Merci, Monsieur le President. That's welcome news from the Minister. I look forward to the strategy. Lastly, in my Member's statement, I spoke about lessons learned from the Mackenzie Gas Project about putting all of our eggs in a non-renewable resource mega-project basket. We learned about trying to cut corners on project assessment; that eventually sort of comes back to bite you. Perhaps the biggest lesson is the need to move past oil and gas to diversify our economy. I would like to know from the Minister: what lessons has he learned from the demise of the Mackenzie Gas Project?
You can answer this a number of ways. I'm going to answer it the way I want to answer it. First of all, the demise of the Mackenzie Gas Project was due to the current market prices of the day. It went from $11 down to $1.90. Market prices dictated that they shut down. At the same time I think some of the lessons learned, and the Premier has talked about this a number of times when we're travelling around is the Aboriginal Pipeline Group, how good that was. It was the heart and strength of that initiative, and it is a landmark partnership that, when we're out there speaking to the public, and travelling around, and doing FPTs, it's a model for future development, not just in our territory, but the country could take as an approach, as to how they can move some of these big, large initiatives forward. The other side of it, too, is the environmental process, how long it's taken. Seven years to get this initiative through is way too long. I'm glad to see the federal government come out with their new legislative proposals or initiatives coming forward with environmental regulations. It's going to be a two-year process, max, on some of these initiatives, and that's going to bring some of these projects forward. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Nahendeh.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the second part of my Member's statement briefly talked about accessing traditional Dene treatment or Dene medicine, and there seems to be some confusion on how they can access that when I was talking with the elders in Fort Liard. My question for the Minister of Health and Social Services, Mr. Speaker: presently it is my understanding that medical travel only covers travel to the NWT borders, when they are accessing traditional Dene treatments. Can the Minister of Health and Social Services please confirm what the process is and how it is done? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Minister of Health and Social Services.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, medical travel doesn't actually cover travel for individuals who wish to attend traditional Dene-type healing in the Northwest Territories, or even outside the Northwest Territories. However, the federal NIHB program may actually cover some of the transportation costs, offer individuals to access traditional healer service, but that must be preauthorized by Health Canada's First Nations and Inuit Health Branch, so they need to apply through NIHB. It is not something that is currently covered through GNWT or Medical Travel.
That is really great information to understand and hear. Will the Minister be willing to get that information or show us where we can get this information so that we can share with the residents of the Northwest Territories?
Yes, absolutely. Certainly, and, as a note, we do administer NIHB on behalf of the federal government. We do not make program decisions. We do not make fundinglevel decisions, but we do administer it, and I do know that staff are happy to help individuals fill out applications if they are interested in pursuing these types of opportunities, either in the North or the South.
I thank the Minister for that answer. I guess I am just looking for: are there some information packages that he can share with us so that we can share it with our constituents?
Mr. Speaker, the information on the NIHB, the NonInsured Health Benefits, is online. It is available. I am happy to sit down with the Member and find out exactly what he is looking for as far as content and to figure out how best we can flow that information through MLAs on both sides of this House so that our residents who are interested can certainly apply for support through NIHB. As I indicated, they still have to get prior approval, so we can help figure out that process for residents, as well.
Oral questions. Member for Nahendeh.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I will work with the Minister and sit down and talk to him about it to try to get some more information for the constituents. Maybe I will be able to share with other Members who are interested, so I thank the Minister for that commitment.
Has the department, Mr. Speaker, looked at bringing Dene healers up from down south to help residents, especially elders, when it is regarding their concern for their health? I will just leave it with that question, there.
I look forward to working with the Member to help get some of that information. There are, unfortunately, some limitations. I understand that NIHB will only cover individuals as far as provincial boundaries or borders, which actually, I think, goes to the Member's second question.
In the Northwest Territories we want to support traditional healing and wellness. We want to do things differently, and up until now there really has been nothing done to support traditional health or wellness in the Northwest Territories. We are trying to change that right now. We want to have more options for residents, and I think it is really important to recognize all the incredible partners out there who are doing work.
The Arctic Indigenous Women's Foundation is doing really important work to bring traditional wellness and healing to the Northwest Territories. We are working with them by making space available on the Stanton campus so that they can move forward with the wellness compound, wellness complex. We also are working with a group, I believe, in Fort Good Hope to test some models of some traditional healing opportunities in the Sahtu. The Stanton Hospital is getting ready to pilot an eldersinresidence program to bring more traditional healing and wellness.
