Motion is being circulated. Motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I think some of my colleagues may speak to this, but there are important people who are breaking ground every day. I want to give credit to people like Amos Scott, who I have known since I was a kid growing up in Simpson. He’s doing phenomenal work which is being recognized. He had a big production here recently at NACC and he had a great celebration when we were out at NWT Days. Artless Collection, Jay Bulckaet and Pablo Saravanja, they are doing phenomenal work. There are many other people. We know about the story of Lesser Blessed, people like Travis Mercredi working forward, making great strides. There are so many more success stories that could be built upon our growing film industry.

Rather than trying to use all the time up, I think the message is pretty clear that I think this is important, and what I’m suggesting is this is something that gets built in the budget programming going forward starting in the 2014-2015 fiscal year. As Mr. Miltenberger said the other day, they’re building the next budget as we speak, so it’s important to get these messages officially on the record. That’s all.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair. Very quickly. I appreciate this being brought forward and I will be supporting the motion. This is the sort of thing that both Yukon and Nunavut have. It’s been called for for a long time. We did a review of support for the film industry during the 16th Assembly. Some good improvements were made and this is taking the next logical step that addresses the big gap that remains out there. The SEED program is supportive but what is needed is exactly what’s defined in this motion. I will be supporting it.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. To the motion. Mr. Dolynny.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate Mr. Hawkins’ for bringing this motion forwards and I know colleagues that have been speaking towards it. This is just the evolutionary progression of what is just good stewardship and management of an industry.

This industry, as we are well aware, is very nomadic when it comes to our national and international filmmakers. This motion does speak very highly to helping our local film producers, as

mentioned by Mr. Hawkins. I had the pleasure of having one-on-one dialogues with the national film producers of Arctic Air and Ice Pilots NWT and they clearly said, as much as they appreciate tax incentives, that is not the impetus for them to do filming here in the North. What would be a value add to them was very clear. Their cost of air travel, their cost of lodging, these are true tangible costs. These were impediments for them to do business here, but they want to do business here. We have to make it easy for them. If we don’t make it easy for them, we know full well that the industry will move on. Just ask the Province of Saskatchewan. That was a lesson learned. We’ve got to learn from the mistakes, possibly of others, and make sure we put adequate measures to mitigate it.

On top of that, not speaking to this motion, is the fact that these very same stewards and film producers clearly indicated they needed cultural experts as well. I know, not speaking to the motion, but we’ve got to listen to these, these are fundamentally the stewards, these are the people who are promoting the NWT through film and industry, and I think we need to look at it. I hope that Cabinet is listening because if Cabinet is not listening, they’re saying no in essence to this industry by not supporting it.

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. To the motion. Mr. Bouchard.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I will be abstaining from this vote on this motion. The difficulty I have with this process is we’re talking about the 2013-2014 budget and this is an initiative they want implemented into the 2014-2015 budget. We have a process in place. We have a business plan process that, as a new Member, I think we have a way to put these initiatives into it. Every one of these Members here have initiatives that are good, strong initiatives. I can sit here and probably make 10 motions of things that I want in the 2014-2015 budget, a year from now, two years from now. Where are we going to go with this? If we’re going to continue the budget process, the discussion should be on the 2013-2014 budget and I’ve already indicated to the Member that I don’t support this concept of putting additional 2014-2015 items into this year’s budget. It’s not the process, that’s not the avenue we have to give our initiatives there. I will be abstaining from this motion.

---Applause

Glad to see the Cabinet is listening. To the motion.

Question is being called.

---Carried

Back to page 12-31, Industry, Tourism and Investment, economic diversification and business support. Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I will give the Minister a chance to get his seat there. I do appreciate the Minister’s support for agriculture under the economic diversification business support side of things. I know he had a bit of a peak experience with the Polar Egg move. I just want to explore the Growing Forward Program a little bit. I understand it’s being renewed, Growing Forward 2. Of Growing Forward 1, what proportion of the funds – I don’t remember how much it was – was allocated to contributions to other parties and what was spent with our own programs internally, agricultural programs internally?

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Vician.

Thanks for those comments. I guess I’m particularly interested in the Small Scale Food Program. I know we have a very active program in that area and I’m getting a lot of feedback from the communities that our approach

hasn’t been the most productive. We tend to go into communities, choose the location of a plot of land, plow it up, plant it, then leave. I think the work that the department has been doing more recently and the partners that they’ve been supporting who are bringing in many other partners are actually working with individuals in the communities to be much more effective and I’m hoping that will actually characterize the work going forward. I would appreciate that breakdown, at least on what we spent internally versus what we made through contributions to partners. Just on that, if we have a community garden put in, say, Whati and we go in and do it and so on, is that an internal expenditure or is that considered a contribution to a partner?

