Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, your Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning is pleased to provide its report on the progress review of the mandate of the Government of the Northwest Territories, 2016-2019, and commends it to the House.
Purpose of the Mandate
The 18th Legislative Assembly's decision to set out a four-year mandate for its term represents an important evolution of consensus government. For the first time, all 19 Members agreed on defined actions to advance the priorities they set. These were set out in the Mandate of the Government of the Northwest Territories, 2016-2019 and approved unanimously in the Assembly. More importantly, the mandate is the 18th Assembly's promise of action and performance to residents of the Northwest Territories.
It is appropriate at the halfway mark of our term that this Assembly takes stock of progress on the work we set out to do. Members of the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning, that is all Regular Members, offer this report as our contribution to the process of taking stock. We want to make sure that we are doing our best and correct our course if we are not. We have made every effort to be fair in our evaluation of the work done to date. We are fully prepared to be accountable to the public in doing so.
No government's performance is perfect, and we are no exception. Our review of progress in delivering on our mandate is an opportunity to learn from our mistakes as well as our successes. This review is also the first evidence-based step in the
mid-term review process our Assembly adopted in its initial year of work. It is significant that the 18th Assembly is the first in the NWT's history to provide such a detailed public accounting of its goals and progress. The Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning acknowledges the hard work done by Cabinet, Regular Members, and the public service to realize our aspirations for the NWT. We stress that effective consensus government is the art of finding common ground, listening carefully to each other, and compromising when it is in the best interest of our territory.
Evaluating Our Progress
The 18th Assembly set many diverse goals to achieve by 2019. It is the job of four standing committees to closely monitor the government's progress, providing input to Ministers and holding them accountable to the Assembly. The four committees are the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning; the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment; the Standing Committee on Government Operations; and the Standing Committee on Social Development. Each has either five or six members.
To begin this progress review, each committee reviewed each mandate item for which it is responsible in its oversight of the work of the Government of the Northwest Territories. Each committee revisited its correspondence with Ministers and briefing materials, referred to the government's Status of Mandate Commitments website, and reviewed the government's Annual Report on Implementation of the Mandate, 2016-2017, tabled on March 6, 2017. In addition, Members provided observations on the effectiveness of work done from their own experience and the perspective of their communities and regions. On the basis of this information, each committee rated progress to date and commented on each mandate item for which it has oversight. These assessments were further reviewed by the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning. The final results can be found in appendix A of this report.
Each standing committee also considered general progress on the key themes of our mandate: economy, environment and climate change; education, training and youth development; cost of living; community wellness and safety; and governance. The views of all standing committees are taken into account in this report, which represents the consensus of all Regular Members.
Overview of Our Progress
Fiscal strategy
In 2017-2018, the government plans to spend $1.7 billion to deliver programs and services, plus $266 million for infrastructure and capital projects. Skilled financial management is essential and must be rooted in a fiscal policy that ensures the government can meet its ongoing obligations. Reliable projections of revenue and expenditures over extended periods are crucial elements of effective fiscal policy.
Cabinet properly takes these duties very seriously, and this is reflected in the high-quality updates and forecasts provided by Finance to the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning. Management of public finances is good, and an excellent job has been done to minimize the cost of the government's borrowing. Members recognize that diligence in this area brings stability and, ultimately, the ability to reach the goals we have set in our mandate. For this, the government is to be commended. While we agree on the need for fiscal responsibility, there are deep differences of opinion in what this entails.
Ensuring the ability to address mandate priorities does not mean this ability was exercised. Many priorities are not being met. In drafting the mandate, Cabinet proposed a reduction target of $150 million for operating expenses. This provision was deleted by majority vote in the Legislative Assembly. Regular Members do not support such deep cuts given prevailing economic and social conditions. Despite the Assembly's rejection of the $150-million reduction target, it persisted as government policy through the 2016-2017 fiscal year and into 2017-2018, driving a major reorganization of government, large program and service cuts, and diverting government's energy and resources from the mandate. This caused a four-month wrangle before the committee and Cabinet reached a compromise on the 2017-2018 budget to fulfill some of the most important measures to improve the lives of residents and nudge the economy in the right direction. It is the committee's view that a consensus of the Assembly was dismissed by Cabinet for far too long, deflecting time and effort from advancing our collective priorities. This must not be repeated. The committee strongly recommends a more collaborative process in the future if we are to live up to the promise of our mandate while also reducing our debt. The committee has suggested moving quickly on the mandate items to boost employment and health outcomes, for example, and lower demand for costly government services. We repeat that advice today while the next budget is in its drafting stages.
