I have had the opportunity to meet the Minister from the federal government, my counterpart, but we not had direct discussions on Pine Point mine site.

Oral Questions. Member for Tu-Nedhe-Wiilideh

Marci, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, [Translation] the people are saying there the Pine Point Mine, the work that was worked on all the chemicals that was used would be going into the water. So the Fort Resolution Bay might be affected by the chemicals that were used for the mine. It seems like the people are getting sick from it and we don't know. I would like to ask the Minister when are you going to start doing an assessment on how the land is impacted, the extent of the impact? When are you going to do that? [Translation ends].

The Pine Point site falls under the Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board. ENR works closely with all other departments. Related to this land use it would be the Department of Lands and ENR. Under ENR we'd have a water licence and all these things are monitored adverse to the Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board. Back to the federal government, if it's a federal government responsibility and we're still trying to figure out how that's working with devolution. The remediation plan will have to be coming probably from the federal government; no different than other federal sites.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Hay River North.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is a document that was tabled yesterday by the Minister of Justice and it hasn't really received much press so I'd just maybe like to ask the Minister about it. It's the Report of the Northwest Territories Judicial Remuneration Commission. I was looking at it and I guess it's like negotiations with judges for judicial remuneration, and I see that they got about $1000 a month raise. I'd like to ask the Minister is this correct? That's it for now. Thank you.

Masi. Minister of Justice.

I respect the separation of the judiciary from the Legislature. Does this increase have any sort of effect on ongoing negotiations or can it be used as precedent? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

No, this is quite different in my understanding from other negotiations, because it's not a negotiation in the normal sense; it goes to a commission. It would be more like a binding arbitration. So I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, that this is quite different than any other negotiation the government is entering into or conducting at this time and could not be treated as a precedent. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. How well do we pay our judges compared to other jurisdictions in Canada? Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, one of the things that the commission looked at was salaries of other judges and I think the salaries of our judges are on a par with other jurisdictions. Mr. Speaker, there are some challenges certainly in living in the Northwest Territories and the judges must travel far more than judges do in the south, so it's more demanding from that point of view. The salaries certainly are not out of line with the salaries in other jurisdictions. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just thought that was something the public should be informed of so I wanted to get the Minister out of his seat. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Laughter

Masi. I'll take that as a comment. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. On June 1stbudget day I asked the Minister of Finance if we could get a table that would lay out the job changes that were being proposed in the Budget, things like whether the positions were vacant or not; whether these changes were a result of reductions, sunsets, or new initiatives full-time, part-time, and I'm still waiting for that information. I raised it again with the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment a couple of days ago and he committed to work with his Cabinet colleagues on this.

Mr. Speaker, we've now finished four of the departments and this is an important piece of information that this side of the House would like to get to help us with our review of the budget. I'm just wondering if I could ask the Minister when I might expect to get this information and if he can't give an immediate answer can he take it as notice? Thanks, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Minister of Finance.

I could give the Member an answer but I will take it as notice and I will commit to getting the information put together. Thank you.

Oral questions. Item 8, written questions. Item 9, returns to written questions. Item 10, replies to Commissioner's opening address. Item 11, replies to budget address. Member for Sahtu.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I rise in the House to reply to the Budget Address.

Mr. Speaker, last week we heard the presentation of this Assembly’s budget. As we stand here today, if we turned back the time to last year or last Assembly’s budget deliberations to unwind our current financial position, we would only find ourselves faced in a similar decision about our financial destiny.

This budget is based on current challenges to reach balanced financial positions on terms developed by our peers and colleagues across the floor.

It is said, and I agree, that the best social programs are wage-earning opportunities that bring security and self-reliance to all who participate on infrastructure and proposed infrastructure development.

Mr. Speaker, governance means setting priorities to achieve the goals and aspirations our voters expect of us for the delivery of programs and services.

