Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the Process Convention on the introduction and enactment of Bills drafted pursuant to the Intergovernmental Council Legislative Development Protocol.
Mr. Speaker, I'll be making a Member's statement on this document tomorrow but for now, I would like to draw attention to the importance of what it means.
We talk a lot about reconciliation and working closely with our Indigenous government partners in this place. As a former chief of the Salt River First Nation for 14 years, I am proud that this document gives substance to the importance of our relationships with Indigenous governments and the shared responsibility we all have as Northerners to enact land and resource legislation that reflects the rights and aspirations of all Northwest Territories governments. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Reconciliatory Review of Housing NWT's Collection Approach:
WHEREAS clients of Housing NWT fall into arrears for a variety of reasons and many clients are unable to get out of arrears in their lifetime;
AND WHEREAS opportunities for employment and to generate income are limited, especially in smaller communities;
AND WHEREAS many clients live on fixed income and limited sources of income;
AND WHEREAS it is a mandate item of this government to support seniors to age in place by increasing supports for seniors to stay in their homes and communities;
AND WHEREAS it is a mandate item of the Government to implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples;
AND WHEREAS there are elders and Indian Residential School survivors in the Northwest Territories with pensions that are being garnished to pay back Housing NWT arrears;
AND WHEREAS the garnishment of a pension to pay off a debt to Housing NWT is unreasonable and unjust;
AND WHEREAS section 62 of the Financial Administration Act provides the authority for the Financial Management Board to forgive a debt or obligation owed to Housing NWT if it is considered unreasonable or unjust;
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the honourable Member for Great Slave, that this Legislative Assembly calls upon the Government of the Northwest Territories to pause the garnishment of elders and the Indian Residential School survivors' pensions to pay for Housing NWT arrears immediately;
AND FURTHER, Housing NWT identify all elders aged 60 and over and consenting Indian Residential School survivors in public housing who currently owe arrears or who are having their pensions garnished.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Monfwi. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Monfwi. You'd like to speak to the motion?
Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, not just now but I've been hearing a lot from my constituents, and others in the Northwest Territories, those who are living on fixed income, that their money are being garnished to pay for housing arrears and other arrears as well, and this is causing a lot of hardship for our vulnerable, especially the elders. It is hard on them especially now with the high cost of living that they have to pay. You know, there are they have to pay for they have to make a choice of either paying for a bill or groceries and this is a lot of them are having difficulty making ends meet. So many are saying that they cannot afford to have their pension garnished or any income that's coming to them. So for that reason, I am supporting this motion as presented to stop all the garnishment, or all the garnishee from pension or debt and debts forgiven. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Monfwi. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. I support this motion. As I understand it, there's about $13 million in arrears with the Housing NWT, and that includes current and former tenants. And as I understand it, about half of that amount would be covered by the motion perhaps. So, look, this is a real issue for many people. It causes tremendous hardships, and we need to find a way to get through this and around it and over it so that our residents aren't seeing their incomes garnished. And so I support this motion in finding a better way to approach this. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Nunakput.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm in full support of this motion because this we're having too tough times right now and back home in my riding in Nunakput, Mr. Speaker, in regards to it's the whole territory. I think that something like this, residential school survivors and all the debts owed in regards to housing, I mean those houses were paid ten times over by now and the state of those houses are not worth the price that we're paying. Something like this is going to really help the people and not make it so difficult to make decisions either pay your bills or feed your family, especially with what's coming forward in this House next week. So I'm in full support of this bill. I wish all my colleagues on this side of the House in an open vote to the floor too to make the right decision for the people they represent as MLAs. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Nunakput. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Great Slave.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So, Mr. Speaker, I too stand in support of this motion, and it is why I wanted to be the seconder on it. To me this is a true act of reconciliation with Indigenous people. It's come to my attention, and I want to thank my colleague for actually being really informative in helping us as a committee to understand really what the situation is like in the smaller communities. I agree with my colleague about the state of the condition of a lot of these buildings that we are, you know, putting off onto low income people in the communities. They aren't worth the money that they're being held to and often it's come to my attention that it's also an issue where perhaps at times people sign documents and they weren't aware of what they were signing. ESL plays into it as well. Don't mean to laugh, Mr. Speaker; I'm just a little distracted today. So yes, no, I just wanted to say that I agree here.
