Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I give notice that on Thursday, March the 9th, 2023, I will present Bill 76, An Act to Amend the Electoral Boundaries Commission Act, to be read for the first time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for the Sahtu, that Bill 72, Opioid Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act, be read for the second time.
This bill creates a cause of action for the Government of the Northwest Territories in its own right against manufacturers and wholesalers of opioid products, and their consultants, for the recovery of the cost of health care benefits caused or contributed to by an opioidrelated wrong. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Madam Premier. The motion is in order. To the principle of the bill.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Any abstentions? The motion is carried. Bill 72 has had second reading.
Carried
Second reading of bills. Member for Thebacha.
Mr. Speaker, I move, second by the Member for Nahendeh, that Bill 73, An Act to Amend the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act, No. 4, be read a second time.
Mr. Speaker, Bill 73 amends the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act to adjust the indemnities and allowances listed in Parts 1, 2 and 3 of Schedule C annually using the average change in the Consumer Price Index over the past five years.
Currently, MLA indemnities and allowances are adjusted each year on April 1st based on the CPI for the previous calendar year. If the status quo is maintained, MLA indemnities and allowances will increase by 6.8 percent on April 1st of this year.
Mr. Speaker, this bill will help avoid sharp increases in MLA pay in years when inflation is unusually and temporarily high. Implementing a fiveyear rolling average as a basis for future annual adjustments to MLA indemnities is the approach used in Manitoba, Mr. Speaker, and it will help smooth out any unusual and temporary spikes in inflation.
For April of 2023, this bill will reduce the annual adjustment from 6.8 percent to 3.02 percent.
Thank you, Member for Thebacha. The motion is in order. To the principle of the bill. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. I wish to speak to the principle of the bill. This is probably one of the shortest bills this Assembly will ever deal with, but I think it's important that the public and media understand what this bill is all about. And I believe that the Member for Thebacha has explained it probably much better than I'm going to try to do right now. But what this is really to do is to replace the current way of calculating MLA's indemnity, or salaries, office holders, and allowances. Right now those are changed according to the consumer price index as of April 1st each year. This is going to move it to a fiveyear rolling average. And I'm not opposed to that, but I think the timing of the bill is the issue, Mr. Speaker.
And as I understand or what the honourable the mover indicated was that this is as a result of the high relatively high rate of inflation that we're experiencing now. As of April 1st, MLA salaries and indemnities and allowances would go up by 6.8 percent. As of April 1st, that would cost about $350,000. So moving to a fiveyear rolling average will reduce the increase to 3.02 percent but increase subsequent years by as much as about 2 percent, depending on what the rate of inflation or the consumer price index is until a new equilibrium is established. So I do not support this change for a number of reasons.
First, I just don't think it's good practice for sitting politicians to change their remuneration. There's already perception of conflict and perhaps even a real conflict of interest when we attempt to change our own remuneration. And this is why we actually appoint an independent commission on compensation and benefits every couple of Assemblies to look at these issues and bring back recommendations to us. But those recommendations, when they're brought back to the House, if they're accepted, they're only implemented for the next Assembly so sitting MLAs are not, you know, making changes to their own remuneration, and I think that's a far better practice.
Secondly, Mr. Speaker, I think there's going to be perception that these changes are really interfering with the upcoming collective bargaining with the Union of Northern Workers for the majority of our employees. That contract is coming to an end as of March 31st, 2023, and I expect, as I understand bargaining's probably already started on this, so I think this sets a bad precedent. It's not unlike what happened perhaps in the last Assembly where initially MLAs decided to take a two year pay freeze after some presentations from Cabinet that were akin to the sky is falling. And I think that set us up for a bad set of negotiations in the last Assembly, and I think this is probably going to head us in the same direction, Mr. Speaker.
Thirdly, the last thing I guess I'd like to say about this is that I think this is really about the effect of this will be about reducing, you know, our ability to attract quality people to this Assembly and to political life, that we want more representative candidates to come into this place. And I think this is going to probably make it less attractive over time. And I think it also feeds into the narrative that politicians are paid too much, work too little, and are expendable. And I'm not prepared to enter into that narrative, Mr. Speaker.
