Thank you, Member from the Sahtu. Any other general comments from the Members? I don't see any hands oh okay, I see one there. I'm going to go to the Member from Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I actually prepared detailed notes so it might take longer than ten minutes, but here it is. Buckle in.
Overall, I want to start by thanking the civil service for the work they put into these business plans within such a short timeframe and for the efforts that each department took to see itself in each priority even when the link is not obvious. So, for example, how ITI might see a role for itself in promoting access to health care, I think each department really did try to see itself in each of these priorities.
I do think that these business plans are a work in progress and that there's still a disconnect between the intentions we set out in our priorities and the targets and measures we see in these business plans. In some cases, I see important pieces that are entirely missing. In other cases, the objectives are not ambitious enough and, too often, the targets are entirely processoriented instead of being outcomeoriented. For example, the target is the number of meetings held instead of what is actually accomplished in them. So I'm going to department by department. Here I go. I'm going to start with ECE.
I appreciate that the ECE targets are, for the most part, specific and measurable; however, one gaping absence in the business plan is a goal related to basic education and literacy, and that should be linked to the economic foundations priority because it's fundamentally how we build the workforce. So I would propose we add an objective that says improve literacy and numeracy outcomes amongst JK to 12 students. And I appreciate that the department should not be telling teachers which methods they should be using in their teaching, but we need to set concrete goals and expectations around literacy. I note that there's a contradiction between a goal stated in this business plan to maintain or increase uptake in the small community employment support program when we are at the same time seeing cuts in the main estimates to this, although I'll speak more to that later.
I support the commitment to work with ITI and GNWT partners to advance plans to transition the diamond mine workforce, but ECE does not specify any targets or measures on this one, saying it first wants to consult with partners. I have to say I find it rather astonishing that at this late stage of the game, ECE still cannot define its role in terms of transitioning the diamond mine workforce. I think there's been a lot of work with partners, and I think we're ready to know what the actions are to move forward.
In terms of the Giant Mine remediation project, the proposed action is to continue to participate in the project, and yet, the logic is that that will somehow lead us to meet or exceed the employment targets even though they haven't yet been met. So I would question that logic. And similarly, ECE commits to work with the mining sector and GNWT departments to make northern hiring requirements more clear and the idea is that will lead to increases in the number of residents northern residents hired and trained. I think that there's some analysis missing here in terms of what actions will actually lead to our desired outcomes instead of just continuing to do the same things we've been doing and expecting that's going to give us different results.
And finally, for ECE, the objective around access to health care is to focus on health promotion and preventative care in schools. So I agree that there's a place for this. I'm just concerned that the pendulum has swung too far away from recognizing the benefits of offering mental health counselling in schools, and we're exclusively focusing now on prevention and promotion, given that I don't see objectives mentioned at all in terms of clinical mental health counselling in schools. And I do think schools have a role in facilitating that. So now my comments on ECC.
While some of the targets laid out by ECC are meaningful, my main comments in this one are pointing out that often the measures are too processoriented and somewhat meaningless. So the target of we're going to participate fully in the integrated resource management regime, I would argue doesn't say much. So on this note, I am begging all departments, please don't waste resources collecting or reporting on data such as number of files we post to an online portal or the number of routine meetings we hold. I don't think that's useful and so I would beg you not to collect that data. One important objective is the efficient and timely regulatory review and EA processes in decisionmaking, but disappointingly, once again the measures seem to be processoriented such as the number of reviews that the department participates in, the number of processes coordinated by the department. But what we need is evidence that improvements are being made. On this, ITI's business plan is more helpful in terms of identifying goals, actually completing regulatory initiatives identified by the Mackenzie Valley operational dialogue. So these two business plans need to be dovetailed and aligned. I also see goals around completing and addressing recommendations in the 2025 Environmental Audit, which leads us to wonder what happened to the 2020 audit and why aren't we establishing goals to implement those recommendations.
