Mr. Chair, I move that consideration of Tabled Document 193-20(1), Capital Estimates 2025-2026, be now concluded and that Tabled Document 193-20(1) be reported and recommended as ready for further consideration in formal session through the form of an appropriation bill. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? Sorry, I'm going to go to the Member from Range Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I know we're -- thank you, Mr. Chair. I know we're in a rush to get to another very important piece of this committee's work, but we do need to -- this is a House of debate, and we should be debating things.
So I never have been a fan of our political process here, and I've never seen a concurrence motion been brought forward by the government House Leader, the Premier, the Finance Minister, any Member of Cabinet before. I think that's significant. And I just spoke to my honourable friend next to me, who has served a number of years more than I have, and neither he can remember a time when such concurrence motion's been brought forward by a Minister.
I think that speaks to the fundamental disagreement that some Members of this House have with how we've approached -- how we are approaching our priorities as a government. This -- the committee of accountability and oversight issued a report about the capital estimates with a broader mandate to look at how the priorities -- the four priorities of the government being met, particularly around health care and housing, and ultimately found that the response to date from government was lacking. The Finance Minister mentioned this in her closing comments.
What we have been offered in response to those concerns, a commitment to remove derelict units, reviewing rent scales that haven't been looked at in ten years, a three-year notional housing plan worth $150 million, and I should note notional means un -- like costed but unfunded. So it's just a plan that could show what could happen if it was funded.
I don't think that's what we meant as a committee when we said prioritize health care. We wanted houses built. We look to our sister territory in Nunavut. A third of their capital budget is being spent on housing. I'm sure people will say well, they budget differently. But the point is people in Nunavut understand that their government is prioritizing housing. They're building 350 homes. We are building 150 homes, or doors I should say. We need to do a better job. We need to do a better job on housing. We need to do a better job on health care and a whole bunch of other files, but to narrow it down to those two, the two most pressing issues, the top priorities of this Assembly, is what this committee was trying to urge the government to do. The actions that have been promised are not sufficient enough. We need some deliverables that we can take back home to our ridings that matter to people.
Members recommended things like shift premiums for nurses and health care professionals, minimum contract lengths, 500 homes were kicked around at one point. We were offering tons of ideas to try to get something concrete out there so people know we're making a big bold action. When I talk to health care professionals in my riding, they are used to the talk, they are used to the town halls, the employee engagement surveys, but they're not used to action. And that's what they're saying; that's why they're so deformalized. It's a lot of talk, a lot of strategies, a lot of planning. But they want to see something. And we haven't provided it as a government yet. We're on our one-year mark, and we still haven't provided it.
So we don't make the declaration that we can't support capital lightly. We understand that they're different things, that it is not the same as an operations and maintenance budget. But the point was this was our next opportunity to speak to the -- to speak to finances. And in any other government, that kind of lack of support would be akin to a confidence motion. And I think Canadians and -- well, Northerners and Canadians are well aware of what the consequences of that are with the situation in Ottawa right now. If the House does not have confidence in government then there's an election, in most places except here.
So when we made that declaration, it was an announcement that we lack confidence in how we're moving, we need to course correct, we desperately need to course correct. Because that's what we're hearing from our constituents. And I am not satisfied that we have done that. I am not satisfied that we are making significant investments in health care or housing. I think we're doing the -- I think we're taking a status quo approach with a commitment to try harder. And I appreciate the effort. I appreciate that we have to do planning, that there's been, you know, units and ADMs assigned, and those resources brought to bear but, again, it's more talk, it's more planning. We need some big commitments upfront, so people know things are going to get better. That's why we're here at the end of the day, to make things better, to fix problems. So it was not -- it was not a -- it's not theater to say we're going to -- we don't support the capital budget. And I think Members may -- I mean, we'll see how the end vote -- how the votes end up today, and I'm sure Members will have things to say. I'm sure some Members will change their tune from that initial report. But I hope we all appreciate the significance of where we're at and how far along this road we've come.
If we're going to make this government work, then we all need to be speaking the same language, and we all need to be prioritizing the same things and understanding how to prioritize the same things. I don't think we're there yet. And saying no to the capital budget is not saying no to all these infrastructure projects which are important. I know they're important. I know they're important in many people's ridings. It's to send a very strong message that we desperately need to course correct or we can't get on with the regular business of supply that governments do. We can't get on with governing until we solve this problem and course correct. That was the point of this message. I know it hasn't been lost on our constituents. I know we've been talking about it at length. But we do need to do better. And we need to deliver something tangible, something real, something that shows people that we are listening to them. I do not believe we've achieved that with the commitments made to our report, and as a result I will not be supporting this budget. Thank you.
Thank you. To the motion.
Member from Yellowknife Centre.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, you know, these capital budgets are not the same as operational budgets, and I think that that's very important, you know. In other words, this is roads versus this is employee salary. It's not that simple, but in a sense, if you're trying to decide, you know, why this budget matters versus the other one, the timeliness of some of the questions -- my good colleague here next to me, he's right. Like, we don't have a lot of opportunities to say truly hold the feet of -- the government's feet, that is, to the fire with respect to important needs. I mean, the asks or the requests by the Regular Members don't come lightly. It's hard enough getting, you know, all of us together on the same song sheet. We are literally 11 independent parties that occasionally work together, and it takes a lot to, you know, get us all on the same page. If not, it's an impossible task. But what we did see this time around is such unanimity around many of the topics highlighted, again, just recently by my colleague, you know, such as housing as an example. I felt it was very important to be -- to demonstrate solidarity to send the message of housing matters.
I like numbers, so I'm going to throw a couple out here. I won't do them too fast, so they resonate. It was -- it's approximately 352 days since the last territorial election. Where's the housing file? It's approximately 340 days since the Members' speeches in this House about, you know, all the things we're going to do. All we heard about was housing and helping people, you know, even bigger centres wanted to help little centres, little communities or small communities. We wanted to be part of the solution. It's been approximately 329 days since Cabinet was picked. And yet we don't see the government as, you know, a war time mandate with the enthusiasm that we're going to make housing number 1, even though it was so loudly spoken. You know, without a number here in the sense of, you know, it's just over 300 days since the -- we met with the territorial leaders at the Tree of Peace. What was the number one issue everybody talked about? Housing. I feel like saying can I get an amen with the congregation here. It's true, though. It's true.
