Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Yellowknife Centre.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just to reaffirm around the $1.3 billion further request, I'm wondering is there -- again, just for clarity, is there any project built into this number; so in other words, is the number $1.3 billion predicated on saying this is our contribution towards the Taltson Expansion; this number is being used for furthering the Mackenzie Valley Highway; this number is based on us continuing or building a foothold into the infrastructure that will start the Slave Geological Province Road up toward the Bathurst -- our side of the Bathurst direction? So curious on that. Thank you.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. No, and it's not. I think that that's actually -- it's a good question, and it's one that -- it's important, actually, that they not be conflated, I'd suggest, in that we still want to be able to go to the federal government, particularly with the nation building scale work, the kind of infrastructure that provinces, you know, arguably not taken for granted in an expressed way but have and have at their avail that were built, whether it's a national railway, whether it's a national highway, whether it's capital level airports, ports, you know, pipelines, whatever it might be, the North as a whole has significantly of it, and what we have was built 60 years ago and hasn't necessarily been maintained. And some of the responsibility for that gets downloaded to the GNWT over time while still not necessarily having the front end of revenues available to us to do the upkeep and with -- and now morphs perhaps into a bit of a conversation about territorial formula financing and just how much of that upkeep is built into that or not, but it's definitely not the idea of having a borrowing limit to take on a reasonable and manageable amount of debt, which, again, we are still servicing that debt in a reasonable comparison to revenues. That is different from going to the federal government to say we have nation scale projects that we want you to be involved in at the table. So I definitely want to keep the two of them separate. Thank you.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Yellowknife Centre.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm curious on how our debt management will change in the context of borrowing. So in other words, if we borrow money we have to pay more. So I'm just curious on how that strategy's been developed and laid out and would it be part of the business case proposal of the additional $1.3 billion request on top of the $1.8 billion debt limit? Thank you.
Thank you. I'll go to the Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, if we borrow more, we have to pay more but, Mr. Chair, the limit is just the maximum amount that we can borrow, not necessarily money that we are, in fact, borrowing, so that -- what would be proposed for -- to be available for borrowing comes through in the budget every year so you will see the -- that there's -- in the main estimates, one of the front end pages has the proposed borrowing plan and that is what's -- where it is reflecting amounts that are anticipated year to year, long-term debt and short-term debt. That's the portion that we would see potentially, in fact, being borrowed, not the borrowing limit itself. Thank you.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the member from Yellowknife Centre.
Seeing my time is ticking away, what I'd do is I'll point into two areas. The first is that it does seem risky that we're almost -- almost, I know not exactly so I'm not trying to give you that impression, but almost doubling our current debt with the addition. That does sound scary by any means. Risky, if not. The other thing is is the other aspect of concern that if we're not borrowing it based on principles of us becoming active partners in our business case, I'm surprised we're asking for so much. And the last piece I'll say, Mr. Chairman, is that while memory doesn't serve me very well on this particular point, in the sense of nostalgia I seem to remember my first GNWT budget was in the range of $800 million and change. So we're borrowing more than the first budget I remember with a $300 million debt limit at that time. So a lot has changed in just over 20 years. Thank you.
Thank you. I take that as a comment. I'm going to go back to the Member from Range Lake -- or sorry?
Just more so around the risk management side of it. Thank you.
Thank you. I'll go back to the Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I certainly have looked back at data and charts going all the way to 2005, and there's a few years which is right around the time when the mines were being built that things were relatively flat, but the increase over the 16th Assembly, the 17th Assembly, the 18th Assembly show a steady -- in fact, 16th has a particularly strong spike up, and then a sort of steady increase in debt levels through the 17th and 18th. 19th, again, sort of steady the first couple of years, spikes up a little over the wildfire year, not surprisingly, and now we are, as of this moment and projecting forward, looking to level that out. So, I mean, I can't necessarily compare dollar for dollar what might have been the budget at one time some time ago but just in terms of that debt, the growth of the debt, it does, as I say, have -- you know, there is a trajectory that you can look at. We then can also look at the gap or a lack of gap between revenues and expenditures, and that, too, over time tends to be pretty similar. You will see that we -- again, devolution saw a little bit of a bump in terms of revenues, but expenditures very quickly caught up in the 18th Assembly. And again, we're trying to create a bit of space now, be really one of the first times we create some consistent and intentional space between our revenues and expenditures. So the risk management of that, Mr. Chair, I -- you know, again, that's largely what Restoring Balance is premised on, is trying to create a culture and an approach that is about not simply increasing even with a debt limit increase. I realize the time; it's probably run out, Mr. Chair. It was kind of a complex question; I was trying to summarize as quickly as I could. Thank you.
Okay, thank you. Is there any further questions on these schedules from Members? Okay, thank you. Seeing no further questions, please turn to page 18.
Government of the Northwest Territories Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 2, 2024-2025, Department of Finance, revised borrowing authorization, total government borrowing authorization, proposed adjustments, $50 million. Does the committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. Do you agree that you have concluded consideration of tabled Document 279-20(1), Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 2, 2024-2025?
Agreed.
I'd like to turn to the member from Inuvik Boot Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I move that consideration of Tabled Document 279-20(1), Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 2, 2024-2025, be now concluded and that the tabled Document 279-20(1) be reported and recommended as ready for further consideration in formal session through the form of an appropriation bill. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Okay, motion carried. Thank you. Tabled Document 279-20(1) Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 2, 2024-2025, will be reported as ready for consideration in formal session through the form of an appropriation bill.
---Carried
Thank you, Minister, and thank you to the witnesses for appearing before us. Sergeant-at-arms, please escort the witnesses from the chambers.
Thank you. What is the wish of the committee? I'm going to go to the member from Inuvik Boot Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I move that the chair rise and report progress. Thank you.
Thank you. There's a motion on the floor to report progress. The motion is in order and non-debatable. 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 279-20(1), and that motion’s carried and that Tabled Document 279-20(1) is concluded, and that the House concur and these estimates are as amended. And that an appropriation bill be based thereon be introduced without delay. And Mr. Speaker, I move that the Report of the Committee of the Whole be concurred with. Thank you.
Thank you, Member from Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh. Can I have a seconder? Ah, may as well do it. The Member from Range Lake. All those in favour? Opposed? Abstentions? Motion passed.
---Carried
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Orders of the day for Tuesday, February 11th, 2025, at 1:30 p.m.
Prayer or Reflection
Ministers’ Statements
Members’ Statements
Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery
Replies to the Budget Address (Day 4 of 7)
Reports of Committees on the Review of Bills
Reports of Standing and Special Committees
Returns to Oral Questions
Oral Question 475-20(1), Budgeting Process for Northwest Territories Health and Social Services Authority
Acknowledgements
Oral Questions
Written Questions
Returns to Written Questions
Replies to the Commissioner’s Address
Petitions
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
Tabled Document 275-20(1): 2025-2026 Main Estimates
Report of Committee of the Whole
Third Reading of Bills
Orders of the Day
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Clerk. This House stands adjourned until Tuesday, February 11th, 2025, at 1:30 p.m.
---ADJOURNMENT
The House adjourned at 5:34 p.m.
