Yeah, one only.
In terms of looking after seniors, I would hope that this reference is particularly geared toward the Territorial Dementia Centre, which is sadly lacking and needed.
In terms of supporting volunteers, one of the reasons I was glad to see it in there is because I am one who is able to take part in both of these: a senior and a volunteer. I’m glad to see them both there, side by side. With volunteers, I sincerely hope that this is referencing, as somebody mentioned earlier, non-government organizations, which are, after all, very much volunteers in the work they do. They provide programs and services on behalf of the Territorial government and do it almost as volunteers. Many of them are run by volunteer boards; they may hire staff, but basically it’s volunteers that run the organizations.
One of the things that wasn’t mentioned for me in Building Our Future, and I think it should be, is aftercare treatment for addictions and other afflictions. We have many of our residents who are treated for an addiction, who maybe go to a treatment centre. They are cleaned up, but then they are basically let loose on our streets and told to survive on their own. I really feel strongly that we need to put in place a program that deals with addictions aftercare.
I was really glad to see the Premier is emphasizing the Mackenzie Valley Highway. I think that one of the best ways we can reduce the cost of living for the communities that are off a highway system is to provide them with that.
One of the things that again we must do is not rely on the G.N.W.T. or on the Territorial government only to provide the funding for a highway. My understanding is that it’s the federal government that is responsible for building new highways. The federal government has been noticeably absent in providing funding for highways over the last while. I certainly hope the Premier, in his discussions with
the Prime Minister and with the federal government, will emphasize that we need money for new highways. And we don’t need a pittance; we need a great deal of money, particularly to get the Mackenzie Highway going.
I’m hopeful that in this four-year term, if nothing else, we will at least have started on this project, that we will have broken ground somewhere between here and Norman Wells — beyond, north. That would make me very happy. We could have a grand party if we do that.
I noticed a number of statements about new developments. They concerned me a bit. I believe strongly that we need to have new developments in order to diversify ourselves economically, but I am little bit concerned, as is Mr. Bromley, about the fact that there seems to be an emphasis by the Premier on the pipeline, that it’s going to be the be-all and the save-all. So I was a little bit conflicted with the fact that we’re talking about new developments, but there’s no discussion about the environment and protecting the environment relative to the new developments. Actually, there is one, but it’s not enough for me.
I found there was a lack of emphasis on prevention throughout the statement. I feel there needs to be a greater emphasis on prevention in terms of the environment and the changes to the environment. I didn’t see that in there. And I think there needs to be a greater emphasis on prevention in our infrastructure, in particular. I just think that much of the statement is forward looking, but we also have to go back a bit and think about preventing some of the things that are occurring at this point.
One of the things I feel we need to do, and it comes under “Refocusing Government Priorities.” None of the statement really talks about money. The Premier covered that in his statement the next day. But one of the things I think we need to do — and it goes to prevention, as well — is that we need to spend money to save money. This goes to our strategic investments, hopefully, which are coming forward. In order to reap rewards, for instance, in energy savings, we need to spend some money. We need to invest in, say, putting in low-wattage light bulbs, and that will save us money down the road. That sort of thing I don’t really see in the statement.
In terms of money in general, it’s not addressed, but I have to state that it is absolutely critical for me that we live within our means. We need to budget a specified amount of dollars. We need to then tell our departments and our staff, “These are the dollars you have to work with,” and they cannot spend more than what they’ve been allocated.
I’m finding, through this budget process, that it’s a bit of foreign animal to me. I’m having great
difficulty understanding why we establish a budget amount, but four times during the year the departments come back and say, “Well, that’s not really the amount we want to spend; we want to spend some more.”
Most people in this world don’t operate their own household budget that way. You know you have $100 a week to spend. When the $100 cash is gone out of your pocket, you don’t go back and get more. You do without.
We don’t seem to budget that way. I would strongly encourage that we consider establishing a budget with a bottom-line dollar amount and we stick to that. If you’re going to over that budget amount — well, you just don’t. You just don’t spend anymore, and you’re going to have to figure out to survive for the rest of the year.
To sum up, I was glad to see the focus points that the Premier wants to deal with in terms of the federal government. I think if there’s an opportunity to push resource revenue sharing as well as the four that are laid out here, that would be a good thing. But if we simply emphasize the four points that are here and don’t try to do everything, I think that’s also a good thing.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment, and I look forward to the Premier’s comments later on.