So for all these reasons, I do not support this bill. However, I'm not opposed to going to a fiveyear rolling average of consumer price index to calculate increases to remuneration but that should apply to the next Assembly. So at the appropriate time, I will move an amendment to that effect. I don't expect that it's going to pass but we'll see. But I certainly look forward to the debate on this, and I expect and would encourage constituents to contact us about what this bill is really all about. Thanks, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. To the principle of the bill. Member for Great Slave.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think it's worth clarifying that if this bill is not introduced that all Members in this House will get a cost of living increase that is the current CPI, which is over 6 percent. What this bill does is actually reduces the amount of money that MLAs would get as a raise come April 1st by smoothing it out using that CPI fiveyear average. Why I think that it's important to make this designation is that we as MLAs are not actually changing what our remuneration is at this point. What we're doing is actually proposing a change that minimizes that cost of living raise that we would be getting regardless such that it doesn't look like we are taking advantage of an odd spike in the CPI at this time. So I do support the principle of this bill. I am a single person. I have one income. I have to run a household on that income. In my professional life, I could make at least $50,000 more a year plus better benefits and such and more vacation. So, therefore, for me it is important to recognize that I believe that MLAs already make a fairly small amount of money comparatively to other professionals in this territory. We are struggling just like everybody else to pay bills. I've heard my colleague here speak many times about paying for things out of his own pocket for his constituents. I do the same. I daily am hit up for money. And at this point, while it may sound like I'm being greedy, I need that cost of living raise. I do agree for it being spread out over the fiveyear rolling average; however, I do want to clarify that this is not MLAs giving themselves a raise. If anything, this is MLAs giving themselves a cut. Thank you.
Thank you, Member for Great Slave. To the principle of bill? Member for Range Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also want to do some clarifications here. The intent of this bill is not around collective bargaining and it is not Cabinet directed or Cabinet did any presentations so I can't speak for the previous Cabinet, but I can speak for this one. At no time has Cabinet talked to the Regular Members in trying to say that this should be the sky is falling and that this needs to happen. This is an initiative by the Legislative Assembly, and I do support this initiative. The supply chain issues since COVID hit have been horrible for all of us. Our cost of living has gone up. Inflation is impacting residents, businesses, employers right across the board. I think that all of us at this time of what's happening, not only in the NWT but across Canada, have to be conscious of what we're doing to stop the rising inflation. And in my opinion, Mr. Speaker, this is part of that, that we would try to curb the inflation rates that are going to be unacceptable and unlivable for many people and residents of the Northwest Territories. So I do support this bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Range Lake. To the principle of the bill. Member for Hay River South.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, although I understand the intent of this bill, as a politician for me it's never been about the money. It's about doing what's right for the people. And also, you know, we have to understand that, you know or to understand what people are going through, we almost have to live that as well. And there's a lot of people out there that I know that are struggling that I you know, I provided money to and I provided other supports as well. And, you know, I still kind of, you know, make ends meet. So I guess what I'm trying to what I'm going to do is introduce a revision to the motion as well and that's to freeze this year's increase and then go to a rolling average starting in a year from now. So, you know, at the end of the day, like I say, it's there's a lot of people out there struggling, and I think it's important that, you know, we do our part as well. And, you know, probably a lot of people here, maybe they made more money, you know, in other jobs, and that's their choice. If they want to go back to that, that's fine. The other thing is and we talk about, you know, recruiting people by, you know, having, you know, a higher remuneration for politicians but I don't think that's true. I think at the end of the day, we probably attract more people who really want to do this job. We get people from the communities. The North is small. And sometimes it's about, you know, picking the person who believes in what's happening on the ground, believes in people. And if we don't do that, we may as well not be here. Because for me, it's doing the right thing for the people. And right now, you know, when it comes to unions well, you know, they got they have to do what they have to do and at the end of the day, you know, I look at where I'm at and the decisions I have to make and it's got nothing to do with the union and their negotiations as well. So, yeah, so what I'm going to be doing is to ask for a is asking for a zero percent for a year and then go to rolling average after that. Thank you.
