Debates of October 28, 2004 (day 30)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Deh Cho, that Bill 13, Supplementary Appropriation Act, No. 2, 2004-2005, be read for the third time. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. A motion is on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion. The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in opposition to this bill, I will be voting against it.

Mr. Speaker, it is not too often that I oppose this kind of legislation. Mr. Speaker, this is brought before us, in fact on the recommendation of the Commissioner, and it is a serious piece of legislation for this committee, for this Legislature. But there are elements of this bill that I believe must be challenged. As I have done during debate in Committee of the Whole of this spending appropriation act, I want to take this final opportunity to air my objections.

Mr. Speaker, this is a bill for approximately $16 million in spending. Let’s be clear; $11 million of this has already been committed under the authority that Cabinet has under the special warrant category. So really the decision before this Assembly in third reading is that we are being asked for permission on only about $5 million worth of miscellaneous projects. Two-thirds of this bill, the $11 million before us, are only as information items, things that have already been committed to and are outside this Assembly's influence. The balance of these items, the $5 million that is technically called “not previously authorized” are not trivial projects, Mr. Speaker, don’t let me give you that impression. Rather, they do cover a number of things that will have some influence and some impact especially in the smaller communities. They range from everything from assistance to the community of Fort Smith to assist with problems that it encountered because of a land slide this summer, to buying employees houses. There is quite a range of things in there, and again I don’t want to trivialize them. But I think that there are aspects of this bill that deserve to be challenged and I hope that I will be able to make myself clear over the next few minutes, Mr. Speaker.

I should explain, for people who are watching, for a special warrant there is generally a provision there that allows the Cabinet under emergency and unanticipated expenses to create allocations and provide for the normal course of business. I think they are a necessary part of the authority that Cabinet should have. But in this bill the government is taking steps that while they may be legal, are not acceptable and are not responsible given our tight financial situation, Mr. Speaker, and I believe that they also violate the overall spirit of consensus in this Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, we have a bill that authorizes $16 million in spending and leaves us with only $1 million in our supplementary reserve. We still have five months left to go in this government. The reserve is there for emergencies, things that are truly unanticipated. So if we have another crises in the Northwest Territories, say an outbreak of a disease such as we had earlier this year and we needed extra money to go in and spend for it -- I think it was a meningitis outbreak -- if we have another school collapse or something where we need to go in and make some emergency repairs, if there is an environmental disaster of some kind, we will have $1 million left to do something with and then we are going to have to go into debt. Just debt.

I don’t think that is a responsible way for us to have managed this supplementary reserve fund this year, especially in the face of the things that we are told were allocated.

---Applause

You know, Mr. Speaker, in the face of all this spending we have a $20 million cutback that we’re struggling to implement and it’s going to be coming off programs such as health, education and justice and other pressing needs. So on one hand we have a Cabinet that’s ready to put our entire supplementary reserve on the line, and yet we’re instructed to withdraw $20 million from current budgets. This is something that has been well advertised and well promoted about our fiscal situation, Mr. Speaker. This is not responsible spending and I oppose it.

Further, Mr. Speaker, is a particular issue of the $6.6 million black hole that this government presented us with for the security upgrade at the Yellowknife Airport. The government has given in to the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority’s order to upgrade our airport, but has left this economy with a $6.6 million question mark as to how to pay for it. We’ve been told by CATSA that even a superficial review of the comparative costs that other airports have to absorb is secret. Why can’t our Assembly at least have some say and some information about this expenditure?

---Applause

The Department of Transportation in particular, Mr. Speaker, has let us down. Obviously it had many months, I think about 10 months -- at least according to the information that was provided in committee the other day, -- to plan the renovations, do the drawings, call tenders, but it didn’t have time, obviously, to plan the cost factor; the consequences of taking $6.6 million out of the travelling public’s pocket. That is not responsible and it’s not acceptable and it’s one of the reasons I’m voting against this.

Hear! Hear!

Because it’s the kind of inaction that on this side of the House I don’t want to tolerate any more from this government. I’m sending a signal.

---Applause

Mr. Speaker, I believe in a good security system for the travelling public in Canada. I believe northerners are prepared to pay a share of it, but I object to being handed an open-ended invoice with no plan and, therefore, no confidence in how we’re going to implement this.

