Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that this committee recommends that the government draft regulations for the operation of the Heritage Fund and refer them to the appropriate standing committee in a timely manner for review and feedback.

A motion is on the floor. To the motion. Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Once again I’m very pleased to support this motion and happy to see the committee bringing it forward. I think again it is an opportunity for the public to be heard on this.

I know that the committee is stepping out a little bit. This is not, again, a typical order of things, but it speaks to this being a different act that is dealing with the public purse and has the added responsibility of ensuring abundant opportunities for the public to be heard on their shepherding. Once again, I support this motion and I appreciate the committee bringing it forward. I will be supporting it.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. To the motion.

Question has been called.

---Carried

Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that this committee recommends that the Caucus of the 17th Legislative Assembly establish a

process convention to facilitate the referral of a limited category of regulations to standing committee for review and comment prior to their final enactment.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. A motion is on the floor. To the motion. Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a couple of brief comments here. I have felt for quite some time that the inability of either standing committee and/or the general public to have any input on the development of regulations is a fault with our system, and I think the consideration by Caucus of establishing a process convention to refer regulations, not all of them because there certainly is some legislation that will not require extensive regulations, but there certainly are some pieces of legislation which should allow for input from standing committee and the public into the development of regulations. I’m really glad to see this coming forward and I hope that the 17th Assembly follows through on this.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. To the motion. Mr. Abernethy.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to follow up on the comments of my colleague Ms. Bisaro. Over the last four years it’s come up many times where certain regulations would have benefited from a review of Regular Members prior to being enacted. I would say that often this would be the exception as opposed to the rule. Many regulations will not likely ever need to come to this level to be approved, but clearly, without question, there will be those certain or specific regs which would benefit from that public review as well as review by the Members of the Assembly. The reason it’s here is because the Heritage Act is one of those regs that we feel would benefit significantly through discussion with the Regular Members. So I support this motion, recognizing that it is for some regs, not all regs, and it will be up to the 17th Assembly to decide what that

regulation or protocol will look like in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. To the motion. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be voting in favour of this particular motion, but I would like to caution Members, as well as future Members, who will be dealing with this type of challenge. We must clearly distinguish the role that we represent.

It’s Cabinet’s typical role of developing legislation, proposing it to the Members, and the Members will review it, respond to it, and dispose of it appropriately in the House. I caution this because if we are reviewing or commenting on regulations, I then beg to say on this particular case is the next logical step that our MLAs on the Members’ side now developing policy and where does it continue? I think it’s a slippery slope when the Members themselves are developing specific regulations or overseeing them. I think that’s a strong role that should be left up to the departments and they have the authority to do that.

This motion specifically really looks at the process and convention to facilitate that, and I think that’s the type of discussion that really needs to happen here and we need to make sure that the roles are clearly defined. I’m not sure if there’s really an excuse for a particular occasion other than the fact that people want to be involved. I can appreciate that Members want to be involved in regulation writing but, quite frankly, they’re not, on the Members’ side, you’re not mini-Ministers. People have to remember that. We’re not a true opposition, which certainly makes this particular issue, I think, complicated, and I think we have to spend time examining again maybe the Members’ role. Perhaps maybe there’s a reason we should be involved, perhaps there isn’t, but I do look forward to the future discussion on this particular issue and I think it would be very helpful going forward.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. To the motion.

Question has been called.

---Carried

Does committee agree that we’ve concluded Committee Report 6-16(6)?

Committee Report 6-16(6) has been concluded. Next on our list is dealing with Bill 10, Northwest Territories Heritage Fund Act. At this time I would like to ask the Minister responsible for the bill to make any comments. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am here to present Bill 10, Northwest Territories Heritage Fund Act. The

purpose of this act is to establish a trust fund for the future benefit and use of the people of the Northwest Territories.

This bill responds to our commitment to introduce legislation to establish a Northwest Territories Heritage Fund before the end of the 16th Legislative

Assembly. During the October 2009 revenue options consultation and roundtable undertaken by the Department of Finance, we heard from many respondents that the NWT needs such a fund in anticipation of achieving control over our non-renewable natural resources. In response, in March 2010 we launched public discussions specifically on the concept of a Heritage Fund. The support received then for the creation of a fund, as well as the numerous indications of support from Members of the Legislative Assembly, has resulted in the bill that you have before you right now.

A Heritage Fund is a way to save for future generations. This legislation will establish a trust fund as a long-term investment fund into which surplus funds may be transferred at the discretion of the Legislative Assembly. Once transferred, these monies become part of the principal of the fund. For the first 20 years of the fund both the principal and income generated in the fund will be retained within the fund. After 20 years have passed transfers out of the fund into the Consolidated Revenue Fund may be made through a special act, although these transfers would still have to go through the regular budget process. The legislation will limit the transfer out of the fund to an annual withdrawal of 5 percent of the year-end balance of the fund, provided that the principal of the fund is not removed. Even after the 20-year period is complete annual deposits may continue to be made and will become part of the principal of the fund.

The Financial Management Board will be the fund’s trustee under the proposed legislation and will monitor the performance of the Heritage Fund, appoint the auditor, and direct and supervise the secretary of the board in exercising the duties of investing and disposing of assets of the fund. This is in keeping with the structure used for other public agencies. This will not prevent the establishment of an arm’s length investment management body to oversee the administrative and investment functions of the fund. However, in the first years while the fund is building principal there is no need to incur the cost of additional administration. The bill includes a requirement for the Legislative Assembly to conduct a review after 10 years of the provisions and operations of the Heritage Fund Act, including recommendations on how to seek public input and advice on expenditures from the fund and whether independent oversight and management of the fund is required.

The Legislative Assembly will receive an annual report on the performance of the Heritage Fund. While financial results will be disclosed separately from other accounts, the Heritage Fund’s investment income, including any capital gains or losses, will be consolidated into the government’s general accounts just as investment income from other government accounts is treated. Similarly, on the statement of financial position the Heritage Fund’s assets will be included along with the government’s other financial assets.

As reflected in this proposed legislation, the single objective of the Heritage Fund’s investment policy is to maximize the long-term growth in the Heritage Fund while avoiding undue risk. The investment management will be guided by accepted investment principles.

We recognize that we are unlikely to be in a position to contribute to the Heritage Fund until we are in a surplus cash position. However, the recently concluded devolution agreement-in-principle is a first step to ensuring that NWT residents receive the fiscal benefits from the development of our territory’s non-renewable resources. We will be prepared, when the day comes, to contribute toward a legacy for future generations of Northerners.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. I believe that the Standing Committee on Government Operations already commented on the bill, so at this time I would like to ask the Minister if he will be bringing in any witnesses.

Yes, Mr. Chairman.