One thing that I think is really key here is any time and this is a conversation around the forgiving of student loans in the US. Any time that you're getting people out of debt, the money that they would be paying towards or spending on those loans or the interest will now come back into our community and our economies and, therefore, that money will stay in the community instead of going into the government coffers which is just only going to help the people that are affected but not only them, the people around them. I think one of the biggest things we noticed, or has been noticeable to me, has been the issue of overcrowding. So, you know, you hear about it and you think you know, you can say oh okay, there's six people living in this house, but until you go into a community like we did with the Member from Monfwi and see that there are, you know, seven adults, children, everybody living in this one or twobedroom home and you really get an understanding of what that means and really what how that impacts people's quality of life. So that being said, I just want to say that I strongly support this motion. I think it's a true act of reconciliation and it goes to furthering the priorities that we set as the 19th Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Great Slave. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Thebacha.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I too support this motion. I stood up in this House many times about the lack of compassion by the NWT Housing department and how seniors are I like the one part where it says especially with the motion that says "and whereas it is the mandate item of this government to support seniors to age in place by increasing supports for seniors to stay in their homes and communities."
Now with the two cases that I've had on my agenda and mandate for since I've been here and nothing has been done with either one, that to me is unacceptable. And I want to I support this motion 150 percent to ensure that this justice is finally hopefully the other side would listen and understand where many of us are coming from. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Thebacha. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Kam Lake.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as some of my colleagues have stated, the current state of arrears in the Northwest Territories is just over $13 million held by about 914 people. The housing corporation has already has a collection policy and the principles of that collection policy stipulate that Housing NWT will
Adhere to a standardized and consistent approach to collections;
That arrears should be collected in a timely and efficient manner;
That tenants and clients should not accumulate large rental or mortgage arrears that are difficult to collect, and,
That arrears should be forgiven where collection is not possible.
Mr. Speaker, I think it's valid to talk about and share some of the stories that were shared with us as committee members when we travelled to communities and had the opportunity and privilege to sit with elders across this territory and hear their stories. Some elders lived in homes for their entire lives and all of a sudden one day received a bill for arrears. They had no idea where they came from.
Some elders came to us and told us of their stories at the age of in their 80s and in their 90s, and they're paying over half of their pension towards their arrears. That leaves many elders with less than $300 to pay for all of their monthly expenses. $300 today in Yellowknife, not even in our small communities, you leave with maybe three bags, four bags of groceries. And that's not the only expenses that somebody would have to live and survive in the Northwest Territories.
So garnishing pensions in an unreasonable manner off of our elders is not taking care of our elders and empowering them to survive and thrive in their home communities let alone even here in Yellowknife.
Mr. Speaker, some of the elders who are carrying arrears are women who have experienced family violence in their homes and are carrying the damages that were inflicted to that infrastructure through family violence and are walking around with this huge weight on their shoulders from those damages and those arrears, unable to access additional housing programs to secure stable housing. There are other elders who spoke to us and they are carrying arrears from income that was earned by other members of their family. And so by preventing homelessness and allowing people to live in their homes, like their children or their nieces and nephews and their cousins, they were incurring arrears. And this policy was changed over the life of this Assembly, but those arrears were not addressed and mitigated by the housing corporation.
In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, these arrears, as you've heard my colleague say, they cause extreme hardship for the people that are holding them and prevent them from being able to move on and address other concerns in their lives. Some of those concerns are really privileges. So rather than holding on to arrears or or sorry, rather than the weight of arrears and being able to turn around and help their family maybe take care of children, because that's a role that a lot of our elders fill in the territory, is that care provision for the younger generation and that care provision ends up turning around and enabling a lot of healing in our territory. So that's a very important one.
Mr. Speaker, it is incredibly prudent that or it's incredibly important that the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation have prudent management when it comes to managing arrears, managing rents, and managing the policies that they actually put in place. So they need to not only understand why people have rent but also be able to mitigate why people have arrears and address that properly. And if the housing corporation is going to have policies to address this, then they actually need to follow them. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Kam Lake. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Hay River South.