On a more fundamental issue, Mr. Speaker, related to this security business, all legislators must be on guard when independent security agencies can dictate conditions to government. It is a genuine concern, not only for our airport situation, but what is going to be next? All in the name of security? I don’t want to treat it with any kind of triviality, Mr. Speaker, but my guard goes up when I’m told to do something by another agency, another level of government. When I don’t have a say in how that is done, I think I have a duty to act on behalf of my constituents, and that’s what I’m doing today. Cabinet on this one has clearly let us down and this is not acceptable.

Mr. Speaker, we’re proud of our consensus system. We hold it up as a model for Canada and the Commonwealth, but it takes hard work and careful attention to make it work. It starts to break down, I believe, when Cabinet exercises its authorities in ways that erode our committee system and in the ability of each MLA to represent the interests of our constituents. I say that Cabinet in this bill has run roughshod over that consensus mandate and has forgotten its duty to act and think on behalf of all the people of the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Speaker, my opposition today is a signal to the government that I want them to think and act more responsibly and more prudently. We have three years to go in this Assembly and I want the government to change the way it does business with the Members on this side of the House. My opposition is also a message to my constituents, the people of the riding of Great Slave, that I’m taking a strong stand on behalf of their interests. I want them to know that I’m doing what I believe is right in order for us to have a government that we can all have confidence in, that we can trust, and that we can rely on. Mr. Speaker, thank you, and I would like to request a recorded vote on this bill. Thank you.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Braden. To the motion. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I echo the sentiments of my colleague Mr. Braden, Member for Great Slave…

---Applause

…on the lack of consultation on behalf of the government in this expenditure of $3.4 million. Basically, Mr. Speaker, what amounts to a black hole, as Mr. Braden referred to it as, but we don’t know what this is going to cost us, we don’t know where we’re going to get the money from and, Mr. Speaker, it’s very irresponsible of the government to put forth a plan when they have no plan, Mr. Speaker.

This bill has $16 million in spending and $11 million of that, Mr. Speaker, is already spent. I’ve thought long and hard about whether or not I would vote in favour of this bill or vote against it, Mr. Speaker, and I just wanted to mention the reasons why I’m going to vote in favour of this bill. Mr. Speaker, I’m going to vote in favour of this bill -- as much as I’m going to have to hold my nose when I do so -- but, Mr. Speaker, it’s for my colleagues here that I’m going to vote in favour of this because, as I see it, the government will pick on us. They will go after especially some of the Members' projects in their ridings and, Mr. Speaker…

Mr. Ramsay, could you stick to the motion, please? To the motion.

Mr. Speaker, just out of fear of retribution I am going to vote in favour of this bill today and because the government will try to blame this side of the House when something has to get cut here or something has to get cut there…

Did somebody call a point of order? Mr. Ramsay, I would caution you to stick to the motion.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will stick to the bill. I think it goes back to an accountability factor, Mr. Speaker, and to be quite honest with you I think in this instance the government has shown a lack of accountability, not only to the Regular Members for lack of consultation with them, but to the public. The public deserves better. This is an expenditure of $3.4 million right now and $6.6 million into the future. I think the public deserves better, Mr. Speaker, and I think the Regular Members deserve better and I would put the government on notice that we are going to be watching what happens.

Again, I really do appreciate Mr. Braden’s conviction on standing up and voting against this bill, but I think the price would be too much to pay if we do vote against it. So I’m going to vote in favour of it today but, again, I express my extreme displeasure with the way this has all come about. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. To the motion. The honourable Member for Range Lake, Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Seeing as this is going to be a recorded vote, I’d like to just state my position on this. I am going to join Mr. Braden…

Ms. Lee. The mike is maybe not picking up here a bit, but I will…To the motion, Ms. Lee.

Thank you very much. I thought I was being ordered…

---Laughter

…ordered out even before I’ve said anything. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Seeing as this is going to be a recorded vote, I just wanted to state my position on this. I will be voting along with Mr. Braden against this bill in protest for some of the items that are in this bill. Mr. Speaker, I just want to state very strongly that I don’t want to impute motive on anything, but I really think the Members on that side are taking it for granted that we will just pass and we will stamp this supplementary bill because we always have. I don’t think there were any in history where the supplementary budget bill was defeated. Certainly we wouldn’t want that to happen, but at the same time I think it’s really important that the government understands that this is a consensus government and that means that we should all have a say in how we spend money and how we do our policies and law-making. The last time we met as an Assembly was in June. In July, we don’t usually have meetings, but through the end of August and September we had committee meetings, so there was lots of time to advise us on some of the items, especially on the airport spending.

