Merci, Monsieur le President. The 20232024 Main Estimates present pretty much a status quo budget for this government. I am going to talk about what's in the budget, what should be in it, and also about some priorities for the next Assembly in terms of fiscal sustainability.
While I can support most of the spending, there are still some serious shortfalls and trouble is still on the horizon. Both shortterm and longterm debt continues to increase, and we remain very close to the debt limit. There is the largest operating surplus of the 19th Assembly at $178 million, but that is largely due to the scaled back overbudgeting on the capital side. This much healthier surplus comes despite slow growth in revenues, higher inflation, and unforeseen flood remediation requirements. The healthier surplus should also provide greater room for the spending associated with the issues and priorities identified by Regular MLAs.
It's unfortunate that input from Regular MLAs is not sought earlier in the process, something I've recommended for the last seven years I've been here. There should be a meeting between the Regular MLAs and the Finance Minister to share priorities and issues before the budget is developed.
There are some good initiatives in this budget, such as funding for the labour market supplement for some healthcare workers, which should be expanded, and more for recruitment as well. There is more funding for some nongovernmental organizations, apparently a 2.2 percent increase with a total value of $780,000. However, it's not clear why some departmental contributions and grants funding was not increased, and I will single our Environment and Natural Resources, Lands, and the Executive and Indigenous Affairs departments where there were no increases. About twothirds of the NGOs seem to be targeted for the increase but this should be applied to all of the contributions and grants provided by GNWT, especially during this period of high inflation. Better yet, we need a policy change to our funding arrangements that incorporates increases into multiyear funding arrangements to allow NGOs to continue to do the valuable work that makes the NWT a better place. The GNWT also needs to do a better job in disclosing, on an annual basis, all of the grants and contributions provided along with the organizations that receive them.
With this budget, the Cabinet will complete its very low and lessthanambitious commitment to increase funding by $5 million to make a small dent in the municipal funding gap. That $5 million probably doesn't even begin to cover the increases in that gap that have taken place since 2015. We can't even get a new calculation of the current municipal funding gap from Cabinet. This gap will continue to grow and will do so even more during 20232024 due to the carbon tax increases and the decision by Cabinet not to share any of those revenues with community governments.
I understand that the increased carbon taxes will cost community governments an extra $2 million in 20232024 and this will climb with further carbon tax increases. Taxbased municipalities will be forced to raise property taxes and smaller communities will likely cut programs and services to cope with the carbon tax increases. If GNWT is to continue the administration of a carbon tax, or receives carbon taxes from the federal government, we must share some of the revenues to cover these increased costs and treat the communities as if they were diamond mines.
And while I am talking about the diamond mines, Mr. Speaker, I remained unconvinced that GNWT is doing anything serious to support the workers at Diavik which is scheduled to close in 2025. I got vague statements from the Finance Minister last week that GNWT departments are at some meetings on the socioeconomic monitoring agreement. That's not good enough in terms of planning for economic transition. I would welcome any specifics on what we are doing as a government to help these workers but I don't see much in this budget that is likely to be of assistance.
A few other observations on the budget I would like to make:
The first is a $75 million bond issuance for the NWT Hydro Corporation. There are absolutely no details in the main estimates about this increase in debt and what this spending is actually all about. I am still waiting for details, Mr. Speaker. This Cabinet has failed to restore public governance to the NWT Power Corporation and our energy planning is, quite frankly, a mess. Crumbling and underutilized assets, reliance on big grids and old technology, no way of properly analyzing and disclosing tradeoffs, I can't begin to express how out of touch with reality this system has become. A new focus on energy selfsufficiency and smaller scale solutions is urgently required.
There are some interesting references in the budget and papers to a review of the fiscal responsibility policy that has failed to keep us out of growing debt and huge overbudgeting of capital projects. It appears the Minister has finally heard Regular MLA calls for the calculations associated with the determination of compliance or noncompliance with that policy that will now regularly be found in financial documents. We need more detailed financial reporting and accountability throughout the year to ensure that sound financial management continues. There needs to be some consequences for noncompliance with the fiscal responsibility policy and, at a minimum, a requirement for a plan to be made public to bring our finances back in order.
I am particularly concerned with this government's increasing reliance on publicprivate partnerships as a way to finance larger capital projects. There has been little to no analysis or disclosure of the impact this has had on our operating budgets as P3 servicing costs eat away into our ability to provide programs and services. There should be a firm cap on P3 servicing costs just as there on debt servicing as part of a renewed fiscal responsibility policy.
