Statements in Debates
I'm not here to hurt his feelings so I'll drop -- withdraw. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, his point of order was intended to interrupt me. You are the judge, Mr. Speaker, on that process, and there is no defined finite rule on it. There is a framework of conversation around it, and hence it was just to interrupt the flow. He's told me this himself. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, a couple things there were a little on the confusing side, and that's how I'll describe it. First of all, it's the old government, not the current government. Second of all, it's the allotment change, not the program. Mr. Speaker, the refugee deal wasn't taken. So, Mr. Speaker, on this meeting that she claims to have, why doesn't she extend an olive branch to the Members, you know, who are very interested in this, and we go down as a delegation and say we're going to take the 150 back, and we're going to ask you, Minister, Mrs. Federal Government, whatever you want to call it...
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don't think there's a Yellowknife Centre delegation up there, but what I would certainly say that I have had the chance to meet with both Tad, Tamara, and Andrew of Local 11, and I know probably many friendly faces out there. I'm getting old; it's hard to see through these spectacles that far up. But that said, in my elder age I still want to take a moment to say thank you to the nurses and the care they provide our Northerners, and I will continue to be a steadfast supporter of their issues. Thank you.
Almost forgot to clap, Mr. Speaker; I was so in shock. Well, Mr. Speaker, it's nice to see government in action is actually two words, so it's -- thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, perhaps the Minister could update us what does that actually translate into. In other words, what timeline is he now proposing? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to deal with the motion I gave notice of earlier today. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, it's difficult to sort of give a quantum as to what it's worth versus what it's timed versus how much Ottawa is giving. Like, we don't know, and that's kind of the question that's being asked. Because I don't even know if we should be pursuing the Taltson project given the fact that, remember, it doesn't go far back that the Mackenzie Valley pipeline dream died because it was studied to death and by the time -- so, Mr. Speaker, my question, really, is focused in on is this the right opportunity? Because I've heard the Taltson project when I came in the House in 2003.
So to shorten...
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There was a lot out there unpacked. But I didn't hear that they're either in favour of it or against it, anticipate to approve it, or working to approve it, anything of that nature. Can the Minister be clear on that initiative; what's the ultimate goal and direction that this department is going to proceed with? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have questions for the Minister responsible for the NWT Power Corp. Perhaps we can start with an update with respect to the overall Taltson project. And when I refer to update, maybe some timelines including costing. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, six months ago, this Assembly stopped at nothing to approve an initiative brought forward by the Indigenous governments, and their proposal, I believe, was called the NWTPFP -- I'm not sure why it's actually specifically called project finance permanence. But that said, must matter. So there was $375 million being offered, and the NWT government potentially could stand in the way if we had dragged our heels. In short, Mr. Speaker, it was about a project of lands and keepers of the land, and I'm giving a simple description of it, but it's never been approved...