Regular Members remain concerned that action on the compromises reached for the 2017-2018 fiscal year will be slow to roll out and that lingering support for a more extreme reduction target will influence Cabinet's willingness to deliver on these aspects of the mandate. The committee is confident that the government will invest strategically in people and infrastructure as it has promised. Doubt is sown among Regular Members when funding is regularly found for initiatives supported by Cabinet but not mandate items strongly supported by Regular Members. Consensus government cannot prosper without good faith between Regular Members and Cabinet.
The committee shares the government's concern over the slow growth of federal transfers expected in the next few years. These funds account for approximately 70 per cent of the government's revenue. Members advise that Cabinet focus even more energy on the federal engagement strategy to secure funding to safeguard the environment and adapt to climate change, build key infrastructure, diversify the economy, and to support and invest in our people. The recent addition to federal support for Aboriginal languages is a good example of what is required. Social development and immigration are important to our future, as well as physical infrastructure.
Common Issues
Action plans, strategies, and frameworks now cover many priority areas and describe many positive measures to be taken to benefit the NWT for decades to come; however, action plans are not outcomes. Only two years remain in our term to advance badly-needed actions and produce meaningful results for the people, communities, and economy. Some action plans lack evaluation tools. These should be developed up front as part of every action plan so that results can be measured. Care should also be taken to ensure that activities identified to support mandate commitments are directly related to the spirit and intent of that commitment. Activities not directly related to a particular mandate objective should not be considered as progress in that area.
The committee also notes an imbalance in the planning taking place for some projects as compared with others. While action plans were written to guide critical spending on mandate priorities, monster projects such as mergers of departments and staff layoffs were quickly given the green light. Junior kindergarten's implementation, started in the 17th Assembly, grew into a monster project in our term and was seriously mishandled. Several such problems could have been avoided had committee input been heeded by Cabinet. It is also common for an action plan, framework, strategy, or terms of reference for a project to be provided to a standing committee for comment with a deadline of two weeks or less, sometimes with the warning that any delay will interfere with timely implementation. Such short deadlines for input are sometimes impossible to meet, prevent meaningful consultation, and show a lack of desire to receive considered advice from Regular Members, eroding the relationship between committees and Cabinet.
These instances undermine Regular Members' confidence in crucial communications from their executive branch. In some unfortunate cases, Regular Members have learned of large investments and controversial policies in the media or from reporters seeking comment. These cases inevitably distract from the issues at hand, and undermine the government's reputation inside and outside the Assembly. Poor communication has also affected the legislative agenda, a key area of work for both the government and standing committees. Amendments to the Education Act and the creation of the revolving fund for the Yellowknife Airport are cases in point, yet neither were mandate priorities. The committee is concerned about the slow pace of legislative change generally, and particularly with respect to responsibilities for lands and resources gained through devolution from Canada. In addition, the legislative agenda is not well connected to the mandate.
Results of Our Evaluation of Progress on Mandate Priorities
With a few exceptions that demanded it, the committee has rated progress on individual mandate items as good, acceptable, or poor. In several instances, a fail rating was issued. The full results are set out in appendix A, with our comments on each item. The breadth of the Assembly's collective goals is impressive; our mandate is very ambitious. The bar by which we now measure ourselves is high. In that light, the list of good and acceptable results is heartening. The committee congratulates our Cabinet colleagues, their departments, and the public service in every area where progress has been considerable. This progress is built on a tremendous amount of work.
Unfortunately, there is also a long list of priorities on which progress is poor or nonexistent. The committee stresses that we did not expect completion of all these goals, some of which will continue for decades; we are only evaluating progress. Areas showing poor progress should serve as a strong message to Cabinet that improvement is required. It is also significant when the committee deems progress acceptable but makes qualifying remarks. The committee hopes the public will find this report useful in holding Cabinet and Regular Members accountable for the mandate we have set out. We look forward to your constructive input and advice. Now, I will turn over this report to the honourable Member for Yellowknife North. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.