I don't think it's actually all that complicated. The Office of the Regulator of Oil and Gas Operations is currently consulting on managing potential cost for spills and debris associated with oil and gas activities or infrastructure. Can the Minister confirm whether the scope of that review includes changing the Oil and Gas Spills and Debris Liability Regulations or eliminating the liability caps set in those regulations? That's something that Cabinet does.
No, this is very high-level consultation. They are out there doing this right now. The Member will probably have an opportunity to actually go to that and participate in that. I want to advise this House that ITI, like the MLA, we will be invited to make our comments on this, on this consultation. We are very concerned as well about the liability and the responsibility. That is one of our big concerns around this whole thing. As well, we want to see more certainty and transparency built into this thing. We will be commenting on it, as well.
I want to thank the Minister for that. So it's very clear, the work that OROGO is doing has nothing to do with the caps that are set in Cabinet's regulations. Earlier today, I recounted the massive costs that can be associated with spills or debris from accidents relating to oil and gas exploration and development. Greenland and Norway have eliminated all liability caps in relation to such accidents. The Auditor General of Canada recommended that such caps for offshore development be reviewed and changed. Would the Minister agree that the liability caps in our regulations put our government at some financial risk?
To be clear, these caps are addressed in the regulations, and we are dealing with the act. That's what we are dealing with. The Member is talking like we are opening up the NWT to liabilities, and that is not what we are doing. In fact, what we are trying to do is close that loop that exists around suspended wells and clarifying responsibilities that operators in the NWT have. These changes that we are proposing do not change the fact that, in the NWT, when they are at fault, the polluter pays.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. Thanks to the Minister for that. We are actually talking about the regulations. That is something the Minister has direct control over. He can take this to his Cabinet colleagues and get those regulations changed next week if he wants. So the liability caps in place through the Cabinet-approved regulations are identical to the ones in federal offshore regulations that have not been changed in over 30 years. These caps fly in the face of the polluter-pays principle which has been endorsed by our government. Does the Minister agree that the liability caps in our regulations are out of date and should be eliminated immediately?
I would agree with the Member that they are out of date, but I am not going to go out and get rid of them immediately. These things are in place. We have mirrored devolution. This is significant change for our government. If we were to do this, we would have to go out and engage all stakeholders in the Northwest Territories. Like I have said, we are only looking at the act right now, not the regulations, but we do have some concerns. I have clearly laid those out and agreed with the Member, but I am not prepared to go out there and just change this on a whim, without engaging all stakeholders in the Northwest Territories. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife Centre.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment. I fear the Minister is not walking the talk on diversification. Tourism represents a tremendous opportunity for our economy for diversification, but we do need considerable investment to make the most of it, for example, in community infrastructure. He has said that, in this biggest-ever capital budget, we will see all kinds of goodies, but what I see here is incremental changes rather than new projects. Can he tell me whether there are any new tourism infrastructure projects in the capital budget? Mahsi.
Masi. Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. When ITI is up in Committee of the Whole, and I believe we are probably going to be one of the first ones up, we have a capital budget of a significant investment of, I cannot remember the exact number, but we will be able to deliberate our capital investment around infrastructure and tourism when I get into the Committee of the Whole around all regions of the Northwest Territories.
I hate to spoil the surprise, but the capital estimates for tourism and parks show a decrease of more than 50 per cent over last year, to just over $3 million, so it's hard to reconcile that level of investment with the "biggest-ever capital budget we have seen." So why is tourism consistently losing out in this government's capital estimates?
I would just like to remind Members that capital estimates is before the Committee of the Whole. When it comes to that, there will be detailed discussion, so it should not be discussed in question period. If you want to rephrase your question, Member for Yellowknife Centre?
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my concern is that, when it comes to community infrastructure, we are not seeing significant new investments. For example, we heard from my colleague from Nunakput about the lack of tourism services in Tuktoyaktuk, despite years of road development and the anticipation of tourism being a big draw there. Likewise, we don't have a visitors' centre here in Yellowknife, so my question is: what kind of investment can we expect before the end of this term, in real economic diversification in tourism?
As I have said, we are going to be going into the Committee of the Whole. We have clearly laid out what our investment is around the money that we've been allocated, and that we will continue to work on that. I am not scared to talk about tourism. Tourism is a big deal in the Northwest Territories. We just came from an FPT; it's a significant challenge right across this country. Things that I have learned from earlier this week's meeting at our FPT is some of the challenges right across this whole country are no different than what we are facing in our territory. In fact, when they were doing the presentation, I reached over to the assistant deputy minister, and I said, "It's almost like the exact same thing that is going on in the NWT and what challenges we are facing."