Yeah, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I too, you know, agree with this motion and support it fully. You know, in the past years the federal government, you know, they've got to take responsibility for some of this. This government has to take some responsibility as well. And, you know, and I've been around long enough that and worked with people and went to meetings with them and seeing, you know, the lack of understanding of agreements being signed and what they are getting themselves into. You know, we do have legislation out there that allows this government to look at all these arrears and write off the ones that are uncollectible. And it's a simple process. We just have to start that process somewhere. So I think, you know, with this motion I think this is a good start and hopefully it gets done sooner than later. Thank you.
Thank you, Member for Hay River South. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes.
Yeah, thank you, Mr. Speaker. And Mr. Speaker, I too support this motion. You know, I've been dealing with the housing concern of a constituent of mine who has actually passed away, and the estate of her her family is trying to deal with arrears that were done. You know, and now we're going like, when we look at what my colleague has said as how are we going to get these arrears paid for when we've lost this person; we've lost this family member and we're dealing with this? So, you know, this is a way that, you know, we can move and push the housing corporation forward to actually act on what they say they are going to be doing. And so yes, again I'm not going to repeat anything that my colleagues have said, but I just wanted to highlight that, you know, this is an issue even when people are gone, we're trying to collect arrears. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Monfwi.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the support of all my colleagues. Can we have a recorded vote, please.
The Member for Monfwi. The Member for Great Slave. The Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. The Member for Hay River South. The Member for Thebacha. The Member for Kam Lake. The Member for Frame Lake. The Member for Nunakput. The Member for Yellowknife North.
All those opposed, please rise. All those abstaining, please rise.
The Member for Nahendeh. The Member for Yellowknife South. The Member for Sahtu. The Member for Range Lake. The Member for Inuvik Boot Lake. The Member for Yellowknife Centre.
The results of the recorded vote: Nine in favour, zero opposed, six abstentions. The motion is carried.
Carried
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I wish to present to the House Bill 74, Forest Act, to be read for the first time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. The motion is in order. To the motion. Oh yes, sorry. Thank you, Minister. Pursuant to Rule 8.2(3), Bill 74 is deemed to have first reading and is ready for second reading.
First reading of bills. Minister responsible for Status of Women.
Mr. Speaker, I wish to present to the House Bill 75, Council of Women and Gender Diversity Act, to be read for the first time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Pursuant to Rule 8.2(3), Bill 75 is deemed to have first reading and is ready for second reading.
Second reading of bills. Consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters, Bill 23, 29, 60, 61, 63, 66, 67, 68, and 73, Committee Report 40, 43, 44, 4519(2), Minister's Statement 26419(2), Tabled Document 681, 694, 813, Tabled Document 881, 882, and 88319(2).
I now call Committee of the Whole to order. What is the wish of committee? Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Madam la Presidente. Committee wishes to deal with Committee Report 4519(2), Report on the Review of Bill 60; and, Tabled Document 81319(2), 20232024 Main Estimates, with Department of Infrastructure. Mahsi, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. We will take a short recess and resume with the first item.
SHORT RECESS
I now call Committee of the Whole back to order. Committee, we've agreed to consider Committee Report 4519(2), Report on Bill 60: An Act to Amend the Petroleum Products and Carbon Tax Act. I will go to the chair of Standing Committee on Government Operations for any opening comments. Member for Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, Bill 60, An Act to Amend the Petroleum Products and Carbon Tax Act, received second reading in the Legislative Assembly on November 1st, 2022, and was referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations for review.
In its review, it was important to the committee to identify what changes could help mitigate the economic impacts of the tax. Committee also wanted to understand implications of reverting to the federal backstop.
Committee held a public technical briefing from the Minister of Finance and the department officials on November 25th, 2022. Following that, the committee sought public feedback on Bill 60. Committee heard from several stakeholders both through written submission and oral comments. Committee heard serious concerns about the carbon tax approach.
As a result of the review of Bill 60, the committee presented a report with five recommendations to the Legislative Assembly on March 1st, 2023.