You know, and I get the interim budget was, in theory, keep the lights on. You know, I get it. I get it. And I supported that. And I think that's a reality. But then when we came in in the May/June budget, you know, where was the system listening to the leaders of this House, the leaders of the territory, the people of the territory, when everyone's saying housing matters? You would think in any system, you know, once they heard those consolidated echos of passion saying we want to make a difference on housing, they would literally stop the factory floor, you'd hit the button, the red light would go on, and say we're retooling for housing. Why? Because these people, these 19 people were sent to this building to make housing -- like, make a difference in housing. So we tried a couple weeks ago. We sent our letter. And, you know, I mean, it should have been written with invisible ink some days I think, because that's how it feels like the answers get. You know, holding it up, I don't see anything from the Members, let's just keep on.
And then there's the fracturing. Well, you know, there's the implied, whether it's direct or indirect or the pressure, oh my God, what's going to happen if we don't support the budget as given? And what happens if we don't support it as given in a timing? So in other words if you don't support this, well, who knows what's going to happen. Can't tell you. Beware of -- well, just beware.
Mr. Chairman, it's approximately 1,039 days left in this mandate before the next election. And some days I think, man, that's -- I wish it would come sooner. Because, you know, I really thought -- I believed, not thought -- I believed in holding the line because housing mattered. Now, I generally mean this commitment which is, you know, I feel very strongly about saying let's just put 500 houses in the communities. Let's do it. You know, that's somewhere between, you know, 12, 13, or even as high as 15 depending where it is. Why, as a Yellowknife MLA, would you say let's focus in on that first? And I -- I'll be frank about it. Because it's important. And the reason it's important is because people are coming from the regions and the communities because of the housing suitability and accessibility. It's just not there in some of those places. They -- you know, or they get a government house and a modular that rolls into town, the government heats it for two years, and everybody's staring at it. Boy, that's at a sore thumb. Nothing -- you know, the equating -- getting results for people is what hopefully we all ran for. To take pressure off Yellowknife. Yellowknife has a land issue with getting housing.
Now, I'm sure someone's going to say I'm wrong on this and that, but the truth of the matter is access to land is a big issue to get houses built here. We have developers that build big tracks of opportunities, whether small apartments, houses, apartment buildings, row houses. People want to build in Yellowknife. It's land. But housing solves the community problems. And I would never disagree that more public housing in Yellowknife wouldn't help. My goodness, that is certainly an important thing. But I just that that -- let's -- the other aspect is, Mr. Chairman, and I really want to stress this, if we could focus on an effort to have the greatest impact, I thought that would have an immediate ripple effect on everybody. Help Yellowknife, help the regions, help the communities, help families who are struggling. So, Mr. Chairman, I couldn't agree more. This notional -- let's put it differently. It's hypothetical. It's theoretical. It's well-intended. It would have been a monumental shift in doing business in recognizing the important story the Members are telling on this side of the House had our initiatives been adopted a little more. And that's really what's frustrating when you're on this side of the House. You know, my favorite saying is the government will always be there when they need you. Yeah, well, you know, if they don't need you, well, you're on your own.
Honestly, some of these initiatives didn't do a single thing for me personally in the sense of the riding in Yellowknife Centre. I didn't necessarily see it always helping Yellowknife at large. I saw it as helping the territory as a whole. And to me, the fabric is weaved very tightly together. And I'm -- I want to take only a -- like, a 30 second step off this, which draws the comparison -- although it's not completely on topic, so I want to recognize I'm doing this on purpose, which is when I'm arguing about the importance of what's happening in Fort Smith is I'm not trying to save a jail. And I told that to the people I spoke to on the phone. No, I'm not trying to save an empty jail. I have no interest in that. I have an interest in saving 32 jobs that make a difference in a region. I see this as helping the fabric of the North. I see possibilities for making sure families are sustainable, healthy, and whatnot. And that's why the housing to me mattered in the communities. How do we bolster our territory? You know, someone tried to give a poke at me yesterday saying I'm only doing this because I want to be in Cabinet. That wasn't it. It matters. It matters. And I was kind of offended by that pure suggestion. It matters helping people wherever they are. And if you can go home at night and sometimes remember you helped somebody, my goodness you sleep the best sleep you've had in a long time. And when you know you've done your best and sometimes you don't cross it over the line, well, you know, you still feel darn good. And they see it on your face when you put the effort. I thought some of their suggestions were going to do that.
So, Mr. Chairman, I didn't expect to take eight minutes, and I sincerely apologize, that wasn't the intent. But I am frustrated because, like I said Members' suggestions, I often deeply feel -- and I'm going to stress, I feel like we write them in invisible ink, and that's what happens to them. You know, and it's just frustrating when you're sitting there trying to help people, not yourself, people, families, make them healthy, make them strong, empower them, help their independence, because we all want good people, you know, and all want good results, Mr. Chairman. So I apologize, a little bit of a rant, but I am frustrated and certainly disappointed.
I won't leave it to a mystery, but I'll let people wonder which way I'm going with this one, which way I'll vote. But I do think a recorded vote on this very matter will be key for Northerners to see if they want to take a point in time to ask who dug in the sand for something that's meaningful. And I feel that this one mattered. And it would have had a monumental achievement recognizable about our efforts and our passion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. To the motion. I'm going to go to the Member from Inuvik Boot Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chairman, when we were elected, we sat down here, all 19 of us, we sat in the conference room out there and we talked about what we wanted to do. Those who wanted to put their names forward for Cabinet talked about what they wanted to do. We talked about a top down approach. My background is corporate. Certainly, you know, I feel that in order for real change to happen, it has to happen from the top down. You have to have that leadership. We can't keep doing the things we've always done and expect a different result. We know that. It's been said many times. And, you know, and that was a conversation everybody said yes, I want to get in there and I am going to make these changes. We know we've had problems. This is -- the last government had problems. You know, they left some problems that we've had to deal with. And that personally is what I wanted to see.
