Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for Premier of the Northwest Territories.

1. How much was paid out in bonuses to each of

the following GNWT employee categories for the 2007-2008 fiscal year: - deputy

ministers

- senior

managers

- excluded

employees

2. What percentage of the employees in each

category who were eligible for bonuses actually received bonuses for that fiscal year?

Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Item 9, returns to written questions. Item 10, replies to opening address. Item 11, replies to the budget address, day three of seven. Item 12, petitions. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to present a petition dealing with the matter of NWT electrical power rates. The petition contains 173 signatures of Nahendeh residents and the petitioners request that the Premier take action to implement a single-rate zone for electrical power rates for the entire Northwest Territories.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Item 13, reports of standing and special committees. Item 14, reports of committees on the review of bills. Item 15, tabling of documents. Item 16, notices of motion. Item 17, notices of motion for first reading of bills. Item 18, motions. Item 19, first reading of bills. Item 20, second reading of bills. Item 21, consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 7-16(3), Ministerial Benefits Policy; Committee Report 2-16(3), Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures Report on Matters Referred to the

Committee; Tabled Document 11-16(3), Northwest Territories Main Estimates 2009-2010; Bill 1, An Act to Amend the Historical Resources Act; Bill 3, International Interest in Mobile Aircraft Equipment Act; Bill 4, Public Library Act; Bill 5, Professional Corporations Act; and Bill 7, An Act to Amend the Student Financial Assistance Act, with Mr. Krutko in the chair.

I’d like to call Committee of the Whole to order. Consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 7-16(3), Committee Report 2-16(3), Tabled Document 11-16(3), Bills 1, 3, 4, 5, and 7. What is the wish of the committee? Mr. Beaulieu.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Committee moves to proceed with NWT Main Estimates 2009-2010.

Committee, break?

With that, we’ll take a short break and get back to Tabled Document 11-16(3).

---SHORT RECESS

We are on Tabled Document 11-16(3), NWT Main Estimates 2009-2010. General comments. Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I do have some general comments with regard to the budget. I’ve got a number of them. I will start with the process which for me, second time around, was an awful lot better than the first time around. I don’t know whether that’s because it’s the second time I have gone through this process or it seemed to work better or whether it’s just because we used a different process. Certainly the first budget I experienced was a little unusual because it was immediately following the election. This one was different in that we went through business plans with standing committees and then went forward from there.

In general, I am pleased with the budget. I am particularly pleased that the Premier and Finance Minister made accommodations, some accommodations, not all but some accommodations after the department-by-department review of the business plans by standing committees. For me, personally, I can’t speak for anybody else but I certainly appreciated

the willingness on the part of Cabinet and the Premier to make accommodations to the recommendations that came from the various standing committees.

I am also appreciative of the flexibility that’s been shown by the Finance Minister, and I think it came from his budget address, to a flexibility to adjust the budget relative to our changing economic times and it’s changing downwards instead of upwards, unfortunately. But I mentioned in my Member’s statement the other day that to me, it’s extremely important that we remain flexible and adapt the budget as required for the economy as we move forward. The budget, to me, seems to recognize the recent downturn in our economy and I particularly am happy to see the emphasis on infrastructure that is in our budget.

The other thing I would like to say is there is a small deficit projected and I’m okay with that. I would not be okay with that as a matter of course, but I think in this particular budget year it’s something which I can live with. I would certainly caution the government not to try to project a deficit every year and I don’t think that’s what I heard the Finance Minister say the other day.

The other thing I would like to say is what I am appreciative of is the work on behalf of the government to minimize job cuts. There is a small number of people who have to look forward to losing their job in this budget year and for me that’s a very good thing.

The last thing, I guess, that’s positive is the statement by the Finance Minister relative to a heritage fund. I strongly support that move. I’m sorry that it’s not in the 2009-10 budget and if I understood the Minister correctly, the government is working towards that and I think if we don’t get it established in 2010-11, it’s probably not going to happen, but it’s something which I think all Members would be happy to see be established within the life of this government.

So now that I have given the Finance Minister my comments and my praise, I am going to extinguish his smile with a few criticisms.

I heard the other day…Sorry. Members heard the other day when I made my statement and also when I asked a few questions of the Finance Minister -- he wasn’t here but the Premier did answer -- I am dissatisfied that the recommendations from the Social Programs committee and the Priorities and Planning committee to establish a milk subsidy in this year’s budget was not accepted. You know, it’s well known the value of milk as a healthful food or as a valuable food, particularly for young children. The other thing I am particularly dismayed with is

although there may be something in the budget to adjust or address the cost of living in communities, I don’t think what is being proposed is going to be put into effect as fast as a milk subsidy could. It’s my belief that particularly in our small communities we need to reduce the cost of living and we need to reduce it now, not yesterday…Sorry, not today but yesterday. I don’t see that the proposed actions are going to be in place in the near future and I think a milk subsidy could have been put into place for the 1st of April.

