Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My last question, Mr. Speaker, is: will the Minister offer my office a schedule of upcoming events? Say, for example, if there is to be a community consultation in Tulita or Norman Wells or various impacted communities, will that schedule be provided to me so that I can accompany the project team? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yes, we will closely work with the Member on his particular region around these projects. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Hay River North.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the Department of Health staff for taking steps to address an issue that I brought up in the last sitting. Even though dialysis treatment is offered in Hay River, it is always fully subscribed, and as a result, there were a number of residents who were living at Vital Abel House in Yellowknife so that they could access dialysis treatment.
What the department did was give these residents an option to fly to and from Yellowknife from Hay River three times a week so that they could receive treatment, and by all accounts, this has worked out very well. My constituents are very happy with this option. There have been no hiccups with transportation.
My first question is: when I see my constituents on the flight home later today, can I assure them that this pilot will continue and that they can go home to their bed every night? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Minister of Health and Social Services.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The short answer is yes, but there are always conditions. We want to keep working with our residents to make sure that they are getting the support that they need. We also acknowledge that it has been good so far, but we have also had pretty decent weather, and the flights have all been on time.
If it looks like we might be having some complications, we need to be flexible. We may have to bring them in for a week or two from time to time depending on those things, but our intention now is to continue to work with our residents across the Northwest Territories, not just those in Hay River, while we do our review of dialysis services in the Northwest Territories and come forward with larger solutions and larger options. In the interim, we will work with our residents one on one. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I understand that everywhere else has it worse, really, than Yellowknife and Hay River when it comes to dialysis, because those are the only two places to receive treatment. I appreciate that. I believe there is someone from Fort Providence and Fort Resolution who drives in three times a week to Hay River for treatment.
The last time that I spoke about this, the Minister stated that he heard loud and clear that we need to do more to provide dialysis services closer to home, and he would prefer not to have people going from Hay River to Yellowknife to receive that service. He stated there is a lot of work to be done, and "we are prepared to start that work." Can the Minister please detail the work done to date?
This is a territorial problem. We have residents across the Northwest Territories on dialysis. We are looking at it from a territorial lens, recognizing, of course, that both Hay River and Yellowknife are the only places that dialysis is currently located.
The authority and the department have already begun their analysis. They are looking at other options like homebased dialysis. I think one Member did mention a travelling dialysis. There are some concerns about that, especially the models that exist in the South, but we have started to explore those options.
Also, recognizing that we need a big solution, a big comprehensive solution for the whole territory, we are also trying to find some shortterm wins, and we have been exploring the opportunity of sharing some resources between Stanton and Hay River to balance out where the resources need to be, where the existing machinery exists today. We are working on some of the details.
We are open to having some shortterm solutions as we continue to move on finding some larger, more appropriate territorial solutions.
I appreciate that. It sounds like a lot of work has been done so far.
The Minister mentioned sharing resources between Stanton and Hay River. Could the Minister please elaborate on that, and would that entail, perhaps, bringing resources to Hay River physically so that these residents wouldn't have to fly back and forth?
We are not intending to move equipment back and forth, obviously, but we have trained professionals here in Yellowknife, and some really great trained professionals in Hay River. The question is whether or not we can actually have some of our staff go back and forth, rather than some of the patients.
There are some complications there. We are trying to figure out whether that's even a possibility, but right now, we are exploring all options. Like I said, we are trying to find some shortterm solutions, some shortterm wins, to support our residents, but also, this has to be done in view of territorial solutions as well.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Hay River North.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Could the Minister please provide us with some timelines on these possible shortterm solutions and on the longerterm territorywide solution to this issue? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We have certain processes within the Government of the Northwest Territories' budget planning and whatnot. I imagine largerterm solutions will have to follow that cycle, but we are trying to find some shortterm interim solutions with existing resources that we can actually implement during the 20182019 fiscal year. We are hoping that we will be able to finish that work, recognizing that that is part of the solution, and it will not be the comprehensive solution that will follow our normal processes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Tu NedheWiilideh.
Marsi cho, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, today I talked about capital in the riding of Tu NedheWiilideh. I would like to ask the Minister of Finance some questions on the capital planning process.
I would like to ask the Minister: in this House, who is responsible for the capital plan? Who has final responsibility? Thank you.
Masi. Minister of Finance.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, there is an interdepartmental working group. They analyze the capital assets coming forward from each department and make recommendations to the Deputy Minister Capital Planning Committee, and that is shared by the Deputy Minister of Finance and includes all deputies.
They review the recommendations made by the working group and either accept or vary the recommendations. Then they provide recommendations to the Financial Management Board, and the Financial Management Board will review the recommendations of the planning committee and either accept or vary the recommendations.
The next part of the capital plan is provided to committee for review, and in camera reviews are scheduled. Feedback from committee can result in capital plans being varied, and then the final review of the capital plan takes place on the floor of the House. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I was going to ask the Minister to lay out the process, which he has already done. I guess what appears to be missing from the process is the weight, and I am not talking about W-A-I-T but the weight of each of the projects as they are brought forward by the various Deputy Ministers through the capital planning process.
