If it does say anything regarding fluoridation, would MACA be interested in updating the public as to why it is used and some of the comments provided on both sides? As I said earlier, I am in support of fluoridation and that’s not the issue, but there are many people out there concerned with its risks, so the public is informed a little about the argument on both sides and allow them to pursue their own. I think it’s in our best interests to provide good education to people on both sides of this argument and one should never be afraid to hear an opposing point of view.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. That’s a good idea. We’ll work closely with the Department of Health, and all the information that we can gather, we’ll make sure that it’s available on our website. We will take the Member’s suggestion and we’ll work to implement it. Thank you.

I appreciate the very warm reception to that thought. That said, I just want to underscore that I certainly am in favour of fluoridation. I think it is a good thing. I think it does wonders for the dental community, and dental health is very important not just for children but lifelong adults in our scope.

Mr. Chairman, just on that note, I wanted to change gears. One more second before I change gears. Can I get the Minister to confirm that he will inform me once it has been updated so I assume that it will be either checked or updated in a timely way, and could I get the Minister to also ensure that I am informed in some way that it has been addressed so that I can get back to my constituent? Thank you.

I can commit to informing the Member and committee when all the information is on the website.

I appreciate that. That will make things most helpful.

Just changing gears here on a particular matter, I was speaking to some folks in Hay River and I brought this up with the Department of Health the other day. I think it sits under this particular operation, community operations, but that said, if the department feels the need to direct me to another page, I’m happy to wait as well.

That said, the issue was about a community access van and sometimes the challenge, of course, is being able to afford to purchase one. Some of the smaller communities have to raise money for a long time in order to be able to get enough money to buy a suitable vehicle so they can get those folks who are either disabled or those seniors who just need a little extra assistance, who would otherwise be easily defined as shut-ins and missing out on much needed community engagement, the old circulation of life, getting out there for a little fresh air, getting to appointments, going to community events, being involved to whatever capacity they are able to, and certainly making it easier for those who work with them and help them, be it family members or support workers. I’m just wondering if this is the right area to speak to vans and how much is dedicated to that type of budget to help provide communities with things such as community access vans so we can get our good folks out there into the community. Thank you.

I believe that was one-time federal money that they accessed to purchase that equipment. But through the programs that we offer, the Gas Tax Agreement and the CPI funding, they are able to use those funds to purchase those pieces of equipment that they might need to get their residents around. Thank you.

The famous gas tax answer. I wondered how long we would get there. If you are part of what we call the NWT Disabilities Council, you don’t qualify for the gas tax money. How does the Minister suggest, or what program is available to these types of folks who want to help enable our citizens to contribute to be involved in our territory’s activities? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. When the Member asked his original question, he mentioned a particular community, so I just assumed it was a community-owned asset. I didn’t realize that it was the council. But the communities do have the ability. As to the council itself, I’m not sure what programs might be there for them. I’m just speaking to it from a community perspective and my apologies for misunderstanding the question if there was a misunderstanding there. Thank you.

It’s completely fine. I didn’t spell it out. I was just more talking about community access programs. I’m just trying to find a way to help small NGOs, as a matter of fact, or those types of organizations that try to work with the communities, and maybe NGO is the right descriptor we should use in this particular case.

Does the Minister see some ability there for them to apply for things like community access vans in order to help the folks such as I mentioned, seniors and those in the disabled community to be more involved in community initiatives? I had a great conversation with a resident of Hay River about that and the need, and the fact is I see it here in Yellowknife, as well, and any other community I’ve had a chance to visit. I mean, when you see things such as people being able to get out of their home and access services, it changes the world that they live in.

What programs exist and how can we get our program people or specialists in the NGO area to apply, and where can they apply? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Through the programs that we offer the communities. Like, we work directly with the communities. If the communities want to purchase that particular piece of equipment and work with a local organization to operate it for them, I think that is allowed under gas tax and through the CPI funding again. Thank you.

If MACA becomes a new steward of the NGO Stabilization Fund, would there be an access point for people to be able to apply for capital projects like this where they offer programing? Again, focusing on our citizens of the disabled or senior community that have, you know, I don’t want to say no means of getting around, but I just want to use a broad statement if people will allow me to say they have little to no means of getting around the community.

So, would he see the NGO Stabilization Fund as a program available for people to apply for these types of opportunities? Thank you.

For the NGO to access the money that a community gets, that’s not part of the process. When there is some money there, I think it was $350,000 that may come over to MACA for the NGO Stabilization Fund and it’s for governance and management and organizational development. So, as to actually purchasing infrastructure, again, that would have to go through the community.

Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Hawkins, your time has expired. With that, noting the clock, I will now rise and report progress. I’d like to thank Mr. Schauerte and Mr. Williams for joining us today and, of course, Minister R.C. McLeod. Sergeant-at-Arms, if you could please escort the witnesses out of the House. Thank you.

Good evening. Item 21, report of Committee of the Whole, Mr. Dolynny.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Your committee has been considering Tabled Document 188-17(5) and Bill 43, An Act to Amend the Borrowing Authorization Act. I would like to report progress and that Bill 43, An Act to Amend the Borrowing Authorization Act, is ready for third reading. I move that the report of Committee of the Whole be concurred with. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Do I have a seconder? Mr. Nadli.

---Carried

Item 22, third reading of bills, Mr. Miltenberger.

Mr. Speaker, I seek consent to proceed with third reading of Bill 43, An Act to Amend the Borrowing Authorization Act. Thank you.

---Consent granted

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the honourable Member…

Consent to proceed, third reading of bills. Do we proceed with third reading of Bill 43 today? Mr. Miltenberger, sorry.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Great Slave, that Bill 43, An Act to Amend the Borrowing Authorization Act, be read for the third time. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Dolynny, to the motion.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to start off by saying to my colleagues, what legacy do you want to be remembered by? Of course, we have collectively, as an Assembly, started off this 17th Assembly with some very harmonious and ambitious tasks, projects and objectives. I’m extremely proud to be part of this legacy and I hope that the history will see the 17th as being remembered for the good that it’s brought to the people it serves.

So why do I find myself perplexed at Bill 43, a simple act that amends our borrowing authorization? Clearly, this House has debated much larger topics and those required more than $25 million as a price tag attached. So why is the Member for Range Lake so concerned with this bill that he feels the need to speak out in its dying minutes on the Order Paper? Because I have a voice. I have a voice of many who are concerned at the spending of this government, a government that has blindly gone into a spending agenda of epic proportion and whose line of credit has reached its end.

It doesn’t take much to understand the predicament that we face with our borrowing both in its long-term and indeed on its short-term merits today sends a message to those in public office and leaders that deal with our finances, that the situation we find ourselves is not only due to unforeseen acts of God or issues such as low water or extreme fires, but, moreover, the financial debt wall that we have before us is equally due to the lack of foresight, improper personal and corporate tax collection, the accelerating of large-scale projects without the Assembly vetting process and inappropriate promises to taxpayers circumventing the due process of the House.

This is now the second time during the life of this Assembly that we are being held accountable for our spending habits or, in this case, our poor habits. I say poor habits because it’s easy to borrow money. Ask anyone who gets a Visa card where the bank has no problem increasing your limit multiple times even though your earnings don’t change.

We went through this process not more than two years ago and the same government clearly articulated a need to increase our short-term borrowing from $175 million to the current $275 million today, a mere $100 million more capacity to deal with the ins and outs of running the business we call government.

Interestingly, today we heard from the Minister the use of the analogy of the Visa card. As I said, we have not really increased our revenues over the last couple of years and the outlook that we have for resource revenues is rather bleak. In fact, we have hard, marginal increases in our revenues in the last little bit and, in fact, this year alone we are destined to add a mere 0.5 percent increase over last year. When you balance our expenditure growth over this same period at a multiplier of more than four to one, it doesn’t take rocket science to see that this inverted proportion is going to hit your general ledger at some point in a form of poor cash flow. As I said, economics 101 and that’s why we’re here today.

So we have asked, many of us have asked and we continually ask why we have been spending the way we have. What is the logic behind each expenditure and what do these expenses do to our fiscal strategy and our overall fiscal health?

I am proud of my colleagues for the thoroughness of their financial oversight and their acuteness of detail in keeping this government accountable. However, today and throughout the process of Bill 43, I have not been thoroughly convinced that this expenditure increase was warranted. Today we are being asked by those in financial authority to trust them, and to trust them with very limited rationalization. This, Mr. Speaker, I cannot support.

I feel that we, Members of this House and the residents that we serve, are being held ransom at the deliberate hands of its creators and we are being asked to mop up this mess. For this reason alone I did not support the principle of the bill in committee and the reason I didn’t support this bill during the legislative process and the reason I’m not supporting it now.

I may not be able to stop this legislative process, but I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, and everyone in this room, we will remember this bill today as being the cipher in the first step of a series of epic borrowing increases never before seen by the NWT taxpayer.

May the residents forgive us for what we’re about to do.

Mr. Speaker, colleagues, I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak today on Bill 43. With that, Mr. Speaker, I will seek a recorded vote of third reading.