Thanks, Mr. Chair. I don’t think this is going to take 10 minutes, but I just want to have one more kick at the Economic Advisory Committee. I’m looking at the -- it’s called the iCareNWT.ca website. This is through the Environment of Natural Resources. The Waste Reduction and Recovery Advisory Committee provides advice and assistance to ENR to ensure improved reduction and recovery of waste in the NWT. Members of the committee are appointed by the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources, and reflect the following sectors and organizations:

● Retailers;

● Distributors/manufacturers;

● Environmental organizations;

● Community governments;

● Public at large; and

● ENR.

Here we have a committee that is established in legislation and is representative. It is inclusive and it does manage or provides advice on the environmental fund, which is about $6 to $7 million a year. I just contrast that with this Economic Advisory Committee, which is set up through a terms of reference signed off by the Deputy Minister. It is not inclusive. It is not representative. I would be advising on a larger pot of money. I just don’t understand how the Minister can rationalize this that on one case with this government, we’ve got a representative and inclusive community that’s establishing legislation and then on the other hand, we’ve got this one that’s going to be providing advice on a larger pot of money that the Minister refuses to make representative of in any way.

It could be done under the Public Airports Act. In fact, the standing committee recommended that it be established under the Public Airports Act, the same one clause that’s in the Waste Reduction and Recovery Act could be added to the Public Airports Act and establish this with legislation. The Minister could have authority over all of this, appoint the people, and so on, but does not seem to want to do it.

I’m just wondering if the Minister wants to respond in any way to these comments. For me, this is a deal breaker. I’ve heard from people. They want to have some meaningful say in what happens at the airport. These terms of reference just don’t do it. I’ll give the Minister one further opportunity to reply, if I could. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. O’Reilly. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Member and I myself have disagreed on this from day one. We have already said we agree to the different types of membership. We believe that the broad range of people will be on this committee from tourism to business people to the city of residents of Yellowknife. We don’t have a problem with that. We want to leave the terms of reference the way they are. That’s what we are proposing because we want the flexibility that moving forward, we’re going to make sure that this is what’s going to work for the best situation that we’re proposing for the Yellowknife Airport. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister. Mr. O’Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the comments from the Minister. We haven’t actually disagreed on this since day one because it took a lot of prying to actually find out what this Economic Advisory Committee was actually going to do. Finally, we get a terms of reference. We gave advice to the Minister about how to try to make this more representative and inclusive. He just doesn’t want to take it. I’m sorry. For those reasons alone, I’m not prepared to support the bill. I’ll be voting against it. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. O’Reilly. I see no response from the Minister. Would Mr. O’Reilly like closing statements?

No, thank you.

Thank you, Mr. O’Reilly. Clause 2. Does committee agree?

Thank you, committee. Committee agrees. Clause 3. Does committee agree?

Committee agrees. Thank you, committee. Does committee agree that Bill 3 as a whole is now ready for third reading? Sorry, does committee agree that Bill 7 is now ready for third reading?

Can I see a show of hands for agreed? Thank you, committee. The bill is now ready for third reading. Does committee agree that this concludes our consideration of Bill 7: An Act to Amend the Revolving Funds Act?

Thank you, committee. I want to thank the Minister and the witnesses for appearing before us. Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the witnesses from the Chamber. Committee, next we have agreed to consider Committee Report 6-18(2): Report on Bill 7, An Act to Amend the Revolving Funds Act. I will turn to the chair of the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment for any opening comments. Mr. Vanthuyne.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the report has already been read into the record, the report on Bill 7: An Act to Amend the Revolving Funds Act, and so, at the appropriate time, I would like move a motion. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Please proceed. I am sorry, Mr. Vanthuyne. First, it's general comments. Do we have any general comments on the report? Mr. Testart.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Should this bill move forward and the airport improvement plan be implemented, although obviously I do not support that, but should it move forward, I think the committee has provided balanced and sound recommendations to improve upon the government's plans for the Yellowknife Airport. I would encourage our colleagues across the aisle to support this and to implement the recommendations and ensure that this plan is held to the highest level of public scrutiny and has the greatest benefit economically to our residents. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Testart. Anything further? Any further general comments on the report? Seeing none, I will return to Mr. Vanthuyne.

Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. There is a motion on the floor and being distributed. The motion is in order. To the motion. Question has been called. All those in favour. All those opposed.

---Carried

Thank you, committee. Committee, do you agree that we have concluded consideration of Committee Report 6-18(2)?