I don't know which process has priority, and I guess coming down to the question would be: how does the GNWT prioritize the actual projects once they have gone through each project that comes up through the capital planning process?
There is a 20year capital plan that most departments have. There is an overall 20year capital plan, and then there is a fiveyear capital plan. There are a number of projects that could get on these plans, but sometimes the plans change. If they find that there is another facility or a building that is unsafe for the occupants, then that might take priority over one that is on the fiveyear capital plan. That may get pushed back a bit. I think we all, that have been around in this building for a while, have seen that, where plans get pushed back a bit because of other circumstances.
That would be the process that would be used. If it is on the fiveyear capital plan, then, normally, the planning would start for that, but if, for some unforeseen reason, something else happens to any of the other government assets, then that may have to take priority because of the safety issues that come along with it.
Assuming that everything remains and there are no emergencies, I would like to ask the Minister if factors such as employment play into the capital planning process. I know it is an important aspect of this Assembly to ensure that we have employment. As many have said, including the Minister of Finance, "employment is the best social program that we can have."
I would like to know if there is a community that has an employment of 40 per cent versus a community that has an employment rate of 70 per cent, is that a factor when we're allocating capital projects? Right now, what is happening in my riding is the projects are getting completed, and the young people that are being trained and are ready to take the next project on will have to work in other communities to fill in the gap.
First of all, that is a good thing. If these young people are getting the skills that they need and the contractor wants to move them to another community, I think that is a good thing. When we debate the capital budget, as we are going to be doing, you will find that there is a number of other projects for other communities. If contractors are able to secure that work, then they may move these folks there, and then there will be an opportunity, if there are other projects in their hometown, to come back home.
I always believe that's a good thing, and it expands their skills, their knowledge, but, as far as the employment goes, I don't believe that plays a part in the prioritizing of that project. Again, it goes back to safety and whether this building needs to be replaced for safety reasons and how long it has been on the capital plan. The Member makes a good point, and I agree with them that, if they have to move around with the work, then that's a good thing. They are being recognized for the skills that they gained when the project was near a home community. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I agree with some parts of what the Minister is saying. Some of the employees like to go to other projects in other communities, but many of them cannot.
I would like to ask the Minister: I know that they use several factors to determine, I think, five or six different factors to be weighed up against other factors to determine which capital item or infrastructure item will be placed first on the infrastructure list for each year that we review in the House. I would like to ask the Minister, if there is a possibility that, it's sort of like a social factor I guess, of getting away from the technical factors, if they could add employment as part of a key factor when determining which communities will get infrastructure projects?
Mr. Speaker, as much as I agree with the Member on the importance of employment in the small communities and I think, through a number of the different programs that the Government of the Northwest Territories offers as part of infrastructure goes, I think we have seen an example through the small community employment fund through the rural and remote committee, there was someone there that was allocated for some employment opportunities and in small communities, but I don't believe that's a particular one that was factored in with the prioritizing of projects. I don't even know if it should be, to be quite honest with you. Maybe it is a discussion we need to have.
Again, I will go back to the fact that we do have infrastructure deficit that is quite large. All communities in the Northwest Territories need projects. We hear that here, in the House. We go back to our capital budget that we are going to be debating in the next couple weeks in this House. I think we are going to see that there is a huge infrastructure budget and there should be benefits for all those possible in the territory.
I think I took the long way to answer the Member's question. It is no, I don't believe that employment factor would be prioritized as part of allocating projects in the Northwest Territories. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, yesterday I talked about the effects of climate change and the importance of taking action now. The federal government has indicated that the way in which we are going to do that is by changing folks' behaviour and that was going to be through an applied carbon tax. The NWT signed on to the federal plan for a carbon tax and even though we had previously argued against it, saying such a tax wasn't appropriate for the North.
Can the Minister describe what the tax was in fact intended to accomplish? Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Sorry, my questions are for the Minister of Finance. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Minister of Finance.
Mr. Speaker, the NWT signed on to the Clean Growth and Climate Change Framework. Carbon pricing is actually an element of that. We didn't sign on to carbon pricing just yet. We have an MOU that we are in the final stages of drafting, or it is in its final stages right now. We have not signed that yet.
The Member is correct. We were against carbon pricing when it first came out because we knew that it was going to have a detrimental effect on people in the Northwest Territories. Once we realized that the federal government was going to implement this regardless of whether we were in or not, then we took steps and showed some leadership in coming up with and made an NWT approach that we thought would benefit or minimize the impact of the federal backstop. Had we gone with the federal backstop, it would have been quite costly to people in the Northwest Territories. I would encourage the people not to stand by the border because people would have been leaving so fast, you would have gotten run over. So we have come up with a plan that, although not perfect, addresses a lot of the concerns that we heard from the public across the Northwest Territories.
I appreciate the Minister's reply, and I certainly do appreciate the effort that they have put in with regarding to protecting Northerner's interests, especially around the cost of living.
