Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Great Slave.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, clearly the Minister does not have his ear to the ground. It's the only thing that I've been seeing all over social media right now is this increase in rent which can only really be called a forced eviction. It's shocking to me to hear a Minister say that he is not live to the situation of what is going on here in the capital.
I'm going to move on, though, because I think my opinions of this Cabinet are pretty clear.
News articles have pointed out that there is a new tenants’ association being formed. Are any plans being made to collaborate with this new tenants’ association or to commit to creating a working committee or a working group with the tenants? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have my ear to the ground and my nose to the grindstone. I was not familiar with the name of the apartment building. I am familiar with the situation that the Member is speaking about. As I stated, any work on this is going to have to happen after we complete the initiatives that are currently underway. So either later in this government or early in the next government. Thank you.
Oral questions. Member for Nunakput.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my Member's statement today was on the federal government restrictions on extended year for the moratorium.
Mr. Speaker, where does my Premier stand and what is she doing to ensure that the offshore oil and gas moratorium gets lifted at this next and final I'm hoping the final deadline; where does she stand and this government stand? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Nunakput. Honourable Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am going to try to keep this precise but I've got a lot to say on this. Where I stand personally? I have concerns about it. Where we stand professionally, basically we're really saying like you need to consult with us. That was a promise that was made. I do know that the natural gas and the light crude in the Beaufort Delta actually creates less pollution than many other major energy sources in the world. So we do have things to offer up there.
What have we done about it? There was a letter sent on June 22nd to Minister of northern affairs Daniel Vandal, from myself, expressing my disappointment in the unilateral decision.
I also met with the Northern Premiers from the three territories and raised my concerns. The three Northern Premiers also sent a letter on July 22nd or 2022 about the unilateral decision. I've had a personal/impersonal meetings with the Minister of northern affairs a couple of times and expressed my disappointment as well. I've had two meetings with the Prime Minister in May and December 2022, stating my disappointment in the unilateral decision. Officials, as well, have been meeting between September and December, just recently, with the officials federally and expressing their disappointment.
My understanding, Mr. Speaker, is that the federal government at first said it was their decision, they weren't willing to discuss it any further; however, they've made some movement. They have assured me that they will be bringing the sciencebased review on the offshore moratorium, that they will be engaging with the communities, and the Inuvialuit regional region, and we're looking forward to that engagement. They're also talking about releasing the results publicly. And hopefully they will be looking at working with the GNWT to build our economy because they can't take the major economy from the Beaufort Delta and not substitute it, Mr. Speaker. On that, I'll just stop. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I just want to remind everybody this is a settled land claim, which was done 39 years ago, and our federal government goes and shuts us down for our only way of living basically in regards to that, taking the I guess taking food off the table, giving us getting everybody on income support.
Mr. Speaker, what is the federal government giving the Government of the Northwest Territories to compensate the Beaufort Delta on not in taking away? What are they giving us? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I'm actually glad that the Member is bringing this issue in the House. I do know that the federal government does monitor our sessions, and I'm hoping they'll hear his words as well. These are the exact concerns that we have brought forward to the federal government. To this date, they haven't made; all they've said is they will work with us on reviewing the sciencebased review. They will support us in some of our building our economy, but they haven't given me a direct answer on that. And those are the questions that I would like answered from the federal government as well. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, today I brought up the moratorium and M18 project that's going to put people to work in my home community and the whole Beaufort Delta, in regards to the M18 project just outside of Tuk on 7(1)(a) lands, which is owned by the people of Tuk and under the Inuvialuit final agreement. 39 years ago it was signed again, Mr. Speaker. Again, the federal government goes and puts it under review.
Again, what are they giving us, Mr. Speaker? What are they going to give to the people of the Inuvialuit settlement region for the holdup for the M18 project? What's going to happen; what are they giving us? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think I'll take that more as a comment; it's a reiteration of what he said. What are they giving us, and that's the question I am asking as well what are they giving us? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Honourable Premier. Final supplementary. Member for Nunakput.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I just want to tell my Premier that please stand up for the people of my riding and the people of the Inuvialuit settlement region, and the whole Beaufort Delta, in regards to this moratorium. And we need help. Help us help you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Nunakput; more of a comment. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. In my statement earlier today, I covered two aspects of the closure of the Diavik mine, on whether GNWT was going to take over the airstrip and what role, if any, GNWT is playing with regard to transition planning for NWTbased employees. I'm going to ask my questions of the Premier because they cut across a few different departments. So can the Premier tell us whether GNWT has decided to take over the Diavik airstrip at closure? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. Honourable Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm deferring those questions to the Minister of Finance who should be able to give comprehensive answers. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Premier. Minister responsible for Finance.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the comment around the airstrip, I understand, arose with respect to materials that are now in the registry of the land and water board. Mr. Speaker, it's the land and water board that notes in its revision that it requires Diavik to include a statement of willingness to participate in discussions with government and other interested parties to assess the fate of the airstrip. So, Mr. Speaker, I gather that their statement of willingness to accept an expression of interest really is them complying with what is required of them by the land and water board. There's not been any request on behalf of the GNWT for that. But, again, certainly would expect that they would continue to comply with what's required of them as expected. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Merci, Monsieur le President. I want to thank the Minister for that. Maybe I'm a little bit not understanding here but Diavik has indicated they want to hear from our government on whether the GNWT wants to take over this airstrip. So what is the answer? Clearly Diavik will save money by not having to reclaim the airstrip and the new owner will incur liabilities and expenses related to its ongoing operations and maintenance and ultimate reclamation.