Mr. Speaker, all through the summer, people out there were telling us about what was going on in this bill before we were privy to this. I don’t think that is fair. There is a lot of money being spent and we should have a say in that.

I have made my objections known clearly about another spending item on this bill and that has to do with the second legal aid clinic. I want to make it clear, for the record, once again, I support the second office, but the way it was done is in line with how everything else is done; we are always the last to know.

I can also tell you there are at least three reviews that will come out after we leave the House. This is related. I am objecting. I am voting against this bill because of the way it’s being presented and there is a trend here.

The internal review on Justice is going to come out after we get out of there. The review on the…

Ms. Lee, I would caution you. We are not debating the merits of the bill. We are debating the motion, so stick to the motion, please.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We are debating the merits of the bill and I believe I am speaking…

Whoa!

Ms. Lee, I will allow you to continue speaking to the motion, but stick within the motion itself. You are straying into process outside of this bill, so stick to the motion, Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe I have made my points clear. I think there are items in this bill that I agree with. There are many things that I understand are important and I support them. However, there are a few items that I don’t think are suitable and that is the airport spending and the legal aid clinic. For those reasons, I am going to vote against this and put the government on notice that we expect them to bring things forward when we are meeting and not do everything when we are outside of here. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause

Thank you, Ms. Lee. To the motion. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will be voting in favour of Bill 13, but I just wanted to indicate my displeasure as well. A lot of the things contained in Bill 13 could have been brought to the Members beforehand and debated. Instead, the government chose to do it after we finished sitting back in June. There were a few other opportunities and they did send us some memos, but it’s not the same as sitting with us as Regular Members as a joint committee to debate the merits of some of the expenditures, Mr. Speaker. With that, I will finish up. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. To the motion. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to say clearly I will grudgingly vote in favour of this bill. I am disappointed because if we vote in favour, it goes through without any serious objection, unfortunately. If we vote against it, we create ripples that are difficult to see at this time. Will they still charge forward? I have no doubt, so I have to vote in favour of it because I feel like my hands are tied.

I can’t see that far in the future, so I don’t know what will happen if we don’t. I feel left out of the process, so what do I do? Do I vote against it just because I feel left out of the process? I think Members could have been consulted better and earlier because we knew this. The merits on this bill stand on their own and it’s not one of those things I really want to vote for, but I feel like my hands are tied.

The government may look at AOC as not united enough to fight against them to vote against this bill. I am not sure how they feel. They may think we are not ready to go. I don’t know what the case is. I think AOC’s time is coming to stand up and vote against bills like this and to show we really mean business. Whether we put on the gloves, as a metaphor, whether we do whatever we do, the time is coming. So you won’t be getting many yes votes as easy as they may come today or as easy as they have come yesterday, so I think the government needs to know that that time is coming.

There are some displeasures I have for voting for yes and I wish I could vote for no. It’s about the process. I think special warrants are wrong the way they are being used. I think the special supplementary issues are issues I have and that’s why I want to vote no.

Again, I refer back and close by saying I can’t foresee the ripples. I don’t believe in the merits of this bill. I don’t believe in everything that’s been brought in with regard to this bill that other Members have had concerns about, but as a whole I will have to vote in favour. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. To the motion. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will be supporting the passage of Bill 13. The reason I am supporting it is very simple. If the government has to find resources from within to find funds that aren’t approved here today, our communities will suffer. As an MLA, it’s a choice I have to make. That’s our responsibility to our communities. I can’t blame the government or anybody else. I am responsible here. So the roll of the dice says I have to vote yes. That’s what I am doing to support this bill.

At the same time, we are learning the process as working MLAs. We see how things move and some of my honourable colleagues from this side are also learning. They are seeing how the system works. We want to be included and part of the process. I think the government got our message. It’s a clear message they got. They have three more years. For me, the logic is very simple. If you take $20,000 out of the Stanton hospital, it won’t have a huge impact, but if you take $20,000 out of the health centre in Tulita, it has a big impact for our people. That’s a big difference. I am not willing to risk it to the services to our communities.

Again, I will restate that the government has our message. We can deal with issues that brought us to where we are right now by changing our practices or possibly amending the Financial Administration Act. That’s what I would like to say, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. To the motion. The honourable Minister of Finance, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, for four days, we discussed this supplementary appropriation and the Members made it quite clear that they were concerned with a number of items and, as we hear here today, the process as well.

