Thank you, Mr. Nakimayak. Next I have Mr. Blake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just getting to the single-window service centres, the GSOs are really important to all the communities that have them. I know they are part-time but hopefully we could look at possibly -- communities that have a huge workload, for example, whether it's Fort McPherson or Aklavik, larger centres like this, maybe we could go full-time, that would be great.
As you know, having this service for the communities is very important. They help a lot of our elders and people in the community fill out any forms. As you may know, every year the elders have to fill in their home heating subsidies and need help with their taxes and all this, so they really do a good service to the communities and it would be nice to see some of the larger places going full-time in the future here. It is a good program that I hope continues over the years.
You know yourself, the department has won a few awards for offering this service and I sure hope this continues. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Blake. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I think my colleagues have spoken very, very well on this and on the achievements of the department today.
One thing, we are, of course, looking at a brand new department of the Executive that is now merging with previous Aboriginal Affairs, and I do want to commend the name change, Executive and Indigenous Affairs, bringing our language terminology in line with the new national standard, which I think shows a great deal of respect and sympathy towards Indigenous peoples across the country and of course here in the Northwest Territories. I think there will still be some terminology to work out within government policies but this is a welcome shift towards modernizing our language towards reconciliation.
I also want to talk about GSOs, but in a different context. I really like this model of service-oriented government support for communities. It's an award-winning service and it should be in our larger centres as well. I know the Premier is well aware of this, and so is the department, I'm sure, as that is something I bring up often, but we really need to start figuring out how to get this done.
Many of my colleagues, the honourable Members who represent Yellowknife ridings, are constantly doing that kind of work, the GSO work, and also colleagues from regional centres as well, and it would be helpful if our constituents as well could benefit from the same resources that a single point of entry to accessing the government services can provide. You know, it's not enough just to say we have headquarters in Yellowknife so it's easy to get help; it can be incredibly complicated and many people need integrated support services. Whether they're trying to open a business or get support for complex social needs or even fill out registration forms, that kind of help is really required, and particularly for the many seniors we have in our communities.
So I do think that as much as we can point to this department as one that has experienced a lot of success in that program and other programs. There is still work to do and not a lot of drive to do it at current, so we still need to take action on making our government a service-oriented government that puts the priority of how government programs affect people and can be accessed.
The Indigenous rights agreement side, I think that is another way we can move forward, especially combining it with Intergovernmental Affairs so we can develop a cohesive approach with our federal and territorial partners and Indigenous government partners. So these are all good things.
I do caution, though, that we are looking at a very new org chart with a very different structure than previous, and where when Indigenous Affairs was a separate department there was perhaps more of an ability to take a focused approach to that work and report directly to a Minister responsible who is often the Premier.
Now, that is going to change, with that position reporting directly to someone inside the public service, and that may have unintended consequences; and I think, again, this is another amalgamation that is driven by cost-savings and not by efficiencies.
I think we are beyond the point where we can debate whether or not that is a good idea, but we certainly can hold the government accountable to the decision to do this amalgamation and we will be watching. Hopefully, it will provide the kind of fast tracking to some of these policy areas that this amalgamation is supposed to improve.
So I have my concerns, but we will see how they roll out in the future. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am not sure that there is much left to be said, but one thing that I did want to touch on that maybe has not been touched on directly is the implementing the GNWT's Federal Engagement Strategy. I have been happy to hear comments in recent weeks and days, in fact, that have come from the Premier with regard to even reaching out now to our sister territories in developing and working toward a pan-territorial strategy toward sustainability and resource development.
I think it is high time that we make a concerted effort to really work closely with the federal government in building our identity as the North and having that identity built into the nation's vision somehow so that we are not in this constant state of flux that wherever, whatever, federal government of the day happens to be in power. It kind of seems to be having major impacts on the North and ultimately it has major impacts on who we are and how we define ourselves.
To that end, in order to have confidence to walk into Ottawa with our sister territories, I think it is important, as all the previous speakers have alluded to here, to make sure we have our own house in order, and that of course means settling our Indigenous rights and getting self-government under way so that we can get over this, I'll call it, fragmentation and build unity and go collectively as one unified territory.
Respectfully, you know, there are obviously five regions throughout the territory with a number of individual characteristics of each that have to be respected, but we have to start to build a vision of our own of this territory. We have to collaborate that with our sister territories and march that into Ottawa and start to build upon the vision for Canada and how Canada sees the North going forward.
So those are just some additional comments. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. I think I neglected to welcome the witnesses to the Chamber, and especially Mr. Courtoreille. I know this is his first appearance in front of the committee, so I would like to welcome him. Mr. Premier, you have 10 minutes to respond if you wish.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair, and I do not think I will use the whole 10 minutes, but I can respond by saying that I am very pleased with the progress that we are making with regard to negotiation of land claims and self-government agreements. In almost every instance we are making significant progress, and I expect that, by that end of the 18th Legislative Assembly, we will have significantly advanced every land claim and every self-government to the point where they are almost all concluded, and I look forward to that.