In terms of supporting communities to access public land through individual parcel transfers and bulk land transfer processes, so ECC is promising to and I quote initiate all processes for land transfers. But clearly there's we're hinting here that there are some barriers to completing them. So I think we need to be more upfront about identifying those barriers and how we propose to address them, how the government proposes to address them, such as if there's resources needed for land surveying or changes needed to legislation, some indication of that needs to be in the business plan so we know how we can move forward.
Okay, next, Executive and Indigenous Affairs. So a significant new role that EIA is taking on is to lead GNWT efforts to support NGOs to secure sustainable multiyear funding. That's great. The catch is that all the actions seem to involve helping NGOs get funding from other parties, third parties. Even when NGOs are delivering core social services on behalf of the GNWT, yet they're still expected to cobble together funds from the federal government or private charitable donors. And so some of the actions identified, I would argue, are not helpful in many cases. So in many cases, NGOs don't need guidance in their funding submissions to other parties. They don't need more meetings. I think they would rather, honestly, just take the money and just just give the money directly to NGOs instead of having all those meetings and trying to help them with funding applications to other people. I think a more useful action in this regard would be to commit to implement the recommendations of the report, strengthening the nonprofit and charitable sector external advisory committee report that was tabled near the end of the last Assembly.
Okay, and in terms of the homelessness strategy, which EIA has also taking the lead on, there's a large disconnect here. So I appreciate that EIA states its goal is to implement the strategy, that's great. But the actions that it proposes will get us there are focused on putting together five teams of staff that are colocated and setting up regional committees. So that, on its own, is not going to solve homelessness, and I think we could all admit that. But I think these business plans should instead just adopt the goals and the measures that are already laid out in the homelessness plan itself. We've already got the targets and measures provided. Just adopt them, work them in to these business plans.
And, finally, in terms of EIA, in the list of departmental highlights, I would say that the project that sticks out like a sore thumb is the one gov project in terms of its disconnect from our core priorities. I would venture a guess that no one in this room campaigned on the idea of consolidating GNWT websites. So I would strongly question the urgency and the cost of this project.
On to finance. One action that I think is missing here in terms of addressing our labour market challenges is that we need to address our extremely long timelines for hiring. I've heard that we often lose out on good candidates because our hiring processes take much longer than anywhere else. So that's something that's tangible that we could put into that plan. Other than that, I actually think the targets and measures are well thought out for finance, and I'm encouraged that the department will advocate that all proposed initiatives undergo a MacroEconomic Policy Framework lens review. The problem I see is when the Department of Finance has other lenses it's requiring departments to consider, like the Government Renewal Initiative, the Fiscal Sustainability Strategy, that can sometimes be in conflict. And I could perhaps conclude if I was given a second chance, if others let me at a later time. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. I want to thank the Member from YK North. I'm going to continue on with round one, and then I'll come back to the Member to conclude her statement. Is there any further general comments from the Members? I'm going to go to the Member from Frame Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Okay, let me just get organized here.
So, yeah, I'm going to try and keep it to ten minutes but similar to the Member for Yellowknife North, I mean, we are talking about a very large document so it's hard to go through all my comments on it in such a short period of time. But I want to speak kind of generally to it and then speak to some of the things that I would have liked to see in there and maybe some things that I would like to advocate to be put in there.
So, first of all, have we established measurable targets? I think it's a bit of a mixed bag. There are areas where they are clearly measurable. There's dates established but in many cases, targets simply say literally TBD. Or the goal is quite vague, or as, you know, articulated by the previous speaker, goals are processoriented, number of meetings as opposed to outcomesoriented. And so we need to look back to the smart goals principle. Are we setting goals that really lay out what we're trying to achieve?
Have we been focused? Are we focused on our priorities? When I look through this document, I'm a bit less confident about that. I will say that the process of having each department speak to the priorities shows me that the government is thinking about the fact that we need kind of an across departmental approach. And I really do appreciate that, because I know that there's been criticism in the past of siloing amongst departments, so I really do like seeing that every department has found ways to see themselves in the priorities of the Assembly, and I think that is really positive. The question is are we being particularly focused and strategic in terms of actions that we're taking to achieve those priorities? Are we trying to do too much? I would say I'm a bit less confident about that just noting how big of a document this is.