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Just to the Member’s last question, it could be both. It depends on which community and the dynamics of it.

On the Member’s other question, we are going to have more money through Growing Forward 2 and Deputy Minister Vician mentioned $1.2 million. So it’s about $6 million over five years. We need to come up with a plan on how best to spend that money. We’ve had discussions with the Territorial Farmers Association late last year and they have some really interesting plans on how to train folks from the smaller communities, bring them into Hay River, provide them with training and support so that they can go back into their home communities and train others. It sounds like a very good model and it’s something that as we move forward and negotiate this deal and plan how we’re going to spend that money, I think that’s going to be a part of it. We certainly will have some more money and I think it’s going to be exciting to put a plan together on how best to spend that money and we certainly look forward to working with the Members on EDI and other Members that are interested on how best to utilize this new funding.

Thanks to the Minister’s comments. I appreciate that. I think this is an opportunity to do some serious navel gazing to see how well we’ve done and how productive our work has been with internal efforts versus through contributions. I know there seems to be an effort out there that restricts contributions to projects that are less than an acre in size. To me, that’s completely crazy. It ignores the size of our communities and so on and I have to wonder where that’s coming from.

I think the Minister is on the right track and good, full discussions on this with all of our partners who are out there doing the real work would be a good way to go. That is all I have on gardening.

Maybe just let me throw in a comment on fisheries. I know that it is dear to some folks’ heart. The

Minister mentioned in discussions – I believe it was yesterday; it seems like several days ago – the Great Bear Lake trout. I completely agree with him. I have eaten at the same table as the Minister. That is a pretty amazing fish.

The difficulty is the Freshwater Fish Marketing Board. It becomes lake trout from somewhere in Canada. That has always been the problem. It’s still the problem. At one point, the fishers were going to get out of fishing and that was reversed, but it is such a dilemma that we are losing out considerably. We used to ship fish from Great Slave Lake to Chicago in the ‘60s and get over $1.50 a pound, big bucks in those days. Then along came this operation and that’s gone. So it’s a sad state compared to what our potential is. I look forward to any comments the Minister has on how we can do it. It is a tough one, I am the first to admit, but we do need to deal with it somehow. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, I really do appreciate the Member’s comments. I know I mentioned yesterday that, with the Great Slave Lake fishery, that is something that over the next two and a half years I think we need to put some real push behind. I have had meetings with the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation. We need to be working together with the industry, both in Hay River and here in Yellowknife. I really think we can make some progress here. It is a resource that is right here. It’s at our doorstep.

I know Mr. Bromley has been here for a number of years. We used to be taking a lot more fish out of that lake than we currently are. I do believe there’s some room to move there. I’ve been encouraged with the discussions I have had with the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation. Our efforts will be on how we can work together. I think that’s how we’re going to proceed on that.

It gets back to some of the dialogue that we’ve heard through the Economic Opportunities Strategy. The panel was down in Hay River. This is a subject that has been brought up repeatedly around Great Slave Lake, is the government has to be doing more with the fishery. Certainly I think you’ll see perhaps some recommendations in the EOS report when it does come back through the strategy. We hope to be able to get some solid recommendations that we can act upon. It is a resource that is right there.

As far as Great Bear Lake goes, when I was responding to MLA Yakeleya, there might be some other opportunities, perhaps not through the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation, for Great Bear trout. It is a specialized product. I can see it being a specialized product. There might be a certain market out there for that fish. I know it is a tremendous fish. Any time I get a chance to go to

Deline, I always have to try the trout from Great Bear Lake. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Next I have Mr. Dolynny.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have one question in this section. This question has to do with the BDIC. Section 41 of the NWT BDIC Act establishes mandatory review of BDIC programs every five years. The act came into force in 2005. Therefore, there should have been a review in 2010, which I don’t believe there was. We’re nearing the second anniversary of a potential review. Because the section does establish a mandatory review, maybe if we can get an update as to why the 2010 review didn’t happen and whether or not we’re going to see a review in short order. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, for a detailed response I will go to Deputy Minister Vician, but I just met with the BDIC board. There are going to be efforts underway to do the work the Member is talking about. For the specifics, I will go to Deputy Minister Vician.

Thank you. Mr. Vician.

Thank you, Mr. Vician. Mr. Dolynny.

