Debates of October 26, 2006 (day 16)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for the Minister of Finance and it’s in regard to a statement that he made in the House last week in the development of a macroeconomic policy division. Mr. Speaker, I’d like to start by saying when the government goes out and develops some policy framework, I think they should keep reality firmly in mind. What I see in the development of this macroeconomic policy shop is the fact that it is based solely on hypothetical scenarios. I mentioned in my Member’s statement we have no resource revenue deal, we have no devolution deal, we have limited ability in the areas of resource management or development, debt management, taxation, investment, and not to mention the 2,000 or so migrant workers who take $200 million out of here annually. So I’d like to start off by asking the Minister of Finance where exactly did the direction come from to develop this macroeconomic policy shop. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Minister responsible for Finance, Mr. Roland.

Return To Question 198-15(5): GNWT Macroeconomic Policy Division

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the idea of the macroeconomic policy unit has been discussed by previous governments that we should take this direction. Ultimately the final direction came from FMBS prior to this year’s budget we’re in now. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Supplementary To Question 198-15(5): GNWT Macroeconomic Policy Division

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, what I take issue here with is the fact that we are dealing with a territory that has no real responsibility for its fiscal situation because we get $900 million directly or indirectly from the federal government. Five hundred million dollars of that is right out the door in salaries and benefits to our employees and I think, Mr. Speaker, we have higher priorities than this macroeconomic policy division. We need to hire nurses, we need to hire teachers. If you look at an ad that I found in the Globe and Mail recently, we’re going to pay these policy analysts in this shop $80,000 a year. That’s more than any nurse or teacher that I know make. Mr. Speaker, we don’t have…

Do you have a question, Mr. Ramsay?

I’d like to ask the Minister who developed the policy? Who developed this policy? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 198-15(5): GNWT Macroeconomic Policy Division

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I know the Member has issues with the macroeconomic policy. He’s made it clear since we’ve discussed this. In fact, at one point I believe he was suggesting it should go into ITI or Executive. It seems anywhere else but Finance. Now it’s why are we doing it. The fact is this issue was raised as far back as 1997 that the government should have something like this in place. A good example was, for example, when diamond mines were starting to be established should we pursue secondary industry or should we focus on taxation. That’s one of the reasons why we’re at this stage today. The fact is, we spend a billion dollars in the Northwest Territories. We do have some of our own-source revenues. Yes, we’re tied to the federal government, but we shouldn’t stop and bury our heads in the sand and not proceed. The fact is right now we’re in the process of developing that policy. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Supplementary To Question 198-15(5): GNWT Macroeconomic Policy Division

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think in my discussions that I’ve had with the Finance Minister I’ve been clear that we have economists in the other departments the Minister mentioned, in ITI or in the Executive for that matter. But what I’d like to ask the Minister is how come, you know, Members on this side of the House haven’t seen this policy? I haven’t seen it and I’d like to ask the Minister when are we actually going to see this policy and what is in it? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 198-15(5): GNWT Macroeconomic Policy Division

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we are in the process of developing that policy. In fact, in my Minister’s statement here I’d provided sort of a framework as to where we’re going and some of the questions we have to ask and some of the partners that we need to work with; for example, our community leaders and aboriginal leaders, as well as our business leaders. In fact, in November as we’re going out to start this leg of the work, going to meet with those groups to begin to put the framework together. Of course we’re always ready to meet with Members and go through that process as well. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Supplementary To Question 198-15(5): GNWT Macroeconomic Policy Division

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, again I’m having trouble understanding, and I don’t know if it’s just me, but I’m having trouble understanding why we need fiscal policy analysts to help us better understand how to spend, in my estimation, what, you know, after we spend, pay all the bills and everything, might amount to $150 million. That’s probably going to go straight to program. I don’t understand where this policy is coming from and I’d like to ask the Minister, what is the basis for a macroeconomic policy framework shop in the Government of the Northwest Territories? What is the basis for that? What is he basing it on?

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 198-15(5): GNWT Macroeconomic Policy Division

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we’re basing it on the fact that the Government of the Northwest Territories needs the appropriate tools to make decisions on spending patterns. It’s not only about spending $100 million. As I stated earlier, we’re spending a billion dollars and should we as the Government of the Northwest Territories, how should we spend that money? Should it be focused on schools? Should it be focused on training programs? Should it be focused on infrastructure, airports, highways? Those are the things we have to use this piece for. In a sense, the policy will be developed and will become a macroeconomic lens that decision-makers like ourselves will have that tool as we make spending decisions as well as revenue-raising decisions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.