I am particularly disappointed with Education, Culture and Employment’s proposal to withdraw the grant to Skills Canada. It’s a paltry amount of money in the grand scheme of things and if we are intent on providing an emphasis on trades and other programs particularly to young people and to women, this is one avenue that would allow us to do that. Skills Canada as an entity is expanding across the NWT. They are into more and more high schools all the time. The removal of this funding will simply remove one of their staff persons and will probably halt the expansion into our high schools. The fact that Skills go into our schools gives kids an opportunity to experience trades at a young age, other vocations as well, and it exposes them to many things that they probably wouldn’t get an opportunity to see or experience if Skills wasn’t there to help them out. So I would encourage ECE to find the money that’s necessary to put that grant back within their department.

I do have a problem with the amount of money we are spending to have a presence at the 2010 Olympics. I feel we should be there. The NWT should be there, but I think the funds which we’re expending are beyond what we should, particularly where we’ve got expenditures in an economy where there’s a downturn. These funds are coming from a community development trust fund and I feel that the fund would be far better used to assist our communities and development within communities than it would be to fund activities at the Olympics, which are a one-time affair. Once the Olympics are done there’s not much that’s going to carry through after those funds are expended.

I’m concerned about a reduction in funding for non-government organizations, to which it’s not a large amount of money but any reduction in funding to NGOs, in my estimation, is not a good thing. We should be increasing funding to NGOs and the other thing that we need to do is to set in place multi-year funding agreements for our NGOs. I think I hear that’s coming, but I haven’t seen evidence of it yet.

I think it’s vitally important that somehow this budget be amended or we go into a deficit to fund supplementary health benefits for the lower income end of our workforce. We have to provide the

benefits to those people who don’t have coverage right now. If it costs us a certain amount of money and if we have to go into a bit more of a deficit situation to do it, then so be it. That’s what we should do. That’s my belief.

I mentioned the other day, and I want to mention it again, that I think it’s important that we ensure that any infrastructure projects that we put in place early on in 2009 benefits the small communities in particular. I think they’re the ones that need the economic stimulus the most and I would encourage the government to make sure that it’s small communities that get the jobs and the projects early on.

The last area of concern for me is assistance for communities, particularly in relation to human resource community capacity. With the New Deal and different ways of doing things for communities I think that they are experiencing a lack of skilled people in their communities who can take on the jobs and the projects that the New Deal requires of communities. They’re given lump sums of money and are required to do project planning, monitoring of infrastructure projects, all sorts of things which previously were done for them by MACA. I think there’s a lack of manpower in MACA to assist them with the holes that they have in their human resource areas. I know MACA says that they help out, but I think unfortunately they’re not providing as much assistance as they should and I think they need to provide more hands-on assistance than they currently are. That’s all I have. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. General comments. Next on the list I have Mr. Menicoche, Mr. Abernethy, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I just want to take this opportunity to comment on the budget as a whole. I, too, am a strong believer in alternate energy and alternate forms of supply and energy to our homes and to our communities, and I’m pleased to see that our budget does dedicate funds and resources to this effort. We’ve got community initiatives, especially in my riding, that want to do something along these lines. We’ve got geothermal interest in Fort Simpson, biomass support from Jean Marie River, and a few other communities that want to explore and they are currently discussing these needs. Just outside of Fort Liard there is proven heat beneath the ground at about 120 Centigrade, but that’s something that has yet to be explored, as well as the specific mention of testing a run-of-the-river system in Fort Simpson. People are curious and they want to see that. We’ve been talking about it so long and at my public meetings people are saying stop talking and start doing something about it. Many of these initiatives and green projects are

capital intensive and very long term. Like that petition I put forward in the House here today, it was about government doing something today to effect change and to change the high cost of living. That specific project in Fort Simpson is showing people that the government is indeed interested in some action, and wanting and willing to look at different ways of doing business. People are happy to see that.

The ATCO proposal, I don’t know where it’s at. But initiatives like that at least government is trying to do something and move forward to help the people.

The budget doesn’t really talk about this, but the initiative of government going throughout the North and talking about NWT power rates and the NWT Power Corporation, that’s a good initiative and I support that. They continue to do that and get that off the ground as soon as they can.