We have put together a terms of reference in partnership with Indigenous governments from across the Northwest Territories to form a wellness advisory group to provide advice and guidance to us on how we can better incorporate traditional healing and wellness into our system as a whole so that people do not even have to look outside to programs and services in the South, that we can truly be an integrated system here that incorporates both traditional as well as western medicine to provide holistic care for all residents of the Northwest Territories.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Kam Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, there have been a lot of concerns raised by Indigenous activists about the integrity or procedural fairness in our justice system. I would like to ask the Minister of Justice if he has taken any steps to review these concerns and how they apply to our role in the Canadian justice system? Thank you.
Masi. Minister of Justice.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I cannot, of course, and it would be improper for me to, discuss any specific case before the courts, but there has been a good deal of commentary about the jury system across Canada. I can advise that I have been thinking about this issue and would like to hear from the public and also from members of the local bar who practice in this area. I am a little concerned that radical changes to the jury system would be ill advised. This system has served us well for a thousand years.
I do have some familiarity with the jury system, as the former jury administrator for this government. I am pleased to hear the Minister is considering opening this discussion up to the public. Is this just an idea he is having, or is he planning on launching some sort of public consultation on these, the issues that have been raised around fairness in our justice system?
No, I was not thinking of having a public consultation. I, too, have a good deal of experience with the jury system and have found that it has worked very well in our jurisdiction, dealing with many jury trials in my home community of Fort Smith and also in at least one or two other communities. I certainly will, and I often do, meet with members of my profession and would like to hear from them. Certainly, if the public wishes to write me or contact me in some way, I would also be interested in hearing their concerns, but I am not planning any formal public process at this time.
I appreciate this is a sensitive issue, but it is also an important issue, and people need to be heard. I might be asking the wrong Minister, but if the Minister could talk to the Minister responsible for Public Engagement and perhaps consult with that Minister to develop a consultation, a round table discussion, anything really, it does not have to be terribly expensive, but can the Minister commit to having some sort of public engagement around these issues and the broader issue of reconciliation in the Northwest Territories and Canada?
Of course the legislation, the criminal legislation, is a federal concern, and I think that it would be more appropriate for the federal Minister to be addressed in this area. The Member also alluded to the broader area of reconciliation, and Members will know that the Government of the Northwest Territories is dedicated to that concept of reconciliation.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Kam Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just because it is a federal issue does not mean we do not have a responsibility to raise these issues that are being raised by our constituents and by people who are leading rallies and protests outside this building to get our attention, so will the Minister commit to bringing this to the federal Minister of Justice or to the FPT table to see if there can be a national conversation or see if the NWT can join the national conversation, and if he can find a way to do this without delay? Thank you.
I imagine this matter will be discussed at the next FPT so, should it be on the agenda, certainly we will be involved with that discussion. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. I would like to continue the conversation that I had yesterday with the Minister of Lands on mine site reclamation. Yesterday he said that he was sure that GNWT had not given any kind of a release or indemnity to TerraX with regard to work that they may want to carry out at the Ptarmigan Mine site, so I am wondering if the Minister would be willing to check with his federal counterparts about whether the federal government had issued any kind of indemnity or release to TerraX with regard to their work on the Ptarmigan Mine site? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Minister of Lands.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the Member for his question, but must take the question as notice.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Infrastructure regarding the Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT) Sole-Source Contracts Report for the period April 1 to December 31, 2017. They ask for a rationale for contracting on a sole source basis for specific goods and services.
Could the Minister please provide:
With respect to sole source #02865 for $7,200,000 and #2922 for $14,800,000 with Imperial Oil Ltd for the supply of petroleum products, an explanation why this purchase was necessary through sole-source purchase and not by public tender;
With respect to sole-source #2949 for $200,000 with the Inuvialuit Development Corporation for “as and when financial advisory services,” an explanation of the specific scope of these services and why they are not sourced in-house from GNWT advisors;
With respect to sole source #3559 for $10,130,000 with Offshore Recruiting Services Inc. for the Marine Transportation Services, an explanation of what is meant by “offshore recruiting services”; and
With respect to sole-source #2811 for $855,000 with Fireside Project Management Inc. for a Stanton Territorial Hospital Renewal project manager, an explanation of why this function was not fulfilled with GNWT in-house resources or by the Boreal Health Partnership.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Written questions. Member for Nahendeh.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to seek unanimous consent to go to item number 5 in the orders of the day. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank my colleagues for allowing us to come back to it. I would like to welcome a longtime friend Steven Cooper to the Assembly. Steven is the lead counsel for the Labrador residential school claim and currently the counsel for the 60's Scoop class, and most recently, the Indian Hospital Case Act. As well, I'd like to recognize Andrew Geisterfer, and I apologize if I got your name wrong that way, but who is in the process of becoming a member of the Law Society of the NWT and Nunavut, and this is his first trip to Yellowknife. Welcome.
