Mr. Speaker, I wish to present to the House Bill 96, Supplementary Appropriation Act (Operations Expenditures), No. 1, 20232024, to be read for the first time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. The motion is in order. To the motion oh, sorry. Bill 96 has had first reading. Sorry, getting ahead of myself here.
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, that Bill 96, Supplementary Appropriation Act (Operations Expenditures), No. 1, 20232024, be read for the second time.
This bill makes supplementary appropriations for operations expenditures for the Government of the Northwest Territories for the 20232024fiscal year. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. 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 96 has had second reading and is ready for third reading.
Carried
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, that Bill 96, Supplementary Appropriation Act (Operations Expenditures), No. 1, 20232024, be read for a third time. Mr. Speaker, I would request a recorded vote. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Frame Lake.
Sorry, Mr. Speaker, I'm not finished yet. So I again owe to my constituents and the public to explain how I'm going to vote on this one. I'm very concerned that the supplementary reserve will be exceeded on this very first sup for 20232024 on the operations side, and I believe that there's going to be lots more spending required as a result of the fires and floods. So I don't think that this is good financial management, especially in relation to the climate emergency and that we have to have a much larger supplementary reserve in the future like we did two years ago where it was $65 million.
So I do want to commend the Minister, though. She has carried through on her commitments as part of our Budget 20232024 negotiations, and those commitments are contained in here. $4.775 million in new spending, I want to thank the Minister for that. But that's really dwarfed by the $15 million in new funding for NTPC in terms of rate stabilization.
Mr. Speaker, that's probably larger than the entire commitments the Regular MLAs have secured through budget negotiations over the almost four years that we've been here. We had no heads up whatsoever about this or a discussion with MLAs before this was brought forward in the supplementary appropriation, and I think that kind of thing should really, we should be told about this ahead of time. And I think this is really as a result of some poor planning by NTPC.
We heard my colleague from Yellowknife North talk about how the fuel costs were estimated at a dollar in the general rate application. And what we've really though witnessed is a failure to actually lower energy costs here in the Northwest Territories, and that's what the NTPC should be doing, building energy selfsufficiency and doing itself out of a job through the use of renewables and alternatives. So I think it's fair to say that Regular MLAs have wanted fundamental change at NTPC. We want to get away from a management board of deputy ministers that have been in place since 2016, or the last seven years.
What we did, Mr. Speaker, was we negotiated a commitment for a discussion paper on governance and on March 23rd, the finance minister said in this House that we would get an options paper. While I can't really talk about what was given to us, Mr. Speaker, I can tell the public that it was not an options paper. We received a twopage letter with a twopage attachment with a Cabinet decision. No options presented; we got a Cabinet decision.
Again, I think Regular MLAs wanted to have some input on this. We're going to perhaps have an opportunity to talk about it unfortunately behind closed doors. But I think the future of NTPC and the need to lower energy costs in the Northwest Territories is still a live issue, and I need to bring some attention to this, Mr. Speaker.
So I will very reluctantly vote in favour of this sup, because it does provide follow through on the commitments during the budget, but in no way can my vote be considered consent or agreement with providing a further bailout to NTPC, and there's Cabinet's broken promise on that, on NTPC governance, and I think they need to work with us more closely on that in the future. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Thebacha.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just want to reinforce my belief in the expansion of the Taltson as a greater greener energy. I don't always agree with my colleague, and I want to make sure that there has to be some support for the staff and the direction that is taken for greener energy and for climate change in the Northwest Territories. You know, we have to give the new president and their staff an opportunity to do that. It hasn't been long since he's been in that position. There are some things that are not quite right with regards to how it's done, but I just want to make sure that greener energy is my colleague I I respect my colleague, okay, because he works hard. But hydro is the cleanest energy that you could ever get and, with that, I'm supporting this supplementary, like he said he's going to do too, but I have to make my position very clear. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Thebacha. And the motion is in order. To the motion. Minister responsible for Finance.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just want to be very brief so there's no misunderstanding for the public. The money that's going towards NTPC isn't necessarily to support their operations. This is a rate stabilization fund increase, Mr. Speaker, and that is really quite specifically because given the costs of fuel, which everyone's experiencing, the government experiences it too and Northwest Territories Power Corporation experiences those increases in rates or increases in fuel, that winds up being an added cost that was not built in to the rates during the last rate process. Therefore, now, they're facing costs that were built in at a dollar and suddenly are at a $1.50. That's a significant change, Mr. Speaker. Add to that that we are in a low water cycle therefore at the Snare facility when they have to burn diesel to make up for low water, firstly they're having to burn diesel to make up for the water and they're burning that diesel at the higher rate. So this wasn't an anticipated high cost and that's why it's coming in as a sup. In such circumstances, when the rates aren't set at that high number, a rider kicks in. The rider kicks in to ensure that, of course, that the corporation can remain viable by having the costs reflect for having people's rates reflect the costs. So, Mr. Speaker, rather than having individuals, residents, have to bear that rider right now, have to bear that increase, which if I recall correctly was between 20, 35 percent increase to people's rates, that's why this is before the House. I appreciate my colleagues' support on it but I did want to clarify it for the public why there is this significant amount there. It really is to ensure that the rider doesn't kick in and rates don't reach those kinds of levels. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
