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Supplementary, Mr. Villeneuve.

Supplementary To Question 314-15(3): Taxation Of Financial Support Provided To Post-Secondary Aboriginal Students

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I guess I had the remissible loan concept a little mixed up. I thought that was repayable, but I guess you have to come back north and repay it in the form of hard labour. I just want to get the Minister’s support, I guess, to help move this thing forward for aboriginals and treaties alike in Canada and the NWT, and I guess I’m looking at him to offer the NWT students some level of comfort in saying yes, they are going to maybe lobby the federal government to help them with this initiative and establish it as a treaty right, which I feel it is. I just want to get the Minister just to offer these people some level of support, that he do everything in his power to move the federal government toward a more reasonable approach to this whole taxation of student financial assistance. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. I don’t know if I heard a question there, but, Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 314-15(3): Taxation Of Financial Support Provided To Post-Secondary Aboriginal Students

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I could certainly commit to the Member that I would communicate to the appropriate federal Minister our concern about the impact that this change might have on the ability of students to be successful and ask that they take a look at their policy. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Before I proceed to item 7, written questions, the Chair would like to correct the record with respect to Written Question 49-15(3), asked by Ms. Lee, and contained on pages 2203 and 2204 of unedited Hansard. The Member incorrectly identified the Honourable Floyd Roland as the Minister to whom questions regarding the North Slave Correctional Centre were addressed. In reviewing the unedited Hansard, I note that the questions contained in Written Question 49-15(3) are all directed to the Honourable Charles Dent, Minister of Justice. Therefore, I have ordered that the requisite changes be made to Hansard and the official records of this House.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for correcting those errors. I have two sets of written questions. The first one is to the Honourable David Krutko, Minister responsible for the NWT Housing Corporation.

How much money was budgeted and has been spent out of the budget approved for the market housing initiative as of October 15, 2004?

Describe the work along with the dollar amounts for which the Business Incentive Policy was waived and for which the BIP was applied in this initiative, respectively.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Honourable David Krutko, Minister responsible for the NWT Housing Corporation.

How many market housing units will be installed, in what community and by when?

As of today, how many units are occupied?

By what professions?

What market research did the NWT Housing Corporation undertake to identify potential tenants and determine their needs/expectations before committing to the market housing initiative?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my written question today is directed to the Minister of Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development.

Could the Minister provide detailed information of the direct financial benefits the GNWT has received over the last five years as the result of oil and gas exploration programs in the Sahtu and in the NWT?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to table a letter I received from Lorraine Kuer, a teacher at Chief Albert Wright School in Tulita, which is signed by 19 staff and teachers in Tulita.

Mr. Speaker, the letter is addressed to the Government of the Northwest Territories and it describes the housing crises facing teachers in the Sahtu region and other small communities in the Northwest Territories, and it challenges the government to take immediate action to redeem the situation. Thank you.

Good afternoon, I call the meeting to order here. In front of us we have for consideration: Minister's Statement 48-15(3), Minister's Statement 49-15(3), Minister's Statement 54-15(3), Minister's Statement 68-15(3), and Bill 13. What is the wish of the committee? Mr. Menicoche.

Mr. Chair, the committee wishes to consider Supplementary Appropriation Act, No. 2, 2004-2005. Thank you.

Bill 13. Does the committee agree?

Agreed.

At this time I would like to take a short break here for about 15 minutes and then resume. Thank you.

---SHORT RECESS

Good afternoon. We’ll resume our Committee of the Whole meeting again now. At the present time we would like to ask the Minister if he would like to introduce any witnesses.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, please.

Does committee agree?

Agreed.

Can the Sergeant-at-Arms please bring in the witness?

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Dent. Would you like to introduce your witness for the record please? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have with me today the secretary to the Financial Management Board, Mr. Lew Voytilla.

Thank you. We are now on page 19, detail booklet of Supplementary Appropriation, No. 2, airports, special warrants, $3.4 million. Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In discussion on this item in the previous day, I believe the Minister of Transportation said that he would bring back some information regarding the relative comparison of CATSA’s investment in the Yellowknife Airport’s detection system. In asking for this information, Mr. Chairman, what I wanted to do was see just how Yellowknife was fairing in comparison to other airports that need to make an investment for security reasons. Has the Minister had a chance to assemble any of that information and give us a picture of just how Yellowknife fairs as far as the federal investment goes? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think that we’ve been told that the information is considered confidential because of security issues with CATSA, and CATSA will not agree to the release of the information. So it’s a situation where they have decided, I guess, that if we tell people what the value of investments are, that people can figure out how to get around that investment in security screening devices. So they have said that the information is classified, therefore, we can’t answer the question in as much detail as we would like to. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Mr. Braden.