I’m pleased to see the investment in Highway No. 1 and Highway No. 7. To me it’s the Dehcho Connection that travels from the Fort Providence junction towards the Checkpoint junction and down towards Fort Liard. That’s what that does there, is it creates a loop from Alberta up through Fort Simpson and exiting in B.C. It’s a very scenic route with lots to do and lots to see. The NWT Tourism and several community residents who travel to international trade shows talk about this and support the tourism aspect of our Northwest Territories, which is the Dehcho Connection. It was seriously impeded last year when the highway collapsed, and we don’t want to see that again. We want to see continued improvement. We take this very seriously because we use this highway every day for our transportation needs getting to and from work. Then the additional income that comes from the tourism market during the summer months is very much needed. I’ve raised it in the House, too, about getting it towards a state where we’re actually looking at chipsealing of Highway No. 1 and Highway No. 7. I really would like to see that in a capital plan. It’s not there. I’ve got no expectations that we’ll get it done this year or next year, but the key thing is to identify it as a priority and get it on the capital plan. Our capital plan runs around five, 10, 15 years. I’ll be happy to get it on the far end there. The main thing is that it should be a goal of our government to run towards chipsealing of that highway. I know we’re going to do some other chipsealing projects. The big thing, too, is that the constituents are saying yes, we’ve got a chipsealing project, but it’s continuing to Yellowknife and around Yellowknife. That might be important, but I think the priority should be other highway access communities as well. That’s why I support Highway No. 1 and Highway No. 7 being chipsealed. It’s not for the benefit of Fort Simpson, it’s for the benefit of the North and all Northerners to continue our...ITI

called it the spectacular vision of the North and that’s certainly part of it. I certainly support advances towards that.

I’m concerned that people are not qualifying for the homes that we’re rebuilding. We’ve got to adjust that and take a good, hard look at that. This year’s housing budget, at least for my riding, wasn’t that good. At the same time I do realize that we are behind in providing infrastructure needs. The homes from Nahendeh that are being built this year are quite a bit, only because we couldn’t get them done before. I don’t know if it’s a blessing in disguise kind of thing, but this gives us a real opportunity to catch up and not always be behind in home delivery. So there’s some good projects happening in our region and I support them wholeheartedly. The thing is one of my other larger communities of Fort Liard the real need is not so much homeownership, it’s that we have to start moving towards public housing in a place like Fort Liard so people can get into those homes and not have an affordability issue.

I’ve always said that our range, our threshold income guideline is very low. There’s only a certain amount of people who can qualify for these homes. I would say that the people that can’t afford them are the ones we should be lending the money to. These are the people who are hard working. They do want to invest in homes and they do want to make continuous payments. If we’re not going to help these people there must be a way of getting around this rule of this income threshold guideline to allow people who can afford it, the double income earners, to access our programs and get these homes built to their specification and to their need. Blocking out the people that are willing and ready and able in the smaller communities just doesn’t fit the situation there. The larger communities, people can argue about market disruption and they may have a legitimate case, but in our small communities there’s really no market. There are people there willing, ready and able to be building their homes and I believe we should support them 100 percent.

There’s the bundling of the water treatment plant. I think that’s a good initiative. If it shows that it can save our government money then we must seriously take a look at that way of doing business. The only concern there is how do we involve local businesses and local residents to benefit from bundling of the water plant or bundling of infrastructure projects. Bundling means a larger company will get it and they’re willing and they want to build these projects. But it also means how do we build a local component into that, too, so that the community and band councils and businesses benefit as well from infrastructure development.

Some of the projects that happen in different ridings, particularly the Nahendeh riding, is that I’m for the infrastructure expenses, the infrastructure budget that we passed earlier this year. To us, that’s our stimulus package. The little projects are happening. The little $60,000 parks that for a small community is a huge project and a big investment into their communities and into their local job economy. I would urge government to see that none of these projects are deferred, that we try to get as much of our, I think, as the Finance Minister mentioned, about $200 million in infrastructure projects done for this coming fiscal year. I urge all the horsepower of our government and the brains we have to see that all these projects or as many of them get done. That $200 million shot in the arm is what our people and communities need. I wholeheartedly support that. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Next on the list is Mr. Abernethy.

I’m not going to go into a ton of detail department by department or anything like that because we’re going to do that as we go through the line by line in each department.

On page 2 in the statements the Minister of Finance said a serious economic downturn is not time for governments to reduce overall spending. I’d just like to put on the record that I agree with that. I think that’s an important statement to be made in this day and age, especially with the financial world as it is.

Having said that, I do have some concerns with some particular areas. I think there’s a lot of good stuff in what the Minister said during his budget address, but this document doesn’t obviously highlight some of the areas that had to be reduced in order to get to some of those good initiatives.

The Department of Health, obviously I’m passionate about the provision of health and social services in the Northwest Territories and to me a 1.2 percent increase in health is actually a 2.3 percent reduction. Because forced growth is usually about 3 percent to 3.5 percent. I know we needed to find some reductions out there; we needed to make sure we had some efficiencies. But given the cost of providing health care throughout Canada, we already pay the lowest amount of our total budget on health care compared to any other jurisdiction. Although a 1.2 percent does appear to be an increase, it is technically a decrease.