I would like to thank committee for its work on review of Bill 60. Individual Members may have additional comments. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. I will now open the floor to general comments on Committee Report 4519(2). Members. Member for Frame Lake.
Thanks, Madam Chair. I want to start by thanking the committee for its work on Bill 60. I sat in on I believe all of their proceedings. I was there for the public hearing and so on, meetings with the Minister and staff. And I think they've come to a given the state of information that was available and what they heard from the public, I think they've put forward a reasonable set of recommendations. Probably but I think it's important to kind of review how we got here first.
And back in 2021, the federal government set new targets for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions partly based on, you know, an international consensus that the PanCanadian Framework targets, the old targets were not going to get us where we need to as a planet. And, you know, the federal government went out and informed all the provinces and territories that there was going to be some new goalposts, new benchmarks, put in place. And the federal government required as of April 1st, 2022, an indication from each of the provinces and territories whether they were going to have their own carbon tax approach that would meet those goalposts, collect the revenues themselves and decide how to use the revenues, or whether they would prefer to go with the federal backstop. And if a province or territory decided to go onto the federal backstop voluntarily, the federal government would transfer all the revenues to that jurisdiction and allow that jurisdiction to decide what to do with the revenues. And if a province or territory decided that they didn't want to voluntarily go into the federal backstop, the federal government would, of course, collect the taxes but then rebate most of the taxes to individual taxpayers in those jurisdictions. And a number of jurisdictions have done that including Alberta, Ontario, and a longer list that I'm not going to go through.
So that was the first sort of gatepost, was April 1st, 2022.
The second was September 1st, 2022, when if a jurisdiction decided that they wanted to retain their own carbon tax, they had to submit specific proposals to the federal government so that they could evaluate that they would fit within the goalpost that the federal government had set. They even issued some guidance around that which, you know, jurisdictions could use in designing their own carbon tax.
Now, the first meeting that, you know, the Regular MLAs had with the Minister of Finance on this approach happened in July of 2022. So by then decisions had already been made and then of course the bill was introduced in October of 2022. So I think it's from my perspective, what this is really all about is Cabinet's approach and whether, you know I think it really is a struggle here about power and authority over who sets the carbon tax, at least within our jurisdiction, and who decides on those revenues and what role will be the Regular MLAs, and perhaps even the public, have in all of that.
So I think it's important to look at how the first carbon tax bill came in the last Assembly. It provided basically total authority jurisdiction to Cabinet to decide how to set the carbon tax rates other than they were set in the legislation but they tweaked they get to tweak it, but they also get to decide how the rebates are going to be set through regulations. And the Regular MLAs had no say whatsoever on the regulations, nor did the public, other than providing feedback and then they can take that. But Cabinet can change regulations at a whim. So I think it's important to look at how that exercise of discretion has been used between the first carbon tax bill and where we are now.
So I said that there was these two important mileposts, April 1st and September 1st last year for deciding if you're going to keep your own carbon tax and then submitting a design for that. And I think it's fair to say that that first milepost of April 1st, 2022, Regular MLAs, we didn't even know it was happening. There was no effort to reach out to us to look at options, get or seek our input. That decision was made completely by Cabinet.
Now, the so then I think, you know, other discretion that could have been exercised when we did start to talk with the Minister and staff about this, we suggested that there be some robust public communications around that. There was one presentation to standing committee, and that's all you can still find I think on the Department of Finance website about the carbon tax. That's it. So there really hasn't been much in terms of public communications around that, and I think that's borne out by what we heard in the standing committee from the public. They want more information about this, and they didn't get it.
So another some further exercise or discretion, the kind of approach the Cabinet has put forward, and I will go on record about this, is unfair. It treats the large emitters more favourably than other businesses, small businesses, NGOs, community governments. It's unfair. That's how Cabinet exercised their discretion with Bill 60. They brought forward an unfair approach.
The only consultation that happened in developing Bill 60 was with the large emitters. The public wasn't consulted. Regular MLAs, we had some input; it didn't start until after some of the major decisions had been made. So I believe that that was unfair the way that Cabinet decided only to consult with the large emitters.
