Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In preparation for today, budget day, I’ve taken a look back at comments I’ve made at various times during this Assembly in regard to previous budgets. I was struck by the similarity of my concerns then until now.

On May 26, 2008, in my Member’s statement, I said, “I am disappointed in three aspects of this budget: that there’s no new revenue source; that budget reductions seem to target jobs first; that there is no coordinated approach from the government for the consideration of saving the environment, energy planning, and minimizing climate change through all of our programs and services.” Regrettably, two of these three items remain a concern today, almost three years later. Today’s budget has no new revenue source and we still do not have a coordinated or comprehensive approach to energy planning, conservation and climate change. Despite continued pleas from Members on this side of the House, it is yet to become a number one priority for this government.

On February 5, 2009, I stated, “The budget continues to use the term ‘strategic initiative’ to define costs which are actually forced growth.” To be honest, this has gotten somewhat better, but all of our budgets continue to identify certain expenditures as strategic initiatives when they’re really just a regular cost of doing business, nothing special.

On January 28, 2010, I spoke of two things: the need for the GNWT to develop an anti-poverty strategy and the need to increase actions which address homelessness. We have yet to see either of these things.

Just last October 29th my Member’s statement

included these words: “On another note, during the departmental reviews it was again evident that GNWT departments plan in isolation. It was all too apparent in our review of business plans last month. It was another case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing.” Again I have to say, regretfully, I must admit, that the situation in this regard has not changed.

In summary, I believe that as a government and as a Territory we need to make fundamental systemic changes to the way we deliver programs and services and to the way we think about government. Without it we will never achieve parity and an acceptable quality of life for our residents.