Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I gingerly put it on three occasions here in my Member’s statement, or during my question statement that is, to frankly ask are layoffs happening and is that being considered. The Minister at no time took the opportunity to say that it isn’t part of the evaluation process that will ultimately be decided by the 18th Assembly.

The Minister can deny it on the last one because he gets the last word, but the fact is, is the government looking at drafting layoff plans as part of the consideration going forward in the 18th Assembly? If the Minister says no, great, but the...

Mr. Speaker, the new government hasn’t taken over, so the operation of the present government in the context of finance is the responsibility of the present government and, furthermore, the responsibility of the Finance Minister. So when departments are drafting these potential lists for consideration for future governments, it’s a responsibility of today at today’s direction, which is ultimately the responsibility of this House, Mr. Speaker.

What type of transparency process is put into place as the government cobbles these options together? Ultimately, I am worried about fair, honest and...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I see that we have two of my constituents, although they’ve already been recognized, but they certainly deserve the credit and recognition once again. I’d like to recognize constituent Chief Superintendent Ron Smith and Superintendent Mike LeSage. They’re not only constituents, they’re both neighbours, so I feel very safe and very proud to have our RCMP members here in the gallery today.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Actually, it’s interesting that we are talking about this. It’s not about the power and it’s not about the rate increase. I think this is about the procedural step that Members feel denied. We shouldn’t cloud the issue with whatever goodwill and intent was provided by the Minister and his argument based solely on the fact to shelter constituents would be an argument worth any opportunity to make time and time again.

Are we worried about why we did it or what method it was done by? I think the merits of why it was done perhaps says, yes, we had to find a way to ensure...

Mr. Speaker, today’s motion is a plebiscite. It’s a motion calling for clear guidance from the public to the Legislature. This motion is something that none of us can lose on if we vote in favour of it. Imagine, Mr. Speaker, this is our opportunity to get the opinion of the public.

Fracking is defined as the topic of today. You see this question all over the place, not just here, not in the Northwest Territories, not in Canada, but all over the world. This is an important question for our time. So, it’s not just about what we think we know about fracking, it’s also about what we want to know...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m just going to quickly say I am going to support this particular motion. I do have a fair bit of comments, but I think what I would be doing is duplicating my statement today, because I have a fair bit to add and speak on the plebiscite motion, which is almost, in some ways, the similar theme.

That said, to save my good colleagues from hearing them twice, I’ll just say I’ll be supporting the motion, and I’ll say, “Look forward to my comments,” my good colleagues. “I have some great, passionate statements to make in a few minutes on the plebiscite motion.”

Mr. Speaker, he took my second question away from me and I didn’t even have a question three or four. Maybe I can just ask if the Minister is interested in this kind of concept for stand-alone environment awards, recognizing the issues I talked about, recognizing children, recognizing schools, community heroes, community groups and even government employees who provide stewardship of public policy. I just want to be very clear.

Is the Minister supportive of the concept? I heard him say he’ll take a look at it, but is he individually supportive of the concept? Because it’s important to know he...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just before I begin, our report is much more succinct with only one page. Your Standing Committee on Economic Development and Infrastructure is pleased to provide its report on the review of draft hydraulic fracturing regulations and commends it to the House.

The Standing Committee on Economic Development and Infrastructure recognizes that the issue of hydraulic fracturing is one of great public importance and interest across the Northwest Territories. Throughout the 17th Assembly, members of the standing committee have invested a great deal of time and research into...

Well, first of all, Mr. Speaker, I thank those who have spoken in favour of the motion, and those who spoke against the motion, I probably won’t thank you at this time. But in the spirit of consensus government, I do recognize and appreciate and respect your perspectives.

I did hear a few things and they did cause me great concern. Mr. Speaker, this is a very important question, the plebiscite question on hydraulic fracturing. The reality here before us, though, is if we can’t use the Plebiscite Act for stuff this important, why bother having it?

I heard the cries of people suggesting things...

WHEREAS the Elections and Plebiscites Act provides that the Commissioner may, on the recommendation of the Legislative Assembly, direct that a plebiscite be held on any question that is of importance to the people of the Northwest Territories;

AND WHEREAS discussion and debate of hydraulic fracturing in the Northwest Territories has entered public discourse;

AND WHEREAS the government has recognized the significance of public engagement in this area and announced that engagement on proposed hydraulic fracturing regulations will continue until at least August 2015;

AND WHEREAS, to date, this...