Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister Schumann.
I will take it as a comment. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister Schumann. Mr. O'Reilly, no more? Thank you. Mr. Simpson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. On page 208, there is a line item, "Egg marketing levy." There is no money attached to it this year, but in previous years, I see in 2017-2018, there was $35,000. For those people who don't know, the commercial egg market is supply-managed. That means commercial production is regulated federally. Producers are allocated a quota through a designated body, the egg producers of Canada. In the NWT, the GNWT is actually the holder of that quota. They don't produce eggs, though. They allow other producers to produce eggs.
This line item here is the egg marketing levy. As the name suggests, that money comes from the egg producers in the territory through the Egg Farmers of Canada back to the holder of the quota, the GNWT, and is supposed to be used for marketing made-in-the-NWT eggs. In the past years, it has just gone into the GNWT's general coffers. I am not quite sure why this is because we do produce eggs in the territory. There is a farm. There is an egg supplier. There is a board. Everything is in place here, yet this money, even though it is not much money, goes into the general coffers and does not go to the egg producers board so they can actually advertise made-in-the-NWT eggs. That is why you never see a made-in-the-NWT eggs advertisement anywhere, you don't see stand-up posters in the grocery store, you don't see ads in magazines unless people have paid for them out of their own pocket.
This year, there is no money attached to this. I am of the understanding that that is because the Agricultural Products Marketing Council has been reinstated by the GNWT. In regulations, this marketing money, for some reason, goes to this Agricultural Products Marketing Council, which is a body that I believe was intended to settle disputes in the industry. I am not sure if there are disputes, but this is all something that can be clarified here once I am done my question or the setup. This money that is coming from the egg marketing levy is going to fund this board instead of going to promote NWT eggs. I guess my question is: why is that the case? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Minister Schumann.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Member stated it was for marketing. This money is not for that. With the re-establishment of the Agricultural Products Marketing Council, which oversees the system in NWT and ensures that it’s arm's length and objective of the council, this money is for the operations of that council. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister Schumann. Mr. Simpson.
Thank you. It is a marketing council. The only money they are getting, I believe, is from the egg marketing levy. Other agriculture producers, are they contributing to this, as well? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Minister Schumann.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We don't have any other producers, so it is all coming from the egg producers board. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister Schumann. Mr. Simpson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. There is an egg producers board who is producing a product. What the GNWT did was create another council that would do the marketing for the egg producers board. Why doesn't the egg producers board just do the marketing like they have been asking to? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Mr. Jensen.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think there is a bit of confusion around the term "marketing." This Agricultural Products Marketing Council is set up to oversee the system in NWT to ensure it is arm's length and objective. It is an oversight board as opposed to, I would argue, a direct marketing responsibility. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Jensen. Mr. Simpson.
Thank you. Once again, if this board isn't for marketing, why is the money for egg marketing going to support this board that's for oversight, that it's the GNWT board and I believe there's ITI employees on there, as well. It's not even at arm's length. Why is the money from the egg producers paying for the GNWT's board, I guess, is my question? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Jensen. Deputy Minister Jensen.
Mr. Chair, it's a board that independently oversees the operations to make sure that the system we have here is objective and that it's transparent. The NWT Egg Producers Board gets in place to promote and market NWT eggs, not just those of one producer. It is responsible for marketing. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Deputy Minister Jensen. Mr. Simpson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, the NWT Egg Producers Board is responsible for promoting made-in-the-NWT eggs, as I stated. There happens to be one producer, but they still can only promote made-in-the-NWT eggs. It's still confusing why the money for the egg marketing levy is not going to the egg producers to market their eggs. It's going to a GNWT oversight board. It's from regulations from 1999, 20 years ago almost, so maybe it's time to look at those regulations and look at how the industry has changed and maybe those need to be changed, as well. What's the Minister's take on that? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Minister Schumann.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. One of the things we have to take into consideration here, this is early days for this arm's-length board. They're just convening here. You know, just lately, we've just put these people in place. I'm sure as these things come up, they will come back to us and we will have a look at it and what role we can take and play to try to maybe correct some of these things going forward. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister Schumann. Mr. Simpson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate that it's sort of early days in terms of the agricultural strategy and when we're trying to get everything all set up and move forward with this. Perhaps the Minister would agree to sit down with me and members of the egg board whenever he's back in Hay River and we can sort of discuss this issue and maybe figure out collaboratively a way to come up with a solution. Would the Minister be open to that? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Simpson. Minister Schumann.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, I would gladly do that. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister Schumann. Anything further, Mr. Simpson?
Nothing further.
Further questions? Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm just looking at page 208, the revenue summary. I'd like to ask just some questions with some of the lines we see here. First, on the nominee program, in the 2016-2017 actuals was that $42,000. Now we see the proposed budget in the last fiscal year was near half that amount. What explains the drop from 2016-2017 to 2017-2018? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The fees have remained a historical budget at our current plan. Nominee program revenue is for the application fees, and the budget is based on an estimated number of applicants in any year. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. In 2016-2017, we budgeted double the amount of applicants. Sorry, those were the actuals, okay. Again in 2016-2017, we had nearly twice the amount that we budgeted for in the preceding year. What explains the drop in that number of applicants? That's what I'm looking for. How do we understand? I understand how the budget works or how the budget works for this program. Why did we lose so many applicants when the program was doing so well?
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. These are just estimates, and we are glad to see these numbers exceed the forecast. The actuals in that particular year for $42,000 were the actuals, but we continue to forecast $22,000. If these numbers continue to climb, well, maybe we'll look at raising that actual number. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Onto the tourism operator licences, it just seems odd that this number isn't growing with the success of the tourism industry and the number of operators. I often hear that there's a lot of competition out there for new operators who are coming in to take advantage of the tourism market. Are we not predicting any new operations applying for licences? Thank you.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This line item is very similar to what has happened with the nominee program. It's a historical number, but we're looking at increasing that because then the number of applicants has actually gone up a little bit here already, and we will continue to revise these numbers as we move forward. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. Testart.
Thank you. Can the Minister account for the difference in mineral, oil and gas royalties? I know some of these issues were raised, but if he could just clearly account for the difference between the 2017-2018 revised estimates and this year's estimates. Thank you.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. These numbers are done on a quarterly basis. We based the royalty forecast referred by the Diamond, Royalties and Financial Analysis Division. The model uses the mining regulations, uses historical data and forward-looking information from companies based on publicly available information, forecast changes in the market, and mine plans change including rough diamond prices and foreign exchange. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. Testart.
Thank you to the Minister for providing the technical details of how it's calculated, but I'm looking for the reasons why there is a drop from $31 million to $13 million. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I can't talk about any specific operation, but I can say that it's bringing forward eligible expenses all in one year instead of having to spread out over a number of years. That's what was the big impact on that line item. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to speak to an issue that I unfortunately wasn't allowed to or wasn't able to ask questions on in a previous section, but I'll just flip over to 207, the departmental total, and just ask about the manufacturing strategy. What money has been attached to the manufacturing strategy in this budget? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
