Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. The Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.

The annual budget for the Northwest Territories reveals much about a government: its vision, its effectiveness, its leadership and its capability to deliver. As part of the 16th Legislative

Assembly, I cannot claim that we have earned high regard from our people on the basis of these standards.

We embarked on budget planning with good faith, confidence in the information provided by the Minister, and a common understanding of this Assembly’s vision and priorities. We had a commitment to positive change and agreement on the budget goals and the process to realize those goals. Yet subsequently, and with deplorable communication by this government, a mystifying focus on cuts over revenues and a demoralizing lack of opportunity for input from Regular MLAs, this government has produced a set of budget moves that almost appears random.

My teacher, Sai Baba, has emphasized that every time I point a finger at someone, I have three fingers pointing back at me. As a Member of this Assembly, I must take some responsibility for what I perceive as a failed process.

We have also had the challenges of starting this Assembly in the middle of a normal budgeting year, with an apparent need for reductions and with a lack of experience for some of us.

For the record, I will be working hard to have real input into improving the budget over the next few weeks in the House.

I am particularly disappointed at lost opportunities. Having just come through an election, we were all familiar with the significant issues and the real need to address them. We recognize that the NWT has a roaring economy, with some of the highest incomes and lowest unemployment rates in Canada, but we also recognize that there are many people and

many communities not enjoying these benefits. Our social structures have not kept pace with our economic gains. There is an uneven distribution of benefits, and the cost of living is especially increasing in our small communities.

It was also clear that our environment is not being looked after. We established the priorities of local economic development, strengthening our social fabric and community capacity, celebrating and strengthening our youth and cultural diversity, and reducing and adapting to climate change — those to be addressed through careful program review and redirection.

There is much in this budget that concerns me: the centralization of staff from the regions; a lack of understanding of environmental issues; an absence of new support for social and mental-health services; little new revenue; and, compared to the substantiated and targeted change we had been led to expect, a haphazard loss of people and positions.

Mr.

Speaker, I request unanimous consent to

conclude my statement.

Unanimous consent granted.

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker and

colleagues.

Especially lacking is a new, innovative response that recognizes the crucial realities and new approach required today. All of these that I've just mentioned are in conflict with our intent.

This session will be difficult, and we will all be working hard. As Regular Members we are unable to add items to the budget, only to delete or recommend change. As the leaders in a consensus government, the Premier and Cabinet have a responsibility to hear the Regular Members, and to finally allow us the input our constituents and the people of the NWT expect us to have.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Mr. Speaker, today we heard the Finance Minister deliver his Budget Address. This address is a culmination of weeks of speculation and frustration on the part of the public, the potentially affected employees, their families and, yes, MLAs like myself.

I’ve been an MLA for 13 years. Even taking into account the changes in the budgeting process schedule in an election year, this path has been fraught with miscommunication, lack of consultation and missteps on the part of this government.

The business plan reviews we would normally conduct at standing committees in the fall instead turned into a three-month status quo budget to get us to the end of June.

We could have extended that interim appropriation until the fall, but we thought that one full year was too long to be in office without a budget reflecting the priorities of the 16th Assembly.

Even so, in the time that was available, Ministers and their departments should have been able to come up with something much better than what we have before us today.

Most budgets contain some good news, and that’s certainly all we heard today in the Budget Address. But this budget and the process by which it was arrived at is flawed to the point that I’m not optimistic that it can be salvaged. If the interaction with Regular Members informing this budget is any indication of how much respect our input will receive during consideration of these estimates, I’m not hopeful.

I’m not one to shy away from a good debate or a good fight about anything, but as Regular Members, as Mr. Bromley said, we only have the ability to recommend additions or approve reductions. Our opportunity to affect change to this budget at this stage is limited.

In a budget already filled with too many reductions, what could be accomplished by further reductions? We could end up with something that is even worse than what was presented here today.

I’m not looking forward to the debate, negotiations and dialogue about this budget over the next four weeks, because I’m in a battle with my hands tied.