Masi. Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Member for Kam Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to recognize my constituent, Ms. Kelly Martin. Thank you.
Masi. Recognition of visitors in the gallery. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. It's been a busy week, and I forgot earlier to mention that there's a Page from my constituency serving in the Assembly, so I would like to recognize and thank Sarah Cassaway for her work and for all the work of the Pages during this very busy budget session. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I have a Return to Written Question 418(3) asked by the Member for Yellowknife Centre on February 7, 2018, to the Minister of Finance regarding the new Stanton Hospital funding arrangements.
The project budget for the new Stanton Hospital is $350 million. Of this total budget, $290 million is the estimate for construction costs. Approximately 52 per cent of these construction costs, or $152 million, is financed by the Government of the Northwest Territories, while the remaining 48 per cent, or $138 million, is financed by Boreal Health Partnership. As of November 30, 2017, the GNWT has made quarterly payments, based on amounts certified by an independent engineer, of $115 million.
The GNWT will begin making service payments to the Boreal Health Partnership on December 1, 2018. The service payment for 2018-2019 will be $6.716 million. It is estimated that the average amount payable for a full year of service will be approximately $18 million. Over the 30-year life of the agreement, the total amount of the service payments will be $598.4 million.
The total amount paid through service payments to the Boreal Health Partnership over the 30-year agreement is broken down into four categories:
$45.9 million to cover lifecycle costs;
$255.5 million to cover the maintenance of the facility;
$227 million to cover the cost of servicing the debt; and
$70 million as a return on equity of 12 per cent.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this is the third budget of the 18th Legislative Assembly, and the third time that Members have gone through the painstaking process of reviewing the draft budget and providing detailed input to the Minister of Finance and his Cabinet colleagues. I have to say, I am beginning to wonder why we bother.
Before I comment on the 2018-2019 Budget, let me say a few words for those who might be listening, about the role of the Regular Members in the business planning process. I think it is important to explain this process to members of the public. Although this government talks a lot about transparency, the business planning process remains shrouded in secrecy. I will come back to the topic of secrecy later, but for now, let me set out the process and the role Regular Members play in the budget cycle.
From our perspective the important stages of the budget planning process are:
The development of the government’s fiscal strategy;
The development and review of the business plans;
The budget address; and
The presentation and review of the main estimates in the Legislative Assembly.
The GNWT’s business planning process occurs on an annual cycle. It all starts with the development of the government’s fiscal strategy.
This strategy is established by the Finance Minister in consultation with his Cabinet colleagues. It is developed by considering the GNWT’s projected financial position based on a set of assumptions about revenues, expenditures, and federal transfer payments, and by considering parameters such as the government’s federally set borrowing authority and its own Fiscal Responsibility Policy. The government comes to some decision about how much of a surplus it wants to carry, how much debt it can responsibly manage, and how to meet those objectives by balancing revenues with expenses. Once established, it is used by the Financial Management Board to set budget targets for each department.
Regular Members have some impact in shaping the fiscal strategy, but because it is ultimately the government’s strategy, we must often resort to political pressure to effect any meaningful change. Two years ago, at the beginning of this Assembly, the GNWT started out with a fiscal strategy based on deep budgetary cuts to the tune of $150 million in the first year alone. The Regular Members objected strongly to this approach, which, as anyone could see, was clearly based on drastic austerity measures, even though the Finance Minister said it was not.
Regular Members were not convinced that deep budget cuts were realistic or necessary, and we were concerned about their impact on our fragile northern economy, already destabilized by low commodity prices and flat population growth. We were told, however, by the honourable Minister of Finance that two years of belt-tightening would be followed by two years of greater spending. The cynic in me could not help but notice that this freer spending would conveniently occur in the lead-up to the next election.
Regular Members advocated instead for a more balanced approach. In fact, we brought forward a motion in the House to have the $150 million reduction target removed from the government’s mandate. Although this motion was carried, the target was nonetheless still touted in the Finance Minister’s 2016 Budget Address, and it continues to reverberate in this year’s budget.