Our population living in small communities has and will contribute to the totals gained through the federal transfer payments. Given that calculations are equal to those living in larger centres, together the income makes up for over half of the GNWT’s income. The smaller communities' populations therefore must be served with the same privileges as any other Northern residents.

Mr. Speaker, that privilege includes the right to develop their own lands for economic opportunities. We cannot afford to sit idle on this vast land of potential and wait for the TFF payment. When it comes to infrastructure development, Mr. Speaker, let us review the principles of engagement for the stakeholders on the proposed Mackenzie Valley Highway extension: the portion from Wrigley to Norman Wells is 330 kilometres in distance. Of that right-of-way 72 per cent is in the Sahtu region and 28 per cent in the Deh Cho. The capital cost of this project is applied for at $700 million.

During the previous years, this Government participated and assisted the regions to develop a Project Description Report. This report in our area, or Sahtu area, shows granular embankment volumes in excess of 8.5 million cubic metres of granular material. If you multiply that by a rate of your choice on the royalties, you would see significant income from that commodity by itself.

Construction. I only can assume it would take place over several years, thus creating multi-year activity at a time of great need. As stewards of the land and elected officials of this Government, it is incumbent upon us to provide growth opportunities based on the principles of commerce and trade.

Mr. Speaker, let us review some elements of the ROI or return on investment, for this proposed capital project. Tourism is already worth over $100 million in annual income for our territory, and by creating affordable access to the Central Mackenzie Valley area further attractions to that area would bring additional traffic and higher revenues. By developing oil and gas and mineral potential in the area we could reasonably expect resource royalties to contribute in excess of $30 million in annual income to this Government.

Savings to this Government also should be realized through more affordable construction, shipping and overall mobility. In our selected options for revenue generation, we risk being viewed as the Sheriff of Nottingham by placing additional taxes on our few Northern residents.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, the Mackenzie Valley Highway is supported by Members of the previous Assembly, the Sahtu Secretariat, various NWT Chamber organizations, Alberta NGOs and the recommendations made in the Transport Canada’s recent National Transportation Review, as well as many other representatives of governments and industry.

We will be resilient. Through sound and prudent financial planning I believe we can overcome this troubled financial inheritance and work together to create a prosperous future for all residents of the NWT. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. replies to budget address, day seven of seven. Member for Hay River North.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just have a few general comments in reply to the budget address and I'll save my specifics for when we debate the main estimates.

This budget process has been quite a unique experience. We have an unprecedented number of first term MLAs, elected during a time when commodity prices were falling to ten year lows, investment in the Territory was waning, and no new mining projects were on the horizon. The Department of Finance told us that we need to find $150 million in savings, and because the previous Assembly saw fit to extend its term, we were forced to compress a budget process that usually takes about six months into three. These factors provide the backdrop to this Budget and are contributing factors to the frustration expressed by Members on this side of the House.

One of the biggest contributing factors, as I see it, was the expectation for change. We were elected on the heels of sweeping changes to federal and provincial governments, whose partisan systems allowed changes to be-- changes in ideologies to be superimposed on an existing government structure.

Our system is different. We’re not party politicians who adhere to a party mantra handed down from on high. We each think for ourselves, and our policies are driven by the wants and needs of our individual constituencies. That means that change comes slower than it would in a party system. We cannot immediately imprint our way of doing business on the apparatus of government, because it takes time to figure out what our way of doing business is.

This has drawbacks and benefits. It provides stability by reducing the risk of wild shifts in policies after each election. The Mandate document produced by this Assembly is an example of us trying to find our common vision. Regardless of our individual political leanings there is something in the Mandate for all of us. The left-leaning priorities are countered by right-leaning priorities. The aggregate is a middle of the road document. Without strong leadership and collaboration among all Members, the stability that consensus government provides can also be its biggest drawback.

You’ll notice that our Mandate is full of references to ongoing GNWT initiatives and many vague and non-committal phrases. Without a unified vision, we defer to the expertise of departments and their stable guidance. So, we continue on the middle-of-the-road policies from the previous Assembly, which followed the same middle-of-the-road policies as the Assembly before that and so on. Now, in this 18thAssembly, we're expecting a change in the functioning of a government apparatus whose mode of operations is fully entrenched.

