Thank you, Mr. Chair. We know that this category involves the insurance, basically the risk management of the GNWT. We know that in the past we continuously have heard that there’s a change in our Risk Management Framework, which I would assume would affect how we calculate our premiums for our insurance evaluation assessment. We know that when we’ve done this in the past, large items of infrastructure such as the Deh Cho Bridge and Inuvik school were slow to get

trickled on to our insurance line. So with that, and because I have yet to see a document of our Risk Management Framework publicly, even as a Member, and yet we know we have a lot of large-scale inventory of infrastructure coming on board, I question the very small, in fact, no increase in insurance premiums for this fiscal year. If I can maybe get an explanation, if we are indeed putting these large-scale pieces on our books, wouldn’t premiums go up at the same percentage? Thank you.

I appreciate the clarification on risk management, but the question still remains. In 2013-2014 we were at $2.218 million. We had $2.305 million in the main estimates of 2014 and zero increase in 2015-2016. As I said, we had a significant amount of infrastructure that hit our books, which means that in the last two years, no change. In fact, there’s only a change of $87,000 since 2013. I find that premium very weak, given the amount of infrastructure that this has assumed in liability. Can I get more clarification on that? Thank you.

I guess the rationale for my questioning is that sometimes in business the quickest fix to find money is to go lean on insurance and do a re-evaluation of your replacement costs and depreciate those costs to the tune where it makes it very difficult to make that investment. I’m just hoping that we as a government are maintaining the right level of insurance for the amount of assets we have coming on our books. That’s my rationale for the question, Mr. Chair.

We know that this area of the activity is involved with debt management. With that, we know that the Macroeconomic Policy, which is used as a guideline force for the department, is a very strong piece of policy and documentation. I have to clearly indicate that this is a very old and very outdated Macroeconomic Policy that we’re using. We’re using assumptions that were pre-recession in order to guide the debt management of our government and that, in turn, will also affect our Fiscal Responsibility Policy which again, if I go on the department`s website, there’s only a reference to a pamphlet. That pamphlet still has the picture of Mr. Floyd Roland on it, which tells me that this thing needs to be looked at. This is quite old and yet all these tools, very old Macroeconomic Policy and old Fiscal Responsibility Policy, provide the oversight for our fiscal strategy.

When can we start to see maybe a modernization of these tools and update of these tools so that we can have some degree of confidence that we’re not using outdated management tools to make the predictions that we’re needing to look at borrowing more money? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. These policies are going to be reviewed, renewed and updated, modernized this year and in place and time for the next budget. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Dolynny.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am encouraged with that response. I know I’ve asked that many times. I guess we’ll have it before the end of the 17th , which is better late than never. So,

congratulations to the department for recognizing that opportunity, because Members have been asking for that for some time.

Last, Mr. Chair, with respect to this activity. The treasury division looks after the administration of all legislative tax programs and I guess to the question and, again, I do applaud the good work that has

been done in terms of increasing the frequency of tax audits, especially on tobacco, but how many tax audits are we going to be doing on outside wholesalers? These are wholesalers that are outside the GNWT’s jurisdiction, such as outside the Northwest Territories. How many of these wholesalers will be audited for the transfer of the tax memo program for our GNWT portion in our fiscal year?

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Mr. Kalgutkar.

I appreciate that response. So, for the sake of fullness here, four out of the 11 outside wholesalers, these are wholesalers that are established outside the border of Northwest Territories. Is this the first time that this government has audited these outside wholesalers? Thank you.

I want to congratulate the department for finally realizing where I firmly believe there are issues with respect to our loophole in our taxation system, so I’m going to be looking with much anticipation of the results of that audit. Can the department indicate how the findings of this audit will be made to Members and how will the findings of this audit will be made public? Thank you.

So, how will Members know the findings of this audit? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Kalgutkar. Committee, we`re on page 151, Department of Finance, budget, treasury and debt management, operations expenditure summary, $26.860 million.

Page 153, budget, treasury and debt management, active positions. Questions?

Page 155, Bureau of Statistics, operations expenditure summary, $1.069 million.