I guess what I want to say about that is we spend a lot of time looking at our department as individuals and little entities, little silos. I don’t believe that’s the best way for us to be doing business. I think we need to be able to stand up and look at the entire

government as a whole and as we’re targeting these individual groups, these individual departments to become efficient and find some efficiencies and hopefully find some money which allows us to do those valuable reinvestments that the Cabinet and the Legislature have been putting forward, I think we need to be cautious that we’re not taking from some departments that fit less with our vision than others at the expense of the others. Health care is important; education is important; justice is important. I’d say those are the three most important departments and the provision of services. Not infrastructure, because infrastructure is a bit of a different thing.

I’d like for all of us to find a way to stand up and look at the big picture and see where we’re flowing the money and some of the reinvestments. They make good sense. Like, obviously my colleague Mr. Menicoche is right; the park projects in the small communities are incredibly valuable to those small communities by way of job creation and whatnot, but I’m worried there are those things that make the most sense for the budget as a whole and providing services. We’re here to provide services to our people. I’m not criticizing any individual project, but I think it’s time for us to stand up and look at the big picture.

Moving through, I really like what we did in October with respect to the infrastructure stuff. I like that we got into that a little early. It gave you guys a lot of time to get out there and do the planning. Now we hear from the feds that they’re going to be expediting that process from four to two years, which on the face of it sounds absolutely fantastic. Last year we had to defer $50 million-- and correct me if the number’s wrong; if I remember correctly it was around $50 million -- because we weren’t going to get the stuff built. I know the world has changed. I was watching the news last night and Alberta was talking about the number of tradespeople and whatnot, construction people that are finding less work to do. They’re doing a lot of cutbacks. Hopefully that means we’ll be able to find some people to actually build the stuff we want to build. We’ve got a lot of money here to build a lot of stuff and it will be fantastic for this Territory to move forward and renovate the schools and build the roads and do all that. I think as a Legislature we’ve done a pretty good job of getting those identified, and thanks to Cabinet for taking those forward to the feds to fight for those. But I’m just worried that we’re not going to be able to build that stuff in the time that we have. I don’t know what Cabinet is doing to ensure that we actually get out there and build that infrastructure. That’s what we need to do to spark this economy. We need to actually build this stuff. We need to stop talking about building this stuff and we need to actually see the things being done. We need to see the roads being fixed

and we need to see the schools opening their doors to allow the children to come in and learn. I’d like to hear from the Minister of Finance at some point on what we are doing. Can we guarantee that we’re going to actually build these things that we talked about building?

On page 5 the Minister indicated that we need to promote the NWT as a great place to live. We need to make investments to reduce the cost of living. I hate to sound like a broken record, but I’m not convinced that the changes proposed for supplemental health that came forward in December are actually going to help reduce the cost of living. I think it’s actually going to increase the cost of living for many Northerners and have negative ramifications if the model goes through. Now, to the department’s credit we’ve heard the Minister say that we are going to go back and look at this and make sure that it fits and works. But until we see that we have to be a little bit cautious on that. Make sure that we don’t increase the cost of living to any of our residents.

I had comments...Just bear with me; I’m not going to use my whole 10 minutes.

I have to say that we went through a bit of a scare last session when we started talking about revenue options. There was a lot of panic in the community. I think the Cabinet’s come forward with a decent proposal on how to increase some of our tax revenues. I think if we’re going to tax things, things like cigarettes and liquor seem like a reasonable place to start. Increasing taxes in that area I think is a good start. I think it will help us raise some money, but it will also maybe force some people to smoke less and drink less, which can only be good for us in the long run as far as the health of our residents of the Northwest Territories. That’s coming from a guy who used to enjoy three-quarters of a pack of cigarettes a day and who doesn’t smoke anymore, I must say for the record.

---Applause

I know smoking three-quarters of a pack a day basically was $300 a month for me, which is now my car payment. So I think increasing taxes affect and scare a few more people off of smoking. I think it is a good thing and is going in the right direction. Those people who want to smoke will be able to smoke, but they will be contributing a little bit more to our economy and our tax base and are helping us fund the programs that are valuable and important to the people of the Northwest Territories.

When we get into line by line, I do have some questions. I will ask you some specific questions on some of the cuts that you propose and some of the reinvestments that you suggested. Overall, I think that there is some stuff in here that Cabinet and

Regular Members should be proud of. I think it is in the right direction. There are some areas that I think we do need to debate further, but overall I am happy with it.

There is another question for the Minister responsible for lands. When we get there, he can answer it. I am just a little confused. On page 12, the Minister of Finance said the GNWT has made a proposal to Canada that provides for the transfer for legislative authority over land and resources to the GNWT. It would also establish an ongoing partnership with Canada on strategic infrastructure and major development of the NWT. I am curious. We had a discussion with you and we talked with the Premier about a proposal that was made I think it was like a major infrastructure, but I didn’t think that was a legislative authority change. I am not sure what this one is. I am a little confused by this one. It might be the one you already told us about, but I would like a little bit more detail on that one, if someone gets a chance to give us a bit of a response.

Overall, not bad. There will be debate. There will be discussion. There’s some room to talk about a few of these things but overall I think it is a good budget. Thank you.