So I'm going to go try and go through department by department with some things that I would like to see. And I'm not going to speak to all of it because, of course, that would make many hours, and, you know, I'd love to ask some questions, but I think we talked about AOC brought forward, you know, the idea of perhaps reviewing the business plans in more detail, and I think that is something that we we're still talking about, and I would love to see us do a kind of a more fulsome review of the business plans as part of our process because I recognize that this document is incredibly important to the work that staff are doing and to achievement of the priorities. So I really do think we need to be focusing on this and not just the numbers in the budget. So let's go to department by department.
ECE first. The grow and enhance mandate commitment. So I appreciate that the government is kind of speaking to some legislative targets, but I would like to see the government establish clear targets for polytechnic university implementation. Whether or not they're going to be investing in a Yellowknife campus, which has been stated as a need, and how the polytechnic university implementation is going to go forward, the college has been said that they need housing, so there's a lot that's not contained in here that needs to happen in order for this project to go forward. And my colleagues have been speaking to that, and I've been speaking to that in the House, the importance of focusing on that project. So I'd like to see more in the business plans on that. And I also think that we need more of a focus and targeting of JK to 12 education. We touch upon it, but I don't see a strong statement in here of where we are, what the current conditions are, where we would like to be at the end of this Assembly. So a goal of progression towards something better than what we've got now. I think we have we recognize that this is a critical need in terms of building up people and the workforce in the NWT, but we haven't really addressed it in the business plan. So I'm going to move on to ECC.
There's a one of the mandate commitments is encouraging private investment in housing. One item I'd like to see added to the business plan here is working to eliminate overlap between municipalities on land management. So not simply processing applications, but eliminating the overlap, replacing overlap with policies about how funding is to be used to address concerns about land mismanagement, but rather than kind of managing the lands within municipal boundaries, simply setting processes policies and expectations and letting the communities take on that role as most other jurisdictions do.
Further to ECC, increasing investments in certainty. The business plan speaks to the 2025 Environmental Audit but doesn't speak to the current environmental audit, which I would note many recommendations from have not been implemented yet. So ITI also speaks to the Mackenzie Valley operation or sorry, I'm going too quickly here.
So I would like to see ECC establish targets for implementation of the 2020 Environmental Audit and prioritize actions based on implementation time, start getting them done in order. Just noting that I would expect that many of the recommendations from the 2025 audit, recognizing that many from the 2020 haven't been done, will reiterate the recommendations. So let's get moving on it now as opposed to waiting until 2025. I would also note that ITI speaks to the Mackenzie Valley operational dialogue in their business plan, but it's not spoken to in ECC's, but it's worth noting that ECC is responsible for many of the MVOD recommendations. So I see a bit of a disconnect there in terms of where the department sees itself and where ITI sees itself with regards to regulatory.
I'm going to jump very quickly into MACA. I realize that it's at the end but I'm just going through my notes in the order that I made them. I would like to see MACA, similarly to ECC, work to eliminate overlap with municipalities on land management, and I'd like to see them implement a new formula funding agreement for communities. There's lots of talk about underfunding of the communities. I think implementing a new formula agreement is the fair way to address that problem. So I'd like to see that addressed.
Man, does the timer ever go quick. Moving on to EIA. Land claims, I mentioned I had mentioned previously, but I think that we're not being particularly ambitious here, or at least we don't appear to be. I realize that they need to work with partners and that there's more to item than the GNWT, and they don't stand alone on this. But I just want to emphasize the importance of land claim settlement to the First Nations involved, to our territory, and I want to see the department prioritize getting these claims done as quickly as they can and coming to the table to the parties saying, what do we need to do to get these claims done, what do you need from us, let's get this done, as opposed to dragging it out indefinitely.
