Total Department, not previously authorized: $34.187 million.

Bill 18, Supplementary Appropriation Act,

No.

1, 2008–2009, Municipal and Community

Affairs, Operations Expenditures, Total Department, not previously authorized: $34.187 million, approved.

Courts, not previously authorized, $833,000.

Bill 18, Supplementary Appropriation Act,

No.

1, 2008–2009, Justice, Operations

Expenditures, Courts, not previously authorized: $833,000, approved.

Community Justice and Corrections, not previously authorized, $613,000.

Bill 18, Supplementary Appropriation Act,

No.

1, 2008–2009, Justice, Operations

Expenditures, Community Justice and Corrections, not previously authorized: $613,000, approved.

Total Department, not previously authorized: $1.607 million.

Bill 18, Supplementary Appropriation Act,

No.

1, 2008–2009, Justice, Operations

Expenditures, Total Department, not previously authorized: $1.607 million, approved.

Moving on to page 7. Education, Culture and Employment, Operations Expenditure, Education and Culture, not previously authorized: $9.878 million.

Bill 18, Supplementary Appropriation Act, No.

1, 2008–2009, Education, Culture and Employment, Operations Expenditures, Education and Culture, not previously authorized: $9.878 million, approved.

Income Security, not previously authorized: $200,000.

Bill 18, Supplementary Appropriation Act,

No.

1, 2008–2009, Education, Culture and

Employment, Operations Expenditures, Income Security, not previously authorized: $200,000, approved.

Total Department, not previously authorized: $10.078 million.

Bill 18, Supplementary Appropriation Act,

No.

1, 2008–2009, Education, Culture and

Employment, Total Department, not previously authorized: $10.078 million, approved.

Moving on to page 8. Transportation, Operations Expenditure, Corporate Services. Mr. Abernethy.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. In reviewing this supplementary appropriation, I have no problem, given most of the money is coming from the feds or is carried over from the previous year. However, at the beginning of the budget process we were told that the supplementary appropriation available was changed from $25 million to $10 million, as $15 million was transferred to the departments so they wouldn’t have to come back for supps on a regular basis.

In the case of this department, $555,000 minus the $33,000 — $518,000, is being asked for out of that $10 million supplementary appropriation fund that we do have. I was under the impression that the $10 million was basically to be used for emergency cases: things that were not or could not be planned, things that were not foreseen, things that came out of the blue. In the case of the money that’s being asked for here, I’m under the impression that this is something that the departments should have been able to identify and should have been able to plan for and that should be taken out of a portion of that $15 million that was already transferred to them.

Now, I understand the reality that transferring that $15 million to the authorities or the departments wasn’t done until yesterday. At the same time, this is clearly something that we’re going to have a hard time approving if it comes forward in the future, given that it is something that should have been planned and should have been captured within the department as part of that $15 million that was transferred to them.

I was wondering if I could just get the Minister of Finance to talk a little bit about that supp fund and the fact that it was transferred to the authorities and

how this relates to that. To me, this is clearly something that should have been able to be planned.

Minister of FMBS, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Is the Member referring to the Department of Transportation?

Sorry. We’re on page 8. Transportation, Operations Expenditure, Corporate Services: $518,000, not previously authorized.

Mr. Abernethy, is your question on page 8?

We’re not quite there yet. Okay, we’re on page 8. Transportation, Operations Expenditures, Corporate Services, not previously authorized: $518,000.

Bill 18, Supplementary Appropriation Act,

No.

1, 2008–2009, Transportation, Operations

Expenditures, Corporate Services, not previously authorized: $518,000, approved.

Highways, not previously authorized: $3 million.

Bill 18, Supplementary Appropriation Act,

No.

1, 2008–2009, Transportation, Operations

Expenditures, Highways, not previously authorized: $3 million, approved.

Total department, not previously authorized: $3.518 million.

Bill 18, Supplementary Appropriation Act,

No.

1, 2008–2009, Transportation, Operations

Expenditures, Total Department, not previously authorized: $3.518 million, approved.

Moving on to page 9, Industry, Tourism and Investment, Operations Expenditures, Corporate Management, not previously authorized: negative $33,000.

Bill 18, Supplementary Appropriation Act,

No.

1, 2008–2009, Industry, Tourism and

Investment, Operations Expenditures, Corporate Management, not previously authorized: negative $33,000, approved.

Minerals and Petroleum Resources, not previously authorized: $100,000.

Bill 18, Supplementary Appropriation Act,

No.

1, 2008–2009, Industry, Tourism and

Investment, Operations Expenditures, Minerals and Petroleum Resources, not previously authorized: $100,000, approved.

Economic Diversification and Business Support, not previously authorized: $555,000. Mr. Abernethy.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman. A

couple of seconds ago I asked that question on the wrong page. I’d like to ask that exact same question on this page on this item.

Would the Minister of FMBS respond to the question asked previously.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, the area of this supplementary appropriation, as the Member has highlighted…. As we’ve budgeted for the fiscal year, we set aside in our fiscal framework an amount of dollars for supplementary appropriation. At times over the last number of years we’ve…. In fact, the Government of the Northwest Territories has gone over that initial amount.

This year, after being elected and starting to put the budget together, we took the $25 million initially allocated for the supplementary appropriation, and based on the drawdown or a percentage of the drawdown from departments, we took $15 million of that appropriation amount or that amount set aside for supplementary appropriations and gave it to departments. ITI’s share was $90,000 of that. Again, the drawdown represents a percentage across the departments. Obviously, because of the fact that we have exceeded the amount that was set in previous years’ supplementary appropriations, we are sticking to the $25 million figure less now the $15 million that’s been sent out to departments based on a percentage of the drawdown.

Outside of that, there are a number of things that we’re still having to deal with. The reason we did that, as the Member has pointed out…. The reason we’ve allocated part of the supp reserve to departments was so they could do their planning up front and do the budgeting exercise, not come in low and within months have to come in for a supplementary appropriation.

In this case is the fact that within ITI the Western Harvesters’ Assistance Program has been in existence since 1994. Initially it was set aside with matching dollars from communities and organizations — actually aboriginal organizations like hunters’ and trappers’ committees within those organizations — but they’d have to match their dollars before the money could be drawn down. That wasn’t put into the Department of ITI’s budget. It was a common practice to have them come back during the supplementary appropriation when they had signed agreements with the organizations. FMB would review those and agree to put them into

the supplementary appropriation package for coming to the House.

As this budget we’re dealing with or the budget we’ve just finished dealing with…. The original planning process was put together, and we started the exercise in summer of last fiscal year. As a government, we have taken over that and made our changes through the budget exercise we’ve gone through. This has found its way on to clear up the amount they’d be needing for this year. So instead of, for example, as we break it down here, Deninu K’ue First Nation, Salt River First Nation, those would have originally come as one single item to a decision paper. It was felt that in this process this allowed the department some flexibility: instead of coming one at a time, to deal with them one time here through the supplementary appropriation.

Mr. Abernethy.