Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for the Minister of Finance. The Minister has put out a revenue option paper. He has held a round table with representatives from many territorial organizations. I’d like to ask the Minister: from his discussions to date, what is the appetite like for a resource tax in the Northwest Territories that could address this gap in finances that they have been referring to? Will he be bringing forward a response to the resource tax? What’s the downside?
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Minister of Finance, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’ve embarked on a revenue options discussion, not the tax increase option discussion. We met; we had a massive circulation and mail out of the papers looking for feedback.
The round table was very productive. It brought together a very interesting group of Northerners from organizations across the North that don’t normally spend a lot of time together to talk about the issue of revenue options. There’s very strong commitment to the North and building the North. There was no unanimity when it came to the issue of, clearly, taxes. I’ll be coming forward with a report from the round table. I’ll also be coming forward, in due course, with the business plans in the upcoming budget session with what’s going to be proposed in terms of potential options to generate new revenues.
As my colleague Mr. Krutko said, the idea of a resource tax has been something that’s been out there for a long time. No government has had the courage to introduce it. I would like to ask Mr. Miltenberger, as the Finance Minister: is he aware of any downside to this government raising revenues through a resource tax?
As the Premier indicated in his sessional statement, there are a lot of things happening around us in the world that are affecting life in the North and business in the North. With every decision we make, be it taxes or other options for generating revenues, there are going to be upsides, but there are also going to be downsides. I’ve heard the Members opposite talk in great detail about the mass exodus and what they’re hearing from their constituents. For the first day of session the political hyperbole was fairly interesting, if not somewhat misleading. It was very interesting and makes the point that there is concern about taxes. So we have to look at the potential impact — what type of tax that would be — and what it would do to the bottom line, in addition to what other considerations we may be looking at right now. Thank you.
Interjection.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask Mr. Miltenberger which part of what he’s heard from the representatives of our constituents on this side of the House today could possibly, with regard to the tax options, be considered misleading? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, we have engaged in a discussion. We’ve put out a discussion paper. We’re talking about options. There have been no decisions made. There have been a number of taxes listed. The documents laid out taxes that were there for consideration. The press clearly put a particular spin on it. There is a misunderstanding in some quarters that all these taxes are being basically agreed to.
Nothing has been agreed to. We’re looking at other revenue options like those that have been suggested by other Members. For example, trying to grow the population and bring more wealth, bring more people into the Territories to build our economic base.
There have been no decisions. This is a discussion paper. To stand up and say — for anybody, the press or anywhere — that these are all happening, it’s not the fact. The case is that we’ve put the document out for discussion, and we’re looking for feedback. When we’re finished the feedback process, we’ll pull all that work together and we will come back. There will be a report done on the round table. We will of course be fully engaging with all the committees about what work has to be done as we look at and lay out the whole budget process, including the reductions for ’09–10, as well as the revenue options, to try to sustain the government that we have and the high level of service that we currently provide.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank Mr. Miltenberger for that explanation. I do concur with him that there were some almost statements of fact about these taxes having been a foregone conclusion on this side of the House today. So if you perceived that, I hear you; I did perceive that a little bit too.
They are only options at this time. But we want to get in there and tell you that any — or tell Mr. Speaker; I don’t want to speak directly to the Minister. But we would like to make sure that this government clearly understands that it would be the preference under the tax options to be taxing multinational companies who are here harvesting our resources rather than the residents of the Northwest Territories who are struggling with the cost of living. Would Mr. Miltenberger agree that that would be preferable? Thank you.
I, as well, have been getting a number of comments and feedback on my e-mails and from wherever I happen to be going. As a government we are very sensitive to the implications of any decision we make with regard to taxes or reductions. We’ve been directed very clearly, and the message from the last budget process was that reductions weren’t the favoured option. So we’ve come forward with plans to look at other revenue options so that we don’t have to necessarily increase the number of reductions we’re talking about.
Yes, we are very sensitive to this, and we want to make sure that we don’t further drive up the cost of living for members in the communities. We have set up special initiative committees to in fact look at the cost of living. We don’t want to be counterproductive here. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Abernethy.
