Thank you. Anyone else? Government accounting, total operations expense, $11.898 million.

Agreed. Thank you. Government accounting, grants and contributions, total contributions, $8.307 million. Mr. Allen.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a committee motion, Madam Chair. I move that committee recommends the government bring back to the committee before the next draft business plan reviews options for measures to stabilize power subsidy costs at current levels. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Allen. The motion is just being distributed. We'll just give Members a few moments to look at it. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I think this motion deserves some discussion to help the public and observers here in the Assembly put this in some context. The power support program is a government program. It really has nothing to do with the actions or the decisions of the NWT Power Corporation or other power providers in the NWT. It is the government's choice and has been for many years now, I think since the early 1980s, to assist those communities where power costs are extraordinarily high and it uses the Yellowknife base rate as a threshold. So if you're living in a community where the cost per kilowatt hour is higher than Yellowknife's rate, the government will subsidize the difference for the first 700 kilowatt hours in your house, or if you have a small business I think it's to 1000 kilowatt hours a month. So this is, I think, a reasonable and a realistic way. There may be better ways, of course, but right now this isn't a bad way, Madam Chair, of assisting customers with the very high cost of electrical energy.

However, the rate at which this program is expanding is of considerable concern to myself and I think this is what prompted the committee motion Mr. Allen just read a few minutes ago. We are looking at a difference of 30 percent in two years in the cost of this program. This is not because the government has changed any of the criteria, but it is because power rates are going up more and more as communities grow and customer numbers grow in the NWT, more people are eligible. We are all using a lot more electricity these days. So these seem to be the drivers. What we have to do, I believe, Madam Chair, is to find ways to stabilize or put some curb on the extremely high rate at which this program is growing. We're looking at total expenditures now of $8.3 million a year. As I said earlier, that's a 30 percent growth in two years. We cannot afford to continue subsidizing this at this rate, Madam Chair. That is why we wanted to put this motion to government. I think rather than having a motion go forward to a vote and be approved with little discussion, I would like to put this to the Minister: We would like to have the government come back to us by the time the business plan review starts in the fall with options for ways in which we can stabilize the cost of this subsidy program. Will the Minister be able to do that? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. To the motion, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I believe we will be able to come up with options that committee Members can look at. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. To the motion. Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Madam Chair. When I look at the cost of our power subsidy program and compare it to the revenues that we're receiving from the Power Corporation, the way we're heading is we want to balance our books and we're not balancing our books with this particular program. We're taking in $4 million and paying out $8 million. I think there are a couple of ways to do it. Of course, increase the revenue from the Power Corporation transfer payment and direct it towards the power subsidy program. At the same time, I do believe that we will have to look at some constraint or even cap this program indefinitely. Perhaps the Minister can let me know if it's possible to increase the amount of transfer payments we receive from the NWT Power Corporation.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. That would be the type of options we could come forward with. That has been looked at, but there has been a decision by past governments that we cannot drain those revenues from the corporation itself. It would bring the viability of the corporation into question as well as some of the other business they need to do. So governments have decided in the past to continue to top up this amount to continue this program at this level from our own general revenue fund. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. I'll just ask Members who want to speak to the motion to do so. The Minister doesn't necessarily have to respond to questions on this. Under the rules, technically, I suppose, he's already spoken to the motion twice now. Mr. Menicoche, did you have anything else you wanted to say here? To the motion. I have Mr. Allen.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Specific to the motion again, I want to speak in the context of the cost to this government, as Mr. Braden pointed out. I believe that the power subsidies to the domestic and commercial consumers should be based on the fact that we need to really look at introducing levelized rates that would help cushion those hit hardest by crushing power bills. I also strongly believe that we have to retain some economic incentive to shift to more affordable, sustainable, environmentally-friendly power sources. I believe that if we were to use that model it would help reduce the power subsidies to those users. I strongly believe as well, from a domestic point of view, that the NWT Housing Corporation is one of the biggest consumers of power in our territory. Knowing the amount of inventory they carry, it perhaps contributes to the high cost of consumption.

The interesting point I would like to make in the context of speaking to the motion, Madam Chair, is the fact that there is quite a misnomer out there in the public that the high cost of delivering power to a little community like Colville Lake with a very small number of consumers is the reason we should levelize rates. I don't think that is fair to the large consumer base. I would again suggest through the motion that we look at different incentives to try to reduce or at least minimize the impacts that this PSP would have on our consumer base as well as government. Those are my comments to the motion. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Allen. To the motion. Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I hope they don't turn the power off in Colville Lake yet. I would like to ask a question to the Minister in terms of the motion here. We're going to go into the regions and talk about ways the communities could look at stabilizing the power in the communities. There are a lot of good ideas in the communities that they would pursue to reduce this power subsidy. I think there is some really innovative thought out there on how to bring electricity down and save. I think there are some incentives that people could use in

small communities that would steer them to bring the electricity down, especially in my region. I hope that the government would look at that favourably in terms of bringing this to the committee before the next business plan. I would like to take on that challenge in the Sahtu to look at ways that we could cut down on our power usage in the region.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. If you have further questions to the Minister, we'll deal with it when we get back onto page 2-47 after we vote on the motion. Right now, are there any further comments to the motion?

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Government accounting, grants and contributions, total contributions $8.307 million. Mr. Braden.

Thank you. Madam Chair, part of the subsidy program that we provide covers assistance to businesses. I know that businesses have to take the proactive step to actually fill out some paperwork and apply for this subsidy, whereas homeowners have it automatically calculated into their bills every month. I wanted to ask if the government could provide some information today, to the extent by which this corporate power subsidy is subscribed to and how much of the total before us, the $8.3 million before us, is dedicated to a commercial subsidy. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I believe the figure for the corporate subsidy for small businesses, the uptake on that is approximately $250,000. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Madam Chair. That seems to me a low number. It is certainly a very small number of the amount of the total we are looking at. Can the department give me some sense of how many businesses take advantage of this? It doesn't seem to be subscribed all that well. Do you have any idea of the size of the subscription? Thank you.