Thank you. Next on the list I have Mr. Bromley.

I would like to start by saying that I felt the introduction, the context provided here was excellent. I think the quality of life in our communities is what we should be aiming for. Basically, that comes down to the happiness of our children, our families and our communities and recognizing their concerns and showing them that we are actually dealing with it. Several times throughout the document, I noticed the Minister referred to our economy or our environment and our people and various orders. To me, that is totally appropriate and finally I think we are getting some full perspectives out there. This sort of holistic approach, full cost economy approach should get us some real gains that deal with what we profess to talk about, prevention and giving the basic issues long-term solutions.

I am not a big fan of deficits. To me I still see lots of opportunities for being more efficient. Under the fiscal strategy, we protest a lot. We put our calculations through the utmost of agony that we could over redemptions and so on, and obviously we cheated very little. I am hoping at least the program review office will eventually come out with something meaningful and make that agony worthwhile. The short-term economic stimulus master refers to…I think needs to have multiple objectives, not just hiring people and flowing money. It needs to ensure that we gain other

benefits as well, which is still development, greenhouse gas reductions, replacing our old system with new ways of doing things. That should be a filter that all of those projects have to jump through.

The infrastructure is not really part of this but is referred to in our budget. Obviously we have a record of increasing amounts of carry-over when we unsuccessfully take on projects. We now have an amazing $246 million infrastructure capital budget with a strong record of not being able to achieve anywhere near that. So our challenge is very clear. This aggressive response is not necessarily a negative, but with it needs to go some performance, so I think that must be highlighted by now. I know we have had a sub-committee looking at this. They seem to have come forward with a good plan. I am looking for evidence that is actually working.

I am not sure in terms of structure and cost of operations of power corporations. We are now looking at another proposal. I am not sure that selling off our assets and our Power Corporation to a very large multi-billion-dollar development company is necessarily the way to go. It seems like a bit of overkill to me. We have a company here that we own. We should be able to get them dealing with reality and with some innovative responses. So I think that is more what the final response we are looking for is here: Providing NWT communities and residents with the tools they need on energy issues and so on, replacing diesel with other forms of energy. These are things that a number of us have been calling for and are very happy to see it in the budget there. These perspectives, developing alternative energy, there are many opportunities right now that are relatively easy to achieve and the government has moved on some of these in terms of replacing fossil fuel, heating of appliances with wood pellet boilers and so on. I think that is the way to go in the short term while we wrestle with the more problematic things that we have on the list.

I am hoping to see this year some substantive move towards dealing with a systemic approach, especially for our smaller communities. We talked about commercial subsidies and whatnot, and maybe I will deal with that in a bit here, but we have a real opportunity to do things in a much better way and achieve multiple objectives at the same time.

On revenue, again, we are very lucky in the North. We have this 70 percent base and so we are somewhat protected in a recession but we also have to recognize, obviously, that some of our companies are slowing down in their operations, so we are losing tax revenue and so on. I was hoping to see much more of a progressive approach in the revenue generation side. Obviously, we have been very modest; $7.5 million planned this year and

some questions about the future. In terms of income, I think it is well established throughout the world, in fact, but certainly in North America, Canada and likely here in terms of income. Ninety percent of gains have been achieved by about 1 percent or the top tenth of 1 percent of people, and that is a fairly obscene accumulation of wealth in a smaller and smaller number of people. To me I see opportunities for developing some new tax brackets and a response there. There are other things that obviously we can be thinking of there. I think we will have more discussions on that this year.

Investments in our economy, there are some good things there. Again, if we can make good use of the capital, I see with housing infrastructure, acceleration of Building Canada Fund, again get those multiple objectives working there, we should really make some gains to the extent that we can actually get some projects accomplished.

The Arctic Energy Alliance I think is a good focus for million dollars there. I am concerned about the Territorial Power Subsidy Program, $3 million up on the commercial power costs. Business as usual is out the window. We cannot keep doing the same old thing and perhaps there is some innovation here that I am not aware of. I would like to assume that $3 million will be put towards supporting commercial enterprises generating their own power with green energy, this sort of thing, rather than just business as usual throwing dollars at a sinkhole. I will be looking for new details on that.

The increase in funding to the arts, again, I think that is well established. I think even the Government of Canada said for every dollar they invest, they get $1.85 or something of economic activity, so that is a good investment. I think that is well developed. This Assembly has a good record now of bumping up support in that direction. Again, a substantial increase to the SEED program, the Support to Entrepreneurs and Economic Development. I would like to hear a little bit more about programs that are applicable under that program.

Investments in our environment, I think I won’t say too much about that except that it is very good to see this happening. It is a substantial effort. It will all be in the details and we will all be helping focus things to make sure that we get the most out of it.

Investments in people, again something you have heard me speak on before. Early childhood education, something that I see has a little bit more support here which is a good recognition of need. Some of the health programs, care for seniors, especially in small communities that have been established and so on.