So, can the Premier tell us whether Diavik has offered to cover these liabilities and/or whether GNWT will ask for these costs as part of any takeover arrangement? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So, again, Mr. Speaker, there's been no request on behalf of the GNWT for them to undertake this. It's not been initiated by us. But, again, in reading in full the section from the land and water board, it does make clear that the regulator is asking that Diavik remain open to that.
Now, Mr. Speaker, there has been the reimagine and closure project initiated by the mines. Looking at ways to better utilize all of the infrastructure that they have, looking at ways to give back in a more long and longer, having a legacy type of approach. We're certainly at that table with them but that is at a feasibility stage only. It's initiated by them. And, Mr. Speaker, to be very clear, it's been very clearly made to us that the diamond mines always will be reclaiming their sites and always will be doing so in line with the reclamation and closure plans that they have filed, including this one, where the regulator asked them to be open to looking at other ways to utilize the airstrip. They're open to receiving that. There's no request coming from the GNWT, Mr. Speaker, but we will always continue to engage to ensure that there is again, that we understand what's happening, that we are ready, and that that's the same case here. But there's no plans on our end to be requesting their airstrip, only that, again, they are following what they are being asked to do. And it's my understanding that they'll be moving forward with the reclamation plans, and progressive reclamation, exactly as required. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Merci, Monsieur le President. I think we have a failure to communicate here so let me try it this way: So the closure plan says that DDMI's waiting an expression of interest from the GNWT on a path forward and a schedule for transferring the airstrip responsibilities. That's from DDMI.
So can the Minister confirm and provide this side with the information, confidentially if necessary, has Diavik asked our government to take over the airstrip or even asked our government whether we're interested in taking it over? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, they haven't asked us to take the airstrip. We haven't asked them to leave the airstrip. The land and water board, very clearly here, says that they had a requirement that they wanted Diavik to be open to it and Diavik has said that they're open to receiving something. But we're not asking for it. We're not looking for it. And nor have they asked us to take it. So for the third time, I think they are complying with what they've been asked to do by the water board, which is exactly what we expect of the mines that operate in the Northwest Territories, that they would always read carefully everything they're being asked to do and comply with it. My reading here is that that's what they're doing. I don't represent the water board nor do I represent the mine. But, again, I'm not sure if I can be much more clear about it. They haven't asked us. We haven't asked them. They are complying. And we're all going to keep talking as we move forward towards reclamation and closure. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. That's a little clearer, thank you. I understand Diavik hasn't asked us. We haven't asked them. So the issues probably still unresolved. But if we're going to take it on, we better get the money that goes with it.
So but, Mr. Speaker, I want to move on to the other issue that I raised, which is transition planning. So there's apparently 500 NWT/Nunavut workers at the site. So can the Premier tell us what, if any, role GNWT has played in the transition planning to date and whether there are any plans to do anything more substantive to assist the employees? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And, Mr. Speaker, I'm happy to say that with respect to socioeconomic agreement monitoring that does take place, ITI is certainly one of the leads at that table. But this is where you do have ECE and Health and Social Services all involved, all working on this. GNWT does continue to have engagement with the mines to ensure that we understand their employment needs and their timelines to work with them so that there are training availabilities, whether mine training society or through ECE.
I can also say, Mr. Speaker, that because we are involved in that work with respect to all of the socioeconomic agreements, there are other projects in the Northwest Territories who also have obligations to hire, and I expect that there will be many opportunities at those other mines, at the other two existing diamond mines, to quite readily achieve their targets by moving forward to take on these workers.
I say that with some confidence, Mr. Speaker, because when we had the Ekati shut down, we saw that the Northern employees very quickly were able to, in fact, find employment. So, again, I'm confident that with the time that we have, the runway that we have, that we would, in fact, be well able to accommodate those workers. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Deh Cho.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. My questions today would be for the MACA Minister but first I'd like to acknowledge that the Premier mentioned the Canadian Red Cross and their presence here in the Northwest Territories. Perhaps we should look at utilizing their services to help the small communities because we got dire emergencies on the first responders in our communities as we're left to our own devices.