Similar to my the Member previous to me beat me to it, but I would also like to see an implementation plan timeline and costing for implementation of strengthening the nonprofit and charitable sector report. And I would like to see us commit to and fund NGOs with core funding. And I want to speak to this one a little bit, just that I think often in the past, we've seen GNWT's answer to things tends to be, what can we do, what can the GNWT do to solve this problem. And it tends to result in the staff growing. We've seen the government grow at a virtually exponential rate over the past number of years. And I don't think that we're thinking about the fact that we need to be thinking about what the government can do in terms of funding others to help them grow their sectors themselves as opposed to the government doing it for them and taking the funding that could be going to them and using it for staff. So that's a shift in the way that we do business, and I know that the mandate speaks to shifting the way we do business. I think that's a key way. I could speak to that quite a bit more, but I don't have the time.
The health department, I'm going to try and be quick. I've got a huge number of notes here. But I will just say with health, I'm quite happy with the business plan in this case. I like that they're focusing on primary care. The one glaring omission that I don't see in here is the issue of management and human resources at NTHSSA. There's been lots of talk, agency nurses, the issues that nurses are facing on the front lines. I'm not going to reiterate them here, but I don't see a concerted plan in these business plans to address these issues. And we've been hearing from frontline health professionals for years now that they are approaching a breaking point. They may feel that they're at the breaking point. We really need to address this problem head on.
Moving on to ITI. I appreciate that they are talking about laying out an economic vision. What is missing right now is the Ws of that the who, what, where, and why, what the timeline is for it. I would like to see us establish a timeline and say when it's going to happen because it relates so closely to all the work that we're doing, and I think that having a vision is really key. I note that I'm out of time, Mr. Chair. So I'm going to stop there and hopefully have a second opportunity to finish up my comments. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you, Member from Frame Lake. Before I go to the next Speaker, I just want to make a little comment here.
Members, I just wanted to remind everybody to wait for their light to come on and before speaking, and when you're done, if you could just say thank you as well so that it will give a much clearer picture to our technical staff and for people watching as well.
I'm going to continue on. Is there any other Members that want to make general comments? Okay, I don't see anybody else. I'm going to go back to the Member of Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the second stab at this.
So in wrapping up my statements on the Department of Finance, I think it's really important that we put a macroeconomic policy lens on our decisions. What I was trying to say is that the Department of Finance also is asking departments to put a fiscal sustainability lens on things. And some of that can be in conflict in that if I was asked, I could either consider a rigorous macroeconomic policy framework or just find a few things to cut that will be noticed by the least number of people, I would definitely choose the second option.
But moving on to health and social services. There are a lot of important actions in here that I support. In particular, I appreciate the commitment to clarify and redefine roles and responsibilities for Health and Social Services corporate support and program and service delivery between the department and the health authorities. That's a really important step. I would note that the actions listed under recruitment and retention strategies mostly focus on recruitment. Retention still seems to be this black box. So that's where the health care task force that I mentioned yesterday could fit in nicely.
Also, in accordance with another of the NWT Medical Association's recommendations in that March 1st letter that I tabled today, the business plan should include the objective of establishing a health care workforce plan. So that would build on the physician workforce plan that was completed in 2020 but that has not actually been implemented yet.
To put things in perspective, we currently have 310 unfunded positions within NTHSSA and 52 unfunded positions within the TCSA. And that's not certainly the fault of the health authorities because we don't have a clear idea if we're allocating funds for the services we want or we need to provide, whether our staffing models actually meet those needs, and where medical travel would be cost effective and where it would be better to provide those services locally. That is a real indepth analysis that I'm not sure anyone within the health authorities have had the time or resources to do. And I think it's important we set ourselves on that path.
On to ITI, so in contrast to the macroeconomic policy framework being proposed by finance, I see the ITI business plan committing to basically increase the number of people and organizations funded in every sector imaginable when you look at the targets and measures. And yet we're not increasing the funding pots. So that leads me to conclude that we're proposing to just reduce funding amounts and sprinkle it around more thinly to more people and businesses and organizations. To me, that doesn't seem wise or sound according to economic principles. And I'm not sure that we always want to simply increase the number of, for example, artists or filmmakers that we're funding. I would argue that we need to increase the value of the income, the employment, and look at increasing value as opposed to just the number of people we're funding.