In the first part of our term here, you know, I wasn't necessarily seeing that. And I said, listen, you know, I want -- I don't -- I want it to be driven by us. I want it to be driven by the people that we've elected to govern. I want Cabinet Ministers to take information from the committees that we have, from Members on this side of the House as well, and to take that and implement those changes.
So, Mr. Chair, what tools do we have if we don't feel that that's being done? Well, one of the tools we have in our toolbox is our ability obviously to vote on budgets. Now, it's not lost on me that in this case we're actually asking for operational change but we're voting on a capital budget. The main estimate budgets, the operations budget, we voted on three months ago. But we weren't happy with where we were so we're to take this opportunity, this is a tool we have to kind of go back and, you know, obviously you -- everyone has heard the report we read. I actually did a Member's statement on that as well that we need to see change before we can support this.
You know, we talk about course correction. We've had -- you know, we talk about real change. We've had, you know, what I think is significant briefings between the report and now, we've had many meetings obviously with Ministers, and we've been given commitments in those meetings, you know, what they want to do to change that. And the question is, I guess, from our side is are we willing now to say fine, has this message been heard, us doing -- you know, us submitting that report, has it been heard, and are you willing to take it now to say, listen, this is the information -- this is how we want you to govern. We want you to take some bold steps and do some bold things and change the course.
Now, we've heard in -- again, through those committee meetings and through those briefings that that is what this government is willing to do. It's going to remain to be said. So as we move forward, you know, we will -- we're one year in; we have three years left to go, we have a lot of work to do. We know that. I mean, I'm not 100 percent satisfied in everything I heard. There were certain things that were said and certain ideas that were brought to me that kind of gave me some, I guess, comfort that perhaps they are listening and perhaps we will get some of this work done. I'm not really interested personally there was -- you know, the capital budget is $300 million. Again, we're making -- we're asking for operational changes on the capital budget. There are things in that capital budget that are important that we need to move forward as well. I do not disagree housing is one of our main priorities, our top priority, but there are other priorities as well, and there are things in this capital budget that I want to see move forward. So that's not lost on me as well, Mr. Chair.
You know, so the question I ask myself is am I willing to allow Cabinet to follow through on the commitments that they've said they would do, and then of course I will, as I'm sure my colleagues will as well, make sure that we're holding them to account as we move forward. This is not the only time we'll get to vote on a budget in this sitting in this legislature. It's only the second time we've gotten to do it. So am I willing to do that? And that's the question, Mr. Chair, that I ask myself when I move forward, do I want to see this budget pass so we can get some of these important capital projects moving forward and has my message been heard or our message been heard that, you know what, there are tools in our toolbox we can use to hold this government to account and to make sure that change is being implemented from the top down as we anticipated -- as we all said we we do when we sat 19 of us together when we first got elected and continue to do that, Mr. Chair.
So I will be supporting the capital budget as it moves forward. I'm in a position now, and I will be holding this government account as we moved forward when we get these important projects going, and I look forward to the next main estimates as well where I'm hoping we're going to see some changes to both health and housing in that budget. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the motion. Next on my left I have the Member from Monfwi.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, being here, we -- we are not here only for us, you know. We have to keep in mind the people, especially the young children, we are here for the future generations. We have -- every decision that we make here, we have to keep the future generation in mind, the little children, the babies that are not born yet. What kind of life do we want them to live in the future, you know? I know we want something bigger, better for them, that -- and it's not just only to this legislature. It's also -- it also goes for other government as well. For example, Indigenous government. Because that's what we've been hearing a lot from our governments. And, you know, like, it's -- that's what we have to do. And when I was first campaigning in 2021, July 2021, I talked to a lot of elders, and a lot of elders have said you cannot do this alone. If you want things to move forward, you got to cooperate, you got to work together. Only one person cannot do it. This is what I heard from my elders. And some of those elders are no longer with us. Because whatever decision we make, it's going to have an impact on our people, you know, the citizens of the Northwest Territories and our constituents. So we always have to keep them in mind. But it's the elders' advice, some of the elders are no longer with us, it's still with me, and I'm still hearing it from some of the elders out in the communities, you know, when you go visit them. When I go visit them, they talk to you. And so I have to keep that in mind.
And here, I know that housing is going to improve. A lot of things, a lot of social problems, education outcome. We know that having sufficient housing that will end the homelessness, it will solve the problem. We know that. We know that for a fact. But in my riding, there's the Frank Channel bridge, you know.
I lived in Behchoko almost all my life. And we're being -- we're using bus to travel -- for nine years, I travel on the bus, school bus, from Behchoko to Edzo to get to school. And we're still doing that now. And we're travelling on that Frank Channel bridge which a lot of people are hesitant, they are scared to travel on that bridge, not knowing if it's going to collapse. They fear -- they're fearful of that thinking it's going to collapse. It's just the way that -- because of the condition that it's in. So with that in mind, you know -- so the Frank Channel bridge, it's a lifeline to Yellowknife as well and to all the mining companies. So it really needs to be upgraded, and it should have been done a long time ago. But it's in the capital project right now, so I'm happy about that.
And Whati transmission line, you know, if any of you have been to Whati, you will see a big generator in the center of town. A lot of young people, a lot of young people my age, you know, like, the older generation, they grew up with that big generator right in the center of town; it's very loud, and it's not good. So I'm very glad that, you know, they're doing the transmission line from Whati to Snare hydro which is greatly needed. And with the high cost of living and a lot of people have complained to me that they are spending lot of money paying for their electrical -- electricity. So I heard that, so that's -- you know, that's good.
And the school in Behchoko, the school in Behchoko, it was built -- Chief Jimmy Bruneau School was built in Edzo. It was not the choice of the people. It was the choice of the federal government. So what the federal government wanted to do was to relocate the people to Edzo because there's better -- they're going to build more, they're going to give us more, better services, they're going to do underground water, everything. That was their intention. And I do -- right now, I do sympathize with a lot of other communities, remote communities, where this is what the federal government did to them. And, you know, they have no choice because they make their living over there in some of the small northern communities and I'm so glad that Tlicho people did not, you know, follow the federal government request to relocate to Edzo.