One would also think that something as important as the fiscal responsibility policy would go through some form of public engagement as we do with such mundane matters like the renaming of the Stanton Legacy Building, or a survey on liquor and cannabis products. I will pursue this further with a Member's statement and questions for the Finance Minister at a later date.
The Government Renewal Initiative appears to have ground to halt, and I've yet to see anything made public or much that is very useful. While I support the concept of program evaluation and review, this work cannot possibly find enough spending cuts to fund our unsustainable path when there is overbudgeting on capital, growing debt, and no willpower to raise more revenues.
I would like to turn to some future priorities that I will pass on to future Assemblies in terms of fiscal responsibility that I do not believe have been adequately addressed during the budgets presented in this Assembly.
Review own source revenues and undertake a fair taxation review
Increase the number of personal income tax brackets to five as seen in most other Canadian jurisdictions;
Increase own source revenues as much as possible in the territorial formula funding arrangement and work with federal opposition parties to make that happen;
Increase our resource revenues that have been characterized by world experts as some of the most charitable in the world. We are giving away our resources when we should be maximizing the benefits.
I will give some credit to the Finance Minister who appears to have listened to my concerns, and those of others, about the lack of transparency around the disclosure of resource revenues. For the first time ever, there is a statement showing the past and anticipated net fiscal benefit in these main estimates; in other words, what we actually get to keep from nonrenewable resource development. This is good but can be improved by separating mining and petroleum revenues. We should also be accounting for payments from the federal government for Norman Wells. Of course, we should go even further and disclose royalty payments from each facility as is already done in Quebec and elsewhere. Mr. Speaker,
Focus on Economic Diversification
There are lots of statements in the budget address, and the economic and fiscal reviews about the pending closure of the diamond mines with little prospect of anything similar on the horizon. The next potential mines are financially and environmentally risky, in many cases already fully licensed, and what is holding them back is financing and commodity prices which we have no control over. Past efforts at concerted economic planning and diversification in the NWT have largely failed. We need to focus on economic diversification and selfsufficiency by building greater food security and import substitution. In an uncertain world with a climate crisis, economic diversification and selfsufficiency will provide greater security for all our residents. Mr. Speaker,
Housing, Housing, and More Housing
Cabinet has promised 100 new public housing units over four years of the 19th Assembly. Nunavut will build that many this summer under its new plan. If this government is serious about economic development, poverty, reconciliation, and virtually everything else, people need safe and affordable housing. This needs to be the priority for the next Assembly. No more megaprojects over housing when Cabinet goes to Ottawa. Treat housing as the megaproject for the next Assembly.
The Climate Crisis
The current Cabinet continues to pussyfoot around the climate crisis or climate emergency. I would have thought that two successive years of extraordinary and catastrophic flooding would have convinced this government that we are now in the midst of a climate crisis that will change virtually everything we do. I think I have only once ever heard a GNWT senior staff person say "climate crisis" once.
Our government continues to fail on climate change mitigation and adaptation. Our public reporting is so convoluted that no one understands it. The only reason we may reach the old and outdated greenhouse gas reduction targets is because of the closure of the Diavik diamond mine. I will be watching very closely to see if the new Department of Environment and Climate Change actually uses the terminology of a "crisis" or an "emergency" and has the responsibility and tools to coordinate and lead GNWT's efforts. If this is not part of the establishment policy for the new department, this Cabinet will have failed again. This government needs to stop being part of the problem, acknowledge the crisis or emergency, show leadership, and make better decisions on mitigation and adaptation.
In terms of the budget process, I can say that the relationship and negotiations with Cabinet over financial matters has been respectful and fruitful, a much different and welcome change from the previous Assembly. I will be happy to work with my colleagues on this side of the House to push for changes to the current budget. We still have more work ahead of us to ensure that the priorities of Regular MLAs are more clearly reflected in the budget, but I am confident that working together we can reach a reasonable compromise and a better balance. Merci, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In Schedule 3 of the business incentive policy is quite a long list of companies, and I don't want to go through the reasons of why each of these got in here or others that, you know, seemingly have the exact same situation in this territory didn't. But can the Minister just give me some explanation of how we got here; why is there a specified list of southern companies that we give preferential treatment to? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Yellowknife North. Minister responsible for Industry, Tourism and Investment.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the story starts way back in 2010. There was some policy revisions made at that time. And essentially any business that was already here at that time, and that was already operating in the Northwest Territories, was grandfathered in under that policy. And that has not changed, and so those companies continue to be on Schedule 3. Thank you.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think at this point the only fair thing is to scrap the entire list and have a policy that anyone can apply to, and maybe some of these companies will reapply. But when you look at many of them, it's clear they have been bought and sold tens of times since they were put on this list and many are owned by, you know, global consortiums around the world. It just doesn't make sense to be spending extra taxpayer dollars on them.