And finally, with ITI, again, we have a goal of a certain number of lower emission infrastructure projects or climate resilient projects in NWT parks. They picked a number of ten. So, I, again, would focus on the value for investment GHG reductions, not simply on the number of projects.
Moving on to infrastructure. My first main point here is that I don't think we can continue to advance all three of our major infrastructure projects that we've had on the books for a long time. We just need to pick one. It just hasn't worked to keep our fingers in all these pies and kind of play coy with the federal government on stating which one's our favorite. I think we need to come up with clear criteria on how we're going to evaluate what's most important and urgent based on this Assembly's priorities and just pick one. Sound simple? And no, it's not.
The business plan for infrastructure is strangely very silent on energy policy, which worries me, and specifically the role of the GNWT in directing energy with clear energy policies that will lead us through an energy transition to keep up with the rest of the world. I do appreciate that there's a policy initiative to issue some policy direction to the Public Utilities Board. So that's a good step. But we also need to extend policy direction to NT Energy and NTPC.
I would note that the renewed energy strategy is due to be released by the fourth quarter of 20252026. I would argue we need it sooner. We've already had consultation complete and a draft What We Heard document. I think we need to move forward on some of the recommendations in there, including developing a short, medium, and longterm roadmap for our electricity system.
Justice. Just a few comments here. I note that the measures so despite the fact that our mandate really emphasizes crime prevention and addressing social issues and addictions and things that would lead to crime, the measures and targets we've got in this business plan focus heavily on RCMPrelated actions. So I don't see much that's going towards the crime prevention and social issues. So I think we need to add an action that basically states that in cooperation with law enforcement officials, we're going to build better, ontheground outreach services and integrate teams of social and health support workers to ensure that noncriminal social issues are addressed appropriately.
And I do understand from numerous statements by the Premier that that is his intention as to the approach that he wants to take. So let's just state it straight out in the business plans and hold ourselves accountable to it.
MACA. So there's some really weak targets in here. For example, in terms of supporting communities in developing or updating emergency plans, the measure is how many MACA is able to contact. So we need to strengthen the accountability in terms of making sure that our communities have emergency plans in place. And I think we need to rethink the value of I think the goto move in MACA is to run workshops for communities, and that's not always the most helpful thing. I think we need to expand our toolbox there.
Okay, finally, I'm going to move on to housing, the last department. I have to say I very much appreciate the new transitional housing program for those who are returning from, say, addictions programs, so aftercare. That's a really important step. I think we also need to set some goals and targets around other kinds of supportive living facilities, including those that are focused on harm reduction, that are getting people off the street, and stabilizing them. I don't see mention right now in our plan, and I think that's a really important aspect for this Assembly.
I notice one of the goals is around talking about investing in Housing NWT infrastructure, including new construction and repairs, and it's mentioned that the goal is to spend $120 million over four years, but there's no context provided in here in terms of what are we actually trying to accomplish with that money, what are the goals of what's going to what we're going to be left with at the end of this Assembly. And it's also not clear where this money is coming from. So I would like that spelled out more in the business plans.
I actually really appreciated this section under housing that talks about the risks in terms of the challenges that are faced in accomplishing the goals under this business plan. And it articulates those risks really well. But there's not much in the way of identifying solutions or what we're going to do to confront those risks. So that stood out to me. And it's okay, but I think we need to be honest about this is going to be really challenging and we need to lay out some kind of path on how we're going to start identifying solutions or ways to mitigate those risks.
So that brings me to the end before the end of the time. I appreciate your patience. I really just wanted to get all this out now before we go line by line into the main estimates. But I very much appreciate you listening. And I know this is not a voteable item, but I hope this has been useful and that we can move forward with the discussions in a productive way. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, the Member from Yellowknife North. I'm going to go to the second round of questions, I'm going to I believe Member from Frame Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for your indulgence in allowing us an extra kind of to finish up our statements. I will try to be quick like I was yesterday.