So the new school that's being proposed right now, it's going to be built in Behchoko, and I'm happy about that. And I even have a little grandson, you know, and I don't think I want him to travel from Behchoko to Edzo to attend junior high and high school. Like, I would like for him -- and there's a lot of other ones too -- and I think -- because when -- once you miss the bus too -- this is another thing too is that once you miss the bus, the school bus, you're out all day. And that's how I know that a lot of our young people fail. I blame some of the education outcome on that. Because we had a lot of poor attendance, and it still is because a lot of our young people are going to school in Edzo. At the beginning of school year, we have lots, but as the year goes on our attendance drops. So I do support that, the school. Because all these job -- all these programs, these projects, capital projects, it's going to create jobs. It's going to create more training opportunity. And here, we're -- we're hearing about it from a lot of other people where we're lacking trades. And this is a good opportunity for Tlicho -- hopefully education will, you know, partner with Tlicho government to provide more programs, trades programs, bring the training to the people to the community instead of our young people going out. Because of the housing crisis, there's a lot of our young people don't want to leave. They don't want to leave our community because they don't want to reapply for housing and be on the housing waitlist. And I have some young people that are on the housing waitlist for, like, five years, and it is a shame, and we do need more houses, you know. And I know that it's something that we're not going to stop talking about, you know, and then it is one of our mandate so we're going to make sure that this government, you know, live to the mandate that we all work together to create it.
So with that in mind, that, you know -- I mean, there's lots of things that we need in our communities. You know, we -- I know that this -- the government -- not just this government but the previous one too, we send a lot of people out for treatment program. So the government is spending thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars, you know, to deal with the substance abuse, with the drugs issues. And right now, a lot of our communities are facing -- you know, are having issues. You know, we have a lot of issues in small communities related to drug issues. And drug dealers, that's a breeding ground for them because they know that a lot of our young people -- not a lot of our young people, but living in the small communities there's not too many opportunities. Unemployment rate is high. So it's like there's no hope. So it's a breeding ground for drug dealers, you know, and victimizing our vulnerable young people, especially the children. The children are experimenting with these hardcore drugs now. So that has to stop. So the thing that I don't like is that what we need -- not only in Inuvik and Yellowknife, we need more of a transitional aftercare program where -- because they spend all the money sending out our people across Canada for a treatment program. Now they need to do something about those -- you know, how can we accommodate these young people coming back? Because we all know someone in our life that has an issue with drugs or alcohol but it's not the alcohol anymore; it's a drug issue, illicit drugs that's taking over many of the small communities. So I do have issues with that. We need that.
And we need more independent living unit for many of our elders in small communities, transitional housing. And I talked to a lot of young people -- a lot of unhoused people in my region, especially in Behchoko, where they are tired of being homeless. You know, they are tired of being homeless. They want a house. They call -- you know, they want a house so that they don't have to worry about where they're going to sleep tonight or tomorrow or anything like that. So -- and education and disability -- program for children with disability and all that. So with that in mind, I will support this budget. Thank you.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, as we all know, the committee of Regular Members brought forward a letter at the start of this session explaining our concerns about the health care crisis and the housing crisis, stating that we need to see significant steps to improve both before we can support the capital budget.
So on health care, we are still in a crisis, but I also understand that the path forward requires more operational changes than capital-related changes. There are steps being taken such as the establishment of the health care system sustainability unit which we certainly need to continue to monitor closely to ensure we actually gain some momentum in addressing these urgent problems.
Where I still do not see a path forward is with regard to the housing crisis. Currently, we seem to be stuck in an outdated way of thinking about what our vision is for public housing in the NWT. As I mentioned in my Member's statement earlier today, the philosophy certainly of the federal government for decades has been that the government just needs to get out of public housing, just kind of ease our way out, and then the market will solve all of our housing problems. But this completely ignores the realities in small nonmarket communities.
All the evidence we have of where our communities' economies are at and incomes in these small nonmarket communities, all this evidence leads us to the conclusion that a significant portion of our population will continue to depend on public housing to meet their basic shelter needs. And so our public housing stock needs to be larger than it currently is to allow our population to meet their basic shelter needs.
As we know, basic shelter is the most foundational aspect of any of the priorities we've set in this Assembly. Without basic shelter, people cannot pursue their education, they cannot stay healthy, they cannot keep a job, and we cannot grow our economy.
I feel like we've been wishing away the need for more public housing. Just hoping or waiting until something or someone else takes care of it, that maybe the Indigenous governments will build enough private housing in each community that those who currently reside in public housing will be able to move out, and that'll free up enough public housing for all the people who need it, even though there's 900 people who are on the waiting list who apparently need it. We just have no evidence to believe that that is actually possible or going to happen. And in fact, all of our evidence leads us to a different conclusion, which is we need more public housing stock. I mean, we've been failing to allocate enough money so far even to take care of all of our existing assets in terms of our public housing stock let alone allocating money to expand our public housing stock. And we continually look to the federal government for a hail Mary. If we look to our neighboring territory, if we look at the Nunavut 3000 strategy, we see that it is, indeed, possible for a territory to increase its public housing stock and to devote its own territorial money, resources, to actually doing that, to making it happen.
But why is this important for my riding, for YK North? First, I mean, somewhere between one-third to a half of the public housing waiting list is in Yellowknife, so it's not only demand in small nonmarket communities, but rising homelessness across the territory also has huge impacts on my riding, and all of Yellowknife, and I hear about that every day from constituents. Most of the people who have ended up homeless on the streets of Yellowknife are not originally from here. The latest survey from the review of Street Outreach found that 90 percent of the people who were using the Street Outreach services who are on the streets of Yellowknife are not from Yellowknife. They've ended up here. Why?
A lot of that reason is because of lack of adequate housing in their home communities. So perhaps more than any other issue housing, and specifically public housing, links all communities in this territory with the ripple effects of chronic underinvestment and it costs all communities, including Yellowknife.
So for these reasons, I feel I have no choice today but to vote against the capital budget. And I don't take that vote lightly. I understand that the ideal way to achieve these kinds of policy changes I'm talking about is not to vote against the capital budget, but the status quo way of doing things doesn't seem to be accomplishing those policy changes either.