Finally, I guess, the support for volunteer non-government organizations, I think we seem to be waiting on this magic meeting that is going to happen. We have a two-year record of that. I see a little bump up this year. We have not been indexing our support to our non-government organizations according to cost as we do ourselves. This has left a deficit that needs to be recognized and responded to. I am hoping that we are going to be doing more on that. All in all, Mr. Chair, I do support this project and I am looking forward to contributing to tune-ups where they are needed.

Obviously, the milk subsidy really needs to be addressed. Skills Canada responded well to what we wanted. Now we need to respond to them. Family violence is a good program worth our support. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Next on the list, I have Mr. Beaulieu, Mr. Yakeleya and Mr. Jacobson.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was pleased with the budget, especially in the area of infrastructure spending. We have in and around the small communities that is a key area for government spending. In my communities -- there are five -- from the operation of some of the infrastructure there is not a lot of O and M spending by the GNWT. The $246 million infrastructure, $50 million in housing targeted some of it, targeted it towards repairs and so on. I see it is very positive. I think government has to develop a good plan for how to spend that money. I know that when I had an opportunity to question the Minister responsible for the majority of the infrastructure or the three major infrastructure departments of Public Works, DOT and Housing, that there are some changes being introduced in the way they plan the infrastructure, project management planning. I see that as a positive thing. I am looking forward to the Housing Corporation developing some sort of strategy for the disposition of their public housing units. My thought is that using this money to fix up the public housing units and then able to pass on the public housing to the clients that have lived in these housing units for a long time in fairly decent shape that very reasonable price that would allow a lot of people to come off of the social housing system and become homeowners.

I like the idea of mentioning small business in the budget. I think that that is very important in the area where I think that small communities will benefit from development of some small businesses in the smaller communities. I think that government has some work to do in facilitating that. However, I think that it is the right idea to place some emphasis on small business development.

In the area of the environmental stewardship, I thought that this is something to put some attention to the Wildlife Act and the Species at Risk Act. I think those are important acts so that we can begin to manage our wildlife with our own home-grown acts and rules that will allow us to make the best decisions for the wildlife; caribou and bison being a couple of areas that we’d benefit from having our own act and our own Species at Risk Act and so on.

The money that was announced by the federal government on Mackenzie Gas Project in the area of regulatory process, streamlining regulatory process, I am assuming that the ultimate objective in doing environmental assessments and so on, I think that is an area I would like to see our environment department get more heavily involved. All of that money is going to be spent directly by the federal government or not. I think there are always opportunities for the GNWT and the federal government to work together. I found that being with the Department of Environment, I found many opportunities where the GNWT and the federal government are working together on all of the environmental agreements and so on at the diamond mines. I am hoping that something like this will evolve from here where there is an opportunity for people in small communities to be involved in the environmental stewardship. I know that is a big issue for a small community. I am looking forward to something evolving from that budget, although it is the federal government’s budget, like I indicated.

I like the hydro development. Of course, he mentioned specifically of mini-hydro in Lutselk’e and the opportunities where that could be afforded to the community of Lutselk’e as a result of hydro development is something that I am looking forward to. I think that the communities did some work and looked at the various ways that hydro development close to a community could benefit the community, and work in the area of lowering the cost of power to the community and ultimately lowering their cost of living for that community.

I am looking forward to having some of the youth spending out there in the communities and so on. I think that there has been more done in the area of youth spending in this budget than has been than in the past. Being this is looked at as the first year where we are trying to put some new money to help the youth and so on. I look forward to future years and also the fact that we will eventually, I am hoping, put this youth plan, youth strategies and so on in place.

Just a brief mention of devolution on the federal government to manage our own lands, water and resources. I think that is a positive move. I think it is a very good move for the economy of the Northwest

Territories. If this government can negotiate the transfer of positions from the other managing our land, our water and resources, Ottawa’s positions were to be held in Yellowknife, I think that it is a good opportunity for displacement positions from Yellowknife to the regional centres and also from the regional centres on to the communities. Managing lands, water and resources is probably no better way to do it than to be near the lands, water and resources that you are trying to manage. I am looking forward to something coming out of the talks, at any future talks or talks that have already occurred between our leaders and also people in Ottawa for this initiative.

I have some general concerns. I’d like to see more focus on small communities. I still have the idea that we can centralize some of the positions out of the GNWT and delegate some of the authority to the community governments and manage some of our programs in that way. Again, the centralization, a very few of the small communities could have such a major impact. We still, I don’t think, have resolved the issue of the public housing income support issue and so on. I think that more emphasis on the cost of living, reduction of the cost of living in small communities and programs that could be put in place to reduce the cost of power. We often hear about the cost of power, cost of food. There are positive things with some of the cost of fuel and gasoline recently. It’s still high, but I’m expecting that to come down over the next couple of years also.