In considering the context for business planning, it is important to note that the budget we are now considering is the GNWT’s operating budget. There is a separate process for reviewing the government’s capital infrastructure budget, but the two are intrinsically linked by the government’s Fiscal Responsibility Policy.
This policy requires the government to fund at least 50 per cent of its capital infrastructure investments from the operating budget surpluses generated by government departments alone, excluding the boards, agencies, and Crown corporations that, for accounting purposes, make up the larger government reporting entity. What all this means is that if the government is going to afford the big-ticket infrastructure projects it wants to undertake, it must it must do so by reducing spending on vital programs and services.
We are not talking about modest capital infrastructure spending. According to this government's 2018-2019 Capital Estimates, the money allocated and spent on infrastructure from April 1, 2016, to March 31, 2019, totals $998,765,000. That is almost a billion dollars in capital spending over three years, of which 50 per cent was or will be financed by this government through reduced spending and cuts to health care, education, and social development.
Mr. Speaker, now that we have this fiscal environment in mind, it sets the context within which the government’s current business plans were developed and reviewed by the standing committees over an intensive three-week period in November 2017.
There are four standing committees that work collaboratively to complete this review. The three envelope committees, the Standing Committee on Government Operations, the Standing Committee on Social Development, and the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment, share the work of reviewing the business plans of the GNWT’s 10 departments and the NWT Housing Corporation. The committees make recommendations for changes to the business plans that are forwarded to the individual departments through the Minister of Finance.
The role of the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning, which is composed of all Regular Members, is to review and prioritize the recommendations coming from the envelope committees that have a dollar impact on the budget; to make additional recommendations as needed; and to ensure that nothing has been overlooked.
It is a significant undertaking for the standing committees and their staff to carry out this work. In fact, we estimate that about 1,300 person hours were spent on the business plan review alone. The three envelope committees made a combined total of 142 recommendations and requests for further information, all with a view to improving the 2018-2019 Budget and the overall operations of the government. In that regard, I should note that not all of these recommendations are related to the financial aspects of the budget. Many have to do with improving how information is presented and how the government organizes and prioritizes its work.
The Standing Committee on Social Development made 62 recommendations, including a safe-house pilot project for women and children fleeing family violence in communities without shelters; and a request to the Department of Education, Culture and Employment to reverse all proposed reductions to the Social Work Diploma program and the Teacher Education Program and restore regular enrolment and program operations.
The Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment made 42 recommendations, including ensuring adequate funding in Industry, Tourism and Investment’s budget for the Business Development and Investment Corporation and for the Boreal Caribou Monitoring Program; and urging the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to make more substantive progress on the Climate Change Strategic Framework.
The Standing Committee on Government Operations, the committee for which I serve as Chair, made 38 recommendations, including requests that support for the Non-Governmental Organization Stabilization Fund administered by Municipal and Community Affairs be increased; that the GNWT support the establishment of more Single Window Service Centres staffed by Government Services Officers; and that the Ministers responsible for specialized portfolios be included in the Business Plan Review and be available to answer the standing committee’s questions; an important step, in the committee’s view, towards greater accountability by this government.
Overall, the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning, often referred to as P and P, made 39 recommendations and requests for information, some of which echoed the recommendations coming from the envelope committees. Some of these recommendations came in the form of opposition to proposed budget cuts and new funding proposals by the government, including opposition to:
A proposed reduction of $475,000 to ECE’s budget that would have been used for school counselors;
A proposed reduction of $150,000 to ENR’s Boreal Caribou Monitoring program;
A proposed reduction of $925,000 to ITI’s budget for the Business Development and Investment Corporation;
A proposed reduction to MACA’s multisport games funding of $650,000 over three years, with the first cut being $250,000 in 2018-2019; and
The proposed addition of $387,000 to fund the GNWT’s office in Ottawa.
Additionally, P and P sought new funding for under-resourced programming, including:
A $500,000 increase to support for the NWT Arts Council;
$100,000 for a touring artist grant program; and
$300,000 to establish Single Window Service Centres, staffed by Government Services officers, in two smaller communities and in Yellowknife.
Mr. Speaker, having conducted a thorough review resulting in detailed, cogent recommendations from the standing committees, Regular Members broke for the holidays, secure in the knowledge that we had done our jobs and confident that our hard work to improve this budget would be accepted by our Cabinet colleagues.
