Mr. Speaker, I believe we do have to take a close look at this. If you look at the profits of these mega-companies such as Exxon Mobil, which announced a $40 billion profit, and you look at the diamond companies, which are making billions of dollars of profits a year, they’re taking diamonds and oil and gas out of the Northwest Territories but not leaving anything behind to the real residents who should be benefitting from those resources.

I think, as a government, we have to seriously take these industries up on this matter. I know, Mr. Speaker, during the argument for the pipeline, we had to reach some concessions to not raise royalties, to not raise taxes for the pipeline from Imperial Oil — which is a subsidiary of Exxon Mobil and which made $40 billion.

I’d just like to ask the Premier if he’d like the government to seriously look at this alternative. Bring it back as an option that we can look at to maybe consider a way of increasing our resource base for revenues by looking at the resource sector, which has the ability to act right now.

I believe I said that as a government, we are looking at our tax options — those that we have on the books as well as those that would require a legislative initiative if brought back to this Assembly.

As we know from past practice, when governments make adjustments, even adjustments with existing

legislation, it can have a lag time of at least a year to two years before you actually start to see the net results of any change — in some cases, sooner.

For example, one of the avenues my past government practised was to raise the corporate tax. It didn’t take very long for corporations — and even our aboriginal corporations — to look at their net impact and decide that they’ll put their money in other areas outside of our Territory, which has almost an immediate impact on lost revenue in the Territories. So we have to work out that balance.

But yes, as I stated, we’re looking at new initiatives to bring this back to this table for input.

So, Mr. Speaker, I’d like to ask the Premier if maybe he could bring forward the legislation that was drafted, I believe, in the 13th Assembly. I don’t recall the tax, but there was legislation put forth, developed, that was ready to come forward — by way of looking at this alternative in the 13th Assembly.

So I’d like to ask the Premier: would you consider bringing that back to the table and allowing the Members of this House to take a look at that as an option?

Mr. Speaker, as we develop our overall plan for the Government of the Northwest Territories, we’ll need to, as I’ve committed, go back to the Members with our options for the savings we need, the re-profiling that we want to do, the reinvesting we want to do in priority areas as well as some of our capital in our communities and the revenue options that we have identified. That’s all got to come back to Members. And we’ll share that as we put our plan together. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I think as a legacy of this Legislature and of the Premier, we can even name it the “Roland Tax Bill.”

Laughter.

I didn’t hear a question there.

Mr. Speaker, when we talk about these difficult times where we have to go back to considering reductions and strategies for that, a couple of pieces of work were left unfinished, I would like to say, in the 15th Assembly. On the

boards and agency review, which looked at strategically refocusing on how we do business, I’d like to know from the Premier — this is one suggestion I’m going to put out today; I’m going to give another one in the next question — would you revive this initiative and take a serious look at it? If our boards and agencies are costing us a lot of

money and not providing a lot for services and programs, would he consider that as part of this reduction strategy?

One of the initiatives was looking at refocusing government — lead Minister was Mr. Miltenberger in that area. That is already a part of the equation to be reviewed.

Thank you, Premier. To continue along the theme of my suggestions and to make sure they’re included…. I got a phone call today from a constituent on two separate but similar matters, so I’ll put them both in the same question.

Mr. Speaker, some of the cost reduction ideas — and I’m glad to hear boards and agencies will be part of this — are negotiated contracts. Negotiated contracts, they’re convinced — and I think they’re right — cost us more than public tenders.

The other thing is allowing employees to use flexibility when they do things like make travel plans. For example, we tell them that they have to go travel one certain way, but we don’t allow them to find the cheapest option. And now in fiscally restrained times, we are telling them to buckle down and show initiative. Well, if we can find ways to do business cheaper, are we going to create that type of flexibility by both stopping negotiated contracts and allowing employees to find cheaper ways to do business?

Mr. Speaker, one of the other areas we have initiated in this government is the infrastructure committee, which will look at how we deliver infrastructure: the timing, the processes, negotiated contracts. There’s a policy overall, government-wide, that is used by departments. We would have to do, in a sense, a case-by-case analysis to see if in fact there was a savings. The other fact of that is, when we talk about sustainable community, it is a way of initiating economic development in our smaller communities. So that’s a balance we have to look at as well.

I was just going to call it quits until the Premier mentioned one thing, which was “if there was a savings.”

Mr. Speaker, I have to say that when you have an RFP — a request for proposal; that is, you request a proposal for a contract tender, and you get a comparison dollar figure on a product, and hopefully it’s the same kind of product they’re offering when it goes out to bid…. But when you do a negotiated contract, you have nothing to compare it to. You just sort of go in and say, “What’s the best price?” And then, “Can we live with it in our budget?”

Mr. Speaker, would the Premier initiate a process that reviews the situation of negotiating contracts and ensures that we stop it in sort of market-style

communities? I’m not suggesting that in little, tiny, small communities we don’t consider the negotiated process; I’m saying in large market communities such as Yellowknife, Inuvik, Fort Smith, Hay River and even Simpson. Those types of places are large enough that they have a real economy.

Mr. Speaker, I think it is a process we’ll have to look at. Right now, for example, any negotiated contract that is left, we require the department to report back on the benefits and the costing. We have looked at the fact that some of those contracts have come back at a lower cost than we would have achieved had we gone out to the public tender process. There are times when we look at it, after looking at the economic benefit…. We have to look at some of the initiatives that are underway. For example, we have two MOUs now signed in the Territory that talk about providing benefits to aboriginal organizations. So that is something that we have to take into consideration as we review this area.