So my question for the Minister of ITI is when is this procurement review going to be finished and will it remove this schedule? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So, Mr. Speaker, there's a number of different things happening with respect to the procurement review. Some already have seen some changes. There's been, for example, vendor performance management is now underway. Contracts are being updated accordingly. There's significant work happening led by EIA on Indigenous procurement, being codeveloped or codetermined with Indigenous parties that would benefit from that. There's also work happening in ITI, Mr. Speaker, around the business incentive policy and around the manufacturing policy to look at ways to improve that. And that is all expected happen still within the course and the lifetime of this government. That includes determining exactly what the definition of a northern business should be, which is certainly a little more complicated than just one department making that determination. Should it be an entity that has a place of business here, that does a majority of its business here, that has a certain number of residents that are employed here; that's certainly proved to be rather more contentious than simply a blanket decision to be made. But, again, I can certainly say that there will be work ongoing and it will be happening in the life of this Assembly. Thank you.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm going to try again once more. Okay, perhaps we have to wait for the new policy that answers, you know, some of these companies and I get it's difficult to say if your base of operations are here but you've sold since been sold, should you fall under the new policy. But to me the answer to that is the new policy. So I don't want to see a situation where we create a new policy and then we keep Schedule 3. So we go well, we're just going to leave those people there forever.
So will the Minister commit that once we have a new policy in place, we will be removing Schedule 3? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, Mr. Speaker, that is certainly was exactly the recommendation in the procurement review, was indeed to remove Schedule 3. And the work that's going on about what that will look like to be replaced and how businesses might find themselves, that work is underway right now. And I'm afraid the Member's going to have to wait and see how that unfolds and then any business that's in Schedule 3 can determine whether or how they find themselves reflected in the new policy. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary, Member for Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, you know, and I think this is a tough policy question. There has to be a way to write it because take Walmart, for example, one of the largest corporations in the world, we presently if they bid on food services, we buy a few hundred thousand dollars-worth of food in this territory, we give them some extra money. And I get they have a building here and they have staff here but my question is, will the Minister remove Walmart from Schedule 3? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, Walmart's the easy one. Walmart and Loblaws and, in fact, many of the other businesses on Schedule 3 have not bid on any GNWT contracts in over ten years. And in that sense, they're sitting there but they're not really gaining much benefit from being on Schedule 3. Those aren't the difficult circumstances. The more complicated ones are those who are longtime northernbased businesses who have had the benefit of growing and becoming large larger businesses, which is really a good news story for the Northwest Territories and for having those businesses based here and who have been grandfathered in, and to determine what, in fact, or how, in fact, we might want to continue to encourage the growth of businesses in the North, to be based in the North, but competing on a national scale, that is the more difficult question. Walmart, I'm not too concerned about as we move forward with this process but, again, it's those northernbased businesses we want to consider how to be tracked and capture that kind of growth in our economy. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Colleagues, before we continue, I believe in the gallery today we have Avery Parle, president of Northern Territories Federation of Labour. Welcome to the Chamber. Oral questions. Member for Great Slave.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Premier. In these complex times, with increasing climate uncertainty and deteriorating healthcare systems, why would the GNWT not want to partner with the humanitarian organization such as the Canadian Red Cross that has experienced its share in skills to bring to the people of the Northwest Territories? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Great Slave. Honourable Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Actually my understanding is that we do work with the Red Cross. The Red Cross provides valuable services to all of Canada; we recognize that. However, this government, because of what we've been facing, has bumped up our EMO, emergency response, from two fulltime positions to hopefully ten after this budget. So we also work Red Cross really excels in what they do in areas of registration and donation management but it's not free, Mr. Speaker. There is a cost to it. So we've used them before. But like I said, there's a price for direct aid costs such as supplies, materials, logistics, transporting, storing and distributing aid, expenses for personnel and transportation, plus admin costs. So we do appreciate the services of the Red Cross. But we're a small jurisdiction, Mr. Speaker. We've been working focusing on trying to get our communities so that they can actually have the supports that work with emergencies that come. They're welcome; we've talked to them. They're more than welcome to reach out to the Red Cross as needed but our focus has been empowering the communities at this point. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A lot of that answer confuses me. First of all, why would we tax our communities that are already lacking capacity and overburdened to then create 33 individual MOUs with the Red Cross? But, also, I'd like to know where the Premier is getting her facts from. It's my understanding that there is a minimum administration fee to work with the Red Cross approximately around $5,000.