I want to be clear that I have full confidence in the finance Minister. I have full confidence in the Premier and in Members of Cabinet. I still have a lot to learn about the best ways to create effective change as a Regular MLA. But I also think there needs to be a lot of adjustments to our status quo way of doing things, way of working in this building, for us to successfully achieve our priorities. I don't want to suggest that we just open the flood gates to endless spending, and I know many people fear that if we start spending more on public housing, it will be a black hole of spending that will never be enough.
I am by nature, I would say, a fiscal conservative. My instinct is always to help us reign in spending, to be more efficient, to find savings. I would like to have more of a role in that. I do think we need to shift where we spend. I would like to see more opportunities for Regular MLAs to be part of those tough conversations about tradeoffs, priorities, shifting spending, to be part of those conversations much earlier on to talk about the kinds of things we would like to shift spending away from so that we can responsibly increase our funding for housing, and specifically public housing. So I'll leave it there for now, Mr. Chair, but I wanted to explain the way I plan to vote on this budget. Thank you.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from the Sahtu.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll make my presentation short and to the point and move on. Yes, there's many challenges that we inherited as the 20th Assembly, carryovers, dead carryovers, misled projects, cost increases. That is for the reason why we set the -- or the Minister of Finance gave a fiscal sustainability strategy, a strategy to recognize that and balance the books. And when I look at the budget, it doesn't really 100 percent accommodate and satisfy everybody. Yes, we try, we negotiate, and we come up with the best capital plan we think is best in balancing our books and servicing the need. The need, I must emphasize, in my region alone, the only remotest area, and the largest one of this territory, and yet the most impoverished one. If I shared my wish list, I'll need more than ten minutes.
Right off the get-go, we were left with no water. That put an emphasis on the impoverished side of the community. You can't create jobs if you don't have your building materials shipped to the site. And the list goes on. And I look at the design negotiated capital plan and what's in it for the Sahtu, and the people that put me in this chair, I think to myself, yes, I support this, but I also look at the future years and try to accommodate the need and a balanced fiscal position. So in short there, Mr. Chair, I will be, yes, supporting this capital plan. Mahsi.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Mackenzie Delta.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. In order to be productive in our society today, we have to be healthy. In order to be healthy, we have to have homes. And right now, I don't feel that this government is reaching out to the people of the Northwest Territories saying that we are going to prioritize what you wanted. During our elections, I've heard numerous times, every house I went to, you know, they showed me the condition of their houses. Some people were walking around because they didn't have houses. And that's what they wanted. They have children that's walking with them, they're going to a friend's house, parents. These are just band-aid solutions.
The Indigenous government stated that their main priority was housing. I go back to my community of Fort McPherson and I hear that on a daily basis, that housing is a priority. They should be pouring money into it and when you look at what was proposed, it was an insult.
In order for our students to be productive, they got have a good night's sleep, they have to stay warm, and the education system is failing them. I hear that continuously from staff members that work at the schools, that these students are uneducated. They can't read at the level they're supposed to be reading. You know, I feel sorry for those teachers because they're trying, but yet there's another group of students who's illiterate that's in the grade that's going to come up next year. And the cycle continues until they're pushed through another door, and that door is income support where they're given everything. They're given the opportunity not to work. They're given the opportunity not to go to school to further their education and be productive residents of their communities. And it's sad to see that because, you know, previous governments, this has been going on for years. I've witnessed people going -- that are adults now that have children that are going to school, and they're in the same situation. They're sending their children to school because they know they'll have free time. That's what these staff members are saying. They're just sending their children to school because they know they'll have a good seven hours of not -- you know, being away. But the ones that are suffering is the students themselves. They're not given the opportunity to get a good education. That education system is not working at all.
And the income, I've always stated, you know, continuously income assistance needs a review. We have to give our residents of our communities a chance at life. We have inadequate health care within our smaller communities. We need to look after our elders. I've often heard that from our people in the communities, our leadership, saying that our elders are our greatest resources, that we have to look after them and yet, as a government, we're not looking after them.
We have criminal activities within the housing units that's not being addressed. The residents of each community knows of these people. Before coming into government, I tried to address that as a resource person in the community. I went to the local housing authority. And the answer they gave me was, you know, in order for them to act on this they have to give them 24 hours notice and by the time they give them 24 hours, they deliver their letter saying that they're going to come search their house, they're moved on to another unit. So we need something in there where we can correct this problem because it's the children of our communities that are hurting.
I know of this one gentleman in my community who was homeless for years, and he slept at different homes within the community and now housing gave him a home, and his home is like a homeless shelter because he knows how it feels for others to be homeless. So he opens his one bedroom house to people that don't have a place to go. He knows the feeling. So some of these -- we always talk about homelessness, well, I've stated this, like maybe about 20 years ago you never saw that in our communities because family members, friends, took them in. You never saw anybody walking out on the streets. But now with all these drugs in our communities, people don't want to be bothered because they're scared because these people are -- they may be a danger to their families. And it's difficult to see this.
I can't go back to my community if I support this capital budget here. I can't go back to my community and say that, you know, everything's going to be okay because it's not. The residents of my constituency put me in this position to look after their well-being, and I have to look after their well-being. So my position is that I will not be supporting this budget. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Next on my list I have is the Member from Frame Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just sitting with the words of my colleagues here. And I think that the first thing I want to say is, you know, just an expression of how much I respect and value the positions of my colleagues and the different perspectives that are shared here regardless of whether -- which way you go on this vote in particular or any vote, really. You know, I deeply appreciate, respect, and value our democratic process and the people who put us all here to represent them, and part of that respect is respecting the different voices that are brought to the table. So I appreciate the comments of the previous speakers.
The bottom line for me on this one -- I don't want to repeat too much of what's already been said. Like I said, I appreciate those comments and, you know, we've all got places to get to, families to go home to or call. And, you know, the real sticking point for me on this one, similar to my previous colleagues who kind of spoke to housing, the ultimate sticking point for me was a word, the word notional. The word notional that meant a notional commitment to a plan but wasn't able to fully commit to that not knowing where necessarily the money would come from. And I think the Member for Yellowknife North kind of spoke to being prepared to have the conversation about what we need to do in order to shift our resources towards our priorities as necessary. And as I've been saying through this process, I'm very open to that conversation. Still looking forward to having it. And so I was looking for us, similar to the Member for Yellowknife North, to not be notional about our planning, but to make a plan, commit to it, be willing to fund it with our resources.