Thank you, Member for Hay River South. To the principle of the bill? Member for Monfwi.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this is not about us. This is about the people that we serve in our region. And MLAs, the way that I look at them is that we are public servants. So we are here serving the people in the Northwest Territories just like under the people that are working for the GNWT under that are under the UNW collective agreement. For whatever UNW gets, I think I strongly believe that MLAs should be getting the same. Mr. Speaker, if this is good enough for the UNW who are representing the staff in the region, it should be good enough for us. So the way that this is presented at 6 percent increase, I do not support but maybe I will support with the amendments made. Like, zero percent and with some amendments made that's reflective of the UNW collective agreement. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Monfwi. To the principle of the bill. Member for Thebacha.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 8.2(7) and have Bill 73 referred to Committee of the Whole for consideration later today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We'll still have to have the vote. To the principle of the bill.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Any abstentions? The motion is carried. Bill 73 has had second reading.
Carried
Second reading of bills. Member for Thebacha.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 8.2(7) and have Bill 73 referred to Committee of the Whole for consideration later today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Thebacha. The Member is seeking unanimous consent to move Bill 73 into Committee of the Whole later today. Are there any nays? There are no nays. Member for Thebacha. Oh sorry, the motion is in order. To the motion?
Okay, we already got unanimous consent. Okay, Bill 73 will be moved into Committee of the Whole for further consideration later today. Thank you.
---Carried
Second reading of bills. Consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters, Bill 23, 29, 60, 61, 63, 66, 67, and 68, Committee Report 40, 43, 44, 4519(2), Minister's Statement 26419(2), Tabled Document 68119(2), Tabled Document 69419(2), Tabled Document 81319(2).
I now call Committee of the Whole to order. What is the wish of committee? Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. Committee wishes to deal with Tabled Document 81319(2), 20232024 Main Estimates, with Legislative Assembly and Department of Environment and Climate Change. Mahsi, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. We will take a short recess and resume with the first activity.
---SHORT RECESS
I will now call Committee of the Whole back to order. Committee, we've agreed to consider Tabled Document 81319(2), 20232024 Main Estimates. We will now consider the Legislative Assembly. Does Mr. Speaker have any opening remarks?
Yes, I do, Madam Chair. I am pleased to present the 20232024 Main Estimates for the Legislative Assembly. Overall, the Legislative Assembly's estimate proposes an increase of $2,165,000, or 8.5 percent, over the 20232024 Main Estimates.
Madam Chair, this year's estimates will focus on three overarching priorities, the majority of which will sunset at the end of 20232024:
Adoption of the independent commission and compensation benefits recommendations, which is estimated at $135,000.
The 2023 general election is anticipated to cost $1,323,000.
Transition out from the 19th Assembly into the 20th Assembly is estimated to cost $777,000.
I look forward to answering any questions Members may have.
Thank you. Mr. Speaker, do you wish to bring witnesses into the House?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. Sergeantatarms, please escort the witnesses into the Chamber.
Mr. Speaker, would you please introduce your witnesses.
Thank you, Madam Chair. To my right, I have deputy clerk, members and precinct services, Ms. Kim Wickens. And to my left, I have deputy clerk, House procedures and committees, Mr. Glen Rutland.
Does committee agree to proceed to the detail contained in the tabled document?
Agreed.
Committee, we will defer the departmental summary and review the estimates by activity summary, beginning with expenditures on behalf of Members on page 9. Questions. Member for Frame Lake.
Thanks, Madam Chair. So on page 9, the compensation and benefits is increasing by about, it looks like almost $600,000. Can I have someone explain to me what that increase consists of? Thanks.
Thank you. Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you for the question there, Mr. O'Reilly. Just to break it down a bit here, under Member's base salary, it's $137,000. Capital allowances for expenses is $13,000, CPI increase of $120,000. CWEA prorated at $139,000. Transition allowance, which makes up the most part, at $474,000.
Thank you. Member for Frame Lake.
Thanks, Madam Chair. And thanks for that information. So how much of this is this, say the 6.8 percent increase in CPI for indemnity office holders and allowances? That total, I think can someone tell me what that total is? Thanks, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The onetime forced growth funding at 6.3 percent would be $305,000 to fund for the Consumer Price Index. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Member for Frame Lake.
Okay, thanks. And so if this was reduced to the 3.02 percent, it would be, I don't know, probably $150,000; is that a correct ballpark figure? Thanks, Madam Chair.