Alas, Mr. Speaker, our confidence was clearly misplaced, as we learned when the standing committees had the opportunity to confidentially review the draft main estimates in January. These are the same draft main estimates that were tabled in the House after the Minister of Finance delivered his budget address last week.
Mr. Speaker, the Regular Members look eagerly to the main estimates to see if the labour we put into reviewing the business plans has borne fruit. What did we find there? Well, contrary to the advice of the standing committees, we found:
A reduction of $475,000 to ECE’s budget that would have been used for school counselors;
A reduction of $150,000 to ENR’s Boreal Caribou Monitoring program;
A reduction of $925,000 to ITI’s budget for the BDIC;
A $250,000 reduction to MACA’s multisport games funding; and
The addition of $387,000 to fund the GNWT’s office in Ottawa.
What did we fail to find, Mr. Speaker? We failed to find:
The requested $500,000 increase to support for the NWT Arts Council;
$100,000 for a new touring artist grant program;
$150,000 in additional funding for the NGO Stabilization Fund; or
$300,000 to establish three new Single Window Service Centres
All of which were recommended by the standing committees.
Mr. Speaker, I cannot begin to tell you how frustrating it is for Members on this side of the House to see such a poor response to our recommendations.
Not a single one of the standing committees’ recommendations with financial implications was included in the draft main estimates. Not one.
The requests made by the standing committees totalled somewhere in the vicinity of $2.9 million out of a total budget in excess of $1.7 billion dollars These were not unreasonable or exorbitant requests; they total less than two-tenths of 1 per cent of the budget. Our requests were modest in their amount, consistent with the government’s mandate and important to our constituents. What is a mere $2.9 million dollars to enhance program spending, as compared with a same-year capital budget estimated at $237 million? Cabinet couldn’t meet us partway. In fact, I have to wonder if they even bothered to review the standing committees’ input at all before printing the draft estimates.
You know, Mr. Speaker, it has been said that the leader sets the tone for a whole organization. When our Premier made a pitch to this Assembly to be considered for the office of the Honourable Premier for an historic second term, he said something that resonated with a lot of newly elected Members. He said, "During this election, it was clear to me that people were tired of adversarial politics and what was perceived as petty infighting. The Northwest Territories residents deserve a government that is focused on making good public policy, not scoring political points. I believe all of us here share that view, and I am committed to working with Regular Members to establish a new, more cooperative approach."
Let me ask you this, Mr. Speaker: do you think a reasonable person would consider Cabinet’s response to our budget requests indicative of a cooperative approach? I think not. Rather than cooperation, rather than good public policy, this Cabinet chose to force the hand of Regular Members. This is what necessitated the deferral of the budgets of the Department of Executive and Indigenous Affairs and the Department of Education, Culture and Employment earlier this week, to give Members time to negotiate with Cabinet behind the scenes to get a better deal on this budget.
I am encouraged at this point in time that these discussions will result in some concessions on the part of Cabinet, but I want to remind the Premier of the commitment he made to every single one of the Members in this House to do business in a new, more cooperative way.
On that note, Mr. Speaker, I want to return to the subject of budget secrecy. There is a tradition of secrecy surrounding the development of budgets in Westminster-style parliaments. John Fraser, Speaker of the House of Commons, explained this tradition in a 1987 parliamentary debate. He said, "Budgetary secrecy is a matter of parliamentary convention. Its purpose is to prevent anybody from gaining a private advantage by reason of obtaining advance budgetary information."
It was also touched upon in a 1976 budget address by the Liberal Minister of Finance Donald McDonald who noted that "the tradition of budget secrecy has two grounds. It is intended to deny to anyone financial advantage from advance information. It is intended to ensure that important statements of government economic policy are disclosed first to Members of the House of Commons." At that time, Minister McDonald suggested that "the time has come to consider whether some of the long-standing traditions that surround the budgetary process should be modified to serve better the needs of today."
As true as that may have been for the federal government in 1976, I believe it is even more relevant for the Government of the Northwest Territories in 2018. This is a consensus system, Mr. Speaker, built on traditions of respect, cooperation, and the sharing of information; principles that seem antithetical to the notion of secrecy. Also, as important as the GNWT’s budget is to the people of the Northwest Territories, openness about proposed budget measures is unlikely to result in disruption to currency or stock markets or to anyone gaining tax advantages.