Ultimately, when we came together as AOC and drafted the letter that we all ended up, you know, publishing in this House, making public by tabling in this House, I wouldn't have put my name behind that letter if I didn't mean it and I was not prepared to stand by it. I am prepared to stand by it, and I will do so today.
I want to speak briefly to, you know, the conditions of housing in my riding, in Yellowknife, in the communities, in the Northwest Territories.
Mr. Chair, before taking on this role, I served for a number of years as -- on the board of directors of the Yellowknife Housing Authority. I got a good idea as to what the housing issues are in our community, my community. In particular, the most impactful moment I had during my time on the authority was when we went on a tour of some of the housing in Yellowknife. Some of the structures were fairly new, were, you know, exciting to look at, and I was happy about what is being brought forward for residents. But some of the places where people are living in in Yellowknife, the conditions are appalling. They're -- I don't know if I can quite find words for it, but the best way I can illustrate what I felt when touring through those buildings was no child raised in a building like this is being set up to succeed, and it stuck with me. I had absolutely no doubt in my mind whatsoever when I put housing at the top of my list when I ran for election that this is an issue that we need to resolve. You know, very few people write you a message or call you up and say this is the exact reason I voted for you but when you put a platform on the table, you have to assume that it had some role in getting you elected. Housing was at the top. And so I feel a strong obligation to keep it at the top until I feel that we're making substantive progress towards it.
And so for me, what I wanted to see was more than a notional commitment, was for this government to really step up, allocate resources to our housing crisis, as we need to, in order to lift people out of the conditions that I just described. It is very important to me, and it remains important to me. For that reason, I join my colleagues who will not be supporting the capital budget. And, you know, I appreciated the comments from the Member from Inuvik Boot Lake. He was kind of mentioning, you know, we're taking a very somewhat operational perspective on the budget through capital budget negotiations but as the Member for Range Lake noted, you know, this is the tool that we have. And so I was prepared to use that tool to put pressure on the government. And I want to be clear, like some previous Members have been clear also, that, you know, I very much appreciate the position -- the very difficult position that the finance Minister's in, I appreciate and respect that perspective. I appreciate the various, you know, concessions and the seriousness with which Cabinet approached the concerns brought forward by Regular Members. I do have confidence that they are taking us seriously. We didn't quite get where I wanted to get to, and that is part of how this system works.
Something that I wanted to -- I always like to kind of come back to this because it's a bit of a passion of mine, but something I did kind of want to note is something that I noted to the clerk the other day during one of our chats that, you know, sometimes things can be really difficult in here. This is not an easy job. It's certainly a job that involves a lot of pressure. It's a job that pits very strong perspectives against one another, between people who I care about, people whose perspectives I respect greatly. But as I said to the clerk, you know, we are having the right conversations here. We're here fighting about the issues that matter to the NWT. We're here fighting about -- fighting is the wrong word, but we're here kind of discussing the major policy issues that this government is facing and the directions that we're going to go with the territory, and that is what is described by practitioners as healthy conflict. It's the right kind of conflict to be having in a building like this. So I want to just kind of highlight that and note that I think that we are having the right conversation, that the conversation we're having right now is the right one. You know, I've landed on the position that I have. I wanted to stand strong in the position that I took, and I will continue to do that. So I think that wraps up my comments on capital budget for today. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. I'm going to go maybe take a moment here, and I'll swap out with the Member from Sahtu to fill in as chair.
---SHORT RECESS
Members, we will have the next Member from Great Slave. Go ahead.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's been a year of hearing my colleagues demonstrate the unbelievable need for basic services in small communities. It's been a year of clean-up after major events. It's been a year of heartache and hurt, and so many of us are still raw bundles of nerves trying to find some peace. I've been told that 15 to 20 years ago working here was a bit of a party. The diamond companies were swinging, the trips to Ottawa were fun, ribbon cutting happened, and it sounds like there were a lot more laughs. And that's no longer the case. Fast forward to now, and the honeymoon of the 20th Assembly is long gone. Urgent emergencies still exist. Climate change is hammering us in different ways year after year. My colleague from the Sahtu has detailed his constituents' need to see resources flow while it's still possible in the winter season for capital projects as they clearly can't get it moving in the summer by barge due to low water levels.
Every day in this building, I hear the frustration of Members that we can't adequately help residents with their most basic needs, most notably in housing and health care. We are scrambling to help, and many days it feels like we're stuck on a leaky boat with a tiny cup to bale out water.
I agree with my colleague from Frame Lake who spoke earlier today to the fact that systems of how we budget, plan, and make good decision in the GNWT need to change and adapt to this new reality we find ourselves in. Members have asked for real change in investments in housing and health care. We set out on that path after setting our priorities just a little over nine months ago. Unfortunately, moving at the speed of government, that's the blink of an eye, and that is also a frustration for anyone who has ever been in government and for those who haven't. To make meaningful systemic change takes time, effort, and likely tears.
I want to speak to notional. Notional is something I hoped that Cabinet would drop from their offer, and they haven't. The reality of funding for housing means it can't be anything but notional. Nunavut 3000 started out as notional, and they worked from there. So I still have high hopes. Those high hopes might end like a led balloon, and that's on Cabinet to pull out.
I have a personal touchstone in writing by the writer Paul Ford that I return to again and again. Quote: There is this set of heavy lenses mounted on a steel base. Each lens is 8 feet across. Looking through them, the world is blurry. Turning these lenses is exhausting. It wears out the muscles, it takes all your energy an inch a day each, and maybe you have three whole revolutions to go on before you end up in focus. It'll take a hundred years to get a clear picture of the world. I'll be dead by then. But in the meantime, some focus is better than none. End quote.