We had unrealistic expectations about change: not about the amount of change, but about the speed of change. Even when there is political will, change is slow. The Premier or a Minister cannot perform the actions of government. He or she relies on departmental senior management to dutifully carry out orders. If the orders do not follow the middle-of-the-road path that a department is used to, there can be resistance. It appears to me that some departments think the best political input is no political input.

At times the Regular MLAs have been inundated with unrequested information, while at the same time being forced to wait weeks for pertinent and time-sensitive information that we did request.

This lack of information and input is the source of my frustration. When combined with the truncated timeframe and the opaque nature of the Main Estimates, the first steps towards finding $150 million in cuts or revenues is happening without Members being given the proper tools to provide adequate input or oversight. Don’t be mistaken, Mr. Speaker, I will attest that everyone on this side of the House is working hard and doing the best possible job with the information we have; we just need more information.

With all that being said, Mr. Speaker, I am happy to report that I actually do see change happening. We, the Regular Members, did not get everything we want in the budget consultations leading up to the debates on the Main Estimates, just as I’m sure each Minister didn’t get everything he or she wanted when Cabinet was debating the budget internally. However, I will give credit where credit is due. There have been instances where Cabinet was responsive, and by working with them we were able to maintain millions of dollars in programs and jobs.

---Applause

It’s my understanding that in previous Assemblies, such compromise was unheard of. Despite not getting as much information as I would like or want we were privy to a level of detail that, again, was unprecedented in previous Assemblies.

That fact that these comments seem at odds with my earlier statements about the lack of information speaks to how slowly change occurs and how far we still have to go. While there may be countervailing views, I don’t believe that we’ve hit a brick wall in Cabinet relations; I believe we’re making progress.

Has the Premier fulfilled every promise he made when he ran for the position? No, but he hasn’t turned his back on those promises either. Even our Finance Minister is softening his steely persona, as evidenced in the House these past few days.

---Laughter

I join my other colleagues and question the need for the $150 million in cuts. I've been asking but I have yet to receive a satisfactory or detailed answer to how that number came about. Regardless, that's the number that they're sticking with. The exercise to find $150 million was a perfect opportunity to find efficiencies and streamline departments. If a corporation, which always has the bottom line in mind, wants to find efficiencies and improve operations and accountability, they will undertake an internal audit. Effective internal audits adhere to universally accepted best practices that require an objective and independent auditor who has the freedom to speak to every member of a department in confidence and provide an unbiased appraisal directly to a Minister.

Unfortunately, the approach that this government took was to give each department a reduction total and let them figure it out. What the departments came back with is what we’d expect: cuts to frontline staff and programs with no substantial changes in department structure or senior management staff. But really, what else could they do? The job of senior management is to run the departments efficiently. If that’s the case then they should have already found all the efficiencies and a different approach to the reductions should have been taken. By tasking the departments with this reduction exercise the government passively prioritized cutting spending through layoffs and program cuts over finding money through innovation, identifying efficiencies, and addressing the structural problems within departments.

I'm not opposed to the idea of reducing spending. Like my colleague Mr. McNeely stated, we can't just sit on our resources and wait for the next federal transfer payment. We can generate the revenue we need to provide services without attracting significant new investments in the resource extraction industry, and that requires us to make investments in transportation infrastructure. However, the manner in which the reductions were done has the appearance of favouring bureaucracy over efficiency. This Government can do better.

Now, Mr. Speaker, these are just my general observations as a Member of this Assembly six months into my first term, part way through my first budget session. So despite my criticisms, I'm still confident that we will ultimately be able to do good for the people of this Territory. I encourage Members on both sides to strive to work together so we can give our citizens the change they voted for. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Replies to Budget Address, day seven of seven. Member for Kam Lake.