In fact, budget secrecy is, in some ways, an anachronism inherited from the British parliamentary system that is out of step with today’s technologically fast-paced world. It inhibits consultation, it is contradictory to transparency, and, as it has been said, "does not take account of the broad economic and social role which modern budgets must play." I believe it is time for this Assembly to consider the role of budget secrecy in our proceedings and to move to a more transparent and open process, so that the people of the Northwest Territories can see exactly what work their MLAs and Cabinet Ministers are doing for them. That would be consistent with the more cooperative approach that the Premier promised us at the start of this Assembly.
There are some things about this budget that trouble me. You have heard those. The budget is irresponsibly silent on the carbon tax and cannabis revenues and how these stack up against the costs of administering the new sales system. The Government of Canada expects revenues of $400 million and costs of $700 million. Surely, the situation is similar here in the NWT. This shows the GNWT still doesn’t have a real plan to deal with cannabis or carbon.
I am concerned about the slow pace of legislative progress by this government, Mr. Speaker. I am concerned that it has left too much work to be done in the last two years, which will force standing committees to rush through their reviews of bills, as we have already been asked to do on the cannabis legislation. I am troubled by the fact that we have yet to see legislation to establish the Office of the Ombudsman, legislation that the GNWT promised in its mandate to introduce the first two years of this Assembly.
However, I want to close on a positive note, by pointing out that there are things in this budget that I am glad to see, such as new funding for friendship centres; additional resources for the settlement of lands, resources, and self-government agreements; increased investment in benefits to seniors, elders, and the working poor; and the continued support for mining exploration and investment, but most importantly, that there are no new tax increases being proposed. I am also hopeful that, before this week is out, Cabinet and Regular Members will come to an agreement on some outstanding matters arising from the standing committee’s recommendations.
I’m glad Cabinet is waking up to the need to develop our economy and make strategic investments to create jobs and growth. Regular Members have been making these points for the last two years. As we review the individual department’s budgets in Committee of the Whole, I will have more specific, detailed comments on the budget in the days to come. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in reply to the Minister of Finance’s budget address from last Thursday. Over the past two years my replies have been somewhat critical of the Minister’s budgets. This year I am pleased to say that, in general, the budget address gives me some optimism that we are heading in the right direction. Before we get too excited, let me say that it is also apparent that we still have plenty of work to do.
Earlier in the 18th Assembly we confronted what I called a "doomsday scenario," where Cabinet was convinced that austerity measures with massive cuts and job reductions were needed to save us from the poorhouse. Mr. Speaker, it was creativity and compromise that got us past that approach, not entirely unscathed, but with a happier outlook and a belief that positive change in the direction of our mandate was possible. Now today we are moving forward, but I am still feeling some reluctance toward taking truly bold steps. Bold steps are exactly what is required to move us ahead with some of our serious challenges.
So I want to take us back to a "principles first" approach rather than the "purse first" approach. Mr. Speaker, a society is not measured wholly by its GDP, by the latest oil prices, or by the rate in which innovation thrives. It is simply, quite frankly: a society is measured by its people. Mr. Speaker, it is measured by how our families are doing; how children and youth are doing in school; how is our health and well-being is in our communities. Sadly, on many fronts, we continue to show that we are struggling as a society when measured by these means. The NWT continues to have some of the highest rates of incarceration in the country. Our unemployment rates in the communities still remain a constant concern. Many students are still not at the grade levels and graduation rates that we would expect in this day and age. Too many people continue to suffer from challenges surrounding mental health and addictions.
Mr. Speaker, the reason I raise these points is because the cost-benefit analysis of our investments, no matter if they are in infrastructure or programs and services, at the end of the day, they must show benefits to our children, our families, our elders, and our communities. How well our people are doing is the measure that matters most. That is the bottom line.
Mr. Speaker, there is one area that we will have to face and invest in significantly in over the coming years, whether we care to or not. We simply don’t have a choice. The most important challenge facing us -- in fact, the world -- is climate change. Across the globe, it is affecting employment, health, migration, food security, world ecosystems, and world population. We are feeling it first and most drastically here in the North.
I believe the government recognizes the drastic nature of this challenge. I commend the government for that acknowledgement by signing on to the Pan Canadian Framework for Clean Growth and Climate Change. The $1.2 million allocated for climate change resilience and adaptation is important and very much welcomed. That said, only a few people in the public service and few resources are specifically assigned to the climate change file, Mr. Speaker. That is troubling because this critical global issue deserves much stronger resolve and much faster action than we have seen so far. I am hopeful that our Climate Change Framework will outline an aggressive approach to tackling this global challenge and that the government arms our departments with adequate resources to take on this daunting task.