So I left off on ITI and speaking to the economic vision. And just a few thoughts on that. I think I would like to see a timeline. I'd like to see that timeline be short and towards the beginning of this Assembly as opposed to toward the end. If we need to develop a vision, if we need to be implementing a vision, I want us to be implementing that vision, you know, today, and if not today, as quickly as possible, because I think if we're halfway through our term by the time we get a vision in order, it's not going to help us be strategic in our decisionmaking.
I also want to note about that, like, being strategic in our decisionmaking, if the vision that comes back is simply that we're going to do everything, I think that we haven't established a vision. The point of the vision is that we're going to have to be focused. We're going to have to make some decisions about what we are and are not doing, the direction that we're taking this territory, and I would really hope that that those decisions are based on evidence that we've collected and information that we use to make informed decisions about what's going to work, that we have evidence to support that.
And I think, again, I'm just going to note in this department, a lot of the measurables in here aren't outcomebased. Again, it's numbers of meetings held. This doesn't really tell us what we're achieving. It tells us what we're doing. But you could hold a lot of meetings and not achieve anything in any of them, so what are we looking to achieve in the meetings? Again, there's also kind of speaking in the business plan to supporting a diverse range of economic activities. But, again, what do we mean by this? I think that we need to be targeted and specific. There's some activities that certainly have more value than others. If we simply support everything, we're not really being strategic in the money that we're investing, we're not being strategic in this the directions that we're going.
Specifically in support for arts, again, I'd like to see us and this comment stands for the way that we fund NGOs also, but I want to speak to the arts specifically on this. I'd like to see us shift to more of an ecosystembased approach to our thinking on how we're funding the arts. Recognizing that the number of artists or organizations funded doesn't actually tell us anything about the health of the sector, return on investment that we're getting. And recognition that arts is about culture also. It's not just about kind of growing industry, but that in some cases successful arts organizations are able to leverage a lot of federal funding. And that's not necessarily based on sales. It's based on the activity and the cultural heritage that they're developing. So I think we need to take a bit of a more holistic view of the arts and just note that you know, actually, I'm going to save my comments for a Member's statement about the ecosystem approach. But just noting that core funding for organizations is how we build up sectors. If we're just funding individual artists all over the place, we don't necessarily build the sector in a way that makes it sustainable and selfsustaining and give us that multiplier effect of the way funding can be the return on investment can be increased.
I'll share some short comments on Infrastructure's business plan. As the previous Speaker mentioned, we're being urged to pick a project. I think this is a wider discussion and but bottom line, I just want to note that there is a big disconnect between what we say we're planning to do and what we have the fiscal capacity to implement, and I feel like I'm, of course, preaching to the choir here. I mean, we've been the government's been telling us this since pretty much day one. But have we really stepped back and looked at some of these projects strategically and the work that Infrastructure is doing and said, you know, we're going to be strategic and focused about what we're doing, or, again, are we kind of trying to keep a number of things moving. I think that is a conversation that we have to have. I think also it's worth noting that a lot of these projects kind of have a very long timeline ahead of them. And we have mines you know, the closure of mines is coming in less than two years. I mean, we the downturn in the economy is coming quickly, and I think it's fair to say that none of the projects that are currently in the hopper are things that are going to immediately stimulate activity in the way that I think is being hoped that these infrastructure investments will make. So I think that we need to be kind of looking in a strategic way at that also. I mean, are we maybe trying to do things that are too big? Do we need to be focusing on the smaller pieces? And, again, as I noted yesterday, the foundation of the economy, building the foundation to ensure that we are taking the action to move forward in a positive way.
I'm going to move to Justice. Give me a second here. So Justice has been an interesting one for me to review. And I think there was some comments made today actually in the House when I was asking about this at the incamera meeting, but I'll just refer to the House comments.
So we're establishing you know, reestablishing this territorial crime reduction unit. And you know, the Premier was saying today that we have kind of a high policetoresident ratio, and I would just note that the numbers are showing an increase in crime despite that. And so what we seeing saying ourselves is that the approach that we are laying out here appears to not be working. And I think that we need to think about that a little bit. In some cases, you know, I'm just hoping that we're using an evidencebased approach to lay out our plans and that we are ensuring that we're putting the resources in the right place to get the results that we're looking for.