I think that housing for staff is key in order for us to carry a lot of these initiatives out. I notice there is some money there, but again facilitation of how housing for staff can be put on the ground in small communities is probably going to be a challenge.

It was good to see some of the energy programs that the government chose to keep supporting in the area of addictions and health counsellors and so on. I’m out of time.

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Next on the list I have Mr. Yakeleya, Mr. Jacobson and Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Yakeleya.

The budget, as I’ve been reading it and picking up, doing some selective listening in terms of what I want to hear and how I see this affecting the North. The communities that I represent would have to wait to give an overall report. I’d have to wait to see where, in general, when it talks about specific expenditures in the Northwest Territories, there are some general statements made in the budget which I think the Minister has been listening to us. It’s very good. It’s a good, well-thought-out budget in terms of, as he noted, that there’s global economic turmoil happening across this great land here and that we

are somewhat reactive to. But I see ourselves, as the Legislature as a whole, we are taking not so much a reactive position, we’re more positive in dealing with the issue at hand.

Mr. Chairman, the issue I do have, and some comments I heard, is that some of the issues we deal with in our region, being isolated, in terms of programs, our services that make sense or could make sense and then not knowing what the impact would be, because most of what I’m hearing, some of the expenditures that are going to be in areas that make sense to the government in terms of the boiler system in some of the large centres. They’re going to experience that and have that. If there are areas where there’s a high cost of living and we acknowledge it and we want to do something about it, I believe the government and the Minister is looking at the area in terms of how do we reduce the cost of living in some of our more isolated communities. We’re not served on a highway system. All our products, all our supplies, materials, all have to be flown in. In my region we rely on a diesel energy source of power. Those are very expensive.

I guess, Mr. Chairman, when you look at the whole, overall, in terms of some regions have hydro, some have got some projects going on there, some have biomass initiatives going on there. They have all these things that pile up. For whatever reason, how they come to that conclusion needs to be discussed in here and see if we can have that in our region also. Hydro is very cheap in the southern communities of the Northwest Territories; very cheap. So why not, with some of the communities that we’re paying high costs of energy, have some of those programs, some of those initiatives refocused in our communities.

That’s what they mean by the “devil’s in the details,” on infrastructure spending, on spending in the communities, treatment plants, a lot of treatment plants, hydro initiatives, transportation infrastructure needs.

Mr. Chairman, if you were to take $50, spend it here in Yellowknife or some other community, down in Smith or Hay River, if you take $50 and spend it in Colville Lake or Good Hope or Deline, you would get two different types of returns. We are expected in the Sahtu to live within those means. When we come here people really appreciate the stores here because of the low cost and how they can get the extra supplies they need in their communities. When you come to those communities that have to fly in their groceries, sometimes once a week if the weather is cooperating, if not then you have to wait until next week. When you have to pay $21 for 10 pounds of potatoes in my community and look at what you have to pay here, this is where we have to really look at. Some communities in the North, for

whatever reason, are not receiving much attention. I’m certain, and I’ll probably get a reply from the government in terms of what they’re doing in some of our communities, but I think just from hearing and reading what’s before me in the budget address, I think some of these things need to be discussed further.

Mr. Chairman, the Minister has certainly prepared his notes and, like any other Finance Minister in Canada, is uncertain as to how the economic turmoil, the economic crisis is going to be dealt with in North America. For me, I feel very confident with his vision, the way they’re going with it. I’m not agreeing with some of the things to where you’re putting some of the projects, but I think you’re doing a pretty good job. He’s telling people in the Northwest Territories this is what we have and this is what we have to deal with.

This budget is a relationship with the federal government in terms of the type of dollars they give to the Northwest Territories. They tell us here’s $1.3 billion, go govern yourselves, go spend it where you think it’s most needed. I think a lot has to do with our relationship with the federal government in terms of how do we get them to look at this government as a partner in Confederation. But that’s at another table. I think the reality is that we have...I think the Ministers have certainly taken some of our views to heart and they’ve certainly had some good discussions as to how do we live through this economic crisis in the next couple of years to see how much we can benefit our communities. Again, it’s a difference of opinions as to where the funding should be spent and who needs it more, community A or community B. We put them in a difficult position, but we’re also here to see if we can better our communities.

There are other points I want to make but I think that when I look at this, the overall picture, I’m going to be asking throughout the budget on how it’s going to impact the communities that I represent, how it’s going to impact the quality of life that I represent, and if it’s going to make a difference in my riding in terms of having this budget being passed. I look forward to a healthy, passionate discussion. I’m going to look at the geographical expenditures on some of the programs.

Some of the things I like in the budget. I like what the Minister has put together with his other Ministers. I certainly know he’s listening because now he’s looking at the plastic bags. That means a lot to the people in our region in terms of dealing with the plastic bags. It’s a small one but it’s a big thing when you look at the environment. I know the Minister is going to continue to take notes as we have some discussions, and certainly I wanted to thank the Minister for his hard work in this budget

here. I know he put down some decisions that I may not agree with, but that’s up for discussion and I look forward to a healthy debate on the main estimates as we go through this. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Next on my list is Mr. Jacobson.