So the whole country is facing these challenges around infrastructure needs, shortage of hotel space, high cost of air travel across this country, how do we move people out of regional centres to the regions. This is a problem that's right across this country, and it's very well information-shared, I think, across the country about how we have to figure out a way to address this with federal support, as well.
It's cold comfort to find out that these problems are widespread. We are talking about what's happening here in the NWT, and the investments we need now to capitalize on tourism. How many people who went to Tuktoyaktuk and found there wasn't even a place to dump their sewage are going to be in a big hurry to recommend their friends go back? So my question really is about the priority of investing in tourism. I still have not heard that the Minister is willing to invest any additional money in tourism diversification and infrastructure before the end of our term. Is that, in fact, the case?
As I have said, I only have the money that is allocated to me, but I am glad to sit down with committee. Anytime they want to have a discussion on how we can improve different funding levels for different programs within my portfolio, I am glad to do that, but the real crux of this is we only have so much money that this government has. If you are going to give it to me, you are going to have to take it from someone else on this side of the room, so that is the hard discussion that we are going to have to make here. Without increasing revenues in this territory and attracting more capital and industry to help support our economy and grow our economy, because that is 30 per cent of our economy, the mining sector in particular, what are we going to do? That is why all 19 of us are in this room, and we have to have those discussions.
We are trying to grow the economy, particularly the Department of ITI, to unlock our potential on what we are going to do to increase revenues for this government, but the reality is we only have so much money. If you want to put more money into tourism and diversification, I am all for it, but we have to have those conversations amongst all of us, and, to make my pie bigger, you are going to have to take it from someone else's.
Member for Yellowknife Centre.
Mr. Speaker, the pie is pretty big at $1.8 billion. I think there are different ways that it can be sliced. As someone else in this House has already pointed out today, when money is needed on an emergency basis, it's there. The pie seems to get bigger as needed, so this is a conversation that we will have in the Committee of the Whole on the capital budget and during the O and M budget in the winter.
My final question is about the feasibility of winterizing one campground north of Great Slave Lake and one south to accommodate late-season travellers. I noted when I went to Hay River about three weeks ago that there were quite a number of RVs on the road. I knew that, at the same time, they would have nowhere to park on their way to Yellowknife. There was nowhere to park in Hay River either. The campgrounds are closed. Can the Minister consider winterizing two campgrounds in the Northwest Territories to accommodate these late-season travellers? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
If I remember correctly, and we would have to go to Hansard, I think I made the commitment that, when we put out these campgrounds to tender, because it all comes back to funding, I would actually ask for a provision on how much it would cost to keep these things open a little bit longer. Based on the amount of money that we have allocated, I don't believe that we can do that.
One thing we are doing around winter campgrounds, particularly in the Yellowknife region, is we are looking at keeping these open for entrepreneurs around the tourism sector to be able to access our campgrounds and use them. We are doing that. I can't remember the number off the top of my head at briefing, though, but I think there are 36 businesses that have permits to use our campgrounds for Aurora viewing, and we will continue to support that.
The reality is that this comes back to what I just answered in my previous question. There's only so much money. That's what we have to work with, all of us. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Hay River North.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I guess when you wear rose-coloured glasses, red tape just looks like tape. I think that's sort of the issue we are running into here with this cross-departmental comprehensive plan to help small businesses. The Ministers don't seem to see a problem. I can't believe I'm bringing this up, but I'm going to discuss a few policies here.
The first is procurement. At first, there were no issues. Then he's heard issues from one or two people. Now it's five people he's heard issues from. I've heard issues from 15 people off the top of my head. I get CCed on the same emails that go to the Minister a lot of the times. I see people coming out of this building, and I know that they have talked to the Minister about it. I know he has heard it more than five times. I'll ask this because the number keeps growing: how many people have to come to the Minister with procurement issues before he considers it to be an actual problem? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment.
Mr. Speaker, I think the Member better take his rose-coloured glasses off, the way he's making comments, there. I have had a few people; like I have said, probably five people. I'm going to stay to five people who have come to me about procurement. The chair of SCEDE is doing a report. I will sit down and have that conversation with SCEDE, but I am not going to sit here and get into a debate if it's one, 10, or 15 people. If the Member has 15 people coming to him, maybe he should come to my office. He doesn't stop by my office and talk about procurement issues. He can do that any time he wants.
Maybe the Minister should begin reading his emails, Mr. Speaker.