The Premier brings up a good point about the benefits. But I got a call quite some time ago — not recently — from a company that does business in the North, and the majority, the lion’s share, of business that they’ve sort of worked through in their contract has gone south. So what they’ve done is set up a bit of a phantom company, so they can get a Northern image, working with aboriginal organizations. So they give a piece, but we don’t see what is really underneath the name.

If we’re going to do this process, and if you’re reviewing and you’re standing there and saying that we did a negotiated contract so this community got the benefits of that, I want to make sure we’re looking to where the benefits really went. Will you do that, Mr. Premier?

Mr. Speaker, the ownership structures are reviewed as part of the process. A benefit analysis for that community or region is looked at as well. The whole area of negotiated contracts is up for discussion. And yes, the intention, when you look at the negotiated contracts policy, is to build an economic factor within the smaller communities. They can then move into the free market situation where there is competition among people and companies in that sense.

Item 8, written questions. Mr. McLeod.

I would like to pose my written question to the Minister of Housing.

1) What is the number of Inuvik clients approved

for housing programs?

2) What is the client-by-client breakdown?

3) What is the amount of money received per

client? and

4) What was the nature of the program and the

money that was approved for it?

Two written questions:

1) Did the G.N.W.T. have the updated cost-

benefit analysis prior to the signing of the concession agreement of the Deh Cho Bridge project on September 28, 2007?

2) What economic analysis did the G.N.W.T. and

the Department of Transportation have at their disposal to make these decisions to proceed with the signing of the concession agreement on the Deh Cho Bridge project, and if so, who did that economic analysis?

My questions are for the Minister of Public Works and Services.

1) What contracted services does G.N.W.T. have

with southern vendors?

2) What are the costs of these G.N.W.T.

contracted services with southern vendors?

3) How many jobs are associated with the

G.N.W.T. contracted services from southern vendors?

Item 9, returns to written questions. Item 10, replies to opening address. Item 11, petitions. Item 12, reports of standing and special committees. Item 13, reports of committees on the review of bills. Item 14, tabling of documents.

I wish to table the official voting results of the general election of the 16th Legislative

Assembly held on October 1, 2007. The official voting results are published in accordance with section 265(1) and (2) of the Elections and Plebiscites Act.

Document 6-16(2), Election of the 16th Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories, Official Voting Results, tabled.

Also pursuant to section 5 of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act, I wish to table the summary of Members’ absences for the period November 27, 2007 to February 5, 2008.

Document 7-16(2), Summary of Members’

Absences for the Period November 27, 2007, to February 5, 2008, tabled.

Also I wish to table the report of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner regarding the finding of the Private Disclosure Statements of Mr. Jackie Jacobson, Member of Nunakput, pursuant to section 99(2) of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act.

Document 8-16(2), Report of the Conflict of

Interest Commissioner — Filing of Private Disclosure Statement, Mr. Jackie Jacobson, MLA Nunakput, tabled.

Also I wish to table the report of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner regarding the finding of the Private Disclosure Statements of Mr. Robert C. McLeod, Member of Inuvik Twin Lakes, pursuant to section 99(2) of the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act.

Document 9-16(2), Report of the Conflict of

Interest Commissioner — Filing of Private Disclosure Statement, Mr. Robert C. McLeod, MLA Inuvik Twin Lakes, tabled.

Item 15, notices of motion. Ms. Bisaro.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Monday, February, 11, 2008, I will move the following motion.

I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Thebacha, that the 16th Legislative Assembly refers

the review of the provisions and operation of the Official Languages Act required by section 35 of that act, to the Standing Committee on Government Operations, and further that the terms of reference for the review of the provisions and operations of the Official Languages Act by the Standing Committee on Government Operations be established as follows:

1) The Standing Committee on Operations, in

undertaking a review of the Official Languages Act, shall examine:

a) The administration and implementation of

the act, including regulations, policies and procedures established by the G.N.W.T.

b) The achievements of the objectives stated

in the preamble of the act.

c) The effectiveness of the provisions of the

act and, in particular, the extent to which they are contributing to the objectives stated in the preamble.

d) The roles and responsibilities of the

Minister, the Official Languages Board, the Aboriginal Languages Revitalization Board, and the Languages Commissioner, and the extent which those roles and responsibilities have been fulfilled and are contributing to the objectives.

e) The Standing Committee on Government

Operations shall have access to such persons, papers and records as necessary for the conduct of this review.

f) The Minister, Languages Commissioner,

Official Languages Board and Aboriginal Languages Revitalization Board shall provide all reasonable assistance to the Standing Committee on Government Operations as required by the Act.

g) The Standing Committee on Government

Operations shall be provided through appropriations of the Legislative Assembly with adequate funds to carry out responsibility.

h) The Standing Committee on Government

Operations shall be provided by the Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories with the necessary administrative and professional support to carry out its terms of reference and assigned responsibilities as they associate with this review.

i)

The Standing Committee on Government Operations may make recommendations for amendments to the act that it considers desirable through a final report.

j)

The Standing Committee on Government Operations may table this report, which may be an interim report, during the life of the second session and a final report no later than February 2009.

Item 16, notices of motion for the first reading of bills. Item 17, motions. Item 18, first reading of bills.

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Range Lake, that Bill 3, An Act to Amend the Employment Standards Act, be read for the first time. Mahsi.