Madam Chair, if we can get a bit more clarity as to the full scope of this review, given the fact that we are many, many years behind this review process. The Minister indicated that it has gone to the program review office. Can we get an indication here as to is this a full-scale review or are we looking at certain components within the framework of BDIC? Thank you.

Madam Chair, if I can interpret what the Minister just indicated, this will be a full review and not a partial review of programs. We are expecting a full forensic review of all financial programs involving the BDIC. Thank you.

Madam Chair, as I said, this act came into force in 2005. We have yet to see any full-scale review. We are talking about programs that were, from what I gather from the Minister`s comments, active programs. Can the Minister indicate to this House, has there been any programs that have sunsetted since 2005 that are no longer an active program and if those programs also be looked at within this process? Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Just so I’m perfectly clear, we believe that there are contribution programs and the Minister indicated that there are venture investment programs. Will they, too, be under the premise of this program review? Thank you.

We know that there have been discussions in the past regarding the formal review process, as indicated in the House. Can we get an

indication as to when Members will be able to see the interim or the final report from this process? Thank you.

Thanks, Mr. Vician. Next on the list, Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Just with regard to grants and contributions, there’s an increment or a new addition for Canadian Zinc Socio-economic Agreement. Maybe if the Minister can just explain how that budget of $30,000 would be used. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Minister Ramsay.

Thanks, Mr. Chairman. If the Member could just restate his question, I missed the first part of it.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Just with regard to the Canadian Zinc Socio-economic Agreement under grants and contributions of $30,000, how is that money going to be used?

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. For that we’ll go to Mr. Vician.

Who makes up this Socio-economic Advisory Committee? Thanks.

Thank you very much. Just on a different topic altogether with the disaster compensation, I see that we’ve got grants at

$15,000. How would that disaster grant have applied to the community of Nahanni Butte for this year or last year?

Just for the 2011-2012 actuals of $80,000, was that a previously budgeted amount or were there some exceptional circumstances in that year? Thanks.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. For that we’ll go to Minister Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That was an exceptional circumstance with very high water in the Peel and Mackenzie, in the Beaufort-Delta that year. There were 13 claims that year.

Thank you, Minister Ramsay. Moving on with questions. Again, colleagues, we’re on 12-31. I have Ms. Bisaro.

Mr. Chair, my questions are actually on 12-33 if we want to wait until we get there. I can ask them now, they’re sort of related.

Okay, committee, we’ll move on, then. Again, 12-31, Industry, Tourism and Investment, activity summary, economic diversification and business support, operations expenditure summary, $22.961 million. Committee agreed?

Thank you, committee. Page 12-32, Industry, Tourism and Investment, activity summary, economic diversification and business support, grants and contributions, grants, $625,000, contributions, and carried forward to page 12-33, sorry, and 12-34. Total contributions. Ms. Bisaro.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I have some questions here related to the Business Development Investment Corporation and I’ve been wondering about the BDIC for a number of years, a while, I guess maybe not a number of years, but I did a little looking into the organization and the number of staff and so on, and I’m more than a little concerned. I’m quite concerned about the org chart, I guess, the staff that work this organization. There are 14 staff if the org chart is correct, but out of that

14 staff, I think one is empty, but there are scheduled seven managers. So 50 percent of the staffing of this particular corporation is managers or higher, directors. We’ve got a CEO, we have two directors and we have managers. So I’m quite concerned that we have more managers than workers, so to speak, and in looking at the org chart, we have several managers who manage one person. It seems to me that this is, perhaps, an organization which could probably use a little less staff, or certainly use fewer managers.

So I’d like to ask the Minister whether or not he considers this normal, that we would have an organization with 14 staff of which seven are managers or higher? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. For that we’ll go to Minister Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That comes under the purview of the board and, certainly, I appreciate the Member bringing that to my attention. I have the opportunity to meet with the board quite often. Actually, I just met with them last week and I’d be more than happy to raise the concern the Member brings on the number of managers in the organization to the board, and I’ll get her a response from the board after I meet with them. Thank you.

Thanks to the Minister for that. I guess in looking at this page, there’s $3.754 million that this government gives to the BDIC, and if the Minister does not have any opportunity to have more input than just having a chat with the board, I’m a little concerned about that. I would think that if we are funding the organization, we should be able to have a bit more input and direction given to the board about what they do with the money that we’re giving them.