I'd like to talk about the volunteer fire departments which are it's a voluntary service within our communities. There was an incident about a week ago in our community, about 4 o'clock in the morning. There was a shack a fire call to a shack and there was only one person from the fire department that showed up. And it was a good thing that that one person did show up and knew how to drive the truck because he saved a life.
So you know, we got challenges keeping volunteers all the time. There's no resources going to it. Most times nowadays, you know, you have to pay somebody to do very many things. And we haven't been given any further resources from the department to keep and maintain volunteer firefighters, training exercises, ongoing things.
I'm wondering if the Minister can advise if there are any plans to deal with the volunteer fire departments in the small communities? Mahsi.
Thank you, Member for Deh Cho. Minister responsible for MACA.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And, Mr. Speaker, the Member talks about a very difficult and challenging situation in the communities. The department has regional assistant fire marshals out there that work with the communities. The communities just need to reach out to them. We can offer the training through the school of community government. The Member talks about the lack of volunteers. That's one of the challenges that we see a lot of, but we are working with the communities. So if the communities in his riding are looking for support, we are more than willing to bring in our staff to come in and help. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. And mahsi to the Minister for that reply. I think we're still facing challenges. Like I was saying before, like it's always like a lip service that we receive. They keep saying well, we got, you know, fire Office of the Fire Marshal or somebody that's working with our communities; apparently they're not, because I'm bringing out these issues. And it's for the other communities, the small communities which we're having challenges. And like I'm saying, we could probably utilize the Red Cross services, or the Canadian Red Cross, in our communities. The government just has to pay for that service so they can come in and help us bolster our volunteer fire departments. So I'm wondering if the Minister is open to that idea? Mahsi.
Mr. Speaker, I represent six small communities as well. I know my communities have reached out to the assistant fire marshal's office. The office is more than willing to come into the communities and work with them. We're also school of community government, we've had the ability to go into the community and work with the community specifically. So if we have volunteers that need first aid training, if they need fire training, we're more than willing to go into those communities to work with them. So the community, we can have the staff there. So that's what we're willing to do. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That's more lip service that I'm hearing, because I'm standing here, you know, on behalf of all the small communities saying we need something done to help our communities. Send your staff in. Now I'm hearing the school of government, you know, community government now, and then the fire marshal. Yet they're still sitting there where I'm asking on behalf of all the small communities to get your staff out there and get helping our communities. Can the Minister commit to doing that? Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I need to clarify. The Department of Municipal and Community Affairs, that's their regional job, is to get into the communities. The communities, as soon as they ask, we get in there. The school of government's willing to come in and offer courses there. The school has a calendar of events but if there's specifically one area that they need, we work with the community to do that. So we're more than willing to do that. The staff go in there. They are working with the communities. As soon as the communities ask, the regional offices work with them to get staff in there. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Deh Cho.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. More lip service. That's what I'm getting from this department nothing but lip service. I'm asking on behalf of the communities, the small communities, get your staff out there to communicate with the communities; don't wait for them. We're crying for help out there. And I'd probably be going back to the Minister again; can the Minister commit to getting his staff to reaching out to the small communities? Mahsi.
I guess the Member's not listening. I guess I'm not speaking properly here so I'm going to try this one more time. The staff reach out to the communities. The communities reach out to the staff. We work on a plan. So if the Member wishes us to reach out to his community, we will reach out to his communities again. But we work with them. That's our process. We work with them. When they ask us to get in there to help, we do that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, one of the things that we've been talking about is carbon tax this week and so my questions are for the Minister of Finance.
You know, I also want to know, like, how we're ever going to grow the Northwest Territories' population when the federal government is forcing the NWT to create a new logo I guess, is what I'm thinking, is move to the Northwest Territories where you can wear a parka eight months of the year in your house just so you could feed your family. You know, that's what carbon tax is going to make people do, is choose.
Mr. Speaker, can the Minister of Finance explain why $15 million, or the 25 percent of the carbon tax revenues, will not be rebated to households, businesses, local and Indigenous governments, or NGOs? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. Minister responsible for Finance.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So, Mr. Speaker, even if we don't accept the proposal that we're putting forward, the tax rates will not change. The tax rates that are being put in place on April 1st from the federal government for carbon tax are coming. What we're trying to do, and what we've done is, particularly after discussions with Members, we're proposing to have a heating fuel offset that will be based on the average household heating usage in the high use zones, middle use zone, and the smaller use zone, which from our calculations, will cover the costs for residents of the increases to the carbon as a result of the carbon tax. We are doing that in a way that, of course that's the madeintheNorth approach. It allows us to have the flexibility of what to do with the increases in revenues.