Cabinet also got an exemption for methane emissions. Methane is problematic when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions and its effect on climate change. It's 80 times worse than carbon dioxide. There are methane emissions that happen in the Northwest Territories, fugitive emissions flaring. These happen at Norman Wells, but Cabinet went and sought an exemption for whatever reasons. This is not environmentally friendly to get this exemption, quite frankly, so.
So Cabinet proceeded on. Cabinet has decided they do not want a legislated approach because Cabinet wants to continue to control how the carbon tax revenues are used. And so the impact, mitigation, offsets, rebates, will all be done through regulations with no input from Regular MLAs, no input from the public. That's not how we should be doing this.
I also tried to get some accountability, transparency, inserted into the bill. I gave the Minister even wording around this from what I tried to do in the last Assembly. That was not included. So there's no separate accounting for this money. There's some public reporting that happens; it's discretionary, it's not very good. I've been critical of that as well, but I think it should be right in the bill itself.
So all of this leads to the need for a legislated approach to set down a fairer approach, greater accountability, sharing of the revenues, and that's what they do in the Yukon. That's not what we have here. And I'm not prepared to yield that much authority and control to Cabinet because of the way that they've exercised that since the last carbon tax bill legislation that was brought in. I'm not prepared to give them a blank cheque to continue to exercise that kind of control and authority given what has happened and transpired here.
So to try to further some of the debate and discussion on this, I did table a model bill for NWT carbon tax rebates in the House last week. That, I think, needs to be plan B. That's the approach that we can and should be taking, Madam Chair. And I've also reached out, offered to discuss this, try I've said that we have to find ways to work together with Cabinet to come up with a better plan for the Northwest Territories. I haven't seen any willingness on the part of Cabinet to actually do that. Those are my remarks. Thanks, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Member. General comments. Member for Nunakput.
Thank you, Madam Chair. In regards to Bill 60, the heating fuel and the gas over the last heating fuel and the diesel, gasoline has gone up in Nunakput. Heating fuel is up 25 percent. For automotive is 24. Gasoline is an average 12 percent. It's gone up to $2.75. Madam Chair, it's a rippling effect across my riding. Food prices are going up. We can't afford to buy food. Nunakput has the highest food price index in the Northwest Territories. Over 50 percent in Nunakput are worried about having enough money to buy food, and almost half the residents in Nunakput are worried that they don't have enough money to feed their families at any all the time or very often. We have to hunt, hunt to eat, Madam Chair. 67 percent of households in Nunakput eat country food. And if you're buying gasoline at $2.75 a litre, you have to get something on that hunt. If you don't, you're going hungry. We have a the price of power continues to go up across the Northwest Territories, which affects my riding. The power in Nunakput riding is among the highest rates in the Northwest Territories. For example, Sachs Harbour pays $2.37 a kilowatt.
Madam Chair, for the housing, you know, the insufficient housing that's built poorly, leaking energy, residents have to pay for poorly built public housing units that are 30 plus years or older. Also with that, approximately 8 percent of housings need in the region. Housing NWT will never renovate units fast enough to keep the housing problems at a minimum. 30 percent of the homes in Nunakput are overcrowded.
The inflation across Canada is at an alltime high, Madam Chair. The NWT has inflation, is higher than Canada at 7 percent. And going this way, where we have issues providing service already, why can't we do the federal backstop? I'd rather do it federally because I don't I don't trust in regards, I don't trust Bill 60 going into the government's hands in regards to what we're going to do and what's coming forward.
Nunakput has the highest cost difference in the NWT. 18 percent of the people in Nunakput are considered to live under low income. Nunakput has over is $50,000 below average on family income but the NWT's price of all goods and services in our region is the highest. We have to pay for where we live, Madam Chair. 10 percent of the families in Nunakput are less than $30,000 a year. 344 people in Nunakput live in income assistance, which is 17 percent. And I know that's higher. There are little employment opportunities in my riding since that moratorium hit and that M18 has gone into review from the federal government. We're resource rich and cash poor.
Impact to Nunakput communities on Bill 60, Madam Chair, the estimated total house carbon tax burden for the Nunakput residents is $899 plus, for 20232024. The people in Nunakput are already can barely buy food for the table, find employment, earn income, pay heat and power and housing. How can we tax people who have nothing?