I have heard about focus and visions in conversations with Cabinet. I have faith in both of the Ministers in housing and health care holding those portfolios. They have shared some confidential information with Members that have a bold vision in the near term, and it's not my place to speak to that detail. But I have confidence that those heavy lenses are being turned in earnest. I am happy to say that I have good relationships with these Ministers, and they're doing the best they can as quick as they can with the tools they have while also trying to build new tools at the same time. That's the sticking point, it seems, what is possible today and what can be accomplished quickly. To that, I'd say for real and lasting and crucially meaningful and impactful change, that takes longer than nine months. In this instance, and for the urgency of the issues facing the Sahtu and for what I see as mainly a pared back capital budget, I will be supporting it. Thank you.
Thank you to the Member from Great Slave. We will move on to the next Speaker, the Member from Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I came in as the MLA for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh in the 19th Assembly and re-elected in the 20th Assembly. When I came to this job, I came with good experience. What I brought to the table is -- as a tradesman in the carpentry. I built a lot of homes throughout the North, worked for PCL, Clark Builders. I did my time in the construction industry. I worked in construction management. And before even Nunavut was here, I worked all over the whole Northwest Territories. And I also sat on the national AFN housing board back in the 1990s, late 1990s. And even at that time, right across Canada we're probably about 120,000 homes short. And here in the Northwest Territories, today we're about 10,000 homes short. And back in the early days with the GNWT government, they had a really good program in place with the Government of Canada and CMHC where they built homeownership programs, they had money for emergency repair programs, money for senior citizen home repair programs, home improvement programs was a big one where they retrofitted homes. And these homes now today are aging out about 40,000 homes. The life cycle of a house is about 50 years before you need a complete retrofit. And it's a big issue here in the North in regards to housing.
I brought this up in the 19th Assembly and spoke passionately about it, and here in the 20th Assembly I'm doing the same thing again. But when I ran for MLA for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh, housing was one of my top priorities. And what I heard was, you know, we got to do something about housing. We need homeownership repairs. Just imagine if we -- if the fire marshal comes into our communities and look at our HAP houses today that's been built back in the, you know, late '80s, it would be concerning. So I'm really concerned that if that ever happened, how are we as a government going to deal with that issue with the housing crisis we already are in?
So I put forward ideas because I brought forward issues on housing to the housing Minister back in the 19th Assembly and the 20th Assembly. When we got together as MLAs when we first got elected in the 20th Assembly, we listened to all the leaders up and down the Valley that came to Yellowknife, all the MLAs came forward and brought their issues forward, and we came up with four priorities, and housing is number one. And I'm deeply concerned here in the 20th Assembly that we're not putting a lot of money into the efforts of homeownership, affordable homes. And how are we going to meet the demands about 10,000 homes short we need today? So there is a big concern. And I know that when this government -- when we put in the Premier and the Cabinet Ministers, you know, a lot of housing issues were carried over from the last Assembly.
In the last Assembly, I asked the question about austerity and basically it was said that at the time that this issue will be brought forward to the 20th Assembly. Now we're at $2.29 billion as a government, $1.6 million in the deficit. We're $1.6 billion that comes from grants and contribution from the Government of Canada. And that's probably earmarked for Indian, Metis, and Inuit. And it feels like for me, any time I go to government and ask for help, it's like I become a beggar in my homeland and going to the government to ask for help for our people in our small communities. And it's really tough, especially when we have that kind of money that comes from Ottawa, from the Crown. And that's something that I'm hoping that this government and the 20th Assembly will take a look at. But right now the words been thrown around here is notional that was brought in our caucus meeting. And believe me that when we went into a caucus meeting we had, it wasn't -- it was a tough go around because we all had our own views about housing. We brought forward our issues. We had disagreements. And I do apologize to my colleagues, we -- sometimes we step on each other's toes. But at the outcome at the end is that I think what we want to bring forward what we hear from our people in the community. And, you know, the Cabinet is -- we got a good Premier here. We have a good Cabinet. We just got to figure a way as to how we all could work together. And, you know, at the end of the day, we're all on the same ship here. But somehow I don't want to lose sight of what the vision here of the North is is going to be of the 20th Assembly, is that housing is number one. We have to figure a way going forward that we could look at new ways to deliver housing, homeownership repairs, etcetera.
I put forward an initiative because I already knew that every time I went to go see the Minister, I'd knock on the door, they said they got no money or they got policies that says I can't help you. So I put forward an idea that I wanted to do homeownership inspections in my riding, and I figured what the houses -- what state they're in and figure out what it cost for bringing up that unit to code and do that for all four communities, and then work with the GNWT government because I'm tired of trying to say, okay, well, it's all on you. But no, I got to figure a way how we can work together. And I'm really happy that this Cabinet had approved the monies to put aside to do this work. But I think that it'll go a long way if we continue to build that relationship because at the end of the day is that if a lot of these houses get written off or they burn down or something happens and the fire marshal steps in, shut these units down, we're going to be in big trouble.
So I'm -- I think it's a great idea that we continue to build that relationship. And even if this motion here today is defeated, we have to figure a way that it's going to continue to be in the main estimates so that we don't lose sight in that because, you know, at the end of the day, the people in the small communities throughout the Northwest Territories, really need help, and we were elected to be here for them and trying to look for solutions. So, Mr. Speaker -- I mean, Mr. Chairman, you know, this has been a very sensitive subject for me for a very long time.
As you know, our treaties are there, our treaty rights are recognized in the Canadian Constitution. We have UNDRIP. You know, we have a lot of treaty right issues here that needs to be talked about but I'm hoping maybe through the Council of Leaders we really need to take a look as to how we're going to talk about Constitution reform because sooner or later, all our claims are going to get done, we're going to be in a better position to start looking at self-government and manage some of these affairs that we could look at. And I'm hoping that through the Jim Bourque I'll table probably next session and continue to build on that.
So, Mr. Chairman, at this time I'm in favour of voting against the budget on this one here because it doesn't go far enough. And I'm doing this on behalf of my people. We are in a housing crisis, and the top priority of this government, it's just not meeting it right now. And I'm hoping that we'll continue to work together to make sure that we resolve this issue and look for new ways to provide better homes for the residents of the Northwest Territories. With that, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
Thank you to the Member from Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh. We will pause for a minute.
---SHORT RECESS
Thank you. Next on my list I have is the Minister of Finance.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I will try not to take the full ten minutes here. Mr. Chair, I wanted to make sure there's some clarity -- I hope there's some clarity around what happens by voting down the capital budget and what message is being, in fact, sent.
