Thank you, Madam Chair. We appreciate the comments from the Members in regard to the lowering of the cost of living, which would be a way of improving services. We are very committed to that. I’ve indicated now quite a number of times, as we look at our borrowing limit we need to make these critical investments that are going to help us lower the cost of living and there are a couple of things that we can do and we are focusing on those. One is the cost of energy generation and look at how we do business. The other one is critical infrastructure that promotes economic development like the Tibbitt-Contwoyto conversion from the ice road to an all-weather road, the next leg of the Wrigley to Norman Wells road where we know that there’s going to be a way to help pay this with industry but also promote activity that will expand our economic base.
When Member Bisaro says we need more revenue, the implication tends to be most immediately is somehow we should raise taxes. We’re saying that we already have the highest cost of living in the country, that we are far better off to make critical economic infrastructure investments that will help grow our economic base, promote more employment and more wealth, put people to work, more money in the economy. So we believe we can do that. We have started that and we have to continue to work at that.
In regard to the issue of wanting to see more, specifically the significant number of activities that we have underway in regard to the growing the population by 2,000 in four years, I’ll commit to the Members that we will have a document for them that pulls together all the pieces of work that have been underway over the last year and we’ll have that probably by sometime before the end of April, the beginning of May. There is a significant amount of work that has been going on that we believe will bear fruit, that the first year was a foundational year as we got ourselves organized and looked through the things we need to do both with industry and chamber as well as internally to government. How do we improve how we do business and take advantage of some of the federal changes to the immigrant Nominee Program that Minister Lafferty will be speaking to in the coming weeks?
In regard to Mr. Bromley’s comment, just to clarify that we were not misunderstanding his point. I think both the Premier and I understood the Member’s concern about any future development of fossil fuel should cease and desist, and what I would suggest to the Member is that that is a very fundamental policy decision. That’s a policy decision for this Legislature to discuss and weigh in on and pass judgment on. I don’t think it would be appropriate at this juncture just for the government to stand up and say it’s no longer going to have anything to do with the development of the fossil fuel reserves in
our jurisdiction without a thorough conversation about that, and I think that has yet to take place. I appreciate the Member’s concern about greenhouse gases, which we share, and the millions that we’re spending on alternative energy to cut our costs and limit our reliance on fossil fuels, but in the meantime my suggestion would be that’s the type of very fundamental policy debate that a Legislature should have and see if there is a consensus that can be reached on that issue, especially given the fact that we have a consensus government.
There was a comment by Ms. Bisaro about no money for MLAs, but when the government wants to spend money it finds it. I can only assume that, if I can use the example of fire season and low water that yes, we found the money, short-term borrowing. We had an emergency response, catastrophic events happening on the fire front, and as I’ve repeatedly reassured Northerners, we’re not going to ground our planes and confine our firefighters to barracks because they have expended their budget. This is a very, very critical issue and what governments are supposed to do: protect their citizens, protect the infrastructure and protect the land to the greatest extent possible and values at risk. Same with the low water. We made a conscious decision that this was a worthwhile investment to keep our costs down so it’s not transferred to the power rates and we put that money on the table as a contribution.
All of us, MLAs and government together, know that we have and we’ve been struggling with our funds. We’ve listened to Mr. Dolynny’s top 10, the issues about the cliff and flat tires and shooting caribou and all of the other eight things that he mentioned about the budget top 10 in his mind. So there are money issues, but yes, for emergencies, to protect our people, we will put the resources to use and if we have to borrow it, we will, and we’ll do the same again this summer if we have to. We want people to be reassured that they’re not going to be left defenseless in any event.
The P3 projects we will determine. The final determination on the P3 projects will be made once the proposals are in. We will determine the costs, we will look at the value, we will look at is it a renovation. Is one of the proponents going to propose a brand new building on a different site that would meet the size increases, the program increases for the same kind of money that we have budgeted for the renovation? We’ll have to see. The P3 is being looked at because we’re obligated to under our own policies and directions from the Legislature and strong push from the Members and we want to see if there is value
Yes, there are examples where things haven’t worked well, but there are probably as many or more examples of P3s that have worked well, both
in Canada and I was just looking at a report from things that have happened in Australia and a countrywide review that was done there. So, that final decision has yet to be made.
In regards to district heating, yes, folks went to Europe and they took a look where the average mean temperature was somewhere… In the wintertime it was like minus 6. We have one very clear experience with district heating and that’s in Inuvik. Madam Groenewegen will remember, as do I, the heated debate, as it were, that took place over the High Temperature Hot Water System in Inuvik. I know how incredibly expensive it was, so much so that everybody, including the government, walked away from it and, finally, NTPC. So technology has improved. I just think we have to look very carefully. It’s not a direct line comparison between what may be done in Sweden and what may be done in a place where today it was, I think, 45 below when I was walking to work. I froze my face in about five minutes. So it’s not something that’s been totally ruled out but we should just recognize that.
The issue of the very specific issues related to health and education I will leave for the Ministers to answer to the Members when they come before the House.
Finally, just to reiterate that we are very committed to expanding our revenues, and our focus is on, once again, creating conditions that are going to foster, encourage and promote economic development that’s broadening our economic base; look at recruiting our own students to a greater extent; look at maximizing all the opportunities that are going to come to us under the new Nominee Program to be able to get workers up here, and their families, within a six-month period; work with industry and encourage them to be like Dominion Diamonds and take the incentives for travelling, flying in, flying out, off the table and see what happens and we will pull that all together, Madam Chair, and we will provide that in the form of a more permanent longer term strategy as we go forward here to look at making the reality out of that decision to expand our population by 2,000 in now four years. Thank you.