We're also, in answering the first half of the Member's question, Mr. Speaker, with respect to what we're going to do to keep people coming up here is to actually have some viable industry. Our approach to the large emitters as opposed to the outputbased system of the federal government, Mr. Speaker, is going to allow us that when as diamond mines or other mines or other large emitters may see their production falling, may see the closure plans, that they're not tied to a certain amount that once they're in, they're in. It allows them to plan for closure. It also allows smaller projects, we hope to be seeing, getting off the ground here to be also not subject to the large version of the carbon tax from the federal government.
So we are, again, looking to fully fund as much as can be done for the average resident, their impact, direct and indirect, by carbon tax, and keep industry functioning in a way that is actually adaptive to the Northwest Territories. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So, Mr. Speaker, the question I asked is why is this $15 million, or 25 percent, being held by the GNWT to go into general revenues? Where is it going; why is it not going back so we're carbon neutral for some of our businesses? I know I had this discussion on Yukon, the way that they're rebating with the Minister. You know, they have got small businesses, medium businesses that are being rebated, but I guess it's a little bit more complicated than just being rebated.
So will the Minister look at our plan, a madeintheNWT plan, that will include businesses, and if it's not so complicated as Yukon, that they can get a rebate out of this 25 percent that we're keeping back, because obviously the last five years we didn't do anything, or four years that we had the carbon tax and we held this money back. Nobody applied on it or whatever. Nobody knew what to do with it. So let's give it back to our small business, our medium business. I don't have a restaurant. I don't have anything in my community because it's too expensive for any overhead costs. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, keeping control of the revenues in the Northwest Territories allows us to do exactly what the Member is saying and to look at where once the carbon tax come in, are there costs that we have not accounted for? The Yukon system, I don't want to speak to another government's system, but very briefly, it is based on assets. It is not based on fuel usage. It is not a direct offset. It is not an uncomplicated system, Mr. Speaker. What we are anticipating, and having done calculations of fuel usage over the last few years, we can anticipate what the added costs to business are that will be passed down to the consumers and residents and add that in to the cost of living offset so that businesses can raise their costs and pass that down. But, on the other end, we were able to include that with the cost of living offset so that the market can adjust for the private sector, but that's so residents don't see themselves penalized as a result of that. And again, as we move forward, if we are maintaining control over the revenues, we're able to continue to adapt that system as we go forward.
Mr. Speaker, this is not a wash for us. There's quite a number in addition to the cost of living offset. Mr. Speaker, we're paying income assistance for folks that are on income assistance living in public housing, the GNWT's covering all those increased costs. So this is not some great, great revenue source in general. There's, you know, tens of millions of dollars being spent on strategic energy initiatives. Money that's being spent over on climate change initiatives with the department of ENR. Far in excess of any extra amount that we are getting in the revenue in the carbon tax. So, again, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'll leave it at that and see where the next question takes me.
Thank you, Minister. Colleagues, please keep your sidebar to a minimum. Thank you. Oral questions. Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, again, I'm going to go back to that 25 percent. Mr. Speaker, our municipalities are not even included. We already know our municipal governments are underfunded. You know, they need to keep the lights on. Every one of us have either had family, friends, or anybody, or we take part in any kind garbage, you know, snow removal, all these things are going to cost more for the municipal governments. So why are we not giving any of this money back to our municipal governments out of this 25 percent that we're holding back for our government slush fund? I don't know, because I don't know what it is. If this government wants us to vote in favour of a madeintheNWT, it needs to fit the NWT and it needs to fit our municipal governments, our residents, and not just the mines, all our businesses. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, carbon tax is coming. Mr. Speaker, the large emitters right now businesses don't have a special program under the federal system either. The federal government will decide where they want to put the money, how they want to put the money. Right now where we've seen them put their money is in electric vehicles, in heat pumps, which don't work in the Northwest Territories. So, Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure that that's necessarily the direction that we all want to go with. As I've said before, we have figured out what the fuel usages have been in the business sector and the private sector, added that into the cost of living offset for residents, so that businesses should realize that they can raise those costs and that they will be offset. We can't take away the signal on carbon tax. That's exactly what the federal government said we can't do. So what else can we do? Again, we're trying to target residents so that they have the spending power to go out and keep the economy churning, trying to ensure that the large emitters, who would be otherwise under the federal system, are able to adapt so that they can come. They can continue to operate here, provide to the Northwest Territories economy. But also, Mr. Speaker, in the last round of conversation, I believe, at the last public briefing, we said we would work with the communities if they want to share with us what they anticipate their actual costs to be. We've already gone to $55 million in contributions to communities with this current budget proposal. That's bringing us up to the $5 million gap that was in the mandate, and we will continue to work with them. So if we know what exactly it is that the communities say they are needing and spending, again, if we have that there's no slush fund. It's called the consolidated revenue fund. It is literally the dollars that pays everyone and everything in this building and everywhere else; it's not a slush fund. So bring us the actuals and we're happy to have that conversation. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