Personally, I would rather see the next four weeks devoted to this government taking this budget back to the drawing board and bringing forward a budget that demonstrates respect for consensus government; demonstrates that this is the people’s government and that quality programs and services delivered to our residents is our first and foremost priority; demonstrates respect for our public service, because the management of the human resource issues and options in this budget are completely unacceptable; demonstrates meaningful analysis of the effects of the reductions; demonstrates that the priorities of the 16th Assembly are reflected

accurately; demonstrates that any reductions must be reasoned and not random; demonstrates that this government does not support centralization and privatization of government jobs and services; and demonstrates that the budget….

Mrs. Groenewegen, your time for Members’ statements has expired.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.

Unanimous consent granted.

Thank you, Mr.

Speaker.

Thank you, colleagues.

I would like to see a budget that demonstrates it is premised on accurate fiscal information.

As a Regular Member, this is not my budget. The government has failed at every turn to communicate effectively. The budget cannot be redeemed by tinkering around the edges. The damage this budget will inflict is not repairable. Nobody takes a sledgehammer to their own house, because they know how much it will cost to rebuild it.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.

It’s a relief that, finally, I can talk publicly about the 2008–2009 budget. As a new MLA, the development of this budget has been an interesting and thought-provoking experience but, unfortunately, not one I wish to repeat if the process and the outcomes are the same.

Last December this Assembly agreed on goals and priorities and sent Cabinet away to produce a budget for us based on those goals. I had high — some would say naïvely high — hopes that I could have some influence on the development of this budget, that my input would be sought and respected. I’m sad to say that I don’t feel that has happened.

In the last five months, more than once I've been made to feel that the government was doing as they please with little concern for me and my colleagues. Perhaps that was not the intention, but that was the perception of Members on this side of the House. And if we feel that we were not respected, then for sure the public feels the same way.

Some examples.... The government has presented us with figures that show revenues increasing at 3 per cent per year and expenditures increasing at 6 per cent per year. I agree that such a situation is untenable and can’t continue, but, to quote a constituent, “the government has not advised its constituents why the territory is suddenly faced with a huge deficit.”

In department briefings few reductions were presented with adequate rationale to justify them, but there was an expectation we would accept them.

There’s been a noticeable lack of opportunity for input into the development of the budget from Regular MLAs, despite repeated requests. I feel as though I’ve had no hand in this budget.

On several occasions the government released information to the public or communicated with constituents before the same information was provided to Regular MLAs. I can only interpret that as a lack of respect for me as a Regular Member.

There’s been little consideration of the suggestions for changes to the budget from Regular MLAs. The mind of the government has seemingly been closed to budget possibilities other than those that have come from Cabinet.

I’ve struggled with the content of this budget. I believe in our priorities, and this Assembly should focus efforts and money on them, but this budget doesn’t seem to do that. Where’s the analysis of the programs and services that would provide justification? The reductions seem random, not reasoned; neither well thought out nor well researched.

The Premier has said several times publicly that job cuts would be a last resort in achieving the necessary budget reductions; 135 affected positions is not a last resort, in my estimation.

Mr.

Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to

conclude my statement.

Unanimous consent granted.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you, colleagues.

One hundred thirty-five affected positions is not a last resort, in my estimation. I’m left feeling that the government has acted in a high-handed manner: job cuts already in place and funding for programs deleted as of April 1, well before the budget is approved.

The following quote appeared in a northern newspaper last month, and I have to agree with it: “It” — job cuts — “would imply that the decision-making process is being done outside of the formal budget process.”

Yes, it was only notification of possible job losses, but the public interprets such actions to mean that the budget is final, that it’s a done deal, even before we debate it in the House. There’s a saying that perception is nine-tenths of the law, and the government would be well advised to remember that in the future.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.

Mr. Speaker, today I want to talk about a subject I’ve raised before in this House, and it’s my concern about Yellowknife Airport parking.