Mr. Speaker, we know that mining is indeed the backbone of the economy. We have what the world needs in minerals and metals that will help sustain life on this earth. I say that with all seriousness. The world continues to move faster and faster into the realm of innovation and technology. The advancement of developing countries is at an all-time high. Our resources will be sought to support those advancements.
The government recognizes the importance of this and support for developing our own mineral exploration and development regime is important to attracting investment. I commend the government for moving forward with the Mineral Resources Act. To the same end, I do not take our environment lightly. We can look into any corner of our territory and see multiple scars with regard to contamination and past abuse of our lands and water. From those experiences, we have become much better at protecting our environment, and we are working with Indigenous governments, various regulatory bodies, and industry to put ourselves at the forefront of protecting our precious ecosystems.
It is with that proven ability to protect our environment that we must know when to apply common sense toward our regulatory requirements for exploration. Regulations should match the degree of impact. Exploration need not be treated with the same regulations as an operating mine. Let’s promote exploration while applying the appropriate measures to protect our environment.
Still on the resources front, Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, all indicators for the future of oil development in the North have signified that this prospect is bleak, but there are areas of potential that aren’t mentioned. Since oil is on its last years in the Sahtu, in particular, Norman Wells, there will be a major need for rehabilitation in that region. That opportunity could be a years-long project with a similar spending impact as the rehabilitation of Giant Mine. There will be opportunities for generational employment. We must be ready to accept the challenge, preserve the land, and reap the rewards.
Similarly, rather than bemoaning that Beaufort Oil "is stranded" in the Northern Sea, we should be seeking ways to exploit inland gas for the benefit of our own communities in that region. Using our own local resources to get off trucked fuels, lower our carbon footprint, and provide cheaper energy only makes sense.
Mr. Speaker, the South Slave region was once a thriving hub for agriculture in the NWT and fed many communities with fresh food up and down the valley. I believe we can get there once again, not only in the South Slave but throughout our entire territory. I appreciate that funding for the Agriculture Strategy was included in the Minister’s address. Access to land is an important step, but it should be emphasized that not only must land be made available, it must also be made affordable if we are to see this sector truly grow and flourish.
I was somewhat discouraged to see limited mention of other economic areas that deserve the government’s active and deliberate support. A truly diversified economy will have to include increased support for the creative arts industry. Our outdated Arts Strategy needs work to become modernized with the times. Let’s make the commitment to engage our creative communities and seek to update the Arts Strategy.
Support for developing centres of excellence and the knowledge economy will be critical so we can take advantage of the creativity and the talents of our people, and create made-in-the-North innovations and technologies. We must remain strong on support for our traditional land- and water-based activities that enhance and celebrate our vibrant Indigenous cultures. Other diversification opportunities will require that we be flexible and responsive to changing times and take full advantage of new prospects, such as when cannabis is legalized later this year. People, businesses, and communities will be frustrated if only a few get to capitalize from this opportunity. We must waste no time in distributing the wealth when it comes to these new-found profits.
Tourism: this is perhaps the brightest light in our economic horizon, and it deserves our continued investment. In support of tourism, we need to ensure that there is no gap in the provision of visitors’ services in Yellowknife. It is also high time that we fast-track changes to the CTV Act to allow municipalities to implement a hotel levy, so they can develop their own destination marketing organizations and enjoy the gains that come from this thriving industry.
Mr. Speaker, another priority for fast-tracking is our land rights negotiations. While the Premier was able to offer an optimistic report on the progress of land rights negotiations last year, we have not heard anything new recently. I commend the $1 million in funding that the government has set aside for this high priority, but we must commit to progress. Mr. Speaker, I don’t need to emphasize, as I have before, that a vast majority of our other mandate priorities hinge on the certainty that will be created by the resolution of land rights.
There was so much hope at the beginning of the Assembly that land management would be a priority, but regrettably, land use plans are also taking far too long. The Yellowknife Periphery Recreational Land Use Plan was to be completed in the second year of this Assembly, but is still not done. Other important land use plans seem equally hung up. As one example: how do we promote agricultural development when land use and allocation remain undefined and unclear?
I have long supported our three major roadway projects, the Mackenzie Valley highway, the Whati all-season road, and the road into the Slave Geological Province. I support our road projects not only because they will help us develop our resource potential, but because they will lower the costs of living and create long-term generational opportunities for employment and small business. This is essential in so many ways to our small communities.