Sitting here today in regard to the budget, I am in support of the budget. I have a lot of comments to make and I’ll start with the federal government on the Building Canada Plan. Being four years earlier, I just want to thank the Conservative government for that in regard to my access road, for getting the extra money that I needed.

The gas and heating fuel in our communities was a good thing in regard to being dropped 16 cents per litre for assistance for people who live on, for hunting and for caribou and stuff like that. So that’s a real good initiative.

Near and dear to my heart is my polar bear issue. I’m working with the Minister of ITI on product diversification and the marketing. Diversification in regard to tourism and stuff is a good thing, but I do still support the polar bear hunt. It’s a $1.7 million hit to my economy in my riding of Nunakput and 85 people affected directly. So many helpers, the airlines, everybody is going to be hit with not having the monies coming in until April. Maybe a guide would take out three or four hunters a year and that’s a big hit to their economy and where they get their money from. I still would like to see our government try to get the United States to take a good look at taking that off the list and talking to Fish and Game on that polar bear issue. It has to be dealt with. It’s affecting too many people in my riding.

Another good initiative is the residual heat project in Ulukhaktok. That would be really good to get that project off the ground and running in regard to the school system and that, the hamlet, the local community government, to try to cut down the cost on the high price of fuel. There are many other people who could use that, like the arena if possible. I think that’s a really good initiative.

Wind turbines in Tuk, that’s going to be really good due to the high cost of power in the community. We are a diesel community and just paying for your power bill every month, it’s gotten higher. You think it’s high up in Yellowknife when you’re 30 percent extra. You’re not paying $800 or $900 a month now in the small communities. It’s a really good thing that we should really support and get that off the ground.

Going through continued support, the extra monies put forward for the pipeline to make sure we stay on

top of it, on the project to make sure it happens. I worry about businesses up and down the valley, especially in the Beaufort-Delta, having no work this winter and half of the community...People are really struggling. We have to stay on top of that.

The overall cost of living is so high in my communities that I represent it’s ridiculous. From travel to power to food, you can’t live. Quality of life is not the same as it should be. People are worrying for little things and not able to go and purchase a new snowmobile every year due to the high costs of living. You make do with what you’ve got or just hope on family and friends to help you.

On projects, the extra funding that’s needed on that initiative right across with the housing, ECE, will make a difference. A couple more things in regard to the job cuts in the budget for my riding, I’ll make sure that I do it justice and I will fight to make sure that gets resolved, because some people say retirement. You could retire on a retirement package down south maybe, but you can’t retire in my riding because you’d go broke in two years with regard to the high cost of living. That’s not an option for me. I’m going to go tooth and nail in regard to the job cuts, if any, in my riding.

Again, the quality of life is not the same, so I’ll really let the government know that we have to do something about this. If it’s not us, we could assist the local community government, the airlines and stuff to see what we can do to help them, the small businesses and the airlines. We’ve been giving out quite a bit of money lately to some airlines. We have a couple of airlines in the Beaufort-Delta that need some money, too, so it would be good to assist.

The extra money that we did get for the housing, the extra $50 million, I think that’s a really good thing. We really do need housing; we’re short in the communities. On just retrofits alone, we could spend that money probably, with the Minister, in a couple of days. I wouldn’t be surprised.

Early Childhood Initiative; I would say that the youth are our future in the Northwest Territories and any support that we can give to the youth and to the families on a go forward basis is always a good thing.

Our elders repair on their Homeownership Program, that’s the extra monies we did get in there that Mr. Beaulieu brought up is another really good initiative we do have coming. Overall, it is a really good budget. I am really happy just seeing a couple of my communities that I represent on one page, so it is pretty good to see.

In the budget it includes over $61 million for NWT community governments increased by 9 percent in

2008-09. I am really happy to see with the increases with the local community governments that they are struggling already. That should be really taken into consideration on the high cost of living, not only for the power and the fuel, but it eats up so much of the budget. Some communities can’t get the arenas opened just due to the high cost of power. It really should be looked at. Any kind of help that we could give our local community governments is always a good thing. I really do stress that it is time to work together to make this budget go through and making sure that everything gets passed along to the communities, and not only the communities but to Yellowknife, Hay River and everybody.

I have one more thing. I have 57 seconds left. I am going to make sure this time that housing gets put back to Housing. We have so many problems with ECE and housing in regards to the small communities. If they are corporations, they should be treated as stand alone. It is the same with the Power Corporation. Right now you have constituents being evicted just because of not showing up on time at the end of the month. A lot of things could be said, but I look forward to working with everybody here to make sure this goes through. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Next on the list is Mr. Ramsay.