I’ve highlighted the concern that Transportation continues to invest a lot of money in the installation

and the repair of the airport parking-ticket machine, and yet the problems continue not to be solved. I wonder how much money will continue to be spent out there on a product, a technology, that just can’t serve people. Mr. Speaker, it’s a waste of money.

In my view, things have gone far off the rails and way out of hand. Anybody who has recently travelled or gone out to the airport to pick up loved ones will know that this parking machine isn’t worth its salt, because long-term parkers have taken up all the spaces and not allowed short-term people out there. This machine isn’t working.

I’m in favour of a simplified process that allows people to get out there with little or no administration. People need to get out there quick and easy, have lunch, picked up loved ones, et cetera. But there’s no parking for those folks, because, again, long-term parkers have taken it up, and the government isn’t charging money for that.

The barriers are gone or they’re left up, so anyone can just drive in there and stay as long as they like. And some stay for a long time — weeks — and nobody pays. What we’ve done is design free, secure parking that’s being provided to the special few.

I can’t see how this government can continue to justify its investment in this parking machine if it’s not working. We’re wasting money, Mr. Speaker. This government continually talks and preaches about efficiency and spending money wisely, but it’s yet to be seen.

We just heard the budget speech from the Finance Minister. Money is our problem. Spending is our problem. So I ask: why do we continue to spend money on a machine that doesn’t work?

All is not lost. Instead of wasting $30,000 or more on a machine that doesn’t work, instead of spending $10,000 or more at a time to fix the darned thing, I’m suggesting we invest in the age-old technology called a clipboard and a pencil. We could go out there and check on who’s paid. If they haven’t paid at the end of the day and they’re not on the list, they could be removed or taken out of the situation.

But the fact is that this is a diabolical departure from normal practice — simplifying it and making something that works.

Mr. Speaker, may I ask unanimous consent to conclude my statements?

Unanimous consent granted.

Mr. Speaker, as I’ve highlighted, we have a really simple situation here. First of all, we have a money problem and a machine that could be making us a lot of money every year. We have a revenue problem; we’ve heard the Finance Minister speak to it many times. Why do you think we’re in

the situation we are? It’s time to go back to start doing business properly and efficiently. I think if the Minister listens very carefully, we could probably solve this problem without trying to embarrass the government by getting on and doing business right.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The Member for Nunakput, Mr. Jacobson.

Mr. Speaker, I’d like to thank the Minister of Justice, Mr. Jackson Lafferty, and the RCMP staff for working with me and the Hamlet of Sachs Harbour to get the detachment opened up. The two members in the community now are there on duty as we speak and serving the people of Sachs. I welcome them to Nunakput. And, again, thank you to the Minister and the community of Sachs for not giving up on this issue. I would like to thank the mayor, Bob Eldridge, and Andy Carpenter Sr. for all the hard work they have done.

Item 5, reports of standing and special committees. Item 6, returns to oral questions. Item 7, recognition of visitors in the gallery, the Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.

It’s my pleasure today to recognize our relatively newly elected mayor of Hay River, His Worship Marc Miltenberger.

I’d like to recognize a constituent and the president of the UNW, Todd Parsons.

Mr. Speaker, I’d like to recognize Mr. Felix Lockhart, former member of Grandin, with whom many long years ago I attended school. As well, I’d like to take the opportunity to recognize my youngest brother in his official capacity as mayor of Hay River and, of course, welcome them both to the Assembly.

Mr. Speaker, I’d like to recognize two fairly distinguished ladies in the gallery today: Lydia Bardak, whose official title is managing director of the John Howard Society and coordinator for Community Justice, Yellowknife, and also a city councillor for the City of Yellowknife; and Arlene Hache, who represents the Centre for Northern Families.

Mr. Speaker, I’d also like to recognize Lyda Fuller, executive director of the YWCA in Yellowknife.

Mr. Speaker, I’d like to recognize Mr. Fernand Denault.

If we’ve missed anyone in the gallery today, welcome to the House. It’s always a pleasure to have an audience in here.

Item 8, acknowledgements. Item 9, oral questions, the honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.