Well, that’s a disappointing bit of news. It obviously takes away from the ability of this Legislature, and I would think others across Canada, to be able to make good decisions. We are handed a huge bill of goods, given the size of our airport and our population -- $11.2 million -- and we’re told pay it. There are good reasons for it -- security -- but I need to be convinced that as part of the Canadian traveling public and under the demand from a federal system, that we’re getting as square a deal or perhaps as bad a deal as anybody else in Canada. Mr. Chairman, I’m sort of layering this silence from the CATSA people on top of the difficulty we are having with our own Department of Transportation, which has had, I think by information we have been given, at least nine months to look at this. They are suggesting that up to $6.6 million may be recovered from airport user fees from the traveling public, but we have no idea how. So this program, as rushed as it is deemed to be, I think we’ve got, what now, Mr. Chairman, 14 months left. Unless we have this stuff built, hey, folks, nobody from the North is going to be able to land anywhere else in Canada. Fourteen months to implement an $11.2 million program that we have so very little detail about.

I’m really uncomfortable with the way this whole package is put together, Mr. Chairman. I have gone over most of my points yesterday so I’m not going to prolong this item, other than to put on the record my deep dissatisfaction with the way this is being put forward to the Legislative Assembly and, of course, ultimately, to the traveling public. It's not acceptable.

Shame, shame.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. I didn’t hear any question. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I’d like to make it clear, so that members of this committee understand, that the government is not being provided this information either. CATSA says that it’s classified information and will not provide information on the levels of security at airports across Canada. Each one, they say, is an individual situation. They are saying that no two are the same and that each one is based on the study of traffic, the volume and where the passengers are flying to and from. Then an individual solution is set for each one, but they won’t tell anybody what the levels of security are for any of the airports across Canada. We get this all as direction as to what must be provided if we want to be part of the national airport system.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Mr. Braden.

Mr. Chairman, I guess I’d just like a bit of procedural help here, and perhaps you could advise what is committee’s ability to deny or exclude this item from the bill. What kind of procedural options do we have in this respect? Thank you.

---Microphones Turned Off

Can I call the meeting back to order here? Thank you. In regard to Mr. Braden’s guidance, I have been told that special warrants cannot be deleted. In effect, they are information items. Amounts for items not previously authorized may be deleted. However, a motion to amend the bill would be required in that instance. Thank you. Mr. Braden.

So just to confirm then, there’s absolutely nothing we can do about this expenditure.

Thank you. At this time this item cannot deleted. Mr. Braden, it cannot be deleted. Thank you. I have next Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It’s quite nice that the government has spent this money and it can’t be deleted and we find ourselves in this position today. I know I made my points pretty clear yesterday, but I would like to add a couple of things. I just want to state for the record that I’d like a commitment from the government, you can criticize something to death, Mr. Chairman, and I’ve been critical of this expenditure, but I think the government needs to have a look at its airport, the grand scheme of things. I know there is a master plan that was developed for the airport property, and before we spend this money on the current terminal building, we have to ensure the residents of Yellowknife and of the Northwest Territories that that terminal building is going to be in its exact location not 10 years from now, maybe 20 or 25 years. We have to give them some type of guarantee that that building is going to stay there. Mr. Chairman, I haven’t seen that type of commitment. I see a government that is intent on spending $11.2 million and we know the government’s track record in terms of design/build and how things can quickly go off the rails. We don’t have to look too far to find examples of that, Mr. Chairman. So my concern is it’s going to cost the government probably $15 million, let’s just say, and it has to make a commitment to stay where it’s at. Why are we looking at moving the terminal building to the west side of the airport property, over by the sandpits and who knows what that would cost, probably over $100 million, Mr. Chairman? So I think the government has to let Regular Members here know, let the public know, that if we are going to spend millions of dollars on the current terminal building, it better well stay there for the foreseeable future, Mr. Chairman. That’s my concern in this and I’ll offer that to the government. You can be critical, but you have to be able to offer something, and that’s my solution to this is I don’t mind spending money if the government can commit to the terminal building staying where it is today.

One of the other things I wanted to mention, Mr. Chairman, while I’ve got the floor, is the airport today. In its operation today, one of the biggest issues that I find with the Yellowknife Airport is in scheduling. I know the government is not in the business of telling companies how to run their business and how to compete with other companies but, Mr. Chairman, it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me that airplanes take off and leave within five to 10 minutes of each other. That results in the airport being crowded. It doesn’t make much sense and I don’t know how we communicate that to the companies that are using the airport, but even if it was a half-an-hour or 45 minutes, Mr. Chairman, it would make a world of difference for that airport. It’s never busy except for one hour in the morning and one hour in the evening. That’s when it’s at its busiest and I think that’s something that we have to address too, before we rush off and spend upwards of $12 million on an expansion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I think I’ve said my piece. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Dent.