Another major contributor to the cost of living is the high cost of power across this territory. Power is not easy, Mr. Speaker, and we face more challenges than almost anywhere, but we need to continue to explore alternatives. Hydro is important to develop, and connecting to the southern grid is a strong long-term option, but it’s only one option. Let’s not put all our energy eggs in one basket. We have had success in developments of wind power at Diavik and solar power in Colville Lake. The City of Yellowknife’s district heating initiative will soon be paying off. Biomass silos have quickly become a common sight in many communities. Even electric cars can now be utilized in the North, and we should be providing charging stations along the highway. All of these areas have potential and need to be emphasized and supported. I want to see an energy strategy that significantly reduces our reliance on fossil fuels, commits us to protecting the environment, and, most importantly, lowers the cost of living for Northerners.
Mr. Speaker, we followed the lead of our electorate and entered the 18th Assembly with a commitment to creating a government of openness and transparency. I applaud the government for the steps that it has taken. Public hearings, better communication with the public, Cabinet meetings in the regions, and more recently the Minister of Finance’s commitment the public overview of the budget process; these are all important steps forward, and many in my riding have appreciated the steps that have been taken.
Again, Mr. Speaker, there is more that we should be doing. Specifically, I would argue that the business planning process needs to be open to public participation. As an MLA providing feedback to government, I would appreciate being able to gather valuable, informed input from my constituents. That would allow me to offer more constructive and valuable feedback to this government, improving the planning process overall. It is frustrating, to say the least, when MLAs have been pitched by departments as to what the government intends to do in the coming year, yet we are not at liberty to go out and consult with constituents and get their thoughts and feedback. This is a backward approach, and we need to make new and open and transparent ways to deliberate on the business plans.
We also need to improve our practices with regard to bureaucracy and red tape. I know that we are hearing encouraging signals from industry, but we still carry the dubious reputation as the most over-regulated jurisdiction in Canada. As we heard with some energy in this Chamber yesterday, our procurement policies have earned us an "F" grade from the Canadian Federation of Independent Business. This kind of inefficiency discourages investment from outside and frustrates home-grown entrepreneurship. Let’s focus on streamlining services, reviewing our procurement policies, and working towards achieving at least a "D" grade next year.
The speed of the legislation to which the 18th Assembly committed itself is very discouraging. I could go on and on here, but simply: where is the long-promised legislation to establish the Office of the Ombudsman? In the name of transparency, get it done already.
Mr. Speaker, part of achieving any ambitious mandate must be to build and lead a great team. To that end, we have a strong workforce in our government, comprised of talented, capable public servants. As any management professional will tell you, what people want is the opportunity to do their best work, utilize their talents, and make a contribution, but we have been without a collective agreement for over two years. To move forward with our team, we must settle our differences without delay and provide certainty and a path forward.
Mr. Speaker, there are many positive things in this budget on which I commend this government. The commitment of additional funding to junior kindergarten is important. Inclusive schooling in JK is a very important investment in the future, as is the inclusion of mental health support in our schools.
Support for long-term and home care, emphasis on dealing with addictions, help for youth in crisis; these are all very important priority areas. I also commend the government, in partnership with the City of Yellowknife, for committing funding for a sobering centre in Yellowknife.
I will make two final points, Mr. Speaker. The first is that we know a carbon tax is in our future. We must not allow a new tax to be a burden on our future. We must ensure that a carbon regime in the Northwest Territories is northern friendly and revenue neutral. Where our residents need to pay more, we must find a way to return it to them. The achievements of this tax must be a cleaner planet, yes, but not a higher cost of living for our people.
The second point is that we must be prepared to meet our end of the federal infrastructure investment. Half a billion dollars in federal money will be coming to the NWT over the next 10 years. We must not miss out. We must be prepared to match those dollars with our own and see it as a crucial investment in our upcoming generations.
Mr. Speaker, it is hard to believe that we are more than halfway through our term, but I still come to work every day with the same optimism I started with. The challenges are daunting, but our achievements are significant. We should not be bound by the limitations of the past, but be inspired by the courage of possibility and the faith placed in us by our constituents to build a better future. Mr. Speaker, I am encouraged by what I heard in the Minister of Finance’s address, and notwithstanding that we have considerable debate before us, on the surface I am hopeful that, in the end, I can get up and support this budget. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
