My questions today are for the Premier. On September 29 it came to our attention that on August 22 the GNWT proposed a ten year partnership agreement with the federal government in which the two governments would cost share and determine priorities for a $1 billion investment in the economic infrastructure of the NWT.
Mr. Speaker, I would like the Premier to tell me when he and Cabinet developed the proposal, and given the importance of devolution and resource revenue sharing, why did he not engage with and discuss the proposal with Regular Members prior to making the offer to the federal government?
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The Hon. Premier, Mr. Roland.
Mr. Speaker, when I first announced that we’d be prepared to put devolution resource revenue sharing on the back burner, I got some negative feedback on that process. We had ongoing discussions with regional aboriginal leadership and in fact looked at the opportunities when we had meetings with the Prime Minister. I’ve had meetings with the Prime Minister to talk about looking at other options, because the option that was on the table, which Members are fully aware of, was not something we would consider to be adequate here in the Northwest Territories.
Also, Members know that I’ve talked to him a number of times, trying to get a deal with the federal government on, for example, the Mackenzie Valley Highway. So putting those together, looking at an infrastructure plan, it’s a framework that’s been put out there, floated out there, and we’re working on trying to keep that door open. Of course, no discussions are happening at this time until we know what the results of the federal election will be.
I’ve informed Members, through communication of letters, to let them know of the proposal and the meeting with the Prime Minister. Hopefully, we’ll be able to give more detail as we see the results of the election and find out just where this will go.
Yes, I remember when it was suggested that devolution and resource revenue sharing were off the agenda. We all were obviously concerned, and we pushed for him to get it on, and it’s on. That’s good; that’s fantastic. What I’m talking about is a proposal that has now gone forward to the feds. We don’t know anything about it. We don’t know the details. We didn’t find out until September 29, which was 38 days after you made the proposal to the federal government.
I’m still curious, and this is going to go back to my first question. Why wasn’t this information on the specifics of this proposal shared with us prior to making that proposal to the federal government?
Just earlier in the Member’s statement I was told to put the sails up and get moving, and now I’m being told to put the sails down and park it until I get word by word discussion with my colleagues.
Yes, we should have gotten the information to you sooner. In this case, because of the time frame, trying to get all the pieces together in a sense of regional leadership, getting that piece, having the Prime Minister come up to the Northwest Territories and trying to fit it in the schedule, I didn’t have an opportunity to share that with Members. I guess I’ll have to wear that one, as well, on the process that we’ve been involved with.
The Member himself has said this may be the right process, the right thing and what we need in the Northwest Territories, but the process is bad, so maybe we should just stop and not move forward on this. So I’ve got clear signals from Members of the Assembly. We’ve got residents out there saying it should move ahead. We’ve got a need for more revenue on the table, and I’m trying to build a bridge to get to that location.
I’m hardly suggesting it’s time to take down the sails. I share my other colleagues’ advice: it’s time to get the sails up, and it’s time for us to move forward. What I’m simply suggesting is that when it comes to something as important as resource revenue sharing and devolution, it’s important to keep us all on the same page, which I don’t feel actually occurred in this case. I mean, I would like to know the details.
I guess the second question, since I really didn’t get the first question answered, is: when are we going to get the full description of what this proposal entails and what the benefits and the negative aspects of the deal are for us in the Northwest Territories?
Mr. Speaker, as I’ve written to Members and told them, this is a framework. There is not much more detail than what I’ve already given Members on the framework. It is an avenue to open the door for further discussion with the federal government. It includes a partnership among the federal government, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the private sector. I’ve given that to Members. We’ve been working on trying to schedule a meeting with Members. I’m open to when the Members confirm a meeting date. I believe we do have some time set aside here in the very near future.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m happy to hear that. Given that we’re all supposed to be equal partners in working towards the best interests of the people of the Northwest Territories, I’d like the Premier to commit to working with the Members on this side of the House and providing us with timely, upfront information in the future when it comes to items such as resource revenue sharing and devolution, as well as any other big picture items that the government might be proceeding with in the future.
Mr. Speaker, Members make a point of how I haven’t communicated with Regular Members on quite a regular basis, and a number of examples were given. But we have listened to Members. We’ve approached Members with some solutions to some of the concerns that were raised. We’ll continue to do that — to work with Members to try to come up with the options.
But, Mr. Speaker, one of the things I need to do before going to Members is to see if there’s even any appetite from the federal government, in this case, for a solution. Otherwise, I’d be wasting Members’ time by coming and saying: here’s an idea; what do you think? And then I’d have the federal government say no to it. Right now the door has been opened, and we can have further discussion on this. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Oral questions. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.