So can the Premier please tell me where she's getting this idea that it would cost us all this money to engage with the Red Cross? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So my information comes from various departments. If I'm wrong, I'm more than willing to relook at that. If the Red Cross charges $5,000 for all their supports that they would do, including the cost of transportation, including cost of personnel, including the cost of supplies, etcetera, then, please, let me know. Send me a letter. I'd be more than willing to entertain that. My understanding is that each one of those components has an additional cost. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yeah, I'm pretty sure that you will be or the Premier will be getting some information to correct her misinformation. Perhaps if she had met with the Red Cross, as she promised to last year, she would know these things directly.
My next question is to do with why does the GNWT keep using the term "contract" when answering me when I'm talking about a memorandum of understanding, not a moratorium of understanding, which the Premier mentioned on Friday in her response, but a memorandum of understanding. This does not have any costs associated with it, and it is not a contract. Could the Premier please explain why she keeps conflating the two? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I did state in the association of communities, I believe it was, that I was more than willing to meet with the Red Cross. I'm more than willing to meet with most people that ask for a meeting with the Premier. However, Mr. Speaker, at no time did I, as the Premier, get a letter requesting a visit so I would have expected that to happen. But, Mr. Speaker, departments did meet with the Red Cross, the applicable departments. And health met with them, MACA met with them. And that would be the route that I would go anyway, was to take the informed departments. Personally the Premier's office doesn't use the Red Cross at this moment. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Honourable Premier. Final supplementary, Member for Great Slave.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this just seems to be another instance where the Premier is passing everything off to her colleagues to take care of. A territorial MOU encompassing all departments would actually make things a lot easier for communities, for departments, for others to engage in contract with the Red Cross at a later date.
Can the Premier please tell me why such a prudent and timesaving measure wouldn't be explored by her office? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think we've already explained that. We are looking at our emergency management structure in itself, trying to help the communities. They are the first on the ground. We do work with other agencies. We have used the Red Cross when needed. And my understanding is they were looking at a standing agreement. But, again, Mr. Speaker, if I'm wrong with that, then please send me a letter. I'm more than willing to entertain that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Honourable Premier. Oral questions. Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.
Can the Minister explain what is known about high school attendance through COVID19? Can he describe the attendance in small communities versus regional centres? What do we know about Indigenous students' attendance? I guess my question is do we have this data, and if not, can he commit to gathering this data? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. Minister responsible for Education, Culture and Employment.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Attendance data is tracked. The most recent data that we have has been published, and that was for I believe the 20202021, and that is in our JK to 12 performance and measures report. That information states that territorywide, the attendance rate was 79.9 percent. In Yellowknife, 87.23 percent. In regional centres, 76.3 percent. And in small communities, 72.8 percent. However, I will note that attendance can be difficult to take when things are done virtually, and teachers don't necessarily see the students. So like most things, the stats from COVID are not perhaps as accurate as we would like. But I can commit to continuing to collect this information and report it publicly when it becomes available. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And thank you to the Minister for that. And I know as a past regional board director that the data is all from kindergarten to grade 12, and our kindergarten to grade 6s are excellent at going to school, and then as we get into junior high, it starts to fade off, and we get into senior high, this is where we start to lose our numbers. So I would really like the numbers for that.
But, Minister, can you explain what kind of support is available to the young adult students? The ones that I am walking about are the ones in grade 10, 11, and 12 who are impacted by the COVID19 pandemic to complete their high school education. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And students who are 19 to 21, they can return to high school. I know that a one or twoyear age difference when you're a teenager is a big deal and so it can be difficult for students to return. I mean, a 21yearold doesn't want to sit with 17yearolds, and that's understandable. Some communities have alternative high school programs. Some of these are flexible programs. Perhaps you could attend on the evenings or on weekends, understanding that older students might have jobs that they need to attend to. In Inuvik, there is the Sunchild ELearning Community program as well. And that delivers educational services to Indigenous students. We also have our career and education advisors who are available to help students determine what they need to graduate and move on to the next phase in their life. So there are a number of supports. However, I recognize that there and as I've mentioned before in this House, there is a gap in this area. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you to the Minister. Mr. Speaker, recognizing there are students who haven't completed high school, can the Minister commit to working with his department or with the regional school boards, you know, to identify these students that didn't graduate or identify these students that, you know, maybe just, just passed and may not be eligible to be accepted into some of our universities or our colleges and, you know, support these specific students to complete their high school education, maybe similar to the university and college PREP program but targeted to these students with additional semesters that they may require. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So there are currently a few options for people. Students can take upgrading at Aurora College. They can take the adult literacy and basic education program. And so that is it's upscaling programming, and there are no tuition associated with this program. There's also the university and college access program and the occupation and college access program at the college. There are fees associated with this, but they are supported through student financial assistance.