Mr. Speaker, the process that we used is one that is established and as the Premier said earlier, we will gladly sit down with Members to discus how we would go about this. This bill was put together within the rules we operate by. Yes, there are a large amount of special warrants within this supplementary appropriation. Forest fires, which were in the summertime when we weren’t meeting when the department came back and knew they would overspend their budget. The school collapse in Inuvik and the fire that followed them is another $2.5 million, Mr. Speaker.

Now there was concern raised about the airport facility and the work that’s going to go on there. That is now being established in the budget, after negotiations between the Department of Transportation and CATSA. They were trying to secure more money for the project, they realized there was a timeline in place, and if we don't get that project approved then CATSA itself will take over the project and put in place what they feel is necessary, without regard to how we operate, without regard to the industry out there that operates here in the Northwest Territories, and they have shown so. There's an example of Whitehorse and Nunavut where they're going to do the work to meet their timelines with the budget they have identified, without concern for the governments of the day.

So we're of the position that this needs to go ahead, that we should be in control of it, and that we should make the necessary repairs and infrastructure changes that would still see a useable facility that would still allow for the air carriers that operate out of there to make a go of it without being hindered more than necessary. Yes, we realize that the full plan isn't put together, but that plan will be brought back to Members of this Assembly for review. The rest of the plan that's going ahead is going to be within the business plans.

So, Mr. Speaker, we realize that there are times through supplementary appropriations, and especially special warrants, that are of concern. As a Member who sat on the other side of the floor, I have raised a number of issues about the use of special warrants. So, Mr. Speaker, in this bill particularly there are some large numbers in here around special warrants. It's not taken lightly that a bill that would come forward or if a request for came money forward that we would look at this and just throw it in there and say well, we think we've got the numbers.

Mr. Speaker, when we put this together I have not sat down with any of my colleagues and said if this does not go through then retribution will be paid to this Member and that Member on this project. That is not how we operate. Mr. Speaker, there have been many, many issues raised on this bill since it went into the House. I could sit down and pull out comments that Members have said that are based on pure politics, but, Mr. Speaker, we are about getting the business done and we need to do this. We take the message coming from Members that we need to take a good look at how we're going to use special warrants in the supplementary process.

Mr. Speaker, there have been a number of issues raised out here that we just need to put some clarity to on this bill and the information that flowed, especially around the airport facility. I am prepared to table, if the Members want, a letter that did go out requesting time from the committee for the Department of Transportation to go through what had occurred. A decision was made in late June, a letter was sent in July, and, unfortunately, we couldn't get the time together between committee members and the department until September. So, Mr. Speaker, there's a concern here about what we do, and as Finance Minister it's like I have to just throw this out there without regard to what might happen and without regard to the rules.

Mr. Speaker, this bill was brought forward following the rules of this Assembly. We can't tighten it up. As the Premier stated, I'll gladly sit down with the Members to look at tightening up the process, and we have to make sure we're clear on how tight we want them to be because there could be things that happen as a result of that, but we'll have that time to go through it.

So, Mr. Speaker, this bill does, for the record, put it on the floor, has allowed debate, and residents of the Territories have heard the discontent about the process in a number of the projects. But I feel, as Finance Minister, in reviewing the request that came forward, they were brought to the table and we reviewed them. With the Members' concern raised here, I will definitely be using that when my colleagues come forward for requests, to tell them to think twice about it before it comes forward.

Mr. Speaker, for the record, I would like to let the Members know over there who have questioned my credibility in this process and said that I am not doing my job, I have followed the rules, the rules that are open and available to everybody, and I have not gone around those rules. This bill was put together and is needed for the legitimate expenses that have occurred in some cases and that will need money coming up.

So, Mr. Speaker, just for the record, we followed the process, we are tight on our money, we recognize that, and we've heard the concerns and will gladly work with the Members on trying to make the process go a little smoother. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. A recorded vote has been requested.

Question.

Question is being called. All those in favour, please stand.

Mr. Roland, Mr. Handley, Mr. Dent, Mr. McLeod, Mr. Bell, Mrs. Groenewegen, Mr. Ramsay, Mr. Pokiak, Mr. Villeneuve, Mr. Zoe, Mr. Menicoche, Mr. Yakeleya, Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Miltenberger, Mr. Krutko.

---Applause

All those opposed, please stand.

Ms. Lee, Mr. Braden.

All those abstaining, please stand. The results of the vote: 15 in favour, 2 against. The motion is carried.

---Carried