Thanks, Mr. Chair. I'm not really sure I have much else to say. I was trying to get it all within my time frame there. But once again, I do thank the Minister for his responses. I look forward to the information he has committed to provide. I'm glad he has agreed to have an inspector go out and check out the site, Mactung, for liabilities and I look forward to working with the Minister and this particular division to make sure that we have our devolution house in order to prevent this sort of thing from happening again. But I’m worried about what is going to happen with Prairie Creek as well. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is more a question or comment on process, but my understanding is that, notwithstanding the excellent exchange of questions between the Minister and the Member for Frame Lake, special warrants are not something that this House need approve. They are already at the discretion of the Financial Management Board or Executive Council. I’m just wondering if there is any further requirement to address this by this committee.
It's my understanding that we need agreement, and I’m allowing Members to make comments if they wish. Mr. Testart.
That's fair. I guess I object to that special warrant existing in here, because, even if we disagree, the money is still allocated. It's more a comment on process. I recognize that it is a change to debate and talk about it, but there are other avenues for that as well.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Finance Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, a decision had to be made on this, and there was a timeline attached to it so the decision was made to use a special warrant. As far as special warrants go, in future, with your indulgence I will have Mr. Aumond speak to that.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Aumond.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. On April 1, when the new Financial Administration Act comes into force, special warrants will no longer be part of the supplementary appropriation process. Instead, the Minister will simply table a report in the Legislative Assembly for any special warrants that were approved by the Financial Management Board between sittings, and then that report will be subject to debate in the House. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Aumond. Mr. Testart.
Thanks for the clarification of process. I think that is a much better option than the current approach. Nothing further, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. Thompson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Can the Finance Minister please explain to me why we bought it and why we did not allow them to use the bids? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, we decided to purchase it because the bids that came in were all very low. They were very low. We then purchased the property, and Canada agreed to be responsible for the remediation. Should the price of tungsten ever rise, we are sitting on a piece of property that could potentially be worth a few dollars. That's why the decision was made. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Thompson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm still a little confused why we would actually not allow somebody else to purchase it, to invest and work it, deal with this mine. We are just holding it and waiting for tungsten to go up. I'm still trying to figure out why we as a government would not just allow a company to purchase it and try to manufacture it from there. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Mr. Aumond.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Under the devolution agreement, the GNWT is required to make best efforts to maximize the value of the Mactung property, if Canada was going to accept Cantung, and so as the Minister said, the bids came in low. The GNWT was not satisfied with the bids. Canada certainly was not satisfied with the bids. So part of the decision-making process that was undertaken by the GNWT at the time was either to accept Cantung and all its liabilities, or to purchase Mactung. Canada then would accept Cantung with its liabilities and the GNWT could wait for the price of tungsten to increase, making that property more attractive, and get a better price than what they paid for it. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Aumond. Mr. Thompson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. If I understand this correctly, the Government of Canada said, “If you don't buy it, you are going to get stuck with the responsibility to look after the other mine and the issues with it”? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, Canada's position is that, if we didn't take best efforts to sell the property, then my belief was we were going to be responsible for the liabilities, so we had to make best efforts. We weren't pleased with the prices that came back. Canada wasn't pleased with the prices that came back. As a government, we made the decision that we would purchase the property, knowing that if we did, then Canada would be responsible for the remediation of the property, then if there is an opportunity, if the price of tungsten goes up, then we would move that property.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Thompson.
Can they explain to us why it came to be $4.5 million? It seems to be kind of a random number. Could the Finance Minister please explain to us how they came up with this number?
Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Minister McLeod. Sorry, Mr. Aumond.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.In the beginning of the CCAA process, when it became apparent that the Mactung property was going to be put up for sale, the assessment at the time was that it going to cost approximately $4.5 million to secure that property. That was the amount of the special warrant. Fortunately, the process came through, and I believe the Mactung property, including all the other costs associated with purchasing that property, has come in at around $2.5 million, which is about $2 million less that the special warrant that was approved, and so the charge is now well below the $4.5 million. The Department of Lands will be lapsing the remaining amount, or the difference between what it paid for the property, around $2.5 million. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Aumond. Mr. Thompson.
Just to clarify, it's coming out to be $2.6 million, the special warrant is for $4.5 million, and at the end, the difference is going to be actually back into the government, so it's not actually that amount? It's actually the $2.6 million, correct?
Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Minister McLeod.
That is correct, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Thompson.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
No one else on my list. We will continue to review the details. Lands, capital investment expenditures, operations, special warrants, $4.5 million.
Agreed.
Lands, capital investment expenditures, total department, special warrants, $4.5 million.
Agreed.
Does the committee agree we have concluded consideration of Tabled Document 3-18(2)?
Agreed.
Mr. Beaulieu.
I move that consideration for Tabled Document 3-18(2), Supplementary Estimates (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 4, 2015-2016 be now concluded and that that Tabled Document 3-18(2) be reported and recommended as ready for consideration in formal session through the form of an appropriation bill.
A motion is on the floor and is being distributed. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour. All those opposed. The motion is carried.
---Carried
Moving on. Committee, we have agreed to consider Tabled Document 4-18(2), Supplementary Estimates (Operational Expenditures), No. 3, 2015-2016. Does the Minister of Finance have any opening remarks?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I am here to represent “Supplementary Estimates (Operational Expenditures), No. 3, 2015-2016.” This document proposes an increase of $19.9 million in operations expenditure for the 2015-2016 fiscal year. The most significant items in the supplementary estimates are a total of $16.4 million for the Department of Health and Social Services for funding for increased program costs, including $6.7 million for costs related to adults and children in care in southern facilities, $6.3 million for costs associated with NWT residents being provided hospital and physician services in other jurisdictions, $1.8 million in costs related to costs for extended health benefits and Metis health-benefit programs, and $1.3 million for costs associated with the Medical Travel Program; $3.3 million in funding for the Department of Education, Culture and Employment, due to increased client uptake in the Income Assistance Program. That concludes my opening remarks. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. We will proceed to review the supplementary estimates by department. We'll start on page four, Education, Culture and Employment, operations expenditures. Sorry about that. Minister McLeod, would you please introduce your witnesses.
To my left I have Mr. Mike Aumond who is deputy minister of Finance and secretary to the Financial Management Board. To my right, I have Mr. Sandy Kalgutkar who is the deputy secretary to the Financial Management Board.
Are there any general comments on the document keeping in mind we will be reviewing it section by section. Seeing no general comments, we will proceed to the first section. Department, Education, Culture and Employment, operations expenditures, income security, not previously authorized, $3,611,000.
Agreed.