As the Member has stated, and I've also stated, we are aware there is a gap here despite these programs, and the department is looking at ways to bridge that gap. It's not going to happen today, but it is something in the near term we hope to be able to do. In terms of identifying those students, that's something I can bring back to the department and talk about any more nearterm opportunities. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And thank you to the Minister. You know, I hear the Minister that I know there is a gap, we know there is a gap; we need to know what the gap is before we can fix it so I'm glad that he's going to be looking into that. But, again, going back to, you know, maybe we have some students that might need a year and a half of university PREP, not just the one year that they could be funded for because I think for funding that's the cap. Is that changed with all the changes made? I can't keep up with some of the great changes that he's made. But are there students that are eligible to get into some of these university college PREP, especially these students that could be a year or two years that they might need to take, and they can get funded through our SFA program? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think that question deserves a full answer so what I'm going to do is take it on notice, and I'll return to the House with an answer. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Thebacha.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, can the Finance Minister explain why finance is providing recruitment bonuses to brand new eligible health staff but is not providing any retention bonuses to longterm healthcare staff in similar positions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Thebacha. Minister responsible for Finance.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the labour market supplement is something that we worked on, both Department of Finance as well is with the authorities, and just to be clear, it's not being paid out differently if you're brand new or otherwise. The issue is around the eligibility of the position. There are specific positions that were negotiated and discussed with the union. Those positions are all going to be receiving the labour market supplement. There are some challenges in terms of the length of time that someone might be employed. So, for instance, if someone's on a term position for one year, then they'd be getting a payment that is in line with the amount of time that they are employed and there would be some differences, for example, if somebody's on paid leave at the moment, there may be differences in terms of when they get their payment processed. But there's certainly not a line that's been drawn as between shortterm or longterm staff, again, other than ensuring that they are paid in accordance with the policy and how that adapts depending on how long someone may be in the role. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, can the Minister tell us if she considers the recruitment and retention bonuses to be fairly distributed among healthcare staff? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I certainly do consider this to be one tool in the toolbox of recruitment and retention efforts that are underway within the health authorities and supported by the Department of Finance. The intention again is to ensure that we are finding those positions that have been hard to recruit here in the Northwest Territories and, again, to then pay according to the positions that were discussed between ourselves and the union and looking at the data available about what those positions are. It doesn't mean that every single person employed within the Department of Health and Social Services, or within one of the authorities, gets a labour market supplement. It was positions that were determined to be difficult particularly difficult to recruit for and that is in line with the labour market supplement policy. That policy applies not only to the healthcare field but to the entire public service. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, can the Minister tell us what type of feedback Finance has received from healthcare staff about these retention and recruitment bonuses? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would say probably the single thing that I have heard the most, that I have had to correct, has been the concept or the notion that these are thankyous or that these are COVID bonuses. Every single public servant deserves a thank you and is valued. The bonus in the labour market supplement isn't the thank you, and it's not a COVID bonus. It really is a reflection of the challenging situation we are in right now all across Canada recruiting healthcare staff and wanting to ensure that our recruitment and retention personnel had every tool available to them, and that's where the labour market supplement came in. And so we have certainly been trying to ensure that folks are aware of exactly what it was for and what it was not for and certainly trying to ensure that we don't undermine people's sense of value and worth. These are all every public servant is valued, Mr. Speaker. But the labour market supplement is hopefully going to bring more folks in to those difficult positions to make it easier for everyone to do their job there. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Thebacha.
Mr. Speaker, can the Minister tell us if the Union of Northern Workers considers the parameters of these recruitment and retention bonuses to be fair for their NTHSSA members? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, while I do hope to have a positive relationship with the union and hope to continue that, I'm certainly not in a position to speak on their behalf. I can say that there were this was an opportunity where, while not always a smooth path along the way, I do believe this was a reflection of a good collaborative effort between the GNWT and the UNW in terms of trying to identify ways to bring more healthcare staff in. With more staff there, it helps lessen the burden on each individual staff and it helps retain the staff that we have. And, again, without losing anybody, that helps maintain the overall staffing contingent that we have. So, you know, discussion around the labour market supplement continues. I expect it will continue given the labour market situation we're in in Canada, and we'll certainly look forward to participating in those discussions with the union. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.
