Debates of March 3, 2021 (day 65)

Date
March
3
2021
Session
19th Assembly, 2nd Session
Day
65
Members Present
Hon. Diane Archie, Hon. Frederick Blake Jr., Mr. Bonnetrouge, Hon. Paulie Chinna, Ms. Cleveland, Hon. Caroline Cochrane, Hon. Julie Green, Mr. Jacobson, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Lafferty, Ms. Martselos, Ms. Nokleby, Mr. Norn, Mr. O'Reilly, Ms. Semmler, Hon. R.J. Simpson, Mr. Rocky Simpson, Hon. Shane Thompson, Hon. Caroline Wawzonek
Topics
Statements

Question 636-19(2): Procurement Policy Review

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have questions for the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment. Procurement in the Northwest Territories is very important. It is something we hear about lots in this House and something we are hearing about lots in our meetings, as well. In the interest of that, I am wondering if the Minister can tell us if the northern manufacturing policy is within the scope of the procurement review that is happening within ITI. Thank you.

Speaker: MR. SPEAKER

Thank you, Member for Kam Lake. Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment.

Mr. Speaker, yes. Thank you.

I hope questions like that happen in Committee of the Whole for ITI next week. Thank you. My second question is: time is money, Mr. Speaker, especially when you run and own your own business. I am wondering what the average time is between receipt of an application for the Business Incentive Policy and the northern manufacturers policy and confirmation of the application, as well, for the business owner.

I was looking for some information rather quickly. I can give an average, and the average is four to six weeks. I am not clear if that includes an application that is for both of those. I expect that it is. It may be that it is less complicated if it is only under BIP. Mr. Speaker, I should note it doesn't include a timeline if there needs to be further information, if an application is incomplete at the front end. As such, the clock would get stopped on the government end to allow a proponent to add to their application if need be.

Like I said, time is money. If somebody is trying to add something under either their Business Incentive Policy or trying to add something under the northern manufacturing policy, those timelines don't match up with a lot of our procurement timelines. If somebody is trying to do that, and it's taking two months, four to six weeks, potentially, for them to add that under, they are missing out on tenders. Every week, either I am notified about somebody missing out on a tender, or I am copied an issue to do with procurement policy, every week within my role representing the people of Kam Lake where there are a lot of business owners.

My next question is in regard to streamlining the process, in order to kind of help simplify those timelines. I'm wondering if the process for the northern manufacturing policy can be streamlined so that businesses aren't burdened by administrative demands of repetitive paperwork. What I find within the northern manufacturing policy is, if somebody, for example, manufactures coffee tables, they have to go back to ITI to say, "This month, I'm going to manufacture side tables." After that, if they want to then manufacture kitchen tables, they have to go back again. This adds a huge administrative burden to businesses. Instead of making kitchen tables, they're filling out paperwork asking to make kitchen tables and bid on government procurement for that. I am wondering if we can streamline this process with ITI to better serve northern businesses.

I want to say "procurement review" instead of simply saying "yes," because, really, the intention of the procurement review is to do exactly this, to look at barriers and to ensure that the barriers that may exist are brought to the attention of the government in a specific way so that we can identify the barriers broadly and systemically, not one by one, not solving one problem at a time for one proponent, but to truly look at having a system that is functional for everyone who is applying.

Again, the northern manufacturers policy is part of procurement review. I want to acknowledge that the Manufacturing Strategy is only barely a year-and-a-half or so old. I heard, in the course of doing that, that manufacturers are struggling with some of the systems. We are well aware of that, and that information is part of what has gone out in the discussion paper on the procurement review. Panel is well aware of it. I am confident that we are going to hear back from the manufacturers and have lots of good ideas of how this policy can be improved in the next few months.

Speaker: MR. SPEAKER

Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate that, and I am very appreciative that the government is going through this procurement review. We have been in House now for a year and a half. We are a year and half into our term, and I believe a lot of us came into this job wanting to reform procurement and make sure that we are retaining benefit for northern workers and northern employers. I think that this is something that we need to, as my colleague says, get on the ground sooner than later. We need to have results for the people that we serve, and we need to have results for the businesses that keep our communities afloat.

My next question for the Minister is: what are the service standards for responding to northern businesses and processing northern manufacturing policy applications? What kind of communication happens with businesses and what are the standards that ITI expects their employees to adhere to when they are dealing with an industry where time is money? Thank you.

At present, there is not a set service standard for responding under the northern manufacture policy. Again, the average time right now for processing the application, ensuring that it goes from start to finish completed, is four to six weeks. If having set standards is something that the manufacturers believe would be beneficial, would be useful, then, again, I would hope and expect that that is going to come through in the procurement review and that we can find something that is more functional and more workable, ensuring that, again, if there are other certain standards that are expected beyond simply the timelines for applying under this one process, then that is all part of what should be coming through. I am confident we can figure out what an appropriate standard can be in the course of this process. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker: MR. SPEAKER

Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Item 8, written questions. Item 9, returns to written questions. Item 10, replies to Commissioner's address. Colleagues, we will take a short recess. Thank you.

---SHORT RECESS