Mr. Chair, respectfully, we are saying no to capital projects and to the capital -- when we vote down the capital budget. And contrary to a lot of things often asked about about improving our planning, improving our efficiency, doing better in all of those regards, this does the opposite. We vote down the capital budget, there is no appropriation for capital spending done now. So best case scenario is that we're waiting until February to bring it all back, which means there's no contracting, there's no procurement, no one can plan, can't arrange for supplies to be ready, and certainly can't arrange to have things ready to move as of April 1st as we might not pass the budget, might not pass it until March 31st. That is exactly why several jurisdictions, particularly jurisdictions that are challenged with supplies and remoteness, do split their capital budgets to a fall sitting from the fiscal operating budget that happens in the winter sitting, because if we don't pass it now, can't do all those things so we're left waiting to see what may or may not happen.
So in a jurisdiction, Mr. Chair, where we have heard, many of us in this room, talk about uncertainty as acting as a chill on private investment, Mr. Chair, voting down a capital budget in October is a chill on private investment. We are deciding not to support the private sector in the Northwest Territories on small capital projects, on large capital projects, on projects on which they depend. So this puts projects at risk. Not all of them. Not all of them, Mr. Chair. Some might kick around and some might wait until April, but it certainly undermines planning, it certainly does stop the procurement, it doesn't promote private sector, and it tells everyone that we're prepared to sacrifice every single other project in here for other principled positions. And, Mr. Chair, I don't -- I know that -- I have certainly been in this room now for many years. I've had an MLA colleague on the other side in the last government vote against the capital budget every single time on principle, every time. So that's fair. I don't want to at all be seen to be suggesting that that's not an appropriate stand to take at some times, but let's be clear about what we are voting down if that's the choice that we're making.
Mr. Chair, on that note, again, I want to make sure that I want to be fair. Cabinet sometimes -- one of the hardest things of being on Cabinet, we have constituents, we have residents, we hear from people. The challenges are not lost on us, and the idea that they are is unfair. But the conversations that we have as a group of 19 Members, in my view, respectfully, go far more and far beyond the idea that we're just not listening or trying hard enough, that the public servants, senior members, right down to the frontlines don't care and aren't trying hard enough, and that somehow by voting down the budget, that changes that.
Point of Order.
All right.
I'm going to go to the Member from Range Lake to the Point of Order.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, under Rule or 3.2(3), the Minister is alleging that Members during this debate have attacked the integrity of the public service in handling issues, and I do not recall anyone saying that. Thank you.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the Minister of Finance to the Point of Order to respond.
Mr. Chair, I am more than happy to retract those comments. I certainly didn't want to leave any impression that Members of this House don't respect the public service. So I apologize, and I take it back.
You got time. Continue. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I do want to speak to the letter that was sent, much of which was ultimately read into the House.
Mr. Chair, that letter was very lengthy and spoke at many points about wanting to see a plan, see a cultural shift, to see leadership change, then in other respects to see a plan, again, to see more changes in policy, to see changes in procedure, to see action plans, to see ambitious planning, and so on and so forth. That's not all that was there, Mr. Chair. I certainly don't want to leave that impression either. But that is a lot of requests for different plans, different processes, different policies, different approaches to leadership. And, Mr. Chair, it was our effort in engaging in the conversations that we did to respond to that with proposals for leadership change, with proposals for policy change, and with an approach that could lead to the culture shift that would then accomplish all of what's in these letters and what all of us here want to see.
Mr. Chair, there's millions of dollars pouring in to the territory for housing. It is not all coming to the Housing Corporation of the Northwest Territories. Now, that said, the housing corporation in the last several years has been successful in seeing significant, tens of millions of investment, come in. The federal funding cycle does not always align well to our funding cycle, and so I'm not in a position to sit here and say that we can remove the word notional from the $50 million commitment that we expect to be able to make. I don't want to sit here and pretend that I have an answer for that. I do believe that we'll be in a position to spend $50 million. And, in fact, I believe the housing corporation will probably be in a position to spend more. But, Mr. Chair, it's not fair or appropriate for me to simply say, no problem, and hope it's fine when I can't actually say exactly where it's going to come from. I do think it will find that money. There's engagement happening not only from the housing corporation but from the Department of Infrastructure and the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs with our federal counterparts to see these problems addressed. And some of the offers that we've made and the discussions that we've had around changes in leadership and changes in approach involve creating better systems for engagement with MLAs. One such -- for example, just ways by which we can bring one another together, we're all hearing from residents, and we want to make sure that we're doing that in a way that doesn't bring us to the brink of not passing a capital budget which again -- so, really, at that point, Mr. Chair, I'll wrap up with that.
There are projects throughout this capital budget that go to every single community. There are projects in this capital budget that go to small communities. There's projects in the capital budget that will link communities. Everything from transmission lines in Fort Providence, transmission line in Whati, there are housing projects, planning for long-term care facilities, extension of the Inuvik runway. Mr. Chair, I know we've been dealing with this for the last two weeks. At the same time, the conversation here isn't about all of these projects. I realize there is one other priority that people are concerned about, but we aren't going to advance the issue of meeting housing if we can't bring the supplies up on the road, particularly the Mackenzie Valley Highway. We aren't going to be able to connect those houses if they can't be connected to power systems. They are going to struggle if the municipal funding -- the multiple capital funding that is in here doesn't flow to the municipalities who are responsible for water and sewer systems, who are responsible for the waste management systems. It does all need to fit together.
It's a lean plan, Mr. Chair. I get that it's a lean plan. Everyone's heard me stand in the House and say that we have to already increase the borrowing limit. Times are challenging. But, again, the kinds of shifts that we were hoping to make to bring about these policy changes and to move forward in advance of the main estimates, and our hope was one that would respond adequately and allow us to get to a place in the main estimates that shows some of the outcomes of that policy, the policy shift and culture shift that every one of us Members in this House want to see. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Any other comments from Members? Thank you. The motion's in order. To the motion. It's been asked to have a recorded vote. Okay, thank you. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Sorry, it's earlier they had asked for a recorded vote. So I'm going to go back to the motions. To the motion. Question.
Question.