The residents shouldn't be penalized for where we live, Madam Chair. The GNWT is not going to provide enough offsets, cost of living offset, the right direction? No. Madam Chair, this has to be sorted out. We should not support Bill 60. It's going to a rippling effect across the territory. It's going to be a rippling effect for all residents. Ottawa and the GNWT is looking out is not looking for the Beaufort Delta and Nunakput communities, Madam Chair. Ottawa is squeezing us financially with the tax while it imposes the moratorium and blocks resource development. The GNWT is doing Ottawa's dirty work, Madam Chair. If Ottawa insists on this tax, they should impose the tax that they thought and do the backstop. The GNWT isn't taking a meaningful role with this side of the House to try to work with us to get this done so I'm in total I'm in total disbelief in regards to why are we doing this? Why are we going to have more taxes on our people that have nothing? We have no jobs. It's just really disheartening. We're here to make a difference and put our people first. That's who we work for across the territory, and we're not. They're going to tow the Cabinet line; do the federal government's dirty work. Ain't going to happen. Whoever supports this bill, Madam Chair, they're not doing it for the right reason. They should be the right reasons is standing up for their people, their constituents that they represent, and not have this extra tax and extra burden on the families that are having a tough time. People are going hungry. People are not being able to pay bills. They're having to choose what to pay. This is not right. Our territory should be doing better.
Madam Chair, this bill will impact all residents, especially those in small communities in the High Arctic who already face the highest cost of living. Madam Chair, I oppose this bill, and I encourage everyone who's concerned about this, rising cost and living impacts of Bill 60, to talk to your MLA. And once this comes to the floor of the House, Madam Chair, everybody's going to have to answer for this to their constituents on why you supported Bill 60. I really I'm hoping that our Cabinet and this side of the House vote for the empathy for the people of the Northwest Territories and let the federal government do their own dirty work and so where we could be able to try to live a little bit.
And in regards to our moratorium, that's got to be lifted. We never used to have to worry about work in my riding. We always had work. We always had oil and gas but we're not we're not green. All the green projects, look at your windmill. They give us solar panels. Man, we're dark six months of the year, how does that help us? Nothing. Doesn't help. But here you could make a difference and stand up to Ottawa and tell them to do their job. Right now. We have to stand up. And I can't say this enough stand up for your constituents, Members. Don't support Bill 60 because you're going to have to answer to your constituents when it's time for election. So Bill 60, please, let's kill Bill 60 and send it back to the federal government for the backstop and then we'll go from there, and we'll work together in regards to try to do better things instead of arguing in the House over something like this when the federal government should be taking full responsibility of it. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Member. Are there any other general comments on the committee report? Member for Thebacha.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I too will be voting against Bill 60. I have I said that right from the beginning. I feel that sitting with all the Indigenous leaders across the territories for the 14 years before I came to the House, I know the hardships of Indigenous people, I know the hardships of the poor, and I know the hardships of every small business and the senior population. And I feel that I stand for that when I stand up in this House. I feel very strongly that the business community, whether they be small or large, it will affect them. I feel that the NWT Senior's Society had written a written submission to the standing committee, and I'm listening. The Indigenous governments also had written letters to the standing committee, and I'm listening. Ordinary people within my community are concerned about this bill, and I'm listening. I will not be changing my mind on this bill because once I've decided that I'm going to do something, I usually make sure that that's what I'm going to do. I'm not I don't waiver. I refuse to waiver on anything that I believe is best for the people of the North and people of my community. So I will be voting against the carbon tax bill, Bill 60. And like my colleague said, the federal government should not be making decisions on behalf of the Government of the Northwest Territories and making us do things that divide us. And we don't have to be divided. I think that this should be a free vote, and people should stand up and decide on how they feel in their heart on this whole issue. I have no problem standing up and voting against Bill 60, and that's exactly what I'm going to do. I will be following the majority of my colleagues on this side of the House. And thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. General comments. Minister Wawzonek. Oh, you don't want to go. Member for Yellowknife North.