Earlier, the Member from Yellowknife North brought up the standing offer agreements. The department has standing offer agreements with firms from the south. The Minister stated that northern firms don't have the expertise, and that's why they have to go to the south. What other options has the department looked at? Have they looked at perhaps requiring some northern content when these firms get these agreements, or going to local companies and helping them build that expertise?
Why does it always have to be on the back of the Government of the Northwest Territories? Can Members tell me, why does it always have to be on the back of the government? I am a private businessperson. If I have an issue with a particular type of tender and I don't have the expertise for it, I will reach out to counterparts in southern Canada to help me. You guys seem to think it's on the back of the Government of the Northwest Territories. The Government of the Northwest Territories is here to help facilitate and grow the economy and look after the residents of the Northwest Territories. We are not here to get into individual businesses and do the day-to-day transactions that they need to do and grow their businesses. That's on the back of the entrepreneur.
That's what ITI does. That's their mandate. That's what the officers do every single day. Well, I'll move to SEED now, since I'm talking about all these policies here. Earlier, the Member from Nunakput was asking about remedies for business owners who were adversely affected by the disruption of barge resupply, and the Minister recommended that they contact ITI about SEED. SEED funding is being used to compensate for this failed barge delivery. Where is the SEED money coming from, Mr. Speaker? Is it coming from that region's pot of money, or is it coming from the entire territory?
The Member is talking about hypotheticals, because I said that's where they could go if they had an issue with it. We don't know if there is an issue with it. Each region has their own allocation for SEED money. If there is some sort of over-pouring amount of money that we have to have a look at, I will certainly have a look at the situation.
Oral questions. Member for Hay River North.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I haven't seen the situation first-hand, but I take my fellow colleagues at their word. If the Member for Nunakput says there is an issue, then I believe there is an issue.
My final question is that, you know, we have had a lot of questions around the table here. It always comes down to how much money we have. The Minister says, "I only have this much money in my budget." Well, I think I've sat running through supplementary estimate deliberations where the government says we need more money, then we sit down and we give them more money. Will the Minister bring forward a supplementary estimate to improve supports for entrepreneurs? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
No, I will not.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. I would like to pursue the issue of the liability caps a little bit further with Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment. To be really clear here, the review that is being carried out by OROGO is about proof of financial responsibility. It's not about the liability caps. OROGO doesn't even set the liability caps. Those are in the regulation. Is the Minister clear that the OROGO review has nothing whatsoever to do with the liability caps? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe that's right. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thanks to the Minister for that. We are starting to get on the same page here. I would like to ask the Minister: why have the caps not been reviewed in the four-and-a-half years since devolution?
As I have said, we are moving forward with the mirrored legislation on devolution. We are looking at the Gas and Oil Operations Act. That's what we are working on. We are going to look at the rest of it in the 19th Assembly, should this bill pass here.
The Member is not going to like this comment, but you know, we have 200-and-some mandate commitments within this Government of the Northwest Territories. To zero down on a regulation here where there's exactly no activity going on in our territory wouldn't be a good use of my time and the department's time. I'm not shunning that responsibility. We are continuing to work on the act going forward, and regulations will be looked at in the 19th Assembly.
Thanks to the Minister for that. Interestingly, a couple of days ago, we had the Premier saying that we are going to go and negotiate an entire offshore co-management regime when there is nothing happening with offshore oil and gas. I think there is a more likely prospect of onshore, and we have to make sure that we protect our citizens and our taxpayers and our government from liability. When will these regulations be reviewed? The Minister could do it next week if he wishes, but when is the Minister going to review these regulations?
As I said, should this bill to amend the act pass in this Legislative Assembly, in the 19th Assembly we will review and modernize the regulations under this act.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. I'm not very happy with the response from the Minister. These regulations are less than four pages long. In fact, I believe they are actually one page long, and the limits are just set here. I don't understand what the difficulty is in reviewing these caps.
What sort of process does the Minister envision going through to review a one-page regulation? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
As we sit here and deliberate this conversation around the Oil and Gas Act and the regulations, the Member has raised a lot of concerns, and I agree with a number of his concerns. This is not something that we are just going to go out and do at a snap of our fingers. We have a lot of different players in this territory. We have committed to deal with all the Aboriginal and Indigenous governments in this territory, and the public. I am not just going to change the regulation before we change legislation on the Act, and I suspect it will be the way we do our full consultation within the Northwest Territories. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Pursuant to section 21 of the Legislative Assembly Retiring Allowances Act, I wish to table the Legislative Assembly Retiring Allowance Fund Financial Statements for the year ended March 31, 2018.