With regard to self-government, the second self-government agreement and the first self-government community, we are working very well with Deline. We have an implementation committee that is advancing very smoothly and implementing their self-government land claim. As part of the resolving and making progress on land claims, we have two MSR reports that we expect will be submitted within the next week or so, and the Government of Canada and ourselves will sit down and work on a path forward and we will engage with the Aboriginal governments. I think we have had very good discussions with both the Akaitcho, the NWT Metis Nation, and the Deh Cho First Nations. So we have changed our new approach and I think that with that with the MSR reports that will allow us to move forward.
On the GSOs, we are very pleased with the GSOs. I think that we are continuously making progress. We have pilot projects with the Government of Canada in three communities where they are funding the costs and in three communities where we provide services on behalf of the federal government. So we expect, once the pilot project is done, we will be able to assess it and I expect that we will be able to use that approach in other communities. Certainly, we want to look at whether more of these positions can be full-time. The larger centres, I think we need to review that, you know, whether we go to a federal model or the service centres approach.
On Federal Engagement Strategy, we have been following exactly pretty closely what the Member has been saying, where the three territories are going to work together. Then we are going to meet with the Prime Minister as well, and the Prime Minister has reassured us that what the three territories develop will be the foundation for the Arctic Framework. We express our concerns that, to us, the Arctic is the three northern territories. The federal government is also involving Quebec, Newfoundland, Ontario, Manitoba, so they see them as having northern areas as well.
We just have to make sure we do not get lost in that process as well, but the federal government has given us some very good signals that the three territorial governments represent the Arctic in the three territories, so we are pleased with that and we are looking forward to coming up with pan-territorial sustainability and economic strategy. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Committee, we will begin consideration of the document. The department starts at page 93, but as always we will defer consideration of the departmental total until we consider each activity individually. The first of six activities is on pages 99 to 101, Cabinet support. So $1.6 million activity found on pages 99 to 101, Cabinet support. Comments of questions? Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. What is the operational relationship between the Public Utilities Board and the department? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This department just provides administrative services for the Public Utilities Board. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. Testart.
Although we are not directly referring to the section, the Public Utilities Board on the org chart is under the Minister responsible, who in turn is under the Premier. Does that have any kind of structural implications? The independence of the office is obviously established by legislation, but does the Premier have direction over the Minister responsible when issuing policy direction to the Public Utilities Board or does policy direction come from the Minister responsible? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Minister provides policy direction to the Public Utilities Board. We provide administrative services, so we handle the contracts and whatever pay that the board and board members are entitled to. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. Testart.
Thank you. Is this where the Office of Priorities and Planning is located as well? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Premier.
There is a separate division, called priorities and planning, which is later on in the document, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, premier. Priorities and planning is activity six of six in this document. Anything further? Mr. Testart.
No, thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. While we are on the subject of the Public Utilities Board, what is the long-term plan for this board? I know that fairly significant and prescriptive policy direction was just issued by Cabinet to the Public Utilities Board. Is it the plan of Cabinet to get rid of this board? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. There is no plan to change the Public Utilities Board. What the Member is referring to is what the Public Utilities Board is doing its job. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I appreciate that answer, but it was fairly prescriptive policy direction in terms of items that are going to come before it. Why bother having a Public Utilities Board if we are going to issue that sort of direction? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Premier.
We are just following the procedures as laid out in the mandate of the Public Utilities Board, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I am not sure that was actually an answer, but I will try maybe a different way. There was very prescriptive direction in terms of how the Public Utilities Board is to deal with electricity rates that really limit the board's ability to exercise its jurisdiction. I am just curious to know if we are going to continue to do that Public Utilities Board, why bother having a board? Just get rid of it, and you can decide internally how to set the rates through ownership of NTPC or whatever. Why bother having a Public Utilities Board if we are going to continue to issue that detailed prescriptive policy direction? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. There was some previous direction with regard to rate rebalancing, which adds significant negative impacts on rate payers in some of the communities, so it was felt that it was in the best interest of all to lighten the impact. Certainly, if committee feels we should look at getting rid of the PUB, if we get that recommendation from committee, we will look at it. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. Just to be clear, I am not advocating doing that, but once again, the Regular MLAs were not told about this. Our advice was not sought. This was not brought before standing committee. It was something that Cabinet went off and did on their own. What is the future of this board? Is the Premier prepared to bring some sort of an options paper or start to engage the appropriate standing committee on this before issuing further policy direction to the PUB? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. As I said, if the committee wants us to change the operation of the Public Utilities Board, we would be prepared to look at it if the committee recommends it. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. That is great that the Premier is looking to the committee for direction, but Cabinet itself has already changed the way the PUB operates by issuing this binding policy direction without bothering to consult the standing committee. Will the Premier commit to consulting with the standing committee before issuing further direction to the PUB? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I believe I responded to that question that the procedures are in place. If the committee wants us to change it, we would be pleased to do it if the committee make a recommendation to do that. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I will try one more time. Before the Premier or Cabinet or the Minister responsible issues further policy direction to the Public Utilities Board, will the Minister consult with the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We would be pleased to respond to recommendation from committee on that matter. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I can see I am not going to get anywhere with this because the Premier does not want to answer the question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. That is all I have.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Seeing nothing further, I will call this activity. Executive and Indigenous Affairs, Cabinet support, operations expenditure summary, total activity, $1,625,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