As maybe a supplement to that question, then, I just want to ask the Minister, then: are there or have there ever been discussions to use carbon tax to mitigate the climate change impacts by changing people's behaviour? I mean if that's what the federal government said it was intended to do, were there ever discussions between ourselves and federal governments to apply it in that manner, that it would be used to change people's behaviour so that we could protect the impact of climate change?
Mr. Speaker, the federal government, that was their original intent, was to try to curb people's behaviour so not to contribute to climate change. They came up with the carbon price tax.
We, in turn, had to make some adjustments to try and minimize the impact that it was going to have on the people of Northwest Territories. The intent was to curb people's behaviours so that there's less greenhouse gas emission, but I think even the federal government realizes that, in the Northwest Territories, and we used the word 'uniqueness' a number of times, our situation is a little different. We have had an opportunity to use their idea to leverage some funding to try and help with some transitional projects in the Northwest Territories to actually contribute to a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
Thank you to the Minister for the reply. You know, northern communities, industry, and residents are already taking significant steps on their own initiative to invest in renewable energy. We have seen numerous examples of that throughout the territory, whether it's the windmills at Diavik, the solar panels in Colville Lake, or just folks doing improvements on their homes.
Because we are doing it on our own, does it make sense to even burden residents with the new tax, especially if it's not going to do what the federal government intended it to do, and that was to change people's behaviour?
I mean, first of all, this government did not want to burden people with a new tax. Had we used the federal backstop, which they were going to use regardless, it would have cost people in the Northwest Territories a lot more. I want to make that quite clear.
Through a number of our approaches to carbon pricing - and I do believe that our document is public. I know I have briefed committee on it. I have some feedback from committee on it, so I do know that we have a backstop that we are using. One of the things is the cost of living offset that we proposed to help offset some of that high cost of implementing this. The NWT Child Benefit is another one that we are using.
We have taken some steps to try to mitigate the impact on people in the Northwest Territories. Again, I have to reiterate that the federal government was going to impose this no matter what. I think we have met the challenge of trying to minimize the impact on people in the Northwest Territories.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you to the Minister for the reply. Yes, the federal government was going to impose it on us no matter what, but, as we have seen around the country, there are a number of different jurisdictions that are mounting arguments against Ottawa's carbon plan. You know, if we were joining the new carbon regime, that very future seems to be in doubt. Does the Minister still think that this is the way to go, or are we still going to go through this carbon tax, made-in-the-North carbon tax, come January?
Mr. Speaker, we are monitoring what the other jurisdictions across the country are doing. We will continue to do that. As I said before, we haven't signed the MOU yet. We are still working with Ottawa, but again, I go back to the point that Ottawa is going to implement this regardless what the other jurisdictions are doing. They will implement. They will have their fight with the other jurisdictions. I just want to be sure that our territory is ready, that when the date comes to implement carbon pricing, we are ready for it, and if there are any benefits to be gained from it while mitigating the impact on people in the Northwest Territories, we will take full advantage of that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Deh Cho.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I was in Fort Providence, the home community of Premier McLeod. My question is to Premier McLeod. It was a proud day in Fort Providence. Everyone was there, but, sadly, there were no GNWT senior officials. Can the Premier explain: what was the GNWT's role in establishing the Edehzhie as a protected area? Mahsi.
Masi. The Honourable Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The reason we weren't there is we received an invitation two days before the event, and we were already scheduled to be in session. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
There was an initial schedule signed back in September, and parties, of course, that were involved, you know, sought clarity, and one of them was the GNWT. Can the Premier explain or update the territorial position on the subsurface withdrawal for Edehzhie?
We have been in discussions with the Dehcho First Nations with regards to the subsurface of Edehzhie. We see it as a package arrangement. We are not prepared to oneoff individual sectors of the Dehcho process. We had put forward a significant offer where Edehzhie was part of it, and we have yet to receive a response to that offer.
I understand that the Dehcho leadership will be holding leadership meetings at some point in October to determine where they want to go with regards to the Dehcho process.
Yesterday evening, it meant a lot for the Federal Government of Canada to be there and Dehcho First Nations officials, as well, and it was a big, exciting event.
One of the steps that needs to happen to fulfill the future of our protected area and advance it through the federal process is transferring Edehzhie to the federal government. Could the Minister or the Premier explain in terms of how that process might work out?
There was never an intention to transfer the subsurface of the Edehzhie back to the federal government. The discussions that we have been having is that it would be controlled in the Northwest Territories by the Aboriginal government and the Government of the Northwest Territories through an agreement that would be established through the Dehcho process.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Deh Cho.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My last question is: going forward, what actions will the GNWT take in the remainder of this Assembly, the 18th Assembly -- some might say that the 18th Assembly is already over -- but take to advance conservation and land protection initiatives like Edehzhie? Mahsi.
We have been in discussions with the Dehcho Grand Chief on several occasions. She has indicated to us that they are still doing work in this area, and we are very optimistic that they will come back with a positive response so that we can move forward and hopefully bring these negotiations to a conclusion before the end of this Legislative Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