So in regard to the $3.7 million for ‘13-14 that is scheduled to be given to BDIC, I’d like to know how much of that is admin, how much of that goes to administering the office, and how much of that goes to loans and credit and so on. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That plan is tabled in the House on an annual basis and I think it may be – the Member is asking a number of questions – very beneficial to get the board, the chairman in to meet with Regular Members. If Regular Members have concerns or questions about the operation, it would be a perfect opportunity to ask the board. They are an independent board. Certainly, they provide me with a corporate overview and I do meet with them to talk about their operations with subsidiaries. But, again, I think there could be a lot of utility in having the board come and meet with Members to address some of the concerns the Member’s raising.

I accept the Minister’s offer of a meeting. I think it’s probably something that should

be discussed. We’ll have to see if committee agrees to that.

In looking at the corporate plan for BDIC for ’13-14, I don’t know exactly where the right piece of paper is but I think it was something like almost $2.2 million for administration for salaries and benefits for this organization. It seems to me that that’s a lot of money for 14 people, $2.2 million.

My other question has to do with a program that is run through BDIC and a program that’s run through ITI. I know that the organization and the department are quite closely connected, but I’d like to know in terms of the SEED program, which is run by ITI, and the programs which are run through BDIC. As I read on this page, the purpose of BDIC is to encourage the creation and development of northern business. How are these two programs different? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. For that we’ll go to Mr. Vician.

Thanks to Mr. Vician for the explanation. I appreciate the descriptions, but I have to say that I fail to understand why we could not administer both of these programs from one place, why we need to have staff in two places basically providing funds to businesses within the NWT, albeit the criteria are slightly different. I feel that there’s some economy that can be had here, and I would seriously encourage the department to look at reducing the staff between both ITI and BDIC, not by kicking people out of a job but through

attrition, because there’s always an opportunity to reduce our staffing through attrition.

Mr. Dolynny mentioned – I guess maybe it was Mr. Vician – the Venture Investment Program. I did look at the corporate plan for ’13-14 and I did look at the website for BDIC. On the one hand, the website indicates that this investment program is not accepting any applications, but I think in the corporate plan it indicates that this program is going to be, I think, regenerated, so to speak. Does the Minister know anything about what actually is going on with that program? Is it active or inactive? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe it’s subject to the program review currently, so it’s inactive. Thank you.

I do have another question about staffing. I’ll ask the question and the Minister can refer me to the board, I guess, if that’s what he needs to do.

I struggle with the Community Futures program and the BDIC program. They are different, I agree, but they are also somewhat similar. If you look on this page, Community Futures is about $1.3 million, BDIC is about $3.7 million. The staffing complements are similar. The number of organizations within each is similar. Yet in terms of jobs that are produced or jobs that are developed through lending and through the support of organizations, I think Community Futures is something like 130 jobs averaging over the last couple of years and BDIC is something like 47 jobs. So on the one hand we’re… There’s a difference of about $2.5 million, yet one organization is producing, in terms of jobs, a heck of a lot more than the other one.

Specifically to BDIC, if I look at their org chart I see that we have, in terms of subsidiaries, there are, I think, eight subsidiaries under BDIC, and these are companies which, presumably, we own. There are, as I look at the org chart, four staff, I think, managing these subsidiaries. I have a really hard time believing that we need that many staff to monitor businesses. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, again, the Member raises a number of concerns and, again, it’s an independent board and I look forward to having them here to discuss issues with the Members.

We have to remember, in regard to the subsidiaries, they were set up, when they were set up to create employment in communities, provide economic opportunities and that’s what they’re set out to do. The subsidiaries are a big part of what the BDIC does. It provides economic activity in some of our smaller communities. So again, this is

a discussion that the Member wants to have with the BDIC board and I think we should try to put that meeting together as soon as possible. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Ramsay. Ms. Bisaro, your time is up but I have no one else on the list, so if you want to continue, go ahead.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. I believe that was more of a comment. Again, committee members, 12-32, 12-33 and 12-34, Industry, Tourism and Investment, activity summary, economic diversification and business support, grants and contributions, grants, $625,000; contributions, total contributions, $13.240 million; total grants and contributions, $13.865 million. Does committee agree?

Thank you, committee. Page 12-35, Industry, Tourism and Investment, information item, economic diversification, business support, active positions. Any questions? None. Page 12-36, Industry, Tourism and Investment, information item, lease commitments – infrastructure. Any questions?

Seeing none, 12-37. Industry, Tourism and Investment, information item, Fur Marketing Service Revolving Fund. Any questions?

Seeing none, 12-38, Industry, Tourism and Investment, information item, work performed on behalf of others. Any questions?

Industry, Tourism and Investment, 12-39, information item, work performed on behalf of others. Any questions?

Thank you, committee. If I can get committee members to return to 12-7 for the department summary. Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment. Mr. Menicoche.