Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for the Minister of Finance on his new release of this year’s budget.
I would like to ask the Minister, if he had done his tour of the Northwest Territories, how he can justify as the amount that we are supposed to put into the Heritage Fund when we have clearly heard other numbers such as 25 percent and 50 percent?
Thank you, Mr. Bouchard. Minister of Finance, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It was an issue of choice and having to make disciplined choices to try to meet all the objectives that we have as a government and as an Assembly, in a way that allows us to be sustainable, stay within our borrowing limit and still move forward.
There was a very diverse range of opinion across the territory. For example, the community of Hay River, they were supportive of the 5 percent when we met there and when we did a wrap-up at the end of the day. In Fort Smith there was a significant debate, 25 percent at the end of the day. Inuvik said they thought it should be probably more, at least 10 percent. In Norman Wells it wasn’t that clear. In Yellowknife the range went from 25 to 100 percent. So there was a range. There was no doubt and you have to make a choice. That’s what we’re supposed to be doing. That’s what we are required to do and that’s what we did in a careful, thoughtful way.
I know the Minister did attend Hay River and he indicated that Hay River supported the 5 percent. At the same time, the Minister indicated that we were reducing debt and he’s indicated in our budget here that we are looking at borrowing another billion dollars. So I mean, I think Hay River is supportive of 5 percent plus paying down the debt. I think the 25 percent that we’re looking on this side for is a cost-savings. The community of Hay River is looking to save more towards the future.
I wonder how the Minister justifies this when he indicated that we’re going to reduce debt but we’re actually taking on more debt, a billion dollars’ worth of debt.
As we went around the North and travelled to the regional centres, we talked about not only the Heritage Fund but we talked about the vision of the Assembly and of the government with the grid build out to the road completion from Wrigley to Norman Wells, the need to look at things like natural gas expansion, the need to put infrastructure into our communities. The only way we can do that is if we get a bump-up to our borrowing limit, which I would point out we haven’t had finalized yet and we haven’t borrowed a cent yet. We painted that picture for folks for the road ahead on what we need to do as a territory with devolution. We are currently, with our $800 million borrowing limit in the budget address, with the path that we’re on, we will be within $142 million of our borrowing limit. We’ve agreed that we want to keep a $100 million cushion on anything that could happen, a horrific fire season this coming summer, God forbid, but something of that nature.
So we had a fulsome discussion with the communities. We didn’t mislead communities. We didn’t just go in there and talk about the Heritage Fund. The Heritage Fund is actually about $45 million that we are looking at potentially out of a budget of $1.6 billion. We had the board discussion too. We have to make those choices. We can do both, the question is not what degree. Thank you.
I think we’re looking at terminology. The Minister indicated that we are looking to borrow a billion dollars. The indication that he said that we might have been misled is the fact that we indicated that we’re actually going to reduce our debt. This budget says we are going to reduce our debt and that’s what they have been selling, but in this budget they are also talking about borrowing another billion dollars. So I’m just wondering where the Minister sees the difference in that. We’ve talked to the communities about reducing the debt, but now in this budget we are actually taking on more debt.
We talked about if we park the $1 billion request to bump up our borrowing limit to the side which is going to be geared to major economic infrastructure, when we talked about the Heritage Fund, the resource revenue sharing, we talked about debt reduction, paying down the debt and we talked about investing in infrastructure. Those are the three areas and we are working to keep the debt reduced to within $100 million cushion of our $800 million borrowing limit. We’ve talked to people about that. We’ve talked to people about the things we need to do about the Stanton renovation at $350 million. When we did the consultation, we didn’t have the number, but we knew it was going to be significant. So we were clear and we do need, as we borrow money like we plan to do on the Stanton renovation, we need to be able to pay down that debt. We want to keep it within $100 million. To me, that’s debt reduction to keep it all affordable for people. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Bouchard.
Thank you. Another area of interest in the budget is the discussion of the regional positions. The Minister’s presentation indicated that there’s going to be 52 positions in the regions. I’m just wondering: how many positions are we putting into Yellowknife with devolution?
Thank you. I think there have been briefings with the Members. We’ve offered all the existing employees in Yellowknife that are in federal positions that are transferring. We’ve had, as the Premier indicated yesterday, nearly 100 percent take-up. So you’re going to be at 150 positions, roughly. I mean, I don’t have the exact number, but all the jobs that are currently in Yellowknife, job offers were made, all of them were accepted and they have a two-year commitment to their positions and stability here in Yellowknife. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