I just need to switch back to my other notes here.
Okay, and I'll share some short comments on housing, very high level. Looking at the housing business plan, I think when I first looked at this and this is getting a bit into budget conversation, and so I'll save my budget comments. But I was looking at it and thinking, okay, we said that we were prioritizing housing. It's a bit difficult to see in this budget. And I understand that looking at the business plan that the needs assessment is a key step towards obtaining federal funding for a plan. So I would like to see us, as a followup to the needs assessment, develop a longterm plan, developed in coordination with partners, and considering the federal funding that we can access, and would like that to become, yeah, the followup from the needs assessment. So I want to see us longterm planning. And, again, as opposed to kind of speaking to process in the business plan, what is the outcome that we're trying to achieve. We've got a needs assessment. That's telling us what is needed. And so obviously I'm hoping that the outcome becomes attached to the need that's identified in that, that that becomes the basis for our plan, and then we move forward in figuring out how we're going to fund it.
And another comment on housing, you know, I made a statement about this in the House in the last session or the last sitting of the session and will just say it again here. We are simply not funding operations and maintenance adequately to maintain our stock. And I think knowing that, we absolutely need to increase this item. I think if the Assembly wants to make good on our priority putting housing at the top of the list, this has to be on our radar. And we have to acknowledge that if we're not maintaining what we have, we're going to have an even bigger problem with how am I putting it? The needs assessment will end up kind of coming back on itself in the sense that we've identified what we need, but things are falling off on the back end. So we need to be maintaining what we have, building new to fill the gaps that we haven't filled, and hopefully wholistically moving forward with our housing plan.
So I'll leave my comments at that for now, Mr. Chair, on the business plans, and look forward to getting into the budget. And just to close, as I've said, I do hope that we, you know, create a process and find a time to dig into these with a bit more detail, being able to ask Ministers and departments questions about them and get through them because, know, it's a big document, and it's an important document, and I think taking a close look at this is a change that I'd love to see us implement, and I think it help us with effectiveness significantly. So I do hope that we can move forward in that way in the future. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Member from Frame Lake. That was the first second round. I want to thank the committee for your general comments. I'm going to move the I'm going to go to the MLA for Inuvik Boot Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I move that the Tabled Document 9420(1), 20242028 Business Plans, be referred to the Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight for further review. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. The motion's in order. To the motion.
Question.
The motion's been called. You're moving the motion? I'm going to go to the Member from Range Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I did want to speak to this because it is perhaps a new practice well, it is a new practice. So this is the first time the business plan's been tabled, and given the importance as kind of a guiding document for this Assembly, I think there is a need to do a more thorough review of the context of them.
My comments earlier today were more about the actual principle of the document and the technique around it rather than the contents. So I for one would like to do a more indepth dive into what the government is committing to over the next four years, and I don't think we have we don't have the time to do that today. This format is I don't think this is the right format to achieve that. I do think the Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight is an excellent place to do that. And I hope that the review of these plans will be in public and available to the public to see and hear their MLAs speak to what those commitments are, and also to have witnesses from the departments come forward and explain the decisions that were made. We've had great commentary from colleagues about those specific choices that were made and perhaps how they can be improved. And I think the best way to do that is by referring this to committee. It's going to be more work for us, but I think we're up to the task. So I do support this, and I thank the chair of the standing committee for bringing it forward. Thank you.
