Thank you, Mr. Chair. It’s been a few months since we’ve been here now, and learning this budget process is interesting because there are certain things in the budget I like and certain things that I don’t like. Ms. Bisaro did point to a lot of those issues, those concerns, so instead of talking about it all, I’m going to focus on just one area that I have a concern with.

I have a concern with the amount of money we are putting into the Heritage Fund. The Minister has put together a budget of 5 percent, which I don’t understand where that number comes from. That’s the minimum that we’ve heard from anybody. The Minister has gone out to the public, heard from a whole bunch of different people and some people said for the first four or five years, let’s put 100 percent in so we can actually accomplish something for the future generations, for them to have capital money to do these projects.

I understand we have a lot of capital needs. Our side has indicated in the past, in June and in the fall, we want at least 25 percent to go to the Heritage Fund. The Minister has gone to the public and said we’re going to put money into the Heritage Fund and we’re going to put money to pay down debt. So the general public believes we are sitting here and we are looking at decreasing the debt, saving money. They are all for that. They see that as responsible government and I see that, as well, but in the same breath when we’re talking about borrowing another billion dollars, we’re not doing what we just told the public we were going out to do. We are basically only putting 5 percent away and the rest is being used to service debt maybe, but not reduce debt.

The Heritage Fund at 5 percent is not a very big number. I think it’s a couple million bucks. I don’t think it’s appropriate that we’re only putting that minimal amount away.

I think we need to put money away for the future. Most of these resource revenue sharing dollars are coming from non-renewable resources. These non-renewable resources aren’t going to be here forever, so in the future generations they aren’t going to have the opportunities we have to generate that revenue. So we need to be putting some of that money away now, so people of the Northwest Territories, who are the owners of this thing, have the ability to reap the rewards from them in future generations, in five, 10, 25, 35, 55

years from now. This is something that is fiscally responsible to do now, put 25 percent away.

I don’t understand why we have to sit here and have a debate over this, whether it’s 5 or 25 percent when this is new money coming from the federal government. This is money we’ve never had in the past and now we are fighting over it just like we’ve already spent it. I don’t understand how that can be. This is new money, the projects that we’re putting into it are new concepts. So how can there be a debate over we can’t afford to put 25 percent away? That shouldn’t even be an argument. Like I said, this is new money coming from the federal government. This is the first year we’re getting it. We should be sitting here and we should be happy on both sides of this House, but yet we’re fighting over the money that we just received from the federal government because that government on that side has already committed the additional 20 percent, but that’s not what they heard from us and that’s not what they heard from a lot of the people in the public. We want to have 25 at a minimum. Like I said, that argument, some people did say 5 percent, some people said 25 percent and some people have committed to 100 percent. So I believe 25 percent is the number that has to be the minimum of us putting away.

I know they want to argue with us and say okay, well, let’s start at 5 percent now and we’ll build the 25 percent. That’s not what you do when you’re saving money. Let’s do it right away when we first get the money. Once we only put 5 percent, we’re never going to get up to 25 percent. So, I mean, the numbers are too minimal at 5 percent. It doesn’t work for me and the government are making us look like we’re the bad guys that have to find the cuts to make the 25 percent happen. I think that’s ridiculous, and the fact that this is new money, this money has never been spent before and the departments will say well, yeah, we don’t get the money for a year and a half, but that side of the House is spending the money like we had it. So they’re borrowing against it, as far as everybody here understands. So we’re supposed to hold off until we actually get that money. That doesn’t make sense from my perspective as a Member of this Legislative Assembly.

The other issues with the budget I will deal with over the next couple of weeks, but I do believe that the Heritage Fund needs a minimum 25 percent down from those resource revenue sharing dollars. Thank you, Mr. Chair.