Thank you. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? Oh, sorry, sorry about that. I'm going to go to the Member from the Yellowknife South.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, my apologies. I think I just wasn't fast enough getting my hand up. Mr. Chair, just a very brief comment. Certainly, I know I'll just say for my own departments, I did find the comments today very helpful and wanted to encourage, you know, a couple of examples, again, drawing only really from my own departments, but it was just to say when I have my other hat on and not as Member for Yellowknife South, but it is a sincere hope that the business plans can be used in the main estimates reviews that we're about to go through. Having fouryear business plans was something new only as of the last Assembly, and tieing them to the same timing as main estimates is new as of this process. So there are some growing pains in that process. It was something that I can say directors of policy and finance from across departments were very glad to see, certainly streamlines their work, rather than spreading it across the year but, more importantly, the main estimates provides the funding through which the departments do all of the things in the business plans, including the opening sections. So not every activity of every single public servant necessarily finds itself in the mandate document of the government, but every public servant is contributing to the core functioning of every department. And that is included in the opening sections of everyone's business plans, and it's often reflected throughout some of the background work that may be going into contributing to the mandate activities that are in the business plan.
So, for example, again, I'll rely only on finance, to the extent that there's questions around what kinds of recruitment activities there are, there is a section in main estimates for human resources, which then would be an opportunity to speak to what is happening in the human resources area and what they're doing to contribute to the mandate, what they're doing to contribute to retention of health care workers, for example.
In Infrastructure, I know there was mention specifically on the energy strategy. When the main estimates document comes forward, the energy and strategic infrastructure division has funding there, and it may well be an opportunity to ask what they're doing with their funding to advance that work and to see that it gets done quickly.
So throughout there was an opportunity here in saying that focusing on the business plans and not just the numbers in the budget, Mr. Chair, I hardly agree and, again, acknowledging this is the first time we've done it this way and acknowledging it's still a new Assembly, I sincerely hope that I I hope I'm not overstepping my speaking for my colleagues on this side, but I think we all want to speak to the business plans in conjunction with the, right now, proposed $2.2 billion associated with achieving all of the work in those business plans. So I hope we find a way that we can integrate that and also, of course, we'll look forward to what may come of committee's motion at accountability and oversight. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to the Member from Yellowknife South. To the motion. Any other Members?
Question.
Question's been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion's carried. Tabled Document 9420(1) will be referred to the Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight for further review.
Carried
Committee, do you agree that you have concluded consideration of Tabled Document 9420(1), 20242028 Business Plan?
Agreed
Thank you. Committee, we have concluded consideration on Tabled Document 9420(1). Thank you. I'm going to pass the mic to Inuvik Boot Lake. Thank you.
I now move that the chair rise and report progress.
There is a motion on the floor to report progress. The motion is in order and nondebatable. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion carried.
Carried
I will now rise and report progress. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, your committee has been considering Tabled Document 9420(1) and would like to report progress and motion carried that the consideration of Tabled Document 9420(1) is concluded. And, Mr. Speaker, I move the report of the Committee of the Whole to be concurred with. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
thank you, Member for Tu NedheWiilideh. Do I have a seconder? Member from Great Slave. Thank you. All those in favour? Opposed? No opposed. Abstentions? Motion passed.
Carried
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Orders of the day for Wednesday, May 29th, 2024, at 1:30 p.m.
Prayer
Ministers’ Statements
Members’ Statements
Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery
Replies to the Budget Address, Day 4 of 7
Acknowledgements
Oral Questions
Written Questions
Returns to Written Questions
Replies to the Commissioner’s Address
Petitions
Reports of Committees on the Review of Bills
Reports of Standing and Special Committees
Tabling of Documents
Notices of Motion
Motions
Notices of Motion for First Reading of Bills
First Reading of Bills
Second Reading of Bills
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters
Minister’s Statement 4-20(1): 2023 Wildfire Season Review and Planning for the 2024 Season
Minister’s Statement 5-20(1): Emergency Management Preparation
Minister’s Statement 17-20(1): Reaching Average $10 a Day Child Care in the NWT
Minister’s Statement 24-20(1): Health Human Resources Recruitment and Retention
Tabled Document 93-20(1): 2024-2025 Main Estimates
Report of the Committee of the Whole
Third Reading of Bills
Orders of the Day
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Colleagues, this House stands adjourned until Wednesday, May 29th, 2024, at 1:30 p.m.
---ADJOURNMENT
The House adjourned at 4:41 p.m.
